Indian Naval Discussion

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby nakul » 25 Oct 2012 18:48

Russia, Italy revisit S1000 non-nuclear sub project

According to reports that appeared in Russian and Western media, the project will become less expensive by abandoning the use of Russia-designed Club missiles underwater launch systems. This, in turn, would cut the costs for their transportation to Italy and customs clearance. According to latest agreements, the ratio of Russian and Italian components in the sub now makes up 20 to 80 respectively (vs. the previous 50 to 50). Thus, Russia will have only one-fifth in the future submarine.

During the conceptual design stage, it was planned to equip the future submarine with Italian-French remote-controlled Black Shark torpedoes and Club complexes that may boast of many years of faultless operation. Why has Club become so expensive all of a sudden?

The fact that the boat has been designed for sales to not very wealthy third world countries - Egypt, Indonesia and Morocco. However, the list of potential buyers includes not a very "poor" country - South Africa.


If this is true, then we can safely rule out this submarine for IN's next procurement. After the French Scorpene, it seems unlikely that we will go for a French solution again. That leaves Germany & Russia in the race. Russia has an edge because apart from our strategic alliance & Brahmos partnership, Germany falls in the west camp from which we are already procuring Scorpenes.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arun » 25 Oct 2012 19:31

Two photos out of many taken by Clinton Wyness on Indian navy ships participating in the currently ongoing Trilateral IBSAMAR III naval exercise in South Africa.

INS Delhi Oct 21, 2012:

INS Delhi

INS Deepak Oct 21, 2012:

INS Deepak

AbhiJ
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 29 Sep 2010 17:33
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby AbhiJ » 25 Oct 2012 22:37

In IN,

Covertte - 3000 Tonnes
Frigate - 6200 Tonnes
Destroyer - 8000 Tonnes

The Covertte is ASW centric.

IN should look for a cheap mass produced frigate at the bottom around 4,000 tonne armed with:

- Oto Gun
- 2*AK 630
- RBU 6000
- 4*8 Barak 8 with Miniaturized MF STAR with 50 Km range.
- 16 Nirbhays
- 16 Klub-N
- 1 Helo

Would fill the void of AAW and Land attack capability.

Also for exports to friendly countries like Vietnam, Argentina.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 25 Oct 2012 22:49

P-28s were supposed to be for various roles but the first 4 were ASW centric (correct me if i am wrong). IIRC they were supposed to allow us the maintain fleet #s as P-17s were cutback due to price escalation.

AbhiJ
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 29 Sep 2010 17:33
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby AbhiJ » 25 Oct 2012 23:08

P28 were primarily ASW centric from the start. P17s could be used as flagship and escorts for CBG.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 26 Oct 2012 00:16

P-28 are ideal for cheap mass produced ASW and low end AShW corvette/Frigate class. At 3000-3200 tonne displacement they will be in demand if rightly priced. Not too many navies require 6000+ tonne frigate and 8000 odd tonne destroyers. Problem is you need to be able to sell complete system with anti ship missiles and point defense missiles. What will they offer? Brahmos is clearly too large and why will russia , france or unkil allow their weapons on P-28 platform. That's why India needs a Brahmos Lite and QR-SAM naval to offer something on the export market.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 26 Oct 2012 01:25

AbhiJ wrote:P28 were primarily ASW centric from the start. P17s could be used as flagship and escorts for CBG.

Hmm wasn't the plan for 12 P-28 and first batch to be ASW.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 26 Oct 2012 01:43

If IIRC P-28/28-A were always meant to be replacements for Petya's in ASW role.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 525
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 27 Oct 2012 22:38


member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 27 Oct 2012 22:57

SNaik wrote:Construction of Indian Navy MiG-29K
https://picasaweb.google.com/1179903832 ... /MiG_Duma#


quite a bit of manual effort.. all most like hand crafted Ferrari

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_22539 » 28 Oct 2012 07:06

^^Why not a hand built Lada? I am sure some of the resident Rondina lovers won't extend same positive epithet if it was the LCA.

member_23677
BRFite
Posts: 153
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23677 » 28 Oct 2012 07:09

Arun Menon wrote:^^Why not a hand built Lada? I am sure some of the resident Rondina lovers won't extend same positive epithet if it was the LCA.

