Indian Naval Discussion

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 19 Oct 2009 10:29

SNaik wrote: never

How come ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Oct 2009 11:04

Cybaru , there is no new Akula-2 under construction , unless they lease it from RuN stock or old Akula-1 in reserve after modernisation , but it is possible to lease a 2nd older Akula.

Any way the RuN existing Akula SSN will be throughly modernised starting 2010 onwards , so lets see.

BTW better to lease another Yasen then Akula

SNaik any information on Akula mid life upgrade ?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 19 Oct 2009 13:18

The idiot is back with his boasting http://**************/2009/1 ... ships.html

"The above four slides explain what exactly is the Integrated Platform Management System (IPMS), which L-3 MAPPS is supplying for the Indian Navy's three Project 17 FFGs, three Project 15A DDGs and four projected Project 15B DDGs."

Project 15A has Ukrainian Zorya/Mashproekt M36E gas turbine plants that are incompatible with the US L3 IPMS. So they will never have L3 IPMS. Same for 15B if it selects the same powerplant.

The only IN ships that use/will use L3 IPMS are those with western origin propulsion plants. Project 71 with GE LM2500 GT, Type 17 with GE LM2500 GT and Pielstick diesels and Improved Magar LST with Pielstick diesels. And maybe Project 28.

Worst part is the ships are listed in the same website from where he lifted the brochures.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Oct 2009 14:48

Yup , Mr Sengupta can write just about on any topic under the sun and speaks with God like authority

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 19 Oct 2009 20:01

Austin wrote:Yup , Mr Sengupta can write just about on any topic under the sun and speaks with God like authority

But, I must accept that his article on HTT-35 was quite good and interesting.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 19 Oct 2009 20:18

Austin wrote:Cybaru , there is no new Akula-2 under construction , unless they lease it from RuN stock or old Akula-1 in reserve after modernisation , but it is possible to lease a 2nd older Akula.

Any way the RuN existing Akula SSN will be throughly modernised starting 2010 onwards , so lets see.

BTW better to lease another Yasen then Akula

SNaik any information on Akula mid life upgrade ?

Ahh! Thanks for de-mystifying things.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Oct 2009 20:19

Austin,

What happened to the Kuguar? Was'nt it too in the same boat as the Nerpa - partially completed?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -akula.htm

Says:

On 5 December 2000 India
announced new negotiations with Russia to lease a nuclear-powered attack submarine. The goal was to retain the familiarization with nuclear propulsion gained during the three-year lease of the Chakra. India’s interest in leasing a pair of Type 971 SSNs was based in part on the slow progress in the Advanced Technology Vessel. Reports are in conflict as to whether the submarines in question are the improved Akula or the Akula-II. As of 2000 there were a pair of both types in a state of partial completion. By 2007 the discussion of the state of completion of the vessels contemplated for lease strongly suggested that they would be the improved Akula Nerpa, laid down in 1986, and Kaban, laid down in 1992.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Oct 2009 20:24

NRao wrote:Austin,

What happened to the Kuguar? Was'nt it too in the same boat as the Nerpa - partially completed?

I think not , parts of Kuguar was used to built the first Borei YD

From what I understand there are no new Akula under construction , so any thing that comes has to come from reserve or RuN operational stock.

But let SNaik have the last word on this

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 Oct 2009 20:26

let's hope it's a yasen then !

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Oct 2009 20:28

KrishG wrote:
Austin wrote:Yup , Mr Sengupta can write just about on any topic under the sun and speaks with God like authority
But, I must accept that his article on HTT-35 was quite good and interesting.

Well most of his write up is designed to dazzle and create WoW effect , although he does have some info , but then he mixes up Facts, Half Truth and Fiction in his writeup. For the uninitiated it becomes difficult to separate these mix up.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 20 Oct 2009 01:30

Austin wrote:
NRao wrote:Austin,

What happened to the Kuguar? Was'nt it too in the same boat as the Nerpa - partially completed?
I think not , parts of Kuguar was used to built the first Borei YD

From what I understand there are no new Akula under construction , so any thing that comes has to come from reserve or RuN operational stock.

