Indian Naval Discussion

jai · Post by **jai** » 16 Dec 2011 04:19

Not sure why did we not extend the lease of or buy the previous Chakra from the soviets as I remember reading somewhere that the offer was there.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Dec 2011 12:25

rediff:
In a further hint at strengthening ties between India and the US, US Deputy Secretary of State William J Burns said today that India's naval presence in the Indian Ocean is a source of comfort for the US.

--
p.s. I can see MQ4-C in IN colours at the P8I base too...

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 16 Dec 2011 12:54

Russian Source on Nerpa Transfer 1

Russian Source on Nerpa Transfer 2

"The bilateral military cooperation program in particular stipulates that Russia will transfer the K-152 Nerpa attack submarine to India on a 10-year lease by the end of 2011. The deal was signed in 2004.

Other aspects of cooperation include the planned delivery of INS Vikramaditya (the former Soviet aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov) to India in December 2012 after an upgrade, and the contract to supply India with 80 Mil Mi-17 Hip-H helicopters, expected to be fulfilled by the end of 2013."

Intresting thing is that all of these are ongoing or previous deals ... No news of any new deal with Russians ... Times have changed indeed from Cold war ...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Dec 2011 13:00

jai wrote:Not sure why did we not extend the lease of or buy the previous Chakra from the soviets as I remember reading somewhere that the offer was there.

Two reasons , The Soviet did not extend the lease beyond the 3 years we leased for , the US was not happy with SU leasing the subs although there was news of another Charlie 2 was to be leased called INS Chitra but US protested to SU, they simply took it back and decommissioned it

Indian Navy was finding it expensive to operate the Charlie 2 , reportedly a good chunk of operational budget was spent on maintaining the sub in 3 years plus those land based facility built etc, the sub itself performed well in the 3 years she was with Navy and took part in all IN exercise at that time with no operational down time and performed quite well.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Dec 2011 15:32

Yes,the IN's budget at that time was miniscule.We also lacked the strategic vision of leasing a more advanced N-sub later on.We were supposedly interested in the Sierra at one time.Had we leveraged better our relations with the Soviets/Russia,who however were in turmoil after the SU's collapse,we would've had a continuity in operating N-subs.We also lost the art of building conventional subs after building just two U-boats.Let's hope that after the Nerpa,another Akula arrives within the next 12-18 months.Unless we rapidly build up our N-sub capability,we will not get the respect from China that we deserve.We need a production/acquisition rate of one N-sub every year for the next 10 years,so that we will possess at least 5+5 SSBNs and SSGNs.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 Dec 2011 17:26

Indian Navy calls for Mumbai citizens participation in reducing bird hits to aircraft

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Dec 2011 19:19

Austin wrote:
jai wrote:Not sure why did we not extend the lease of or buy the previous Chakra from the soviets as I remember reading somewhere that the offer was there.
Two reasons , The Soviet did not extend the lease beyond the 3 years we leased for , the US was not happy with SU leasing the subs although there was news of another Charlie 2 was to be leased called INS Chitra but US protested to SU, they simply took it back and decommissioned it

Indian Navy was finding it expensive to operate the Charlie 2 , reportedly a good chunk of operational budget was spent on maintaining the sub in 3 years plus those land based facility built etc, the sub itself performed well in the 3 years she was with Navy and took part in all IN exercise at that time with no operational down time and performed quite well.

The collapse of teh Soviet Union was one of the major reasons.

K

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Dec 2011 19:47

Digging further , FAS says Chakra served from Jan 1988 to Jan 1991( 3 years ) and SU broke some time in Dec 1991 so both events are unrelated , it was a decision of SU leadership not to renew the lease because the US protested very hard , I recollect how VOA and other defence magazine at that time was claiming how dangerous it was to let the IN operate the nuclear submarine and Pakistan too raising its vocal pitch and 2nd half 80's IN was rapidly rising with multiple assets.

Finally it seems it was a concious decision by SU leadership not to renew the lease although IN would have liked to do that and lease another submarine.

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 16 Dec 2011 20:36

Anyone in Mumbai with a view of the harbour?

