Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 03 Sep 2014 06:40

Leo.Davidson welcome back. Looks like it is a short return.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 03 Sep 2014 19:12

http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/australi ... nese-subs/

Just read this 12 Soryu's at approx 500mil$ a piece, wonder why we are still wrangling with the russians and the french when the japanese are offering such advanced harware at such enticing prices, could some gurus shed furtehr light on the same please.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Sep 2014 19:30

^ Because Unkil and it's poodles have different pricing when dealing within the group besides given the huge chip which Japan has on it's shoulders it will never sell military hardware to India not until Unkil approves so.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Sep 2014 19:59

Operative words:

Japan changed some of its laws in December 2011, allowing it to export some items to vetted allies.

TBD.

But, generally speaking, I see ache din for Bharat. Need to play the game right and not goof up this opportunity.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 03 Sep 2014 20:26

We already have made some headway with the japanese with the shinmaywa deal, we should try and at least send feelers out to the japanese regarding the possibility of soryu's for us, even if they come at a 50% premium on the above mentioned 500mil each they'll be far cheaper than the scorpenes.The japanese industry could do with a paying customer like india and we need subs bad so its a win win as far as i can see.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Sep 2014 20:44

The Varyag/Liaoning is supposed to be a carrier to train PLAN pilots ,with similar new carriers being built at great speed according to US intel.China will within a decade have possibly 3-4 such carriers of similar size. These will definitely embark more aircraft and helos,esp. in any crisis. When these carriers hit the water,one is sure to see China flex its maritime muscles against Taiwan and attempt to hold the US mil alliance at bay.One can be sure that the PLAAN will send its carriers into the IOR to show the flag.The IN requires IAC 2 and 3 to be nuclear powered 65,000t+ flat tops which can if perfected and affordable by then use EMALS,and stealth aircraft/UCAVs in the future.

The Japanese are trying to sell their subs to Oz,not India.Unless India kowtows to Uncle Sam,like the Japanese and buzzards of Oz,sign CISMOA,etc.,etc.,they will not sell anything worthwhile.A dozen amphibs pales into insignificance when Russia is willing oi sell us Akula N-subs,N-sub tech,and co-develop its most advanced missiles like BMos/hyper-BMos,etc.,not to mention stealth aircraft. Secondly,the Russian subs are as advanced if not more so than the Japanese ones and carry far more lethal weaponry like the Klub series of missiles,Shkval torpedoes which have no equivalent in the w west or Japan. We are also very familiar with Russian sub tech,both conventional and nuclear and there is much commonality of eqpt. across the types,from Kilo to Amur to Akulas,not to mention the same weaponry used.Adding a Japanese type to a sub fleet which already has German and soon to be French sub-tech apart from the main strength being Russian,would be a nightmare.

member_28722 · Post by **member_28722** » 03 Sep 2014 21:50

+1 Philip

We should buy Chakra 2 and also other Akula supposedly being built in Russia with our money. I don't think we need more than 4 SSBNs if they are carrying 5000km SLBMs.
Ideally we could convert the Arihant itself into an SSGN (after the follow on subs are built) a la' Ohio class. If it can launch 12 750 SLBMs then it should be able to launch an equal (if not more Brahmos/Nirbay). One per PLAN carrier should be a sufficient enough deterrent.

Leo.Davidson · Post by **Leo.Davidson** » 04 Sep 2014 06:29

deejay wrote:Leo.Davidson welcome back. Looks like it is a short return.

Am not that smart, really don't know what that comment means...

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 04 Sep 2014 08:59

Philiposky, Did Japan tell u that they will not sell Soryu to the Indians?

Seems Amrikhan Ambassador told you that they are against the sale of Soryu by their friend Japan to their Enemy India.

If you're talking geopolitics, Amrikhan wants Indians and Japanese to be friends.
Now for us and Japan its what we require and whether Japanese can meet those requirements.
If both are met expect Soryu and Scorpene (larger) fighting for the P75I contract.

kit · Post by **kit** » 04 Sep 2014 10:26

Is the Soryu as good as it is made out to be ? More importantly would it suit the Indian Navys requirements

Some of the sensor suites on the Soryu seems to be american and i am definitely sure it needs American approval before any export

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Sep 2014 10:47

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 331_1.html

For over eight years, as Hindustan Shipyard Ltd (HSL), Visakhapatnam, has struggled to overhaul one of the navy's Kilo-class submarines - INS Sindhukirti - critics have flayed the shipyard for depriving the navy of a critical warship. HSL has never publicly explained the delay.

