Indian Navy News & Discussion - 22 April 2015

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 02 Jun 2016 17:38

Russians use 533mm adapter in 650mm torpedo bays (from Wiki) to fire Type 53 torpedo.

But all this jugged aside, why did we went for completely different armament system in second sub.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 02 Jun 2016 23:58

Kakkaji wrote:This will be music to many BRFites ears:

Defence Ministry eyeing optimal resource utilisation for more submarines & advanced frigates

NEW DELHI: The defence ministry is doing a rethink on a prohibitively expensive naval programme for a futuristic aircraft carrier and is evaluating options for more optimal utilisation of resources for other critical purchases — like submarines and advanced frigates.

Officials have confirmed to ET that the Navy's plan for a 65,000 ton nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to be fitted with an American catapult system is not likely to get financial clearances soon as the ministry was looking at other options. While a detailed project report for the carrier is ongoing and the Indo-US Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Technology Cooperation (JWGACTC) is in place, officials say that the next step involving release of more funds could be deferred.

A reason for the rethink is the massive cost involved in the new-age aircraft carrier. By conservative estimates, the cost of construction of the carrier itself, without the aircraft, would exceed Rs 70,000 crore. The high cost is primarily due to the integration of the nuclear plant as well as the American electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) being planned.

With other critical naval projects requiring attention — including two lines of indigenous nuclear powered submarines — a line of thinking within the defence ministry is that allocating huge resources to a single platform would not be prudent.

"The aircraft carrier itself is expensive and also requires a number of warships and platforms around it to operate at sea. We also have other pressing needs of the Navy to consider," a defence ministry official said.

Finally, someone is applying their mind, instead of pursuing advanced (and expensive) US technology like fanboys.

Re the EMALS, have we even considered trying to build it our selves? AFAIK its just a linear induction motor, how hard can it be? Instead of spending the next 10 years doing chai-bisckoot with the Americans on it before finally buying it (whilst paying through our nose), why not spend a few crores building a PoC/prototype ourselves. Let some university or companies like BHEL or L&T develop it. We are making 10lac+ engineers every year, please put some of them to work on this. Even if the project doesn't succeed, it will be money well spent.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 03 Jun 2016 00:01

abhik wrote:
Re the EMALS, have we even considered trying to build it our selves? AFAIK its just a linear induction motor, how hard can it be? Instead of spending the next 10 years doing chai-bisckoot with the Americans on it before finally buying it (whilst paying through our nose), why not spend a few crores building a PoC/prototype ourselves. Let some university or companies like BHEL or L&T develop it. We are making 10lac+ engineers every year, please put some of them to work on this. Even if the project doesn't succeed, it will be money well spent.

Hear Hear!! We desperately need a DARPA type research funding agency. (And some bold professors to apply for such funding!)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Jun 2016 04:53

sudeepj wrote:
abhik wrote:
Re the EMALS, have we even considered trying to build it our selves? AFAIK its just a linear induction motor, how hard can it be? Instead of spending the next 10 years doing chai-bisckoot with the Americans on it before finally buying it (whilst paying through our nose), why not spend a few crores building a PoC/prototype ourselves. Let some university or companies like BHEL or L&T develop it. We are making 10lac+ engineers every year, please put some of them to work on this. Even if the project doesn't succeed, it will be money well spent.
Hear Hear!! We desperately need a DARPA type research funding agency. (And some bold professors to apply for such funding!)

