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.
Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2004
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Bala Vignesh » 05 Dec 2019 17:58

lakshmanM wrote:It looks photoshopped

It most definitely is not, sir.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Katare » 06 Dec 2019 01:52

nachiket wrote:
Katare wrote:Aircraft Carriers are non negotiable necessity for IN. USN has suffered through the teething pain of EMLS development, so IN would have relatively low pain route to it. EMLS or not it's time to graduate to the big boy's club, China is already building in that size range. We can't afford to let our only edge over Chinese navy wash away.

These statements would be fine if we were a $10 trillion economy. IN aspirations have to be commensurate with what the country can afford. And it is up to them to utilize available resources optimally. So if there is a choice to be made between getting one 65000 tonne CATOBAR carrier vs several Destroyers/Submarines/ASW assets for the same cost which can more effectively counter the Chinese buildup then that discussion needs to be had and plans changed. Nothing is non-negotiable.


I see your logic but is it build on solid assumptions?

Where are these numbers coming from? $10 trillion economy/ 65K ton aircraft carrier and Rs70K corer for the 65K ton ship alone.

US navy has 11 super carriers (100k ton/carrier) so size of it's economy must be $110 trillion to afford such luxury?

China is planning to have 6 carriers of 65K+ tons so size of it's economy must be $65 trillion/year?

Even if approved today the 65K ton carrier would not show up until 2035 and India will be a $10 trillion economy by than

IN has graduated from 20K ton class aircraft carriers to 40K tons class in the last decade. From here it's going to the next larger size of 65K ton for next two ships which seems logical choice to me. Next stop would be 100K ton unless RMA throws out something different.

Regardless of everything that is said about vulnerability of Aircraft carriers, and a lot of it is true, yet without one shepherding the destroyers, submarines and rest of your flotilla it would be butchered at high seas, if it encounters enemy fleet led by a carrier with it's own mini air-force (fighters, bombers, AWACs, tankers, helicopters, Massive radars...). No battle group on land or water can fight effectively without having an effective air arm to protect it and soften-up the enemy targets.

Of-course unless you want to play purely defensive game into coastal waters under an umbrella of land based air support.

Last but not least, Indian economy produces ~ $10 trillion/year, when measured in PPP terms, even now.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3705
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 06 Dec 2019 04:26

Katare wrote:
nachiket wrote:These statements would be fine if we were a $10 trillion economy. IN aspirations have to be commensurate with what the country can afford. And it is up to them to utilize available resources optimally. So if there is a choice to be made between getting one 65000 tonne CATOBAR carrier vs several Destroyers/Submarines/ASW assets for the same cost which can more effectively counter the Chinese buildup then that discussion needs to be had and plans changed. Nothing is non-negotiable.


I see your logic but is it build on solid assumptions?

Where are these numbers coming from? $10 trillion economy/ 65K ton aircraft carrier and Rs70K corer for the 65K ton ship alone.

US navy has 11 super carriers (100k ton/carrier) so size of it's economy must be $110 trillion to afford such luxury?

China is planning to have 6 carriers of 65K+ tons so size of it's economy must be $65 trillion/year?

Even if approved today the 65K ton carrier would not show up until 2035 and India will be a $10 trillion economy by than

IN has graduated from 20K ton class aircraft carriers to 40K tons class in the last decade. From here it's going to the next larger size of 65K ton for next two ships which seems logical choice to me. Next stop would be 100K ton unless RMA throws out something different.

Regardless of everything that is said about vulnerability of Aircraft carriers, and a lot of it is true, yet without one shepherding the destroyers, submarines and rest of your flotilla it would be butchered at high seas, if it encounters enemy fleet led by a carrier with it's own mini air-force (fighters, bombers, AWACs, tankers, helicopters, Massive radars...). No battle group on land or water can fight effectively without having an effective air arm to protect it and soften-up the enemy targets.

Of-course unless you want to play purely defensive game into coastal waters under an umbrella of land based air support.

Last but not least, Indian economy produces ~ $10 trillion/year, when measured in PPP terms, even now.


An estimated "affordability" of an aircraft carrier is one per Trillion dollar GDP nominal

GDP 2019

US 20 T
China 13.4 T
India 2.72 T

But no getting around to the fact its not just affordability but the services requirements that counts, India does need 3 with one in reserve making a total of 4 carriers

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 06 Dec 2019 05:47

With the shrinking naval budget, down to 12% from 18%, there is no way we can afford another carrier.A recent panel discussion involving well-known former MEA Secs. like Saran, Menon, etc. drew the comparison with China and India's thrust on the maritime front.China has given top priority to its navy while the GOI and the defence establishment are still stuck in the mindset of landlubbers giving primary importance to dealing with Pak and stalling China in the Himalayas.It costs China very little to scare us by calling Ar.Pradesh " S.Tibet"! It is in the west in Aksai Chin where its land route to Pak and onto Baluchistan, its maritime ambitions at Gwadar/ Jiwani and the Gulf which is more important to it. The new $550B deal with Russia for a new gas pipeline will help in part resolve the Malacca dilemma, but it is its overall maritime trade reaching its destinations that matters.After all, almost all wars are economic in nature, control of ME oil that sparked off the Gulf/Iraq and Syrian wars.

