Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Feb 2019 21:17

The pics of the Karmuk missile corvette, our " pocket destroyer", highlights my call for building a series of milti- purpose corvettes smaller than the expensive P-28 ASW corvettes which are really frigates larger than our erstwhile Nilgiri class frigates.

The Russians have brilliantly used their approx. 1000t Buyan class corvettes with their 2500+ km range Kalibir missiles in the Syrian conflict launching the Kalibirs from the land-locked Caspian Sea!
A series of corvettes around 1750-2000t, approx. twice the size of a Karmuk , would be able to carry an integral ASW helo, hangar below deck or conventional- or even UAV/UUVs stored be/low deck, and carry a decent load of anti-ship/ land attack missiles as in the Karmuk anti-air missile defences , a lightweight main gun and ASW MBUs and TTs. The corvette could also carry a TAS/ VDS
which even our far smaller Pauk/ Abhay class carridd.

ASW capability is required as the smaller inshore/ shallow water ASW corvettes cannot operate outside
coastal waters.The IN will be hard put to countering the PLAN which will possess 80+ subs in the next decade, building 4+ new subs every year apart from the PN which will have between 12 to 16 AIP subs.With assured permament bases at Gwadar/Jiwani , Djibouti plus logistic spots like H'tota and Burma, will see a huge permanrnt sub threat that we will bd unable to defeat unless we have adequate numbers of surfaces ASW assets, HUK attack subs both AIP and nuclear and LRMP ASW aircraft.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Feb 2019 21:38

Austin i was taking of the kind of sensor jsf which in video tracked a ballistic missile going up and the even more large 747 yal1 sensor which had range of 100s of km to track ballistic missile ir signature for its airborne machan

https://youtu.be/DN-A6PWRFno

High flying hale drones at 60,000 ft could pack such a sensor and look for such targets against cold dark blue sky

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 13 Feb 2019 05:38

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1095263613881905152 ---> Indian Navy issues Expression of Interest (EON) for 111 naval utility helicopters to Airbus, Sikorsky, Bell and Russian Helicopters. Apart from Bell, the other three responded to the earlier RFI.

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1095266967550865408 ---> Here’s the Indian Navy full statement on the naval utility helicopter (NUH) program tender, crucially on shortlisting the Indian partner that will make the copters in India.

chola · Post by **chola** » 13 Feb 2019 10:47

On the surface not a bad thing to expand mil contracting to private firms. But the iniative can’t help but eat into possible sales of HAL’s helo wing.

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/india- ... 961789.cms

India seeks to short list bidders for 111 naval helicopters

Reuters | Updated: Feb 12, 2019, 20:11 IST

NEW DELHI: India on Tuesday invited expressions of interest for 111 helicopters to be made in the country in collaboration with foreign partners, the defence ministry said, in a deal estimated at nearly $3 billion.

Lockheed Martin, Airbus Helicopters and Bell Helicopters are among those expected to participate in the bidding, the ministry statement said, to replace the Navy's ageing Soviet-era helicopters.
...
Under the elaborate rules of defence purchases, once manufacturers have submitted expressions of interest, the defence ministry will issue requests for proposals likely to be in the third quarter of 2019.

That will be followed by a tender inviting final bids from the manufacturers in a process that is expected to take years.

The Indian companies likely to participate in the bidding are Tata Advanced Systems, Mahindra Defence, Adani Defence, L&T, Bharat Forge and Reliance Infrastructure, the defence ministry said.

These firms will collaborate with the foreign companies to make the helicopters in India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Make-in-India programme designed to build a domestic military industrial complex and reduce imports.

"The project is likely to provide a major boost to Govt’s ‘Make in India’ initiative and fillip to manufacturing capability for helicopters in India," it said.

The helicopters are meant for search and rescue operations, casualty evacuation and light transport.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 13 Feb 2019 23:50

Say it like Vijainder Thakur

Having committed to the local manufacture of two light helicopters - Kamov Ka-226T & HAL LUH - why is India dishing out ReOI (Request for Expression of Interest) to other foreign vendor? @DefenceMinIndia How serious is this government about make-in-India? @PMOIndia

Why can't the SP acquisition be limited to the two OEMs that we have already committed to - HAL and Rosoboronexport? Which other great power does this - make its locally manufactured defense products compete against foreign analogs?

