Respective manufacturer sites, not included in igorr's blog:Igorr wrote:Have posted in my blog a short review of the Russian naval propulsion systems.
NRao wrote:US clears Hawkeye E-2D aircraft for India
and it is obvious that the next two will be nuke propelled ,no matter what whether we get E-2D or not.periodIndia Strategic quotes unnamed Indian officials as saying that the technology onboard the Hawkeye E-2D is "very tempting" and that although neither the Gorshkov aircraft carrier which India is buying from Russia nor India's first aircraft carrier indigenously being built would be able to accommodate this aircraft, India's future aircraft carriers could be a little bigger.
"By the time this aircraft comes, and by the time the Indian Navy gets used to it from initial shore-based operations, plans for two more aircraft carriers could be amended to house this system."
Rahul M wrote:many items have been 'cleared' in the past but not been ordered.
is the IN actually interested in this item ?
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=4237India Struggles to Keep Navy Afloat
Siddharth Srivastava | Bio | 01 Sep 2009
World Politics Review
NEW DELHI -- India's defense procurement and modernization processes are infamously slow, and mired in red tape, corruption, and lack of long-term strategic planning. One prominent result has been the country's unsuccessful quest to either procure aircraft carriers internationally or build them at home.
The delays have forced India to refit its sole aircraft carrier -- the 50-year-old INS Viraat, which according to earlier plans should have been junked by now -- to operate for five more years, by which time India hopes to have procured more.
The irony is that, over time, Viraat's air fleet has also been substantially depleted due to accidents, which makes the ship essentially a "toothless tiger," as an anonymous army official was recently quoted as saying. In the 1980s, the Indian navy inducted roughly 30 British Sea Harriers for the 28,000-ton Viraat. More than half have been lost to crashes, with the latest going down in August in Goa, killing the pilot and resulting in the grounding of the jets pending an inquiry.
Viraat, a Centaur-class aircraft carrier, was originally commissioned in the British Royal Navy as HMS Hermes in 1959. The Indian navy acquired the platform in 1987.
Sources say that the vessel's 18-month refitting schedule would probably have taken even more time had it not been for the November Mumbai terror attacks, in which militants used a sea route from Pakistan. Since the 40,000-ton carrier being built at Cochin Shipyard will not be ready before 2015-2016 due to years of political and bureaucratic indifference, the need to keep Viraat operational became more urgent.
Despite India's efforts to hasten the procurement of the refurbished 44,570-ton Admiral Gorshkov from Russia, that ship -- currently undergoing a refit at the Sevmash Shipyard in North Russia -- will only be available by 2013, assuming existing differences are sorted out. India and Russia have yet to work out the final cost of the Gorshkov's refit, with Moscow wanting nearly $3 billion, while India hopes to spend a little more than $2 billion.
Indian navy commanders have long tried to impress the political leadership about India's need for at least three aircraft carriers to secure strategic interests that stretch from Africa's eastern coast to the Malacca Strait, in order to assure that two remain active -- one each for the eastern and western seaboards -- even if the third must be refitted and upgraded..
A growing rivalry has emerged between India and China to control the waters of the Indian Ocean. China has spoken of developing three ocean-going fleets, to patrol the areas of Japan and Korea, the western Pacific, and the Malacca Strait and Indian Ocean region.
On paper, at least, manning the seas is a crucial element in India's ongoing defense modernization exercise, estimated at over $100 billion. The Indian Navy is looking to produce at least 25 submarines valued at $20 billion to meet challenges across the Indian Ocean. The government also has plans to invest more than $15 billion over the next 10 years on warships.
There has been some progress as well, especially in efforts to meet heightened threats from Pakistan and to balance the advanced military capabilities of China. The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India has reported that over the three years from 2004-7, India has spent $10.5 billion on military imports, making it one of the largest arms importers in the developing world.
India launched its first indigenous nuclear-powered submarine, the INS Arihant, for trials in July. Part of a $3 billion plan to build five such submarines, the Arihant would complete the triad of nuclear launch capability from air, land and sea platforms. The project, conceptualized in the late 1970s, is already long-delayed. Built under the Advanced Technology Vessel project with Russian help, Arihant is expected to be commissioned around 2012, making India the sixth country -- after the U.S., Russia, China, France and Britain -- to possess a nuclear-powered submarine.
