Indian Naval Discussion

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 13 Oct 2009 09:10

Nat geo did show one small fleeting clip of the upgraded kilo's bridge, before it shifted to the older kilos for the rest of the show.
I froze that clip and indeed there were a row of consoles with those two LCD screens there displaying the sonar output.

George J · Post by **George J** » 13 Oct 2009 09:21

Austin wrote:..........Any modern CIC or ops room as the IN prefers to call it , would have integrated combat control with rows of control stations and console like you see here link......... but then I could be wrong

I thought you had pics for the Talwar/Delhi/Shivalik/Brahmaputra layout, that's an a/c carrier and not even the real thing. On these ships they do a LOT with little (again thanks to IT-Vity). So just trust me on this that's pretty much the ops room. If this was a fully functional ship then at the resolution that Ajai took this pics you could easily read what most of the consoles are for.

The modernised kilo has a row of console , IIRC with 4- 5 people each manning 1 console with 2 LCD screen and control stations , its similar to the 5th picture on that link with 5 operator station with 2 LCD each , ditto for Kilo upgrade.

Umm I will defer to you on this one, the Klub firing Kilo does have a LCD console but beyond that I don't recall.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Oct 2009 09:56

George J wrote: I thought you had pics for the Talwar/Delhi/Shivalik/Brahmaputra layout, that's an a/c carrier and not even the real thing. On these ships they do a LOT with little (again thanks to IT-Vity). So just trust me on this that's pretty much the ops room. If this was a fully functional ship then at the resolution that Ajai took this pics you could easily read what most of the consoles are for.

One can do a lot with little , but still that looks like an ops room ?
Emm may be TSarkar or SNaik can provide some input.

Umm I will defer to you on this one, the Klub firing Kilo does have a LCD console but beyond that I don't recall.

youtube once had those mission navy snippet and the kilo part , not sure they still do.

On second thoughts the MKI seems to have a better ops room than Shivalik

arun · Post by **arun** » 13 Oct 2009 10:21

Rakesh wrote:
arun wrote:For the line drawing of the Survey Catamaran being built by Alcock Ashdown for the Indian Navy please click on “General Arrangement” in this post of mine.
Thanks! Do we have any details on delivery? Date of contract execution? Anything?

Sorry I have no additional information and you are on your own.

I however recall that there was a bit of a kerfuffle with regard to the order of the HUGIN 1000 AUV used by this class and the CAG had made some rumbling noises.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Oct 2009 17:09

Was this posted some time ago?The article is worth re-reading in the light of the second line of subs,decision to be made soon.One intersting point is that there could be commonality of eqpt. in the sub and the ATV tech,where L&T have had a major role to play.L&T are supposedly wanting to build Amur/or the S-1000 for the second line and might very well get the nod,hence the relevance of this article.

http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:Px ... clnk&gl=in

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 13 Oct 2009 18:18

Austin wrote: One can do a lot with little , but still that looks like an ops room ?
Emm may be TSarkar or SNaik can provide some input.
On second thoughts the MKI seems to have a better ops room than Shivalik

This is how Trebovanije-M looks on Talwar class, just 8 consoles, but you can do a lot

http://mr.shipbuilding.ru/magazine/n2/kopanev/
and this is from producer's site
http://www.morinsys.ru/index.php?option ... 55&lang=ru
Frankly, I don't know what is integrated in Shivalik, Ajai has signed his photo as ops centre, but certainly it does look more outdated than Talwar.
And second batch can get Sigma which is in Chinese 956EM, Jaroslav Mudry and Stereguschy (scalable sets, different number of consoles and functions)
http://www.morinsys.ru/index.php?option ... 55&lang=ru

Google translator rules, BTW

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Oct 2009 18:23

Thanks SNaik , exactly what Ajai claims as ops center is not one , more has to do with control system of machinary and display units for radars , may be he was given permission for partial pics of ops center.

The one you posted is a proper ops center pics.

