Indian Naval Discussion

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 02 Sep 2009 21:26

Got some decent details of IN`s planning and dealing with other IOR navies in future.Will put all details together.Sounds like new chief is foreseing the future through the chanakyan philosophy.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Sep 2009 21:51

details of IN`s planning and dealing with other IOR navies

Looks like the Indian politicos have woken up?

IN cannot go it alone.

Interested in which of the IOR Navies.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 02 Sep 2009 21:53

Indian Navy Mulls Northrop Advanced Hawkeye

A U.S Navy representative, E-2 New Business Manager John Beaulieu, last week made an eight-hour presentation to the Indian navy on the E-2D after a request for more technical clarifications following a request for information last year.
<snip>
Northrop has been asked to present a shore-based version, as Indian naval aircraft would require ski-jump compatibility and not the conventional catapult-launched version. “It is a decision the Indian navy has to make,” Beaulieu noted.
<snip>
Gorshkov, however, is capable of deploying both vertical-takeoff-or-landing and catapult-launched aircraft. This has led the Indian navy to look at a redesign for its future ships.

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 03 Sep 2009 00:41

THe universal VLS for 'BrahMos' and 'Club'have been offered.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 03 Sep 2009 03:55

I was talking today to a colleague who was previously a nuclear submariner with the USN. he was in charge of the Nuclear propulsion systems on board a Los Angeles class SSN. it can apparently can super dreary at times..spoke of the guy at the fire control screen looking at it for 6 hours a day, day in and out, for 110 days and they didn't make a single contact !

Most interestingl was what he said when I mentioned the Chinese submarine that surfaced close to a US carrier. He spoke about the futility of defending aircraft carriers from submarines, especially newer generation diesel electric subs, which are very quiet. he recalled an exercise with Argentinian U-209s (similar to the IN's) and said that during a series of exercises where it simulated the enemy sub, they penetrated the outer and inner defences of the aircraft carrier, getting as close as 0.5 miles to the aircraft carrier ! and apparently, this wasn't just one off- they did it several times.

Left me dumbfounded as to how the maha-stupid politicians in India let the HDW line at Mazagaon go cold when it is so capable and after so much had been spent on getting the required knowhow. And as some other Admiral mentioned earlier in a report on the INS Arihant, it was the Germans who were very liberal in sharing knowledge related to submarine development. I wonder how much pressure the IN must've put on the GoI, or did the then Admiral simply kowtow to political diktats ? We know what George Fernandes did to Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat..

the IN will really need to invest most heavily in its ASW warfare ships and helis. when a US carrier battlegroup is so vulnerable, an IN carrier battlegroup would be just as if not more vulnerable, to Agosta 90Bs or the PN's next U-214 line of subs.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2009 08:46

John wrote:IMO IN won't be able to afford to build so many Scorpene's, if basic version with no AIP costs about 700 million one can only imagine how much AIP and enlarged version will be.

And do you think IN will be able to afford Scorpene , Amur and a 3rd new type ?
If IN add AIP and all the ding dong it needs the Amur will as costly , but its not the high initial cost that will pinch IN very badly , but the long term implication of operating 2- 3 types of modern SSK.

If you buy one design and expand on it in block upgrade , it will turn out to be least expensive option initial cost and operating/logistics cost.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 03 Sep 2009 08:57

High time the Indian armed forces moved towards standardizing equipment. The current pot-pourri must be a logistical nightmare.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 03 Sep 2009 10:08

could we make an extended kilo (or scorpene for that matter), fit in a small nuclear reactor like the sarov, fit in a vls and build our own small SSGN.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Sep 2009 10:55

soumik wrote:could we make an extended kilo (or scorpene for that matter), fit in a small nuclear reactor like the sarov, fit in a vls and build our own small SSGN.

Not very easy to scale up an existing diesel design.

The increased endurance of the nuke as well as the accommodation of the missiles / weapons will result in a needlessly complicated design in the upscaling. Every design solution in the upscaling may not have a optimized resolution befitting a nuke.