China using Pak as proxy and sabre- rattling in Tibet is a device to keep India looking away from the sea and playing a greater role in SE Asia and the Far East while it is full steam ahead for its navy,.This strategy is helping it dominate the maritime space by sheer weight of numbers. It will outclass us in numbers of subs by 3-4 times, major surface warships at least double, smaller combatants 4 times and carriers double. However, its carriers' principal task is to counter US CBGs in the Pacific , exercise total control over the ICS and not in the IOR where any PLAN CBG would get trapped and swiftly despatched to D.Jones' Locker from IN and IAF assets based on the mainland, the islands and our CVs. It will instead send in large numbers of subs which will be logistically supported by its bases in the IOR, some permanent ones like Djibouti and Gwadar/ Jiwani.It hopes to do to Indian shipping what the German wolf packs did to Allied shipping in the Atlantic.The string of pearls ambition is still being pursued.
Scrapping the Hambantota deal is going to be a huge task for the new Lankan pres., much easier said than done as the Chinese footfall and presence in the island keeps on increasing.

The US is using its amphibs effectively for dealing with smaller crises.Ideally another ( modified) affordable sister ship to the Vikrant , faster to build, would suffice for now. Redesigning our amphibs accordingly, basing the flight deck dimensions around IAC-1 ,being able to cross-deck aircraft with our CVs another possibility.It would give us more multi-role platforms to deal with multiple threats. Leveraging our huge advantage of possessing unsinkable carriers like the subcontinent and islands like the A & N, basing Backfires,LRMP and other strike aircraft , etc., would give us enormous reach in pre-emptive strikes if need be in the ASEAN waters.A base in Vietnam and perhaps the Phillippines to emulate China's at Gwadar/Jiwani, to keep a closer eye on the PLAN in its owm backyard.

What the IN requires is a much larger chunk of the budget and a balanced fleet, with a greater emphasis on an expanded sub fleet so that we can return the compliment to the PRC, by sending our subs to monitor its movements in the ICS.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Nikhil T » 06 Dec 2019 07:34

kit wrote:An estimated "affordability" of an aircraft carrier is one per Trillion dollar GDP nominal

GDP 2019

US 20 T
China 13.4 T
India 2.72 T

But no getting around to the fact its not just affordability but the services requirements that counts, India does need 3 with one in reserve making a total of 4 carriers


It's not as simple as that. GDP per capita is equally important when you think of affordability, than just the size of the GDP. US has 350 million citizens that produce 20T - i.e. $62,000 per capita, we have 1400 million that produce 2.8T i.e. $2,000 per capita. China's per capita i $10,000. So, while we have 2 AC today, China should have had 10AC with 5X higher per capita. In reality, it has 2 AC, because it has been focusing on building its capital warships like DDGs, FFGs, and subs - which are far more cost effective.

India should first enter an irreversible, high economic growth cycle - similar to what China has been experiencing since 1990 - before we start spending the money we don't have.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3976
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 06 Dec 2019 08:51

srai wrote:^^^
The last image of MiG-29 looks bit weird. Look at the the wheels and the deck. It looks as though MiG is flying. Can’t make out is it landing or take-off.

With burners on, probly take off. Stunning pic. The fulcrum looks like a boss

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2074
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Picklu » 06 Dec 2019 22:05

tsarkar wrote:Image
The beauty of this shot is INS Viraat sailing ahead.


The humpback is an ugly mother that grows on you.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3705
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 06 Dec 2019 23:18

Nikhil T wrote:
kit wrote:An estimated "affordability" of an aircraft carrier is one per Trillion dollar GDP nominal

GDP 2019

US 20 T
China 13.4 T
India 2.72 T

But no getting around to the fact its not just affordability but the services requirements that counts, India does need 3 with one in reserve making a total of 4 carriers


It's not as simple as that. GDP per capita is equally important when you think of affordability, than just the size of the GDP. US has 350 million citizens that produce 20T - i.e. $62,000 per capita, we have 1400 million that produce 2.8T i.e. $2,000 per capita. China's per capita i $10,000. So, while we have 2 AC today, China should have had 10AC with 5X higher per capita. In reality, it has 2 AC, because it has been focusing on building its capital warships like DDGs, FFGs, and subs - which are far more cost effective.

India should first enter an irreversible, high economic growth cycle - similar to what China has been experiencing since 1990 - before we start spending the money we don't have.


It has to be kept in mind the few billions for the AC is not spent in one go, rather over the build time of over 5 to 7 years., India can afford to do this esp when building indigenously.

Anthony Hines
BRFite
Posts: 102
Joined: 16 Jul 2009 22:09
Location: West of Greenwich

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Anthony Hines » 07 Dec 2019 00:57

Defense Outlay should be a based on threat perception and this needs a long term vision. Yes, there has to be a sense of proportion with respect to the GDP. However, historically, Indian Defense budget as a fraction of its GDP has been fairly low as compared to the countries with which it has "contests".

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5680
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby vishvak » 07 Dec 2019 02:06

However, its carriers' principal task is to counter US CBGs in the Pacific , exercise total control over the ICS and not in the IOR where any PLAN CBG would get trapped and swiftly despatched to D.Jones' Locker from IN and IAF assets based on the mainland, the islands and our CVs. It will instead send in large numbers of subs ..

It's better to not be spendthrift while erring on side of caution. Will any Chinese CBG last much in the vast Pacific where nations are better organized with lead from US. Another way to look is will China loot more of Asian continent while bidding time for forays towards weaker South American nations.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3976
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Dec 2019 03:39

Picklu wrote:
tsarkar wrote:Image
The beauty of this shot is INS Viraat sailing ahead.


The humpback is an ugly mother that grows on you.

Sirji, that's not a humpback, that's a K.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7322
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby nachiket » 07 Dec 2019 03:57

The UPG like hump is still there if I'm not mistaken, just hidden because of the raised cockpit.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Indranil » 07 Dec 2019 05:35

That picture looks PSed.The Mig29k has been superimposed.

But can't say that the 29k has a hump. I mean just look at it. It is the best looking 29. In fact, that's one the best looking aircrafts of all times. I don't trust anybody who says otherwise :D .
Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Indranil » 07 Dec 2019 06:23

Some airbrushed images.