There's an awe inspiring sight in store for you, ahead of the PFR next week. From one of the skycrapers where I work, I counted, anchored in the harbour (not the docks):

- Viraat
- At least 1 sub (pretty sure its a HDW)
- 2 Delhis
- 2 Shivaliks
- At least 1 Talwar
- 3 Magars
- 2 Tankers
- Sagarwshwani class
- Surprisingly, Amba class- I thought that was retired
- 3 gangas
- 3 Leanders/ Brahmaputras- were a bit far and light not good
- At least 1 Khukri class
- At least 1 Abhay class
- Tir
- Some auxiliaries
- Also saw a flight of 3 Kamovs landing in at Shikra. Along with the increased Sea King and Chetak flights

Could not spot the Kashins/ Jalashwa from my vantage point. Will be good to see how many I spotted correctly. Very confident, though. The evening light (4-5 pm) is perfect to catch a view.

Its truly truly awe inspiring.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 Dec 2011 20:44

jai wrote:Not sure why did we not extend the lease of or buy the previous Chakra from the soviets as I remember reading somewhere that the offer was there.

I was reading some ex - Mandarin's who are on my FB. One fact that dawned on me was that INS Chakra was supposed to be offered for renewal. Not withstand the claims that US pressure etc was on, it was the legendary babudom that killed the renewal. US pressure was as much when it was leased originally, so that was not a pain. One was of the opinion that "political will" (logically Indian) was lacking.

One was of the view that US pressure and demise of Soviet Union played a role, but, he also said that it was definitely on the offer if India had decided.

Separately, one (not a mandarin) said that the lease was of no use as our own sub (for which it was used for training) won't be out even after the next lease etc. IMO, it is true that the people experienced on INS Chakra went away (baring very few who were looking after the project till retirement).

A gentleman pointed out that Akula deal was done when Russia was in its lows. So, US pressure was not a major reason. It was Delhi bungling. US has habit blowing trumpet very high even if there is less reason.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Dec 2011 02:26

Chacko is more accurate.Quite right about our ATV being nowhere on the horizon whatsoever,so what was the point of the lease for just training? babudom would've questioned the huge costs of operating the vessel and the IN has always been the "Cinderella" of the services.Building/acquiring greater numbers of smaller conventional subs would be a more effective plan for the IN's needs.

http://the-diplomat.com/2011/12/16/chin ... ia-navy/2/
China Base a Threat to India Navy?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 18 Dec 2011 18:43

Naval Fleet Reviews in India Link

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 18 Dec 2011 22:07

chackojoseph wrote:Naval Fleet Reviews in India Link

I remember the IN once showcasing its might to the public in Bombay. They had Seahawks blowing up targets and the chopper routine and the finale was Seahawks escorting a brand new AI Boeing 707. This was just after we had inducted the INS Vikrant so it must have been the early 60s.

There were Alize's too. Alas, I do not remember the year except that I had a vantage point from the terrace of a building at Marine Drive, where my Uncle stayed.

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 18 Dec 2011 23:28

Austin wrote:
jai wrote:Not sure why did we not extend the lease of or buy the previous Chakra from the soviets as I remember reading somewhere that the offer was there.
Two reasons , The Soviet did not extend the lease beyond the 3 years we leased for , the US was not happy with SU leasing the subs although there was news of another Charlie 2 was to be leased called INS Chitra but US protested to SU, they simply took it back and decommissioned it

Indian Navy was finding it expensive to operate the Charlie 2 , reportedly a good chunk of operational budget was spent on maintaining the sub in 3 years plus those land based facility built etc, the sub itself performed well in the 3 years she was with Navy and took part in all IN exercise at that time with no operational down time and performed quite well.

Austin wrote:Digging further , FAS says Chakra served from Jan 1988 to Jan 1991( 3 years ) and SU broke some time in Dec 1991 so both events are unrelated , it was a decision of SU leadership not to renew the lease because the US protested very hard , I recollect how VOA and other defence magazine at that time was claiming how dangerous it was to let the IN operate the nuclear submarine and Pakistan too raising its vocal pitch and 2nd half 80's IN was rapidly rising with multiple assets.

Finally it seems it was a concious decision by SU leadership not to renew the lease although IN would have liked to do that and lease another submarine.

