Indian Naval Discussion

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 16:52

sir even indian navy which is by far the best operator of harriers is not interested in the aircraft
we can understand the capability

it could take on the 3rd gen planes that pak operate but f16 or even jf17 i am not sure

it could became target practice for new gen sams

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Dec 2010 17:09

Tushar,Harriers mainly for small STOVL carriers like the Viraat which have very few operational.It is going to be very interesting to see how the MIG-29Ks and Harriers operate together once the Gorky/Vik arrives and even before in joint trainign once there are enough MIG-29Ks delivered before the carrier arrives.

SureshP · Post by **SureshP** » 16 Dec 2010 17:28

Russians upto the usual old tricks of screwing India.

Russian shipyard seeks $100 mn to complete Indian contract

Press Trust of India / Moscow December 16, 2010, 16:01 IST

Russia's naval shipyard Yantar has sought extra funds to the tune of $100 million from authorities here to complete three Talwar class stealth frigates for Indian navy, according to a media report.

The lack of funds has delayed the completion of three frigates for India under the $1.6 billion deal signed in 2006, which were to be delivered beginning next year, Kommersant business daily said.

"The lack of funding is linked to the VAT refund problem: we will only receive the money after the frigates have been delivered to India," CEO of Kaliningrad-based Yantar shipyard Igor Orlov was quoted as saying by Kommersant.

However, the extra funds required by Yantar to complete frigates to be commissioned as the INS Teg (sabre), Tir (arrow) and Tarkash (quiver) will not lead to the cost escalation for India, the daily said quoting sources.

Yantar was to deliver the three frigates currently under different stages of completion in 2011-12. However, due to the financial problems the delivery schedule could be revised.

"The Indian side was aware of the issue and was treating it with understanding," a source close to the state arms exporter - Rosoboronexport -- was quoted as saying by the daily.

"We are not considering increasing the contract price for India. We propose to settle the issue with the help of domestic reserves, including those of the United Shipbuilding Corporation," an unnamed Rosoboronexport source said, underscoring that there will be no repetition of Gorshkov story, which led to the doubling of initial cost of the deal.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... /119445/on

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 17:50

i just wanna say even if we bought a handful of the harriers & in case war wanna use it against pak air force will it justify its needs by fighting against f16's or jf17's in say attack on karachi port ???

we have to understand that we need fighter because it has a purpose or we need a fighter because its easy to operate & will increase the fighter no. count in IAF

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Dec 2010 18:19

SureshP wrote:Russians upto the usual old tricks of screwing India.

We are not considering increasing the contract price for India. We propose to settle the issue with the help of domestic reserves, including those of the United Shipbuilding Corporation," an unnamed Rosoboronexport source said, underscoring that there will be no repetition of Gorshkov story, which led to the doubling of initial cost of the deal.

IF you read that carefully , it is a problem between SY and Rosoboronexport their internal problem.

We are not being overcharged or any thing like that. The SY just needs more money to do the task

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 16 Dec 2010 18:42

Philip wrote:The Viraat even now requires more STOVL Harriers,the only aircraft that can operate from it.IAC-2 most prbably will be an even larger carrier than IAC-1,especially as the plan plan a fleet of around 5 large carriers of 65,000t size.Therefore,IAC-2 will realistically appear only by 2020.Until then,the third carrier-Viraat ,will also need a stand-by/complement,and if a light amphib carrier such as the early-retired Ark Royal and her harrier complement was available on the cheap,would give the IN considerable flexibility and the ability to operate three carriers for most of the time.

^ A very pertinent point. The Viraat for better or worse is due to operate till about 2019 when the IAC-2 enters service. With a complement of about 7 or 8 Harriers instead of the 28 that it can actually carry, it can generate a very limited of sorties in wartime. If the IN can get their hands on another 12-18 aircraft at a reasonable cost, it would be money well spent. Seeing as the RAF's Harriers are currently heading for museums and auctioneers, even after a radar upgrade, India should be able to get a good deal on them. And if they've got enough life, they can continue to serve in the IN even after the INS Viraat has been retired, in the same role as the USMC's Harriers.