Can you please make sense of this , any interesting snippets ? Thanks

http://www.4shared.com/file/139886184/e ... ard-1.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/139886598/f ... ard-2.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/139886722/f ... ard-3.html

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

Austin
It would be interesting if you did an update on your torpedo piece with a focus on new Indian developments.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Oct 2009 21:10

Ajai’s pictures are that of what used to be called as the engine room, that has now evolved to Machinery Control Room.

His reporting focused on the IPMS, that’s a first for IN onboard Shivalik. He probably misunderstood the “control” to “command & control”.

The inclined consoles are IPMS consoles. The LCD screens display navigational data. The engineers need to know where the ship is headed. Earlier bridge used to communicate engine room via telephone, these days the LCD screens do the needful.

Loads of info here
http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/integrated_ ... ystem.html
http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/images/typi ... ration.jpg
http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/marine_datasheets.html
http://www.naval-technology.com/contrac ... -3-mapps2/
http://www.naval-technology.com/contrac ... pps21.html

Shivalik uses BEL EMCCA as its combat management suite. Posters are there in the Aero India galleries somewhere around here.

Added later - Integrated Platform Management System is NOT THE SAME AS from Combat Management System. The former manages machinery, propulsion and navigation while the latter manages sensors and weapons. Prasun goes around creating an incorrect impression that they’re one & the same.

Gagan - Consoles only display sensor data and take user inputs, just like our laptops. Combat Management System integrates sensor data and designates weapons. Consoles are called multi functional displays because can display any type of data (images, text, like a laptop) and take inputs to any the systems they’re interfaced with. In the good old days, every system had its own peculiar display, like a PPI, B Scope, RHI, etc and its own input systems.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 13 Oct 2009 22:10

Austin wrote:Can you please make sense of this , any interesting snippets ? Thanks

http://www.4shared.com/file/139886184/e ... ard-1.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/139886598/f ... ard-2.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/139886722/f ... ard-3.html

Nothing really unknown. Official tactical data, changes in outer appearance - narrower sail and smaller container for TAS, all equipment positioned in silenced zone-blocks. The rests is bla-blah and about older boats with similar name.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Oct 2009 22:28

Thanks SNaik , i thought they will come with interesting info on Gepard

TSarkar that was as expected useful information , all these interesting automated gadgets , have they reduced manning on IN ships over period of time ? Do we need more commissioned officer now compared to sailors to man these sophisticated ships ?

Rupak , I will try , next year DEFEXPO should have more information on these torpedoes and countermeasures development.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 14 Oct 2009 05:56

arun wrote:Sorry I have no additional information and you are on your own.

I however recall that there was a bit of a kerfuffle with regard to the order of the HUGIN 1000 AUV used by this class and the CAG had made some rumbling noises.

Arun, I just realised that I had already done this. The only thing missing is the PDF file. Check it out;

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Surv ... maran.html

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 Oct 2009 07:15

Naval technology has pages on the IN:

Shivalik Class
Arihant SSBN

John · Post by **John** » 14 Oct 2009 08:07

Austin wrote:Do we need more commissioned officer now compared to sailors to man these sophisticated ships ?

Well it seems there is plenty of improvements made in that department when compared to P-16s but there is still some ways to go. Talwar for example has complement of 250 compared to 150-170 for similar sized Frigates such as LaFayette or Anzac etc.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 14 Oct 2009 08:15

I seem to remember reading that IN ships are deliberately overmanned in order to maintain crew functionality in case of a hit. may be tsarkar sahab can provide the actual fact.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Oct 2009 08:33

IN needs to be able to fight a real war, as opposed to cost cut and austere western peace keeping and colonial war missions

John · Post by **John** » 14 Oct 2009 08:40

Well one lesson RN learned from Falkands is overcrowded ship is never a good idea, apart from fire hazard even damage control is harder.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Oct 2009 11:22

Flight Intl. on the IN's extra MIG-29K buy and naval LCA options.If the engine for the naval LCA is only going to arrive by 2013(!),then the aircraft when finally in IN service will be even further behind in technology the 5th-gen fighter for which a naval variant is an option being considered.

