Indian Navy News & Discussions

[jeet]

Indian Navy likely to get new diesel submarines
The Defence Ministry is believed to have cleared the decks for the Navy to purchase diesel-powered submarines to replace its ageing fleet of Russian submarines. The purchase is reported to be worth over Rs 25,000 crore.


The proposed acquisition of submarines was discussed Monday during the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) meeting which clears the acquisitions by the armed forces chaired by Defence Minister A K Antony. The meeting also discussed Armys proposal to upgrade Air Defence equipment guns and missiles systems.


Though the Indian Navy has already ordered six French Scorpene Hunter submarines, the first of which is expected to be inducted by 2012, at a cost of over Rs 18,000 crore, it is looking for a second line of modern submarines to replace the old Kilo and Foxtrot series submarines, which are currently the mainstay of its submarine fleet.


The Navy is keen on the new set of advanced submarines, equipped with Air Independent Propulsion (AIP), as it will considerably boost its ability to stay submerged.

The Navy had issued RFIs (Request for Information) to major companies including German HDW, French Armaris and Russian Rosoboronexport for the submarines in 2007 but it is yet to issue a tender for the acquisition. Sources, however, said the tender will be issued shortly.

The Navy is keen to expedite the acquisition of the submarines partly because Pakistan inducted its first AIP equipped French origin submarine last year.Unlike other warships, AIP equipped subs do not need to surface frequently to take in oxygen and can stay submerged for days. As a result these submarines are quieter than nuclear submarines and more enduring.


Besides acquiring new submarines, India is also in the process of inducting its own fleet of nuclear submarines. The first of the three indigenously built Arihant nuclear submarines was launched last month. Besides the Navy will also get a Russian Nerpa class nuclear attack submarine that on a ten year lease.

 

[Mig-29]

Jeet , there is a sticky for Indian defense related news and these has already been posted.

 

[jeet]

sorry buddy..
Mods plz delete it..

 

[Saint N sinnerr]

New Delhi: India's second indigenous nuclear-powered submarine will be ready soon and will take less time from launch to induction than the first one, says a retired Indian Navy officer who was associated with the top secret project since its inception.

"The second one will be ready and will take lesser time," Vice Admiral (retd.) Mihir K. Roy told.

Roy, who is now 84, was the first head of the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) that was launched in 1984 and guided it during its first four years. He has been involved in all the back room negotiations with the then Soviet Union, which assisted in the project. He is now director of think tank Society for Indian Ocean Studies.

Roy said the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 delayed the ATV project, under which India aimed to initially design and construct three nuclear-powered combat submarines within the country.

The first vessel, INS Arihant, was launched into the waters July 26. When she is inducted into service after three-years of sea trials, India will became only the sixth country in the world after the US, Russia, Britain, France and China to be capable of designing and constructing nuclear-powered nuclear submarines.

"We were going fast (on the project). But there was a long delay. Then the USSR fell and there was tremendous social, political and technological changes in the country. All contracts (on the ATV project) were changed," Roy said.

"In 2004, Russia stabilised and we signed fresh contracts in dollars. Money was a problem for them because they (Russians) were short of dollars," he added.

The Soviet Union had in 1981 offered to help with the design and construction of a nuclear submarine. In 1988, it had also leased a nuclear submarine, INS Chakra, for five years to enable the Indian Navy, its first batch of officers and sailors, in operating such vessels.

The ATV project was made successful by the close partnership of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and other public and private sector undertakings.

The project was conceptualised around the same time as those to produce an indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA) and a main battle tank MBT). Both these projects have suffered heavy cost and time overruns, making the launch of INS Arihant a "historic milestone" for the Indian Navy.

"I said that I wanted to report directly to the defence minister, with no interference from secretaries and bureaucrats. It worked. Decisions were made across the table," said Roy, a submariner and former chief of the Eastern Naval Command.

He noted that extra security precautions had to be taken to maintain the secrecy of the project to prevent triggering an arms race on the subcontinent.

"We did not even have a name plate (outside the office). Nobody in my family, not even my wife, was aware what I was doing. On July 26 (when INS Arihatn was launched) my grandchildren said: 'You never told us!' " Roy said.

"I got the dry docks (at the Visakhapatnam Ship Building Centre) covered; otherwise satellites would have spotted the vessel and taken pictures," Roy reminisced, adding: "I also got the dry docks lengthened."

 

[xebex]

It will always take time for the first R&D. once we develope the first vessel then the next one will come in a matter of time. Just like that!

 

[Screaming Skull]

@sancho

Before proceeding, two important clarifications- one, the Navy intends to procure up to 40 N-LCAs at least (may be more if required) and not just 8 as you think. They are also expected to replace the Sea Harriers in operation with the IN. Here is the confirmation for you-

The LCA naval variant, which is to be used by the Navy in an air defence role from its carriers, will jockey for space on the deck with the MiG-29Ks that India is buying from Russia. It will be a replacement for the British-made Sea Harrier jump jets currently used by the Navy. The Navy has already placed intent to procure 40 aircraft.

