Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 118
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby LakshmanPST » 12 May 2019 15:21

Not sure if this is posted already here...
But as per this report, MoD put INS Vishal on hold for now, due to budgetary woes...
The report also says that the capacity of the carrier has been reduced to 50000 T...
https://wap.business-standard.com/artic ... 047_1.html
Further it also says that IAF is against expansion of aerial assets by Army & Navy, and hence working against INS Vishal...
----
That article was written by Ajai Shukla, so I'm not sure whether to believe it or not...
But similar news (regarding IAF) came in IDRW as well...
https://idrw.org/why-iaf-doesnt-want-na ... ns-vishal/
----
Personally I feel govt. should prioritise increasing IAF strength and assets (new jets, upgrades & AWACSs) than investing in a new carrier now... I feel they may start investing in a 3rd carrier only after 10 years...

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3876
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 12 May 2019 15:48

^^^ The trim-down to 50K tons is news to me. But not unexpected due to the MoD rejecting the 65K tons CATOBAR proposal for years.

At this point, I will be happy with even a STOBAR of a larger Vikrant variant. We cannot wait a decade and let the newly acquired skills and eco-system atrophy. Vikrant was delayed by years when we needed to painstakingly acquire and assemble things as basic as the steel to make the hull. It would be insane to do all of that over again years from now.

I love the IAF, only the Army and Navy can hold territory on land and at sea and present Indian jurisdiction in sustained fashion. Aircraft is an incredibly important supplement to that but there is no persistence in flight. I find that fight against Army and Navy resources disappointing though not unexpected (happens in the US as well with a particularly bloody episode in the 1950s called the "Revolt of the Admirals" in the Amreeki Dept of Defense.)

mmasand
BRFite
Posts: 606
Joined: 19 May 2009 23:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby mmasand » 12 May 2019 15:49

^ it means INS Vishal is definitely on track. If Ajai Shukla says so, it's exactly the opposite.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3876
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 12 May 2019 16:14

^^^ LOL. One can hope. But even a broken clock is right twice a day. The MoD's refusal to accept and fund any proposals had been going on for years. Reaching out to BAE and Thales over the QE design is the Navy's initiative. The IN is planning ahead. They've had things in place for years.

But when the money is not coming in then even Shooklaw can see the writing on the wall.

I feel sad but resigned.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chetak » 12 May 2019 16:43

LakshmanPST wrote:Not sure if this is posted already here...
But as per this report, MoD put INS Vishal on hold for now, due to budgetary woes...
The report also says that the capacity of the carrier has been reduced to 50000 T...
https://wap.business-standard.com/artic ... 047_1.html
Further it also says that IAF is against expansion of areal assets by Army & Navy, and hence working against INS Vishal...
----
That article was written by Ajai Shukla, so I'm not sure whether to believe it or not...
But similar news (regarding IAF) came in IDRW as well...
https://idrw.org/why-iaf-doesnt-want-na ... ns-vishal/


----
Personally I feel govt. should prioritise increasing IAF strength and assets (new jets, upgrades & AWACSs) than investing in a new carrier now... I feel they may start investing in a 3rd carrier only after 10 years...



this is not the only case, not by a long shot.

people are aware of at least three other cases over the past two decades where a similar thing has happened. there are many more cases where the details are not really clear as they pertain to another service.

open forum precludes the posting of any details. samjhdar ko ishara kafi hota hai.

the interservice rivalry is very much alive, well and very much active.

the long standing, petty, and single minded opposition to the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) proposals pending for decades, by itself speaks volumes.

this alone has allowed the baboo(n)s to ride roughshod on a huge range of vital issues over which they have absolutely no understanding, appreciation or even interest except the very obvious bofors like interest to our political leaders and so many file notings made by pliant baboo(n)s have been "suggested" by middlemen keen on leading the thirsty buffaloes to bountiful waters.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 13 May 2019 03:52

@LakshmanPST, in addition to everything Chetak has said....the IAF does not want the F-18 (or the F-16). They want Rafale onlee. Even during the SE contest, the Gripen E was the pack leader. The F-Teens do not share enthusiasm in the IAF. That enthusiasm is only there among a few on BRF, with some in the media (both in the US and in India) and with policy influencers like the Observer Research Foundation in India and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in the US.

