Indian Naval Discussion

[Singha]

the footprint of the Osprey means it needs a very large carrier to operate it. I am not sure even LHD Mistral/Juan carlos sized ships can use it effectively without compromising on other assets. in any case the MQ-4C type hi-alt hi-endurance UAVs beat the osprey by miles in persistence.

[Brando]

The V-22 is an overpriced, under powered beast that is the product of restless engineers and Pentagon dreamers. Dollar for dollar, the Ch-47 or the Ch-53 are MUCH MUCH better investments for regular use. The only advantage the V-22 offers is in range and ceiling compared to the CH's, however this is moot when you bring in a UAV, which are the rage these days. The other drawback of the V-22 is that rotorwash and the exhaust of the engines is so fierce most regular LZs are not going to be able to handle it. A carrier deck would have to be extensively modified to tolerate the heat of the exhaust from a v-22. Not to mention that a v-22 is going to eat up deck space as it can't be stowed in the hanger deck.

The V-22 is only for shore based applications. Unless the nerds at Bell-Boeing can figure out a way to dramatically increase thrust without chewing up the deck or losing payload, the V-22 is not going to join any naval air group anytime soon.

[Philip]

X-47B! However,until we are able to develop an AEW version of a UAV that is as efficient as a manned aircraft,the need for either a large AEW Hawkeye class bird or AEW helos like the Merlin/KA-31 will have to do for the medium sized carriers with STOBAR.

[uddu]

Those 24 P-8I need to be backed up with addition 24-36 Medium MPA. Given our coastline and threat scenario(s), we need these assets to patrol the huge EEZ. Look at Japan, it has ~ 100 P-3C MPA. IMO, P-3 is a good platform and with modern/latest avionics, should fit the bill.

It seems like the Navy is going for additional 12 instead of going for another variant of the MPA. May be they are very much satisfied with the progress of the P-8I program and the aircraft. So having 12 more aircraft of the same type will bring in lot of advantage in terms of cost, common platform availability for multiple missions based on threat, countering sanctions by making available some platforms and speedy induction. For smaller roles, and for shorter distance they may be going for Saras.

[uddu]

Diesel Submarines armed with Brahmos missiles
---------------------------------------------
I do not understand the rush behind arming every platform with the Brahmos missile. Note that each of this missile weights between 2.5 to 3 TONs. And the length is approx 10mts which makes it impossible for tube launch (besides the weight).
Anyway, our diesel submarine will suffice being armed with Exocet/Harpoon. Both of these are less than 700 kg and are equally effective. If these are not enough, then the Klub-S should be good enough. At 1.5 tonnes and 6.2 mts long, its a tight fit for the diesel submarines.

For the Navy, it seems they try to avoid seeing threats from a country specific view point. If the U.S can send the flotilla into the Indian ocean during the 1971 war any such threat can emerge at any time. Arming diesel subs with Brahmos seems to be a very defensive approach to counter any Navy that can come with an aircraft carrier into the Indian ocean. When the enemy can take out the surface flotilla using their air launched weapons, the only defense seems to be the subs armed with missiles. Since we got very few subs, it's necessary to arm them with really potent weapon like the Brahmos to ensure success with a single hit. The missile was tested on a corvette and one can see its devastating effect in this video.

The future may see nuclear attack subs and ships of the destroyer and cruiser types getting armed with Nirbhay. but that will be for land attack.

[Cybaru]

I think for all future Indian ocean sanitation needs, we should move all AsuW to long range drones. Those seem to have long on station times and can travel long distances and carry an optical pod and a surface search radar to track and classify. I think with Andamans & Lakshwadweep, we can cover large tracts of Indian Ocean.

Manned Maritime platforms should be exclusively positioned for ASW hunting or for destroying AsuW platforms in case of war.

[Katare]

The V-22 is an overpriced, under powered beast that is the product of restless engineers and Pentagon dreamers. Dollar for dollar, the Ch-47 or the Ch-53 are MUCH MUCH better investments for regular use. The only advantage the V-22 offers is in range and ceiling compared to the CH's, however this is moot when you bring in a UAV, which are the rage these days. The other drawback of the V-22 is that rotorwash and the exhaust of the engines is so fierce most regular LZs are not going to be able to handle it. A carrier deck would have to be extensively modified to tolerate the heat of the exhaust from a v-22. Not to mention that a v-22 is going to eat up deck space as it can't be stowed in the hanger deck.

The V-22 is only for shore based applications. Unless the nerds at Bell-Boeing can figure out a way to dramatically increase thrust without chewing up the deck or losing payload, the V-22 is not going to join any naval air group anytime soon.

