Marking the completion of the Indian Navy's crucial Project, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar will commission its last vessel "INS Chennai" into service on November 21, an official said here on Friday.
The Press of the terrorist fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan is claiming that it is a Nuclear Submarine:krishna_krishna wrote:Sandeep U. article claims it resembles 209, just curious Erdogan is in napaki land and they also operate 209 no wonder they could be involved in drama as they done one with ruskies :
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/paki ... 14350.html
I would trust Singha's word on this.Singha wrote:the arrangement , gaps and white colour of the masts to me makes it one of the older 688 los angeles SSNs.
does not match the kilo, akula, u209 or scorpene to me. the 688 which operate in the arctic region have masts painted white sometimes with black spots on them.
Those RBUs just take too much prime space. Plus their reload magzine which goes three decks below taking even more precious Space.Karthik S wrote:At last INS Chennai to be commissioned on Monday:
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 172_1.html
Marking the completion of the Indian Navy's crucial Project, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar will commission its last vessel "INS Chennai" into service on November 21, an official said here on Friday.
There are a couple of designs in service:Sid wrote:....Instead of a 12 round horseshoe design it can be replaced with fixed 30 tube (5x5) mbrl type design, which will get rid of that manual reload component and space requirements below the deck. It will also make it a much simpler design and be able to relocate it anywhere on the ship.
That space then can be used to pack LRSAMs making it a potnent air defense platform.
Wonder what are are disadvantages with that.
I was not aware LSTs were employed in Op Pawan. Any details?Port Blair, Nov 11: Indian Naval Ship Mahish was decommissioned on 11 Nov 2016 at Port Blair after spending 31 years of glorious service to the nation at an impressive ceremony presided over by Commodore Girish Kumar Garg, Naval Component Commander and Commodore Flotilla, Andaman and Nicobar Command. The ship was commissioned on 04 Jun 1985 at Gydnia, Poland and had served at Vishakhapatnam and Port Blair since her induction into the Navy. During the ship’s journey of over three decades, INS Mahish traversed over 3,30,129 nautical miles and also played a pivotal role in Op Pawan at Sri Lanka wherein the then Commanding Officer was also awarded the Nau Sena Medal (Gallantry) for the ship’s valiant contribution. ....
Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar on Monday commissioned ‘INS Chennai’, the third indigenously designed guided missile destroyer in the Kolkata class, here.
Built at the Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd in Mumbai, the ship’s construction also marks the end of the Project 15A to build Kolkata class guided missile destroyers.
Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Sunil Lanba was present on the occasion.
With an overall length of 164 metres and displacement of over 7,500 tonnes, ‘INS Chennai’ is one of the largest destroyers in the Indian Navy’s fleet.
The ship is armed with supersonic surface-to-surface BrahMos missiles and Barak-8 long range surface-to-air missiles.
The ship is to be assigned to the western fleet after completion of some additional trials of systems deployed on it.
The first ship of the class, ‘INS Kolkata’, was commissioned on August 16, 2014 and ‘INS Kochi’ was commissioned on September 30, 2015.
The third destroyer will be placed under the operational and administrative control of the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief Western Naval Command.
Posting in full :
PPS: Oh forgot this titbit.The USN will not buy more ammo for the Zum's main gun as each shell costs about $900,000.So the DDGs will sail with low ammo stocks. Great ship what?!US navy's most expensive destroyer breaks down in Panama Canal
USS Zumwalt, which cost more than $4.4bn, stuck in Panama after losing propulsion and sustaining cosmetic damage
The Zumwalt sustained an engineering problem in the Panama Canal and had to be towed to port.
Associated Press
Wednesday 23 November 2016
The most expensive destroyer ever built for the US navy has suffered an engineering problem in the Panama Canal and had to be towed to port.
US Third Fleet spokesman commander Ryan Perry said a vice-admiral directed the USS Zumwalt to remain at ex-Naval Station Rodman in Panama to address the issues, which arose on Monday.
US navy to take charge of largest destroyer – the $4bn USS Zumwalt
The ship was built at Bath Iron Works in Maine and was on its way to San Diego.
