Indian Navy News & Discussion - 22 April 2015

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 31 Dec 2015 01:08

High speed targets.
Either Brahmos or those Mirach 100/5 flying at M0.85 used for Akash

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Dec 2015 03:16

32 B-8s are inadequate for defeating saturation attacks.Small missile craft carry 16 SSMs.If B-8 is too expensive then a secondary med-range SAM (30+km) is reqd plus a gum/manpads system(Manpads from 10+km) for third tier defence.The B-8s must be fitted to both VikA and new Vikrant too.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 31 Dec 2015 03:45

Philip saar, you know these ships don't work in isolation. Together, they have all the layers that you speak of. And VikA and Vikrant will have Barak-8s.

srai · Post by **srai** » 31 Dec 2015 04:47

Singha wrote:we first need enough subs to deny the area to any adversary and then spend on LPD which need total protection from sub and air threats to be effective.

Fleet build up needs to be done in parallel. Glaring holes in the IN's ASW capability would indicate bulk of immediate budget would be prioritized on filling those. However, one must remember fleet build up takes decades. In order to possess a balanced fleet, the IN needs to continuously spend part of the budget for carriers and LDPs. Planning, design, build, induction and operationalization takes over a decade (or two) for each of these capital assets. Plus, India would want to build upon its experiences. So a regular order at set intervals must be in place to have continuity (as old ships retire new ones are coming online). Let there be no more "lost decades".

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 31 Dec 2015 13:06

My point was that this is the first time a SAM system that needs more decks to be penetrated, has been placed aft of the bridge, on an indigenous ship. From earlier photos (and articles), I thought those hinged traps were for the Little Bs (as in older ships), not the Big B

Nice. The availability of real-estate at the aft end means a mid-life upgrade can pack more (if the situation and Indian economy matches)

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 31 Dec 2015 13:19

Delhi class destroyers have Shtil system in the same position:

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Dec 2015 13:22

32 Barak-8 and 32/64 Barak-1 SR SAM would still be good AD system for Ship of such size , Not to mention 4xAK-630 CIWS systems

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 31 Dec 2015 13:52

Aditya G, touche! (Forgot about the One-armed Bandits and was thinking of the VLS type)

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 31 Dec 2015 15:35

L&T in collaboration with DRDO has successfully developed, manufactured and delivered Vertical and Inclined Launcher Modules for the Brahmos Missile System for the Naval Platforms. The Fire Control System for the naval platform is completely designed, developed and manufactured by L&T. The Universal Vertical Launch Module (UVLM) system is a modular launch system for canisterised BrahMos missiles on board ships and controlled by a Fire Control System (FCS) which has been developed in-house. - Larsen & Toubro

Question 1. What is 'universal' about the Universal Vertical Launch Module?

Question 2. The silos for the BrahMos are wider, longer and taller than the Mk 41 VLS. What stops us from modifying them to accept a quad-packed Barak 1? Or in the future, a quad-packed Astra (same dimensions as Raytheon's ESSM)?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 31 Dec 2015 18:38

Viz-a-viz missile loadout on our destroyers, I think we are running in circles as there is no new information from IN. The only statement we have from IN is that they are very happy with the Kolkata as a weapon system. I think this is an area where def columnists should dig deeper.

We are comparing with analogous systems from other navies, which I think is not fair to either as requirements are unique.

Viv S wrote:...Question 1. What is 'universal' about the Universal Vertical Launch Module?

Question 2. The silos for the BrahMos are wider, longer and taller than the Mk 41 VLS. What stops us from modifying them to accept a quad-packed Barak 1? Or in the future, a quad-packed Astra (same dimensions as Raytheon's ESSM)?

#1. The russian system can accept Klub AShM, Klub Land Attack and Brahmos. Presumably L&T should accept these as well as Nirbhay.

#2. Barak-1 and Barak-8 are hot launched for quickest possible reaction time. Thus, they are not compatible with cold launch VLS as there is no venting for exhausts.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 31 Dec 2015 19:44

Hate to be a spoil sport but just wanted to know, why no details of actual range, altitude, direction, speed etc of the missile & target has NOT been published? Considerable details of even Astra, AAD, PAD tests are normally published. This missile has got orders of Rs. 20-25,0000 crores even before first test. It is 5-10 times more costly then Akash. The ToT is iffy. So are we getting value for our money?