Yet, Business Standard found, during a detailed tour of HSL, that the delay has little to do with inefficiency or incompetence. Instead, much of the blame rests with a loosely framed contract with Moscow that has allowed Russian "experts" to incrementally extend the work to be done on the Sindhukirti, in one case to 13 times what was required for overhauling an Indian submarine in Russia.

The Russians who have worked at HSL since 2006, overseeing Sindhukirti's "modernisation-cum-refit" knew they were assisting a competitor. HSL's success would disrupt the lucrative flow of Indian submarines to Zvezdochka shipyard in Russia, which had long overhauled them for hundreds of crore rupees each.

"INS Sindhukirti will complete its refit by March 31, when it will rejoin the navy fleet. But the experience of overhauling this submarine holds major lessons for Indian shipyards," says HSL chairman, Rear Admiral N K Mishra (retired).

An overhaul, or refit, conducted every 10 to 15 years, extends a submarine's life by repairing its hull and modernising its combat capability. It involves examining, repairing and even replacing parts of the hull (two hulls in the Kilo-class, an inner "pressure hull" and an outer hull); replacing worn-out cabling; and replacing or upgrading major weapons, sensors and communication systems.

Business Standard has compared the work that Russian "experts" at HSL ordered on the Sindhukirti, with that done on two submarines earlier - INS Sindhughosh, refitted in Russia; and INS Sindhudhvaj, refitted in the Naval Dockyard, Visakhapatnam (see chart). In each work category, the Sindhukirti has required several times the work done on the Sindhughosh and Sindhudhvaj.

Tellingly, this was not anticipated in the preliminary work estimation, which was in line with earlier refit experiences. Shipyard workers recount (and the figures endorse) that the work only ballooned after it began, with Russian overseers repeatedly ordering work extensions.

The "pressure hull build up" - in which pits on the hull surface are filled with metal -doubled. So did the "frame renewal", or replacement of the metal framework that supports the hull. The grinding work expanded almost threefold. The time-consuming and costly work of replacing entire hull plates went up 13-fold from what the Sindhughosh required in Russia. The conning tower, which was only repaired in earlier refits, had to be entirely rebuilt.

There are only two possible explanations: Either INS Sindhukirti, which the navy operated exactly like its other Kilo-class submarines, inexplicably underwent exceptional wear and tear; or else Russian experts ordered needless work extensions, for their own reasons. Senior navy officials say the former is unlikely.

Contacted for comments, the defence section of the Russian Embassy in Delhi has not responded.

Furthermore, INS Sindhukirti's refit involved extensive modernisation. Like the Sindhughosh and Sindhudvaj, its torpedo tubes were modified to fire Klub missiles against surface targets. Unlike them, it also got a new MCA inertial navigation suite, a Palady nerve system, and a Pirit ship control console. Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) installed indigenous Ushus sonar and upgraded communications. As the submarine was being reassembled, Russian overseers ordered a time-consuming replacement of all the main-line cabling.

"When Russia overhauls a submarine, the work package is frozen at the time the contract is signed. But we had no experience of framing a contract. We allowed the Russians to indefinitely increase the work required, which kept expanding," recounts Commodore Ashok Bhal (retired), director of the Sindhukirti refit.

Russia has historically taken two and a half years or more to refit a Kilo-class submarine. The Sindhukirti will have taken three-and-a-half times longer, with its expanded work package and a series of major modifications and upgrades. Time has also been expended in developing worker skills. It is today the only Indian shipyard that has actually refitted a Kilo-class submarine.

Even so, the shipyard has been denied any role in overhauling six Indian Navy submarines, a Rs 4,800-crore project that the defence ministry cleared on Friday. Two of these will go to Russia, while four are overhauled in India - two in Mazagon Dock Ltd (MDL), Mumbai, and two at Naval Dockyard, Mumbai.

HSL has been left out even though the shipyard was transferred in 2010 from the ministry of shipping to the ministry of defence, on the grounds that it would be central to the construction and overhaul of submarines.

Senior admirals lament the wastage of skills and experience. Former navy chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, points to how MDL developed submarines skills while building two vessels under licence from HDW of Germany. After allegations of bribery surfaced, HDW was blacklisted and construction of submarines in MDL halted. With the gradual dissipation of worker skills, the Scorpene construction project required skills to be developed afresh.