Meanwhile, the construction of the highly advanced Scorpene submarine is progressing at the upgraded Mazgon Dock in Mumbai, under a $3.5 billion deal for six such French vessels.
India has also developed a submarine-launched supersonic missile using a modification of the BrahMos cruise missiles, a capability limited so far to advanced nations such as U.S., France and Russia. Ship- and land-launched versions of the BrahMos cruise missiles are also being inducted in the navy and army. The state-controlled Defense Research and Development Organization is also undertaking a joint development project with Israel Aerospace Industries for a surface-to-air missile for use from land and ship.
In early 2007, India purchased the 36-year-old 16,900-ton warship U.S.S. Trenton -- re-christened INS Jalashwa -- for $50 million. Trenton is the first Indian warship purchased from the U.S., and the second-largest that India now possesses, after the Viraat.
In addition to expanding its naval capabilities, India is also intent on improving its air force. Trials began in August for India's largest-ever defense deal, the $12 billion contract for 126 medium multirole combat aircraft (MRCA). Lockheed Martin and Boeing (U.S.), Dassault's Rafale (France), Gripen (Sweden), MiG (Russia) and Eurofighter Typhoon (a consortium of British, German, Italian and Spanish companies) have begun presenting their fighter jets for flight testing by the Indian air force.
The new MRCA fleet will replace the shrinking MiG-21 interceptors, filling the gap between the more powerful Russian Sukhoi-30MKIs and the low-end indigenous Tejas LCA lightweight fighter.
The question of India's aircraft carriers, however, remains caught in a time warp.
Siddharth Srivastava is a New Delhi-based journalist covering foreign and strategic affairs, security, politics, defense, business and lifestyle issues. He has been a correspondent for the Times of India and is widely published in newspapers and magazines in Asia, Europe and America. His Web site can be found here.
..
Exactly. I have always pointed that with Americans we will never be able to indigenize.Philip wrote:The interesting fact is that this offer is coming only when we have stated that we want to develop our own AEW/AWACS based upon an Embraer airframe
nrshah wrote:Exactly. I have always pointed that with Americans we will never be able to indigenize.Philip wrote:The interesting fact is that this offer is coming only when we have stated that we want to develop our own AEW/AWACS based upon an Embraer airframe
-Nitin
The DRDO AWACS as of now is not being designed to operate from carriers. Ofcourse, we can't expect an Embraer to land on an A/C and given it's limited range it would difficult for Navy to use it from airfields.The interesting fact is that this offer is coming only when we have stated that we want to develop our own AEW/AWACS based upon an Embraer airframe
Thats what I initially thought... but this could just be a plan B in special cases. When needed and feasible, instead of surfacing, battery recharge can be outsourced!!Lalmohan wrote:if the sub fails to rendezvous with the recharging ship then its dead. better to maintain an autonomous capability to recharge?
The Indo-US contract for eight Boeing P-8I long-range maritime reconnaisance & anti-submarine warfare (LRMRASW) aircraft was signed at the beginning of this year, but, according to sources in the Navy, there appear to be some bogeys that seem to have passed the muster of South Block bureaucrats, certainly the ones who signed the deal. With such committed focus on the end user monitoring (EUM) clauses, sources point to a certain other clause in the contract that could spell potential trouble in the future, not just for the P-8I relationship, but others Indo-US contracts as well.
According to Section 6.1 under Article 28 of the contract between the two governments, the US will be liable for no penalties in the event that any "malicious code" is detected in the software that governs the P-8I's sensors and systems. Malicious code, among other things, could include deliberately embedded bits of software designed to do one or many of a variety of things, which could include encrypted recording of platform usage information -- data that only American inspectors will be able to decrypt during end-user inspections, without making it apparently so. Sound far-fetched. It apparently isn't. Anyway, the point is, if Indian engineers are lucky enough to detect the malicious software (in some fortuitous spasm of counter-intelligence), then as per the contract on paper, there will be no penalties. All the US will have to do is to modify the hardware or software and remove the malicious code, with no other liabilities.
There are folks who believe this is precisely what the US government has seen done in contracts with Pakistan's P-3 and F-16 fleet. Could something be amiss or is this paranoia? Has something far more dangerous passed under the radars of South Block?