You left out the MSP of V22 design, speed of a turbo plane with take-off/landing from a oversized helipad like a copter.

Hot exhaut damaging ship deck is F35 related issue, V22 works like a helicopter.

UAVs have endurance but do not have the power or payload or manstations for realtime control. 2 completely separate assets that have some overlap but mostly have their own turfs

[Katare]

Notwithstanding the aircraft's (touted) prowess,the indecent haste with which the P-8I is being acquired,bears remarkable similarities to the manner in which the C-17 is also being acquired.We are first told that a small qty. of 8 or 10 aircraft are being acquired,and after the debate has died down,an immediate order for twice that qty,in the case of the P-8 3 times as much for an aircraft that is not even in service with the USN! Why can't we similarly acquire another two Akulas on lease,they have been in service for a long time now and are highly regarded by western navies as the best only after the Seawolf and Virginia classes.

There are many who have screamed at the thought of buying a weapon system without it being in service in a foreign country first,the MIG-29K for example,but the MIG-29 air force version was been in service for decades.The K was nothing more than an upgraded naval variant.If one wants a naval Rafale or EF too,both basic types are already in service,but the P-8? Will its ASW and NCW systems meet parameters as required? We know that the IL-38SDs had problems initially.The stark fact is that wherever a US product can be bought and without too much debate,it is being speedily done,especially as this insidious UPA-2 govt. is fast approaching is sell-by date,if not already! This applies to the other two services as well.See how fast the LCA Mk-2 engine deal was finalised,as will the Jaguar's too!

So why can't other equally,if not more important issues like the second line of subs get the same treatment and attention? Simple truth,that there is no US alternative! If you check out the deals which are moving at lightning speed,for the MOD's track record of being a tortoise,most of those decided upon have been those where US suppliers are in the forefront.I suspect that the huge naval ASW helo requirement,much needed but almost double of earlier numbers stated,is also due to the ticking clock determining the expiraion of the UPA-2 regine.

Coming back to naval matters,and the good admiral's want of a desi built navy,let a tabulation be done of warships and subs acquired from abroad and those built at home,their delivery time,delays and costs as well.We have it officially that our homegrown warships have huge cost overruns,due to late ordering of material or decison-making on weapon systems,unavailability of special steel from abroad or from local plants,non-modernisation of shipyard-though AKA is on record that some delays are not due to this factor.How then can we timely equip the IN with the assets it requires to fight a war? This can only be achieved by three simultaneous routes.

1.Foreign acquisitions,where deliveries have been relatively good as with the Talwars,Italian built tankers,etc.Orders placed in large numbers from the beginning will ensure speed and cost-effectivenes.A third lot of Talwars,a type which has performed very well in service,would be wise,especially if it can be made to house a larger 10t ASW helo or even two KA-31 sized helos and more powerful integral ASW armamaent.A few extra upgraded Kilos with B'mos,as an interim solution until a final design/capability is arrived at for line-2 of subs,is another possibilty.

2.Foreign designed,and locally built Vessels like SoKo MCMs,etc.,can either be acquired in part/full strength from abroad or some built at home.Where we need large numbers and speedy delivery this is perhaps the best compromise.fast attack craft,patrol craft,landing craft,etc.,as well as the new requirement for 4+ amphibious warfare vessels of 20,000t+.

3.Fully designed and built vessels at home,like the IAC-1 and P-28s.One must stress that even here with "locally designed" vessels,a large component is still foeign,either in the weaponry or propulsion systems,as we have yet to develop any truly indigenous powerplant ourselves.We are still awaiting the naval variant of the GT Kaveri!

Even with "local" shipbuilding,the PSU's dominate,taking the cream of orders and are resisting furiously any large defence orders to Pipapav and L&T,who will get the crumbs.If that happens,the shortcomings of the PSU yards will be in full view!
Uless this simultaneous three-street route is taken, with a stick and carot policy,Indian PSU yard will coninue to obtain the best orders and keep on delaying results.

Again, much ado about nothing mixed with political/personal preferences....

24 aircraft is a wish, order was for 8 with followon option for 4 more. IN may exercise followon option of 4 more p8I this year as it is happy with the progress so far. Just like MKI started with order of 40 and now order book has exceeded 272 or T-90 have gone to 1600+ or followon of kirvak frigates to Russia or Hawks order trippling to UK. P15 destroyers 3, 3 P15a and 4 P15B ordered as confirmed by Nirmal Verma in same article.......