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 16 Dec 2010 18:58

Philip wrote:Brilliant pic of the 16 Harriers in formation in their farewell flight among others.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ewell.html

PS:79 Harriers available! That is a huge amount of a great aircraft that is going to the scrap heap unless it is picked up by Harrier operating navies.This is a great once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pick up such a quality product for the price of scrap! The aircraft can easily deal with almost all the aircraft in the PAF and has in-flight re-fuelling capability too.C'mon MOD/IN,look at it closely!

Phillip- we keep going over this. How can a Harrier with no radar, no BVR deal with the PAF? Why do we keep going around in circles? Modifying this is going to be a massive task! New nose, blah, blah, blah

These are ground attack aircraft with modest self defense capability. Or am I missing something huge here?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 16 Dec 2010 18:59

tushar_m wrote:i just wanna say even if we bought a handful of the harriers & in case war wanna use it against pak air force will it justify its needs by fighting against f16's or jf17's in say attack on karachi port ???

we have to understand that we need fighter because it has a purpose or we need a fighter because its easy to operate & will increase the fighter no. count in IAF

Actually, the first priority for a naval aircraft is the aircraft carrier/battle-group's security. The 'escort' ships are protected by the carrier's air group. And while an attack on Karachi will have a great psychological effect, a more cautious and measured strategy would be simply to 'police' shipping heading for the port of Gwadar, from the Gulf of Oman (or perhaps off-Chabahar), sapping away Pakistan's war-fighting capability in a very low key fashion. Karachi is well within the IAF's reach and the MKIs can carry out any mission, that carrier based aircraft would have performed in the past.

So the Harriers are more likely to have to deal with JF-17s performing anti-shipping missions which with an EL/M-2032 + Derby, which they should to be able to do quite comfortably for the next six or seven years.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 16 Dec 2010 19:07

K_Rohit wrote:Phillip- we keep going over this. How can a Harrier with no radar, no BVR deal with the PAF? Why do we keep going around in circles? Modifying this is going to be a massive task! New nose, blah, blah, blah

These are ground attack aircraft with modest self defense capability. Or am I missing something huge here?

Why will it be massive task? The USMC, Italian and Spanish navies upgraded their Harrier IIs with the APG-65 and AMRAAMs without any major technical problems. The IN's LUSH Harriers are operating as expected as well.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 Dec 2010 19:31

GR9s have precision strike capability and are available

arun · Post by **arun** » 16 Dec 2010 20:15

The Indian Navy has issued a Request For Information (RFI) for two Deep Submergence Rescue Vessel’s (DSRV’s):

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION DEEP SUBMERGENCE RESCUE VESSEL FOR INDIAN NAVY

The DSRV‘s will presumably go onto the two 3,000 Ton Diving Support Vessel’s for which the Navy issued an RFI 0n July 9, 2010:

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) CONSTRUCTION OF TWO DIVING SUPPORT VESSELS (DSV) FOR INDIAN NAVY

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 17 Dec 2010 00:57

Navy to induct first Italian-made tanker in January next

NEW DELHI: Navy is scheduled to induct the first of the two Italian-made tanker ships in its fleet by the end of January next, providing it with the capability to send supplies to its sailing warships instead of these having to visit ports for replenishment.

"The Navy will formally induct the first of the two tankers, christened INS Deepak, at a function in Mumbai by the end of January next year," a senior Defence Ministry official said here today.

Tentatively, the induction ceremony will take place at the Mumbai Naval docks on January 21 or there about.

Italian shipbuilder Fincantieri, which won the contract for building the two tankers in October 2008, has built the Deepak class of tankers and the second ship, INS Shakti, in this class is currently under final stages of trials.
Deepak had been launched in the waters at Fincantieri's Muggiano shipyard on February 12 this year and Shakti on October 11 this year at the firm's Sestri Ponente (Genova) shipyard.

