Indian Navy News & Discussions

[SRP]

 

[Abingdonboy]

Cross posting from another forum where I posted:

The trend in carrier aviation is for medium sized fighters- MiG-29K, F-18, Rafale-M, F-35C etc. The "big hitters" F-14 and Su-33 have been traded in for them and if the USN with 100,000+ ton carriers has made this call then it applies even more to the IN's 65,000 ton carriers.

Going for the Rafale-M instead of the FGFA will alllow for a 40-50% larger air group from what I can tell. Of course this all rests on whether the FGFA can be modified to take off from catapults which may never even happen so the Rafale-M is the clear choice.

In the long term the AMCA should be the IN's future 5th gen carrier borne fighter. Ensure it can take off from catapults and pump as much know how and money into it as possible (hopeflly a tie up with Israel or France or both), the AMCA will be nice to have for the IAF but, IMHO, it is ESSENTIAL for the future of the IN. Rafale-Ms and N-AMCAs will be a formiddable combination and unmatched except by the USN (even then, I think the N-AMCA with two engines and an optimised design would give the F-35C a run for its money once it is fully matured).


This to me seems like the most logical roadmap for the IN by 2030-5. They are the ones with the long term critical perspective plans and they can get this done.


@PARIKRAMA @Taygibay @Vauban @SRP @Skull and Bones @Ankit Kumar @MilSpec @Levina @Water Car Engineer @acetophenol @SrNair @anant_s @ni8mare @knight11 @kaykay @Omega007 @AMCA @sarjenprabhu @surya kiran @sathya

Surely this is is the optimal scenerio for the IN over the next two decades with them commiting to 65,000 ton (potentially nuclear powered) EMALS-equipped CATOBAR carriers. The F-35Cs should be avoided at all costs but the E-2Ds should be snapped up

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Cross posting from another forum where I posted:

The trend in carrier aviation is for medium sized fighters- MiG-29K, F-18, Rafale-M, F-35C etc. The "big hitters" F-14 and Su-33 have been traded in for them and if the USN with 100,000+ ton carriers has made this call then it applies even more to the IN's 65,000 ton carriers.

Going for the Rafale-M instead of the FGFA will alllow for a 40-50% larger air group from what I can tell. Of course this all rests on whether the FGFA can be modified to take off from catapults which may never even happen so the Rafale-M is the clear choice.

In the long term the AMCA should be the IN's future 5th gen carrier borne fighter. Ensure it can take off from catapults and pump as much know how and money into it as possible (hopeflly a tie up with Israel or France or both), the AMCA will be nice to have for the IAF but, IMHO, it is ESSENTIAL for the future of the IN. Rafale-Ms and N-AMCAs will be a formiddable combination and unmatched except by the USN (even then, I think the N-AMCA with two engines and an optimised design would give the F-35C a run for its money once it is fully matured).


This to me seems like the most logical roadmap for the IN by 2030-5. They are the ones with the long term critical perspective plans and they can get this done.


@PARIKRAMA @Taygibay @Vauban @SRP @Skull and Bones @Ankit Kumar @MilSpec @Levina @Water Car Engineer @acetophenol @SrNair @anant_s @ni8mare @knight11 @kaykay @Omega007 @AMCA @sarjenprabhu @surya kiran @sathya

Surely this is is the optimal scenerio for the IN over the next two decades with them commiting to 65,000 ton (potentially nuclear powered) EMALS-equipped CATOBAR carriers. The F-35Cs should be avoided at all costs but the E-2Ds should be snapped up

Agreed fully.. The key challenge still is to snap up what's essentially very important but still does nt compromise on the real objective.. F35 I stated in the other thread so will avoid it here..
The principal challenge is still the same as we have always said and discussed..

The make in India ambition.. Rafales and future AMCA both needs a time bound implementation.. If for next 15 -20 years we are getting rafales its fine so that post that we can focus on AMCA production..

What I am a bit sceptical today is our ability to execute this plan in a time bound manner..

Unfortunately the more MII is delayed the more is the chance that the potential force planning will go haywire..

 

[Abingdonboy]

Agreed fully.. The key challenge still is to snap up what's essentially very important but still does nt compromise on the real objective.. F35 I stated in the other thread so will avoid it here..
The principal challenge is still the same as we have always said and discussed..