It is an enlarged Derby with an original touted range of 50km. When it failed to kill Akash-1 and DRDO started claiming that Akash Range can easily be enhanced to 35km then Barak-8 Brochure range increased to 70km.

After talk of Akash-2 and AAD started then its brochure range has again increased to 90km (?). I don't care about Barak-8 one way or another except to the extent whether Akash-1 will get the orders for remaining projected 49-34=15 firing units (squadrons?). Also whether the unfilled need of another Hundred SRSAM, QRSAM squadrons etc will be met by Astra 1,2 and Akash-1,2 followed by AAD, PDV for VLRSAM requirement or not?

John · Post by **John** » 31 Dec 2015 20:51

Lot of news in last week or so i have been out on vacation.

Aditya G wrote:#1. The russian system can accept Klub AShM, Klub Land Attack and Brahmos. Presumably L&T should accept these as well as Nirbhay.

#2. Barak-1 and Barak-8 are hot launched for quickest possible reaction time. Thus, they are not compatible with cold launch VLS as there is no venting for exhausts.

Aditya other way around hot launch requires venting barak-8 can be adapted for cold launch if needed. Reaction time for Cold launch systems is quite comparable these days to hot launch system (VL-Shtil for example), the main advantage of hot vs cold launch is the relative safety of the former in event of failed launch from my discussion with people who have worked on Mark 41.

^ Gyan they never publish much information on the target type unless the test is being used for PR purpose.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 31 Dec 2015 22:21

Frankly 32 vls seems adequate for the primary role the Kolkata will probably play ....blue water ops and carrier escort, and some land attack. Mounting an air launched attack on the kolkata is possible only for the Khan in such spaces. The Chinese emphasize more on sams because the US is their main concern. Neither tsp nor prc can come close to the the kol unless she is used very close to land. One feels that the land attack role will come into the picture once the nirbhay is available, and she can fire from a distance that is safe from enemy air assets. The additional space will probably be used for more nirbhays

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 31 Dec 2015 22:28

CM, in some report it was mentioned that there is no space left in Kolkata class to add nirbhays. So it means a 7500T ship is armed only with 48 missiles. It's very lightly armed for its size.

John · Post by **John** » 31 Dec 2015 22:46

Cain Marko wrote:Frankly 32 vls seems adequate for the primary role the Kolkata will probably play ....blue water ops and carrier escort, and some land attack. Mounting an air launched attack on the kolkata is possible only for the Khan in such spaces. The Chinese emphasize more on sams because the US is their main concern. Neither tsp nor prc can come close to the the kol unless she is used very close to land. One feels that the land attack role will come into the picture once the nirbhay is available, and she can fire from a distance that is safe from enemy air assets. The additional space will probably be used for more nirbhays

Karthik S wrote:CM, in some report it was mentioned that there is no space left in Kolkata class to add nirbhays. So it means a 7500T ship is armed only with 48 missiles. It's very lightly armed for its size.

Limitations of P15 platform if you want to squeeze any more VLS cells in there you need to sacrifice its multi purpose capability (i.e hanger, torpedo tubes, rbu etc). Chinese have run into similar limitation with 052 class and are switching to larger platform for future. Also the other thing is the price tag which adj for inflation is lower than P-17s and P-15Bs are budgeted to be cheaper than P-17A as well.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jan 2016 09:47

Barak 8 / LRSAM Tested Onboard an Indian Destroyer

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 01 Jan 2016 11:38

Karan M wrote:High speed targets.
Either Brahmos or those Mirach 100/5 flying at M0.85 used for Akash

Pilotless target drones present another area, though non-glamourous, for DRDO.