Image

Image

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4304
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Manish_Sharma » 07 Dec 2019 11:52

Twitter:
https://twitter.com/hukum2082/status/12 ... 79936?s=20

Hukum
@hukum2082
Replying to
@daeroplate
and
@elmihiro
Also this playing around with Propulsion. You get better deals when you place long term orders.We have a heady mix :

P-28 - CODAD
P-15A - COGAG
P-15B - COGAG
P-17 - CODOG
P-17A - CODAG

Ukrainian , German , Amercian , Finnish , Russian , Indian

The famed IPMS is Canadian

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby John » 07 Dec 2019 19:44

^ Not sure what the poster is saying all vessels should have same propulsion :roll: ? P-28 are designed for range not speed it make sense for them to have CODAD where as P-15A for both Ashw and fleet air support so they have COGAG and P-17 for patrol and fleet air support so they have CODOG (I am pretty sure p-17a do not have CODAG). When you have Brahmos, Barak-8, Mf-Star, ltr-25 radar and now throw in 60 mill dollar main gun costs will add up fast cost savings from propulsion is negligible compared to that.

Even the new frigates China is building for Pakistan cost around 400 million and they are likely taking a loss on this, more than likely the Chinese 055 DDG cost lot more than billion and it sensor suite is far inferior to P-15b or P-17A.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Nikhil T » 08 Dec 2019 01:45

kit wrote:
Nikhil T wrote:
It's not as simple as that. GDP per capita is equally important when you think of affordability, than just the size of the GDP. US has 350 million citizens that produce 20T - i.e. $62,000 per capita, we have 1400 million that produce 2.8T i.e. $2,000 per capita. China's per capita i $10,000. So, while we have 2 AC today, China should have had 10AC with 5X higher per capita. In reality, it has 2 AC, because it has been focusing on building its capital warships like DDGs, FFGs, and subs - which are far more cost effective.

India should first enter an irreversible, high economic growth cycle - similar to what China has been experiencing since 1990 - before we start spending the money we don't have.


It has to be kept in mind the few billions for the AC is not spent in one go, rather over the build time of over 5 to 7 years., India can afford to do this esp when building indigenously.


Now you’re making the same argument that credit card companies do - Buy it now and pay it over years. It still doesn’t change the fact that India’s defense budget has seen a very slow growth over the past few years and it is unlikely to grow substantially anytime soon. Why wouldn’t we spend the limited money in churning out cheap warships and subs, buying Naval multi-role helicopters for existing ships, more minesweepers (we have just two left), long range UCAVs, over AC that cost $10B and can’t really be used in wars?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 08 Dec 2019 09:56

Nikhil, you're spot on! Cheap ships with decent armament in large numbers.

The US is reviewing its naval inventory strategy vis-a-vis China.China possessing carriers has complicated its battleplans.It now talks of fighting 1000km away from the carrier given the advent of new anti- ship missiles.A juicy target of a CBG with several assets other than the carrier is now at far greater risk than before, hence the interest in having a dispersed fleet with more smaller but lethal assets all networked.This will make it harder for the enemy to track, target and destroy assets of the fleet.

Multi-role corvettes of around 2000t + are ideal for the IN.Armed with a mix of weaponry and an ASW helo, these vessels can carry out patrol duties for 30 to 45 days . Our planned 35000t amphibs should be redesigned as also serving as light/ med flat tops which can accommodate carrier strike A/C like 29Ks and NLCAs apart from heavy attack helos in support of landing forces using faster LCs like hovercraft, etc. In the future if a STOVL naval bird is available, it would be ideal for CAS duties.These multi-role flat tops could be of 40,000t. This would hugely add to the number of air- capable flat tops equipped with frontline naval strike aircraft .The US is already successfully using its amphibs for lesser crises instead of sending in a CBG.

Having more numbers of smaller surface warships would enable us to deal with simultaneous crises better.Russia is using 1200t corvettes equipped with 2000+ km Kalibir missiles in Syria! Kalibir's range is to be further extended to 4500km. One class that could benefit from upgrades are our NOPVs. They require better ASW eqpt. for a start.Our CG is a very valuable force and their larger vessels must be equipped with ASW packages.The CG must also be trained in MCM ops.We are woefully short in this dept. Our 16 inshore ASW corvettes must be complemented by a similar number of larger multi-role corvettes as mentioned above.This does not mean that our major capital ships, DDGs and FFGs of 5000- 10000t are passe.These smaller warships will be cheaper to acquire in large number, and could be used for lesser duties instead of capital ships reducing costs.

Our sub requirement is another tale.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8297
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby brar_w » 08 Dec 2019 22:02

Carrier stand off attack is just one of the missions a carrier can be called in to perform. The IN may use it for an entirely different purpose. Additionally, the ability to dial-up the AW and prep it for a suitable stand-off range is a hallmark of a good carrier design that can accommodate different types of aircraft of varying sizes and weight classes, both manned, and unmanned. It is not a shortcoming of a carrier but one of its air-wing which can be evolved to keep pace with an evolving mission set and national security need. How you do it? First add 300-1000 km weapons range via stand-off precision strike munitions (like THIS, THIS or THIS). Next look to launch heavier payloads with more fuel that is efficiently carried (Like THIS ,THIS and THIS). Finally, over time morph the carrier air wing's capability by providing it aircraft that have longer reach i.e. aircraft that can fly say 40% longer with about a 40% increase in cruise speed (for example)... None of those are insurmountable challenges and between the French, the US, the Chinese, British and indeed the IN..the powers at be have made that determination and are comfortable with a plan for AC's to keep pace with the threat to them just like it has for decades..Finally, an Aircraft Carrier is going to always be more survivable than a fixed base on an island somewhere that is known to the opponent, is non-mobile and will likely be peppered with massive waves of sea, air and land launched fires. While it is always possible to know that an AC is operating in a particular theater, during conflict one can apply deception and severely restrict that last mile tracking and targeting..while something similar can be created via dispersed basing that is clearly not an option when one is looking at region specific employment which limits the number of air-bases or physically restricts the zone from which land based assets can operate from (and still meet mission objectives).
Last edited by brar_w on 09 Dec 2019 02:19, edited 2 times in total.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3705
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 09 Dec 2019 01:10

Nikhil T wrote:
kit wrote:
It has to be kept in mind the few billions for the AC is not spent in one go, rather over the build time of over 5 to 7 years., India can afford to do this esp when building indigenously.