“The schedule for the ship will remain flexible to enable testing and evaluation in order to ensure the ship’s safe transit to her new home port in San Diego,” Perry said in a statement.
USNI News, a publication of the US Naval Institute, reported on its website that the ship was in the canal when it lost propulsion.
Crew also saw water getting into bearings that connect electrical motors to driveshafts, the website reported.
USNI News reported that the Zumwalt suffered minor cosmetic damage. The ship had been scheduled to arrive in San Diego by the end of the year to start the activation of its weapon system, the website reported.
The 610ft warship has an angular shape to minimise its radar signature and is regarded as the most technologically sophisticated destroyers ever built for the navy. One of its signature features is a new gun system that fires rocket-powered shells up to 63 nautical miles.
The Zumwalt cost more than $4.4bn and was commissioned in October in Maryland. It also suffered a leak in its propulsion system before it was commissioned. The leak required the ship to remain at Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia longer than expected for repairs.
The ship is part of the first new class of warship built at Bath Iron Works in more than 25 years.
The second Zumwalt-class destroyer, which also cost more than $4.4bn, was christened in a June ceremony during which US Rep Bruce Poliquin called it an “extraordinary machine of peace and security”. The third ship is expected to cost a bit less than $3.7bn.
A spokeswoman for Bath Iron Works said the shipyard was not planning to comment on the breakdown and referred questions to the navy.
Comment section - mexicans understandAustin wrote:China, Pakistan Bonhomie Forces India to Rethink Its Nuclear Submarine Plan
Read more: https://en.ria.ru/military/201611221047 ... -sub-plan/
When one is fighting in far off lands - say Somalia or Afghanistan - then preventing casualties becomes important - because no one wants to occupy that god forsaken territory - so getting the job done with minimum casualties becomes an important objective.Vivek K wrote:tsarkar ji one downside to having a larger number of crew on board is that loss of life is also higher in the unfortunate event that a ship is lost in action.
And my response -In 2012, the Indian Navy became the first non-US military to field the Boeing P-8 Poseidon, paying $2.1 billion for eight of these cutting-edge multi-mission maritime aircraft that patrol vast stretches of ocean to detect and destroy enemy submarines and warships.
Yet, India has lost the advantage of being first-mover. Australia’s new P-8 aircraft, which arrived in that country last Wednesday, is significantly more capable than the Indian version. So too will be the British version of the P-8.
The reason: poor contracting by New Delhi. The Australian and British contracts with Boeing provide for automatic upgrade of their P-8s, in tandem with each new upgrade of the US Navy P-8s, a process that continues round the year through the aircraft’s service life. India’s contract for the P-8I has no such provision.
Australia’s and the UK’s automatic upgrades are embedded in what is termed a “spiral upgrade programme”. Without the upgrades this provides for, India’s P-8Is are steadily lagging behind the technology curve.
A follow-on Indian contract signed in July 2016 for four more P-8I aircraft, which are to be delivered by 2020, will belatedly make up some of this technology lag. Mark Jordan, chief engineer of the P-8 project, said in Seattle last Monday that the Indian Navy had provided “a long list of upgrades” for the new aircraft. Some of those upgrades would also be fitted retrospectively into the first eight P-8Is.
But subsequent upgrades and improvements would not be passed automatically to India’s P-8Is, while Australia and the UK will continue to benefit.
With no contractual provision for even informing India about new upgrades developed by the American vendors, the navy would only learn about upgrades from open sources, such as the internet, and information shared during joint exercises.
From the start, the navy’s P-8Is were handicapped by Delhi’s refusal to sign up for an Indo-US communications security agreement called the “Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement” (CISMOA). Without this the US cannot legally part with any “CISMOA-controlled equipment”.
Instead, the navy opted for commercially available equipment that does not permit such secure networking.
Of all the weaponry that India has contracted from the US in the last decade --- including the C-130J Special Operations transporter, C-17 Globemaster III heavy lift transporter, P-8Is, CH-47F Chinook heavy lift helicopter and AH-64E Apache attack helicopter --- the P-8I has arguably contributed the most towards strengthening India’s defence.