"The skills we have developed cannot be allowed to be wasted away", says Mishra, the HSL chief.

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 04 Sep 2014 12:06

^^^ I wonder what new yarn the Russian fan boys will spin now. This should teach us there are no permanent friends or enemies. Only permanent interests (which in this case for Rodina was to ensure continuity of work in Russian yards).

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Sep 2014 12:08

And what were our MOD guys who framed the contract doing?

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 04 Sep 2014 12:15

Nobody is absolving the legal team of MoD from their cockup. But Rodina fan boys need to remove their blinkers and stop claiming that Russia is all awesome friend of India and we need to be 'grateful' to them. Friends also mean business like they have shown us with this refit and T90 saga. Time to recognize this and trust the choices of the services even if they pick non-Russian hardware for import.

d_berwal · Post by **d_berwal** » 04 Sep 2014 12:56

nileshjr wrote:http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 331_1.html

For over eight years, as Hindustan Shipyard Ltd (HSL), Visakhapatnam, has struggled to overhaul one of the navy's Kilo-class submarines - INS Sindhukirti - critics have flayed the shipyard for depriving the navy of a critical warship. HSL has never publicly explained the delay.

Yet, Business Standard found, during a detailed tour of HSL, that the delay has little to do with inefficiency or incompetence. Instead, much of the blame rests with a loosely framed contract with Moscow that has allowed Russian "experts" to incrementally extend the work to be done on the Sindhukirti, in one case to 13 times what was required for overhauling an Indian submarine in Russia.

the author of this article is know for his paid new articles... he has no credibility... he is our own SHUKLAJIIIII

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 04 Sep 2014 12:59

nileshjr wrote:http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 331_1.html

This is the first sub overhauled by an Indian shipyard, right? Would you allow for a learning curve for the local personnel to do the job? The whole point of the exercise is to do it at home. Scorpenes in France certainly would have been built in a fraction of time spent by Mazagon, but the delay was accepted in order to start building subs in India and stop buying them abroad.

Zvezdochka is swamped by repair jobs, right now three nuclear subs are transported from Pacific for overhaul, they are even tasked with building surface ships, I would regard the claim of sabotage with a big grain of salt.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Sep 2014 13:12

The fact is that the yard dismantled the sub and after that were clueless as to how to repair and modernise it.Instead,the sub should've been given to MDL,the ONLY yard that had built subs at that time,that too just two U-boats! Have there been any complaints about the remaining Kilos that were sent to Russia for upgradation? If 5 of them were thus upgraded successfully,it indicates that both technologically and financially the upgrades were a success and according to contract. AS a poster has said,what were the MOD boyos doing when writing the contract? The same jokers were also responsible for the massive hike in the Scorpene costs,far more than the costs of this Kilo upgrade,now the cost of just one non-AIP Scorpene more than $500M,when a brand new larger Kilo is available for just $300M! Not to mention the enormous delays in the Scorpene,with further delays hinted at.Truly the Scorpene's sting is in the tail!

In the case of the SKiriti,the sub was a virtual write off.Who knows how it was dismantled and whether Russian experts were at all involved in the original process.As far as we know it,they were not.Now compare what is also going on in the same base.Our very first N-sub,the Arihant was successfully built WITH extensive Russian help,without which we would have no SSBN in the water.The then PM,MMS,openly acknowledged the huge contribution made by Russia and their technical experts for the same.Further subs of the class are in the pipeline with the second expected to be launched before the year-end.One isn't even talking about the Akula lease,which no other nation on the planet will give us! So let's not rubbish the Russian contribution to the IN's sub capability.It is deliberate propaganda,no coincidence as to the timing.

PS:As to the capability of the Russian yards,they are churning out Kilo subs at record speed and at very affordable costs.Just see how Vietnam is getting its 6 Kilos in record time,subs where we are going to train the Vietnamese Navy in operating them.Russia is also building more Kilos for the RuN and more are in the pipeline for its customers.

The IN/MOD given that we operated 10 Kilos (until the SR was lost) for over a decade+,should've in the original agreement worked out a package where some mid-ilfe refits,perhaps 4 out of the 10, would be dome in an Indian yard.The hard truth is that both the IN and MOD/GOI went to sleep about sub-building,allowing our hard earned capability in building subs ,U-209s go to waste,and allowing the Pakis to overtake India in building conventional AIP subs.