MP has proposed some such agency. In-the-works I would say. IIRC it includes deep Univ involvement.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Jun 2016 09:39

the only solution is to double down and complete the varunastra HWT as quickly as possible. this will end the never ending circus of deals , bribes and blacklists for this vital weapon system.

just as in missiles we need to achieve independence in LWT and HWT to truly stand up for ourself.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Jun 2016 10:24

Even if Varunastra gets qualified for Submarine , most of the submarine would still get the best top of the line Western torpedo as these niche asset would still need to get the best weapons package , varunastra would be an add on it

asgkhan · Post by **asgkhan** » 03 Jun 2016 10:27

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ ... _years_of/

I was a sonar operator for about 5 years, for the most part, if a submarine does not want to be found, you're probably not going to find it without a struggle, and when you do it will be just above background noise on a single frequency band. You won't be able to audibly hear it until it try's to kill you. The last thing you will hear is a very loud active pulse which sounds nothing like the sonar ping from the movies followed by a loud pounding sound. The pounding is the sound of the ram ejecting a torpedo into the water, it's very loud. Then, depending on the type of torpedo, you hear either a slow revving, like that of an automobile engine or an instant max rev count. Combustion driven torpedoed rev up like a car, electric torpedoes reach their maximum rpm as soon as they turn on. All of this information is used to create a firing solution. Sonar collects and interperpates data that is then passed onto fire control who further refines the data into a workable firing solution; learn your trigonometry kids.

The firing solution is used to model what your weapon needs to do in order kill the intended target. We now have such a solution, the torpedomen have loaded warshot and the order is given to launch weapons from the number 2 and 4 tubes. Sonar will become useless for a short time because now all you can hear is the loud pounding sound of your ram ejecting your weapons and the sound of your weapons warming up. Okay, now our weapons are in the water but we still have a problem, there's probably between 4 and 6 torpedo a running for us right now. We have a solution. Countermeasures. So we launch our counter measures and for the sake of this scenario they work. Now our weapons are in the water and about to score a kill. They detonate but we're 50 yards from our intended target. That's okay because the Mk48 ADCAP is a giant bomb and the shockwave will kill just about anything even from that far out. In fact, the MK48 is designed to be detonated under the target so the shock will snap the keel.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 03 Jun 2016 11:41

Sid wrote:But all this jugged aside, why did we went for completely different armament system in second sub.

Lessons from Sindhurakshak. The Type 53-65 & SET-65 torpedoes are really old with safety and performance issues.

Philip wrote:PS:Can't understand why the torpedoes for the SSBNs and subs have been so badly mishandled.
This is primarily the IN's fault having no back up plan.We well know that any kind of sanctions would cripple our sub fleet,esp the N-subs. Our N-subs especially should've been configured to fire both Russian and Western torpedoes.Either Ru and German or Ru and French/whatever.

Russians and Westerns use physically different systems, so not possible using both together.

Western systems only require integration with FCS, which is easily doable. Pakistanis integrated DM2A4 with their Agosta 90B SUBTICS CMS. Australia integrated Mk48 ADCAP with their Collins. India integrated UGM-84 Harpoon with Type 209/1500.

Making vendor's compete actually works better. If Atlas wants the deal, they need to do the integration for free, otherwise we should negotiate with Mk48 or Spearfish or F21.

Sadly we're poor negotiators. We should've kept both Eurofighter & Rafale in negotiations since IAF technical recommendation was both. That would've given us both pricing & ToT leverage.

The other thing is our reaction to scams. Nothing wrong in EH-101 or Blackshark or Pilatus, they're inanimate objects. Its people who need to be prosecuted. I'll be happy that day Manohar Parrikar the engineer points this out.

Other misconception is lack of corruption in indigenous purchases. There money is made via raw material sourcing, sub-component sourcing, civic works, etc.

How do you think our politicians make money?

PSU leadership is appointed via Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). Its an easy guess that ability to channel money to politicians is an important unstated appointment criteria.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Jun 2016 17:17

What we've been saying for a long time on BRF. The USN is advancing its sub capability with concerted effort,so are the Russians and the Chinese are also trying hard to catch up. At this crucial time,our sub fleet's woes require a tremendous concerted effort right now to claw back lost time and opportunity.

