please forward it to me too atStan_Savljevic wrote:Please post your email address, i will send you the pdf.csharma wrote:Can someone get hold of this paper?
chirag dot s dot 08 at geemail dot com
please forward it to me too atStan_Savljevic wrote:Please post your email address, i will send you the pdf.csharma wrote:Can someone get hold of this paper?
I would be shit scared and damn stupid to send my A/C without any ASW. I would have a GOOD ASW cover with shipboard helicopters and shore based P 8I.aditp wrote:Lord Admiral Sir, do tell us how you plan to counter the Agostas creeping in at 3knots (or lesser) at 150 mts depth toward your high chair just 500 kms from Puke ports
The ocean is a huge place sir, sure with the new fancy maritime surveillance planes theres a better chance of finding a CBG but its still not childs play. Unless of course you use a constellation of satellites flying overhead with Aesa radars and death ray Brahmos missiles to destroy the whole Carrier battle group with only one sukhoi passing target co-ords through a 12982382gbit secure and faultless datalink to another sukhoi carrying 8 brahmos missiles on its wingtips.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.
Which is why they might take the carrier but they'll still lose the war. Now I agree, losing a carrier is a big deal, but winning the war would probably matter more. The Carrier could park itself off anywhere in the Indian ocean with guaranteed safety from its escorts, its own air wing and ground based MKI's from the P-3C's and Atlantiques which in my opinion, probably get tracked the second they're in the air by ground stations on our wester borders(forget the Phalcon which will be in service by then).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.
I agree.kaangeya - No one has ever assembled anything like a complete package of resources required to dynamically track a CBG, excepting the Russians.
Got it.Stan_Savljevic wrote:Please post your email address, i will send you the pdf.csharma wrote:Can someone get hold of this paper?
csharma, sent. Chirag, email bouncing. can you email standuude AT yahoochiru wrote: please forward it to me
aditp wrote:Lord Admiral Sir, do tell us how you plan to counter the Agostas creeping in at 3knots (or lesser) at 150 mts depth toward your high chair just 500 kms from Puke ports
The agosta will take 2-4 days to reach the carrier when it is creeping at 3kts. Wonder whether the carrier will sit still & idle waiting for the agosta to catch up. Also 500km from coast does not mean 500km from agosta base, it could be say 700km from agosta and the ship may change position, such that agosta may have to travel say 1000km in 4-10 days and agosta may meet Indian subs, ships, sonars, MPAs on way assuming it has range to travel 1000km on AIP or batteriesaditp wrote:Lord Admiral Sir, do tell us how you plan to counter the Agostas creeping in at 3knots (or lesser) at 150 mts depth toward your high chair just 500 kms from Puke ports
They will most likely be snorkeling for good portion of distance at 10-12 knots before diving and running on batteries. Also keep in mind agosta 90B cost more than any vessel in IN arsenal so they can't risk it any engagement where it has chance to be detected.Raj Malhotra wrote:The agosta will take 2-4 days to reach the carrier when it is creeping at 3kts
Stan, can you please send it to sit dot sourav at gmail dot com ...Stan_Savljevic wrote:Please post your email address, i will send you the pdf.csharma wrote:Can someone get hold of this paper?
Indian Coast Guard places trust in MTU engines from Tognum
*MTU Series 2000 and 4000 engines to be main propulsion units for new Indian Coast Guard craft
*Specifications include MTU Callosum and Blueline automation systems for propulsion control and ship monitoring
*Tognum subsidiary MTU Asia secures contract worth 32.5 million euro
Friedrichshafen/Singapore, 10 September 2009.
The Engines Division of propulsion and power specialist Tognum has received two orders for the supply of MTU engines and automation systems for 23 new ships for the Indian Coast Guard. The total value of the contracts is 32.5 million euro. The engines are to be delivered between the end of 2009 and the end of 2011.