These all are listed in Navy perspective plans and being executed as and when possible. Certain things are much harder to order for different reasons, there is no point in holding up everthing that can be ordered just because they are listed at lower prioroty in someon'e list.

[Leo.Davidson]

For the Navy, it seems they try to avoid seeing threats from a country specific view point. If the U.S can send the flotilla into the Indian ocean during the 1971 war any such threat can emerge at any time. Arming diesel subs with Brahmos seems to be a very defensive approach to counter any Navy that can come with an aircraft carrier into the Indian ocean. When the enemy can take out the surface flotilla using their air launched weapons, the only defense seems to be the subs armed with missiles. Since we got very few subs, it's necessary to arm them with really potent weapon like the Brahmos to ensure success with a single hit. The missile was tested on a corvette and one can see its devastating effect in this video.
The future may see nuclear attack subs and ships of the destroyer and cruiser types getting armed with Nirbhay. but that will be for land attack.

I do not know what is the payload (std displacement - max load) of a typical submarine is. I would assume it would be couple hundred tonnes, for crew, fuel, water, food, weapons, etc.

Now consider this submarine carrying 6 Brahmos missiles in a vertical launch configuration; 6*3 + ... = ~20 tonnes. That means the submarine may have to cut other payloads to accomodate this. Also, for the vertical launch capability, with the missile being 10 mts tall & 0.6 mts in diameter, I'll assume a hump of ~ 0.75 * 3 = 2.25 mts will need to be added to the length of the submarine. Now, the added length & weight of the new weapons will mean that the propulsion will have to uprated or suffer from lower performances. This is not worth it.

If you are conceding that our entire naval fleet can get wiped off; I don't see us able to win the war or even defend solely with the submarines.

I'll stick to my assertion, that we do not need to arm all of our surface fleet & submarines with the Brahmos missile.

[Kartik]

I am at a loss in understanding the delay in sub procurement and the astronomical costs of conventional subs given.The Scorpene seems to cost $0.5 B each,while a lease for 10 years of a nuclear Akula-2/3,which is 4 times larger and carries upto 40 weapons,is a mere $1B! At these prices we should lease out at least another 3-4 Akulas,while concentrating upon building our fleet of SSBNs based upon the ATV-1 design.ATV-2 must be large enough to carry a decent number of ICBMs with MIRV warheads. There are several conventional AIP options available,but in the long run,the best AIP system is a nuclear powered sub,as nmany a submariner will tell you.

Well, that would mean that if the IN were to use the Nerpa for 25 years we'd end up paying $2.5 billion for the sub simply for the lease- all of it getting us nothing in return except for a nuclear attack sub that cannot be used as a strategic deterrent. How is that cheap compared to the quieter Scorpenes that at $500 million each will be 4 times cheaper? Add AIP and its attendant costs and the AIP diesel sub will still be a cheap and effective submarine for the IN.

What makes most sense is to add a couple more Scorpenes to the existing 6 on order from Mazgaon to give the IN a small cushion for the big jhatka that comes when its Shishumar and Kilos start retiring. MDL has gone over the big hump that they had with the difficult in tech transfer and other issues that delayed the initial Scorpenes.

I for one cannot still fathom what on earth they're expecting onboard the P-75I that makes it 3 times costlier than the P-75 Scorpenes. What am I missing here? Just adding AIP and perhaps Brahmos capability cannot make these conventional subs so damn expensive..perhaps the costliest the world over ! HOW on earth can 6 conventional diesel electrics cost $11 billion ?!

[uddu]

I do not know what is the payload (std displacement - max load) of a typical submarine is. I would assume it would be couple hundred tonnes, for crew, fuel, water, food, weapons, etc.

Now consider this submarine carrying 6 Brahmos missiles in a vertical launch configuration; 6*3 + ... = ~20 tonnes. That means the submarine may have to cut other payloads to accomodate this. Also, for the vertical launch capability, with the missile being 10 mts tall & 0.6 mts in diameter, I'll assume a hump of ~ 0.75 * 3 = 2.25 mts will need to be added to the length of the submarine. Now, the added length & weight of the new weapons will mean that the propulsion will have to uprated or suffer from lower performances. This is not worth it.

If you are conceding that our entire naval fleet can get wiped off; I don't see us able to win the war or even defend solely with the submarines.

I'll stick to my assertion, that we do not need to arm all of our surface fleet & submarines with the Brahmos missile.