Ideally we need not import systems such as Banshee and Mirach if Lakshya and Abhyas are available.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Jan 2016 14:26

Mirach is higher speed than lakshya. We rent it for periodic trials. Abhyas was iirc developed for Army AD. It too has only got a top speed of 0.5M. Given DRDOs limited manpower, this could well be an area where pvt firms take up the mantle.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 01 Jan 2016 14:34

L&T has purchased rights to IPR of Lakshya, and let's see if they come out with more advanced & sophisticated version.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Jan 2016 16:10

You need a brand new design + more powerful engine.
TBH ADE seems to have lost its way for a while now, its flagship Rustom 2 and Nirbhay programs are both yet to take off properly.

raghava · Post by **raghava** » 01 Jan 2016 19:50

A small tidbit to usher in 2016...

my friend the panwallah was reading a book about Vedic Gods. As he reached p28 and 29, he suddenly felt very drowsy and fell asleep. The God Varuna appeared to him in a dream and confirmed to him that an island in the Nicobar chain and an island in the Lakshadweep chain would be under His personal protection...

my friend the panwallah has been trying to make sense of the dream ever since then...

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 01 Jan 2016 22:07

So Kamorta and Kadmatt have varunastra? I thought they were based in vizag? What about them? In fact what about P-28a?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Jan 2016 12:42

raghava wrote:A small tidbit to usher in 2016...

my friend the panwallah was reading a book about Vedic Gods. As he reached p28 and 29, he suddenly felt very drowsy and fell asleep. The God Varuna appeared to him in a dream and confirmed to him that an island in the Nicobar chain and an island in the Lakshadweep chain would be under His personal protection...

my friend the panwallah has been trying to make sense of the dream ever since then...

This is good news.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Jan 2016 15:13

For comparison with IAC-1.The PLAN's new CV expected by 2020.

http://www.maritimeprofessional.com/new ... ith-282821

Dragon Flexes Naval Muscle With 2nd Aircraft Carrier
By Aiswarya Lakshmi January 1, 2016

China's first aircraft carrier "Liaoning". Photo by Chinese Navy

China has confirmed it is building a second aircraft carrier in a move that is likely to further inflame tensions with its regional rivals over the South China Sea.

Beijing wants to exert its presence in the South China Sea, after complaining of “provocations” from the US, as well as defending its interests in the region.

According to Defense Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun, construction of the conventionally powered carrier, with a displacement of 50,000 tons, is underway in the country's northeastern port city of Dalian.

"China has a long coastline and a vast maritime area under our jurisdiction. To safeguard our maritime sovereignty, interests and rights is the sacred mission of the Chinese armed forces," Yang said, as cited by Reuters.

The yet-to-be-named vessel will be able to accommodate J-15 fighters and other types of planes, Yang said, adding that fixed-wing aircraft will use a "ski-jump" takeoff ramp. The J-15 is a copy of Russia’s Sukhoi Su-33.

“After an overall consideration of various factors, the relevant authorities started the research and development of China’s second aircraft carrier which is currently under independent design and construction,” Yang said.

Yang did not release more details nor did he say when the carrier would be completed. Information about the program is closely guarded.

China already has one aircraft carrier, the Liaoning. It was purchased from Ukraine in 1998 and retrofitted domestically.

Plans to build a second carrier do not come as a surprise. Rumors have been swirling for more than a year, but have been quickly scrubbed by China’s censors.

The acknowledgement of the second aircraft carrier comes at a time when China is locked in a military tussle with the US over the South China Sea (SCS), where Washington and its allies refused to recognise China’s efforts to build artificial islands with military installations.

China has been looking to increase its maritime defense capabilities, as it exerts its claims in the SCS.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jan 2016 09:56

^^ Philip's facts on the submarine arm are correct, however his reasoning is a bit lacking.

Unfortunately, most posters are considering Philip's view as sacrilegious that IN can't handle Type 885. Sadly these posters have no clue of operational matters, not do they ever bother to read & research.

How many of those berating Philips read the India Today article posted in BR News and inferred from the numbers? How many of them read member's Abhibhushan's blog?

Its not about IN ability to handle the Type 885, but its about proficiency, infrastructure & logistics.

India's best brains clear IIT JEE but it still takes them 4 years to complete engineering and further years to become proficient. Despite their ability, they don't become proficient engineers in 2/4/6 months but rather require years.

Similarly, a new ship/submarine has new equipment. INS Chakra and INS Kalvari have new sonars and powerplants. They have new trim characteristics that officers will need getting used to.