China's J-20 is no match to the F-35 but the PLAAF is not clamoring for the F-35. Why do the IAF, IN want the best weapons, not indigenous weapons? What's the @DefenceMinIndia /'s rationale for running @HALHQBLR, its own baby, to the ground, instead of fixing it? @PMOIndia

BTW, LUH comes closest to being a HAL success story so far. Let's not make it a victim of our visceral dislike for the laid back and largely inefficient aerospace giant. @writetake

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 14 Feb 2019 00:16

Indranil wrote:Say it like Vijainder Thakur....

From my heart, to their fingers!! All my thoughts on this new EoI request. Especially considering how close we are wrt to LUH. DefMin should instead be asking the navy to place an interim order for LUH and whip RWRDC to come up with a navy optimised gearbox for both Dhruv and LUH.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 14 Feb 2019 08:23

Apparently the NUH tender specifies a twin-engined bird. So LUH is automatically excluded.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Feb 2019 13:56

Indian Navy Saves $28 Million Bringing Kilo-Class Submarine Home After Refit

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/02 ... refit.html

gaurav.p · Post by **gaurav.p** » 17 Feb 2019 15:14

Prasad wrote:Apparently the NUH tender specifies a twin-engined bird. So LUH is automatically excluded.

HAL will be presenting a modified ALH with foldable rotor blades and foldable tail at aeroindia in the static display. It was repeated again during the tarmaktalking episode.

Hope the babus don't overrule it by defending the strategic partnership model.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Feb 2019 18:04

One of the key reqs. will be endurance- time on station at range carrying a dunking sonar plus a full load of ASW/ ASuW weaponry like torpedoes/ DCs, anti- shipping missiles. These birds are supposed to replace our Chtetaks.Therefore some improvement6_ in capability is called for given current threats and tech. advancement.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Feb 2019 22:10

how is a small cheap utility helo expected to carry out missions with torpedoes, ASMs , dunking sonar, radar and still remain a utility heli capable of carrying cargo and people around?

I dont think it will be armed or sensored at all.

a previous pretender the kaman SH2 seasprite seems like a failure looking at its track record and clientale

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaman_SH- ... _Seasprite

John · Post by **John** » 17 Feb 2019 22:27

Philip wrote:One of the key reqs. will be endurance- time on station at range carrying a dunking sonar plus a full load of ASW/ ASuW weaponry like torpedoes/ DCs, anti- shipping missiles. These birds are supposed to replace our Chtetaks.Therefore some improvement6_ in capability is called for given current threats and tech. advancement.

They're are not for AShW, even torpedo drops have been left out in few reports. Assuming it is correct, I presume they will used for torpedo drops to support the Anti sub warfare helos.

"SAR, CASEVAC, LIMO, passenger roles and torpedo drops"

VKumar · Post by **VKumar** » 17 Feb 2019 23:53

Must start building another aircraft carrier, even if it is not the latest and greatest. We will need many more.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Feb 2019 05:33

It would be the biggest folly to emulate the US and base our strength upon CBGs.They will end up like the battleships in the next major conflict.Adm.Rickover , father if the USN's nuclear navy,was once asked how long would the carriers last in the next war .The answer,"48hrs."!

In numerous naval exercises conducted by the US, small diesel boats apart from its N-subs have "sunk" its CVs.
The phenomenal cost of a CV plus the 70% of that cost for the air wing, then that of the escorts makes it the most attractive and compelling target for the enemy.
One US study found that China coild build more than 1200 anti-ship ballistic missiles for the price of just one CV. The US's 12 CVs will be extremely vulnerable in the next great naval clash as gheir carrier aircraft have gor the F-18 around 400km radius of combat anc 700km for the F-35 still not fully operational.The Chins claim that the Sov. era radar has made stealth passe.

