Nothing much in the web on the P 18 DDG except for that its 9000 + tons and one helo ; with hypersonic brahmos and "electromagnetic rail gunsmaz wrote:I have come across the P-18 next gen DDG on some of the other fora on the interweb. Some of the defence journalists have also referred to the next gen DDG in news reports. I think MDLs boss also referred to it in one of the Defexpo 2018 show dailies.Aditya G wrote:Maz
Any news of Project-28A and Project-18 DDG? Do these even exist?
"was in meetings with someone formerly with the directorate of naval design recently, asked him about when we would have ships with more VLS cells his response" beta P17A aur P15B ke baad ki designs toh abhi tumne dekhi bhi nahin" rest assured we're working on it.the video below came out earlier & shows at least one of these conceptsmaz wrote:I have come across the P-18 next gen DDG on some of the other fora on the interweb. Some of the defence journalists have also referred to the next gen DDG in news reports. I think MDLs boss also referred to it in one of the Defexpo 2018 show dailies.Aditya G wrote:Maz
Any news of Project-28A and Project-18 DDG? Do these even exist?
No doubt caused by incompetent Indians unable to absorb the 'sophisticated' Russian technologyPrem wrote:Indian Navy's IL-38 maritime patrol aircraft operating for the Indian Navy (06) was damaged when it landed with a retracted nosegear at Moscow Zhukovsky
Yes, I know. Was a sarcastic statement inspired by the BS peddled by russia-rakshaks to demean indigenous programs and DRDO/forces. In fact if this didn't happen in Russia and with Russian pilots, you would probably have seen such a statement already, in defence of all things Russian.arun wrote:^^^ No need to go there. From the wording, albeit ambiguous, of “According to the Ilyushin company press service, the plane belongs to the Indian navy, there are experienced Ilyushin test pilots on board, said.”, I am guessing it was not Indian but Russian pilots doing the flying
That video is from 2011, and from the looks of it we aren't going to have any new designed frigates/destroyers before the late 2020's.soumik wrote:was in meetings with someone formerly with the directorate of naval design recently, asked him about when we would have ships with more VLS cells his response" beta P17A aur P15B ke baad ki designs toh abhi tumne dekhi bhi nahin" rest assured we're working on it.the video below came out earlier & shows at least one of these conceptsmaz wrote:
I have come across the P-18 next gen DDG on some of the other fora on the interweb. Some of the defence journalists have also referred to the next gen DDG in news reports. I think MDLs boss also referred to it in one of the Defexpo 2018 show dailies.
...
it was apparently all Russian crewBart S wrote:No doubt caused by incompetent Indians unable to absorb the 'sophisticated' Russian technologyPrem wrote:Indian Navy's IL-38 maritime patrol aircraft operating for the Indian Navy (06) was damaged when it landed with a retracted nosegear at Moscow Zhukovsky
Good point on the media spin by OEM nation.kit wrote:it was apparently all Russian crewBart S wrote:
No doubt caused by incompetent Indians unable to absorb the 'sophisticated' Russian technology
Technology is never a challenge. Changing mindset in adopting a different way of building and operating is.maz wrote:Regarding stern launching of small boats from ships, there is hope! The Bharati built CG interceptors have a stern ramp. Maybe the IN can learn something from the CG?
Thanks maz. Check email please.maz wrote:Prasad wrote: Uh i shot all those picturesI'll see if I have a higher res shot. Don't think there is but will look.
Prasad, you have done a great job capturing the images of the posters and kit. It is hard work, so a very BIG thank you for your coverage!
Please check your BR pm inbox.
If standard landing approach is followed with fuel dumped/emptied to get the weight right and reduce the possibility of fire, belly landings are safe.shiv wrote:That was one classy landing of Il-38. Virtually no visible damage
Ships are designed around systems. We've state of the art Elta 2248, LRSAM & BrahMos that would be ahead of the curve for atleast 10-15 years. The Type 15A/B has four gas turbines for speed but reduced endurance. Type 17/17A has CODAG for greater endurance & silent operation but at a reduced speed. In the absence of newer systems, new designs are unlikely.abhik wrote:That video is from 2011, and from the looks of it we aren't going to have any new designed frigates/destroyers before the late 2020's.