But let SNaik have the last word on this

Kuguar and Rys, both unfinished Severodvinsk boats were used for Borei, as were two unnamed hulls from Komsomolsk. There is still one unfinished hull in Komsomolsk, around 40% finished, but no work on it has been carried out for a decade.
I'm afraid that midlife upgrade will cover only Severodvinsk built Akulas which are newer. A lot of capacity will be tied up by midlife mod of Oscars.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 20 Oct 2009 02:17

Is there a second or third sub lease in the works ?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 20 Oct 2009 09:59

Updates

After reading the comments here, our national idiot Prasun updated his website with the following lines -

"The Bangalore-based subsidiary of L-3 MAPPS was set up in early 2002 to specifically undertake systems integration-related applications software development for interfacing the IPMS with the Ukraine-based Zorya/Mashproekt M36E gas turbine-based propulsion plants of the Project 15A and Project 15B DDGs."

Now this represents an incredible feat in system integration. A western origin IPMS fitted to an eastern origin powerplant.

But this is another case of Prasun lying to cover an earlier lie. What makes this news false is -

This would have opened up the former russian/ukrainian powered merchant and naval ship market to L-3, yet L-3 is silent about it.

This would have been such a boost to Zorya sales to western shipping industry, yet Zorya is silent about it.

Zorya M36 plant doesnt have any kind of digital control systems. Its a robust, but legacy system. So what will IPMS interface with?

L-3 customer list mentions Project 71 IAC - that will be commissioned 2012-2015 as using IPMS. Yet it doesnt mention Project 15A, that will be commissioned much BEFORE Project 71 IAC. If Project 15A really uses L-3 IPMS, why didnt they mention it in their customer list?

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 20 Oct 2009 10:59

Has the P-15 B been officially sanctioned? When is the steel cutting expected to start.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Oct 2009 11:23

vavinash wrote:Has the P-15 B been officially sanctioned? When is the steel cutting expected to start.

In principle Yes , 4 P-15B cleared by CCS

Is there a second or third sub lease in the works ?

If the intent and purpose is to train IN sub crews on the nitty gritty of operating a N submarine , then you need no more than 1 SSN , the training intent is what the CNS stated.

If you want to build a small SSN force , you would first train and operationalize the first SSN for atleast a year , then one can make a decision if a second or third is needed

It would be heavy expenditure on the Navy to operate even a single N submarine with all the shore based infra , IIRC the old INS Chakra took a good portion of IN budget to operate , something the IN found it expensive as per news reports.

With 13 % of budget that the IN gets , itw hard to imagine they can operate a fleet of N submarine , unless they just spike up to like ~ 25 - 30 % of defence expenditure from next year onwards.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Oct 2009 13:07

shore based infra cost is best amortized across a fleet of N subs not just one sub. we in any case need big new submarine docks, underground cave pens, missile handling facilities. the N-reactor is sealed and will probably be carted to kalpakkam for refuelling when the time comes rather than be opened in any IN facility.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 20 Oct 2009 15:26

tsarkar wrote:Updates

"The Bangalore-based subsidiary of L-3 MAPPS was set up in early 2002 to specifically undertake systems integration-related applications software development for interfacing the IPMS with the Ukraine-based Zorya/Mashproekt M36E gas turbine-based propulsion plants of the Project 15A and Project 15B DDGs."

Now this represents an incredible feat in system integration. A western origin IPMS fitted to an eastern origin powerplant.

This would have been such a boost to Zorya sales to western shipping industry, yet Zorya is silent about it.

Zorya M36 plant doesnt have any kind of digital control systems. Its a robust, but legacy system. So what will IPMS interface with?

L-3 customer list mentions Project 71 IAC - that will be commissioned 2012-2015 as using IPMS. Yet it doesnt mention Project 15A, that will be commissioned much BEFORE Project 71 IAC. If Project 15A really uses L-3 IPMS, why didnt they mention it in their customer list?

Igorr can shed some light on this for sure that which IPMS is used on talwar/delhi class or its still legacy system

but i am sure that if russia has developed all digital systems for ships then they must have developed digital IPMS

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 20 Oct 2009 17:03

India Mulls Land-Based E-2D
AVIATION WEEK

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Oct 2009 18:12

The slow,small and limited range E-2Ds are of no use if operated from land.A few more Phalcon AWACS,or the smaller Israeli AEW Gulfsteram or desi AEW aircraft on an Embraer platform would be better land based options.

John · Post by **John** » 21 Oct 2009 05:24

Philip wrote:The slow,small and limited range E-2Ds are of no use if operated from land.A few more Phalcon AWACS,or the smaller Israeli AEW Gulfsteram or desi AEW aircraft on an Embraer platform would be better land based options.