There will be compromises when it comes to fitting the sub with CM's or with AIP.
Not worth it? It's difficult to answer. If we do have plans for nuclear attack subs, yes then we can say it's not worth it to fit Brahmos on subs like Scorpenes. And if possible to fit them into Scorpenes without much compromises, then it's very much worthy.
If it's a Navy-vs-Navy war, then it's going to happen against an opponent that will come with an AC into the Indian ocean. But fotunately the Indian landmass itself is a big AC. Now defending solely with the sub is not possible, but subs that have such a capablity will be an asset that the Navy will be very eager to have. But as you said Scorpene may not be the right platform. We must be building something like the Japanese sub Soryu and fitting that with the Bramos. And about surface fleet having Brahmos and the next generations having Brahmos-2 variant, i'm for it. It ensures our supremacy at sea against a Navy without enough aircraft carriers.

[srai]

Those 24 P-8I need to be backed up with addition 24-36 Medium MPA. Given our coastline and threat scenario(s), we need these assets to patrol the huge EEZ. Look at Japan, it has ~ 100 P-3C MPA. IMO, P-3 is a good platform and with modern/latest avionics, should fit the bill.

This is from the award winning vision 2020 document written by Lt. Cdr. JM Golsalves. Although since the document was written around 10 years ago, India now has a roaring economy to fund much more than the relatively modest quantities proposed in the document. Looking at the current and future IN, it would seem that the IN, in principle, has followed the vision.

THE INDIAN NAVY-A PERSPECTIVE VISION UPTO 2020

Code: Select all

...
36.	Simultaneously, whilst affecting the above trimming, the Navy would have to cater for the following: -

    (a)	Judicious update of the punch of her existing fleet to match current technology in weapons, sensors and other equipment.

    (b)	Design of new ships to evolve from the Fleet Combat Ship concept, and capable of operating UAVs from onboard. Concentrate on two types of surface vessel of approximately 3000 and 6000 tonnes displacement, aiming to build 12 of each to stabilise at 24, and supported by large fleet tankers.

    (c) 	Decommission progressively all patrol aircraft not capable of 15 hours flying time and raise the numbers of four engine aircraft to achieve a 1:1 ratio with surface vessels.

    (d)	Maintain a mix of diesel and nuclear submarines initially; however progress towards an all nuclear force of SSBNs and SSNs by 2030.

    (e)	Build a carrier group comprising two CVBGs capable of sustained operations of 100 days at a time with necessary auxiliaries.

     (f)	Build an amphibious group capable of landing one reinforced battalion in the first wave, including helicopters, landing ships and landing craft, retaining a brigade lift capability with STUFT.
...

Around 2020/25 and based on the current inductions and orders, we would have the following as per the mentioned categories above:

(b) 34 x FCS -> 10 x DDG (3 x P15, 3 x P15A, 3 x P15B); 16 x FFG (6 x Kirvak.III/+, 3 x P-17, 7 x P17A); 8 x ASW Corvette (4 x P-28, 4 x P-28A); + others older

(c) 36 x MPA -> 24 x LR-MPA (12 x P-8I + 12 second batch); 12 x MR-MPA (6 + 6 options)
+ 4 to 5 UAV squadrons

(d) 18 x SSK/SSN/SSBN -> 12 x SSK (6 x Scorpene + 6 x P-75A); 1 x SSN (1 x Akula); 5 x SSBN (5 x ATV)

(e) 2 x CVBG -> 3 x CVG (1 x Gorskhov, 2 x P-71 IAC) supported by 4 x Large Replenishment Tankers

(f) 9 x LPD/LST -> 4 x LPD; 5 x LST (2 x Magar, 3 x Shardul)

[Singha]

the V22 has neither the payload and manned operator space of the P8I , nor the endurance of the MQ-4C marine global hawk. and its pretty expensive and needs big decks to fly from. not does its ASW version exist or any plans to make one.

so I guess the P8I paired with Rustom(later)/MQ-4C represents the best tag team for us.

[Juggi G]

Navy Ball 2011

Navy Queen at the Navy Ball 2011

[vishnu.nv]

the V22 has neither the payload and manned operator space of the P8I , nor the endurance of the MQ-4C marine global hawk. and its pretty expensive and needs big decks to fly from. not does its ASW version exist or any plans to make one.

so I guess the P8I paired with Rustom(later)/MQ-4C represents the best tag team for us.

Singha saab,

IN is evaluating V-22 for AEW role only.

Neither the AEW variant of the global hawk exists. The V-22 has its own share of problems, as its a new concept being developed and put in to operation. But i guess the program is stable now and marines using it in a wide variety of roles.