TSarkar,still don't understand why our sub torpedo acquisition didn't plan for this current problem.Understand the design complexities of the western and Ru systems,but silly to have not planned for sanctions,bans,etc.

http://www.theday.com/article/20160601/ ... 9847[quote]
Admiral: Submarine force shifting to payload-centric model
Published June 01. 2016 By Julia Bergman Day staff writer

Groton — The submarine force is shifting from a platform-centric model to a payload-centric model, Rear Adm. Jeffrey Trussler told a small crowd Wednesday night at the University of Connecticut's Avery Point campus.

"We have some very good weapons in our little Swiss knife but we're still very limited," Trussler said.

Trussler is the commander of the Undersea Warfighting Development Center, which began operating Sept. 1, 2015, in Groton as part of a larger Navy plan to establish warfighting development centers for air, undersea, surface and expeditionary forces.

The command is responsible for training the submarine force in advanced tactics, techniques and procedures for anti-submarine warfare.

His talk Wednesday, "The Future of the Submarine Force and Submarine Warfare," was part of Connecticut's Submarine Century lecture series.

At any given time, the U.S. can have five to 10 submarines around the world, Trussler said, and "their job is just to help us listen, walk that potential future battle space to give us forewarning of adversary activities."

"We're the one part of the force that's kind of doing today what it might do, should an actual conflict arise," he continued. "We may already be there and we may already have experience in the area, know what the order of battle is in the area and understand the environment very well."

Trussler described the evolution of the submarine force, which he considers to be in its fourth generation, as the "leading edge of a lot of great work that's going to be happening over the next 10, 20, 30 years."
He detailed some of the work being done to extend the reach of the Navy's submarine fleet.

The submarine force is going to double, triple, quadruple "or even more" how far its torpedoes can go, Trussler said.
"We're going to have the ability to launch and recover unmanned undersea vehicles," he said.

He indicated the possibility of building those so-called UUVs, that can operate for 10, 20 or 30 days by themselves, or that can drop sensors and come back and query them later.

Maybe in the future when launching an unmanned aerial vehicle from a submarine, the UAV will be able to fly for eight or nine hours and feed visual and other information back to a submarine, he said.

"That's the type of work, experimentation and the research and actual testing that's going on right now to grow longer arms," Trussler said.

"That submarine that can get in and go farther and penetrate farther right now than most other of our military units," he said. "We're going to make those arms longer and we're going to make them more lethal with the technology we're working on right now."
[/quote]

srai · Post by **srai** » 03 Jun 2016 17:32

...
At any given time, the U.S. can have five to 10 submarines around the world, Trussler said, and "their job is just to help us listen, walk that potential future battle space to give us forewarning of adversary activities."
...

US has a fleet of around 60 SSNs. Just shows how many submarines are required to permanently deploy 5 to 10 submarines around the world. For 1 regular deployment (3-months) you need another 5 in rotational reserve.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 03 Jun 2016 17:45

Or may be they are deploying only 5-10 to cut operating costs.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jun 2016 12:54

Is this confirmed? If so,great news.First export orders of significant warships.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf ... 60602.aspx

Surface Forces: India Becomes An Exporter

June 2, 2016: India has become an exporter of large warships. It was only in 2014 that India put its first locally made large warship (a Kamorta class corvette) into service. Now the builder has got the first export order from the Philippines. This is for smaller version of the Kamorta. The Filipino version will closer to 2,200 tons, 13 percent shorter, be armed with a 76mm gun (and other unspecified weapon) and Indian electronics (including a battle management and fire control system) and cost less than half what the Kamortas go for. India won on price and these Filipino corvettes may be built at a loss simply to help build an export market.

It was in mid-2014 that the Indian Navy received the first (INS Kamorta) of four Indian made corvettes. These are the first locally built modern surface warships for India. The Kamortas are 3,400 ton ships that are 109 meters (355 feet) long, have a crew 193 and a top speed of 46 kilometers an hour. They are optimized for anti-submarine warfare and are armed with a 76.2mm gun, two 30mm multi-barrel anti-missile autocannon, two multi (12) barrel 212mm anti-submarine rocket launchers, 16 Barak anti-missile/aircraft missiles and six torpedo tubes. It has a hull mounted sonar and carries a helicopter that can be armed with four anti-submarine torpedoes. The ship has stealthy features (small radar signature and more difficult for submarine sonar to detect as well.) By 2016 two of the Kamorta class ships are in service with the Indian Navy and two more are being built.