PPS:Saurabh,you're quite right.Another couple of Akulas would do well for the IN,while we build at home a second line of SSGNs based upon a modified version of the Arihant.Russia has an unfinished Akula,plus could make available to us again on lease one of its serving Akulas as more Severodvinsk class subs are inducted into its fleet as an interim measure.It takes 3 N-subs in the inventory to keep one at sea.Therefore,we need at least 2 of our SSBNs at sea ,out of at least 5/6,with an arsenal of at least 24 missiles with MIRV warheads to counter both Pak and China.

In fact the ATV design as it is can be converted into an SSGN with different missiles,both land attack and anti-ship, loaded in the missile silos.In any crisis these SSGNs could also be fitted with .strategic missiles if the silos are also of similar size.This would increase the number of BM capable N-subs without any sweat.What would however be also required is a higher speed and a significant operational diving depth,without any reduction in stealth performance/quieting,if it is to combat other N-subs and attack carrier task groups.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Sep 2014 14:35

Full details about the French delays ,fourth in a row and lack of spares for the Scorpene subs.The GOI should immediately enforce penalties,especially as the Rafale deal is on the table,waiting to be signed. A great ad for its signing!

from another BR td.

India
French supplier faltering, deadlines breached; Scorpene may take another hit says defence shipyard
Jugal R Purohit New Delhi, August 30, 2014 | UPDATED 10:55 IST

The alarm bells have gone off. After nine long years of waiting, the Indian Navy couldn't have expected a worse time for it to happen.Jaitley during his visit to the MDL in Mumbai,earlier this week.

Suffering from two debilitating underwater losses within a year and tardy acquisition process, its only hope, Project 75 involving the construction of six Scorpene submarines based on transfer of technology from the French firm DCNS, is on the verge of taking a hit, resulting into the fourth straight extension of delivery deadline.

The Mumbai-based Mazagon Dock Limited (MDL), which is building the boats with DCNS' assistance, has stated that critical spares which were to be supplied by DCNS are yet to materialise despite the deadlines expiring. What makes the crisis worse is the fact that these spares impact the first boat in all sections and thereby the lack of availability is expected to hit progress in construction. The present delivery schedule was worked out in November 2012 and orders were placed accordingly. This schedule stipulated that the first submarine would get commissioned into the navy by September 2016 and the remaining five at intervals of nine months after that. It is this schedule which now stands breached.

Meanwhile, the MDL has completed the construction of the six hulls for the six boats and has made headway into outfitting work on the first.

Rear Admiral (retd) Rahul Shrawat, Chairman and Managing Director, MDL said, "Earlier too this project was delayed on account of Mazagon Procurement Material (MPM) not being procured on time. Fresh MPM was ordered following a review. Of that, while some parts have come, some have not despite their delivery deadlines expiring. I am being forced to absorb delays and on many occasions I am undoing work I have done because parts come in later on". (!) He added that the Ministry of Defence had been briefed over this and the 'pressure from all sides' was being applied on DCNS to deliver. "Even if it comes through today, I can deliver the boat on time," he mentioned. When asked if a revised timeline will have to worked out, following the delay, his response was, "I can't comment till the material actually comes to me."

It was informed that the first of the Scorpene boats was ready to be 'launched' in September next year. A year of trials after that, involving all systems including weapon firing, she should be ready for commissioning into the navy i.e in September 2016. "Work is going on 24 by 7 at the yard and we are highly motivated. My fingers are crossed," he added.

Defence Minister Arun Jaitley had visited the yard earlier this week and when asked did not comment on the development. However, top sources said they were aware of the matter and were 'pushing it'.

Despite sending email to DCNS, Paris, seeking answers to this delay, there was no response. It was informed that senior officials were 'travelling'.

Navy's response
It may be recalled that Project 75 submarine construction project is a very important project for the country and Indian Navy. 06 state-of-the-art submarines fitted with latest equipment are being built at MDL, Mumbai under collaboration with M/s DCNS France, giving a massive boost to the indigenous submarine construction capability of the country. With all the impediments & material hurdles resolved, the construction of the submarines is progressing on schedule to meet the planned delivery schedule of Sep 2016.