The Hindu : National : Tejas’ naval variant to take to the skies in 2009

two, the N-LCA project was not thrust upon the Navy. In fact the original idea of developing a carrier based aircraft was of the IN itself. IN has been participating very enthusiastically right from the beginning of the N-LCA project. In fact, the keenness of the IN to complete the project in time has translated into a very synergetic partnership between the user and the developer. Unlike the IAF LCA project, the N-LCA project had user participation right from the beginning. The project director, Commodore (retd) C.D. Balaji is an ex-IN guy. The core team has quite a few ex and serving IN guys. Hence, the project is being very professionally managed and is in sync with the development of the IAC. Delays if any will be only due to the delays caused by the AF LCA.

Hey, I know that N-LCA is not a new aircraft, but it's still needs further developments from the normal LCA version, which are imo unnecessary at the moment. It is much more important after all the delays of the LCA project, to get it done now and induct it into IAF in numbers, than wasting more time, energy and resources for just 8 N-LCAs.

Following is in addition to what I stated above-
N-LCA and AF LCA air two separate projects independent of each other manned and headed by different teams and different project directors. The progress of N-LCA is not at all at the expense of the AF-LCA. In fact it is the other way round; delay in the AF LCA is causing delays to the N-LCA as the latter is a derivative of the former.

As I said before I doub't there will be much benefit for later carrier aircrafts through this project, because FGFA will get all necessary navalised parts directly from the N-Pak Fa, so there won't be any further developments for us to do. Even if we go for a navalised MCA, don't you think the experience and parts of navalised FGFA will be more important than from a N-LCA?

FGFA will have only ‘minimum common technology’ with PAK-FA. So, while you can expect the Russians to provide us with an aircraft optimized for stealth, with internal weapons bay, armaments etc.(obviously without ToT), imo all other techs like avionics, composites, landing gear etc. will have to developed in house. The idea of common minimum tech itself is suspect. You never know what the Russians will give or won’t give when we reach that stage. Prime example is the BrahMos JV. Though it is a 50-50 JV, the Russians won’t give us an iota of tech for their power plant or seeker. So, it is better to develop as much tech in house as possible well in advance to avoid unnecessary delays in future. And that is the primary reason why we have already started working on the MCA project.

I did understand your point before, that's why I made nearly the same calculation and said that one can carry 8 N-LCAs, or 4 (you said even 6) Rafale, or Mig 29K with the same payload of the carrier.
But I can't agree on your conclusion that N-LCA is more advantageous for 2 reasons.
At first you took the empty weight and MTOW of the normal LCA version, but the N-LCA has increased empty weight because of double seat and changes to make it carrier capable. That's why it also will have a lower MTOW and the effective payload will be much closer, if not equal to Rafale/Mig 29K!
Secondly, even if 8 N-LCA can equalise 6 Rafale in payload of the carrier, they are way inferior in capabilities. A single Rafale, or even Mig 29K can take as much payload and weapons as 2 N-LCA. So to have slightly less numbers of a more capable aircraft is still more advantageous, than to have just 2 more of an inferior aircraft!


That's why I said if N-LCA won't give any advantage in capability, even if we can take some more of them, why make things more complicated as they have to be? Take just 22 Mig 29k instead of 16 + 8 N-LCA and you will have a way more capable airwing within the payload of the carrier and less problems in logistics.

As I clarified, the IN intends to procure 40 N-LCAs, part of which will replace the harriers. Rafales can’t replace the harriers simply coz they are too heavy. If it was possible to replace them with heavy aircrafts, they would have been replaced long back with the Migs. Moreover, 40 Rafales are gonna cost a lot. So, I will rule out Rafales from further discussion.

That leaves us with the Mig-29K. Again, these can’t replace the Harriers. Assuming that we drop the N-LCA and go with only Migs for our IACs, then IN will have to hunt for a new aircraft for Harrier replacements. That is clearly not feasible. Also, the N-LCA is expected to be used for air defence where you need a light and agile aircraft (slim & trim as they say), operating reasonably close to the carrier. Hence, the limited range of the N-LCA is not a constraint. Instead the larger num (even if it is only 2 extra) becomes an advantage in air defence. imo the N-LCA will carry mostly A2A missiles to ward off any arial threat to the carrier and the long range anti-ship, land bombing operations will be carried out by the Migs. Mig-29K is certainly not ideal for air defence. Even if it is used for such a role, its actual capabilities will be vastly underutilized.

Of course a single engine fighter is cheaper to operate than a double engine fighter, but we have to keep one thing in mind! There will double engine fighters in big numbers anyway and N-LCA is just an small addition. You might save the maintenance cost of some engines (6 Mig 29K 12 engines, 8 LCA 8 engines), but also have to carry spares, parts and maybe even weapons of 2 different fighters, with different engines. That means even if the operational cost per aircraft might be reduced, the logistic costs will increase!

Also you have to train pilots only for a single type of aircraft and not for 2 totally different types.