Now you’re making the same argument that credit card companies do - Buy it now and pay it over years. It still doesn’t change the fact that India’s defense budget has seen a very slow growth over the past few years and it is unlikely to grow substantially anytime soon. Why wouldn’t we spend the limited money in churning out cheap warships and subs, buying Naval multi-role helicopters for existing ships, more minesweepers (we have just two left), long range UCAVs, over AC that cost $10B and can’t really be used in wars?



As a matter of fact GOI is investing into its own owned and operated enterprises ( Cochin shipyard being the case in example ) , military industrial projects needs to be continued to ensure industrial viability of ancillary industries that are mostly private as well as maintanence of skills., also another point being you cant build a carrier overnight because of long leadtimes , needs at least a decade for a country like India to produce and induct one.

I am not saying build multiple carriers at same time like china but funding must go on so you have one at some point in future if not there is a high chance india will end up buying one in say 2035., citing chinese threat to IOR !!! .,

No point in comparing apples and oranges, minesweepers and frigates cant do the job of aircraft carriers.

There is credible threats from multiple sources to India , and if it intends to keep its individual foreign policy " India choses India" investing in its own military industrial capability is an absolute requisite.

I fear the day when India buys another carrier that is NOT built in India.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 09 Dec 2019 08:32

The usefulness of a carrier, with its air power reach while mobile on the high seas is not denied.In the IN's context there are large gaps in critical areas like subs,MCM vessels, amphib vessels, landing craft, around 200 helos utility and ASW, capital ships with light-weight anti-air capability and ASW vessels with incomplete ASW packages. In such a situation demanding a large CV with bells and whistles like EMALS and aircraft that cannot cross-deck with the existing carriers, costing anywhere upwards of around $14B is absurd. Add the Indian time to construct it, nothing less than a decade during which time carrier warfare may change and evolve even more and you may end up with a white sea elephant .
India's geographical uniqueness jutting into the centre of the IOR like a dagger , plus blessed with island territories on both sides give us the equivalent of several unsinkable carriers for the purpose of sanitising the IOR, with land-based long-legged strike and MP aircraft . With the advent of S-400s plus a variety of other SAM and anti-air/ missile systems, protection of naval air stations as described will be taken care of.

Nevertheless, the availability of aircraft at sea to widen the reach of control can be met by smaller flat tops, multi-purpose amphibs as mentioned earlier.The Japanese are doing that with their thinly veiled amphibs,actually light carriers using F-35Bs. Possessing 3 to 4 35/40K t such vessels would increase the number of flat tops in the IN which can simultaneously handle crises at different hotspots. These would be more affordable and faster to build after the experience of IAC-1 .

We are not going to fight the 21st. century's equivalent of the battle of Midway or Leyte Gulf. Our main task will be fighting a variant of the battle of the Atlantic with Chinese and Paki subs, protecting our energy supplies from the Gulf and maritime trade and control of the chokepoints to keep the PLAN out. Further operations in the PLAN's own backyard will be possible if we augment our sub fleet substantially, and acquire base/ logistic facilities in the ICS . Subs and long-legged supersonic bombers armed with super and hypersonic Brahmos , LRCMs would be better options instead of a lone CBG.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3705
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 10 Dec 2019 03:08

My point is India needs both, it cant forego aircraft carriers at any point, and carriers dont go alone do they ? ., they need the mix of Air warfare, ASW ships, Subs, Tankers etc. The Navy is a very potent and as important as land and airforces and deserves equal treatment when it comes to capex. , and i dare say they provide more "bang for the buck" , esp in the coming decade of "sea battles, cold and hot" with China. India WILL need to face off China in IOR whether it likes it or not !!

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3705
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 10 Dec 2019 03:15

Nikhil T wrote:
kit wrote:An estimated "affordability" of an aircraft carrier is one per Trillion dollar GDP nominal

GDP 2019

US 20 T
China 13.4 T
India 2.72 T

But no getting around to the fact its not just affordability but the services requirements that counts, India does need 3 with one in reserve making a total of 4 carriers


It's not as simple as that. GDP per capita is equally important when you think of affordability, than just the size of the GDP. US has 350 million citizens that produce 20T - i.e. $62,000 per capita, we have 1400 million that produce 2.8T i.e. $2,000 per capita. China's per capita i $10,000. So, while we have 2 AC today, China should have had 10AC with 5X higher per capita. In reality, it has 2 AC, because it has been focusing on building its capital warships like DDGs, FFGs, and subs - which are far more cost effective.

India should first enter an irreversible, high economic growth cycle - similar to what China has been experiencing since 1990 - before we start spending the money we don't have.


Unfortunately threat perceptions dont remain static and the world is not going to wait "till India catches up" ., two things can happen , kiss up to uncle Sam and let China get away with their claims to Arunachal , Sikkim etc , the pakis do all their paki stuff etc or stand up and face it, lets just say India does spend money on defence but then let it spend it wisely, build and spend on its own Mil Ind complex instead of endlessly financing foreign imports !