India has long bought Russian warships and has studied their construction and operating characteristics carefully. In 2012-13 Russia delivered the last of three Talwar class frigates. These were to be the last imported surface ships India will buying. India ordered these three ships (for $1.6 billion) in 2006. The 4,000 ton P-17 project Talwar's are 124.5 meters (386 feet) long, carry 24 anti-aircraft and eight anti-ship missiles, four torpedo tubes, as well as a 100mm gun, short range anti-missile autocannon, a helicopter, and anti-submarine weapons (rockets and missiles). The ship has a very complete set of electronics gear, except for a troublesome Indian sonar (?). There is a crew of 180. All of the Talwars are equipped with eight Indian BrahMos anti-ship missile each. The Talwar is a modified version of the Russian Cold War era Krivak IV design.

The P-17A "stealth" frigates are the same size as the original three Talwars India ordered in the 1990s. The Stealthy Talwars have their superstructure changed so as to reduce the radar signature (making the ship less likely to show up on enemy radars). Improved weapons and electronics are installed as well, making it a more formidable warship than the original Talwars. India is not ordering any more warships from Russia, as it has developed the capability to build what it needs locally. This now includes aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines as well as aircraft carriers, frigates and corvettes.

PS:Our media recently reported that another 4 Talwars may be bought/built at home and the figure may go upto 10 later.This may perhaps be buying the incomplete 4 Talwars/Ru std which need UKR engines. Pipavav may complete them /build more?

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 04 Jun 2016 15:47

Our Media will report many things. The import of warships is a closed chapter. Now everything is about exports.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jun 2016 10:30

http://aviationweek.com/defense/israel- ... se-systems

Addressing these challenges, Israel recently introduced air and missile defense capabilities for naval forces. The first is Barak-8, the successor of Barak-1, developed by IAI in cooperation with the Indian Defense Research and Development Organization for the navies of both countries. Barak-8 is an area defense system, comprising an advanced, multimission radar, command, control and communications system, and data link connecting all vessels and sensors operating on other platforms in the area. The vertically launched interceptor missiles used by Barak-8 are also connected to the network via missile data links. The weapon is Israel’s first naval air defense system in the class of major air defense systems, such as the U.S. SM-2, Russian SA-N-6 (naval version is S300) or French Aster 15.

India designated the Barak-8 as a long-range surface-to-air missile (Lrsam) for large vessels. The Project-15A destroyer Kolkata, the first platform to use the system, conducted a successful firing trial earlier this year. The other two vessels of the class, Kochi and Chennai, will also be equipped with the weapon. India plans to use the Lrsam on new vessels such as the Project 15B destroyers and Project 17A frigates and the aircraft carrier Vikrant and to retrofit the system to Kamorta-class corvettes and the aircraft carrier Vikramaditya.

The Israeli navy fields the Barak-8 on board Saar 5-class corvettes. The first vessel with the system was Lahav, to be followed by the remaining two Saar 5 corvettes Hanit and Eilat. The smaller Saar 4.5-class corvettes will be fitted with a rotating variant of the radar designated EL/M-2285 Alpha, which will also support the Barak-8 installation, albeit with fewer capabilities.