Better to start from scratch and do a good job.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Sep 2009 13:08

Left me dumbfounded as to how the maha-stupid politicians in India let the HDW line at Mazagaon go cold when it is so capable and after so much had been spent on getting the required knowhow. And as some other Admiral mentioned earlier in a report on the INS Arihant, it was the Germans who were very liberal in sharing knowledge related to submarine development. I wonder how much pressure the IN must've put on the GoI, or did the then Admiral simply kowtow to political diktats ? We know what George Fernandes did to Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat..

carriers are getting vulnerable no doubt -some times wonder whether it is worth having and that too small ones like virat - before gorky gets in we need to boost our sub force significantly or we have problem in hand . Even an akula may not be enough in a tricky situation

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Sep 2009 13:30

assuming one goes to the cost and expense of putting in a new reactor section, ballast tanks, hydrodynamic retests etc, the SSKs storage space for food and supplies will also need expanding to support 90-120 day patrols. the SSK hull diameter is not sized for that and you simply cannot go on increasing its length without affecting the performance significantly.

its better to go with a dedicated from-scratch SSN design.

ourcourse if we can obtain Siemens AIP system, we should use that for domestic SSK line..maybe draft in HDW
as the design consultant.

Ranvijay · Post by **Ranvijay** » 03 Sep 2009 14:11

To detect and attack a carrier, you have to first find it!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Sep 2009 14:22

follow the F-18s back to their homebase

if you are not within F-18 range, the carrier is no immediate threat to your landmass.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Sep 2009 14:29

ocean sat 2 will come in handy i guess along with other remote sensing birds -the carrier group cannot move that far in 90 minutes and then a flight of 4 su-30s armed with brahmos - bye bye carrier

Ranvijay · Post by **Ranvijay** » 03 Sep 2009 15:50

follow the F-18s back to their homebase

Weren't we discussing how SSK's could be a major threat to a carrier group?

.

Or you plan to follow the F-18 with a submarine ?

ocean sat 2 will come in handy i guess along with other remote sensing birds

You'd still need to get an asset to know the lat/long co-ordinates of the Carrier. Then theres the fact that you cant just order satellite passes based on hints and guesses, plus orbit changing maneuvers will lead to fuel depletion.

Following a carrier is a hard job. To sneak up behind one, an SSK will need to move slow (engines make too much noise at full), know an approximate position of the carrier, its course, approximate speed and then the nav dude on board will have to plot an approximate course to somehow maneuver themselves into a position to get a firing solution on the carrier, while simultaenously evading the ASW assets of the group, enemy satellites and snooping planes. Then the awesome fact that to sink a damn carrier you'd need to get in a good number of torpedos, face it folks, its not made of wood and 50,000 tonnes is hard to sink. Imagine what would happen if you go up against a Nimitz

.

Btw, the story of 4 SU-30's taking out a carrier is theoretically possible though. Now if only we can get an air launched version of the Brahmos.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Sep 2009 16:18

Following a carrier is a hard job. To sneak up behind one, an SSK will need to move slow (engines make too much noise at full), know an approximate position of the carrier, its course, approximate speed and then the nav dude on board will have to plot an approximate course to somehow maneuver themselves into a position to get a firing solution on the carrier, while simultaenously evading the ASW assets of the group, enemy satellites and snooping planes. Then the awesome fact that to sink a damn carrier you'd need to get in a good number of torpedos, face it folks, its not made of wood and 50,000 tonnes is hard to sink. Imagine what would happen if you go up against a Nimitz .