While learning operations is easy, becoming proficient needs time and hands on experience in different operational environments, viz Sonar Operators need to train in coastal waters, high seas, stormy seas with churning waters, different depths to account for thermoclines. Simulators help only to an extent.

IN is inducting three submarine classes near simultaneously - INS Chakra, INS Kalvari & INS Arihant. Each class has new systems. Each class has its own infrastructure requirements. Each class has its own logistics requirements. Hence a fourth class Type 885 at this point of time will severely overload people, infrastructure & logistics.

IN is not a large organization, its only 55,000 people and the Submarine Branch is a part of it. Its a volunteer arm. It takes time to train a person and even more to make him proficient. This is described here http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/unde ... 56654.html

Guess what INS Chakra is doing? She spends most of her time training crews for 3 Arihant and 6 follow up submarines. She occasionally does Operational Patrols but her primary job is training, and will be so for a long time to come.

Most of our DE submarines are training new submariners in their sea time. You can infer from the training article. Providing 6 months sea time for 45 officers and 176 sailors in submarines of crew size 40 & 53 will require a number of submarines being pulled out of their operational roles. And with submarines, like all equipment, have a certain percentage under refit at any point of time, the number operational submarines decreases significantly.

People may argue that personnel can be trained well in advance. However, their skills will attrite if they just sit on the shore waiting for their platforms to get built.

If you increase training batches, quality suffers. If you read member Abhibhushan's blog (TKS Tales), you will find that after the 1962 China War, IAF increased pilot induction and quality of training suffered leading to flight safety issues later. From https://tkstales.wordpress.com/2011/11/ ... rthigeyan/

Karthi had joined the Air Force when it was in the throws of a rapid expansion. The days of massive pruning at the initial flying training days at the Academy were long gone. Unlike my own cadet days (where only 33 cadets reached the stage of completion out of 93 who had commenced) any cadet who could somehow muddle through the flying syllabus was allowed to pass out of the Academy.

As the above article makes clear, knowing how to fly & operate and proficiency in flying & operations are vastly separated points on the learning curve.

Most personnel have aspirations for promotion and larger roles rather than just being gadget geeks. So personnel do not do the same role for 10 years. Tenure is usually 3 years, because officers and men expect promotion and move on to larger roles. Hence staffing requirement is further increased.

These days, officers and men need to do a lot of courses, leading to lesser sea time and consequently skills like handling & navigation suffers. I met the CO of a IN Frigate in December whose sea time was 1/3 of CO's in my time, however, whose courses attended were 3x of CO's in my time. This leads to -

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 255068.cms

With at least 11 major accidents in 2014, the Indian Navy is yet to figure out what caused four of them, leading to a sharp rap on the knuckles from a parliamentary panel.

Also, just after learning to operate, one cannot commence operations. One needs to be proficient. And proficiency takes years. Otherwise one will make fool of themselves in enemy waters giving opponents chance to learn from your fumbling & bumbling.

There is an interest in Type 885 because it has partial single hull construction whose construction techniques are superior to presently known in India. It has a spherical bow sonar. Hence there is an interest in it. However, a fourth submarine class at this point of time will be quite a bit of stretch.

Even the best people will need time to be proficient, even after throwing money Infrastructure will need time to build up and logistic supply chains established. And proficiency in all areas will require time.

PS - Did anyone read the Bhutanese & Nepali personnel? They serve in IN. Also note Sri Lankan & Myanmar submarine aspirations.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jan 2016 10:03

Tx. "TShark" for elaborating upon the issue.It should now make more sense to the gang.

Int. viewpoint about the PLAN's carrier ambitions.Indian carrier history dwelt upon too.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comme ... acific-war

Colby Cosh: Does China’s latest naval disclosure point to Pacific war?
Colby Cosh | January 2, 2016 .
A 2012 file photo from China’s Xinhua news agency shows the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning cruising for a test on the sea. Beijing has increased military spending and is working on an aircraft carrier.

AP Photo / Xinhua, Li Tang, FileA 2012 file photo from China’s Xinhua news agency shows the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning cruising for a test on the sea. Beijing has increased military spending and is working on an aircraft carrier. .