Both platforms have large, solid-state phased-array radar—the ELM-2248 MF-STAR from Elta Systems. The Kolkata mounts four panels of the radar on a pyramid-shaped structure installed on top of the main mast, while the Saar 5 uses three smaller panels on the forward mast and a fourth panel mounted on a pedestal facing aft. With the larger radars and broad-area connectivity between multiple platforms, Barak-8 missile systems have an effective range of 70 km (43 mi.), covering a much wider area than the Barak-1. Moreover, unlike the point defense system of its predecessor, Barak-8 defends other ships or facilities in an area, such as offshore oil and gas rigs, thereby extending a defensive umbrella far beyond the carrying platform.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 05 Jun 2016 12:14

Austin wrote:Even if Varunastra gets qualified for Submarine , most of the submarine would still get the best top of the line Western torpedo as these niche asset would still need to get the best weapons package , varunastra would be an add on it

If a version of the weapon is good enough to serve on the surface fleet. It's version will be good enough to be placed on a submarine.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 05 Jun 2016 13:42

Vijainder K Thakur @vkthakur

@rajfortyseven INS Koltakata has a new 16-container vertical launching system (VLS) of the BrahMos missile & 2 missiles per container! 1/2
4:26 AM - 4 Jun 2016

@Aryanwarlord @rajfortyseven 48 cell LR-SAM,16 Barak-1 SAM, 4 x 30 mm AK-630 CIWS,1 x 76mm Super Rapid Gun Mount (SRGM)

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 05 Jun 2016 22:19

32 Brahmos ! 64 SAM. Total 96 missiles. That is quite a loadout!
Finally something along the lines of an Arleigh Burke loadout.

Any nation will shiver if one of these beauties is parked off its coast

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 05 Jun 2016 22:24

-deleted-

kit · Post by **kit** » 05 Jun 2016 23:01

32 brahmos more than enough to flatten anything upright !! including aircraft carriers

... or say Gwadar and karachi comes to mind !!

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 05 Jun 2016 23:08

Why does a ship need 32 Brahmos? Wouldn't splitting it 16 Brahmos and 16 Nirbhay be more useful?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 05 Jun 2016 23:12

^^^Looking at Wiki, the 32 brahmos seems odd. Wonder if it is not 32 Barak 1 and 16 Brahmos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolkata-class_destroyer

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Jun 2016 23:59

seriously 32 brahmos will turn karachi infra into dust.
see the damage caused by firing all of 6 missiles!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation ... %281971%29

then in follow up damage caused by all of 4 missiles in operation python

On the night of 8 December 1971, in rough seas, a small strike group consisting of missile boat INS Vinash and two multipurpose frigates, INS Talwar and INS Trishul,[11] approached Karachi. Vinash fired four SS-N-2B Styx missiles. The first missile struck the fuel tanks at the Keamari Oil Farm. Another missile hit and sank a Panamian fuel tanker the SS Gulf Star. The third and fourth missiles hit the Pakistani Navy fleet tanker PNS Dacca and the British ship SS Harmattan. Dacca was damaged beyond repair while the Merchant Vessel SS Harmattan sank.[1][5][12] One Pakistani ship was captured off the Makran coast.[10]

Between Operations Trident and Python, and the Indian Air Force attacks on Karachi's fuel and ammunition depots, more than 50 percent of the total fuel requirement of the Karachi zone was reported to have been blown up.[3][12] The result was a crippling economic blow to Pakistan. The damage was estimated at worth $3 billion,[12] with most of the oil reserves[6] and ammunition, warehouses and workshops had been destroyed and PAF was also hit.[12]

IMHO, this is more PLAN centric.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Jun 2016 00:00

Gawadar has almost nothing, maybe a few targets.
Karachi is target rich! like 2-3 dozen odd targets in that area.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jun 2016 02:06

you are right TSP will sh!t its pants if Kolkata is deployed against them.