The make in India ambition.. Rafales and future AMCA both needs a time bound implementation.. If for next 15 -20 years we are getting rafales its fine so that post that we can focus on AMCA production..

What I am a bit sceptical today is our ability to execute this plan in a time bound manner..

I think, interestingly, the time pressure is not as serious for the IN as it is for the IAF. For the IAF they literally needed the Rafale yesterday (and thousands of days before that), the IN still has some time to decide what they need and formulate the correct policy to get it as the carriers are the limiting factor here, they have to wait on them.

It is important the AMCA is a world class product from day one so some extra time to develop it can be given but I think it should be in service by 2032 at the latest. 16 years from now to develop it is perfectly reasonable.

As for the Rafale, the IAF needs them ASAP as I have said but the IN needn't make orders before 2024 UNLESS they are going to put Rafale-Ms in STOBAR ops for the Vikrant's sister ship (if she comes), if that is the case they will have to make orders by 2022 IMO. I do think it is time that India doubles down on the Rafale, it is a strategic procurement that will address many requirements (IAF's, IN's, industry's etc) the current BS about only 36-54 Rafales needs to be dropped and both sides accept how vast the requirement is and work towards that. The childish games being played right now are just slowing down the inevitable.


Hopefully the IN doesn't screw up like how they did with the MiG-29K purchase which brought zero industrial benefits for India.

 

[anant_s]

Surely this is is the optimal scenerio for the IN over the next two decades with them commiting to 65,000 ton (potentially nuclear powered) EMALS-equipped CATOBAR carriers. The F-35Cs should be avoided at all costs but the E-2Ds should be snapped up

I'm not sure of current program status, but surely with escalating costs and delays, F 35 program is becoming a nightmare for a lot of participating nations and US would definitely want to add more customers to the list.
However we are pretty sure even if India goes for F 35, it will be an off the self purchase and i'm not sure, India would want that.
Second is the question of threat perception. J 31 seems to be the only adversary for F 35 in our region and unfortunately little authentic information is available on its capabilities. So i guess its best to go for Rafale M, which is a formidable machine and will have commonalities with IAF's future fleet.
as for E2D, surely this number won't be more than 8 (4x2 Vishal class), so there is no problem to get them through G2G deal in same manner as P8I.

 

[Taygibay]

This to me seems like the most logical roadmap

I recognize that quality in you but lacking to such a degree in your country's mil procurements ...
that I'm afraid you are heading for disappointment and depression in hoping for this dream!

Here's to me being wrong , cheers, Tay!

 

[SrNair]

Cross posting from another forum where I posted:

The trend in carrier aviation is for medium sized fighters- MiG-29K, F-18, Rafale-M, F-35C etc. The "big hitters" F-14 and Su-33 have been traded in for them and if the USN with 100,000+ ton carriers has made this call then it applies even more to the IN's 65,000 ton carriers.

Going for the Rafale-M instead of the FGFA will alllow for a 40-50% larger air group from what I can tell. Of course this all rests on whether the FGFA can be modified to take off from catapults which may never even happen so the Rafale-M is the clear choice.

In the long term the AMCA should be the IN's future 5th gen carrier borne fighter. Ensure it can take off from catapults and pump as much know how and money into it as possible (hopeflly a tie up with Israel or France or both), the AMCA will be nice to have for the IAF but, IMHO, it is ESSENTIAL for the future of the IN. Rafale-Ms and N-AMCAs will be a formiddable combination and unmatched except by the USN (even then, I think the N-AMCA with two engines and an optimised design would give the F-35C a run for its money once it is fully matured).


This to me seems like the most logical roadmap for the IN by 2030-5. They are the ones with the long term critical perspective plans and they can get this done.


@PARIKRAMA @Taygibay @Vauban @SRP @Skull and Bones @Ankit Kumar @MilSpec @Levina @Water Car Engineer @acetophenol @SrNair @anant_s @ni8mare @knight11 @kaykay @Omega007 @AMCA @sarjenprabhu @surya kiran @sathya

Surely this is is the optimal scenerio for the IN over the next two decades with them commiting to 65,000 ton (potentially nuclear powered) EMALS-equipped CATOBAR carriers. The F-35Cs should be avoided at all costs but the E-2Ds should be snapped up

AMCA is not that easy thing bro .That is a fifth gen fighter in making .Our establishments looking for a jet almost parallel like F22.And it would cost 200 million $ at that time .
And project is still in drawing stage .