The advent of unmanned carrier strike aircraft will make it possible for current smaller amphib class vessels to possess an expanded air capability.Why there is a body of thought wanting smaller light Essex type CVs looked at.India with its mainland and islands, our unsinkable carriers, equipped with supersonic Backfires, LRMP aircraft, front- line strike fighters, tankers and UCAVs , would easily dominate the IOR.Equally important is possessing a powerful sub fleet of both AIP and N- boats.

jpremnath · Post by **jpremnath** » 18 Feb 2019 13:57

I never thought I would say this, but Philip is absolutely spot on!...Our navy should be focusing on having enhancing our ASW capabilities and a formidable underwater wing of 30 to 40 Subs before we start adding CVs...For the Napakis, managing a single hit on one of our CV will be enough for them to tom tom it for the next hundred years..it will be a significant hit on our morale and i am not even talking about the financial loss...If we think the pakis cant score a hit from one of their subs, we are grossly underestimating our enemy...
I know the argument will be that we cant go to war scared of our assets being attacked. .. we dont need CVs for ocean dominance..besides there is no worthwhile part of pakistan which our IAF birds cant reach...Having more than 3 carriers just doesnt make sense..

chola · Post by **chola** » 18 Feb 2019 14:07

The IN CV is not for Pakistan not when the IAF have the entire cesspool covered.

It is for power projection into the IOR and beyond. We are not strategically tied to that stone age dungheap.

jpremnath · Post by **jpremnath** » 18 Feb 2019 14:15

What kind of power projection are we talking about?...That is something only Khan can do...Who is scared of us?...we dont have the ability to sustain high level combat ops beyond probably 2 weeks..How many ships can we spare to go for an expedition knowing that we are leaving our shores guarded by the remaining ships? Do we have any such scenarios planned out?..Will we be able to go into SCS to scare China?...Or are we planning to scare of Mauritius or Fiji? Even the USN wouldnt dare to send carriers near to China if a conflict breaks out...they know very well their 'power projection' works only against smaller nations like Afgh, Iraq, Serbia...

On the other hand imagine if we have like 40 or 50 subs spread around...anyone will be shit scared to wade into IOR knowing there will be an IN sub somewhere around at any time...and even the Paki ships wont dare to go out of their ports..

chola · Post by **chola** » 18 Feb 2019 14:45

jpremnath wrote:What kind of power projection are we talking about?...That is something only Khan can do...Who is scared of us?...we dont have the ability to sustain high level combat ops beyond probably 2 weeks..How many ships can we spare to go for an expedition knowing that we are leaving our shores guarded by the remaining ships? Do we have any such scenarios planned out?..Will we be able to go into SCS to scare China?...Or are we planning to scare of Mauritius or Fiji? Even the USN wouldnt dare to send carriers near to China if a conflict breaks out...they know very well their 'power projection' works only against smaller nations like Afgh, Iraq, Serbia...

On the other hand imagine if we have like 40 or 50 subs spread around...anyone will be shit scared to wade into IOR knowing there will be an IN sub somewhere around at any time...and even the Paki ships wont dare to go out of their ports..

Power projection is not just the kinetic kind. Wars in general are hard to come by. The overwhelming majority of the time, great powers compete for influence during peacetime.

Subs are great for war but can do nothing to establish presence during times of peace since their greatest asset is staying hidden.

The immediate game is in the IOR. Khan will reign surpreme in the IOR but once Cheen sends a CBG into the IOR then they will be viewed as the clear number two in the region by the sundry states of the Gulf and the East African seaboard — unless we show something in kind.

It doesn’t matter if we have 40 subs in the region and Cheen only a handful of ships but if one of them is a CATOBAR then they become second to US onlee because that is what the littoral states will see.

And with all the other navies plying the IOR — France and UK with their carriers — we could end up not just third but even lower in the reckoning of our own backyard.

Sir, the IN had been asking for a 65K ton CATOBAR for a reason. The Navy had always been the most frugal and rational of the services. Trust them.

jpremnath · Post by **jpremnath** » 18 Feb 2019 15:13

I understand the importance of CVs..I only said I see no reason to go beyond 3 considering our limited resources. we also dont have enough capital ships to spare if all of them go for escort duties..
Another interesting point is that all the major naval powers with CVs besides UK make their own carrier birds..we are not there yet. The Mig29Ks are a joke at present and if we know that, I am pretty sure our enemies do too..