(c) Indian Navy. Making Pakistan brown uniforms since 1971.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jun 2016 02:07

Best part is they dont even have a single system in place to intercept Brahmos. They'd need many to even contemplate layered protection. But hey even their ships are completely helpless against Brahmos. Wouldn't be surprised if a single Kolkata salvo turned much of their surface navy to bits and then proceeded to hit targets in Karachi POL/bases etc causing huge damage, even after that.

titash · Post by **titash** » 06 Jun 2016 02:37

Aditya G wrote:Vijainder K Thakur @vkthakur

@rajfortyseven INS Koltakata has a new 16-container vertical launching system (VLS) of the BrahMos missile & 2 missiles per container! 1/2
4:26 AM - 4 Jun 2016

@Aryanwarlord @rajfortyseven 48 cell LR-SAM,16 Barak-1 SAM, 4 x 30 mm AK-630 CIWS,1 x 76mm Super Rapid Gun Mount (SRGM)

I don't think this is accurate. Look at the square hatches below...how do you put 2 missiles in here? And this is BrahMos not a smallish Uran/Harpoon.

IIRC there were several confirmations on the loadout of 16 BrahMos + (16 front + 16 rear = 32) LRSAM + 4 CIWS AK-630...no Barak-1 is fitted and no Barak-1 STGR director is present

titash · Post by **titash** » 06 Jun 2016 02:48

Philip wrote:Is this confirmed? If so,great news.First export orders of significant warships.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf ... 60602.aspx
Surface Forces: India Becomes An Exporter

June 2, 2016: India has become an exporter of large warships. It was only in 2014 that India put its first locally made large warship (a Kamorta class corvette) into service. Now the builder has got the first export order from the Philippines. This is for smaller version of the Kamorta. The Filipino version will closer to 2,200 tons, 13 percent shorter, be armed with a 76mm gun (and other unspecified weapon) and Indian electronics (including a battle management and fire control system) and cost less than half what the Kamortas go for. India won on price and these Filipino corvettes may be built at a loss simply to help build an export market.

It was in mid-2014 that the Indian Navy received the first (INS Kamorta) of four Indian made corvettes. These are the first locally built modern surface warships for India. The Kamortas are 3,400 ton ships that are 109 meters (355 feet) long, have a crew 193 and a top speed of 46 kilometers an hour. They are optimized for anti-submarine warfare and are armed with a 76.2mm gun, two 30mm multi-barrel anti-missile autocannon, two multi (12) barrel 212mm anti-submarine rocket launchers, 16 Barak anti-missile/aircraft missiles and six torpedo tubes. It has a hull mounted sonar and carries a helicopter that can be armed with four anti-submarine torpedoes. The ship has stealthy features (small radar signature and more difficult for submarine sonar to detect as well.) By 2016 two of the Kamorta class ships are in service with the Indian Navy and two more are being built.

India has long bought Russian warships and has studied their construction and operating characteristics carefully. In 2012-13 Russia delivered the last of three Talwar class frigates. These were to be the last imported surface ships India will buying. India ordered these three ships (for $1.6 billion) in 2006. The 4,000 ton P-17 project Talwar's are 124.5 meters (386 feet) long, carry 24 anti-aircraft and eight anti-ship missiles, four torpedo tubes, as well as a 100mm gun, short range anti-missile autocannon, a helicopter, and anti-submarine weapons (rockets and missiles). The ship has a very complete set of electronics gear, except for a troublesome Indian sonar (?). There is a crew of 180. All of the Talwars are equipped with eight Indian BrahMos anti-ship missile each. The Talwar is a modified version of the Russian Cold War era Krivak IV design.

The P-17A "stealth" frigates are the same size as the original three Talwars India ordered in the 1990s. The Stealthy Talwars have their superstructure changed so as to reduce the radar signature (making the ship less likely to show up on enemy radars). Improved weapons and electronics are installed as well, making it a more formidable warship than the original Talwars. India is not ordering any more warships from Russia, as it has developed the capability to build what it needs locally. This now includes aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines as well as aircraft carriers, frigates and corvettes.
PS:Our media recently reported that another 4 Talwars may be bought/built at home and the figure may go upto 10 later.This may perhaps be buying the incomplete 4 Talwars/Ru std which need UKR engines. Pipavav may complete them /build more?

Another classic half-ass article from strategypage. These guys type up just about anything to get pageviews.