The two tankers, having a displacement of 27,500 tonnes at full load, are 175-metre long and propelled by two 10,000 kilowatt diesel engines.

These ships can attain a maximum speed of 20 knots and have the capacity to carry fuel for four warships at a time.

The tankers are manned by 250 crew members and have the capacity to carry troops too, apart from carrying a 10-ton helicopters on its flight deck. INS Shakti too is scheduled for induction into the Navy before the end of 2011.

In July this year, the Fincantieri contract had come under CAG's criticism for acceptance of inferior-grade steel used in the manufacture of the fleet tankers, saying it amounted to "undue favour to a foreign vendor in (the) procurement of fleet tankers."

srai · Post by **srai** » 17 Dec 2010 04:06

K_Rohit wrote:
Philip wrote:Brilliant pic of the 16 Harriers in formation in their farewell flight among others.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ewell.html

PS:79 Harriers available! That is a huge amount of a great aircraft that is going to the scrap heap unless it is picked up by Harrier operating navies.This is a great once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pick up such a quality product for the price of scrap! The aircraft can easily deal with almost all the aircraft in the PAF and has in-flight re-fuelling capability too.C'mon MOD/IN,look at it closely!
Phillip- we keep going over this. How can a Harrier with no radar, no BVR deal with the PAF? Why do we keep going around in circles? Modifying this is going to be a massive task! New nose, blah, blah, blah

These are ground attack aircraft with modest self defense capability. Or am I missing something huge here?

Since IN plans to have Viraat for most of the next decade (until 2017/18), additional 10 to 12 of these ex-RAF/RN Harriers would be a way to go to act as a reserve and augment the current fleet of 8 or so Harriers.

I don't think anyone is saying to get all the 79 Harriers being retired. Just a handful to keep the current fleet in full capacity for the next 7/8 years or so.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 17 Dec 2010 04:18

Gorshkov Redux : Russians Demand $100-mil More To Complete Indian Frigate Order
Live Fist

In a Gorshkov-style jolt (though not quite on the same scale), Russia's Kalingrad-based Yantar shipyard has told Russia's Rosoboronexport that it will need $100-million more to complete the construction of three stealth frigates for the Indian Navy --Teg, Tarkash and Trikand -- follow ons to the Talwar-class frigates already in service. The follow-on deal was signed in 2006. The Kommersant newspaper indicates that a delay in delivery is also implied, so it's like deliveries won't meet their 2011-12 timeframe. It remains to be seen if the escalation is passed onto the Indian Navy, though it won't be surprising if it is.

John · Post by **John** » 17 Dec 2010 05:05

Not sure what is contributing to the delay of Frigate considering the launches were on schedule integration issue with Brahmos perhaps? As for 100 mill+ not sure if it was passed on to the IN but overall the price tag for Teg is still less than Shivalik's 700 mill.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 17 Dec 2010 05:29

Shivalik's $700 mil is akin to its STEALTH features, Talwar class frigates are "semi-stealth" at best apart from being in a different class/tonnage. Can't compare apples with oranges

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Dec 2010 06:37

Youtube video in russian titled: Rusian Help in 1971 indo pak war
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQchmaC5 ... re=related

Can someone translate?
At 1:50 onwards there is a graphic, which seems to show that the British Royal Navy was deployed in the Arabian sea off Bombay, and they scooted off when the Russians arrived off Srilanka. The USN then arrived into the bay of bengal.

