Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

[Shreeman]

Stowage about VikAd.



Why would something like this not work?

[Samudragupta]

India to ramp up amphibious capabilities with four warships

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) had re-issued a request for proposal (RFP) to Indian private sector shipyards in September to build four amphibious assault ships, also called the Landing Platform Docks (LPD) in naval parlance. Each of these will approximately cost Rs 6,000 crore and are expected to deliver over the next 10 years.
Each of these ships will be anything between 35,000 and 40,000 tonnes. The Indian shipyards have been asked to locate their own foreign collaborator. “The bids have come in,” a source in the Navy said. The RFP was sent to ABG, Larsen & Toubro (L&T), and Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering.
The successful private shipyard and its foreign collaborator will be given order for two such ships and the two others will be made by the MoD-owned Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Visakhapatnam, at the same price being paid to the private builder.
This signals an important change in the long-term strategic plan as this will be huge jump over the existing capability of launching offensive sea-borne. The LPDs are essentially the first step towards increasing capability to launch “out-of-country operations”.
The LPDs are essentially a modern-day sea-based version of the Roman epic “Trojan horse”. Each carries, in its huge lower deck, hundreds of Indian Army troops with tanks, vehicles and cargo. Such a ship can deliver men and equipment near a sea beach and does not need a berthing dock, hence providing the option for landing thousands of troops near a spot chosen to attack.
The size of the LPDs indicates the Indian Navy’s growing amphibious warfare capacity. As of now, the biggest such variety of vessel is INS Jalashwa, a 16,900 tonne ship. Another five warships classified as Landing ship tank large (LST-L) are some 5,600 tonnes each, another four ships are just 1,100 tonnes and lastly the smallest are 650 tonnes and six of these are in service.
Forces that move across sea are referred to as “amphibious task force”. At present, India has the capability to move a Brigade, some 5,000 men, using the lone LPD, INS Jalashwa, along with a fleet of five smaller 5,600-tonne (LST-Ls) each of which can carry 10 tanks, 11 combat trucks and 500 troops.
Each of the new LPDs will have three times the capacity and have multi-role helicopters, including heavy lift helicopters to provide even greater flexibility.
Foreign shipbuilders offering such ships include DCNS of France, Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Fincantieri of Italy, South Korea’s Hanjin Heavy Industries & Constructions Co and Navantia of Spain.
India has sought a vessel of 213 metre, endurance at sea for 45 days, the vessel must be able to house combat vehicles (including main battle tanks, infantry combat vehicles and heavy trucks on one or more vehicle deck), and the vessel should be able to undertake all-weather operations involving heavy lift helicopters of up to 35 tonne.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 29035.html

India may be getting serious abt Balochistan...

[JTull]

You can't scale an LHD by nearly a third and still have a competitive design that leverages your risk reduction work due to it being a proven ship. Without that they are hardly competitive to Juan Carlos types that are proven designs for their class

Your definition of proven designs means only one thing : be an importer of yesterday's technology. Without taking risks we'll never be at the cutting edge.

In an era where you have to formally compete with others in the open marketplace if your design/proposal has an inherently larger risk attached to it, compared to the competition that risk better be worth it, otherwise you would end up on the loosing end of the competition.

Developing indigenous capabilities is not about competition but about safeguarding your political and military interests, not to mention technological and economic benefits it may accrue. Importing 'proven' systems is not the only way to make it 'worth' your while.

By your argument, we should not have gone with IAC-1 design or even attempted to build one as the proven 'Illustrious' and 'Invincibles' of the world were available. But, thankfully IN learnt very early from the Viky acquisition fiasco. A floating ship is not equivalent to a proven one. Our northern neighbours could be using Varyag as a capability demonstrator to build upto 3 new carriers simultaneously. What's wrong with IN using Jalashwa in an equivalent way?

[brar_w]

Developing indigenous capabilities is not about competition but about safeguarding your political and military interests, not to mention technological and economic benefits it may accrue. Importing 'proven' systems is not the only way to make it 'worth' your while.