Now when it comes to carrier based AEW, as everyone knows we have a very little options. We are limited to helicopter based AEW operations only as our carriers are of STOBAR type. We should have shore based AEW aircraft's but those are not feasible when we are operating away from our mainland.

V-22 is a new class of the aircraft which can fly like a turboprop. I guess it have space inside couple of consoles just like the E-2D. Any day better than our kamovs as it can move with the fighters. IMHO IN should finance further its development or buy the air frame and integrate DRDO radar with it.

regarding deck space

[Shrinivasan]

Repaired Tu-142ME (IN312) yesterday flew home back.
Official press release

Thanks Megh... For the benefit of people who are not able to read the translation...

December 2, 2011 delivered to the customer distant anti-aircraft Tu-142ME (side number 312) aircraft of the Indian Navy, the last major overhaul in the Beriev. GM Beriev. The plane passed all necessary tests, and after the transfer to the Indian side, December 5, departed to their place of permanent deployment.
Eight Tu-142ME, built in Taganrog, in the second half of the 80s were delivered the Indian Navy. In matters of repair and life extension of Tu-142ME Indian side is working closely with the "Rosoboronexport" and Beriev. GM Beriev.
Beriev leading after-sales service and maintenance manual supplied vehicles to the Indian side, particularly in matters of maintenance and spare parts.
Overall, the program overhaul and logistics support for India's fleet of Tu-142ME on Beriev designed for up to 2020

[Shrinivasan]

Those 24 P-8I need to be backed up with addition 24-36 Medium MPA. Given our coastline and threat scenario(s), we need these assets to patrol the huge EEZ. Look at Japan, it has ~ 100 P-3C MPA. IMO, P-3 is a good platform and with modern/latest avionics, should fit the bill.

Rohit, the 100+ P-3C operated by the Japananese seems to be an overkill, uncle also operates the Orions from its bases in the region and the orions have shorter legs compared to the Poseidon. My take is, the uptime of these birds should be pathetically bad (also these birds were built locally by Kawasaki and not my LockMart)
in the Indian context, 25-30 P8s would be sufficient, our Bears and Mays are not going anywhere... IN will flog them for another decade!!!

[Singha]

looks like P3 production ceased in 1990 ie 21 years ago

wiki:
734 P-3s were produced until 1990.[10][11] Lockheed Martin opened a new P-3 wing production line in 2008 as part of its Service Life Extension Program (ASLEP) for delivery in 2010. A complete ASLEP replaces the aircraft outer wings, center wing lower section and horizontal stabilizers with new-build parts.

--
so not sure what LM was offering the IN if it was offering P3....perhaps some deeply overhauled crates salvaged from the boneyard.

[nachiket]

^^They were offering a new P-3D version to do a one-up on the paki P-3Cs. The IN wasn't impressed.

[Singha]

it would atmost be a cleaned up boneyard fuselage + new wing off their 2008 line + some updated avionics + same engine.

no wonder the IN went for P8I.

[Prabu]

China's Hu Jintao urges navy to prepare for combat

[Philip]

"Prearing for combat" with whom?

Kartik,reports when the Akula lease was first mentioned,said that after the "10 yr." period,the IN could buy the sub if it wanted at an affordable price (possibly based uon depreciated value).I think that the "lease" was also one method of avoiding international obligations/accusations on N-proliferation instead of a "sale".Remember this method was used for the Chakra also.

Katare,the points I earlier raised about a desi-built navy are relevant if we truly want to get there.Paying lip service as one observes as of now,when private industry has made such huge investments in anticipation of large orders,but the PSUs still have a dog-in-the-manger attitude denying them significant orders,will only keep us dependant upon foreign suppliers.The huge cost-overruns of the Shivaliks ,as well as delays,makes a mockery of lower costs of indigenous production.We will see each year admirals and ex-naval officers by the dozen bemoaning the state of indigenous warship and sub production year after year.One has seen the same sort of articles written by eminent officers after they've retired for at least three decades now.

The differences between the IN and MOD on warship production,yard,etc.,remain and the political bosses seem indifferent.Why do you think that the decision for the second line of subs is inordinately getting delayed and committee after committee is set up to evaluate the findings of the previous committee? MDL is filibustering.It wants the "whole hog" and build the second line of subs too,unwilling to let any other builder in India build subs,hence the asinine delay/excuse in determining its parameters until the Scorpenes are finished (major work completed for all subs), so that MDL can then say "we have no work,please give us the order,we are the only ones with experience"! There is also silence about the line of nuclear attack subs ,SSNs/SSGNs,meant to be built in parallel with the ATVs.Only L&T has the capability after HSL which is manfully asembling out ATVs at the appeox. rate of one every 2-2.5 years.With this rate,we will only have the required SSBNs and SSGNs by 2030!