And apart from the usual doctrinal divide between air forces and naval air arms worldwide, what worried the IAF was that the IN's order for 57 carrier borne fighters could be merged with the IAF's fighter aircraft requirement for 114 fighters. And what the IN wants (air arm consisting of naval fighters, AEW aircraft, SAR helicopters, 65,000 ton, nuclear power, EMALS) is not what the IAF wants. The MoD does not see it that way and would prefer to merge both contests into one. On a per unit cost basis, the F-18 would work out cheaper. And MoD Babus are pure number crunchers. They could care less about specifications, capability, maneuverability, etc. Also from an industrial package perspective, Boeing can bring a lot more to the table than Dassault can.

So this cash crunch (there really isn't one) is more like a turf war between the IAF and the IN, with the MoD in the middle. But both services can still get what they want, but they will have to compromise some variables.

For the IN ---> A third carrier would be a welcome addition for the IN, but not with the fancy bells & whistles (EMALS and nuclear power). A more realistic approach should be a scaled-up Vikrant design with wider lifts. The upcoming Vikrant is sitting in at 40,000 tons. A larger Vikrant Class vessel would be the most ideal solution. A 50,000 ton vessel (or even larger if required) with ski jump. Quicker build, quicker induction and significantly cheaper than the current plan for the second carrier. Go with a new design and there will be long delays (as is common with all naval projects in India). Once the second vessel has started construction, then work on the bells-and-whistles aircraft carrier program. Crawl, Walk and Run. We want to run from the outset. That will only spell trouble.

For the IAF ---> Drop this MMRCA tamasha right after the General Elections. The wisdom in acquiring 114 fourth-generation fighters (with the last of them being inducted by the early 2030s) is questionable. Acquire 2 - 3 squadrons more of the Rafale (off the shelf) and focus on the Tejas Mk1 / Mk1A / Mk2. The IAF's best best in increasing squadron strength lies in the Tejas onlee. The Tejas is the IAF's future and so will be the AMCA. And I repeat the same ---> Quicker build, quicker induction and significantly cheaper than 114 phoren fourth-generation fighters. And ignore the naysayers. They only exist to complain and whine. Also another 2 squadrons of Su-30MKIs and commence the Super Sukhoi upgrade as well.

P.S. I would like to see the IN operate the Rafale M (just from a commonality perspective), as there is potential for a lot of shared resources between the IAF and the IN on the platform. However 57 will be a hard sell at the MoD. A scaled back number (two squadrons versus three) to start off, will be nice.

And folks, do not be concerned (if any of you are) with what Amreeka will think or what Amreeka will do if they are not awarded the IAF and IN contracts. Losing is *NOT* going to affect the Indo-US relationship. Amreeka knows it and India knows it. A few on BRF, a few in the media and elsewhere like to spin it that way. But they have vested interests in their line of argument. Just ignore them.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3837
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 13 May 2019 08:32

^So it might come down to a choice between 75 rafale and 150 Mig 29. I think price point will be more or less the same. Split Between both services about, say 90 for IAF and 60 for Navy.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Singha » 13 May 2019 09:07

the rafale is far more modern than mig29 and will last thrice as long with a lesser opex. its not even a fair fight.
another 36 COTS + a huge order for the Tejas mk1A is the best soln to fall in numbers.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 13 May 2019 09:09

Doesn't the navy have a plan for 500 aircraft by 2030? Does the IAF have any say in it..

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3837
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 13 May 2019 10:08

My feeling is that once elections are done, is will get 21 extra fulcrum smts, 36 rafale and possibly some Mki. The Navy will likely go with a stretched Vikrant and stick to fulcrums.