This is what i know -> Chakra had radiation problems in its power plant, a second charlie-I class sub (to be named Chitra) was offered as a substitute to the first one. In 1991 Jan when Chakra was returned its material condition wasn't very good (which i think is the reason for non renewal of its lease, it was already 24 years in service). Where as why Chitra never reached Indian shore is unclear (possibily chaos of forthcoming soviet downfall be the reason).

*PS - both chakra and chitra were of Charlie-I class.

Kapil · Post by **Kapil** » 19 Dec 2011 09:57

All,

I have set up a blog to track pfr
its at http://pfr11.wordpress.com

I have put up some articles given by the IN for now
will update with pics.
Please excuse the gremlins as my non-existent blogging and html skills are kinda rusty.
I welcome advise and help in running the blog.
Pls mail to kapil at bharat hyphen rakshak dot com

thanks

alexis · Post by **alexis** » 19 Dec 2011 11:14

Is teg fitted with Kashtan or Barak 1?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Dec 2011 11:19

alexis wrote:Is teg fitted with Kashtan or Barak 1?

barak 1 and AK-630M

Ajit.C · Post by **Ajit.C** » 19 Dec 2011 13:33

Regarding the PFR 2011-Any chance of Arihant being displayed?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 19 Dec 2011 16:44

No Arihant will not be displayed. She is yet to fire her reactor.

Indian Navy readies for President's Fleet Review 2011

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 20 Dec 2011 14:46

check out new warship stealth concepts being pursued by IN

Original Here:
http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/213377/ind ... ships.html

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 20 Dec 2011 15:05

It has MI-25's in the starting as ship based helicopters.

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 20 Dec 2011 15:19

I have a view on brahmos deployment for navel air fleet, So need all experts advices on it. Like we have the brahmos ship navel variant which has 290 km range. This range obstruct the required air defense for any carrier. So why not we updated the MIG-29K variant belly to carry the air to land brahmos as we are doing for super SU-30MKI. By this we need not to carry whole carrier to the danger area, just one MIG flight would do it...or we may use some other platform for such deployment..

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 20 Dec 2011 15:21

Aniket,

But I am sure by then we will have some actually stealthy attack choppers. We are talking about time period between 2020-2025.

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 20 Dec 2011 15:34

The second ship in the video a Single Hull Frigate class ship, seems very much a stealthier derivative of the Talwar/Shivalik. Maybe its the design for the 7 Shivalik follow-on ships which have been in the pipeline.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Dec 2011 15:54

trimarans and bimarans are one of those things that look good on natgeo and discovery but nobody has gone for a principal combatant in that form factor yet. the reasons imo are
- to steer the ship properly all the hulls will need a propulsion plant. if one fails or is down, it will need heavy rudder to keep going in a straight line and surely much less than top speed. in a single hull the prop shafts are close together and even if one is shut the other can operate at full speed, with slight rudder trim maybe
- the hugely increase area of deck looks sexy but the actual hull volume is poor - the slim bi/tri hulls do not accomodate the space needed for proper hangers and airwing stuff. .... and loading all that stuff topside just makes the ship more and more top heavy.

even if there are side hulls to increase the deck space, there will have to be a fat central hull to be the proper ship.

sum · Post by **sum** » 20 Dec 2011 16:21

^^ Few pics of the fleet review:
Livefist pics

Marut · Post by **Marut** » 20 Dec 2011 17:10

The main attraction of the catamarans and trimarans is the increased pitch and roll stability due to the multiple hulls (upto a certain sea state 3 or 4, IIRC) and the slightly higher speeds compared to mono hulls due to reduced surface friction. This is offset by reduced maneuverability and lack of hull space and design issues for roll and pitch stability at higher sea states. IMO it is a concept that can be studied for ADS type ships, where the huge deck area can be used to support a large complement of aircraft. The relatively stability and the protective screen provided by carrier escorts will compensate for the lack of maneuverability. But the design complications ans attendant costs may be prohibitive. The stealth aspect of such vessels will be a different story altogether given their rather huge profile. It's too much to expect a deployable design coming out of these form factors anytime in the next couple of decades.