Expert Opinion - R. Adm (Retd) Raja Menon
Iwould blame the MoD more than the yard, the yard has bore the brunt of MoD's indecision

Poor decision-making has impacted the submarine project earlier too. Scorpene submarines are very eagerly awaited in the navy and they do represent the latest in technology that will take us ahead of Pakistan and give superiority in the Indian Ocean vis a vis the Chinese.

Construction of subs not the only problem
While the submarine building is mired in delays, it does not represent the only problem facing the project.

The navy, which is favourably seeking the Black Shark torpedo, is yet to finalise contract for supplying of torpedoes. The cause behind was the shadow of the VVIP helicopter scam. The Black Shark is manufactured by WASS, a company of the Finmeccanica group, dealings with which were under an unofficial freeze. Only earlier this week the MoD has issued a notification in this regard and a final call is yet to be taken.

The navy is keen to also fit the fifth and sixth Scorpene with Air independent Propulsion (AIP) system, which helps the boat to remain underwater for longer periods. However with the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) being tasked with the job, the navy remains unsure. Sources in the DRDO, when contacted, said, "It is extremely high end technology and challenging too. We are on the job and hope to meet the deadline set by the navy."

Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/fren ... 79926.html

So we are to be yet again guinea pigs for the DRDO's AIP "tech demonstrator"! One cannot understand the logic.First import a proven, or enter into a JV for an AIP system ,then develop an indigenous one based upon the operational characteristics in the IOR environment.

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 04 Sep 2014 14:56

SNaik wrote: This is the first sub overhauled by an Indian shipyard, right? Would you allow for a learning curve for the local personnel to do the job? The whole point of the exercise is to do it at home. Scorpenes in France certainly would have been built in a fraction of time spent by Mazagon, but the delay was accepted in order to start building subs in India and stop buying them abroad.

Zvezdochka is swamped by repair jobs, right now three nuclear subs are transported from Pacific for overhaul, they are even tasked with building surface ships, I would regard the claim of sabotage with a big grain of salt.

Snaik sir, Why HSL had to overhaul this sub only MoD/ GoI can answer. Till now people were berating HSL on account of the sub being out of water for so many years. But when the other side of the story is told people find hard to believe there can be something wrong with the Russian side? Why did this sub have to undergo the amount of work listed in the chart compared to others in the class? I am not claiming HSL is a holy cow, but same yardstick of opining needs to be applied for all the parties concerned.

As for d_Berwal sir, futher upgrades of 2 kilos are going to Russia with the rest shared between MDL and Navy Dock Mumbai. Also this article does not question Kilo as a platform, hence does not affect Russian chances for P75I. So who is going to benefit and pay for a lifafa as you claim in this instance?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 04 Sep 2014 17:43

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 683000.cms

Navy's largest patrolling vessel INS Sumitra commissioned

CHENNAI: Aimed at enhancing the Navy's coastal surveillance, its largest offshore patrol vessel INS Sumitra was formally commissioned by Chief of Naval Staff Admiral R K Dhowan here today.

The vessel is the fourth in its class and built on in-house design of state-owned Goa Shipyard Ltd.

...
The ship, which has a displacement of 2200 tonnes and can travel a speed of upto 26 knots, is equipped with state-of-the art medium and short range weapons which include 76mm medium range gun(SRGM), a potent Close-In Weapon System (CIWS), Electronic Support System Sanket Mk III and Communication Intelligence System ELK 7036.

dinesh_kimar · Post by **dinesh_kimar** » 04 Sep 2014 19:23

^ A few days bk saw the HSL newspaper tender for "80kl waterplant for INS Sindhukriti" and this got me wondering whether the sub was finally ready. Uptil today, the speculation was:

> The INS Sindhukriti delay was because our local boys wanted to put an extra missile "plug" on the boat, they thought they had the know-how, and they cocked it up.

> HSL was selected as UPA top guns favored it, and was near the ENC. This project was to help them develop sub maintenance skills. (I dont see anything wrong in this decision,it happens all over the world, and dont blame the UPA for the shoddy implementation)

> Shipyards in India had capability to do Kilo overhauls, but it took longer time, hence sent to Russia by Navy.