Would love to know how those dact exercises between the rafale and fulcrum are turning out.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby negi » 13 May 2019 10:35

Without a big carrier with a catapult, operating Rafale M or even F-18 SH is counter productive, operating from carriers is significantly more expensive than operating from land as you can only bring back so much load. On a USN Eisenhower or such huge carriers you get lot of flight deck to make a touch and go so you can bring back more load. On a compact or medium carrier, the deck would be smaller so the same AC would have to come in light which means it will either have to dump more fuel or carry less payload when taking off that's why operating a compact NLCA from a STOBAR platform while on paper might look less capable than likes of Rafale M and F 18 SH in reality it will effectively be capable of carrying out same tasks as these big ACs from our smaller carriers. We have 1 ski jump based VikD then Vikrant is also a ski jump design that leaves only Vishal which is in the works. IMHO, there is no point in buying Rafale M or SH now or they will remain land based for long time. Best thing is to get NLCA flying and then have them serve on both VikD and Vikrant there is no way Rafale M and SH will be able to haul and bring back their designed payload on these STOBAR designs. They will be simply more expensive to operate, maintain and occupy more real estate on the ship as compared to a compact single engine NLCA.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 13 May 2019 10:41

I guess it's a combo of numbers and funds available..a smaller 60k carrier looks likely (judging by the Indian Navy's tango with RNs QE) .. the Rafale will be the prime contender esp if it's the NDA redux. (more sensible giving commonality with the IAF)...also it might come with lower prices if the IAF orders another 36 with it. The F-18 looks more and more unlikely with an recalcitrant trump administration.

The LCA Mark 2 would be prime contender for a even bigger 80k carrier that will come with EMALS at a much later date.

Interesting times ahead.

LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 118
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby LakshmanPST » 13 May 2019 11:14

Regarding the 3rd carrier, I came across the following article the other day dated 28th August 2017--->

Boeing Says Super Hornet Fully Compatible With Indian Navy Ski-Jump Carriers
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/1 ... p-carriers

There is this quote in the article...

India plans on fielding catapult assisted takeoff but arrested recovery (CATOBAR) configured aircraft carriers in the 2020s, but before that it will add two more ski jump equipped carriers to its fleet. The first of these vessels, named the INS Vikrant, is being indigenously designed and built and is slated for commissioning before the end of the decade, but it could be some time after before it is actually ready for patrols. Two Vikrant class ships will be built before the Indian Navy plans to switch over to CATBAR configured carriers. These two Vikrant class carriers will join the INS Vikramaditya, which is currently India's only fixed-wing aircraft carrier.

Though author of this report seems to be ill-informed regarding INS Vishal, but I feel this should have been the right approach ---> Build 2 Carriers of same Class & Design and then shift to the upgraded Weight and new technologies in IAC3 (to be commissioned by the time Vikramaditya is to be decommissioned). They would have had enough time to plan everything and execute it seamlessly.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 509
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby SNaik » 13 May 2019 14:38

Some pics from latest Varuna exercise

https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... s-5720445/

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 13 May 2019 17:18

LakshmanPST wrote:Though author of this report seems to be ill-informed regarding INS Vishal, but I feel this should have been the right approach ---> Build 2 Carriers of same Class & Design and then shift to the upgraded Weight and new technologies in IAC3 (to be commissioned by the time Vikramaditya is to be decommissioned). They would have had enough time to plan everything and execute it seamlessly.

Nice find. I missed this one!

Many of us on BRF have been saying the same thing. This is the best path forward.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4598
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Kartik » 14 May 2019 04:35

Some pics from Ex Varuna with the French Navy

Image

Image

Image

Flying over INS Vikramaditya

Image

Image

Flying over the Charles De Gaulle

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3876
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 14 May 2019 14:27

https://twitter.com/IndoPac_Info/status/1126333618995908609

IndoPacific_SCS_Info
@IndoPac_Info
Thread: We know that BAE is in discussions with #India to provide the Q. Elizabeth carrier class to the Indian Navy. The QE design was at one point a CATOBAR carrier with catapults & arresting gear & that's the design for India. Here are some pics of that variant
@Aryanwarlord

Image


https://twitter.com/IndoPac_Info/status/1126333631419432960


IndoPacific_SCS_Info
@IndoPac_Info
Thread: More pics of the Q.E. carrier CATOBAR design with catapults & arresting gear that BAE is offering to India.

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby ramana » 15 May 2019 01:32

Rakesh, The way I look at it the ski jump carrier deck came from the Harrier procurement. Adding a ski jump increases the range or payload for the Harrier. Then after the Harrier phase out IN had the carriers with ski jumps and were constrained to require that for future aircraft buys.

The catapult is the right type of take-off option for carriers using conventional planes.