It was during early cold war days -now the situation is different

To start with the geo sats over indian ocean can lock on to the electronic emissions of not just the carrier but its escorts and the aircraft flying in and out
you cannot operate a carrier with total radio silence - it is simple too risky -you cannot cut out the air toship chatter or shut off the data links that operate always

you may not understand it because of encryption but can locate all the same the source -then make a fly past with any of the remote sensing sats in the neighborhood

the attack birds should be in air by then - and near the location - get precise co ordinates then sukhois close in and launch from multiple direction simultaneously

Brahmos will do the rest for sure

this in fact is the primary purpose of sukhoi-brahmos combination -sink a carrier group if required

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Sep 2009 16:22

in fact russian bears did it routinely all through the cold war and even now -it was deadly cat and mouse game - f14 S used to intercept and escort them out -what if they were not Tu-95 but sU-30 ??SO sU33 s carried yakhont anti ship missiles but never approached a carrier group -it was the real thing -no game US knew it too well

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 03 Sep 2009 16:47

Awww and the carrier and all its investments have no idea of this brilliant Tom clancy attack planned by SHankarosky

But then again at least you are consistent in your scenarios \fantasies

John · Post by **John** » 03 Sep 2009 17:17

Shankar wrote:in fact russian bears did it routinely all through the cold war and even now -it was deadly cat and mouse game - f14 S used to intercept and escort them out -what if they were not Tu-95 but sU-30 ??SO sU33 s carried yakhont anti ship missiles but never approached a carrier group -it was the real thing -no game US knew it too well

Air launched Yakhont was never developed, as for Su-33 they cannot carry any standoff weapons so USN was not too worried about them.

As for ASW the RBU-6000 should provide some defense against torpedoes, RPK-8 can intercept torpedoes upto 2.7 miles away provided they can be detected. Groshkov should be installed with some hard kill torpedo weapon.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 03 Sep 2009 17:22

Surya wrote:Awww and the carrier and all its investments have no idea of this brilliant Tom clancy attack planned by SHankarosky

Certainly they have idea and that is why there is great debate on the feasibility of Aircraft carriers owing to increased recce capabilities, lethal and accurate new gen supersonic / hypersonic anti ship missiles in all forms (Sub launched / Surface ship / Shores / Aircraft)

With stealth become available, all those protective screens have degraded. Consider PAK - FA attacking a CBG.. by the time surface search radar of CBG detects the incoming treat (not to mention threat fill be flying low), CBG will already be under firing range of LR cruise missiles flying at super sonic speed

Not to mention the threat from Sub.... it has become a daily routine news that so and so sub surfaced within the firing range of carrier.....

To sum, while it is not very easy to attack CBG, a carefully planned operation will endanger CBG

Probably this is one reason why America has declared attack on CBG will be construed as nuclear attack on USA.

-Nitin

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Sep 2009 18:10

The question that must exercise us is what is the role that the new subs should play in the overall context of the IN's tasks?

The U-209s were supposed to be specifically hunter-killers ranged against Pak's Agostas and daphnes.The Kilos were multi-role.with an emphasis on long range and blue-water ops.Our ATV is for strategic deterrent and the Akulas arriving for training N-sub crews and for global patrols,particularly to deal with any Chinese n-sub intruders.Our Kilos have been upgraded to carry versions of Klub missiles for anti-ship and land attack roles also.However,with the advent of Brahmos a huge force multiplier is available.There is no equal to it in any navy.Therfore,the enxt line of convntional subs should carry Brahmos and since it was co-developed with Russia,best aboard a sub of Russian origin.The Rubin Amuir design is there.Brahmos is too large for the German U-boats and the Scorpene.In addition the Scorpene's cost is so high that I've given details of how by the most pro-builder generous prices,we could acquire at least half a dozen Akulas for the price of the Scorpene deal! Which boat would one want?!

If we build the 6 Scorpenes,upgrade and/or acquire more U-boats,plus the second line of conventional AIP subs,we would both save money and have suufficint numbers with which to deal with our threats from both flanks.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 03 Sep 2009 18:48

NRao wrote:
details of IN`s planning and dealing with other IOR navies
Looks like the Indian politicos have woken up?

IN cannot go it alone.

Interested in which of the IOR Navies.

Mail me at
username at googlesssss dat com

John · Post by **John** » 03 Sep 2009 19:06

Philip,
Scorpene is about the same size of Amur, however it is doubtful Russians or even France for that matter will cooperate with modifying Scorpene to accommodate Brahmos.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 03 Sep 2009 20:33

chetak wrote:
soumik wrote:could we make an extended kilo (or scorpene for that matter), fit in a small nuclear reactor like the sarov, fit in a vls and build our own small SSGN.