By your argument, we should not have gone with IAC-1 design or even attempted to build one as the proven 'Illustrious' and 'Invincibles' of the world were available. But, thankfully IN learnt very early from the Viky acquisition fiasco. A floating ship is not equivalent to a proven one. Our northern neighbours could be using Varyag as a capability demonstrator to build upto 3 new carriers simultaneously. What's wrong with IN using Jalashwa in an equivalent way?

My argument was towards competing foreign designs and why the US designs are at an inherent disadvantage to other foreign designs for the spec's being talked about. It had absolutely nothing to do with indigenous designs and choosing them over foreign designs. Someone brought up that US should have also competed and I responded that they would most likely not have been competitive with the ships they have in production and by submitting designs that were not in production, they would have made them inherently weak compared to the competition.

Never in any of the replies on this topic did I mention that indigenous options should not be looked at or preferred compared to foreign bidders. My point was, as explained, about OEM's around the world choosing to bid or not bid on a particular work.

[member_28840]

Stowage about VikAd.

Why would something like this not work?

Because we will need a well deck with stowage for landing craft, another storage area for vehicles from tanks to trucks which will all need to be driven into the ship RO-RO style, and not to mention accommodation for about 900-1000 soldiers along with enough room for all their ancillary equipment, armories for storing all the ammunition needed to fight for at least several days if not weeks (this includes everything from sidearm carried by soldiers up to bombs and rockets used by gunships / CAS fighters carried onboard.

All this besides whats already there in terms of flight deck and hanger for aviation component. Not to mention caring for 1000 extra people onboard will need expanded galley and mess facilities, larger capacity water makers and waste disposal systems and god know what else.

Like I have stated earlier, much less of a headache to design one from the ground up than to modify an existing aircraft carrier design.

[Indranil]

Stowage about VikAd.



Why would something like this not work?

Now this is good work!

[NRao]

Slow day, nothing much to do.

Why would something like this not work?

Not a good idea because such a mix would certainly reduce the radius of ops. Just getting the boat to host more LCAs does not solve the problem - in fact I think it makes it worse.

What is needed is to get a right mix of LCAs and MiG-29s, the prior solely for CAP and the rest for whatever.

As far as I can tell, my argument still stands.



On the economical, etc angle, there is a lot more than just saving on gas, etc. Carriers - especially those that travel far from "home" - are expected to replace, overhaul, test, etc, engines. More types of air crafts, the more for all of these activities. As an example - testing an engine on board needs space. Vicky, from all these angles, is not the right carrier.

BTW, if replacing engines is part of the deal, then you also need planes that deliver new engines and take old engines off the carrier. Yes. try that.

I will leave them worms in the can.

[NRao]

Why would something like this not work?

Now do the same on the deck - with war time numbers.

IIRC, you will gain between 2-3 LCAs in all - if at all.

[pankajs]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 910273.cms
Third indigenous Landing Craft Utility vessel launched

The vessel is the third in the series of eight LCUs being built by Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Ltd (GRSE).

Launching of the vessel which is designed in-house and built by GRSE for the Indian Navy is yet another milestone in India's quest for self-reliance in sophisticated shipbuilding, an official statement said.
...
The first LCU was launched on March 12, and the second on September 23 last year.

The ship will be fitted with an advanced Integrated Platform Management System for remote control of propulsion, auxiliary and power generating equipment.

Two CRN-91 indigenous 30 MM guns to provide fire support during operations will also be fitted onboard.

The ship can be deployed for maritime security, beaching or un-beaching, humanitarian relief operations and evacuation from distant islands, search and rescue operations and peace-keeping missions.

[Shreeman]

Why would something like this not work?

Now do the same on the deck - with war time numbers.

IIRC, you will gain between 2-3 LCAs in all - if at all.

The geometry of vikAd says you gain 1 NLCA by replacing 3 29ks (in peacetime, some would be KUBs), and doing this twice, once below deck, once on the deck gives you 8 NLCAs. Frees up 6 29ks (who can be used elsewhere). In CAP alone that would be a huge difference. You still keep 24 29k max. capacity.
All can wander off.

A 25% increase is nothing to be sneezed at. It has been noted that the "air defense ship" nomenclature came out of some strategy somewhere. In that paradigm, the NLCA is even a better shipborne craft.

If you are not repairing, then on any outing one or two craft will sit idle. They will not sail with 30 during normal times. The 1-2 extra fit in both regular operations and intended use. And you get a flight of 6 off goa/jamnagar for no extra tenders/delays/usual machinations.

Not all repairing is the TFTA class engine replacement and engine shops on board. But you do need hanger space beyond parked craft if you want to do anything.

25% improvement in capacity is usually seen as a generational improvement -- see 40 kt vs 50+ kt carrier debates.

[NRao]

Let it slide, we are not on the same page.

[JTull]

Someone brought up that US should have also competed and I responded that they would most likely not have been competitive with the ships they have in production and by submitting designs that were not in production, they would have made them inherently weak compared to the competition.

Since I brought up US, I'll gladly concede your point being a valid argument in this context.

But US remains by far the biggest player in the LPD space so I believe that we'll only have something to learn from their experience.

[Vipul]

Garden Reach builds landing craft utility ship for Indian Navy.

The third ship of the Landing craft utility ship (LCU) Mk IV project, Yard 2094, for the Indian Navy was launched at Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Ltd (GRSE), Kolkata, on Friday.

Launching of Yard 2094, designed in-house and built by GRSE for the Indian Navy marks a step in self-reliance in defence shipbuilding.LCU L53 is the third vessel in the series of eight landing craft utility ships being built by GRSE for the Indian Navy.

The first LCU was launched on 12 March, and the second on 23 September, last year. These ships will play significant role in transportation of main battle tanks, armoured vehicles and troops of the Indian Army during amphibious operations.

The ship will be fitted with an advanced integrated platform management system for remote control of propulsion, auxiliary and power generating equipment.

Two CRN-91 indigenous 30 MM guns to provide fire support during operations will also be fitted onboard. The ship can be deployed for maritime roles like maritime security, beaching/un-beaching, humanitarian relief operations and evacuation from distant islands, search and rescue operations and peace-keeping missions.

Speaking on the occasion, Vice Admiral Sunil Lanba, Vice Chief of the Naval Staff commended the contributions made by GRSE towards meeting the Navy's growing requirements of state-of-art warships.He also lauded GRSE and its team of designers, engineers, technicians, quality controllers and the members of Warship Overseeing Team for their untiring efforts in successfully achieving this significant milestone of launching of Yard 2094.

He appreciated the efforts put in by GRSE and other private sector industries for their valuable contributions towards achieving Indian Navy's dream of transformation from a ''Buyers Navy'' to a ''Builders Navy''.

[devesh]

India to ramp up amphibious capabilities with four warships

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 29035.html


India may be getting serious abt Balochistan...

at the risk of uniting Iran and Pakjabis under common threat of Baloch nationalism?

do we even understand the potential players who would become stake holders if we intervened in Balochistan at the present?

we will ensure a Shia-Sunni joint Jihad on India. are we prepared for it? are we prepared to ruthlessly lay down the justifications of enemy action to advance our cause? do you think the State is prepared for such long term civil-military expansion?

[srai]

GRSE - Landing Craft Utility (LCU)

[maz]

The LCUs, starting with L-53 are being built in paris at GRSE new "Integrated Shipbuilding Facility" with modular SB infrastructure and processes. Moreover, the last 4 LCUs are to be built using " integrated construction technology" - to achieve a achieve considerable reduction in build period of ships according to GRSE Annual Reports.

GRSe notes that implementation of new Build Strategy involving Modular Shipbuilding would lead to significant reduction in “Build Period” by realizing:
(a) Shorter Keel Laying to Launch time due to use of Mega Hull blocks.
(b) Shorter “Fitting Out” time due to higher prelaunch outfitting.

"Since ‘Modular Shipbuilding’ involves consolidation of Mega Hull-Blocks inside Modular Hall in
a protected environment, consequent better workmanship, higher levels of accuracy, lesser distortions, better access for fitting out etc. would result in significant improvement in quality of ship
construction."


Key LCU project milestones
Contract signing: 29 Sep 2011 followed by a almost a year long gap to start production.

Start of production (SOP) -that is to say plate cutting, outsourcing of hull blocks, etc, commenced as follows:
1st pair of LCUs YN 2092 & 2093 on 04 Sep 12,
3rd LCU YN 2094 on 05 Nov 12
4th LCU YN 2095 on 27 Dec 12,
5th & 6th LCUs YN 2096-97 on 26 Jun 13
7th & 8th LCUs , YN 2098-99 on 30 Aug 13.

The Keel laying (KL) milestone - essentially a hull block nowadays- were as follows:

1st& 2nd LCUs on 24 Apr 13
3rd& 4th LCUs on 30 Aug 13
5th - Sep 2014? not confirmed.
6th - 24 Sep 2014
7th
8th

Launching (L) -essentially the completed hull and superstructure - milestone on:

1st LCU L51 (YN 2092) on 12 Mar 14,
L52 on 23 Sep 2014
L53 on 16 Jan 2015

Next milestones are: outfitting, trials, followed by

acceptance, delivery and commissioning.

Planned commissioning dates

L51 - planned for end 2014 - has not happened.
L-52 - delivery planned for end 2014. Has not happened
L-53 planned for 3Q, 2015.

Calculated timelines from SOP to date:
L51 : SOP to KL: 232 days or 33.14 weeks, KL to Launching = 46 weeks, SOP to launching = 554 days, or 79 weeks. Days in outfitting, trials = at least 40 weeks and counting as of 17 Jan 2015. This adds up to 124 weeks to date. Note: l51 launched less bow dorr and lower level of completion than L52.
L52: SOP to KL: 232 days or 33.14 weeks, KL to Launching = 517 days, almost 74 weeks; SOP to launching = 749 days, or 107 weeks. Days in outfitting, trials = almost 17 weeks as of 17 Jan 2015. This is 124 weeks to date.
L53: SOP to KL = 298 days or 42.6 weeks, KL to Launching = 504 days or 72 weeks, SOP to launching = 802 days or 114.6 weeks.
L54: SOP to KL = 246 days or 35.14 weeks; KL to launching - 72 weeks have elapsed, not yet launched
L55 - no data yet
L56:SOP to KL= 455 days or 65 weeks.


The above data shows that build time is all over the place. It will be interesting to see how much build time reductions GRSE is able to achieve from L55 onwards since they are to be built using pre-outfitted hull blocks with most equipment installed.

A design deficiency is that these LCUs lack a Ro-Ro layout which would have permitted rapid loading and unloading of vehicles and equipment.

[Karan M]

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com.es/20 ... er-is.html

About balance and how the Kolkata class has it

[brar_w]

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com.es/20 ... er-is.html

About balance and how the Kolkata class has it

Although the author/blogger successfully showcases the balance in the Kolkata, he fails to realize that the Burke's issues with the Harpoon were clearly driven by a need (or lack of) and the fact that the mission that is most critical to these ships is BMD given the threat. That has since shifted, and the ASBC has ushered in a faster push towards arming platforms to give them better capability then the harpoon. Despite of this shift the Navy has not felt the "threat to the burke's" to be significant enough to warrant a new weapon in the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare Increment 1 program. The LRASM is strictly an urgent needs weapon for the F-18SH and the B-1 Bomber (but since it is UAI every legacy platform including the B-52 would be able to carry it if required) that DARPA had been working on for close to 5 years (seeker) and that is to be fielded in limited numbers (as stipulated in the urgent needs) by 2017-2018. The Harpoon replacement would come with the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare Increment 2 for which there would be a full fledged competitions, with things like JSM coming to the picture (Kongsberg showcased a vertical launched JSM last year) and talks of a supersonic tomahawk and what not. That would be the large scale competition to replace the legacy weapon that is seriously outclassed by threats and competition yet still remains a competent weapon given the sort of threat these ships have to prepare for in the very short term.

[Philip]

Well balanced it may be,but the only real evaluation comes when it experiences combat. Sensor capability is an unknown qty.Thus far,it still lacks its LR SAMs,plus requires a multiple anti-missile defence system. Depending upon just one missile type for LR SAM defence as well as anti-missile defence seems odd.The number of SAMs carried is also suspect. One supposes looking at the ship that there is ample scope for increasing the number of VLS silos . There is also little info about UAVs/UUVs,etc being deployed and the destroyer requires a new multi-role helo preferably in the Merlin class,but with the AW scandal,this seems unlikely.The hangar size is also in question. If the vessel also had a LR anti-sub missile/system like the Klub variant or Medvedka system as well as the RBUs and TTs,it would enhance the vessel's ASW capabilities.

[John]

The above data shows that build time is all over the place. It will be interesting to see how much build time reductions GRSE is able to achieve from L55 onwards since they are to be built using pre-outfitted hull blocks with most equipment installed.

A design deficiency is that these LCUs lack a Ro-Ro layout which would have permitted rapid loading and unloading of vehicles and equipment.

Thanks for your detailed look but are you suggesting design doesn't allow Roll on/Roll off?

GRSE built LCUs are twin screw diesel ship driven by fixed pitch propeller. It has a bow ramp for Roll-on/Roll-off cargo, for handling combat equipment and vehicle and a bow thruster to assist in beaching and beach extraction.

[VinodTK]

Navy chief in Mauritius on four-day visit

Indian Navy chief Admiral R.K. Dhowan Monday reached Mauritius to explore new avenues of defence cooperation and strengthen military ties.

During his four-day visit, Admiral Dhowan will meet senior government and defence officials.

A defence ministry release said that Dhowan and his Mauritius counterpart will inaugurate "data flow of the information exchange" concerning merchant marine.

The release said India and Mauritius share centuries old religious and linguistic bonds.

"These bonds have strengthened over time through goodwill gestures and bilateral visits. The people of Indian origin, who comprise around 68 percent of the population, have preserved their heritage and have a strong emotional attachment with India," the release said.

It said that Indian Navy has been actively cooperating with Mauritius Maritime agencies on their maritime security needs such as hydrography surveys as also in training.

Mauritius Coast Guard ship 'Barracuda' was recently built by Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Kolkata, the release said and added that Mauritius has also placed orders for two fast-attack craft and ten fast-interceptor craft.

[Eric Leiderman]

John roll on roll odd usually implies a through design, it fore to aft ,(or on larger vessels the means to turn on board) this ensures vehicles do not need to back up to load or unload, saving time and possible damage due to cramped parking. However ,this design would be imply time consuming load with possibly a more rapid discharge. However with only 4-6 vehicles, that is not a major issue.

[Karan M]

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com.es/20 ... er-is.html

About balance and how the Kolkata class has it

Although the author/blogger successfully showcases the balance in the Kolkata, he fails to realize that the Burke's issues with the Harpoon were clearly driven by a need (or lack of) and the fact that the mission that is most critical to these ships is BMD given the threat. That has since shifted, and the ASBC has ushered in a faster push towards arming platforms to give them better capability then the harpoon. Despite of this shift the Navy has not felt the "threat to the burke's" to be significant enough to warrant a new weapon in the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare Increment 1 program. The LRASM is strictly an urgent needs weapon for the F-18SH and the B-1 Bomber (but since it is UAI every legacy platform including the B-52 would be able to carry it if required) that DARPA had been working on for close to 5 years (seeker) and that is to be fielded in limited numbers (as stipulated in the urgent needs) by 2017-2018. The Harpoon replacement would come with the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare Increment 2 for which there would be a full fledged competitions, with things like JSM coming to the picture (Kongsberg showcased a vertical launched JSM last year) and talks of a supersonic tomahawk and what not. That would be the large scale competition to replace the legacy weapon that is seriously outclassed by threats and competition yet still remains a competent weapon given the sort of threat these ships have to prepare for in the very short term.

Not really bothered about putting down rival or competing weapons platforms.. the context of the post was that it was my perception that the IN seeks balance in its platforms as versus super specialized ones. The author basically came to the same conclusion, so found it interesting (and a validation). Of course, I also think there is something "missing" in the Kolkata that it seems to have a lot of unoccupied real estate and only 32 LRSAMs.. so its pretty possible that going forward, we might see more LRSAMs/or Nirbhays. I'd push for the former.

The existing Shtils on other platforms are limited by their single arm launcher & slew challenges (can't handle two threats from completely opposite directions) easily.

[Philip]

Relations with Mauritius are vital as the PRC is making inroads there too with PRC aided dev. projects.Thanks to PRC nationals squatting in the isle,dogs have begun disappearing in the villages.No guesses as to their fate!

[Austin]

India will have to rent Russian nuclear submarine

http://vpk.name/news/124992_Indiya_vozm ... halot.html

India has begun negotiations with Russia to lease nuclear submarine K-322 "Kashalot" Project 971 "Pike-B", informs "Interfax" referring to a source in the Russian military-industrial complex. If the parties sign a contract until the end of 2015, the ship can be delivered to the customer already in 2018.

According to the source agency, before the submarine will be leased, it will be modernized in accordance with the requirements of the Indian Navy. Work will be performed Amur Shipyard, where now is the K-322. A total revision "Kashalot", its testing and training of Indian crew will take three years. Indian Ministry of Defence is considering the lease nuclear submarine for a period of ten years.

The fact that India is considering the possibility of renting the submarine Project 971, it became known in December 2014. Then the Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said that the Defense Ministry is considering two options: the extension of the lease of the submarine "Chakra" (K-152 "Seal") Project 971 or rent the second ship of the "Pike-B." On the timing of the final decision Parrikar then spoke.

It was also reported that the Indian military department interested in the possibility of renting a submarine "Irbis" Project 971I tab which took place in 1994. Readiness of the ship with the serial number 519 is estimated at 46-48 per cent; at the time of freezing construction in the Amur shipyard in 2011, was formed by the pressure hull of the submarine. Earlier, India declared its readiness to consider funding the completion of the submarine and its subsequent lease.

Currently, the Indian Navy submarine worth "Chakra", built in Russia under the project 971 "Pike-B." Contract on leasing the ship was signed in 2004, and its cost was about $ 980 million (it was originally set at $ 650 million). Delivery of the ship to the customer regularly delayed; the contract of 2004 it was assumed that India will "Chakra" in 2008.

[Philip]

According to some reports,the sub is in reserves at the moment/under repair,perhaps ideal for modernization to bring it upto Chakra std. with improvements.This may be the fastest way to acquire a second Akula than completing the unfinished Irbis.It may also be a cheaper option.That the completion of the Irbis may also happen as Russia is revamping Soviet era N-subs whose hulls have decades of life still left in them.Every sub is a vaulable asset and modernizing and upgrading them is a cost-effective way to maintain a larger N-sub fleet.

The news is excellent if the deal is sealed asap.The IN's sub fleet is in dire straits and a second N-sun would help counter the steady increase of PLAN subs into the IOR,including their SSNs.

[Philip]

The Koreans have been building German U-boats for some time,therefore the guess is that they and HSL will plump for the Germans in the contest for the P-75I sub programme.

From Korea Joongang daily.
[quote]

HHI signs submarine deal in India

Shipbuilder to partner with company to add six vessels to navy
Jan 20,2015

Hyundai Heavy Industries’ dockyard in Ulsan. Korea’s largest shipbuilder has set goal of collecting 22.9 billion dollars worth of orders this year. Provided by the company
The world’s largest shipbuilder, Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI), has established an agreement to build submarines for India as part of a 40-year program to strengthen the nation’s naval forces.

The financially struggling company said it signed an MoU with Hindustan Shipyard Limited (HSL) last week stating that the Korean shipbuilder will work with the Indian company to build six submarines that the nation’s navy is preparing to order.

“Since HSL wants to be a part of the submarine manufacturing project by the navy, they asked us for help,” said a spokesman for HHI. “Because they are the largest shipbuilder in their country, the possibility that they will win the order is big.”

If HSL wins the contract, HHI will dispatch a work force to give technical support that the company needs to build the submarines while HSL will take charge of manufacturing the vessels. The Indian government will spend about $9.72 billion (10.47 trillion won).

In an interview with Indian media, HSL said, “HHI will help us build submarines as they are the biggest shipbuilder in the world and have some of the best high-end equipment and techniques. Since India has a 40-year submarine construction program, this will be a win-win situation for both of us.”

This is some of the best recent news for HHI, which has been struggling to make a profit as its number of orders decreases. The company expects that the project with HSL could help it grow in India in the future. The country is considered a big market for Korean companies in the defense industry. The Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade said last year that India will become Korea’s second-largest export market in defense after the United States. According to the industry, the amount of weapons imported by India increased an average of 29.3 percent from 2009 to 2013.

Another Korean firm, Kokam, a lithium polymer battery manufacturer, is also seeking technical cooperation with HSL.

“It looks like India will invest about $76.9 billion in the next five years to replace their decrepit military devices and weapons,” said a spokesman for the Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade. “Since Korean submarines, radars and howitzers have good price competitiveness in the market, this will be a good business opportunity for us.”

The institute said India’s recent expansion of its military force is a matter of survival, especially after China has been aggressively strengthening its navy recently to expand its influences in the Indian Ocean, a transport route for about 80 percent of the world’s oil.

Last year, China sent two submarines to run a combat simulation in the Indian Ocean, saying it was necessary to protect the nation’s businesses from pirates.

According to military sources last year, China has a total of 52 submarines in operation, three of which are nuclear powered. India, however, has 14 submarines and only one is nuclear powered, which it borrowed from Russia in 2012. About half of the 14 submarines were built in the 1980s, according to the industry.

BY LEE SOO-KI, KWON SANG-SOO [[email protected]]
[quote]

[SNaik]

According to some reports,the sub is in reserves at the moment/under repair,perhaps ideal for modernization to bring it upto Chakra std. with improvements.This may be the fastest way to acquire a second Akula than completing the unfinished Irbis.It may also be a cheaper option.That the completion of the Irbis may also happen as Russia is revamping Soviet era N-subs whose hulls have decades of life still left in them.Every sub is a vaulable asset and modernizing and upgrading them is a cost-effective way to maintain a larger N-sub fleet.

The news is excellent if the deal is sealed asap.The IN's sub fleet is in dire straits and a second N-sun would help counter the steady increase of PLAN subs into the IOR,including their SSNs.

K-322 Kashalot is laying at Amur shipyard since 2003, awaiting repairs and modernization. According to some insider reports, it's probably the best built hull of Pr.971, commissioned in 1989, but didn't see much service after 1998.

[Pratyush]

Taking in a new build hull and commissioning her is one thing. But taking a hull that has been waiting for modernization after nearly a decade of service and a decade + in the mothballs is a recipe for disaster.

It will be Gorshokov all over again.

[Singha]

>> China has a total of 52 submarines in operation, three of which are nuclear powered

that is not true. between the hans, the lone xia, the shang and jin class they have around 12 n-boats for sure.

[Philip]

The hulls of Russian nuclear subs are the best in the world.They are generally double-hulled and have a lot of titanium inputs.Their lifetime is around 50 years at least,longer than the reactor life.Russia is already modernizing Soviet era Sierra class SSGNs.The USN also converted an Ohio class SSBN into an SSGN very successfully,significantl;y extending tis life.Here are more details of the news report.

Arihant stirs up the ocean

Russia offers to help repair India’s Kilo class submarines
Russia prepared to modify submarines for Indian tend
India to lease second Russian nuclear submarine.

K-322 Kashalot submarine. Source: US Navy / wikipedia.org

India has started negotiations with Russia seeking to lease the nuclear submarine K-322 Kashalot ("sperm whale") of the Project 971 “Shchuka-B” Class, reports “Interfax” citing a source in the Russian military-industrial complex. If the parties sign this agreement before the end of 2015, this ship could be delivered to the customer already in 2018.

According to the news agency’s source, before the submarine is leased out, it will be modernized in accordance with the requirements of the Indian Navy. This work would be performed at the Amur Shipyard, where the K-322 is berthed today. In total, the modernization of the Kashalot, running it through all the tests, and training of Indian crew should take about three years. The Indian Ministry of Defense is looking at leasing the nuclear submarine for a period of ten years.

The fact that India was considering the possibility of renting this Project 971 submarine came to light in December 2014. That is when the Indian Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar said that his ministry was considering two options: the extension of the lease on the Chakra K-152 “Nepra” Class Project 971 submarine or renting a second ship of this project – the “Shchuka-B”. At that time, Mr. Parrikar did not mention any concrete deadlines for this decision.

It was also reported that the Indian military establishment was also interested in the possibility of renting the Project 971I “Irbis” Class submarine, which was started back in 1994. Readiness of this ship, bearing the serial number 519, is estimated at 46-48 percent. At the time the construction work was frozen in the Amur shipyard in 2011, the pressure hull of the submarine has already been formed. Earlier, India had declared its readiness to consider funding the completion of this submarine and its subsequent lease.

Currently, the Indian Navy operates the “Chakra” submarine, built in Russia based on the 971 “Shchuka-B” project. The agreement to lease the ship was signed in 2004, and is worth about $980 million (with the initial price being set at $650 million). Delivery of this ship to the customer experiences constant delays; in the contract of 2004, it was assumed that India would receive the “Chakra” in 2008.

[tushar_m]

Russian Navy B-871 Alrosa is the only Kilo-class sub that uses a pump jet propulsion system instead of a conventional propeller.


Can this be Implemented in Indian Navy Kilos that are going for refit & how much benefit pump jet actually have over propeller.

[John]

John roll on roll odd usually implies a through design, it fore to aft ,(or on larger vessels the means to turn on board) this ensures vehicles do not need to back up to load or unload, saving time and possible damage due to cramped parking. However ,this design would be imply time consuming load with possibly a more rapid discharge. However with only 4-6 vehicles, that is not a major issue.

Thanks Eric but are there any <70 meter vessel that feature a through design.

[srai]

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com.es/20 ... er-is.html

About balance and how the Kolkata class has it

...

Not really bothered about putting down rival or competing weapons platforms.. the context of the post was that it was my perception that the IN seeks balance in its platforms as versus super specialized ones. The author basically came to the same conclusion, so found it interesting (and a validation). Of course, I also think there is something "missing" in the Kolkata that it seems to have a lot of unoccupied real estate and only 32 LRSAMs.. so its pretty possible that going forward, we might see more LRSAMs/or Nirbhays. I'd push for the former.

...

Eyeballing, there is enough room in the front (between Brahmos VLS and Barak-8 VLS) for 8-to-12-cell Nirbhay-sized VLS module. As for the LRSAM VLS, there is plenty of room for another 8-cell module on the side of the current two 8-cell modules both in the front and rear (3 x 8-cell modules front and rear). That would increase the capacity to 48 from the current 32 LRSAM load.

Long-term, universal VLS is the way to go. Two or three LRSAMs could possibly be loaded on one "Brahmos/Nirbhay-sized" VLS.

[Khalsa]

interesting post tushar

anyone know noise or propulsion advantages over conventional...
reminds me of the hunt for red october

[Singha]

there is some loss in propulsion efficiency for a gain in lower prop noise levels.
might be ok for n-boats only as they have a lot of reserve power vs the batteries of diesel boats.
must be useful as all the western boats use it.

[Yagnasri]

Hunt for Red October speaks about something called electro magnetic propulsion. I do not know what it means. This jet thing may be coming thrust vectoring.

[Singha]

they alluded to a low power tubed pumpjet for quiet submerged run by shutting down main prop and instead using this 'caterpillar drive' perhaps one on each flank . atleast thats the vision i got.

[Pratyush]

That drive is not actually fictional. The sunrise nation, developed a similar drive in the 70s. With a power output of 5 Mw.

[Philip]

Propulsors,shrouds,etc.,are all in existence.However,the leading sub manufacturing nations have been experimenting with them for decades.A lot of noise reduction has been achieved which is classified,little open source info is available.However,many new designs still use unshrouded screws so they must be happy with noise levels. What is known that pop-out mini-screws are used in some N-subs when running silent.