With naval pilots flying long, eight-to-ten hour surveillance missions in the Bay of Bengal, Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean, India knows exactly what is happening in these waters. To deal with enemy warships and submarines the P-8I detects, it has seven tonnes of weaponry on board, including the Harpoon missile and heavyweight torpedoes.
Even so, there may be a cost to keeping the P-8I fleet lagging in technology.
The root of the problem is New Delhi’s out-dated approach to buying weaponry, which acquires equipment separately from upgrades. Currently, several Indian platforms are undergoing exorbitantly expensive “upgrade” programmes that cost several times more than the original purchase. These include Kilo-class submarines; and the Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 fighters.
In contrast, buyers like Australia and the UK incorporate continuous upgrade programmes into the procurement contract, keeping the equipment current rather than paying for “upgrading” several decades down the line. This involves sharing the cost of upgrade development with the vendors. In return real-time upgrades translate into a continuous technology edge.
For example, Australia’s 24 F/A-18 Super Hornets, which began delivery in 2010, have been kept at the same cutting edge as the US Navy’s Super Hornets through a “spiral upgrade programme” included in the contract.
The P-8I, which is engineered on a Boeing 737-800/900 airliner, is built to cater for continuous upgrades through its service life. Boeing engineers point to its 60 per cent power reserve, 25 per cent cooling reserve and 200 cubic feet of unutilised space. Its software has “advanced modular architecture that allows for quick expansion and affordable growth of capabilities.”
Says Jordan: “As threats evolve, you can modify and upgrade the mission systems and stay in front of the threat for a very long time.”
Technical issues, slow decision-making, and concerns about bureaucracy led a Russian Mig-29 fighter jet to crash into the Mediterranean Sea on Nov. 13, the authorities have established.
A source in the military told Lenta.ru that the plane, which was returning to the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, was unable to land due to a problem with the carrier's arresting cable.
"The broken arresting cable and the delay in correcting the fault served as the starting point of the event," the source said.
"The pilot was forced to eject after running out of fuel because the command did not want to send the aircraft to an alternate airfield, hoping for a quick resolution of the problem on the ship's deck. If [the pilot] landed at Hmeymim (in Syria), or especially in Cyprus, then the incident would have to be reported and there would be a reprimand."
"In the end, it's necessary to account for a fighter jet that costs two billion rubles," he added.
The Mig-29KR was part of the 100th separate naval fighter regiment. According to the Defense Ministry, the cause of the crash was a technical defect, the details of which were not disclosed. Later, a Russian military blog, citing its own sources, reported that the plane could not land on the carrier's deck due to a broken arresting cable.
The spiral development and upgrade is actually not OEM designed but user defined and designed. FMS customers can choose to opt in, opt out, choose to design their own spiral development strategy or simply pick and choose what they want from the work that is being done by others. Piggy backing on a spiral upgrade strategy is the most cost effective if you wan't the capability being offered. If you want to have a say in the spiral development you have to pay to fund that block either through its development or a separate fee at the end of it. Australia signed an MOU last decade to officially participate in the spiral development of the maritime patrol aircraft. They will fund their contribution for each block and have a say in what capability goes into that block starting with increment 2.Hi Ajai,
The continuous upgrade is an OEM scam, where one has to pay an AMC fees annually.
And the U.S. Navy has to use what is developed by Boeing / Raytheon / NG / et al.brar_w wrote:[On the P-8, the strategy to pursue spiral development, define each block capability gets decided by the US Navy and its process before getting approved by the Office of Secretary of Defense and ultimately the Congress.
What if our requirements are divergent? We'll still need to pay over and above the cost of spiral development cost.brar_w wrote:Australia signed an MOU last decade to officially participate in the spiral development of the maritime patrol aircraft. They will fund their contribution for each block and have a say in what capability goes into that block starting with increment 2...If you choose to participate in the spiral development program you deal with the PEO, and the service in charge and all payments to the OEM are handled through the PEO negotiated contract for a particular set of capability requirements that are jointly developed as per the MOU.