Not very easy to scale up an existing diesel design.

The increased endurance of the nuke as well as the accommodation of the missiles / weapons will result in a needlessly complicated design in the upscaling. Every design solution in the upscaling may not have a optimized resolution befitting a nuke.

Better to start from scratch and do a good job.

I believe the russians have already made a nuclear -diesel hybrid, i found this link in a post by igorr in the international naval thread,maybe india could acquire this knowledge from the russians and use it

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2009/08/ ... arine.html

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 03 Sep 2009 21:15

Russia, India to sign new deal on Admiral Gorshkov overhaul

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 03 Sep 2009 22:07

NRao wrote:
details of IN`s planning and dealing with other IOR navies
Looks like the Indian politicos have woken up?

IN cannot go it alone.

Interested in which of the IOR Navies.

Probably ME navies, since UAE is now head. I expect East asians to join in too. But ME navies joining is part of a long term cunning yindu plan of protecting certain allies and their shipping from Piracy, in exchange for capital and oil. Refer to security agreements with GCC nations. Yindu nuclear umbrella is also talked about for 2 nations. GCC defence and intelwallahs have made many visits to Dilli since 2007.

JaladiPC, correct?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 03 Sep 2009 22:28

nikhil

If there is one thing the Americans do it is visualise all possible things that can be hurled at their CBGs.

Whether buying supersonic missles from Ukraine or getting diesel subs from Sweden - they spend a good deal of time on this.

Shankars little fantasy is nonsense - because he looks at 1 CBG being penetrated and hit and that too with hilarious assumptions of where a Carrier group can move in 90 mins and how that relates to mission planning.

Reality is that you have to look beyond the 1 CBG - and ALSO think the consequences if you do manage to sink a CBG what they will throw at you next.
And thats where the fun starts -

Also note by the same fantasy - our Gorshkov is pretty much toast because we do not even have the level of defence the US CBGs have.

Having said all this - there are options and tactics to go after the CBGs if we are being attacked but there will be a big cost and not a cakewalk.

Take the time and talk to IAF aircrews who fly missions (albeit without Brahmos for now) against our own Naval ships. Ask how many come back 'alive'.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 04 Sep 2009 00:11

Ranvijay wrote:To detect and attack a carrier, you have to first find it!

its not that hard. the older generation carriers were noisier than current generation ones, and they are escorted by a number of other ships. the The IN's carrier battle group usually consists of two destroyers (usually of the P-15 Delhi Class, previously Kashins were used) and two or more frigates, (usually a combination of P-16 Brahmaputra and Krivak III or Talwar class) and one support ship, with one submarine lurking nearby.

consider how disproportionate PN's ASW and ELINT assets (P-3Cs and Atlantiques) and its submarine fleet are compared to its surface fleet. their whole doctrine hinges on finding and attacking the carrier.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 04 Sep 2009 00:26

Kartik wrote:
Ranvijay wrote:To detect and attack a carrier, you have to first find it!
its not that hard. the older generation carriers were noisier than current generation ones, and they are escorted by a number of other ships. the The IN's carrier battle group usually consists of two destroyers (usually of the P-15 Delhi Class, previously Kashins were used) and two or more frigates, (usually a combination of P-16 Brahmaputra and Krivak III or Talwar class) and one support ship, with one submarine lurking nearby.

consider how disproportionate PN's ASW and ELINT assets (P-3Cs and Atlantiques) and its submarine fleet are compared to its surface fleet. their whole doctrine hinges on finding and attacking the carrier.