There is a very good article in the latest VAYU on overburdening aircraft with technology,which from past experience has degraded its performance during wartime.The author calls for simpler aircraft with clear roles in mind,with many examples of differing western and Russian aircraft types during the last major conflicts,a message for the MMRCA decision makers.One interesting fact is a Northrop study that a twin engine fighter has a 5 times greater survival rate during peacetime (engine failures),and that quantity matters greatly in any conflict.The mytho of stealth,BVR missiles,etc.,and inability of the US to field the abominably expensive F-22 in current conflict zones,is analysed.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Oct 2009 13:29

Reduced Manning - Yes, that has happened. Shivalik is roughly twice the size of Nilgiri, but manages well with the same crew size.

Shivalik has two propulsion types (Diesels & Gas) vis-a-vis only one type (steam turbines) in Nilgiri.

Reduced crew are a bad idea. Reason being most surface warfare tasks are AD or ASW. This requires long hours of operations, AND monitoring / maintenance of electronic systems and electrical machinery.

Automation reduces, but cannot replace man in the loop. Having multiple officers/crew for the same billet in wartime reduces fatigue and keeps up efficiency.

As learnt by the Israeli Navy ref INS Hanit, fully automated systems dont work too well. Maybe extra lookouts on board could have spotted launch activity onshore and activated the Barak system in time (boot up time is quite high, BTW)

Second reason is situational overload. Given the way modern systems churn out loads of data, sparse crew may simply become overloaded and panic. This is a serious problem even during normal circumstances, leave alone wartime.

Third reason is damage control. Off duty crew can fight fires while on duty crew can still man systems/machinery. Having only automated damage control, like sprinklers, is a bad idea. On a properly manned ship, the crew can use a hose in case the sprinker doesnt work. On a sparsely manned ship, all the crew can do incase sprinker doesnt work is evaculate. http://www.dcfp.navy.mil/mc/articles/other/Orkla.htm http://www.dcfp.navy.mil/mc/articles/ot ... htm#Orkla4

Fourth reason is attrition. If part of your crew is killed, then other officers/crew can take over and continue fighting if the weapons/sensors/machinery are intact.

Fifth reason is detaching crew for disaster relief / anti piracy boarding parties without reducing normal operational tempo

Officer to sailor ratio has remained more or less the same. However job profiles have changed. Sailors are much more technically proficient these days.

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 14 Oct 2009 16:29

From IBN Live

Just when the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government had buried the ghost of Bofor's kickbacks, a letter from the Indian Ambassador to the United States of America is sure to bring some more embarrassment.

The letter states how American companies paid huge kickbacks to Indian public sector units, Indian Railways, Maharashtra State Electricity Corporation and even the Indian Navy.

Indian Ambassador in Washington Meera Shankar's letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's Principal Secretary TKA Nair was written in May 2009.

The Ambassador has listed out seven cases of how government officials in India have been bribed by US-based companies

According the Corrupt Practices Act in the United States all US companies must provide details of the illegal payments they make in foreign countries and the list is a big one.

On January 9, 2009, Mario Civino of a firm called Control Companies pleaded guilty for illegally paying $1 million $ to the Maharashtra State Electricity Corporation.

Then on February 14, the Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies (WABTEC) paid off employees of the Indian Railways $137,400.

More than two years ago on October 1, 2007, York International Corporation confirmed middlemen paying Indian Navy officials upto $132,500 for getting contracts.

An official in the Central Insecticide Board, too, has been named as a recipient to expedite registrations.

The revelations have come as a severe embarrassment for the government.

"The matter will be looked into," was all Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee said.

External Affairs Minister SM Krishna said, "Our Ambassador in the United States might have sent a report. We will certainly be looking into it."

The matter has now been referred to the Enforcement directorate to divert the flak.

The UPA Government says it will act against the officers if there are credible evidence.

But it may find it difficult to defend itself against the political flak from the Opposition.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 14 Oct 2009 18:08

Simply put a warship or a container ship have one room in common thats the bridge (well and mess and kitchen and living). You navigate, communicate and monitor the functioning of your ship from engine oil temp to water supply to which toilet is backed up from the bridge.