The above article turns everything known till now on its head. "Russian " experts to blame, "only" yard capable of upgrading the Kilo but still MoD and Navy ignored it, etc, etc.
As the wise say, the truth is somewhere in between.

d_berwal · Post by **d_berwal** » 04 Sep 2014 20:32

KiranM wrote:[
As for d_Berwal sir, futher upgrades of 2 kilos are going to Russia with the rest shared between MDL and Navy Dock Mumbai. Also this article does not question Kilo as a platform, hence does not affect Russian chances for P75I. So who is going to benefit and pay for a lifafa as you claim in this instance?

KiranM sir, i only stated that "the author of this article is know for his paid new articles... he has no credibility... he is our own SHUKLAJIIIII"

thats all where did i say about US/ France/ Germany/ UK or Russia and now Japan chances for P75I

my point was about the credibility of author where did you get the impression on P75I from ?

Sirji, can you elaborate on how does a sub gets overhauled ? ("HSL had to overhaul this sub only" ?)

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 04 Sep 2014 20:51

d_berwal ji can you dispute Shuklaji's chart and figures he produced in his article ?

-Ankit

d_berwal · Post by **d_berwal** » 04 Sep 2014 20:58

Ankit Desai wrote:d_berwal ji can you dispute Shuklaji's chart and figures he produced in his article ?

-Ankit

what is there to dispute in the chart... (seriously i cant understand anything in the chart)
can you tell us all here in BFR what does the chart reveal on the 7 parameters he has out there ? (your understanding)

where he is not even using 3 parameters for comparison and still showing them?

what is the difference between crowning tower build up vs renewal? and what does it signify in a chart? (on a lighter note even shuklaji will not be able to tell the difference because he didn't create the chart, he jut put it there)

my understanding remains the same "shuklaji writes paid articles"

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Sep 2014 21:12

Russia delayed sub refit to weaken shipyard?

With all the extra work that has been done on INS Sindhukirti, should it not serve the IN for much longer than other refits? As the IN submarine fleet is dwindling, this should be a good thing if these extra work extend service life by another 5 to 10 years more than planned

d_berwal · Post by **d_berwal** » 04 Sep 2014 21:24

srai wrote: With all the extra work that has been done on INS Sindhukirti, should it not serve the IN for much longer than other refits? As the IN submarine fleet is dwindling, this should be a good thing if these extra work extend service life by another 5 to 10 years more than planned

may be serving longer vs deeper vs wider that others before it

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2014 21:30

SNaik wrote:
nileshjr wrote:http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 331_1.html

This is the first sub overhauled by an Indian shipyard, right? Would you allow for a learning curve for the local personnel to do the job? The whole point of the exercise is to do it at home. Scorpenes in France certainly would have been built in a fraction of time spent by Mazagon, but the delay was accepted in order to start building subs in India and stop buying them abroad.

On local personnel it is a moot point, India did bring in Russians to help out, so that should answer your question.

However, are you claiming that the differential between the time taken in Russia and the Actual in India is what it takes to learn? And, who estimated the original time/unit in India? (Asking)

On the topic of the Scorpean - outside of the fact that both were "delayed", is there anything else that is common based on that article? Do we have such data for the Scorpeans?

Zvezdochka is swamped by repair jobs, right now three nuclear subs are transported from Pacific for overhaul, they are even tasked with building surface ships, I would regard the claim of sabotage with a big grain of salt.

What has the Russian overload to do with this article?

On "sabotage" - perhaps to powerful a word to use - but the data bears him out.

can you tell us all here in BFR what does the chart reveal on the 7 parameters he has out there ? (your understanding)

Parameters do not matter. What matters is the diff between the estimates and actual. Based on that he is right.

d_berwal · Post by **d_berwal** » 04 Sep 2014 21:40

d_berwal wrote: can you tell us all here in BFR what does the chart reveal on the 7 parameters he has out there ? (your understanding)

NRao wrote: Parameters do not matter. What matters is the diff between the estimates and actual. Based on that he is right.

guruji u are the supreme analytical and statical mind on BFR so can you tell me what is your understanding of the 7 parameters and there estimates by 3 different entities where 3 parameters are and estimates are not even used in a chart ?

guruji can you explain the chart for us dhotiwalas ?

NRao wrote: On local personnel it is a moot point, India did bring in Russians to help out, so that should answer your question.

now do you know gruji when were russian bought in to help out? before starting the overhaul or after 1 yr or after 2 yr or after 4 yr or after 9yrs ?

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 04 Sep 2014 22:57

d_berwal wrote:
Ankit Desai wrote:d_berwal ji can you dispute Shuklaji's chart and figures he produced in his article ?