Plus didn't the Americans say that the Indian carrier could be spotted for miles based on the smoke rising from it's chimney burning fuel oil

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 04 Sep 2009 00:36

Raveen wrote: quote="Kartik" quote="Ranvijay"To detect and attack a carrier, you have to first find it!

its not that hard. the older generation carriers were noisier than current generation ones, and they are escorted by a number of other ships. the The IN's carrier battle group usually consists of two destroyers (usually of the P-15 Delhi Class, previously Kashins were used) and two or more frigates, (usually a combination of P-16 Brahmaputra and Krivak III or Talwar class) and one support ship, with one submarine lurking nearby.

consider how disproportionate PN's ASW and ELINT assets (P-3Cs and Atlantiques) and its submarine fleet are compared to its surface fleet. their whole doctrine hinges on finding and attacking the carrier.

Plus didn't the Americans say that the Indian carrier could be spotted for miles based on the smoke stack rising from it's chimneys burning fuel oil

Indian carriers have been burning diesel for a very long time now.

The days of fuel oil are long gone.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 04 Sep 2009 00:40

chetak wrote:
Raveen wrote: quote="Kartik" quote="Ranvijay"To detect and attack a carrier, you have to first find it!

its not that hard. the older generation carriers were noisier than current generation ones, and they are escorted by a number of other ships. the The IN's carrier battle group usually consists of two destroyers (usually of the P-15 Delhi Class, previously Kashins were used) and two or more frigates, (usually a combination of P-16 Brahmaputra and Krivak III or Talwar class) and one support ship, with one submarine lurking nearby.

consider how disproportionate PN's ASW and ELINT assets (P-3Cs and Atlantiques) and its submarine fleet are compared to its surface fleet. their whole doctrine hinges on finding and attacking the carrier.

Plus didn't the Americans say that the Indian carrier could be spotted for miles based on the smoke stack rising from it's chimneys burning fuel oil

Indian carriers have been burning diesel for a very long time now.

The days of fuel oil are long gone.

Sorry, diesel smoke in that case...I know they made that comment after the joint naval excercise...it was even mentioned on BR

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 04 Sep 2009 12:24

Another paper on India's ability to be a power in the pacific. There were a couple of papers recently one by Walter Ladwig and one by Iskander Rehman and now this one C Raja Mohan.

Is India an East Asian Power?

Explaining New Delhi's Security Politics in the Western Pacific
This article examines the development of India's 'look-east' policy since 1990. It argues that India will remain a valuable partner for many Asian states, provided the high economic growth sustains and the blue water navy continues to expand. Subsequently, the paper discusses India's naval diplomacy, security cooperation and India's place in the Asian balance of power. The author concludes that pragmatic cooperation instead of ideological posturing will render India a strategic factor in Pacific Asia.

http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Libr ... &id=104768

The full pdf is available

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 04 Sep 2009 12:35

>>>Sorry, diesel smoke in that case...I know they made that comment after the joint naval excercise...it was even mentioned on BR

Do the carriers go alone? if not, what do the escort ships burn to move ahead?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 04 Sep 2009 14:02

geeth wrote:>>>Sorry, diesel smoke in that case...I know they made that comment after the joint naval excercise...it was even mentioned on BR

Do the carriers go alone? if not, what do the escort ships burn to move ahead?

All ships in the IN burn LSHS diesel onlee.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 04 Sep 2009 17:36

MOD 2008-09 Annual Report download
http://mod.nic.in/reports/AR-eng-2009.pdf

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Sep 2009 18:56

Indian Navy crew to join Russian sub sea trials in Far East

VLADIVOSTOK, September 4 (RIA Novosti) - A crew of Indian submariners will take part in sea trials of a Russian nuclear submarine in mid-September, a source involved in the trials said on Friday.

The submarine is to be leased to the Indian Navy by the end of 2009 under the name INS Chakra.

The source said the Indian submariners would need to undergo a course of training together with Russian specialists and servicemen.