John · Post by **John** » 17 Dec 2010 06:59

Craig Alpert wrote:Shivalik's $700 mil is akin to its STEALTH features, Talwar class frigates are "semi-stealth" at best apart from being in a different class/tonnage. Can't compare apples with oranges

Yes Shivalik incorporates more feature to reduce its RCS and IR signature but that's not the main reason it cost more. The main reason was the production delays, increase in the size of the vessel and the integration/procurement of equipment from vendors from western countries (i.e GE Turbine). Point being 100 million cost over run for Teg class is bad but nothing compared to cost over runs for P-17 project.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 17 Dec 2010 16:51

Indian Navy, Royal Thailand Navy Jointly Patrol Eastern Indian Ocean Region

aditya_d · Post by **aditya_d** » 17 Dec 2010 20:16

Can someone translate?
At 1:50 onwards there is a graphic, which seems to show that the British Royal Navy was deployed in the Arabian sea off Bombay, and they scooted off when the Russians arrived off Srilanka. The USN then arrived into the bay of bengal.

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2009/12/ ... l-bay.html

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Dec 2010 10:27

Indian Navy Kamovs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGngFSwNQqY

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Dec 2010 21:57

Diesel Submarine Radiated Noise Trend link

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 19 Dec 2010 16:09

Videos of INS Vikramaditya

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQrCT0ywUnM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf7v_ECAg4Q

Assuming it hasn't been posted as they both have so few views for vids posted here - apologies if already posted

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 19 Dec 2010 16:14

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=14013

Did the crew of INS Kirpan, the Indian Navy frigate which was honoured with gallantry award for its role in 1971 Indo-Pak war play an ignominious role by deserting sailors who were drowning in INS Khukri?

Read more: Correct Naval history, says INS Khukri survivor - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... z18YTSDzDu

Amol (California)
7 hrs ago (09:25 AM)
The sailor should ask his conscience, if his late actions are going to help change the history ? India won the war, help liberate Bangladesh. That is the glory which the sailor should feel proud of. Blaming others would not bring back the dead. The sailors who "retreated" lived to fight another day, that is battle tactic, not cowardice, as suggested by the sailor.

Vivek (Mumbai) replies to Amol
1 hr ago (03:29 PM)
easy for you to say , I am one of the people whose father was on INS Kukhri and went down with the ship , we do need to know the truth , peoples lives could have been saved !!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2010 16:28

not sure of the context of this, but in WW2 , destroyers trying to pickup survivors from sunken ships would depart under orders from the scene if enemy submarine activity was detected (they'd be sitting ducks) and convoys like the ones to murmansk also never broke rhythm to help sinking ships but pressed on regardless...even though crew of slow sinking ships like oil tankers could possibly have been saved...the safety of the whole convoy and its vital escorts was deemed uppermost.

reading the wiki details, these ships has a small bofors gun and two A/S depth charge throwers and NO homing torpedoes. the kirpan and kuthar had old sonars and in that era no night vision eqpt (even if the PN sub were to surface). I think they'd really have no means in the absense of support from ASW aircraft/helis to localize and drop depth charges against such a lurking sub at night, which could unleash a spread of 4 torpedoes from kilometers away without any warning from the darkness. kirpan would likely be way out of her league attempting a night hunt and might have got sunk before the morning if she persisted around.

maybe for indic reasons (public and media will not understand) any radio'ed order to turn back sent from HQ was not made official record?

20/20 hindsight - the ships sent were not the ideal force to tackle that submarine, but perhaps nothing else was available in that area.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 19 Dec 2010 17:03

This guy was a fresher OR-1 Artificer Apprentice, equivalent to a jawan in the Army, aboard the Khukri when the events which he is questioning, happened. What would he know about the reasons for any particular actions? There could be very good reasons why the ships turned away.

They would be sitting ducks, slowly searching for survivors, in an active combat situation. The captains first duty is the safety of his crew and his ship.