I know IN has two ski-jump carriers but future carriers should not be burdened with this handicap.
Future carriers should have a catapult either steam or EMALs based on affordability and reliability.

Whats the opinion on this?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby ramana » 15 May 2019 01:33

Whats the displacement of the QE class with CATOBAR?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby ramana » 15 May 2019 01:37

I have another question on ships size and manpower.

I would like a comparison of manpower requirements of ships in IN which changes in generation?

Could someone help gather Ship class; generation, manpower
Eg Frigate: Leander class: Displacement, Manpower Gen I.
And would like to compare with UK ships or Russian ships.

Does IN have two crews (blue/gold) per ship?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7916
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby brar_w » 15 May 2019 02:02

LakshmanPST wrote: Build 2 Carriers of same Class & Design and then shift to the upgraded Weight and new technologies in IAC3 (to be commissioned by the time Vikramaditya is to be decommissioned). They would have had enough time to plan everything and execute it seamlessly.


By historical standards, going from program conception (with an assured funding stream) to first operational cruise for a large, modern technology packed AC is 20-25 years. If Vishal goes beyond concept development phase and into the design phase in 2020-2022 time-frame then you are looking at late 2030's for its first cruise. Of course this can be shaved somewhat by picking something like the QE or CdG or mature technologies but just saying that if the IN wants a large, EMALS/CAT equipped AC by the mid to late 2030's then it needs to get going pretty soon.

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

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 15 May 2019 02:43

ramana wrote:Whats the displacement of the QE class with CATOBAR?

65,000 tonnes. The exact displacement of the proposed Vishal.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 15 May 2019 03:00

ramana wrote:I have another question on ships size and manpower.

I would like a comparison of manpower requirements of ships in IN which changes in generation?

Could someone help gather Ship class; generation, manpower
Eg Frigate: Leander class: Displacement, Manpower Gen I.
And would like to compare with UK ships or Russian ships.

Does IN have two crews (blue/gold) per ship?

I will start off on the classes of frigates/destroyers in the Indian Navy. Not extensive, but will be a starting point for a good discussion with knowledgeable folks like SNaik, John, Karan M, etc. The progression from the upcoming Visakhapatnam Class (P15B) of destroyers starts with the Leander Class frigate. So here goes...

* Nilgiri (Leander) Class ---> Godavari (P16) Class [modified Nilgiri design] ---> Delhi (P15) Class [stretched Kashin-II/Rajput Class with design influence from Godavari Class] ---> Kolkata (P15A) Class ---> Visakhapatnam Class (P15B).

The Nilgiri design also influenced a series of follow-on frigate designs, which were....

* Nilgiri (Leander) Class ---> Godavari (P16) Class ---> Brahmaputra (P16A) Class ---> and *perhaps* Shivalik (P17) Class and P17A Class

Destroyers
* The Nilgiri Class had a complement of 267 crew, with a displacement of 2,600 tons.
* The Delhi Class has a complement of 350 crew, with a displacement of 6,200 tons.
* The Kolkata Class has a complement of 390 crew, with a displacement of 7,400 tons.
* The Visakhapatnam Class will have a complement of 300 crew, with a displacement of 7,400 tons - clear sign of automation

Frigates
* The Nilgiri Class had a complement of 267 crew, with a displacement of 2,600 tons.
* The Godavari Class has a complement of 313 crew, with a displacement of 3,600 tons.
* The Brahmaputra Class has a complement of 300 crew, with a displacement of 3,600 tons.
* The Shivalik Class has a complement of 257 crew, with a displacement of 6,200 tons - clear sign of automation
* The P17A Class will have a complement of 226 crew, with a displacement of 6,670 tons - clear sign of automation

I do not believe IN capital ships have gold/blue crews.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 15 May 2019 03:15

ramana wrote:Rakesh, The way I look at it the ski jump carrier deck came from the Harrier procurement. Adding a ski jump increases the range or payload for the Harrier. Then after the Harrier phase out IN had the carriers with ski jumps and were constrained to require that for future aircraft buys.

The catapult is the right type of take-off option for carriers using conventional planes.

I know IN has two ski-jump carriers but future carriers should not be burdened with this handicap.
Future carriers should have a catapult either steam or EMALs based on affordability and reliability.