Did you hear the one about the Chinese aircraft carrier? Sorry; that made me sound like your uncle telling a lousy joke at the Christmas party last week. But it’s a serious question. A spokesman for the Chinese defence ministry confirmed Thursday what U.S. intelligence sources have been saying for a while: the People’s Republic of China is building its own aircraft carrier from scratch in the port city of Dalian, which is still probably more familiar to history buffs as Port Arthur.

Aircraft carriers are such fascinating objects. With the exception of manned spacecraft, there is probably nothing that signifies national prestige quite as boldly as a flattop. It is almost the best single marker you can identify of the difference between states properly called “powers” and those that are just — well, will I be forgiven for saying “Canadas”? They attract enormous amounts of attention and analysis from military experts and amateur opinionators.

And, in a sense, this is disproportionate nearly to the point of self-evident unreason. The age of battles between aircraft carrier groups began with the commencement of the fight in the Coral Sea: May 4, 1942. It pretty much ended when the Americans sent four Japanese carriers to the bottom at Midway, 30 days later.

Since that abbreviated epoch, the countries capable of operating aircraft carriers have mostly avoided hot wars with each other. American ones have the run of the seas and find no trouble. Others constantly leave their owners wondering if they are worthwhile.

John Ivison: Tension between China and Japan over islands could threaten world peace
‘A game-changer’: China shows missiles it claims can destroy aircraft carriers after plummeting from orbit
.
Perhaps this means that on the whole carriers have done their job. But a constant theme in their history is the fear that they make nice fat targets for the weaker side in a conflict. India’s carrier Vikrant played a key role in blockading Bengal during the 1971 war over Bangladeshi independence, but the Indian Navy was nervous about a seemingly foreordained single combat with Pakistan’s diesel submarine Ghazi (formerly USS Diablo), and got lucky when it sank in an apparent accident. The U.K., whose remaining scraps of empire pose a unique defence problem, sent a carrier, HMS Hermes, to the Falklands — and then the Royal Navy held it off, wincing all the while, at the edge of the theatre, barely within Harrier range of the islands.

Hermes is still on duty today as INS Viraat, a successor to Vikrant; one of the interesting things about carriers is that, as with submarines, their lives will often have two acts in different navies. That is the case with China’s existing, first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning. She was christened Riga in Soviet days and inherited by independent Ukraine as Varyag. A Hong Kong travel agency bought the hull, claiming it intended to turn it into a floating casino. (Getting the ship out of the Black Sea under the nose of Turkey might otherwise have been tricky, and wasn’t easy anyway.)

To no one’s total surprise, Varyag was spotted in a Dalian drydock a few years later, undergoing military refit in the hands of the People’s Liberation Army Navy. The renamed Liaoning barely qualifies as a full-fledged aircraft carrier on dimensions, it burns gas, and it has a ski-jump takeoff runway that limits the armament and range of its planes. It does not, on its own, represent a challenge to American supremacy, even in the waters around China.

But Thursday’s announcement is that the Chinese have reverse-engineered Varyag with some success and intend to build their own indigenous carrier of similar design. The question is whether more ambitious projects might follow in the years to come; the Chinese submarine fleet, for example, has already mastered nuclear propulsion.

The truth is that no one really knows how much use any country’s aircraft carriers would now be in a serious shooting war between technologically advanced nations. If you drill into the defence literature you find that the interesting contemporary discussions concern, not carriers, but hard-to-stop “carrier killer” missiles.

In a way we know more about Chinese preparedness for a Pacific naval war with the U.S. than anyone at all does about the Americans’
.
And, in fact, the Chinese have invested as much time and investment in carrier-killer tech as anyone. In that field they are not bogged down in the late Cold War era that Riga/Varyag/Liaoning represents. They might be ahead of everybody, including the U.S.

In a way we know more about Chinese preparedness for a Pacific naval war with the U.S. than anyone at all does about the Americans’. The latest U.S. doctrine (outlined in a congressional research report delivered Dec. 21 by the revered Ronald O’Rourke) is that the answer to increasingly sophisticated carrier-killers lies in breaking their “kill chain” by means of electronic countermeasures.