-Ankit
what is there to dispute in the chart... (seriously i cant understand anything in the chart)
can you tell us all here in BFR what does the chart reveal on the 7 parameters he has out there ? (your understanding)

where he is not even using 3 parameters for comparison and still showing them?

what is the difference between crowning tower build up vs renewal? and what does it signify in a chart? (on a lighter note even shuklaji will not be able to tell the difference because he didn't create the chart, he jut put it there) ...........

Well the chart explains the cost and time over run because of difference between estimated and actual figures. In one case the figure is for tonnes ! The use of 2100 tonnes of material over 80 tonnes ! And to use it, the required time which resulted in to delays of many years. You can say similar thing about other categories too.

In the article he clearly mentioned which also reflects in chart that refit of Sindhugosh at Russia which was at similar line was done with much lesser material. Experts coming from same country took 2.5 years to refit kilo-sub in Russia which took them 3.5 times more ! You can take HSL workers lake of expertise in refit in to account but that should not result in to 3.5 x estimate time as total time.

d_berwal wrote:my understanding remains the same "shuklaji writes paid articles"

I am neither fan nor foe of Shuklaji but you can not impose your impression on every article he comes out with. Let me quote from article

There are only two possible explanations: Either INS Sindhukirti, which the navy operated exactly like its other Kilo-class submarines, inexplicably underwent exceptional wear and tear; or else Russian experts ordered needless work extensions, for their own reasons. Senior navy officials say the former is unlikely.

So he has two theories but I guess due to categories he presented he came to conclusion that the delay and cost over run is due to Russians. There is no denying of the fact that there is cost over run (estimate and actual figures are different) and delay in refit. So if Russians were there as experts than did they dispute the estimate figures ? Can you deny both the parts (delay and cost over run) ?

d_berwal wrote:can you tell us all here in BFR....

Well I can already read few of BRF having different views than you so I am not sure if "ALL BRF" want to know about chart ! Please let's keep it to our selves as we both quoted each other.

-Ankit

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 04 Sep 2014 23:22

d_berwal wrote:
nileshjr wrote:http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 331_1.html
the author of this article is know for his paid new articles... he has no credibility... he is our own SHUKLAJIIIII

"When Russia overhauls a submarine, the work package is frozen at the time the contract is signed. But we had no experience of framing a contract. We allowed the Russians to indefinitely increase the work required, which kept expanding," recounts Commodore Ashok Bhal (retired), director of the Sindhukirti refit.

If the quote is fabricated, I think we'll be hearing from Cmdre Bhal soon enough.

As far as Ajai Shukla is concerned, his early skepticism of the Arjun aside, he's been an strong advocate for domestic products. Strong enough to suspect him of being on the DRDO's payroll.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Sep 2014 02:04

d_berwal wrote: guruji u are the supreme analytical and statical mind on BFR so can you tell me what is your understanding of the 7 parameters and there estimates by 3 different entities where 3 parameters are and estimates are not even used in a chart ?

guruji can you explain the chart for us dhotiwalas ?

First of all, I assume you meant statistical. Statical mind or a static mind is moksha, headed but not yet there.

On 7 parameters, does it matter? Why should it matter? What matters is that the three sides (IN, the Yard and Russians) agreed to those 7 parameters. And, from what I can tell Shukla did not make them up, or are you saying that he did? And, got paid for that too?

What matters are the metrics. And as long as the Russians agreed to the parameters and the method of calculating the metrics all should be fine.

And, from what I can tell the two sides did sign a "loosely framed" contract (see below).

NRao wrote: On local personnel it is a moot point, India did bring in Russians to help out, so that should answer your question.
now do you know gruji when were russian bought in to help out? before starting the overhaul or after 1 yr or after 2 yr or after 4 yr or after 9yrs ?

Shishya ji: Pahele padho, phir padhahi karo. Ye yad rakho. Answer is in the article. Someone has already paid for you, now you need to do your part: read up:

The Russians who have worked at HSL since 2006

I checked out a few older articles and none are as explicit as this but I did find refs that seemed to indicate that the Russians joined in 2006, when the project started.

Next: this article also stated:

Instead, much of the blame rests with a loosely framed contract with Moscow

I tried to find when this "contract" may have been signed, but could not find any leads so far. So, the assumption from me is that it was also in 2006.