Whats the opinion on this?

The catapult is indeed the right buy for carriers using conventional planes. But brar's post above is the truth. And the standards that he has mentioned is for nations that have operated CATOBAR designs before. In India's case, it will take even longer. BR has been around for 22 years and in that time, I cannot think of a single Indian naval vessel program that I know of, that has come on time. Every program has been delayed and by quite a long margin. Refits are another sorry story. But that is just the name of the game with Indian PSU shipyards.

For a quicker turn-around, go with a follow on Vikrant vessel. Call her Viraat and start the construction. Same as the Vikrant, but just larger and wider lifts. Steam or EMALS should be in the next class of vessels i.e. the Vishal Class, consisting of the Vishal and the new Vikramaditya. And this class will be all the bells-and-whistles vessel ---> 65,000 ton (or higher) with steam or EMALS, nuclear power (if a reactor design is available), etc.

The IN needs three carriers as per its own plans. If we lay the keel NOW for a follow on Vikrant Class vessel....she will be ready for active carrier ops by the end of the next decade. By mid 2020s though, the design for the bells-and-whistles vessel should be finalized and construction can commence on that class of vessel. If we go for the bells-and-whistles vessel now, expect it to come only by the late 2030s. Till then, the IN will have to soldier on with the Vikrant and the Vikramaditya (heaven only knows whether she will be of any utility at that point in time). The better bet would be to have at least two Vikrant Class of vessels, so if Vikramaditya is FUBAR...the IN at least has two serviceable and newer aircraft carriers.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 536
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby souravB » 15 May 2019 04:08

^^ We are supposed to build 4 LHDs in the meantime. We could always use them as mini carriers if we invest early on to make them compatible with F-35Bs to be bought at a certain point of time. Since we are not landing significant amount of troops anywhere soon, this also gives us a breather and we can take our time to bring up IAC-2. We should utilize the time and go for nuclear prop since China will also launch it's nuke propelled carrier around that time.
INS VikaD will serve us atleast till 40s so we have time to launch the 1st of Vishal class.
JMT.

Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 374
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rishi_Tri » 15 May 2019 04:58

LakshmanPST wrote:Not sure if this is posted already here...
But as per this report, MoD put INS Vishal on hold for now, due to budgetary woes...
The report also says that the capacity of the carrier has been reduced to 50000 T...
https://wap.business-standard.com/artic ... 047_1.html
Further it also says that IAF is against expansion of aerial assets by Army & Navy, and hence working against INS Vishal...
----
That article was written by Ajai Shukla, so I'm not sure whether to believe it or not...
But similar news (regarding IAF) came in IDRW as well...
https://idrw.org/why-iaf-doesnt-want-na ... ns-vishal/
----
Personally I feel govt. should prioritise increasing IAF strength and assets (new jets, upgrades & AWACSs) than investing in a new carrier now... I feel they may start investing in a 3rd carrier only after 10 years...


Shake...Low.. Well this article is not about INS Vishal but F35 and US Navy carriers. Shake.. Low is biggest peddler of F35 in India and has been doing so for more than decade now. Since he already mentions close collaboration with US, his next article shall be how one of the decades old helicopter carriers of US Navy can be positioned / repurposed / marketed given they are in 50,000 Ton range and seamless operations with F35.

Classic platform strategy.. Make money off the platform; Think - Printers... Think Harriers on HMS ships.. Think Mig 29s on Admiral Gorshkov..

As to money, Rs 6000 crore is lose change for India. ITC profits are at run rate of Rs 14,000 crore / year. ITC alone can fund building INS Vishal, let alone L&T, Reliance or GOI.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 15 May 2019 07:05

souravB wrote:^^ We are supposed to build 4 LHDs in the meantime. We could always use them as mini carriers if we invest early on to make them compatible with F-35Bs to be bought at a certain point of time. Since we are not landing significant amount of troops anywhere soon, this also gives us a breather and we can take our time to bring up IAC-2. We should utilize the time and go for nuclear prop since China will also launch it's nuke propelled carrier around that time.
INS VikaD will serve us atleast till 40s so we have time to launch the 1st of Vishal class.
JMT.