A carrot-and-stick policy for both desi and foreign yards is the best way to get the IN what it needs to fight at affordable costs but are our leaders interested at all,when the attitude is just like the CWG scam? A blank checque as after all,its only taxpayer's money! Someone with guts is needed to cut this "Gordian knot" that is scuttling our sub capability.

[Kailash]

Navy-defence ministry logjam delays Scorpene submarine building programme

The Indian Navy is in dire need of more submarines. But the plan to build six next-generation underwater boats with foreign collaboration, which has been in the works for long, is stuck in the labyrinth of the bureaucratic muddle.

Project 75 India, under which the new submarines are to be built, has failed to take off as a number of critical issues regarding construction modalities are yet to be sorted out between the defence ministry and the navy.

The failure of the two sides to find common ground has further set back the 30-year submarine building programme, which was approved by India in 1999 to overhaul its ailing fleet.

While under Project 75 - another part of the programme - a periodic delivery of the French Scorpene submarines (which are being constructed by Mumbai's Mazagon Dock Limited) should have already begun, the first of the lot will not be ready for induction before 2015. The final one is expected to be finished by 2020.

What this means is that for now, the navy will have to make do with its ageing fleet comprising 10 Russian Kiloclass and four German HDW submarines. The prospect raises serious security concerns as India's two main adversaries, Pakistan and China, boast of a fairly wellequipped fleet.

While Pakistan has the superior French Augusta 90B conventional submarines, China is armed with nuclear submarines capable of firing ballistic missiles.


Consequently, the navy is treading a cautious path as it doesn't want to worsen the situation and hopes that the construction modalities for Project 75 India would soon be sorted out and bids invited from the foreign contractors for the same.

The project is crucial for the navy bosses because it is their last chance to source foreign expertise, as the next batch of submarines will be built completely indigenously.

The navy is counting on foreign help to master technologies such as missile launch capability and air independent propulsion (AIP), among others.

In the arrangement finalised by the defence ministry for Project 75 India, three submarines were to be built at government owned Mazagon Dock Limited and one at the Hindustan Shipyard Limited.

The construction of the other two underwater boats will either be assigned to a private shipyard in the country or bought from abroad.

The differences in the approach to execute the project have led to the appointment of various committees to resolve the stalemate.

At the current pace, the request for proposal could be sent to the foreign contractors only by next year, which means that contracts will not be in place for another twothree years. As a result, the delivery will be delayed much beyond the 30-year deadline.

All major submarine makers have already responded to the request for information sent in August 2010.

[Kailash]

Submarine for Mahabs museum

The Navy and the ministry of shipping have planned to set up a permanent maritime heritage museum at Mamallapuram with a decommissioned submarine INS Vagli as the centrepiece.

[chackojoseph]

250 men Ferry Craft Manoram inducted into the Indian Navy

[kancha]

Shaurya Chakra Awarded to Lieutenant Commander Firdaus Darabshah Mogal
A truly inspiring tale of valour at high seas ..

[Badar]

the V22 has neither the payload and manned operator space of the P8I , nor the endurance of the MQ-4C marine global hawk. and its pretty expensive and needs big decks to fly from. not does its ASW version exist or any plans to make one.

so I guess the P8I paired with Rustom(later)/MQ-4C represents the best tag team for us.

The only advantage of osprey over a helo from a AEW perspective are operating altitude and time on station. Are they worth the expense maintenance headaches? Why not just go for a Merlin solution?

Something tells me we wont see any global hawk variants in Indian livery any time soon. The only reason US will sell anything to IN is if [1] it is available elsewhere or locally or [2] it perfectly positions IN as an adjunct to the USN.

[Singha]

I would think the marine ghawk qualifies under [2]..the marine version does not have the classified 'hyperspectral/SAR/GMTI' stuff they use on the ones orbiting over pindi anyways.

else India is developing the Rustom-2 and Israel has a couple of big sized uav's like Eitan we can go for....

[ramana]

The India Today article is broderline moronic. It does not coem clear what the differences between the MOD and Navy are which is the ciritcal cause of the delay. Second by suing the word "Navy bosses" the reporter shows his biases. Navy doesnt have bosses. It has a Commander In Chief who is the President of India. The head of IN is Chief of Staff.

Only thig one can make out is the French sub deal is dealyed in excecution.

Why does this happen repeatedly when MOD manages such procurements?