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 10 Dec 2019 04:30

Watch what China says and what it does. Two different things. A few years ago China made its top priority beefing up its navy in unimaginable manner.Remember that not too long ago Ru Sov. class DDGs were its top warships.Almost overnight the Varyag supposedly acquired to be a floating casino was repaired and transformed into the Liaoning, carrier 2 commissioned, new classes of very capable DDGs and FFGs plus dozens of corvettes and dozens of new AIP subs added to the fleet. Amphib. vessels too for the " big push" one day- the invasion of Taiwan and gobbling up of islands in the Spratlys and the Indo- China Sea. New overseas bases opened in friendly countries to atrengthen its " string of pearls" gambit in the IOR.But its kept its mouth shut on all these momentous events simply talking "peace", while the build-up is anything but peaceful.

Its army has taken a back seat in comparison. But it is precisely in this arena that it has been more belligerent."Ar.Pradesh is ours", blah, blah, ad nauseum. What have we done? Invested huge amounts in rightly beefing up our milstancd in the Himalayas, but at the expense of the navy, shrinking the naval budget to 12% from 18% when it should at least be 30% ! See how China has deceived us , weakening our capabilities in the maritime arena where it has placed its shirt on, while making us look in the opposite direction the almost impenetrable Himalayas.

Any serious analyst will quickly see that China cannot support a long war in the mountains and annexe Indian territory at will because of the massive logistic problem it faces.All India has to do is to cut off the rail link to Tibet and destroy key bridges, tunnels, etc. that link the plateau thousands of miles away from Beijing. In '62 after invading and having us at its mercy, it retreated keeping key positions though. Ar.Pradesh is mixed up in the affairs of Tibetan Buddhism and the future Dalai Lama when the current incumbent of that title passes on. China hopes to influence that decision- the successor when the time comes so that it can control the anti- Chinese Tibetans if a pro- China DL is chosen.Hence its sabre-rattling in the Himalayan region while the real action is taking place in the IOR, Indo- China Sea and beyond.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3705
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby kit » 10 Dec 2019 13:22

Philip wrote:Watch what China says and what it does. Two different things. A few years ago China made its top priority beefing up its navy in unimaginable manner.Remember that not too long ago Ru Sov. class DDGs were its top warships.Almost overnight the Varyag supposedly acquired to be a floating casino was repaired and transformed into the Liaoning, carrier 2 commissioned, new classes of very capable DDGs and FFGs plus dozens of corvettes and dozens of new AIP subs added to the fleet. Amphib. vessels too for the " big push" one day- the invasion of Taiwan and gobbling up of islands in the Spratlys and the Indo- China Sea. New overseas bases opened in friendly countries to atrengthen its " string of pearls" gambit in the IOR.But its kept its mouth shut on all these momentous events simply talking "peace", while the build-up is anything but peaceful.

Its army has taken a back seat in comparison. But it is precisely in this arena that it has been more belligerent."Ar.Pradesh is ours", blah, blah, ad nauseum. What have we done? Invested huge amounts in rightly beefing up our milstancd in the Himalayas, but at the expense of the navy, shrinking the naval budget to 12% from 18% when it should at least be 30% ! See how China has deceived us , weakening our capabilities in the maritime arena where it has placed its shirt on, while making us look in the opposite direction the almost impenetrable Himalayas.

Any serious analyst will quickly see that China cannot support a long war in the mountains and annexe Indian territory at will because of the massive logistic problem it faces.All India has to do is to cut off the rail link to Tibet and destroy key bridges, tunnels, etc. that link the plateau thousands of miles away from Beijing. In '62 after invading and having us at its mercy, it retreated keeping key positions though. Ar.Pradesh is mixed up in the affairs of Tibetan Buddhism and the future Dalai Lama when the current incumbent of that title passes on. China hopes to influence that decision- the successor when the time comes so that it can control the anti- Chinese Tibetans if a pro- China DL is chosen.Hence its sabre-rattling in the Himalayan region while the real action is taking place in the IOR, Indo- China Sea and beyond.



There is indeed a big difference now on how the chinese armed forces operate., you can no longer contain it into "navy" "army" or "airforce" fiefdoms., the elevens mandate being chinese armed forces operate as one, India is still in its infant stages of creating cohesion between its different arms.

If China wants to create issues in IOR i would expect them to create some ruckus in the eastern front ( or western depending on which (indian) government is in power), its NO longer just the PLAN ! ( no pun ! ), India needs a balance into power projection and the Navy is the best bet to create a force projection away from its shores. A strong India needs a powerful Navy., period. There should be no second thoughts about this.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 10 Dec 2019 16:21

Good point as the Chins have already restructured their forces into theatre commands.We are yet to do so, but with the CDS appointment v.soon, hopefully before Republic Day, the reorganisation of our services into integrated tri-service commands will begin.

However, in IOR operations mainly to secure its energy supplies and merchant trade, the PLAN will be the chief protagonist against India with support from the PLA and PLAAF in the Himalayas to keep us off balance .The island of Sri Lanka is of critical importance as an avowed pro- China regime has taken over. This regime will work with China to strengthen Lankan forces' ability to withstand any Indian intervention in any future ethnic crisis also using large numbers of Chinese " workers" permanently resident in the island ostensibly engaged in infra projects , but in reality a permanent colony of ethnic Chinese based in the island to justify further Chinese military presence in the future no matter what the regime has assured India on the subject. The Chinese plan to penetrate the N-E of the island in predominantly Tamil areas to wean them away from Indian influence. Chinese merchant shipping must be carefully watched operating in Lankan waters and ports as there is it is the other side of the same coin that is the PLAN.