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 19 Feb 2019 18:58

Dhruv Rotor and tail folding
The Rotor is folded so that one blade remain forward and rest 3 backward and the folded width get reduced to 2.7m as compared to 5.7m as per interview of HAL test pilot.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 19 Feb 2019 20:43

jpremnath...no denying that its only USN which can really project naval power ... but why do ships dock at foreign ports or sail close to countries..its to show we are there/ mark a presence... to tell we exist..dont count us out. Even if IN does anti piracy ops in Arabian sea it constitutes force projection albeit at a smaller scale. Can you really do anti piracy ops with subs?? India is not planning to project force in pacific ocean or atlantic. Its objectives are much simpler..to be a force in Indian ocean..control access to Indian ocean.

jpremnath · Post by **jpremnath** » 19 Feb 2019 21:25

^^ Couldnt we do the above with Frigates and Destroyers?... I only meant we are forcing serious constraints on ourselves with this fantasy of CBGs. They are so damn expensive to build and maintain. Not to talk about buying 40 - 50 fighter jets to furnish it. All this while knowing how vulnerable a carrier is to a diesel sub with AIP. Didnt we hide Vikrant in the Andamans when Pakis deployed Ghazi during 71 war? One single sub in the waters meant all our eastern naval operations were focused on tackling it. Imagine we are going to see the napakis operating more than 10 or 14 subs in a few years.

I want our Navy to be a giant striding the IOR. But we dont have the funds to build beyond 3 or 4 destroyers in a go now. I dont see it changing even 10 years down the line. Subs are cheaper to build and their impact is disproportionate. We should plan on having more than 3 CVs beyond 2050 when our naval budget can afford it...Till then why dont we build more Frigates, Subs and Destroyers?...

I am not expert on naval warfare. So I apologize to all senior BRFites if all this sound very ridiculous. Feel free to delete it if so..

John · Post by **John** » 20 Feb 2019 02:47

Subs are cheaper to build and their impact is disproportionate.

Unf due to increasing cost of on board equipment like CMS and reliance on imports SSKs are very expensive. I believe Scorpene's came to around $700 mill each ( as much as Shivalik and P-15a) and P-75i is well over bill.

jpremnath · Post by **jpremnath** » 20 Feb 2019 16:50

I am talking about plans to go beyond 3 CVs. How much will a CV with EMALS cost?.. when you add the cost of all the accompanying 40 odd fighters and their own weapon systems,will it stay within 10B $? We are not even addressing the operating costs on an annual basis here..It would beggar the IN budget allocation. Wouldnt be more practical to build up your basic units like Subs, Frigates and Corvettes in numbers before climbing the ladder?

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 20 Feb 2019 17:06

jpremnath..sounds reasonable to me..but I am not an expert on these matters. I also find CV's expensive units. more pressing requirements..

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Feb 2019 19:30

I don't think the IN or our enemies consider the 29Ks a joke at all..The CV is in fine fighting fettle. The v.high cost of a CBG is being debated even in the US with the advent of UCAVs and anti- ship BMs.3 CVs is adequate for the IN blessed with its commanding geographical advantages too.The thrust should be on acquiring subs, between 36 to 48 the min. reqd. to counter the Sino- Pak JV.

John · Post by **John** » 20 Feb 2019 19:53

jpremnath wrote:I am talking about plans to go beyond 3 CVs. How much will a CV with EMALS cost?.. when you add the cost of all the accompanying 40 odd fighters and their own weapon systems,will it stay within 10B $? We are not even addressing the operating costs on an annual basis here..It would beggar the IN budget allocation. Wouldnt be more practical to build up your basic units like Subs, Frigates and Corvettes in numbers before climbing the ladder?

CV with EMALS is guessing game of how much the final cost will be. But for Vikrant currently it is at around 3 billion for carrier by itself and AIR arm if using just Mig-29k will come to around 1.5 billion. However Vikrant will have MF STAR along large no of Barak-8 missiles so it will double to provide fleet air defense. IMO smaller carriers with UCAV are most cost effective option but some decades away from that however by the time EMALS carrier is built around 2040

the technology would have matured.

jpremnath · Post by **jpremnath** » 20 Feb 2019 21:47

I dont think Vikrant will be 3 Bil when it is commissioned...We still dont know the final figure. A brand new one with EMALS should definitely go above 6 Bil..these are random figures, but knowing how all our recent def purchases went, I am pretty sure even 6 wont be enough...IN will definitely avoid Mig29K if their recent experience is any measure. Even then 1.5 Bil is just the fighters.. We need to spend on the missiles, bombs and the Helis..WIll it be less than 4?..I doubt it considering we will be ordering this beyond 2022.