Achieving a “hard kill” of incoming missiles by knocking them out of the sky is difficult and expensive. It’s easier — and “frankly, cheaper,” in the words of a former U.S. chief of naval operations — to prevent enemy ships and onshore missile bases from detecting, identifying and tracking you, all of which are necessary prerequisites to a score.

The U.S. Navy professes lavish confidence in its “soft kill” countermeasures — but it doesn’t talk much about the details, it cannot be 100 per cent sure they would work until they’re called upon in a real conflict, and it has not altogether neglected the wider question of whether carriers are obsolete — whether, in fact, the whole capital-ship paradigm pursued since Henry VIII and the Mary Rose is now passé.

There is talk of a more dispersed “fleet architecture,” and conscious plans for “distributed lethality.” This language summons visions of stealthy, small unmanned craft chasing the big ships from the seas — and one recalls, with a gulp, what happened to USS Cole.

National Post

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jan 2016 10:27

srai wrote:Obviously, the crew numbers reported by the above article is incorrect. It seems they have more than doubled the crew in their estimates. Check out below (Naval Technology.com) which states crew of 31.

No, Indian ships deliberately have higher staffing. Reason being in prolonged operations, people exhaust and do not work at full efficiency. A second operator can take the role while the first one rests. Same for engine room crew. In case of personnel being killed or injured, replacements are available on board, and equipment & hence overall platform is not inoperable because of unavailable personnel.

Centuries earlier, when the Royal Navy won wars to control of global seas, their ships were outnumbered by French & Spanish. However, Royal Navy ships had higher staffing.

This ensured that despite enemy cannon fire decimating men, more men were available to handle the sails & steering, as well as fire the cannons without slowing the tempo. More men meant boarding parties could be detached to take the fight to the enemy. More men meant landing parties could be sent to shore to man forts and colonies.

India continues the old traditions. It works wonderfully. The reduced staffing of Western Navies to save salaries and training costs is foolish. Equipment can be built or bought faster but training personnel takes time. Building experience takes even more time.

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Jan 2016 11:06

^^^

If, as per what you are saying, the staffing is more than double of standard crew size for Scorpene design, then endurance would be severely compromised due to limited food storage and crew space. Modern platforms like Scorpene are highly automated with crew comfort given a much higher value than designs of previous generation.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jan 2016 11:25

srai wrote:If, as per what you are saying, the staffing is more than double of standard crew size for Scorpene design, then endurance would be severely compromised due to limited food storage and crew space. Modern platforms like Scorpene are highly automated with crew comfort given a much higher value than designs of previous generation.

No, look up for concepts like hot bunking that were very common in the cold war.

Typically, ships and submarines designs have weight & buoyancy reserves for future equipment growth. We use these reserves...to store food. And Moore's law kicks in by the time upgrades are due.

Practically, the camaraderie of a large crew works better in the isolation at sea, than among few men.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2016 11:53

Like blue and gold crews on subs?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jan 2016 11:59

No, Blue & Gold are separate crews altogether swapped while at port. Hot Bunking refers to personnel sharing bunks within the same crew. Those on watch are at their stations, while those off watch sleep at the bunks.

Because the bunks are always in use, they stay warm from the previous occupant. Hence the term Hot Bunking.

Earlier, sailors had the option of putting up their hammocks.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Jan 2016 12:09

tsarkar wrote:IN is inducting three submarine classes near simultaneously - INS Chakra, INS Kalvari & INS Arihant. Each class has new systems. Each class has its own infrastructure requirements. Each class has its own logistics requirements. Hence a fourth class Type 885 at this point of time will severely overload people, infrastructure & logistics.

True , All the news of India buying Yasen is just pulled out of someone Musharaf , Logistically it makes more sense to operate a new class of submarine.

yasen itself is a very new class and it will take years to fix the big and small issue they encounter , barely 1 is operational today , Akula design has 25 years of ops service and has all their issues fixed by now , So IN will likely opt for 1 more Akula to have logistical , crew and operational commonality

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Jan 2016 12:10

tsarkar wrote:
srai wrote:If, as per what you are saying, the staffing is more than double of standard crew size for Scorpene design, then endurance would be severely compromised due to limited food storage and crew space. Modern platforms like Scorpene are highly automated with crew comfort given a much higher value than designs of previous generation.
No, look up for concepts like hot bunking that were very common in the cold war.