Lanka must now be marked as hostile in the war room. The PM Rajapakse, ex- pres. whose brother is now the new pres., has
stated that the Port City project in Colombo originally planned as a Chinese enclave so close to India, will go ahead at full pace. India has to plan for any eventuality in SL now, or face the Chins in strength just a few dozen km off our southern underbelly.We all know how the Europeans and English conquered India first from the south.

PS: The Chinese are successfully resolving logistic resupply at sea using specialised and std. merchant vessels.Analysts say that this is being done specifically for PLAN IOR operations where they can station a permanent IOR fleet using bases and logistic facilities at Gwadar/ Jiwani, Djibouti, Thailand and Sri Lanka.
The huge interland leased out for 99 years at Hambantota will see massive logistic supplies stationed there , a Chin version of DG. We may even see industies supporting its IOR Afro- Asian ambitions set up at Hta. Using merchantmen operating from Lankan ports which would resupply their naval assets on the high seas would evade any technicality about navval vessels using Lankan ports.
Last edited by Philip on 10 Dec 2019 21:54, edited 1 time in total.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8423
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Peregrine » 10 Dec 2019 21:51

X Posted on the Terroristan Thread

Indian navy & Gulf - Muhammad Ali Siddiqi

IT is unfair to draw lessons from the fate of a bankrupt Egypt in the 19th century and relate it to today’s economically vibrant Gulf states. Nevertheless one can detect a beep on the radar. In 1875, Britain purchased Khedive Ismail’s shares of the Suez Canal Company to become the majority shareholder — it already had its own shares.

The khedive’s reckless modernisation drive had made Egypt go broke. The loans he had secured from European powers, especially Britain and France, enabled the two, especially the former, to interfere in Egypt’s internal matters and tighten their economic stranglehold. The number of Europeans working in Egypt had gone up phenomenally. They were ubiquitous and were resented by Egyptians, especially army officers.

In 1880, there was a row between an Egyptian donkey cart boy and a European, and this led to a riot which killed a large number of people, including Europeans. While France was reluctant to act for reasons which do not concern us here, Britain used the opportunity to occupy Egypt. Thus, the Arab world’s most important country was to remain under British control till 1952 when Gamal Abdel Nasser and Mohammad Neguib overthrew the Albanian dynasty. The reader need not be told the moral of the story: the economic control of a country by a foreign power invariably leads to the former’s enslavement.

Against this background, Pakistan must carefully watch the economic and geopolitical developments in Gulf sheikhdoms and be alert to overt and covert moves that may in the long run affect its security. The people of Pakistan have still not recovered from the shock received from some Arab countries’ reaction to India’s annexation of occupied Kashmir. Saudi Arabia was neutral, but the UAE felt no qualms about calling the Aug 5 annexation decree India’s ‘internal matter’.

Various interpretations have since then been given about why Khalifa bin Zayed al Nahyan’s government behaved the way it did. One explanation is obvious: trade between the Emirates and India is estimated at $100bn. To this must be added the crucial role Indian expatriates have played and will continue to do so in building the UAE economy and the extraordinary control they have come to exercise over business and finance in the sheikhdom.

The number of Indian nationals — nearly two million — constitutes 27pc of the Emirates’ population of 9.4m. Taken together, all Gulf states have an Indian population of 9m, and let’s be clear that in a given geopolitical turmoil this population could be an extraordinary asset to India to help New Delhi advance its interests.

K.M. Panikkar’s India and the Indian Ocean is a much-quoted book, for it gives a clear indication of what Indian strategists think of their country’s role in relation to Asia and the Middle East. The gist of the thesis is that India must step into British shoes and play the role Britain did in the geographical mass between Aden and Singapore. He argued that the Indian Ocean must “truly remain Indian”.

No wonder the ‘Persian Gulf’ finds repeated mention in the post-Panikkar era. Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee told a military conference in 2003 that India’s “strategic frontiers” had grown beyond South Asia and that India’s “security environment ranges from the Persian Gulf to Straits of Malacca”. Similarly, former Indian navy chief Arun Prakash said India’s “strategic relevance” ranges “from the Persian Gulf to the Strait of Malacca.”

It is doubtful if the Gulf nations are aware of India’s naval ambitions. For reasons of history and geography Arab nations (and Iran) look west and seldom bother about developments in the east. In their worldview, the Pakistan-India relationship is a minor issue — a nuisance — and does not deserve the attention we think it must. Twice this year, the UAE has stunned us. In February, it invited an Indian foreign minister to a conference of Islamic foreign ministers, and it termed the Aug 5 villainy India’s internal matter.

Read : Islamabad apprises OIC of reservation over invite to India

The Asian Arab world has virtually no navy, even though 80pc of oil shipping passes through the Gulf of Hormuz. Pakistan has a vital interest in this crucial sea lane, and it is exactly for this reason that Gwadar port is an eyesore for many governments hostile to Pakistan.

The situation calls for Pakistan’s greater collaboration with Gulf navies in a manner that pre-empts any attempt by non-Gulf powers to penetrate what undoubtedly is Pakistan’s underbelly. Let Islamabad keep its eyes and ears open so as not get caught again by surprise. Bases are not begged for; bases are extorted or imposed. The host country has no choice but to follow the diktat of the economic hegemon. It is a pity that it is Pakistan that has to suffer because of the Arab ignorance of South Asian history.

Cheers Image

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 10 Dec 2019 23:42

Pannikar was a prophet.India, the greatest nation of the IOR, the world's richest nation 500+ years ago, plundered by John Co. and Europeam imperialists rampaging across Asia, has to dominate the IOR if we are to survive.More powerfu European navies fought each other for control of the seas and thaks to the RN, India was Britain's prize. Are we going to allow a Chinese invasion of the IOR and India succumbing to the dragon's diktat? Our reply and watchword should be NEVER!