I think the main reason IN is looking at E-2D is because it looks more and more probable the 3rd carrier built here will be CATOBAR.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Oct 2009 08:12

John wrote:
Philip wrote:The slow,small and limited range E-2Ds are of no use if operated from land.A few more Phalcon AWACS,or the smaller Israeli AEW Gulfsteram or desi AEW aircraft on an Embraer platform would be better land based options.
I think the main reason IN is looking at E-2D is because it looks more and more probable the 3rd carrier built here will be CATOBAR.

The IN, I feel, has subscribed to the 1000 ship navy concept. One of the features of this concept is interoperability.

Also:

Northrop Grumman has, moreover, signed a memorandum of understanding with Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. to develop a "wet wing" that holds additional fuel and permits the aircraft to fly for 8 hr.

So, I am not sure what is the concern WRT "limited range".

Or, how much more do we want it to be? How much "range" does the Phalcon have?

The "desi" platform is a ways away. And, IIRC, they would like to use the "desi" platform for the middle of three layers (along the coast).

The CAT is a dream for the IN - possible, but a ways away, for it is the electromag one they are eying, not the steam one.

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Oct 2009 08:32

If I be allowed to speculate the kind of role an AWACS AC has to fit into for the IAF is completely different from that of what IN would want it to perform. In case of former AWACS will actually be directing deep strike missions into enemy territory from the forward airfields hence the need for a larger platform with longer loiter period along with a more powerful RADAR is self explanatory. IN on the contrary will use land based AWACS mostly in defensive roles and given the geography of most of the IN bases a small/medium platform like E-2D might suffice.

Also IN does not operate the IL-76 which is much more expensive to maintain and operate, and then the prospect of land based E-2Ds operating from future IN carriers does make sense.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 Oct 2009 09:49

The IN, I feel, has subscribed to the 1000 ship navy concept. One of the features of this concept is interoperability.

You could be right sir. The talks on the E2D seem to be at an advanced stage what with MOUs being signed left and right. We already saw how quick they moved with the P8s. Interesting indeed that the IN should choose U.S hardware for sensors and SA while using russian gear for the dirty work. Best of both worlds?

CM.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 21 Oct 2009 10:10

How difficult would it be for E-2d to take of with less fuel and then get refueled by mig-29k's? Though wether the aircraft with a wingspan of 24.5 m can take off and land from the Vik'ad and Vikrant needs to be seen.

amit · Post by **amit** » 21 Oct 2009 11:01

Juggi G wrote:India Mulls Land-Based E-2D
AVIATION WEEK

Was reading this report and one thing caught my eye:

The navy has been waiting some time for the refurbished Russian carrier Admiral Gorshkov, now due for delivery in 2012, and is working with Fincantieri of Italy on two carriers.

I know the first carrier is being built. However has work already started on the second one? Or is it just a figure of speech in the sense that when India starts work on the second carrier it will collaborate with Fincantieri?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Oct 2009 11:51

the second carrier, tentatively named IAC-2 is more or less firmly on the cards.
since it is expected to be identical to IAC-1 the article is correct even if actual construction hasn't been started yet.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Oct 2009 12:04

John wrote:
Philip wrote:The slow,small and limited range E-2Ds are of no use if operated from land.A few more Phalcon AWACS,or the smaller Israeli AEW Gulfsteram or desi AEW aircraft on an Embraer platform would be better land based options.
I think the main reason IN is looking at E-2D is because it looks more and more probable the 3rd carrier built here will be CATOBAR.

Well ... the 3rd Indian built carrier is a long ways off! Vikramaditya will only be entering service in 2012 and will be around for at least 2030 before being needed to be replaced by the 3rd indigenous carrier. The other two new indigenous carriers will be ready around 2014 and 2020 time frame respectively and will be largely be of a similar design. As per current force plan, IN has only planned of a 3-carrier fleet.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Oct 2009 12:16

the IAC2 would not be starting in parallel before 2014 presumably. if that is the case, the size could be upped to 55000t which would accomodate EMALS system
and also E2D runway length.

the 40kt is a dead zone of limited use. 60kt+ or bust!

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 21 Oct 2009 12:39

Link

Aroor's blog reported a while ago that No. 2 and No. 3 are going to be built while No. 4 and No. 5 are being designed.

amit · Post by **amit** » 21 Oct 2009 13:07

Folks, thanks for clearing up the issue for me.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Oct 2009 15:50

The ideal number for the IN is 5 carriers,but from the 3rd indigenous carrier onwards,the design should be for a larger 50,000t+ carrier which can carry a larger fighter,either the SU-33 or more likely the naval version of the 5th-gen fighter.The carrier should also be large enough to carry its own AEW aircraft,which could be the D version of the Hawkeye or another new type.This is because these larger carriers will only be built by around 2010 onwards.Hopefully by around 2015-18,both new "Cochin" carriers would've been commissioned and we will have three carriers-including the Gorshkov in service.