John · Post by **John** » 20 Feb 2019 23:06

jpremnath wrote:I dont think Vikrant will be 3 Bil when it is commissioned...We still dont know the final figure. A brand new one with EMALS should definitely go above 6 Bil..these are random figures, but knowing how all our recent def purchases went, I am pretty sure even 6 wont be enough...IN will definitely avoid Mig29K if their recent experience is any measure. Even then 1.5 Bil is just the fighters.. We need to spend on the missiles, bombs and the Helis..WIll it be less than 4?..I doubt it considering we will be ordering this beyond 2022.

Of course there will be cost escalation but for now it stands at 3 billion. Vikrant will carry Mig-29k and hopefully Naval LCA by 2025, real question is whether Mig-29k will be carried by IAC-2 and another contract will be signed? Lot of contradicting news on the Migs but for now it seems most of Mig-29k issues seems to be sorted out and navy is happy with it.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Feb 2019 23:47

I hope Navy just tanks this Naval Utility Helicopter project. It is guaranteed that if they put their heads to it NLUH will get there faster than signing of any contract. It already has foldable rotors. Its only drawback, if you want to call it one is that it has a single engine. But Navy has operated the Chetak for so many years!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Feb 2019 06:42

The NUH could be resolved with the new Dhruv with folding tail, etc. if it can fit in the smallest warship hangar
existing.It is larger than the Chetak , medium size and could carry enhanced sensors and weaponry.That would be preferable instead of another Chetak- capable bird.
There was the touting of the Panther to fit the bill, but I'm not uptodate on its ASW capabilities.Here again cost will be a factor.There may be much cheaper contenders.In fact the prevalance of cost over capability in MOD protocol is being debated according to some reports.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 21 Feb 2019 12:16

Wont NLUH need extensive rework of gearbox of the current LUH?

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 21 Feb 2019 19:06

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... licopters/

Looks like the US Navy has bought too many naval helicopters (58 extra MH60R and MH60S) and is paying millions to store it.
This is the same airframe that India has attempted to buy in the past (though there have been pricing issues) and has recently bought 24 of. India has a desperate shortage of these helicopters. There is also a RFP pending in future (with selection of oem, a potential indian partner etc)

A pro-active and agile procurement idea would be to provide a G2G offer to take some of these off the US Navy hands; since they are spending millions to store these excess planes,we could get a good deal on them. Since they are same airframe as India uses, there will be no logistics issues.

Win-Win

And if Make in India is desired after that, make the RFP completey make in India - no airframes to be imported as part of it...

Of course, given the lack of agility in our procurement processes and the financial challenges (especially with elections coming up), I suspect the chances are low

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Feb 2019 19:18

good find. 10X faster & cleaner than a ponderous global tender ....

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Feb 2019 19:23

The size of the Small Surface Combatant has remained unchanged in the current USN 30 year ship building plan with there being a requirement for at least 20 FFG(X) frigates with the number likely to grow to 30 and beyond in the long term so I don't see the demand for these helicopters to change long term. They are receiving 4 SSCs a year which will transition to 2 once the LCS program concludes so they have a medium to long term demand.

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 21 Feb 2019 20:20

It might not make too much sense to buy all 50+ as funding is an issue, it can undermine the Make in India upcoming RFP, and the US Navy can use some by rotation or as their FFGs start to come on board. But I do think there is an opportunity for india and a possible sweet spot for a buy (price vs number). And availability for India will be immediate.

After all, I think their buy was more driven by their chopper contract cancellation penalties.

Plus the S400 purchase made US unhappy - this buy makes sense for India, will allow US political brownie points and can be something India can point to for brownie points against US pressure elsewhere - eg larger Iran oil contracts next year or whatever...

And it is clean and quick and will be seen as clean and quick.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Feb 2019 20:44

What I was saying was that the USN is transitioning to the FFGX without any delivery gap on the SSC side so they will be commissioning 4 SSCs a year till the time that the first FFGX comes online. Those ships coming online will need helos so while they had excess capacity in 2017-2018 and may have some more into the early 2020s they will soon need all of them becaus they are inducting ships at a good pace and have not altered the overall SSC fleet size for which the helo order was sized.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Feb 2019 23:03

Naval Dhruv Pictures

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3541798.html

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Feb 2019 01:19

Defence Ministry approves torpedo acquisition for Naval submarines
https://www.bignewsnetwork.com/news/259 ... submarines

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Feb 2019 10:03

Yes.One saw the mockup, but the interior merely had seats.No eqpt. or afmament shown..