[Kartik]

Notwithstanding the aircraft's (touted) prowess,the indecent haste with which the P-8I is being acquired,bears remarkable similarities to the manner in which the C-17 is also being acquired.We are first told that a small qty. of 8 or 10 aircraft are being acquired,and after the debate has died down,an immediate order for twice that qty,in the case of the P-8 3 times as much for an aircraft that is not even in service with the USN! Why can't we similarly acquire another two Akulas on lease,they have been in service for a long time now and are highly regarded by western navies as the best only after the Seawolf and Virginia classes.

Philip, what would you rather have? That the IN sits around waiting for a competition to unfold, evaluations to be held (even when the P-8I itself has very little competition) and then a winner announced like the MRCA? Would you rather that the IN gets its LRMP in 2020 or after that?

What you call "indecent haste" (actually all of us would rather that all our deals go through as quickly) is clearly because its a US platform. Had it been a Russian product, I doubt you'd call it that. The implication of yours is that there is a scam going on, simply because its a US platform, which I find extremely offensive because it implies that the only way in which things can move fast is when some gadbad is involved.

As for Akulas, from Russian sources itself, there is no other available Akula out there for the IN to take up on a lease.

There are many who have screamed at the thought of buying a weapon system without it being in service in a foreign country first,the MIG-29K for example,but the MIG-29 air force version was been in service for decades.The K was nothing more than an upgraded naval variant.If one wants a naval Rafale or EF too,both basic types are already in service,but the P-8? Will its ASW and NCW systems meet parameters as required? We know that the IL-38SDs had problems initially.The stark fact is that wherever a US product can be bought and without too much debate,it is being speedily done,especially as this insidious UPA-2 govt. is fast approaching is sell-by date,if not already! This applies to the other two services as well.See how fast the LCA Mk-2 engine deal was finalised,as will the Jaguar's too!

the USN is going to be the first customer for the P-8 and on the basis of their huge order, one can rest assured that all chinks will be ironed out on the P-8. the IN isn't going to be the ONLY customer for it unlike some others, so that if it doesn't meet performance specs, the IN will be left with the bill for getting it to work after several years of negotiations (Il-38 Sea Dragon suite anyone?).

So what other option did the IN have that was operational, proven and had adequate life left in it to serve another 40 years with the IN?

What amazes me is that you crib when deals take time, you crib when deals get done fast. So what do you want? Deals with Russia only (or maybe EU) but at the same speed as FMS deals? Won't happen, especially since these deals have much more hanky panky going on with arms dealers involved and what not. FMS deals have no such issues and the GoI only goes for them when the Indian Armed Forces state that they have no other valid option.

So why can't other equally,if not more important issues like the second line of subs get the same treatment and attention? Simple truth,that there is no US alternative! If you check out the deals which are moving at lightning speed,for the MOD's track record of being a tortoise,most of those decided upon have been those where US suppliers are in the forefront.I suspect that the huge naval ASW helo requirement,much needed but almost double of earlier numbers stated,is also due to the ticking clock determining the expiraion of the UPA-2 regine.

Exactly- the FMS option, taken when no other valid options exist, circumvents all the myriad procedures (which are in place to avoid allegations of corruption) that delay all other deals that involve multiple companies in the process. I'd rather that the ASW helo deal circumvents the allegations of corruption or procedural issues that have delayed every non-FMS deal and that the IN gets what it wants in time. If that means a FMS deal is required, so be it. If that had meant going to Russia and getting it, I'd be happy if it meant that good quality weapons were being delivered on time and on budget. Seeing that such a thing happens very infrequently in their case, no real hopes of that happening. Cannot blame the US for making sure that their deals are executed well and on cost and schedule. Your problem is that you have such a hatred of the US that you cannot but be unhappy even when the IN gets what it wants on schedule and on cost!

[Surya]

err kartik saar - there comes a time when you have to ignore certain people.

Else we will pop a vein somewhere (at least I do not have the option of using alocohol to numb myself to such nonsense)

Logic and reality long ago left the alternate world Philip saar resides

So silly things like saying we did the same with SU 30 MKI or the diff between 29 K and this is that the original operator has didly squat vested interest are all water of a ducks back for our pal.

[anishns]

^^^

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1201004

[anjan]

Shaurya Chakra Awarded to Lieutenant Commander Firdaus Darabshah Mogal
A truly inspiring tale of valour at high seas ..

Truly sad. India has lost a brave son.

[tsarkar]

FMS has another aspect. Because its a government to government deal, the quality standards are those of US armed forces. The equipment has to pass QA certification by US Armed Forces team before it is delivered. Theoretically, buyer gets same (or better equipment) certified by the respective US service.