I believe that the IBN reporter got a couple of soundbytes from the IN chief designer regarding stealth and then added the masala regarding multihulls, LCS, GCS etc after a vigourous session of google search and wikipedia copy paste!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Dec 2011 17:14

ADS will still need one level of hanger and one level of storage for aviation fuel, munitions, spares, workshops preferably deep within the hull protected by anti-missile measures. that is tough to do on catamaran style speed hulls.

the Ro-Ro Jervis bay concept for moving men and machinery x-ocean is worth exploring though...a purely logistical role. shallow draft is actually good for island harbours and bow and side thrusters can make these amenable to austere jettys.

Marut · Post by **Marut** » 20 Dec 2011 18:25

^ The flight deck joining the two hulls can be a one/two level deck with the facilities for the POL, spares, munitions, workshops and hangars for aircraft. CIWS & anti missile measures are standard just like other carriers. The only drawback as I mentioned earlier is the sea worthiness of such a design and its complexities that will make the monohull design a preferred option.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 20 Dec 2011 18:57

India's first woman President reviews the Naval fleet

I will post some pics later

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 20 Dec 2011 18:58

What's been shown at 0.40 is the P17A class stealth frigate. Seven such beautiful ships are to be build. Regarding the LCS concept being adopted by the Navy, i still don't understand why? The concept of using an attack Helicopter (like modified Navalized LCH) is a good concept. Especially if this ship is going to take the role of futuristic corvettes just like in the U.S Navy. The final comments by the journo of India joining the British Concept ship was a cheap gimmick. I don't know why he said that when we have our own plans to build the P17A which will be superior to any British concepts. Looking forward to the commissioning of INS Kamorta and also more orders for follow on corvettes along with it's variants.
Now what i can make out of the trimaran concept is that, it's a Corvette sized ship. Uses two different types of propulsion including waterjet for better speed. Capability to carry two helicopters. Enough space for surface to air and anti-ship missiles. So may be the future corvette of the Indian Navy that can carry two helicopters. One can be attack helo to support troops doing amphibious landings. May be capability to carry small amphibious force as well. One utility or Anti-sub helo based on the requirement. Good offensive/defensive capability with respect to air and surface warfare, along with Anti-sub warfare. Very stealthy. Smaller ship, may be for production in large numbers. May be a small ship that will be an all rounder.

arun · Post by **arun** » 20 Dec 2011 21:30

sum wrote:^^ Few pics of the fleet review:
Livefist pics

Anantha Krishnan’s Tarmak blog has a different set of President’s Fleet Review pictures that were released by our Ministry of Defence:

Snapshots From PFR 2011

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 21 Dec 2011 00:18

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Dec 2011 00:23

>> The final comments by the journo of India joining the British Concept ship was a cheap gimmick

this is the same idiot that called IA 'unwieldy peasant army'. what can you expect.

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 21 Dec 2011 01:13

No Mig 29 KUB 's in the review ?

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 21 Dec 2011 04:34

More PFR 2011 from Livefist:
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2011/12/ph ... vy_21.html

Best among them for me were:
INS Satpura, INS Mumbai, INS Shivalik and INS Mysore.

Missed INS Vikramaditya and INS Chakra due to delays.

But anyhow PFR 2011 rockz

maz · Post by **maz** » 21 Dec 2011 10:05

BR's PFR 2011 album with pix by Kapil is online. Bear with us as we upload pictures. Numbers in front of ships indicate ships' position in the reviewing lines along with the commanding officers name.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Gall ... s/PFR2011/

Enjoy!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Dec 2011 02:08

New IN warship design concepts link not opening properly.Can someone pl. post pics in the thread ?

Media reports that the CAG has pulled up the MOD/IN once again the decision to buy the rust-bucket Trenton which is again being refitted at Vizag.The acquisition of the LPD has been controversial ever since acquisition,including the accident which killed several sailors when cleaning a tank,the state of its Sea King 'copters,etc.The Trenton was conspicuous by its absence at the recent Review of the Fleet.

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 22 Dec 2011 19:30

Launch of new anti submarine corvette named INS Kadmatt from kolkata..
Ajay Shukla blogging..
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2011/12/ ... ithin.html

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 22 Dec 2011 19:44

we can sail the newly leased Russian nerpa akula class for just 60 to 80 day a year, which is very low then the standard of 240 day. If it is true the why IN leasing it for 10 long years on 2Bn $. Its because russia is not providing enough fuel to sail long.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GQtxH8B7gEY/T ... /NEWS2.jpg