“These contracts secured by MTU Asia demonstrate once again that business in the government vessels sector is a very steady, strong and essential component of our overall portfolio. It is also especially important in economically difficult times“, states Rainer Breidenbach, Tognum COO with responsibility for the Engines Division.
Eight new Inshore Patrol Vessels are to be powered by triple Type 16V 4000 M90 engines with an output of 2,720 kW (3,648 bhp) each. In combination with waterjets, they will propel the vessel at speeds up to 35 knots. The systems to be supplied for the 48-meter patrol vessels include the MTU Callosum ship automation system with an integrated solution for monitoring all ship’s services that also incorporates fire detection and extinguishing systems. The reliable, easy-to-maintain and low fuel consumption engines enable the patrol vessels to remain at sea for a prolong period of time without having to return to base to replenish supplies.
The Tognum Group is also supplying 30 MTU Type 16V 2000 M92 engines each capable of 1,630 kW (2,186 bhp) for 15 Interceptor Boats in the 26-meter class. They will provide the boat with a top speed of 35 knots. Engine control and system monitoring will be performed by the MTU Blueline automation system.
The Series 4000 engines will be delivered as assembly kits to the licensed producer in India, Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers (GRSE) in Kolkata, for local assembly and testing. Meanwhile, the Series 2000 units will be sent to the Bharati shipyard in Mumbai.
The construction of the new ships is part of an expansion of the Indian Coast Guard. The varied duties of the Indian Coast Guard are fishery protection, combating smuggling and terrorism, prevention of illegal immigration, search and rescue operations as well as marine environment protection.
Tognum subsidiary MTU Asia has already sold more than 100 Type 16V 4000 M90 engines to the Indian Coast Guard and Navy in recent years. They are highly valued for their proven reliability, outstanding power-to-weight ratio and also the well-established MTU service network in India.
Press Release
Can you send it to me on kersikdotiwalla at redifmail do com ?Stan_Savljevic wrote:Please post your email address, i will send you the pdf.csharma wrote:Can someone get hold of this paper?
The Agostas would be in touch with their home base / Naval HQ. If our Ajanta & Ellora systems are that good they should be able to idntify and monitor any radio signal form the Agosta. Do nit forget are pretty looking Dorniers of IW squadron.Raj Malhotra wrote:The agosta will take 2-4 days to reach the carrier when it is creeping at 3kts. Wonder whether the carrier will sit still & idle waiting for the agosta to catch up. Also 500km from coast does not mean 500km from agosta base, it could be say 700km from agosta and the ship may change position, such that agosta may have to travel say 1000km in 4-10 days and agosta may meet Indian subs, ships, sonars, MPAs on way assuming it has range to travel 1000km on AIP or batteriesaditp wrote:Lord Admiral Sir, do tell us how you plan to counter the Agostas creeping in at 3knots (or lesser) at 150 mts depth toward your high chair just 500 kms from Puke ports
John wrote:They will most likely be snorkeling for good portion of distance at 10-12 knots before diving and running on batteries. Also keep in mind agosta 90B cost more than any vessel in IN arsenal so they can't risk it any engagement where it has chance to be detected.Raj Malhotra wrote:The agosta will take 2-4 days to reach the carrier when it is creeping at 3kts
It can be argued that India would consider a CBG as its own territory and a nuclear attack on a CBG is akin to a nuclear attack on Indian territory, hence a full blown war.Certainly is not striking main land India and will be an acceptable damage politically to handle ?
I would expect a pay back.Even a loss of single Carrier will be a big physiological blow to IN and a great moral booster to PN even if it looses the submarine during such action.
Try plugging in a high wattage appliance under water and please post results of experiment...if you do post...the idea may be worth investigating furtherkmkraoind wrote:I have a dumb question, just as air fueling system, is not possible to create an underwater charging cable system. Where a diesel based submarine comes to one of ship and gets hooked to a power cable and recharges its batteries and again disappear in sea.