Sure, Mr Singh says that he should have been picked up first thing, right away. But it cant always be done in an active combat zone. Media is giving him face time, because he is making a stink. Doesnt mean he is right.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Dec 2010 22:18

TV9 Kannada had a good video ad from IN "Join the Indian Navy"

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Dec 2010 00:21

^^^Same on mainstream hindi/english media as well. The aerial shots of Harriers is great....

nithish · Post by **nithish** » 20 Dec 2010 01:05

'Navy has no wish to play 'super-cop' role in Indian ocean region'

The Indian Navy has no desire to play the role of super-policemen' in the Indian ocean region, but it will always be committed to protecting the country's sovereignty and security, besides responding to any sea-borne threat or situation, said Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Nirmal Kumar Verma here on Sunday.

The naval chief has also highlighted the significance of developing a sea-borne strategic nuclear deterrence as part of efforts to safeguard the country's vast coastline.

"More than being super-policemen', the Indian Navy sees itself as playing the role of a net provider of security and will put a specific emphasis on cooperation with other countries in the Indian ocean region," he said, while addressing the 17th anniversary of the Indian Maritime Foundation.

Speaking on India's role in the Indian ocean Strategic challenges and opportunities in the decade ahead', Verma said that providing security remains the most serious challenge before the navy and the same also influences other challenges, viz. protecting economic interests and marine natural resources as well as building a sound maritime infrastructure.

He said, "The Indian ocean remains the third-largest region covering 20 per cent of water on earth. It involves as many as 25 countries, including six island nations, and is among the busiest sea lines of commercial interest, besides serving as a key transit provider to several countries across continents."

Post-cold war era, an increasing number of countries have emerged to challenge the US pre-eminence and the emerging geo-politics will largely influence the challenges vis-?-vis security, economy, natural resources and infrastructure, he said. "The impact of inter-play between US and China in particular will influence the new geo-political dynamics in the region."

Sea-borne terrorism, as manifested in the 26/11 attack on Mumbai, has ensured that security issues have become more complex. "Unlike land, detecting and combating sea-borne threat is more serious, as there cannot be physical boundaries on the seas," he said.

The enormous task of protecting 7,500 km of coastline and interacting and coordinating with the multitudes of central and state agencies, remains a challenge that the navy is steadily working on, said. "A national maritime domain awareness infrastructure will be in place in the next two years, to ensure that all these issues are dealt with more effectively."

Verma also stressed on the need to build a sound maritime infrastructure including those related to ship-building, repairs, research and development, among others, besides the need for the country to engage in growing cooperation with other nations for countering problems like piracy and to protect marine natural resources.

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Dec 2010 16:24

For archival only.

The Last Post for a 36-yr-old warhorse

INS Vagli, a Foxtrot class submarine type 641B, was commissioned by then Lieutenant Commander Lalit Talwar on August 10, 1974 at Riga, Latvia, in the erstwhile Soviet Union

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Dec 2010 16:33

Wuff wuff !

Image1: http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/1166/img0424gc.jpg

*Photochor'd from 2010 IN calendar.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Dec 2010 21:37

Medvedev has assured India that it will get a cruiser, as had been agreed ( via rian )

The delay in the delivery of India's Admiral Gorshkov "is not connected with the military-technical cooperation with other countries, India, construction is on schedule and all agreements will be fulfilled, said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

"Everything is absolutely fine, everything turned out. Now the construction is in the agreed schedule, all the agreements that exist with the Government of India, will be fulfilled" - said the Russian President, responding to students Indian Institute of Technology on the question of whether the delay is not related to the supply "Admiral Gorshkov" with the cooperation of India and the U.S.

"Admiral Gorshkov" will join the fleet in India, however, apparently under a different name, and will guard your borders ", - Medvedev assured.

He acknowledged that the construction of the ship was delayed for various reasons, including because of the commercial and technological issues. At the same time the Russian leader stressed that the delay "has nothing to do with India's cooperation with other countries."

"We have no jealousy, we are quite calmly to this attitude," - said Medvedev.