Saar, couple of points;

1) Supposed to build 4 LHDs in the meantime ---> That file will sit in the MoD, till maggots and insects build LHDs of their own on the file itself! It has not moved since 2017 and will continue to sit there. Let us focus on what we have at present - blueprints of a Vikrant Class aircraft carrier and a physical vessel. That is what exists now. So let us focus on improving that design first. The new Vikrant is not perfect and a follow on, larger and improved vessel will be far quicker than inducting a bells-and-whistles aircraft carrier.

2) For nuclear propulsion to exist, you need a nuclear reactor. And guess what? Neither the BARC or the Indian Navy wants to foot the bill for the R&D for the reactor. What should be done then? Can we import a nuclear reactor? Who will give such a design? Priorities need to be set in stone. Navy sent a wish list for the INS Vishal and the MoD promptly shut that down. Reason? No Funds! The MoD Babu got an asthma attack when he saw the cost for the nuclear powered aircraft carrier. Service wishes for something, but the MoD sees something else onlee. Nothing is in sync.

3) Vikramaditya may serve well into the 2040s. Whether she will be sea worthy in the 2040s is a whole other ball game. As time passes, spares and parts will be hard to come by. Her serviceability will continue to fall. We will be left with Vikrant and hope that the Vishal will be ready by the late 2030s or early 2040s. If you feel I am over estimating the timeline of the Vishal, please take a look at below (which are facts!) --->

* In 1989, the Indian Navy wanted two 28,000 ton air defence ships (ADS) to replace the INS Vikrant and INS Viraat. Construction of the first vessel (today known as the new Vikrant) was supposed to start in 1993. It sat there in the MoD and nothing moved from 1989 to 1999. Ten Wasted Years. Finally in 1999, then Defence Minister George Fernandes re-opened the ADS file. Finally in 2003, the then Govt gave the go ahead, via formal government approval. So another four wasted years. From 2003 onwards, new and revised designs kept delaying the laying of the keel till 2009. So another six wasted years. Finally the keel of the vessel was laid in 2009. So, 20 years just to lay the keel of the vessel! She was then launched in 2013 and is expected to be completed by 2020, with commissioning by 2021. So how much time has elapsed? Let us see ---> 1989 to 2021....32 years! I personally do not see commissioning before the early 2020s though. All things considered, around 35 years for a 40,000 ton aircraft carrier.

* Now how long will a 65,000 ton, nuclear powered, CATOBAR (EMALS or Steam) equipped aircraft carrier will take? I can guarantee 100% that this program will be severely delayed. And the Navy will soldier on with a 40,000 ton aircraft carrier for the next couple of decades. Reasons are many, but the main reason is that we have *NO* experience in designing a CATOBAR aircraft carrier. It is not impossible, but neither is it a piece of cake. Take a look at the struggles the PLAN is going through and they have a reversed engineered vessel to fall back on. And the Liaoning (ex-Varyag) is a ski jump vessel. Adopting the QE design is laughable, because the QE Class is a ski jump vessel.

So the following needs to be sincerely asked...

1) Is there a desire for a nuclear powered aircraft carrier? Does the Govt see the wisdom in such an investment? If so, will the Navy and BARC partner together on development of such a reactor? Should a work share agreement / contract between the two be written up to commence design & development of a reactor?

2) Is there a need for EMALS or Steam Catapult? If EMALS, who will provide the system? Are we going to develop an EMALS system in-house or get one from a foreign nation? If it is the former, good luck! If it is the latter, only the US has experience in that area. The same is true of the steam catapult. Even the steam catapult on the Charles De Gaulle is of US origin.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7916
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby brar_w » 15 May 2019 07:11

If the French ever get a nod to do other CVN to replace the CDG then it will have EMALS. General Atomics has already begun discussions with the French to that end and the system is cleared for them as well. With the USN not building any steam catapult ships anymore, and the French and the Brits not having that it leaves the IN with the only option of developing steam cats. in house. It, in my opinion, would not be a wise decision for a ship that isn't likely to see an operational patrol till the late 2030's and expected to be in service till the 2060s.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 15 May 2019 07:30

Well said brar. Perhaps you can provide some info on how the Gerald Ford Class was conceptualized and brought into reality.