It would take at least 2040 for a N Amca .
Rafale M is a good choice but IN is stil not clear about their future Airwing.

 

[Taygibay]

SrNair has an interesting point that might warrant development in its own thread.

-Using Tejas as a comparison base, evaluate AMCA timeline to be
and what is required to make it happen.​

If someone opens that one, I'll gladly drop by for a chat, Tay.

 

[raktaka]

I recognize that quality in you but lacking to such a degree in your country's mil procurements ...
that I'm afraid you are heading for disappointment and depression in hoping for this dream!

Here's to me being wrong , cheers, Tay!

Mil procurement in India has a logic of its own. Just because you cant see it, does not mean it does not exist.

Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

 

[Taygibay]

Since a virus or microbe fits your can't see it analogy ...
isn't it possible that it's you that are not seeing the flaw?

There's no one more deaf than he who refuses to hear.

Good day, Tay.

P.S. I love this exchanging sayings and proverbs idea; we should have a thread for that!

 

[raktaka]

Since a virus or microbe fits your can't see it analogy ...
isn't it possible that it's you that are not seeing the flaw?

There's no one more deaf than he who refuses to hear.

Good day, Tay.

P.S. I love this exchanging sayings and proverbs idea; we should have a thread for that!

This is what an Virus looks like under an Electron microscope.

so from where I stand, its YOU who is blind and is unable to see.

Still confused ?

 

[MKC]

Designing a new ship require a huge cost but we design too many ships & build 3-4 ship of each class, so why shouldn't build more ships of same class?

Godavari class - 3
Brahmaputra class - 3
Shivalik class - 3

Delhi class - 3
Kolkata class - 4
Visakhapatnam cl*** - 4

Kamorta class - 4
Next Generation Missile Vessels - 4
Follow on Waterjet Fast Attack Craft - 4

Saryu class - 4
Khukri class - 4
Kora class - 4
Magar class - 2
Shardul class - 3

Talwar class & Rajput class aren't indigenous so that isn't problem.

Why was INS Godavari decommissioned on 23 December 2015 which was commissioned in 1983 while INS Jalashwa (L41) was purchased which was commissioned in 1971.

If we was decommissioning INS Godavari then we should have transferred it to any friendly nation which are buying old USN ships without arms while in India it will be used as target ship for sinking.
Am I right?
INS Godavari, 1st indigenously designed warship, calls it a day.

 

[Armani]

Designing a new ship require a huge cost but we design too many ships & build 3-4 ship of each class, so why shouldn't build more ships of same class?

Actually you can say that Godavari (P16) and Brahmaputra-class (P16A) are the same basic ship, but with upgrades like new missiles, radars etc. So are P-15A (Kolkata) and P-15B (Vizag). As are the P-25 (Khukri) and P-25A (Kora) corvettes.

This becomes necessary are new technology & more options for fitments become available over time and the new 'class' of ships has to accommodate the best available. Much like the different 'Flights' of the Arleigh Burke.

How many such ships we build ultimately depends on IN's requirements. You should expect to see P-15B numbers being expanded from 4 to 8 or so in future. Our needs are increasing, economy is soaring & defence budgets keep increasing considerably. We are aiming for a 6-carrier fleet and we'll need anywhere between 12 to 18 destroyers and over 30 ocean-going frigates to support & defend those fleets.

 

[Masterhunter]

I'm not sure of current program status, but surely with escalating costs and delays, F 35 program is becoming a nightmare for a lot of participating nations and US would definitely want to add more customers to the list.
However we are pretty sure even if India goes for F 35, it will be an off the self purchase and i'm not sure, India would want that.
Second is the question of threat perception. J 31 seems to be the only adversary for F 35 in our region and unfortunately little authentic information is available on its capabilities. So i guess its best to go for Rafale M, which is a formidable machine and will have commonalities with IAF's future fleet.
as for E2D, surely this number won't be more than 8 (4x2 Vishal class), so there is no problem to get them through G2G deal in same manner as P8I.