Navigation and communication yes. But monitoring engine oil temps and other critical functions happen to be from the Engine control consoles. While the Bridge may be the heart of the navigational and communication console, the Engine Control console is the engineering heart of the ship. Monitoring of power generating equipment, pollution prevention equipment, fuel centrifuge equipment, main propulsion equipment parameters , Fresh water generation and distribution, cold storage equipment all function and are controlled from the precincts of the Engine console. This also includes the hydraulic systems essential for steering, bow thrusters and emergency bus supplies in cases of failure of mains. With navigation becoming extremely simple these days, there's a school of thought thats gaining prominence that a Ship is an engineering entity in it's entirety and the 'seamanship' component is less assertive due to the dominance of the Engineering component over the years.

John · Post by **John** » 14 Oct 2009 19:17

tsarkar wrote:As learnt by the Israeli Navy ref INS Hanit, fully automated systems dont work too well. Maybe extra lookouts on board could have spotted launch activity onshore and activated the Barak system in time (boot up time is quite high, BTW)

To be fair as per IDF report they did not expect Hizb. to have C-802s and hence did not have Phalanx/Barak online. And i don't think having few look out would help spotting any shore activity (Hanit was miles away) or a missile.

But the small crew size did help keep the casualty low and they were able to respond quickly to move the ship away before they fired any more.

IMO improvements in construction, automation and damage control helped the Hanit, where as HMS Sheffield did not survive such an impact with exocet.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Oct 2009 17:44

Reduced manning beyond a point makes it very difficult for the warship to engage in successful damage control if hit.Manpower is absolutely vital especially if there have been casualties.In the case of subs,greater automation is preferable as a smaller crew means more living space and batter facilities for the crew,plus extra space for weaponry,sensors,AIP system,or even a smaller sized sub if required.What new surface warship design is engaged in is to compartmentalise the ship into as many secure compartments that even if two or more are hit and severly damaged,the ship remains seaworthy.In addition,at least two citadels-fore and aft,that enable either citadel to carry out all the functions of the ship even if hit allowing it to remain in a battleworthy condition if possible.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 15 Oct 2009 18:08

parshuram wrote:From IBN Live

Just when the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government had buried the ghost of Bofor's kickbacks, a letter from the Indian Ambassador to the United States of America is sure to bring some more embarrassment.

The letter states how American companies paid huge kickbacks to Indian public sector units, Indian Railways, Maharashtra State Electricity Corporation and even the Indian Navy.

Indian Ambassador in Washington Meera Shankar's letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's Principal Secretary TKA Nair was written in May 2009.

The Ambassador has listed out seven cases of how government officials in India have been bribed by US-based companies

According the Corrupt Practices Act in the United States all US companies must provide details of the illegal payments they make in foreign countries and the list is a big one.

On January 9, 2009, Mario Civino of a firm called Control Companies pleaded guilty for illegally paying $1 million $ to the Maharashtra State Electricity Corporation.

Then on February 14, the Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies (WABTEC) paid off employees of the Indian Railways $137,400.

More than two years ago on October 1, 2007, York International Corporation confirmed middlemen paying Indian Navy officials upto $132,500 for getting contracts.

An official in the Central Insecticide Board, too, has been named as a recipient to expedite registrations.

The revelations have come as a severe embarrassment for the government.

"The matter will be looked into," was all Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee said.

External Affairs Minister SM Krishna said, "Our Ambassador in the United States might have sent a report. We will certainly be looking into it."

The matter has now been referred to the Enforcement directorate to divert the flak.

The UPA Government says it will act against the officers if there are credible evidence.

But it may find it difficult to defend itself against the political flak from the Opposition.

What is the contract?

Jalashwa was inducted by Sep 07 and Boeing proposed poseidon on Jan 08..