Q: You have mentioned India. Was Kuznetsov involved in the maintenance of NK-12 engines used on the Indian Tu-142ME anti-submarine planes?
A: That was our company’s first delivery abroad, and we went about it very carefully. We weren’t completely familiar with the operational environment in India (high air temperature and humidity). At high air temperature and lower air density, the engine delivers lower thrust than at sub-zero temperatures. The Indians – pilot crews as well as technicians – spent long time training at our country. We kept in close touch, and set up a working team that maintained the planes. We understood each other quite well. My first trip to India lasted 12 months because that’s how long the engine warranty lasted, and we had to resolve all the emerging issues very quickly. It was in 1988.
The location was Goa, which is a dream destination these days, but back at the time it was in the middle of nowhere. To get in touch with the head office, one had to relay the call through Delhi, then London, then Moscow and on to Kuibyshev. There were three of us there: a designer from the Special Design Bureau, a test engineer, and myself. During those 12 months, we managed to resolve many issues, and there wasn’t a single major incident with the engines. There was very strict selection of the personnel sent to India: the first selection round was at the company itself, and then the candidates were approved by the local Communist Party committee and then by the Communist Party Central Committee in Moscow.
Q: What do you think about the Indian Tu-142ME pilots and technicians in terms of their skills and training?
A: The pilots were very well trained – at least those we worked with. But they did have some quirks. They tended to be less diligent in some areas. Take, for example, the take-off run. As I already mentioned, the engine produces less thrust at increased ambient temperature. So they would start messing with the engine fuel system – what is worse, they would start doing it when we were away. Then we would say to them, “Why r did you try to change the fuel system settings? What for?” And they would reply, “Two weeks ago I reached sufficient speed for take-off near that light over there, but today it was near that other light farther away. I do not seem to get enough thrust”. So we had to convince them that the runway length would be sufficient for them to take off.
There were also other problems, for example, with rapid descent. When they hunted a submarine, they would dive to it – and then complained that the propellers started to feather. Nevertheless, they were very experienced and skillful pilots. They have a large selection of planes of different manufacturers to choose from. For example, when we were at the airfield, we saw British Harrier vertical-takeoff-and-landing aircraft. So, the Indians would always compare different hardware – but they did like our plane at the time.
Also, they have an interesting quirk in how their personnel are deployed. They have adopted the British approach, with constant personnel rotation: today you are assigned to the Air Force, tomorrow to the Navy, and the day after to the tank troops. We asked them why, and they would say that when a specialist works at the same unit all the time, he becomes less diligent in following all the requirements and instructions. So when we used to come there, we had to train a new group of technicians each time.
Q: Did you learn any lessons in India in terms of design and engineering?
A: We had to adapt to a new operational environment – namely, increased air temperature and humidity. We once had an incident when the crew reported an engine fire in mid-flight. But as the plane approached the airfield, we saw no sign of any fire from the ground. We inspected the plane after it landed, and again, no signs of fire. It turned out that the fire detectors in the engine nacelle had their electrical contacts damaged by corrosion, setting off a fire alarm. The first stage of the fire extinguishing system was automatically initiated (the second and third stages required manual input) and fed quenching fluid into the engine.
We kept struggling with corrosion. We also had to manually rinse the icing detector because it kept getting clogged with mosquitos.
Besides, the Indians used their own locally made fuel and engine oils, although that had of course been agreed with the supplier back home and approved by the chief designer. Nevertheless, it also effected the engine operation and maintenance.
Q: Am I right that the final NK-12 production run in the mid-2000s was made under an Indian contract?
A: That is correct. It was in 2008. When Indian delegations came here, and I always tried to meet them to discuss whether there had been any issues with the engines.