We believe that security and military-technical cooperation with India, we are very privileged partners" - said Medvedev.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 22 Dec 2010 21:44

Jealousy? What is he talking about? Who accused him of jealousy?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Dec 2010 21:48

^^ Student of Mumbai IIT were asking questions to Medvedev and the topic of defence relationship with other contries viz a viz russia.

saurav.jha · Post by **saurav.jha** » 23 Dec 2010 08:06

Boeing to pitch ‘diet’ P-8 to Indian Navy

US defense major Boeing will be pitching a ‘diet’ version of the P-8 Poseidon aircraft in response to the Request for Information (RFI) issued by the Indian Navy for Medium Range Maritime Reconnaissance (MRMR) Aircraft, due by the end of the year, next week.

even though the derivative proposed for the MRMR RFI will look the same as the P-8I and be based on the 737 platform, it will have smaller tanks and a shorter range and will only have surface warfare capability. The P-8I is capable of both surface as well as sub-surface warfare.

The RFI also asks vendors if the aircraft can carry out electronic intelligence gathering and counter-measures, besides maritime patrol and search and rescue within an operational envelope of 350 nautical miles or almost 650 kilometers, as well as a patrol endurance of at least three and a half hours. It also specifies a requirement that the aircraft be capable of carrying at least two anti-ship missiles and a jamming pod.

As with the P-8I, the navy has specified in the RFI that certain pieces of equipment must be indigenous, like, IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) Interrogator with Secure Mode, MSS Terminal – BFE, Datalink and Speech Secrecy Equipment and vendors must indicate their commitment to integrate this equipment into the aircraft.

http://www.stratpost.com/boeing-to-pitc ... ndian-navy

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Dec 2010 08:36

interesting idea. wonder how the opex will match up against that of smaller 'bombardier' class a/c though..this is still a big heavy 737-800 platform with meaty engines. they will pitch the commonality of logistical chain thing and common simulator training + wide 737 footprint in civilian sector here.

I am all for it - but with ER fuel tanks, powerful sea search radar and harpoon / exocet ASMs and LGBs(litening below cockpit b52 style) in a sort of maritime strike a/c role...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Dec 2010 14:51

What range though? It will be vastly inferior to the 10,000KM+ of the TU-142s which can strike anywhere in the IOR,Far East and parts of the Pacific too.This "Janata" version solely meant for surface strike will be a flying white elephant.It would be far better to have more Il-38SDs which can perform both "low and slow" multi-role ops to prosecute subs,which the P-8s cannot do,and would come cheaper too than a Janata P-8. In addition,the IL-38s and TU-142s can/will carry the air-launched versions of Brahmos,which the P-8s cannot carry,so what is the point in acquiring them? If the IN want a faster aircraft with long range too,then one should go back to the original plan to acquire the TU-22M3 Backfires,dedicated supersonic bombers (in service with Russia and available in large numbers,which can be upgraded with indigenous avionics,etc.) which can reach its target zone much faster than a P-8 and carry more numbers of and longer-ranged missiles than anything that a P-8 can.These bombers would also be able to carry nuclear ordnance/missiles in a strategic role.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Dec 2010 16:11

Philip - two words - availability & uptime - where IL38SD and Tu142 does not score heavily. neither is in production and no plans exist to put them into new production anytime soon.

its either the gareeb rath version of P8 or other solutions from embraer/atr/bombardier etc.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 23 Dec 2010 16:17

i somehow suspect that a turboprop might be a better bet for the medium role, certainly from an opex point of view, all the aircraft should have IFR, and the tanker capacity needs to be increased to deal with maritime requirements - although the navy does not need to operate its own. perhaps the tankers should be part of the "strategic fleet"?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 23 Dec 2010 16:37

What exactly is the requirement of the navy.( Seems to be surface search onlee. ) This being the case can't this be filled by a UAV. With data linking to shore based station.

Some thing like the BAMS tailored to meet IN requirements. NAVY will be getting it own Com sat soon. So the Issue of the availablity of bandwidh should not be an issue.

JMT