At that point of time,equally important would be the need for at least 3 LHPDs of the Juan Carlos type,at least the Mistral.The Juan Carlos design is superior as it has an extra deck for vehicles,eqpt.,etc.,and can act as an emergency carrier for strike/ASW ops using VSTOL/STOVL aircraft.If we do acquire another dozen+ ex-RN Harriers and upgrade them as we are doing to those in service (LUSH),they would be extremely useful in the amphib ops role carrying out air support as is done by the USMC's carriers.The IN does need a STOVL version of the 5th-gen fighter as the RN is acquiring in its version of the JSF.It makes carrrier ops far easier and safer using this version.

With 3 medium sized carriers and 3 LHPDs/amphib flat tops of Juan Carlos size, the IN would have a balanced force.By then operating the MIG-29K and naval LCA's and the advent of the 5th-gen fighter,the size and capabilities for future larger carriers will be assessed with the experience of operating the Gorshkov and the two indigenously built ones,plus the aircraft being operated fro their decks.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Oct 2009 16:02

vera_k wrote:Link

Aroor's blog reported a while ago that No. 2 and No. 3 are going to be built while No. 4 and No. 5 are being designed.

Let them first build the first one on Time , under budget and to the satisfaction of end user , then dream about the rest

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 21 Oct 2009 16:04

http://meaindia.nic.in/pressrelease/2009/10/20pr03.htm

Former CNS, Adm. Sureesh Mehta (Retd), appointed India's High Commissioner to New Zealand. Kudos. He was at the forefront of the armed forces fight for parity in status with the civil services, post the VIth CPC.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 21 Oct 2009 23:58

Maldives Army starts Training in India

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 22 Oct 2009 02:47

Austin wrote:
vera_k wrote:Link

Aroor's blog reported a while ago that No. 2 and No. 3 are going to be built while No. 4 and No. 5 are being designed.
Let them first build the first one on Time , under budget and to the satisfaction of end user , then dream about the rest

Any news from any paanwalla about the status of the construction of IAC-I? Haven't heard anything after the keel-laying eons back.

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Oct 2009 03:03

vera_k wrote:Link

Aroor's blog reported a while ago that No. 2 and No. 3 are going to be built while No. 4 and No. 5 are being designed.

If this is true, then we can speculate the following:

* No.3 is being called INS Vishaal which means INS Vikramaditya will not have retired by the time it enters service sometime in the 2020-2030 time frame.

* 3 carrier fleet allows IN to have 1 carrier available per Eastern & Western fleet while the 3rd undergoes routine maintenance (or acts as a reserve)

* With 5 carriers planned in the "distant" future (post 2030), this means IN will have 2 carriers available per Eastern & Western fleet while the 5th undergoes routine maintenance.

kirang · Post by **kirang** » 22 Oct 2009 03:06

http://www.livemint.com/2009/10/1822585 ... ve-st.html

the picture claims to be a ship being built and hence posted here.. delete if its not related

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 22 Oct 2009 06:53

kirang wrote:http://www.livemint.com/2009/10/1822585 ... ve-st.html

the picture claims to be a ship being built and hence posted here.. delete if its not related

That's surely not the IAC-I.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 Oct 2009 06:58

Austin wrote:
vera_k wrote:Link

Aroor's blog reported a while ago that No. 2 and No. 3 are going to be built while No. 4 and No. 5 are being designed.
Let them first build the first one on Time , under budget and to the satisfaction of end user , then dream about the rest

err austin sahab, can you afford to wait till everything is in place ?

I think a second ship of the same class is a good idea, it would allow us to improve our understanding of the intricacies of carrier building using the user's inputs on IAC-1. all this without risking a costlier new design. at the same time, it still keeps our shipyards busy and will hopefully deliver a more efficient ship than IAC-1.

-----------------
that's the viraat.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 22 Oct 2009 07:01

Nikhil T wrote:
kirang wrote:http://www.livemint.com/2009/10/1822585 ... ve-st.html

the picture claims to be a ship being built and hence posted here.. delete if its not related
That's surely not the IAC-I.

I think it is the Viraat undergoing a refit.

CM.