Hmm. Philip saar. While praising the Rodina and all else is fine and dandy, even you will have to admit that the KA-31 by nature is very very very limited and at best can be used for over the horizon detection and targeting of surface combatants. It is a great "airborne artillery post" , but as an early warning platform for airborne threats , it is woefully inadequate, given it's short legs, endurance and very limited radar by nature of it's platform and design. You really need a full up AEW on a great fixed wing platformWe also have a large number of Russian KA-31 helos in service with more being ordered,aboard our warships
In your story, "Is Indo-US plane deal a compromise?" (India Today, Sept 11), you leave readers with the impression that a "potentially explosive clause" in the contract India signed for the purchase of eight Boeing P-8I aircraft will allow an unnamed US entity to inject malicious code into the aircraft operating software. In fact, the purpose of the clause is quite the opposite. The malicious code clause, signed by Boeing with full concurrence, intentionally protects India against injection of any malicious software that could inhibit the desired and designed function of the equipment, or cause it physical damage. The Government of India stipulated the requirement, and by signing the contract, Boeing is agreeing it will not include, nor allow third parties to include any malicious software in the delivered system. Boeing has passed this requirment down to our suppliers. Boeing takes this contractual requirement extremely seriously as our company reputation and operation demands the highest ethical behavior. [STATEMENT ENDS]
Russia's Zvezdochka shipyard said on Wednesday it will install Club-S cruise missile systems on four Kilo class diesel submarines in service with the Indian navy in the next five years.
Russia has built ten Kilo class submarines for India. Only two of them — the INS Sindhugosh and INS Sindhuvijay — have reportedly been equipped with the Club-S (SS-N-27) cruise missiles to date.
"The new missile system will be installed on the INS Sindhuratna, INS Sindhuraj, INS Sindhushastra, and INS Sindhuvir. The retrofit will be carried out at Indian shipyards," the shipyard in northern Russia said in a statement.
Yes, he should raise more valid questions.NRao wrote:Aroor, by trying to start a public debate on this matter, is going to make a bigger mess out of this rather silly topic.
While not disputing the fact that a fixed wing AEW/AEWCS is always better than a rotary wing platform like KA-31 or the ASaC 7, it would be wrong to just call them a glorified AAP. And btw ASaC 7 (the AEW version of Sea King) was designed after the Falklands War. The radars on these birds do have a decent range and power. What they lack are on board control facilities, and ability to operate far away from the mothership. On the other hand they are not tied to the carriers, and could easily be operated out of one of the far away escorts/ screening ship.vina wrote:Hmm. Philip saar. While praising the Rodina and all else is fine and dandy, even you will have to admit that the KA-31 by nature is very very very limited and at best can be used for over the horizon detection and targeting of surface combatants. It is a great "airborne artillery post" , but as an early warning platform for airborne threats , it is woefully inadequate, given it's short legs, endurance and very limited radar by nature of it's platform and design. You really need a full up AEW on a great fixed wing platformWe also have a large number of Russian KA-31 helos in service with more being ordered,aboard our warships
....
Without AEW, you are toast. Not that the Brit equivalent of the KA 31 (the Sea King heli based AEW radar) did any good there in terms of AEW.
AFA we know navy isn't. all that has happened is the americans making a sales pitch.On a related note, why is the IN looking at E-2D.
Nahh.AFA we know navy isn't. all that has happened is the americans making a sales pitch.On a related note, why is the IN looking at E-2D.
India has been interested in the Hawkeye even prior to her interest in the P-8!!After receiving a cold shoulder from the Indian Navy for Northrop Grumman's Hawkeye 2C aircraft, the US administration has apparently cleared the sale of its most advanced maritime reconnaissance plane, the Hawkeye-2D, to India.
According to a report in the forthcoming issue of India Strategic defence magazine, the Indian Navy had issued an RFI (Request for Information) for the aircraft to the US government some time back.