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2910
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 12 Dec 2019 02:46

Image

Revati radar on INS Jalashwa

6 ships with Revati - 4 Kamorta class, INS Rajput and INS Jalashwa

It’s sister Rohini radar deployed in Pune along with Akash missiles and posted in the Missile thread

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 12 Dec 2019 08:00

The abandonment of Iran thanks to US pressure is costing us v.dearly.An Iranian - Paki rapproachment is in the works , with a military dimension and now the Chinese are to conduct naval exercises with Iran on Dec. 27th. ,which has openly asked by Adm. Khanzadi for destroyers and subs, of the type Pak will get. The Iranian supremo Ayatollah Khamanei has viewed the budding relations as " strategic". We can now no longer outflank Pak via Iran and Chahbahar and thus will gravely endanger our ability to prop up the Kabul regime from falling to the Paki- Taliban axis.
If greater support for the IN in beefing up its strength , especially in subs is not forthcoming, we will have to face trouble in a most critical region of the IOR.

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby rajsunder » 12 Dec 2019 08:08

Philip wrote:The abandonment of Iran thanks to US pressure is costing us v.dearly.An Iranian - Paki rapproachment is in the works , with a military dimension and now the Chinese are to conduct naval exercises with Iran on Dec. 27th. ,which has openly asked by Adm. Khanzadi for destroyers and subs, of the type Pak will get. The Iranian supremo Ayatollah Khamanei has viewed the budding relations as " strategic". We can now no longer outflank Pak via Iran and Chahbahar and thus will gravely endanger our ability to prop up the Kabul regime from falling to the Paki- Taliban axis.
If greater support for the IN in beefing up its strength , especially in subs is not forthcoming, we will have to face trouble in a most critical region of the IOR.

I do not think that India should ever be under the assumption that any Muslim country would help India in containing pakistan.
If Iran was helpful, we could have completed the chabahar port and also connected Afghanistan by a train line.
Forget about pakistan, we still have never got support for kashmir issues from iran.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 12 Dec 2019 09:16

Iran is aka as Persia.Not an arab nation at all. A Shiite nation now bitterly opposed to Sunni Wahaabism of the Saudi- Paki type." My enemy's enemy is my firend". Mao's dictum still holds good.India has always had decent relations with Iran which has not promoted Islamic terror into India unlike the Saudis and Pakis.Great hopes bi-lateral were envisioned with the JV at Chahbahar but the Iranians were shocked at India's merk and shameful capitulation to US pressure over meagre oil imports.We could've reduced imports slightly which would've been enough, but like the famous statement about the Emergency " when we were merely asked to bend, why did we choose to kneel?"

We have now embraced the worst nation in the ME on human rights, the Saudis, brutal in their interpretation of Islam with regular beheadings, murder of a critical journalist in their consulate in Turkey, chopping him up into pieces, perpetrators of the war in Yemen affecting millions of civilians starving to death and responsible for sending millions upon millions of dollars into India to finance terror madrasas.By our asinine foreign policy running after a retreating US from the region where Russia now calls the shots and Iran has huge influence in predominantly Shiite Iraq, we have pushed old friend Russia closer to China and now another old friend Iran towards China and Pak!
More headaches for the IN, it can thank the MEA for it.

PS: Talk about misplaced priorities.Lusting after a 3rd. large carrier et al, the Chinese navy has 100 mine counter measure vessels ( MCMs), the IN? Zero!
Last edited by Philip on 12 Dec 2019 13:45, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21508
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chetak » 12 Dec 2019 09:49

rajsunder wrote:
Philip wrote:The abandonment of Iran thanks to US pressure is costing us v.dearly.An Iranian - Paki rapproachment is in the works , with a military dimension and now the Chinese are to conduct naval exercises with Iran on Dec. 27th. ,which has openly asked by Adm. Khanzadi for destroyers and subs, of the type Pak will get. The Iranian supremo Ayatollah Khamanei has viewed the budding relations as " strategic". We can now no longer outflank Pak via Iran and Chahbahar and thus will gravely endanger our ability to prop up the Kabul regime from falling to the Paki- Taliban axis.
If greater support for the IN in beefing up its strength , especially in subs is not forthcoming, we will have to face trouble in a most critical region of the IOR.

I do not think that India should ever be under the assumption that any Muslim country would help India in containing pakistan.
If Iran was helpful, we could have completed the chabahar port and also connected Afghanistan by a train line.
Forget about pakistan, we still have never got support for kashmir issues from iran.


the slimy iranians wanted Indian money and India to construct chabahar port, its infrastructure, rail and road links to the iranian hinerland, all for free.

shia though they may be, when push comes to shove, they will not ever side with kafirs against the greater ummah.

We have now learned this the hard way.

The congis will go back to kissing the persian ass, if they come back to power because the congi agenda is driven by the BIF as long as the eyetalians are in charge

alexis
BRFite
Posts: 462
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby alexis » 12 Dec 2019 13:39

chetak wrote:
the slimy iranians wanted Indian money and India to construct chabahar port, its infrastructure, rail and road links to the iranian hinerland, all for free.

shia though they may be, when push comes to shove, they will not ever side with kafirs against the greater ummah.

We have now learned this the hard way.