But then it would have been the "inferior" Indians... that is the difference sirji :mrgreen: :evil:

Daedalus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 42
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 00:57

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Daedalus » 28 Oct 2012 09:33


merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby merlin » 28 Oct 2012 10:35

Daedalus wrote:I don't think these were posted here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO3_sBOcKkQ
http://tambovwolf.livejournal.com/252230.html

Enjoy :D


The most terrifying langot twisting landings must be the carrier landing ones :shock:

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 28 Oct 2012 10:56

at night in driving rain is also part of qualification for newbie carrier pilots.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby merlin » 28 Oct 2012 15:09

Singha wrote:at night in driving rain is also part of qualification for newbie carrier pilots.


Double gulp.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 28 Oct 2012 16:40

Looking at youtube videos i get the feeling night carriers ops might actually get suspended in bad rain or fog. In clear weather, the carrier is barely visible at 3 miles out...just the runway and a few signal lights are on unlike a cruise ship.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 525
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 28 Oct 2012 19:00

F 50 at Yantar yard
Image

Vasu
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Vasu » 29 Oct 2012 11:04

I hope the F46 is sticking to its date in November!

Hoping for lots of wall paperesque photos fellow rakshaks.

anand_sankar
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 09 Jan 2009 19:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby anand_sankar » 29 Oct 2012 12:13

The factor that affects carrier ops the most is the sea state. The pitching, and worse, rolling motion is most hazardous for landing aircraft. Most carriers have roll stabilizers so they can operate upto a certain limit. The sea state limit for safe air ops is usually 5/6. The general thumb rule is bigger the carrier better the sea keeping. Our Vik should be on par with the CDG, which is claimed to operate upto 5/6.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_state

This is an interesting doc with sea states that the USN faces in different seas... http://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.803/pdf/cvs.pdf

Rain or fog usually have no bearing on flight ops as the landing is radio controlled and the ILS is on par or exceeds the best CATIIIB systems used on conventional airfields. Also in the ocean there is no chance of running into ground hazards. But rain affects deck operations, as the slippery deck is a hazard.

In a larger sense, warships (carriers and other combatants) shy away from adverse weather, as their design is not optimal for it. They are not like merchies (RO-RO containers are an exception) who all have cargo below decks, which enhances stability. In warships, you need stuff above the deck, so compromises have to be made in sea keeping. The worst example of sea keeping is of course the Ticonderoga Class, whose problems in heavy seas are well documented.

I remember seeing a fragment of the story of INS Mysore bashing its way through a hurricane for an exercise in the US some years back. The USN was stumped that we actually blasted through that. It would be lovely if anyone could get one of the officers on that voyage to write their account!

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby negi » 29 Oct 2012 13:22

^ IN ships specially R class onwards have excellent sea keeping, all ships built in India since the mod Kashin-II have retained that aspect of the design. Sea state wise ops in bay of Bengal are much more challenging than the arabian sea , even this year the old faithful INS Ranvijay won the best ship trophy in the entire E naval command.

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20453 » 29 Oct 2012 19:26

nakul wrote:Silly reply. Nothing you said refutes my point. The US stuff is only for itself. CISMOA gets you more goodies but even that will not get you anywhere as close.

http://theasiandefence.blogspot.in/2010 ... ional.html

They have different radars for international customers. The downgraded version is branded as international version or export version. This is another of those marketing words such as US selling monkey models to Australia in the Growler under the pretext that "it is sufficient to meet the threat environment of the customer." If you have been following the MMRCA dhaaga, you would know that US is usually known to decide the technical requirements of the customer.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/apy10/

The AN/APY-10 leverages more than 40 years of Raytheon expertise and innovation in maritime and overland surveillance systems. Raytheon has delivered more than 1,900 maritime radars for a variety of platforms worldwide. Raytheon’s AN/APY-10 radar for the U.S. Navy’s P-8A Poseidon provides superior maritime, littoral and overland surveillance capabilities for assured anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance mission support. An exportable system design, the AN/APY-10(I) is available for certain international customers, providing comparable radar performance.


AN/APY-10(I) is the monkey version of AN/APY-10, the latter is US onleee


Just because there is an export version doesn't mean it is downgraded, there is no proof of such a downgrading besides APY-10I was built to specs defined by the IN. It is silly to say it is a monkey version when the USN's own version doesn't have a built in A2A mode, looks like they got the monkey model. We have ordered 12 and chances are we will order another 12+, so I trust the IN to know what they are doing, IN wouldn't have ordered it if it was downgraded any bit. Offcourse the USN version will be slightly different, our version was built from the ground up to be more customizable.