They will subsequently operate on their own under the supervision of Russian instructors.

kaangeya · Post by **kaangeya** » 05 Sep 2009 00:00

Following a carrier is a hard job. To sneak up behind one, an SSK will need to move slow (engines make too much noise at full), know an approximate position of the carrier, its course, approximate speed and then the nav dude on board will have to plot an approximate course to somehow maneuver themselves into a position to get a firing solution on the carrier, while simultaenously evading the ASW assets of the group, enemy satellites and snooping planes. Then the awesome fact that to sink a damn carrier you'd need to get in a good number of torpedos, face it folks, its not made of wood and 50,000 tonnes is hard to sink. Imagine what would happen if you go up against a Nimitz

No one has ever assembled anything like a complete package of resources required to dynamically track a CBG, excepting the Russians. Starting from keeping track of CNV docking and sailing, deployments, exercising etc. That XYZ's submarine sneaked thru a CBG cordon means nothing more than the fact that DE submarines are very quiet. The endurance required to catch a CBG are beyond the means of DE sub. And even if the DE sub does launch it cannot launch a large enough salvo to sink a CVN and survive. Of course it can carry nuclear torpedoes and be on a suicide mission or simply be one huge nuclear device in itself on a suicide mission. That's stretching it very far. I don't think any rogue nation would want to go that far, because if it did it would cease to exist in the retaliation that would follow. While rogue nations may house an endless number of suicide freaks, their leaders as a rule love life.

Russian anti carrier tactics allegedly call for long range - 600 km+ nuclear/conventional tipped missiles. Here's an excerpt from a very good article on anti-CVN tactic development in the Soviet Navy. To quote the author,

Soviet planners determined that approaching a US carrier group closer than 100 km was suicide for a submarine, so a minimum range requirement of 120 km was set.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199 ... ssian.html

They also developed a 200-km range sonar

Talking about DE subs sneaking thru a CBG escort curtain and crying

is about as useful as the first and only line of that classic recipe for duck soup. "First go out and catch a duck"

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Sep 2009 05:17

Granit missile has 500km range and a Oscar submarine could unleash a couple dozen in a few minutes. The salvos can network and a high flying missile can use its own radar to scout for the fleet and pass on data to its low flying mates. they are said to even allocate targets among themselves perhaps using a weighing formula based on size of ship. like 10 for a CVN, 2 for a DDG, 1 for a FFG, 3 for a vital tanker...

if a CBG can be located within strike range, Oscar2 is best weapon - no need to fight past a swarm of E2, F18 and SM-2, just make sure a couple SSNs can protect the Oscar before it fires a full salvo and escapes.

John · Post by **John** » 05 Sep 2009 06:00

Well Granit are quite large and fly barely over Mach 1 @ high altitude so they should be vulnerable to SM-2ERs. Which was designed mainly to specifically counter maritime strike aircraft and large anti shipping missiles.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 05 Sep 2009 20:51

Surya wrote:nikhil

If there is one thing the Americans do it is visualise all possible things that can be hurled at their CBGs.

Whether buying supersonic missles from Ukraine or getting diesel subs from Sweden - they spend a good deal of time on this.

Shankars little fantasy is nonsense - because he looks at 1 CBG being penetrated and hit and that too with hilarious assumptions of where a Carrier group can move in 90 mins and how that relates to mission planning.

Reality is that you have to look beyond the 1 CBG - and ALSO think the consequences if you do manage to sink a CBG what they will throw at you next.
And thats where the fun starts -

Also note by the same fantasy - our Gorshkov is pretty much toast because we do not even have the level of defence the US CBGs have.

Having said all this - there are options and tactics to go after the CBGs if we are being attacked but there will be a big cost and not a cakewalk.

Take the time and talk to IAF aircrews who fly missions (albeit without Brahmos for now) against our own Naval ships. Ask how many come back 'alive'.

Not Nikhil, Nitin here...

No body is planning to sink USN CBG. The only point i was trying to put is CBG can be hit and it is very wrong assumption that they are very formidable.

Also, if by any chance history repeat itself and USN sends it Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carrier along with other ships in CBG against India, who will worry of what happens next? The first thing that will come to mind is how to sink the bloody carrier.

Meanwhile our CBG, as u rightly said, don't have adequate defense. All the accompanying destroyers / frigates are not equipped for self defense of it own particularly from air. It is high time we should start building some Air defense asset in sizable qty and sub surface asset, again in bulk to make strike groups far more safer

-Nitin