The situation will be extremely useful in CBGs, where the silent diesel hunter killer submarine can recharge its batteries endlessly without getting coming up to open sea to run its motor to recharge its batteries.
Probably so, but to the best of my limited knowledge I don't know of one way either the ship or the sub could avoid being a sitting (floating in this case) duckjaladipc wrote: By the way there are many ways to re-charge underwater.And its highly feasible.
Did you read that whole page?govardhanks wrote:Its a question
" Do we have Fleet oilers? that replenishes other ships with food,ammo and other necessities while at sea. ".
I searched Indian navy web-
http://www.indiannavy.nic.in/ships.htm
not listed here can anybody please answer me...
Fleet Tankers – Jyoti, Aditya, Shakti
Ok sir i got it thankskrishnan wrote: Did you read that whole page?Fleet Tankers – Jyoti, Aditya, Shakti
Do you think the subs are safe if they have to surface for recharging the batteries? And when charging with this "hypothetical" mechanism you criticize, why would it shut down SONAR and other warning mechanisms? And when danger is detected, do you think it would take hours to breakoff contact?Raveen wrote: Probably so, but to the best of my limited knowledge I don't know of one way either the ship or the sub could avoid being a sitting (floating in this case) duck
This seems very do able. But that would reveal the location of the sub, something which is not done.kmkraoind wrote:I have a dumb question, just as air fueling system, is not possible to create an underwater charging cable system. Where a diesel based submarine comes to one of ship and gets hooked to a power cable and recharges its batteries and again disappear in sea.
The situation will be extremely useful in CBGs, where the silent diesel hunter killer submarine can recharge its batteries endlessly without getting coming up to open sea to run its motor to recharge its batteries.
Gorky Migs will provide air cover to Ships (& subs being hunted by MPAs) and these ships / subs will go forward and fire clubs + brahmos with the aid of UAVs.Y. Kanan wrote:While the Gorshkov can dramatically increase its odds of survival by staying 500-800 miles from the Pakistani coast (assuming it's also protected by ASW helos and screening ships), this effectively cancels out most of its combat power. The Migs would be severely limited in what they can hit at that distance. Frankly they'd be better off relocating the Mig-29's and helicopters to airbases in Gujarat, where they could at least be used effectively. Which gets back to my original point about the Gorshkov being too lightly defended to be used in combat.
That $3 billion would have been more effectively spent on other things, assets that can actually be used in wartime (IMHO).
NRao wrote:India pays USD 102 million to speed up refit of Gorshkov
The issue came up in the delegation level talks between President Pratibha Devisingh Patil and her Soviet counterpart on September 3, during her first state visit to the country.
Kumar, please read what I wrote and point out where I "wrote off" anything...neither you nor I are in any capacity to write anything offa_kumar wrote:Do you think the subs are safe if they have to surface for recharging the batteries? And when charging with this "hypothetical" mechanism you criticize, why would it shut down SONAR and other warning mechanisms? And when danger is detected, do you think it would take hours to breakoff contact?Raveen wrote: Probably so, but to the best of my limited knowledge I don't know of one way either the ship or the sub could avoid being a sitting (floating in this case) duck
This itch to writeoff ideas just because one doen'st know how to use them or make them successful needs to be overcome!! If the idea is worth it, one has to find ways and strategies to work around its limitations.
Y. Kanan wrote:While the Gorshkov can dramatically increase its odds of survival by staying 500-800 miles from the Pakistani coast (assuming it's also protected by ASW helos and screening ships), this effectively cancels out most of its combat power. The Migs would be severely limited in what they can hit at that distance. Frankly they'd be better off relocating the Mig-29's and helicopters to airbases in Gujarat, where they could at least be used effectively. Which gets back to my original point about the Gorshkov being too lightly defended to be used in combat.
That $3 billion would have been more effectively spent on other things, assets that can actually be used in wartime (IMHO).