And even the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier program was delayed and with cost overruns. And this coming from the leader of aircraft carrier design and operation - the US of A :)

How much delay and cost overruns will the Vishal be?

I say build a stretched Vikrant Class vessel. Go at 65,000 tons if need be. Learn the ropes of building a larger vessel. Once that hurdle has been completed, then move on to an even bigger vessel.

Crawl, Walk, Run.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 536
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby souravB » 15 May 2019 08:46

Rakesh wrote:--snip--

Rakesh sir, yes I understand the glacial pace our babudom works in and the MRSV project is its shining example. But I also believe it will move quickly if NDA comes for a second term.

Let us focus on what we have at present - blueprints of a Vikrant Class aircraft carrier and a physical vessel. That is what exists now. So let us focus on improving that design first. The new Vikrant is not perfect and a follow on, larger and improved vessel will be far quicker than inducting a bells-and-whistles aircraft carrier.

1. IN has too many capital acquisition to make during the 20s. NUH, MRH, N-LCA, SSBNs, SSNs, 75I. So realistically IN has option of getting either Vikky class by late 20s or Vishal class by early 30s. Next carrier can only come later as replacement of VikaD.
2. New Vikky class will be dependent on N-LCA which is not coming before 2025. So IN can't deploy Vikky redux before that. We wouldn't be getting it quickly and this vessel will be serving IN till 2060.

Is there a desire for a nuclear powered aircraft carrier? Does the Govt see the wisdom in such an investment? If so, will the Navy and BARC partner together on development of such a reactor? Should a work share agreement / contract between the two be written up to commence design & development of a reactor?

As per me a carrier whether conventional or nuked have to stop to get sustenance and R&R. So conventional powered is fine with me as long it has IEP. But in any case Navy and BARC has to develop a gen2 reactor for S-5 and SSNs during the 20s. I have no idea why that cannot be used for Vishaal.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3837
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 15 May 2019 13:27

All this is fine and good but is there any news on the legendary air battles between the rafale and Navy fulcrums?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3876
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 15 May 2019 13:41

Getting to a CATOBAR is the main goal of the IN from what I read. Nuclear powered and EMALS were thrown about as the highest aspiration but I don't think those are strict requirements that the navy wanted as preconditions.

They want a carrier at 65K tons which is a modest but properly sized vessel -- smaller than the last conventionally powered Kitty Hawk class of the US. The UK, Russians and chinis are using 65K ton carriers for STOBARs. So what the IN want is not extreme by any measure.

The true is with our track record, a larger STOBAR like stretched Vikrant would probably take a decade and a half. I would rather use that time for a steam catapult CATOBAR and go into the next step that we'll have to take eventually if we want to stay among the leading nations in naval aviation.

The STOBAR/VSTOL carrier will be sailed by many mid-powers from Italy to Spain to the UK to SoKo and Japan with the spread of the F-35B. The top tier with CATOBARs in service or building will be US and Cheen onlee. I want us in the top tier and so does the IN. All things considered, they are not asking for the moon despite all the DDM talk about "behemoth" and "EMALS" to conjure visions of extreme and unaffordable expense.

MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 314
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby MeshaVishwas » 17 May 2019 16:23

http://pib.nic.in/PressReleseDetail.aspx?PRID=1572157&RegID=3&LID=1
MRSAM Firing Trials
Posted On: 17 MAY 2019 2:29PM by PIB Delhi
The Indian Navy achieved a significant milestone in enhancing its Anti Air Warfare Capability with the maiden cooperative engagement firing of the Medium Range Surface to Air Missile (MRSAM). The firing was undertaken on the Western Seaboard by Indian Naval Ships Kochi and Chennai wherein the missiles of both ships were controlled by one ship to intercept different aerial targets at extended ranges. The firing trial was carried out by the Indian Navy, DRDO and Israel Aerospace Industries.

The successful conduct of the test has been the result of sustained efforts by all stakeholders over the years. DRDL Hyderabad, a DRDO Lab, has jointly developed this missile in collaboration with Israel Aerospace Industries. The MRSAM has been manufactured by Bharat Dynamics Limited, India.