Our P-8I has CAe MAD (the only new gen MAD available in the market), A2A & A2G modes in the radar, and additional Telephonics radar for 360 degree coverage over & above what US P-8A will have. And full Indian communication suites. The best of both worlds.

[Austin]

Our P-8I has CAe MAD (the only new gen MAD available in the market), A2A & A2G modes in the radar, and additional Telephonics radar for 360 degree coverage over & above what US P-8A will have. And full Indian communication suites. The best of both worlds.

Like all other deals we would be getting export standard stuff , most certainly not the P-8I of US standard

[Singha]

I agree that P8I < P8A. but even then, most of the US exported stuff esp in avionics, weapons and sensors is highly competitive or superior to the best of the rest. eg even the amraam C7 matches every well , even if we leave out the amraam-D. the hellfire is the best air launched atgm out there. the JDAMs and Paveways are cheap and matches the best. the APG79I on the Shornet has today what others will have in 2015 at best case.

and in drones, ucav and stealth khan is decades ahead. a export model global hawk still has no competition as a platform.

they will obviously not share data like library of worldwide submarine signatures built up over decades of snooping or the details of hostile emitters from their own stable like apg69 radars on F-solah or the radar inside the amraam. these we will have to provide ourself and populate the raw hw for our own use.

[Badar]

I agree that P8I < P8A ... they will obviously not share data like library of worldwide submarine signatures built up over decades of snooping or the details of hostile emitters from their own stable like apg69 radars on F-solah or the radar inside the amraam. these we will have to provide ourself and populate the raw hw for our own use.

Every time you hear of an exporter extolling the virtues of a product like "the export F-16XYZ has greater top speed, altitude and radar range than even the latest models in USAF service", you have to realize that someone is palming off a "monkey version". This is specially noticeable in the sales report of middle eastern states. Raw radiating power and range is slightly less useful than NCTR modes, top speed and altitude affords you marginal safety when compared to a comprehensive self protection suite. Its in these boring details that the importers are short-changed.

But like GD says, the crucial point to focus is weather a product "monkey version" or not, meets our need. If it is a no expense spared kind of deal - the question is not if it is the best of class in the world, but best of class available for purchase in the world. The P-8 certainly meets this criteria.

[Austin]

Thats true all countries compete in the market with their export version stuff and depending on the sensitive version of stuff involved it would be suitably downgraded , American equipment in many cases are second to none.

In the end if you are a buyer and you dont have many people competing for the same product , you are left with little choice which is to buy what is being sold with some bargain on price etc or to just leave it.

P-8 looks like a very good platform but it would be some time the Navy gets hold of it and gets to know how good it is in Indian condition and fine tune the product.

[Singha]

we need more hydrographic survey ships and couple U209 modded into spy-survey subs to prowl all over from yellow sea to edge of antarctica and generate much needed data for both our ASW and SSBN forces.
the treacherous shallow waters of the andaman sea, south china sea and the 1000s of indonesia islands/timor sea need careful handling....

[Philip]

It was our former CNS who was openly against the FMS route as it gave the seller an unequal advantage when determining the pricing and nuances of the deal.Thus Kartik and co.,I'm in good company! I've listed out elsewhere the increasing number of US military hardware deals that get ultra-swift decisonmaking,while others languish.Read Karnad today in the Deccan Chronicle about the MMRCA deal and how we can and must leverage this deal to the fullest extent,and also how the IAF deliberately squashed desi aeronautic devlopment in favour for foreign wares.The FMS route without any competition allows for kickbacks to be easily engineered and adjusted in the pricing as there is no competition whatsoever.US aerospace companies have an excellent track record of the same.

If you see how long it took to buy Hawk trainers,the Gorshkov,Akula,still on-going adventure in discovering which artillery piece is the best;plus competitions for the LUH,basic trainer,naval ASW helo etc.,it grates on the mind.The ultra-swift air tanker decision in favour of Airbus had to be pegged back and a competition conducted.There was also no contest for the Barak-8 medium naval SAM too and Barak-1.ts acquisition was also controversial and investigated.There have been very few similar acquisitions in favour of other nations.The best example is probably the T-90 buy ,a knee-jerk reaction to the Paki buy of Ukrainian T-80UDs after the collapse of the USSR.It was also ta a time when not all western nations were willing to sell us their wares.

One is not asking for special favours for certain nations,but a level playing field."Horses for courses",is what I've always said and a healthy competiton brings out the best results as we are seeing in the MMRCA deal. FMS does not allow for this.