- The Kamortas do not have a Barak VLS system
- The Kamortas has 4 heavyweight TT and not 6 tubes
- The Talwars are not "P-17 project Talwar"
- The indian sonar is not "troublesome"...there's 10 sets on order for god's sake
- The P-17A stealth frigates are not the same size as the original Talwars

...poorly written, poorly researched, but they receive pageviews all the same, and yet another member will post from strategypage tomorrow

. Life goes on...

John · Post by **John** » 06 Jun 2016 03:29

titash wrote:don't think this is accurate. Look at the square hatches below...how do you put 2 missiles in here? And this is BrahMos not a smallish Uran/Harpoon.

It could be dual packed,in which case single launcher can carry 2 canister side by side. However there is no indication that launcher can do that or 1.5+ meter wide to accomdate that. It looks to be about same size as russian u vls launchers which can carry only one missile.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 06 Jun 2016 04:25

titash wrote: I don't think this is accurate. Look at the square hatches below...how do you put 2 missiles in here? And this is BrahMos not a smallish Uran/Harpoon.

IIRC there were several confirmations on the loadout of 16 BrahMos + (16 front + 16 rear = 32) LRSAM + 4 CIWS AK-630...no Barak-1 is fitted and no Barak-1 STGR director is present

In this video, @4:42 the guy asks the Commander how many missiles are there in the VLS system, the commander replies he can't say. I guessing it need not necessarily be 8 as there are 8 tubes in the system. Similarly, in Kolkata, there could be 2 missiles per tube.

srin · Post by **srin** » 06 Jun 2016 06:03

I do remember reading that Kamortas were going to get Barak-8.

John · Post by **John** » 06 Jun 2016 06:33

^ I think you meant to say Barak 1.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 06 Jun 2016 07:21

Although we all would like it to be 32 missiles, but in reality it's 16. It's a 8x2 config, 1 missile per cell.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Jun 2016 07:52

Indian Navy to harness solar, ocean energy

New Delhi, June 5 (IANS) Aiming to reduce its carbon footprint, the Indian Navy has set a target of producing 21 MW of solar power and is also looking at tapping the energy of oceans for power generation, a statement said.

For this, the navy has pledged to use 1.5 per cent of its work budget for generating renewable energy, it said in a statement on World Environment Day.

An official statement said the navy has set itself an "aggressive target" of 21 MW solar power installation, to be implemented in three phases.

The initiative is in line with the National Mission for achieving 100 GW solar system installations by 2022.

"Additionally, the navy has also pledged to use 1.5 percent of its works budget towards renewable energy generation," the statement said.

"Under this scheme, solar projects are being undertaken at various naval stations across all Commands. Naval stations, with scarce available land, have resorted to the deploying rooftop solar PV panels," it said.

The statement added that while the renewable energy scenario in the country is dominated by solar and wind energy, the navy is also exploring the possibility of harnessing the renewable energy from oceans.

"Towards this, in consultation with pioneers in the field and the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), feasibility of exploiting ocean thermal energy and wave energy as sources of power, are under discussion," the statement said.

Sunday marks two years of the Green Initiatives Programme of the navy.

srin · Post by **srin** » 06 Jun 2016 09:03

John wrote:^ I think you meant to say Barak 1.

No - I did mean Barak 8 LRSAM
See http://m.indiatoday.in/education/story/ ... 58885.html

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jun 2016 11:16

even 16 is enough. in accounts above 10 missiles were fired.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jun 2016 11:17

For the usual doubters.
http://www.manilalivewire.com/2016/04/p ... dian-firm/
Details.GRSE and Hyundai only two shortlisted firms.Costs fro 2 FFgs,approx 15B pesos,just under 1B pesos lower than the approved budget.
95M in length,2000t,12t helo,anti-surface,anti-sub,anti-air and EW warfare capabilities and weaponry.