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20453 » 29 Oct 2012 19:36

aakashj wrote:
Dennis wrote:I'd refer Septimus P. to the discussion on the APY-10I near the bottom half of this page: Link


http://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=115126&x=.

This document has all the specs with respect to each mode.


Thanks, interesting doc, I don't see any differences except for the A2A mode being extra on the APY-10I or perhaps I am not looking clearly.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 525
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 29 Oct 2012 19:52

Sindhurakshak modernization completed, out for sea trials from today.

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arijitkm » 29 Oct 2012 22:58

Murky helicopter deal shadow on billion dollar torpedo sale
by Ajai Shukla

.....
The flow of leaks from an Italian investigation into Finmeccanica’s Indian dealings has placed the MoD on edge. And amongst those with stakes in this contract, nobody has forgotten that on March 05th 2012, the MoD had banned four global arms vendors from doing business with the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), even though wrongdoing has not been proved.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kartik » 30 Oct 2012 03:51

Prithwiraj wrote:
SNaik wrote:Construction of Indian Navy MiG-29K
https://picasaweb.google.com/1179903832 ... /MiG_Duma#


quite a bit of manual effort.. all most like hand crafted Ferrari


that is in fact true of almost all aviation assembly lines. the numbers being built cannot justify the cost of robots being used for the assembly. The parts themselves however, may involve a lot of automation during fabrication. Again, the cost of setting that up versus the number of airframes to be built will decide how much automation is required.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vasu raya » 30 Oct 2012 06:30

OT, So, we are missing out on railways not having assembly line robotics, Alas! one area where Japanese can sure JV with us.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21061
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 30 Oct 2012 08:13

http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20121030/177034749.html
Upgraded Indian Submarine Starts Seas Trials in Russia

An Indian Kilo class diesel-electric submarine that has been overhauled at the Zvezdochka shipyard in northern Russia has sailed for two-week sea trials, the company said.

INS Sindhurakshak, which was handed over to the Indian Navy in 1997, has been upgraded under a direct contract between the Zvezdochka shipyard and the Indian defense ministry, signed on June 4, 2010.

“The Indian submarine, which has been repaired and modernized at the Zvezdochka shipyard, sailed for sea trials on Monday,” the company said in a statement.

The upgrade program stipulated a complete overhaul of the submarine, including its hull structures, as well as improved control systems, electronic warfare systems, and an integrated weapon control system. The upgrade is reported to cost around $80 million.

The sub is expected to be delivered to India by the end of 2012, following a series of additional tests.

Russia has built ten Kilo class submarines for India and has already overhauled four of them: INS Sindhuvir, INS Sindhuratna, INS Sindhughosh, and INS Sindhuvijay.

The overhauled Indian submarines are equipped with 3M-54 Club-S (SS-N-27) anti-ship cruise missiles, the Indian-developed USHUS sonar, CCS-MK radio communications system and Porpoise radar.


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 30 Oct 2012 09:35

this brings to 6 the number of Klub equipped Kilos in our hands. the 10th Kilo Sindhushastra had come with it on delivery.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 30 Oct 2012 13:47

one nugget from CNN.

all Naval ships are scrammed in storms, because a ship tied to a dock would be disastrous to both the ship and dock. There's not a single ship in Norfolk right now.

AbhiJ
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 29 Sep 2010 17:33
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby AbhiJ » 30 Oct 2012 22:12

http://defenceexpress.blogspot.in/2012/10/dac-approves-defence-procurement-worth.html

Along with this another important clearance has been for the construction of two underwater special operations vessel at Hindustan Shipyard Ltd (HSL) under a project of Rs. 1,700 crore. During the 90 minute meeting, the DAC also approved construction of a cadet training ship at the cost of Rs. 480 crore at ABG Shipyard, sources said.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kartik » 31 Oct 2012 00:00

nakul wrote:Silly reply. Nothing you said refutes my point. The US stuff is only for itself. CISMOA gets you more goodies but even that will not get you anywhere as close.