My GUESS is that the IN has subscribed to the 1000 ship navy concept proposed by Adm Mullins(sp?). I feel that the IN sees some gain in plugging into the US/NATO "system"s under some circumstances. Going out on a very long limb here ........... but, IN could do with some real-time intel under some circumstances. And, share some going the other way.why is the IN looking at E-2D
don't know if this issue ever carried such a news, one we haven't heard of till now.According to a report in the forthcoming issue of India Strategic defence magazine, the Indian Navy had issued an RFI (Request for Information) for the aircraft to the US government some time back.
Very old story sir. Very old story.Sharma will also expand awareness of Northrop Grumman's core capabilities with programs such as E-2C Hawkeye and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye,
Since its not going to be carrier based, whats the advantage of say gulfstream based AEW's for navy versus hawkeye ?NRao wrote: India has been interested in the Hawkeye even prior to her interest in the P-8!!
IN was offered the 2C, which In did not like. So, the US offered the 2D. Never an issue about the "2", just the "C" vs. "D".
IF you read the first URL in my previous post, teh author claims that the IN was thinking about the Hawkeye on the Vicky.Cybaru wrote:Since its not going to be carrier based, whats the advantage of say gulfstream based AEW's for navy versus hawkeye ?NRao wrote: India has been interested in the Hawkeye even prior to her interest in the P-8!!
IN was offered the 2C, which In did not like. So, the US offered the 2D. Never an issue about the "2", just the "C" vs. "D".
.After IN's experience with Dhruv they likely don't want to put all chips in one bucket hence they are also looking at E-2D while Embraer version is developed. Do agree we need to look for larger platform if it is going to be land based but IN does go with catapults for its next carrier it would make sense.NRao wrote:On Gulfstream - they are getting the Brazilian planes for this sole purpose, but I suspect those will be an all India effort - IAF + IN. The 2D will be solely IN. And, for what it is worth the 2D will allow compatibility with US/NATO elements. ???????
I believe MF STAR is already tested and Barak-8 is undergoing testing?What is the current status of MF-STAR and Barak 8? Are they at least in land test phase? Or is India going to have INS Brahmaputra - New Generation?
NEW DELHI: The Navy will launch a new stealth destroyer named INS Kochi on Friday. It is the second of the Project 15-A vessels that are being built at home.
The project is running behind schedule as INS Kochi has been launched when the earlier vessel, INS Calcutta, is far from ready for induction into the Navy. INS Calcutta is the first ship of Project 15-A.
The 6,500-ton INS Kochi is being built at Mazagon Docks Limited in Mumbai and it has been designed by the Directorate of Naval Design.
Three Delhi class destroyers - INS Delhi, INS Mysore and INS Mumbai - are already in service.
In keeping with naval tradition, the warship will be launched by Madhulika Verma, wife of Navy Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma.
One key aspect of Project 15-A is the stealth feature of the ships. They will be fitted with the supersonic cruise missile BrahMos and long range surface to air missiles.
It will have an MFStar multifunction radar system for acquiring data on surface and air targets.
For close range targets it will have four AK-630 rapid fire guns and a medium range gun. There will be twin tube torpedo launchers and anti-submarine rocket launchers. It will have Humsa sonar developed by the Naval Physical Oceanographic Laboratory.
The launch procedure itself will be new for the warship that will have two multi-role helicopters providing aerial support. A pontoon-assisted launch technique is being employed to avoid slipway constraints on heavier vessels. This is the first time such a technique is being used for a warship built at home.
Officials hope that the ship will be ready for induction in the Navy on time without any delays. Work on INS Calcutta is running behind schedule.
The Navy is emphasising induction of vessels built in Indian shipyards. Several key projects are going on to overcome the problem of maintaining a suitable force level
My guess is that is all we can do within the Kilo's limitations. This is the MLU for the Kilos.Why are we opting for Klub-n when we have a superior Brahmos?
And I thought the Kilos are supposed to be slowly phased out by 2018. So, is this investment worth the buck.?
John wrote:I believe MF STAR is already tested and Barak-8 is undergoing testing?
It says single-face rotating PAR, meaning something like Sampson design. Have they changed the concept only for land based version or this also corresponds to naval MF-STAR? The last I've heard of it is that in November 2006 a single faced test model was to start emission tests. Silence after that.Barak 8 is said to be scheduled for service in 2010, no actual infiormation on test results.Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has recently signed a contract to develop and supply the land-based Barak 8 Air and Missile Defense (AMD) System to a foreign customer.