E2D number will reach more than 12 (4+4 for carrier ops and minimum 04 more for reserves and to replenis those onboard during repairs). However I agree with you that G2G will have no problems. Along with it IN should go for about 20 odd V22 osprey in role of AEW and ASW for supporting E2D on CATOBAR and standalone on STOBAR and our planned LHA/LHD. I think this much will help IN get EMALS from US.. And it will be tech Leap for IN

I

AMCA is not that easy thing bro .That is a fifth gen fighter in making .Our establishments looking for a jet almost parallel like F22.And it would cost 200 million $ at that time .
And project is still in drawing stage .

It would take at least 2040 for a N Amca .
Rafale M is a good choice but IN is stil not clear about their future Airwing.

I just pray to god IN should not be bitten by stealth bug or fifth Gen term bug... Or they will for F35...if you go by reality.. There is no confusion for IN, they are just pretending to be confused, MIG29K is not capable to sustain operational edge for 40 yrs.. F35 is not ready and has a lot of strings.. AmCA is on drawing board and yet 15 yrs minimum for LSP and 20 yrs for induction. NLCA is not capable enuf for the role IN wants a aircraft carrier, the option left is Rafale M. It's capable, good payload, good avionics/EW/weapons, good combat radius, commanality with IAF, relatively sanction proof. What else u want. Yes it's costly, all good and capable things are. If IN commit to Rafale with condition of MII...dassault will go for it as it will ensure a huge order.

Actually you can say that Godavari (P16) and Brahmaputra-class (P16A) are the same basic ship, but with upgrades like new missiles, radars etc. So are P-15A (Kolkata) and P-15B (Vizag). As are the P-25 (Khukri) and P-25A (Kora) corvettes.

This becomes necessary are new technology & more options for fitments become available over time and the new 'class' of ships has to accommodate the best available. Much like the different 'Flights' of the Arleigh Burke.

How many such ships we build ultimately depends on IN's requirements. You should expect to see P-15B numbers being expanded from 4 to 8 or so in future. Our needs are increasing, economy is soaring & defence budgets keep increasing considerably. We are aiming for a 6-carrier fleet and we'll need anywhere between 12 to 18 destroyers and over 30 ocean-going frigates to support & defend those fleets.

..
Let's be realistic man... 06 CBG is too much... 04 is more reasonable by 2040 timeline that is 25 yrs from now on.. 02 vikrant class (40-45k) and 02 Vishal class (65-75K).
To operate a CBG, the bare minimum escort is 02 AD dest/cruiser(60+ long range SAM)
03-04 Multi purpose frigate (with LRSAM)
02 ASW frigate/corvette ( kamotra class)
01 SSN..
One FSS with one marine BN

Ideal for me is
03 Vizag class( as they carry less SAM than US AD dest)
04 MP frigates
02 ASW frigate/corvette
1 FSS
1-2SSN..
This group will have capability to even launch a SAG to operate independently say 300 NM ahead or laterally in required cases without hampering CBG escort requirement.

With this capability for 04 CBG, we need about
12 dest
16 frigate
8 ASW frigate
4 FSS
4-8 SSN

Beyond that IN will need about 4-6 SAG build around a AD destroyer ( say Delhi/Kolkata class capability) to operate in Arabian sea, gulf of aden, gulf of kutch (against PAK), A&N with malaca straits. This SAG will consist of One dest/one frigate/one-two ASW corvettes.. These can be used as escorts missions, SUB hunting missions, economic blockade of ports etc.. With this total requirement goes to
Dest 16
Frigate 20
ASW corvettes/frigate 16

And underwate r fleet of minimum 30 SSK/6SSBN/12 SSN...

We don't have resources to build carriers to the tune of Six CBG, better to utilise those resources for underwater fleet and to go more low cost high firepower platform like MP frigates to achieve better sea control..

If I have my way, I will even equip P28A with 16 barak 8 + 16 barak 1 and 08 ASM minimum to give them capability of a MP frigate with tonnage of 4K ton or so.

Being blue water navy does not only mean CBG, it just means ocean going capable platform. A CBG build around a Vikrant class will cost us about minimum 10 billion dollar with carrier along with airwing cost us about 5 billion . we can easily build àbout 04 SAG for that cost..

 

[ni8mare]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1040462192698502