Typically, ships and submarines designs have weight & buoyancy reserves for future equipment growth. We use these reserves...to store food. And Moore's law kicks in by the time upgrades are due.

Practically, the camaraderie of a large crew works better in the isolation at sea, than among few men.

I know of "hot bunking". Those nowadays in modern designs are being dispensed with for better crew comfort. Plus, automation has reduced the need for all those extra crews of old technologies. While there may be some extra crew, I don't think you will have more than doubled the designed crew capacity. The designed crew capacity of 31 + some extras already factor in crew roatational shift needs for running of various systems within the submarine. Likewise, storage spaces for food and other provisions are inherent in design.

Can you provide sources that say Indian crew will be more than double of standard Scorpene crew of 31 (+6 for special ops)? Apart from that one article estimating a crew of 72, I'vent seen it anywhere that states that high a number. I seriously doubt Scorpene can take in that many crews and still perform within its design parameters.

Note: That article's estimate of 72 crew for Scorpene is larger than for Kilo at 53. Scorpene has lesser displacement than Kilo SSK.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 04 Jan 2016 12:28

31 crew seems awful small for a submarine. Assuming 3 shifts of duty (like the way the US and UK do it), on one shift that would be around 10 people on watch to run the sub, 10 more people doing maintenance/drills/studying/exercising and the remaining 10 or 11 are sleeping. I know that there is a lot of automation, but only 10 people operating the sub's systems at any given time seems really small.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jan 2016 12:33

What Rubin is going to offer for the P-75I req. If equiopped with BMos launchers,it willl be exceptionally formidable.

Sea Ghost: New Russian Submarine is Stealthier Than a 'Black Hole'
© Sputnik/ Alexei Danichev
Russia
16:18 02.01.2016
Russia’s newest silent submarine is even stealthier than its sneaky predecessor.

RS-24 Yars/SS-27 Mod 2 solid-propellant intercontinental ballistic missiles
© Host photo agency

The stealth capabilities of Russia’s new Lada-class diesel-electric submarines far exceed those of their predecessors, Admiraty Shipyard’s CEO Alexander Buzakov told the Russian press.

According to Buzakov, the new vessels are even stealthier than Russian Kilo-class submarines, thought to be one of the quietest diesel-electric submarine classes in the world and dubbed "black holes" for their ability to "disappear” from sonars.

The new submarines are able to maintain such a low profile thanks to a clever implementation of a next-generation anti-reflective acoustic coating and a new improved hydro-acoustic system, Buzakov said.

He also added that during the new submarines’ construction and design process, the development team managed to gather a lot of valuable data which, among other things, allowed them to significantly improve the Kilo-class submarines as well.

The Lada-class submarines are designed to defend coastlines against ships and other submarines, gather intelligence, provide surveillance and reconnaissance missions, and act as a mother ship for special forces. With its new air-independent propulsion plant, a Lada submarine can remain submerged for as many as 25 days. With its vast array of weapon systems, the Lada is also world’s first non-nuclear submarine to be equipped with specialized launchers for cruise missiles.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20160102/ ... z3wGELysHy

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jan 2016 12:56

Srai - We'll need to wait for its commissioning & first cruise.

However, as an example, the Talwar class can be crewed by 180 but in Indian service carries between 240-270.

When the INS Sindhuratna fire happened, there were close to 100 people on board, though that included shore based trials team.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 04 Jan 2016 21:35

Seems we have signed up for 22 US-2i

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/eco ... 061630.ece

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jan 2016 21:49

^^^^^

12, not 22. Typo perhaps?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Jan 2016 15:38

2 bought,10 built locally.That number is going to be a v.expensive "build in India" venture.To recover the costs of TOT,etc. one would require dozens to be built. Our need isn't that great particularly as the amphib has zero ASW capability.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jan 2016 17:39

they could in greater numbers replace the bears and mays for maritime surveillance and patrolling. both are nearing end of service lives.

I am sure you know of the legendary PBY catalina and the B-24 liberator in battle of atlantic role.

being japanese origin we could fit any western or indian search radar and ESM kit on it.