These Surface to Air Missiles are fitted onboard the Kolkata Class Destroyers and would also be fitted on all future major warships of the Indian Navy. With the successful proving of this cooperative mode of engagement, the Indian Navy has become a part of a select group of Navies that have this niche capability. This capability significantly enhances the combat effectiveness of the Indian Navy thereby providing an operational edge over potential adversaries.

8)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Singha » 17 May 2019 16:36

i believe the tall stick mast on top of the mfstar housing is the antenna for this. due to its height should be able to maintain LOS link to similar ships 50km out.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2803
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 17 May 2019 18:52

^^ No its the MF-STAR radar itself that is providing the datalink updates to the missile here. On top of MF-STAR is Integrated EW System http://www.bel-india.in/Products.aspx?M ... =1&link=65

MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 314
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby MeshaVishwas » 18 May 2019 17:58

The Defence Ministry in its order said, "The Central government after careful examination of the matter is of the opinion that this statutory petition dated April 10 from Vice Admiral Verma regarding his non-selection as the chief of naval staff is devoid of merit and be rejected."
The ministry further said, "Upon examination, the Central government is satisfied that the parameters for selection as evident from consistent practice were applied uniformly to all the officers in the zone of consideration and based on the assessment, Verma being the senior most eligible officer was considered and found unsuitable to tenets of the appointment of Chief of naval staff."

"The Central government is also satisfied that no unsubstantiated frivolous, extraneous or irrelevant consideration has had a bearing on this said selection," Richa Mishra said in her order rejecting the Verma's plea.

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/defence-ministry-rejects-vice-admiral-bimal-vermas-plea-challenging-appointment-of-navy-chief/amp_articleshow/69385925.cms#stickyBanner
Very unambiguous statement.Scary that the officer made it so far up the chain.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 18 May 2019 18:05

brar_w wrote:If the French ever get a nod to do other CVN to replace the CDG then it will have EMALS. General Atomics has already begun discussions with the French to that end and the system is cleared for them as well. With the USN not building any steam catapult ships anymore, and the French and the Brits not having that it leaves the IN with the only option of developing steam cats. in house. It, in my opinion, would not be a wise decision for a ship that isn't likely to see an operational patrol till the late 2030's and expected to be in service till the 2060s.


The French are indeed looking to develop a new aircraft carrier to replace the CDG and based on the QE class design. Preliminary studies going on.
Last edited by kit on 18 May 2019 19:05, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chetak » 18 May 2019 18:31

MeshaVishwas wrote:
The Defence Ministry in its order said, "The Central government after careful examination of the matter is of the opinion that this statutory petition dated April 10 from Vice Admiral Verma regarding his non-selection as the chief of naval staff is devoid of merit and be rejected."
The ministry further said, "Upon examination, the Central government is satisfied that the parameters for selection as evident from consistent practice were applied uniformly to all the officers in the zone of consideration and based on the assessment, Verma being the senior most eligible officer was considered and found unsuitable to tenets of the appointment of Chief of naval staff."

"The Central government is also satisfied that no unsubstantiated frivolous, extraneous or irrelevant consideration has had a bearing on this said selection," Richa Mishra said in her order rejecting the Verma's plea.

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/defence-ministry-rejects-vice-admiral-bimal-vermas-plea-challenging-appointment-of-navy-chief/amp_articleshow/69385925.cms#stickyBanner
Very unambiguous statement.Scary that the officer made it so far up the chain.


not nearly as scary as some of the others who made it to the top of the heap in all three services.

that's one book no one is going to be writing any time soon :mrgreen:

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 18 May 2019 19:07

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/up-front/story/20190527-big-carriers-are-a-bad-idea-point-of-view-1526363-2019-05-18

Karnad at it again !!
We should export him to China to spread his wisdom to the central committee :mrgreen: :rotfl:

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3876
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 18 May 2019 19:09

Admiral, we have operated catapults before and can get a steam catapult up if we need to. The last Nimitz was built barely a decade ago and I doubt all that eco-sustem and institutional knowledge is lost. We had the Russians design and build the aviation complex for new Vikrant so why have the Amreekis design for a CATOBAR Vishal. Also EMALS might be matured technology by the tome decide on a CATOBAR. We just need to get started ...




Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chiru, navneeet, VickyAvinash, Vinod Ji and 75 guests