Just a quick nitpick P-17/P-17A are CODOG unf not CODAG. Yes i agree with your statement one of the reasons i am not big fan of this Talwar "Made in India" attempt i don't mind buying these vessels outright from Russia and fitting the propulsion system. But in all likely hood GSL built Talwar are not going to get inducted likely till 2025+ in which case we are talking about SY build a 30 yr old design which is inferior to even P-17s. I would rather have them or Private SYs build ASuW variant of P-28 (fit 8 Brahmos in place of Rbu-6000 and 16 Barak-8) or even P-17s.tsarkar wrote:Ships are designed around systems. We've state of the art Elta 2248, LRSAM & BrahMos that would be ahead of the curve for atleast 10-15 years. The Type 15A/B has four gas turbines for speed but reduced endurance. Type 17/17A has CODAG for greater endurance & silent operation but at a reduced speed. In the absence of newer systems, new designs are unlikely.abhik wrote:That video is from 2011, and from the looks of it we aren't going to have any new designed frigates/destroyers before the late 2020's.
DND may churn up exotic designs for "thought leadership" like HAL concept for amphibious aircraft to impress leaders but that will remain khayali pulao. This sort of "thought leadership" is pretty common in the private sector that gives management and shareholders impression and assurance that "they're ahead of the curve".
Vikrant class is 45,000 tonsPhilip wrote:The IAC-1 i a perfect case in point,taking twice as long to build as the Chinese with their carrier about twice as large!
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ne ... 740931.eceThe collapsed crane, according to a shipbuilding expert, is damaged and will have to be written off. The structure has blocked the dry dock and the building berth gates.The module hall where blocks for the P 17-A class frigates are being fabricated was destroyed in the mishap and has become unusable. “This has a direct impact on the P 17-A frigates-building programme. A large store adjoining the building berth has been damaged and is now unusable, further impacting the work at the shipyard. A new Goliath crane has a time-period of 30 months from issue of tender to installation and commissioning. Thus, not only will the ongoing programmes suffer, but this will also impact the contract under negotiation with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for anti-submarine warfare shallow water crafts,” said the expert, who has knowledge of the incident.
There was an all russian crew on board the distressed aircraft and not "incompetent Indians"Bart S wrote:No doubt caused by incompetent Indians unable to absorb the 'sophisticated' Russian technologyPrem wrote:Indian Navy's IL-38 maritime patrol aircraft operating for the Indian Navy (06) was damaged when it landed with a retracted nosegear at Moscow Zhukovsky
And the great luck of IN seems to continue into 2018!Prem wrote:https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ne ... 740931.eceThe collapsed crane, according to a shipbuilding expert, is damaged and will have to be written off. The structure has blocked the dry dock and the building berth gates.The module hall where blocks for the P 17-A class frigates are being fabricated was destroyed in the mishap and has become unusable. “This has a direct impact on the P 17-A frigates-building programme. A large store adjoining the building berth has been damaged and is now unusable, further impacting the work at the shipyard. A new Goliath crane has a time-period of 30 months from issue of tender to installation and commissioning. Thus, not only will the ongoing programmes suffer, but this will also impact the contract under negotiation with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for anti-submarine warfare shallow water crafts,” said the expert, who has knowledge of the incident.
Let the contract be assigned to Pvt sector yard at the price quoted by MDL. In the interest of getting the ship's being built on time.Prem wrote:https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ne ... 740931.eceThe collapsed crane, according to a shipbuilding expert, is damaged and will have to be written off. The structure has blocked the dry dock and the building berth gates.The module hall where blocks for the P 17-A class frigates are being fabricated was destroyed in the mishap and has become unusable. “This has a direct impact on the P 17-A frigates-building programme. A large store adjoining the building berth has been damaged and is now unusable, further impacting the work at the shipyard. A new Goliath crane has a time-period of 30 months from issue of tender to installation and commissioning. Thus, not only will the ongoing programmes suffer, but this will also impact the contract under negotiation with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for anti-submarine warfare shallow water crafts,” said the expert, who has knowledge of the incident.
Please read the news properly its not MLD but GRSEPratyush wrote:Let the contract be assigned to Pvt sector yard at the price quoted by MDL. In the interest of getting the ship's being built on time.
While the MDL repairs itself and then focuses on the p 15 b and p 18.
GRSE was suppose to build only 8 ASW craft the other 8 is to be built by CSL. I dont think the ASW project will be affected as the damaged yard was for P-17APhilip wrote:At least 8 of the 16 ASW craft,giving time for the yard to acquire a new crane and rectify the damage-within 3 years.These vessels are only 700t each.A pvt. yard like L&T should be able to deliver around 2/yr. at least.