The earlier posts said that a modified version of the Kamorta would be built for the PN.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Jun 2016 12:30

DCNS Scorpene Submarine

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Jun 2016 12:33

this video gives better view of Scorpene Technology and video inside the sub

titash · Post by **titash** » 06 Jun 2016 17:52

Karthik S wrote:
titash wrote: I don't think this is accurate. Look at the square hatches below...how do you put 2 missiles in here? And this is BrahMos not a smallish Uran/Harpoon.

IIRC there were several confirmations on the loadout of 16 BrahMos + (16 front + 16 rear = 32) LRSAM + 4 CIWS AK-630...no Barak-1 is fitted and no Barak-1 STGR director is present

In this video, @4:42 the guy asks the Commander how many missiles are there in the VLS system, the commander replies he can't say. I guessing it need not necessarily be 8 as there are 8 tubes in the system. Similarly, in Kolkata, there could be 2 missiles per tube.

Karthik - he probably means it's less than 8 since a few tubes are empty

But jokes apart, I agree with John, the size of the cell is similar to the standard russian VLS (i.e. not 2x it's size) and can fit only 1 missile.

This is the L&T UVL Module that carries 8 missiles...the kolkata appears to have 2 UVL Modules back to back, and not a 16-cell unit.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Jun 2016 09:08

“Indian Navy Pledges 1.5 Per Cent of its Works Budget Towards Renewable Energy Generation” MOD Press

World Environment Day – 2016

The Green Initiatives Programme of the Indian Navy completes two years on World Environment Day. Over this period, considerable impetus has been given to reduce the overall carbon footprint of the Navy. Being a responsible and multidimensional force, the Indian Navy believes in an all inclusive and sustainable growth. Accordingly, the focus has not only been on correcting its ‘impact’ on the energy and environmental footprint, but also to address the root cause of the problem, which lies in the way energy is used.

Creation of an Energy and Environment Cell at Naval Headquarters in Jan 16 to monitor pan Navy implementation of green measures is a concrete step in this direction. This Cell has been tasked to enable the Navy’s vision of adding a Green Footprint to its Blue Water Operations and make it an environmentally responsible force which is not only energy and resource efficient, but also resilient to energy costs/ disruptions.

The Key Result Areas of the INs Energy and Environment Policy underline the triple bottom-line approach of Energy Conservation, Diversification of Energy Supply and Minimising Environment Impact. The ever expanding reach of IN necessitates use of new platforms equipped with cutting edge technology and state-of-the-art equipment. These platforms are energy intensive and have a significant carbon footprint in terms of energy and fuel use. IN has initiated concerted steps to reduce the carbon footprint– through efficient ship design and operations. Mass energy conservation awareness drives are conducted regularly at all Commands and Repair Yards to continuously educate and sensitise personnel on the importance of energy/ environment conservation in an effort to make this a way of life. Apart from greater awareness of the naval fraternity, the efforts have resulted in significant savings of approximately Rs. 12 Cr annually. The efforts of one of the major repair yards have seen it emerge as a model consumer, a feat lauded and recognized by the State Electricity Board.

The Navy has set itself an aggressive target of 21 MW Solar PV installation, to be implemented in three phases. The initiative is in line with the National Mission of Mega Watt to Giga Watt towards achieving 100 GW Solar PV installations by 2022. Additionally, IN has pledged 1.5 per cent of its Works budget towards Renewable Energy generation. Under this scheme, Solar PV projects are being undertaken at various Naval Stations across all Commands. Naval Stations, with scarce available land, have resorted to the deploying Rooftop Solar PV panels.

While the Renewable Energy scenario in the country is dominated by Solar and Wind energy, the Navy is also exploring the possibility of harnessing the Renewable Energy from oceans. Towards this, in consultation with pioneers in the field and MNRE, feasibility of exploiting Ocean Thermal Energy and Wave Energy as sources of power, are under discussion.

The pursuit of green goals of Indian Navy requires sustained and focussed efforts. The Men and Women in Whites, have, nonetheless pledged to walk hand in hand with the national objectives set by the Hon’ble Prime Minister.