The congis will go back to kissing the persian ass, if they come back to power because the congi agenda is driven by the BIF as long as the eyetalians are in charge


While i dont agree with your assessment of Iranians as slimy, the current geo-politic situation means that we and Iran will be in different camps. Considering Turkey-Pak rapprochement, India will move closer to KSA, taking us away from Iran.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20450
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 12 Dec 2019 13:50

...and allowing the Chinese to jump in and park themselves in Iran apart from Gwadar/ Jiwani in place to sever the jugular of our energy supplies transiting the Gulf. The Saudis who can't even deal with Houthi/ Iranian drone attacks are truly inferior allies. They love to shoot from another's back and as the saying goes, " will fieroociously fight to the last...American"! Or in the future should we have to say " last Indian"?

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Karthik S » 12 Dec 2019 14:07

alexis wrote:
chetak wrote:
the slimy iranians wanted Indian money and India to construct chabahar port, its infrastructure, rail and road links to the iranian hinerland, all for free.

shia though they may be, when push comes to shove, they will not ever side with kafirs against the greater ummah.

We have now learned this the hard way.

The congis will go back to kissing the persian ass, if they come back to power because the congi agenda is driven by the BIF as long as the eyetalians are in charge


While i dont agree with your assessment of Iranians as slimy, the current geo-politic situation means that we and Iran will be in different camps. Considering Turkey-Pak rapprochement, India will move closer to KSA, taking us away from Iran.


Is turki-paki rapprochement is so dangerous to us that we need to move closer to KSA? I mean, it's good to maintain good relations with Iran, KSA etc on our terms, but not because of pakis allying with turki. We've dealt with pakis when they had direct support of USA, UK etc during past wars.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21508
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chetak » 12 Dec 2019 14:29

alexis wrote:
chetak wrote:
the slimy iranians wanted Indian money and India to construct chabahar port, its infrastructure, rail and road links to the iranian hinerland, all for free.

shia though they may be, when push comes to shove, they will not ever side with kafirs against the greater ummah.

We have now learned this the hard way.

The congis will go back to kissing the persian ass, if they come back to power because the congi agenda is driven by the BIF as long as the eyetalians are in charge


While i dont agree with your assessment of Iranians as slimy, the current geo-politic situation means that we and Iran will be in different camps. Considering Turkey-Pak rapprochement, India will move closer to KSA, taking us away from Iran.


I stand by my assessment of iran. Over the years, they have treated us with barely concealed contempt, hectoring and lecturing and pushing a largely one way weighted trade relationship and not allowing Indian investments. We may just have to write off chabahar as a bad investment solely due to iran's intransigence.

India is not moving closer to the KSA, its actually the other way around and that's not the same thing. There are various reasons for that.

re turkey-paki rapprochement: beggar pakis are sitting squarely in KSA'a lap, feeding off crumbs and leftovers from the saudi table and they are not going to be seen openly cosying up to iran/turkey and endangering their KSA applecart, here again, its the other way around.

Theoretically, India is "non aligned" so it makes good sense for iran as well as KSA to seek out India's favor and markets and purchasing power to line their pockets.

India has derisked her oil/gas supply chains by roping in players from america, russia and latin america and the ever ubiquitous spot market and high seas sales of oil.

The saudis have realized that India is a very safe place for their investments, given our size and scale and also our occasional independent streak in being able to buck international political pressures.

The IN's blue water reach, as well as India's long standing non hegemonistic stance is a big factor in the region.

One suspects that the Indian forces may well be their secret plan B, if the saudi/gelf royals are threatened

They never expected Modi though. :mrgreen:

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21508
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chetak » 12 Dec 2019 15:11

Philip wrote:...and allowing the Chinese to jump in and park themselves in Iran apart from Gwadar/ Jiwani in place to sever the jugular of our energy supplies transiting the Gulf. The Saudis who can't even deal with Houthi/ Iranian drone attacks are truly inferior allies. They love to shoot from another's back and as the saying goes, " will fieroociously fight to the last...American"! Or in the future should we have to say " last Indian"?


Philip saar,

the CPEC is in a bit of a mess these days with the hans slowing down their investments and the expected "benefits" not reaching the mango paki.

With the paki economy in the schitt house, the mango pakis might just come out on the streets, pushed and prodded by the jehadis

At this time, if the hans make a play for chabahar while going slow on the CPEC itself they just might push the niazi govt + bajwa combo over the edge and then again, the jehadis are also waiting.

the amerikis need niazi + bajwa for their afghanistan disengagement so trump may well have a big say in how events may unfold.

After the maldives fiasco, the hans won't want to burn their fingers once again and destabilize pakiland. Their gelf access is under threat.

If the pakis go for a toss, then Hambanthota is just not geared to take up the slack at this time, both politically and infrastructure wise.

xi and the han economy are also in the schitt house. xi's options are at best, limited.

by some reports, bajwa may have lost the support of his corps commanders and hence the judiciary has become emboldened enough to question niazi's three year extension given to bajwa and the court has now limited that to just six months extension.

There is discontent brewing because of high prices and the mango paki may not be too keen to support niazi any more as he appears not to have delivered on any one of his flamboyant electoral promises.

so, I'm guessing that chabahar port take over may not make the hans shortlist in the short to medium term

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby John » 12 Dec 2019 18:55

This is turning into geo political discussion can we move it to appropriate thread.

tsarkar wrote:Image

Revati radar on INS Jalashwa

6 ships with Revati - 4 Kamorta class, INS Rajput and INS Jalashwa

It’s sister Rohini radar deployed in Pune along with Akash missiles and posted in the Missile thread

tsarkar any word on whether other Rajput class DDG will be fitted with it?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2910
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 13 Dec 2019 13:00

John wrote:tsarkar any word on whether other Rajput class DDG will be fitted with it?


Image
Lets see. Rajput actually has her radar removed as seen during Navy Day.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, BALAR025, Google [Bot], Khalsa and 62 guests