Do you have a problem with the start date?

All this in addition to the above post.

Now if anyone has a problem with those numbers, then that is fine, can understand that, which is what I asked in the first post (on learning curve).

But, if anyone has such a problem, I do have another question ........................... yes, based on statistics.

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 05 Sep 2014 04:21

Viv S wrote:

As far as Ajai Shukla is concerned, his early skepticism of the Arjun aside, he's been an strong advocate for domestic products. Strong enough to suspect him of being on the DRDO's payroll.

Are you sure that DRDO did not just say that they have an AGNI pointed and ready for him

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 05 Sep 2014 04:32

Not at all surprised by the INS Sindhukirti extra work saga. Russians are behaving like any sane business would do - kill any potential competition targeting their revenues.

Since it's 'Made in Russia', they will lock us down for refurbishment while the 'Made in India' Scorpene don't even make it out of the mazgoan docks unless extra $$$ for torpedo tubes is paid upfront.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 05 Sep 2014 05:15

The propensity of some forum members to brand people as being on a payroll, or sold-out, or unpatriotic, etc. just because they don't always say things that are in tune with the majority opinion on this blog, is perplexing and disappointing.

I myself don't agree with many things AS says, but he takes the trouble to author insightful and thought-provoking reports, which is an extremely rare trait for Indian defense journalists.
Also, he has served his country and his army, and quite well per all accounts. How many of the posters here who are doing the labeling have done that?
So let's argue on the merit of the each report rather than issuing nonsensical blanket statements.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Sep 2014 07:06

@nik,

++1.

I do not blame the Russians one bit, that behavior - perhaps not that blatant - is par for the course. It is the contract - in this case - that needs attention in the future.

@ManuJ,

I have not read most of his articles, especially the one/s on F-35. But from what I have read so far I do not find him to be biased. Could be that he is aggressive.

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 05 Sep 2014 07:19

NRao wrote:
I have not read most of his articles, especially the one/s on F-35. But from what I have read so far I do not find him to be biased. Could be that he is aggressive.

Wow, you sure are asleep or don't want to wake up. He was selling Indian interest in Siachen to highest bidder, porkistan and its chacha. And he doesn't have any agenda/bias other than to make some money for himself. I grant you that.

http://www.canarytrap.in/2013/11/22/rew ... overnance/

ACM Tyagi declined to respond, but Col Ajai Shukla, a Track II member and its self-appointed spokesperson did. He was livid with anger but had no answers to our questions. So he called us all ‘communal scums’ and pointing to me wrote: “Amongst those with the most dubious credentials in this group is you. An IAS officer turned moralizer! What a combination, Sir-ji.” This impotent outburst did not work, PMO made a hasty retreat but Ajai Shukla, the treason-peddler, was offered a high position in Prashar Bharati, but that did not work out! This ‘gentleman’ who has sold his soul says that General VK Singh’s ‘autobiography provides a stunning insight into the mind of an army chief who went rogue’. He then goes on to upbraid co-author Kunal Verma as ‘a long-time military groupie who has been paid crores from the defence budget to write self-congratulatory coffee-table books!’ What a travesty!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Sep 2014 07:34

******* self deleted *******

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Sep 2014 09:50

Sivab, its not money but the problem that per some little birds, Shuklaji is of the establishment - the * "secooolar" variety that dominates many of our erstwhile congress chaap politically connected folks. These folks are unique in that they simultaneously parrot everything the domestic left says about indian culture/yindoos/rss etc and at the same time wax rhapsodical about amrika bahadur & its advantages.
BTW he had pretty good contacts in the establishment, so much so that even a long time defense mag correspondent was livid about how this guy would wrangle visits to all the "right places".

negi · Post by **negi** » 05 Sep 2014 09:52

sivab wrote: http://www.canarytrap.in/2013/11/22/rew ... overnance/

Tyagi being head of Track II team assumes even more significance after his involvement in the Chopper scam has been established . Basically every committee under UPA was a choron ki toli.

srin · Post by **srin** » 05 Sep 2014 10:34

d_berwal wrote:
the author of this article is know for his paid new articles... he has no credibility... he is our own SHUKLAJIIIII

d_berwal-ji, this is an "ad hominem" attack. We have debated here on this board AS's past articles. But attacking him doesn't shed light on it. Some of the facts are verifiable (names are mentioned for instance).