-Nitin

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Oct 2009 18:47

apparently the individual payments to IN officials were all less than $1000 but there were a lot of them so the total adds up to the above.

rather than money sounds more like crates of jhony walker/chivas regal and jewelry watches to me

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 15 Oct 2009 19:17

Singha wrote:apparently the individual payments to IN officials were all less than $1000 but there were a lot of them so the total adds up to the above.

rather than money sounds more like crates of jhony walker/chivas regal and jewelry watches to me

Doesn't it make things more serious - for our IN officials can compromise for as less as 50K INR

-Nitin

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 16 Oct 2009 20:27

PHOTOS: Indian Navy Chief Meets His Marine Commandos in J&K - LiveFist

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Oct 2009 20:31

I wonder why they are showing faces considering marcos sometimes go out in civilian garb also?
even after the marcos handed over to nsg in mumbai they kept the masks on.

some of them would easily fool the paki kamandu guarding kayani sir's residence

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 16 Oct 2009 20:34

Kakarat wrote:some of them would easily fool the paki kamandu guarding kayani sir's residence

Totally agree. Love the look of long hair and unshaven beard. Makes them blend in with the enemy. All they need now is to change the dress pants and shirts to a SALWAR KAMEEZ (Pathani Style) and carry the AK's. Who needs RAW and their agents, when our home grown marine commandoes are available in a large supply

manish · Post by **manish** » 16 Oct 2009 20:44

Craig Alpert wrote:
Kakarat wrote:some of them would easily fool the paki kamandu guarding kayani sir's residence
Totally agree. Love the look of long hair and unshaven beard. Makes them blend in with the enemy. All they need now is to change the dress pants and shirts to a SALWAR KAMEEZ (Pathani Style) and carry the AK's. Who needs RAW and their agents, when our home grown marine commandoes are available in a large supply

Why? RAW definitely is and the RAW agent could also be, homegrown.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 16 Oct 2009 21:29

i don't know why the raw isn't as effective as cia,mosad or for that matter ISI

sum · Post by **sum** » 16 Oct 2009 21:58

Kakarat wrote:PHOTOS: Indian Navy Chief Meets His Marine Commandos in J&K - LiveFist

Cant even imagine the number of tales these handful of men will have which can keep a jingo awake for weeks...

Only small concern is that i am surprised that "on the job" MARCOS commando faces have been splashed around so liberally..aren't they supposed to be undercover?

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 16 Oct 2009 22:47

manish wrote:Why? RAW definitely is and the RAW agent could also be, homegrown.

Never said RAW neither its Agent AREN'T HOMEGROWN Homie. If you read between the chatters after 26/11 you'll know that RAW said that they did not have enough man power and training them was a long and ardous process. Trying to recruit for RAW is also not easy. Commonsense WE NEED RAW and their AGENTS...But I guess you choose to not read between the lines and missed the SARCASM!

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 17 Oct 2009 05:35

Nuclear sub Nerpa to enter service in December

manish · Post by **manish** » 17 Oct 2009 10:29

Craig Alpert wrote:
manish wrote:Why? RAW definitely is and the RAW agent could also be, homegrown.
Never said RAW neither its Agent AREN'T HOMEGROWN Homie. If you read between the chatters after 26/11 you'll know that RAW said that they did not have enough man power and training them was a long and ardous process. Trying to recruit for RAW is also not easy. Commonsense WE NEED RAW and their AGENTS...But I guess you choose to not read between the lines and missed the SARCASM!

OK. Thanks for the insight. And for the emphasis provided with the capital letters, it made it very easy for me to finally get it

So I guess MARCOS are easy to recruit and train? I am sure no sarcasm was involved there in the part about training, right?

Why the need for sarcasm against RAW if it has a real problem that you already know exists? Or is it a slight against MARCOs?

Anyways, its all OT. Sorry if I misinterpreted your intentions, Homie.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 17 Oct 2009 13:55

Gerard wrote:Nuclear sub Nerpa to enter service in December

and when will the second akula join navy

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 17 Oct 2009 23:40

saptarishi wrote:
Gerard wrote:Nuclear sub Nerpa to enter service in December
and when will the second akula join navy

never

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 18 Oct 2009 05:48

CM010/CM011, CH088/CK 038 : Submarine masts and periscopes

http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Oct 2009 15:16

INS Mahish and INS Trinkat on "coordinated patrol" with the TNI-AL:

Indian Navy and Indonesian Navy to conduct two weeks of coordinated patrol from 18 Oct 09

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 18 Oct 2009 16:11

India sending Dornier aircraft to Maldives for surveillance mission
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 132308.cms