The Barak 8 AMD, an advanced all-weather, day/night system capable of multiple simultaneous engagements in complex scenarios, provides a 360° defense against a wide variety of airborne platforms and munitions from short and medium ranges. The land-based system is based on the Naval Barak 8 AMD system that has been sold to the Israeli Navy and to foreign customers.
The Barak 8 AMD system includes a unique battle management, command, control, communication and intelligence center (BMC4I); an interceptor; and a Land-Based Multi-Function Surveillance, Track & Guidance Radar (LB-MF-STAR). The BMC4I, produced by the MBT Division of IAI's Missiles, Systems, and Space Group, offers both stand alone operation for a single fire unit, and joint task force coordination (JTC). The JTC mode allows for the synergy of all available resources, giving the user maximum operational flexibility.
The LB-MF-STAR, produced by ELTA Systems Ltd., IAI's group and wholly owned subsidiary, supports air defense missions and guides AMD weapon systems. It can deliver an accurate, high quality arena situation picture and extract low Radar Cross Section (RCS) targets even in the toughest environmental conditions. The LB-MF-STAR is a digital Active Electronic Steering Array (AESA) Radar System which incorporates new, advanced technologies and includes one rotating S-band Phased Array Antenna.
That is the land based version which will have only one phase array radar based on their info the naval version will have:SNaik wrote:It says single-face rotating PAR, meaning something like Sampson design. Have they changed the concept only for land based version or this also corresponds to naval MF-STAR? The last I've heard of it is that in November 2006 a single faced test model was to start emission tests. Silence after that.Barak 8 is said to be scheduled for service in 2010, no actual infiormation on test results.
Kilo can be fired from torpedo tubes, the brahmos is limited to vls launch.koti wrote:Why are we opting for Klub-n when we have a superior Brahmos?
And I thought the Kilos are supposed to be slowly phased out by 2018. So, is this investment worth the buck.?
Thanks, John, I know that. Th question is - do you have any bit of information that naval MF-STAR has been succesfully tested in it's full four-face configuration? On which Israel or India Navy ship has it been installed for tests?John wrote:That is the land based version which will have only one phase array radar based on their info the naval version will have:
"The MF Star includes 4 active arrays in S-band frequency.."
All land based phased array radars are single face. And many of them even non-rotating (AN/MPQ. It makes sense for a land based system as you can easily reorient to face the usually only one axis of threat. The few multi-face ones are the huge early warning types like PAVE-PAWS.SNaik wrote:Thanks, John, I know that. Th question is - do you have any bit of information that naval MF-STAR has been succesfully tested in it's full four-face configuration? On which Israel or India Navy ship has it been installed for tests?John wrote:That is the land based version which will have only one phase array radar based on their info the naval version will have:
"The MF Star includes 4 active arrays in S-band frequency.."
Instead we have the information that Israel has adopted a totally different concept of single rotating radar face for the land based version of MF-STAR. Therefore my question - is this change adopted only for land based version or the test results of multiple-face naval version have led to the change in design concept and will this design also be adopted for naval version?
Have not run into anything saying it has been tested but IAI has implement phased array radar in Phalcon, Greenpine etc so they certainly have enough experiance. I believe the first deployment will be on Kolkata and would most likely require good deal of testing. As for land based version it not cost prudent for 4 faced radar since the main advantage of reduced detection time is not as important for LB version plus it can be networked with 3 other single face radar to provide better coverage.SNaik wrote:Thanks, John, I know that. Th question is - do you have any bit of information that naval MF-STAR has been succesfully tested in it's full four-face configuration? On which Israel or India Navy ship has it been installed for tests?
Instead we have the information that Israel has adopted a totally different concept of single rotating radar face for the land based version of MF-STAR. Therefore my question - is this change adopted only for land based version or the test results of multiple-face naval version have led to the change in design concept and will this design also be adopted for naval version?
Barak-8 is active guided uses MF-STAR only for mid course guidance and target detection. MF-STAR will not be needed to provide illumination to guide the missile in terminal phase. So it should make things simpler integrating them.bijit wrote:But is it really necessary to be testing the 4 faced system together ? Most of the times only a single face will be used to guide a missile (at least in the most difficult terminal engagement stages).