http://theasiandefence.blogspot.in/2010 ... ional.html

They have different radars for international customers. The downgraded version is branded as international version or export version. This is another of those marketing words such as US selling monkey models to Australia in the Growler under the pretext that "it is sufficient to meet the threat environment of the customer." If you have been following the MMRCA dhaaga, you would know that US is usually known to decide the technical requirements of the customer.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/apy10/

The AN/APY-10 leverages more than 40 years of Raytheon expertise and innovation in maritime and overland surveillance systems. Raytheon has delivered more than 1,900 maritime radars for a variety of platforms worldwide. Raytheon’s AN/APY-10 radar for the U.S. Navy’s P-8A Poseidon provides superior maritime, littoral and overland surveillance capabilities for assured anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance mission support. An exportable system design, the AN/APY-10(I) is available for certain international customers, providing comparable radar performance.


AN/APY-10(I) is the monkey version of AN/APY-10, the latter is US onleee


Frankly speaking, this is nothing new. The same happened with other suppliers as well, such as the erstwhile USSR, which used to supply 'export' models to India and keep the best equipment for themselves.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby negi » 31 Oct 2012 00:52

I have always wondered at the logic around this export model being downgraded ro-dho for isn't the downgraded model in question put to user trials and evaluated against the GSQR ? As long as it meets one's requirements how does it matter how much the exported model in question is downgraded ?

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby merlin » 31 Oct 2012 09:43

negi wrote:I have always wondered at the logic around this export model being downgraded ro-dho for isn't the downgraded model in question put to user trials and evaluated against the GSQR ? As long as it meets one's requirements how does it matter how much the exported model in question is downgraded ?


Only matters when rah-rah fanboys jump and dance around looking at specs. Nobody sells top of the line equipment that their own forces use. Even if the foreign maal meets GSQR/ASQR/etc. does not mean its top of the line in the country of origin.

The rho-dho is not for getting downgraded stuff. Its for people touting it as the latest and greatest when it clearly isn't.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8311
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 31 Oct 2012 13:13

^^^

In case of imports the GSQR / ASQR is tailored to the specs of the maal being procured.

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20453 » 31 Oct 2012 14:15

As far as the P-8I is conerned apart from Unkil's special CISMOA equipment everything else on it is full spec. However, without that special CISMOA equipment the P8-I might not be as razor sharp as the P-8A, we won't have access to unkil's extensive IFF libraries. Yet, it remains top notch in comparison to other systems on the planet.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21061
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 01 Nov 2012 11:05

According to the USNI Proceedings,China has struck a deal to buy two and build upto 34 backfire strategic bombers.We dithered for a decade in buying these same aircraft for the IN and will now have to face this massive threat once these aircraft are in Chinese service,both for the IN and IAF if also based in Tibet.

D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby D Roy » 01 Nov 2012 11:28

if true, this is news indeed. Because until now despite the propaganda shots of H-6U refuellers, Chicom's ability to sustain real long range airpower with flankers was suspect. I know you have posted this in the naval thread as it may seem in tune with Chicom's A2/AD buildup ( hey it's Proceedings which has carried this after all) but this actually may have more relevance to the North Myanmar corridor. as you pointed out it will be interesting to see where they base these backfires if they are indeed bringing them in.
Last edited by D Roy on 01 Nov 2012 14:25, edited 1 time in total.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2330
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 01 Nov 2012 13:15

Philip wrote:According to the USNI Proceedings,China has struck a deal to buy two and build upto 34 backfire strategic bombers.We dithered for a decade in buying these same aircraft for the IN and will now have to face this massive threat once these aircraft are in Chinese service,both for the IN and IAF if also based in Tibet.


I am not happy! :evil:

And we all know once they build 34, they are going to continue building more illegally and call it H-7 or something.

But to be honest, the real threat of stand-off missile launches already existed for the IAF from Tibet even with H-6s. Arrival of the backfires will not change too many fundamental equations for the IAF with regard to defenses of its airbases from the north. The real threat here is for the IN, who far less well equipped to handle such an attack. Suddenly fifty Mig-29Ks does not seem formidable enough from where I see it.

That said, how confirmed is this news? Any links/sources?

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Surya » 01 Nov 2012 18:03

no I am ok

we cannot buy every expensive toy just because others might buy them

Its a white elephant and if they want to buy and spend billions maintaining them - good luck

We have been burnt by 1 white elephant already

There is no point in having these and showcasing their flt once a blue moon

the threat existed in other forms and we have to think of other ways to counter it


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests