Indian Navy News & Discussion - 22 April 2015

nits · Post by **nits** » 19 Nov 2015 16:36

In short its sea based AWACS; just to understand what benefit it provides over AWACS in Air... or its just another AWACS like platform but on the Sea.

Also like AWACS it has no \ minimal protection and has no weapon systems which means it will need support ships for protection

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 19 Nov 2015 20:47

OMG, just reading that article made my brain go noodle - what chinglish, what wet dreams!

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 19 Nov 2015 20:56

What happens to the blockade if IN sinks 5-10 submarines and what is with the self defeating blockade plans of China when India is not blockading anything going to China. The wet dreams are going to drawn the Chinese in the Indian ocean.

John · Post by **John** » 20 Nov 2015 03:15

There is reason surface vessels have RPK-8 system. They are one of few hard kill defense systems against torpedoes.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Nov 2015 07:10

we hunt their subs down, since blocade means areas are more predictable...kill them, and put them in davy jones locker, with a exhibition of floating debris in sasson dock thereafter. thats the plan.

member_29172 · Post by **member_29172** » 20 Nov 2015 07:54

Lol I really hope our iq chinese brothers (and sisters) go ahead with the plan, if nothing else it'll legitimize our reason to be in the South China/West Phlipines/East Vietnam Sea. We'll balkanize India!!! to we'll Naval blockade India!!!

chinese plincelings certainly think like 3 year olds

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Nov 2015 08:56

Seeing India as a threat as opposed to ignoring is a backhanded compliment

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Nov 2015 11:48

Warning from the past.Hitler ignored his navy and neglected the role of his subs,and sealed his fate.
Indian Navy,take note please.

Faced by what Holland describes as 'Britain's very infuriating insistence on continuing to fight', the Fuhrer had no Plan B when the over-rated Luftwaffe failed to bomb this island nation into submission.

He turned his attention to quick victories in the Mediterranean, the Middle East and (he imagined) Russia, thinking he could leave Britain parked and out of the game.

That was his big mistake. With aid from the U.S., Britain was able to build up its own fighting power and strike back.

There were German generals with the gumption to know that an unbeaten Britain would come back to haunt and eventually defeat them, but they kept their thoughts to themselves.

THE WAR IN THE WEST: GERMANY ASCENDANT 1939-1941 by James Holland

The result was another fatal mistake: failure to cut off the transatlantic trade that, in those crucial early years, kept Britain fed and re-armed. German submarines could have done the job, but (and we should be grateful for this) there were not enough of them.

Hitler never really understood sea power, his mindset as landlocked as Austria, the country of his birth. He starved his navy of the steel it needed to build more ships, and what little the Kriegsmarine did get generally went on grandiose battleships, rather than churning out more subs.

Used effectively and in greater numbers, U-boats could have won the war, starving Britain into submission and, by ruling the Atlantic, dissuading the U.S. from joining in. But there was no focused effort to employ them.

Instead, four subs were on permanent loan to the Luftwaffe as weather-watchers, issuing meteorological reports instead of sinking enemy ships. For the invasion of Russia, Hitler inexplicably ordered eight to the Baltic, where there was nothing for them to do. Meanwhile, in the Atlantic, the vast majority of convoys got through, enabling Britain to survive and prepare for the entry of the U.S. into the war that, in time, would seal Hitler's fate.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/a ... z3sCbPna7T

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Nov 2015 07:09

Makes a good read

Inside INS Sindhukirti: On board in sub surface

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 23 Nov 2015 09:14

Austin wrote:Makes a good read

Inside INS Sindhukirti: On board in sub surface

From the article:
Meanwhile, in compartment three, Electrical Sailor Lokendra, is preparing for what he does twice a day -....
Shouldn't that be Electrical Artificer, not "Sailor"? DDMitis at work again.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 23 Nov 2015 22:46

Was the name changed from sindhukriti to sindhukirti?

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 26 Nov 2015 04:32

Looks like L&T is quite confident of bagging large orders from the Navy:

Hyundai looking for new partner to bid for building LNG ships for GAIL

L&T's shipbuilding arm has broken ties with Hyundai for building LNG ships primarily due to a strategic shift towards the defence sector where prospects have brightened with the government's increased resolve to raise local production, said an executive, who did not wish to be identified.

L&T has decided to shut its commercial shipbuilding activities and not take fresh orders, the executive cited earlier said. The company wants to focus on naval orders as it has the competence and experience in executing those, instead of a LNG carrier where it's a novice, he said.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 26 Nov 2015 05:51

Aditya G wrote:Was the name changed from sindhukriti to sindhukirti?

Its always been Sindhukirti.

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 26 Nov 2015 12:35

INS Kadmatt to be handed over to the Indian Navy today
The Indian Navy is set to receive a major boost on the seventh anniversary of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack when INS Kadmat, an anti-submarine warfare corvette, will be added to its fleet of warships.
Designed by the Directorate of Naval Design, the warship is the second in its class of four ASW corvettes being built by the Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers, the state-run defence manufacturer, under Project-28 (P28) for the Indian Navy. The GRSE will hand over INS Kadmat to the Navy at its Fitting Out Jetty on Thursday.
Chief Staff Officer (Technical) Rear Admiral Narayan Prasad of the Eastern Naval Command, Naval Officer In Charge (West Bengal) Commodore Ravi Ahluwalia and GRSE chairman and managing director Rear Admiral (Retd) A.K. Verma are scheduled to attend the event. On Wednesday, Commo-dore Ahluwalia told this newspaper, “There is a lot of indigenous features in INS Kadmat, an ASW corv-ette, which is required by the Indian Navy for its operational activities. The Navy feels this warship will add boost its capability.”
INS Kadmat is the second naval warship which has been built in the country with indigenously developed special grade high-tensile (DMR249A) steel produced by the Steel Authority of India. Its hull encompasses the bulk of sensors and weapon systems which are also indigenously manufactured.
The second ASW corvette will be based at Vishakhapatnam, the ENC headquarters. It will also participate in the International Fleet Review from February 5 to 8 next year in a fleet of around 40 Indian Navy warships.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 26 Nov 2015 13:47

Philip wrote:Warning from the past.Hitler ignored his navy and neglected the role of his subs,and sealed his fate.
Indian Navy,take note please.

first of all it would be wrong to say Hitler neglected subs. From the outbreak of war, when he wanted new naval construction to be the highest priority, to the end, when he still gave u-boats the highest priority rating (equal to fighters, flak and anti-tank), Hitler clearly thought a lot about them.

But the U-boats were never going to win the war for several reasons

1 They were only truly effective when cargo ships weren't in escorted convoys

From the middle of January to the end of July 1942, 360 ships were sunk in American waters

when convoys were finally extended to the East Coast, only 3 were sunk in July and none were sunk the rest of the year in American waters

yes there were some convoys that suffered heavy losses, but that was rare. Overall, the convoy system made it far, far more difficult and dangerous for u-boats

The only reason u-boats even had their initial successes was that CNO Ernest King absolutely refused to divert escort vessels from the Pacific to the Atlantic despite pleadings from just about everyone.

2. cargo ships were getting faster

u-boats were limited to 8 knots underwater, so being faster than that was a huge advantage. Convoys that averaged 9 knots had 50% fewer losses than convoys averaging 7 knots. By March of 1943, 2/3 of the atlantic cargo fleet could make at least 10 knots, so what the Germans were doing at that point was just thinning the herd of the weakest members

3. air support was improving

by the spring 1943 there was only one large area that could not be patrolled by planes, the Greenland Air Gap.

How important was air power? Doenitz concentrated the majority of his submarines in the gap, and once it was closed by new longer-ranged planes, he essentially ended the north atlantic campaign

4. US shipbuilding could simply outbuild them

by 1943 they realized they had the u-boat problem well in hand and were in fact oversupplied with escorts, so they decided they could cancel 405 destroyer escort vessels that were in construction without harming anti-uboat operations at all

on the cargo side, they were able to build a complete Liberty ship in less than 10 days, 160 a month

all of this combined to devastate the u-boat fleet. On May 1, 1943 Germany had sixty u-boats operating in the Greenland gap. By the end of the month they had lost 41 of them while only sinking 34 ships

in Doenitz's own words:

The overwhelming superiority achieved by the enemy defense was finally proved . . .The convoy escorts worked in exemplary harmony with the specially trained "support groups". To that must be added the continuous air cover, which was provided by carrier-borne and long-range, shore-based aircraft, most of them equipped with new radar. There were also new and heavier depth charges and improved means of throwing them. With all this against us it became impossible to carry on the fight against the convoys.

of course the ultimate reason the u-boats were never going to win the war is that even if the UK was knocked out, the Soviets still would have steam-rolled over them . . .

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 26 Nov 2015 13:58

GeorgeWelch wrote:of course the ultimate reason the u-boats were never going to win the war is that even if the UK was knocked out, the Soviets still would have steam-rolled over them . . .

With the western & southern flanks secured and no Allied strategic bombing campaign to contend with? Doubtful.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 26 Nov 2015 14:15

Viv S wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:of course the ultimate reason the u-boats were never going to win the war is that even if the UK was knocked out, the Soviets still would have steam-rolled over them . . .
With the western & southern flanks secured and no Allied strategic bombing campaign to contend with? Doubtful.

you see the list of casualties by front? eastern front was where the vast majority of the damage was done, western and african fronts were a sideshow

Russia absolutely would have handled Germany on their own. they had the industrial muscle and the manpower to do it

'some people' like to say the French should thank America for not having to speak German. The reality is they should thank the America for not having to speak Russian . . .

while the value of strategic bombing was somewhat dubious, there is a lot of truth in the Western allies absorbing a ton of Germany's industrial production (air, sea, v2, etc). As Stalin said "you paid with steel while we paid with blood"

but even still the industrial numbers support a Russian win

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 26 Nov 2015 14:35

GeorgeWelch. Your opinion may have substance to it but can you substantiate your claims with some data ?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 26 Nov 2015 14:45

GeorgeWelch wrote:you see the list of casualties by front? eastern front was where the vast majority of the damage was done, western and african fronts were a sideshow

Russia absolutely would have handled Germany on their own. they had the industrial muscle and the manpower to do it

There's no disputing the fact that the most blood was shed on the Eastern front. But the Soviets didn't fold in the first few months of Op Barbarossa because they had strategic depth, manpower and were able relocate their industry behind the Urals and that kept chugging for the rest of the war.

For the Germans, in contrast, a significant chunk of their manpower was tied up in the west and in Africa. And between 1942 & 1944 the RAF & USAAF air campaign reduced their cities into rubble and left their industry in tatters. But if those factors were absent, well.. big 'what if' question.

The Germans won't have won, no doubt about that. The Soviets had a core numbers advantage at a result of a population that was twice at large. On the other hand, closer to the German heartland that advantage would have begun to shrink (especially since both sides depended quite heavily on conscription). For an offensive war, that may not have been enough (think Lanchester square law).

A stalemate would have been quite possible. A negotiated ceasefire? Again, possible. But 'steamrollering'? Unlikely.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 26 Nov 2015 16:32

this quote from ajai shukla's report - 2009, refers to the propeller shafts which were to be supplied by Ukraine did not arrive.

MDL is fighting to deliver this Rs 11,000 crore project on time. Holding it back is a default by a Ukrainian shipyard in delivering the propellers that drive these warships and the shafting that delivers power from the engines to the propellers. After three years of waiting fruitlessly for the equipment to arrive from Ukraine, MDL placed the order with a Russian shipyard.

Ukrainian shipbuilders, set up in the Black Sea by the erstwhile Soviet Union navy, have been an important source of components for Indian warships. Each of the three Project 15-A destroyers will be powered by four Zorya reversible gas turbines from Ukraine, which have already been delivered. But they can only be installed after Russia delivers the shafting.

MDL Chairman, Vice Admiral HS Malhi told Business Standard, “The Ukrainian shipbuilding industry is a mature one, but we have this problem of non-delivery. The answer is only to increase the level of indigenisation, and to develop and cultivate our own vendor base. As long as we are dependent upon foreign vendors, late delivery will remain a risk.”

wrt the bolded, as per this report of 2013, DRDO was developing composite propeller shafts for ships. quote -

IS: Has the new propeller shaft designed by DRDO been taken up by the navy? What was the need to reinvent the wheel as the Navy has no complaints with the existing propeller shafts?

VBR: NSTL is developing composite propeller shaft for ships. Conventional propeller shaft are made of ferrous material. This shaft is corrosive in nature and also gives extra low frequency emissions (ELFE). This ELFE signature is source of detection by ELFE sensors. This is not a case for reinventing the wheel, but bringing in new technology to advantage.

any idea what is the status on this? is it productionised? anyone?

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 27 Nov 2015 00:54

Steel Shaft Vs Carbon Fiber Shaft

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjErH4_1fks

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 27 Nov 2015 03:02

INS Kadmatt finally inducted. The Navy now operates 63 major surface combatants - impressive.

02 Aircraft Carrier
10 Destroyer
15 Frigate
06 Corvette (ASW)
20 Corvette (Missile)
10 OPV

A further 20 are on order.

GRSE should now serve up the Mark 4 LCUs.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...- ... 939362.cms

KOLKATA: The INS Kadmatt. second in a series of four Kamorta-class Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Corvettes being built by the Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers (GRSE) Ltd was handed over to the Navy in Kolkata on Thursday. This advanced weapons platform will formally be inducted into the Navy's Eastern Fleet in the next few days. The first ship of this class, the INS Kamorta, which was commissioned into the Navy on August 23, 2014, at Visakhapatnam, is already engaged in active service with the Eastern Fleet.

GRSE chairman cum managing director Rear Admiral (retd) A K Verma, who calls the INS Kadmatta a 'super-sophisticated' frontline warship, handed it over to commanding officer Cdr Mahesh C Moudgil in the presence of Rear Admiral Narayan Prasad, chief staff officer (technical), Eastern Naval Command and other senior officers of the Navy and GRSE.

"It is a known fact that warships of the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) are foraging close to Indian territorial waters in the Bay of Bengal region. PLAN submarines are detected on a routine basis close to the Ten Degree Channel that separates Andamans from the Nicobar group of islands. On an average there are four contacts every three months. This is an attempt at muscle flexing and probing India's defences. The Chinese know that we are watching but that is only half of the job done. With ships like the INS Kamorta and INS Kadmatt on the prowl, China would also know that we have the capability to destroy in case of any mischief. India is developing her own submarine fleet but they will play a more offensive than defensive role. A submarine is not meant to protect a country's maritime interests," a senior naval officer said.

The Andamans has a tri-services command but no naval fleet though this has been the demand from several senior officers and strategists. For the moment, ships like the INS Kamorta and INS Kadmatt can patrol the Andamans Sea from their base at Visakhapatnam.

GRSE is building four ASW Corvettes under the Navy's Project P-28. The basic design for these ships was developed by the Navy's Directorate of Naval Design and the details were filled in by the in-house design department of GRSE, The INS Kadmatt is 109 metres long with a displacement of 3,200 tonnes. The ship has a maximum speed of 25 Knots, with an endurance of over 3,400 nautical miles at a speed of 18 knots. She is designed to accommodate 17 officers and 106 sailors and is armed with torpedoes and rocket launchers apart from a main gun. She also has excellent stealth features, both above and below the sea surface.

"These ships have an extremely low radiated underwater noise signature making them difficult to be detected by sonar, whilst the 'X' form of the hull and superstructure gives the ship a low radar cross section. The successful construction of ASW corvettes with advanced stealth features bears testimony to GRSE's growing capabilities in building state-of-the-art naval combatants, comparable with the best in the world. The ship has also been built with over 90% indigenous content and this is a major step towards achieving self-reliance in state of the art warship design and construction." Rear Admiral (retd) Verma said.

srai · Post by **srai** » 27 Nov 2015 04:53

^^^

Anything concrete on P-28A follow-on orders? The plan floated around a while ago was to have a fleet of 8-12 P-28s.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Nov 2015 10:51

Same holds good for India,protecting our offshore assets and installing SAM systems at sea where required. If as I've advocated before,our oil platforms-some of them,are also equipped with ASW detection gear,we would have extra ASW capabilities and the platforms-esp. the old ones could be used as logistic bases for ASW helos.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/n ... e-gas-rigs

Israel tests new Barak 8 missile to defend offshore gas rigs

Weapon system being developed jointly with India as Israel fears Hezbollah has acquired Russian-made missiles that can be fired from land at targets on sea

Israel and India are jointly developing the Barak-8 missile. Photograph: Georges Seguin/Wikimedia commons
Associated Press in Jerusalem

Friday 27 November 2015

Israel’s military says it has successfully tested an advanced surface-to-air missile that analysts believe could play a key role in securing the country’s offshore gas fields.
Russian TV stations broadcast secret nuclear torpedo plans

A military official said that the Barak 8 was tested from a ship for the first time and intercepted a small drone simulating an enemy craft. The system, being developed with India, extended the range of Israel’s aerial defence and should be operational in about two years.

Speaking anonymously in line with military guidelines, he said it could deal with strategic threats like Russian-made Yakhont missiles, which can be fired from land and destroy ships at sea. Officials believe Hezbollah militants in Lebanon possess Yakhonts.

Israeli media reported that Barak 8 could be deployed near offshore gas rigs.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Nov 2015 12:09

Officials believe Hezbollah militants in Lebanon possess Yakhonts.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 27 Nov 2015 14:30

Singha wrote:Officials believe Hezbollah militants in Lebanon possess Yakhonts.

Speculation alert:
I believe India is a partner in this project as we possess the intell to defeat the brahmos. So barak-8 is probably one of the few missiles which can defeat the yakhont. Good to know we operate both

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 27 Nov 2015 14:43

Aditya G wrote:
Singha wrote:Officials believe Hezbollah militants in Lebanon possess Yakhonts.

Speculation alert:
I believe India is a partner in this project as we possess the intell to defeat the brahmos. So barak-8 is probably one of the few missiles which can defeat the yakhont. Good to know we operate both

Counter Speculation .

I doubt if India would pass on intel to Israel about how to defeat Brahmos.
Its INs only Bhramastra for now. Passing it on to Israel would mean handing it over to Khan. Non parvadable.

IAI could have on their own threat assessment and engineering+Intel come up with technology to counter supersonic Yahkont type missiles. Its a good thing that we are on board Barak-8 .. will be helpful against Chinese missile clones.

John · Post by **John** » 28 Nov 2015 06:17

Off topic but china had a hand in funding Yakhont and $$ for Brahmos wasn't used for Yakhont development as Russians had claimed all along. This was confirmed with China showing off its own variant and confirms an old janes article that Russians had found source to fund yakhont around 98. This was well before Brahmos.

member_29004 · Post by **member_29004** » 28 Nov 2015 07:04

Aditya G wrote: A submarine is not meant to protect a country's maritime interests," a senior naval officer said.[/b]

[/quote]

What does this tell about the thought process in our Navy! Is this the reason why Submarine arm has always been given a rough shoulder in the Indian Navy! What is the role of Submarine's in our Navy, How do they envisage Sea Denial?

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 28 Nov 2015 08:27

Josh wrote:
Aditya G wrote: A submarine is not meant to protect a country's maritime interests," a senior naval officer said.[/b]

What does this tell about the thought process in our Navy! Is this the reason why Submarine arm has always been given a rough shoulder in the Indian Navy! What is the role of Submarine's in our Navy, How do they envisage Sea Denial?

It is the same thought process in every navy in the world. Submarines are offensive weapons, not defensive. No one uses a sub to mount a defensive patrol against an oil rig or a harbor. Incidentally, the Naval officer quoted above made the same point in the previous sentence of the paragraph you quoted.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 28 Nov 2015 09:24

Singha wrote:Officials believe Hezbollah militants in Lebanon possess Yakhonts.

Well found this report. Dunno if it's just red herring or there is some real concern on Israel's part.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/01/03/why ... or-israel/

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Nov 2015 09:54

if hezbollah really had yakhonts, the israeli navy would not dare to move north of the lebanon border.

some small scale irani subsonic ASM was fired at a israeli patrol vessel once and thats it I think.

During the 2006 Lebanon War, the vessel was patrolling in Lebanese waters ten nautical miles off the coast of Beirut. It was damaged on 14 July 2006 on the waterline, under the aft superstructure[1][2] by a missile (likely a Chinese-designed C-802[3]) fired by Hezbollah that reportedly set the flight deck on fire and crippled the propulsion systems inside the hull.[4] However, INS Hanit stayed afloat, extricated itself and made the rest of the journey back to Ashdod port for repairs on its own power

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Nov 2015 10:50

I doubt that the Hiz has Yakhonts.The Syrians were supplied with them and the Israelis destroyed most of them in a commando raid. But events have moved dramatically since then.Syria is now not considered a major threat to Israel,the Hiz are fighting ISIS and the Syrian CIA/mercenary/Turkmen "opposition".
What they most likely possess are the Iranian supplied Chines silkworm variants. One of which damaged and nearly sank an Israeli corvette.

More accurate details form Israel about B-8.V-Clip in the link.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/watch-isra ... se-system/

WATCH: Israel successfully launches new naval missile defense system

IDF holds first operational test of ‘Barak 8,’ aimed to deflect Hezbollah weapons, as all eyes turn to more powerful Russian S-400

By Judah Ari Gross and Times of Israel staff November 26, 2015,
The Israel Navy has carried out its first successful launch of a new maritime missile defense system under battlefield conditions, a senior naval official announced on Thursday.

News of the “Barak 8” missile defense system’s successful test came as the eyes of the world turn to the Russian S-400, an anti-aircraft system deployed in Syria on Thursday, which operates at a substantially greater distance.

Though the Russian missile system is effective at a greater range, the Barak 8 can be installed on naval ships as well as on the ground, giving it a decided advantage in its mobility.

The system, made up of a radar array and missile launcher, successfully detected and shot down an unmanned aerial vehicle “that was very fast and very small,” in order to simulate a real-life enemy aircraft or missiles, the naval officer said.

The system, which was developed jointly by Israel and India, had been installed on one of Israel’s Sa’ar 5-class warships. In previous tests, the missiles had been fired from land.

The radar acquiring targets for the Barak 8 system is code-named Adir (Hebrew for “Tremendous”), or MF-STAR (Multi Function Surveillance And Threat Alert Radar).

This newest iteration (“8”) is intended to defend against advanced weaponry believed to be in the hands of Hezbollah, including the Russian-made Yakhont P-800 anti-ship missile.

“The Barak/Adir systems will be able to deal with the Yakhont,” the senior officer boasted. “It is the bread and butter of this system.”

The Israeli Navy tests its new 'Barak 8' missile defense system on November 26, 2015. The missile (blue) is shown here about to strike its target (red). (Screen capture: IDF Spokesperson's Unit)

The system is intended to be mounted either on naval vessels or on the ground, in a battery formation. It can identify and destroy airborne threats like UAVs, jets, missiles and rockets — including projectiles launched simultaneously.

Though the senior officer said he could not reveal the maximum range of the Barak 8 system, an executive vice president of Israel Aerospace Industries, which helped develop the defense system, revealed to Jane’s Defense News earlier this summer that some of the missiles being used can shoot down targets at a range of 150 kilometers (93 miles).

The system is also intended to defend the coastline and reportedly can tackle missiles larger than those within the capabilities of the Iron Dome system.

PS:The revelation that the missile has a range upto 150KM is v.good news indeed for the IN.Together with the Russian ABM systems supposedly being acquired ,they two systems will complement each other in med and long ranges.

PPS:The second P-28 ASW corvette,INS Kadmatt of the four of the class,was formally handed over to the IN yesterday.These are 3200t vessels and should really be classified as (light) frigates,being Leander frigate size. These corvettes do not come cheap either. The future variants planned are supposed to come with improvements.Given the expanding duties of the IN in the IOR and beyond and the Chinese boast that they will saturate the IOR with their subs and checkmate the IN,the number of IN platforms that possess capable ASW warfare suites has to increase significantly.At one time we had 12 Petya FFs for the purpose. The 12-16 ASW shallow water corvettes of 750t approx. may be insufficient,as these will be used for coastal brown water duties primarily,with no blue water capability. Between this 750t series of corvettes and the P-28s,there are no surface warfare vessels other than the OPVs which in truth are really meant for "policing" duties only.

A multi-role corvette with a slant towards ASW warfare of between 1500-2000t max is required. Russia has just displayed how its small 1000t corvettes can fire a missile 2500km away! Such a corvette armed with a main gun,MBUs,VLS silos for anti-missile/point defence SAMs,and both Nirbhay amidships,and another SSM (BMos-M)-on either beam,ASW TTs,two 30mm gatlings,TAS and a helo deck with a below deck hangar could be fitted within a 2000t displacement. These corvettes would be able to conduct ops anywhere in the IOR and given their smaller size,could be built in larger number and at lower cost. They would pack even more punch than a P-28 which from the surface warfare angle is underarmed and cannot operate on the high seas alone. This size of corvette would also be in great demand from smaller navies which cannot afford larger warships like P-28s,Talwars,Shivaliks,not to mention the Delhi DDGs and P-15 variants. IN corvettes would have Nirbhay,but not those for export.

member_28990 · Post by **member_28990** » 28 Nov 2015 16:10

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/in-u ... 33506.html

If the hostile entry of United States Navy 7th fleet in the crucial stage of the 1971 war for the liberation of Bangladesh sent a shiver down the spine of Indian military commanders, events of last month gave them some relief. Not surprisingly there is a spring in the stride of those from India's beleaguered submarine arm at the Vishakhapatnam-based Eastern Naval Command (ENC). "It is among the coolest things to happen in recent times," said a young officer.

An operation under the high profile naval exercise MALABAR, between the navies of India, USA and Japan, featured a simulated battle to hunt and destroy each other's submarines. Locked in this match were two prowlers, the INS Sindhudhvaj (S56), a Soviet-designed EKM class of conventional submarine and the USS City of Corpus Christi (SSN705), a nuclear-powered attack submarine which functions like a fighter plane - scramble and destroy enemy submarines and ships. The crew of both the vessels were asked to hunt the other down in a general area of the Bay of Bengal, based on 'available int'. They, subsequently dived.

Hours later, as they still searched the Americans were informed that the game was over already.

Unknown, they had been marked, tailed and suitably 'annihilated' by the 533mm torpedos 'fired' by their Indian counterparts from on board the INS Sindhudhvaj. What came as a clincher to the Indian side was the tool which detected the USS Corpus Christi - the 'made in India' Ushus SONAR (Sound Navigation and Ranging) which was recently installed. "The way it happens is that the Sindhudhvaj recorded the Hydrophonic Effect (HE) - simply put, underwater noise - of the nuclear powered submarine and managed to positively identify it before locking on to it. Being an exercise what did not happen was the firing," explained a naval officer. The HE thus captured can easily slide into the elaborate database that the any navy maintains for classifying and identifying foreign submarines. A US embassy spokesperson said, "We have no information on the results to share."

What will lend succour to the navy's submarine fleet is yet another validation of the kill potential of its premier platform. India has nine such submarines apart from four German-designed Shishumar class submarines. After years of disallowing its presence in any naval exercise involving foreign navies - attributed to the IN's desire to not its HE be recorded by a foreign player - this edition of MALABAR was the first time the Indian Navy (IN) allowed an EKM to take part.

Scoring over a US submarine also underscores the reputation that precedes an EKM submarine. Not without reason do the western navies term them 'black holes in the ocean' - a measure of how difficult it is to detect once submerged.

The six-day MALABAR exercise began on October 14 and saw the sea-going phase begin from October 16. Underwater warfare was among the most important aspects of this exercise. India allowing the participation of INS Sindhudhvaj can be linked with the fact that China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy has a much bigger fleet of EKM submarines, 12 in all, which it purchased from Russia from 1990. The PLA Navy's rising profile has seen it becoming the biggest maritime power in Asia with over 300 assets which includes a menacing underwater fleet of 62 submarines. The PLA Navy has also initiated the deployment of its submarines, in addition to its surface ships, in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) - a region far removed from China's traditional area of maritime interest which would include the Taiwan Strait, East China Sea and South China Sea, apart from the Pacific Ocean.

Veteran submariner, Vice Admiral KN Sushil (retd), said, "I would have been upset had we failed at achieving what we did. A nuclear powered submarine always makes more noise vis a vis a conventional one and thus the results do not surprise me."

FACTS

INS Sindhudhvaj, is a conventional diesel electric submarine and was commissioned into the Indian Navy in June 1987. Her present home is the Vishakhapatnam based Eastern Naval Command.
USS City of Corpus Christi is a Los Angeles class, nuclear powered attack submarine and was commissioned in the US Navy in January 1983. Her present home is Pearl Harbour.

MALABAR 2015 saw the participation:

IN - Stealth frigate INS Shivalik, guided missile destroyer INS Ranvijay, frigate INS Betwa & INS Shakti, fleet support ship.
US Navy - Aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, Cruiser USS Normandy, Littoral combat ship USS Fort Worth, USS City of Corpus Christi, F18 fighter and Poseidon 8A maritime reconnaissance aircraft
Japan Maritime Self Defense Force - Destroyer JS Fuyuzuki and SH60K integral helicopter

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 28 Nov 2015 16:33

Philip wrote:....A multi-role corvette with a slant towards ASW warfare of between 1500-2000t max is required. Russia has just displayed how its small 1000t corvettes can fire a missile 2500km away! Such a corvette armed with a main gun,MBUs,VLS silos for anti-missile/point defence SAMs,and both Nirbhay amidships,and another SSM (BMos-M)-on either beam,ASW TTs,two 30mm gatlings,TAS and a helo deck with a below deck hangar could be fitted within a 2000t displacement. These corvettes would be able to conduct ops anywhere in the IOR and given their smaller size,could be built in larger number and at lower cost. They would pack even more punch than a P-28 which from the surface warfare angle is underarmed and cannot operate on the high seas alone. This size of corvette would also be in great demand from smaller navies which cannot afford larger warships like P-28s,Talwars,Shivaliks,not to mention the Delhi DDGs and P-15 variants. IN corvettes would have Nirbhay,but not those for export.

Perhaps you should wait for INS Vishakapatnam to enter service to have these wishes fulfilled!

The weapon systems you mentioned are exactly what Project 28 ships have, minus Nirbhay, Brahmps, PDMS.

Firstly, The smaller hull ASW ship @ 2000 ton is going to cost only marginally less than a Kamorta with same armament. The latter is already commissioned with two boats - why not simply increase the production run?

Secondly, installation of Nirbhay and Brahmos will also require installation of associated sensors such as Grapun Bal FCS. All of this is going to take the cost and displacement up.

PDMS is definitely missing on Kamorta, but we will have to wait for Maitri system as it is based on around the 3D-CAR radar already present on this class of ships. IN may possible retrofit Barak-1 from the retiring G-class frigates for some of the ships though.

I agree that the Navy has never found a replacement of Andaman class corvettes. But we still need Coastal ASW ship to replace abhay class.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 28 Nov 2015 16:38

An operation under the high profile naval exercise MALABAR, between the navies of India, USA and Japan, featured a simulated battle to hunt and destroy each other's submarines. Locked in this match were two prowlers, the INS Sindhudhvaj (S56), a Soviet-designed EKM class of conventional submarine and the USS City of Corpus Christi (SSN705), a nuclear-powered attack submarine which functions like a fighter plane - scramble and destroy enemy submarines and ships. The crew of both the vessels were asked to hunt the other down in a general area of the Bay of Bengal, based on 'available int'. They, subsequently dived.

Hours later, as they still searched the Americans were informed that the game was over already.

Unknown, they had been marked, tailed and suitably 'annihilated' by the 533mm torpedos 'fired' by their Indian counterparts from on board the INS Sindhudhvaj. What came as a clincher to the Indian side was the tool which detected the USS Corpus Christi - the 'made in India' Ushus SONAR (Sound Navigation and Ranging) which was recently installed. "The way it happens is that the Sindhudhvaj recorded the Hydrophonic Effect (HE) - simply put, underwater noise - of the nuclear powered submarine and managed to positively identify it before locking on to it. Being an exercise what did not happen was the firing," explained a naval officer. The HE thus captured can easily slide into the elaborate database that the any navy maintains for classifying and identifying foreign submarines. A US embassy spokesperson said, "We have no information on the results to share."

maxtraul, you just gave away the ammunition (inspite of USHUS being the factor!!) to Philip sir to 'import' a few Kilos. i won't mind ofc.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Nov 2015 17:15

Shhhh...I was about to say same thing

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Nov 2015 17:16

Its difficult for Nuke Submarine to search for SSK as the latter is much quiter running on battery , IN would be well aware of acoustic condition of Indian water and Indian Sonar are known to perform better then its Russian counterpart on Kilo.

So not surprising Kilo managed to achieve its task , Generally IN does not field Kilos in exercise with Western Navies but T-209 class , Any ways hope they would have masked their own signature.

A Kilo versus Chakra blue on blue would be a more interesting exercise

member_28990 · Post by **member_28990** » 28 Nov 2015 18:43

one thing that consistently comes out in these exercises is that in terms of technical ability, training and tactics our boys and girls (from all services) rank with the best of the best.

now if we can get our scorpenes fitted with AIP tech and get some japanese battery tech, our sub fleet will pack a real mean punch.

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 29 Nov 2015 05:55

Captain DK Sharma ‏@CaptDKS 48m48 minutes ago
#NavyWeek2015 Dolphin's Dive - a Spl pgme on Submarines on India Today TV channel at 0730, 1330 & 2330h today.