I beg to differ on that. Don’t look at the IAC aircrafts in isolation. The N-LCA will operate the same engine as the IAF LCA. This means we will be operating close to 250 engines of the same type (maybe 500 if the MRCA winner also operates the same engine). Maintenance and overhaul of such large nos of engines will be easy and cost effective and profitable for HAL. But, it is not only about the engine, the same logic applies to the aircraft also. Maintenance of 250 aircrafts of same/similar type is much easier and cost effective as compared to aircrafts of various types. Also, since most of the parts/components going into the N-LCA are indigenous, we won’t be susceptible to unnecessary delays caused by Russia which has become a regular feature nowadays. All this is apart from the fact that a Mig-29K will cost us twice as much as the N-LCA.

 

[Saint N sinnerr]

It will always take time for the first R&D. once we develope the first vessel then the next one will come in a matter of time. Just like that!

thats it mate lets see chinas reaction now

 

[BATMAN]

The Soviet Union had in 1981 offered to help with the design and construction of a nuclear submarine.

What is Russia doin gin india's indeginous design!

thats it mate lets see chinas reaction now

In which waters do you expect to face Chinese naval forces?

 

[Saint N sinnerr]

What is Russia doin gin india's indeginous design!


In which waters do you expect to face Chinese naval forces?

with over 2000 posts under your belt my man , did U not read the articles abt the chinese navy wants `more share` in indian ocean????
DUH!!

 

[gubbi]

In which waters do you expect to face Chinese naval forces?

South China Sea

 

[xebex]

What is Russia doin gin india's indeginous design!


In which waters do you expect to face Chinese naval forces?

Hmmm......

 

[sancho]

Before proceeding, two important clarifications- one, the Navy intends to procure up to 40 N-LCAs at least (may be more if required) and not just 8 as you think. They are also expected to replace the Sea Harriers in operation with the IN. Here is the confirmation for you-

Eight is the number of N-LCA that INS Vikramaditya should get (as far as I know), not sure about how many the Vikrant class carrier will get, but the fact that IN seems to take the option for more Mig 29Ks, means that the number will be similar and of course there will be some in reserve, or for training. How should N-LCA replace Sea Harrier on INS Viraat? They are not VTOL capable and the Viraat don't has an arrested landing system, very doubtful!

FGFA will have only ‘minimum common technology’ with PAK-FA. So, while you can expect the Russians to provide us with an aircraft optimized for stealth, with internal weapons bay, armaments etc.(obviously without ToT), imo all other techs like avionics, composites, landing gear etc. will have to developed in house.

I agree with you in avionics, but come on mate the landing gear?
I doubt that we are able to include more than avionics and some own weapons in this development, but more is just not realistic. I expect some co-developments maybe on weapon and electronics side but the main parts like airframe (except the double seat config), gears, engine, radar will be the same. But this is another issue that we don't need to discuss here

As I clarified, the IN intends to procure 40 N-LCAs, part of which will replace the harriers. Rafales can’t replace the harriers simply coz they are too heavy. If it was possible to replace them with heavy aircrafts, they would have been replaced long back with the Migs. Moreover, 40 Rafales are gonna cost a lot. So, I will rule out Rafales from further discussion.

That leaves us with the Mig-29K. Again, these can’t replace the Harriers. Assuming that we drop the N-LCA and go with only Migs for our IACs, then IN will have to hunt for a new aircraft for Harrier replacements. That is clearly not feasible.

As I told you above the Sea Harriers can't be replaced, by any of this aircafts, because they are not VTOL capable, so having a replacement is not the point. Also IN officially showed interest in F35B which are more expensive than Rafale and Rafale could even win MMRCA, which gives IN the chance to licence produce them too, so I wouldn't rule them out that easy.

Also, the N-LCA is expected to be used for air defence where you need a light and agile aircraft (slim & trim as they say), operating reasonably close to the carrier. Hence, the limited range of the N-LCA is not a constraint. Instead the larger num (even if it is only 2 extra) becomes an advantage in air defence. imo the N-LCA will carry mostly A2A missiles to ward off any arial threat to the carrier and the long range anti-ship, land bombing operations will be carried out by the Migs. Mig-29K is certainly not ideal for air defence. Even if it is used for such a role, its actual capabilities will be vastly underutilized.

Without an offense, but I think your assumption that N-LCA is mainly for air defense is wrong! If so, the airwing would look like this, 15 - 20 N-LCA (only single seats, cause for air combats and short missions 2 pilots are not needed) and only a few double seat Mig 29K for the strike role. But it is just the other way around right?
Mig 29K will be the main aircraft in bigger numbers, on both carriers (if not Mig 29K another double engine fighter on Vikrant class), most of them will be single seated and the fact that they was designed for agility and maneuverability, makes them clearly the first choice to defend an expensive carrier group and not the few N-LCAs! The double seated versions will be for training and strikes, which leaves no main role for N-LCA.
To be honest the only role for N-LCA that I see in this configuration (double seat, only in few numbers, enough payload to carry a2a missiles for self defense, some fuel tanks and maybe a pod), are recon, or EW missions. A small aircraft, fast and with low RCS, one pilot and a flight engineer, add a good pod and you have a good fighter for such roles.

I beg to differ on that. Don’t look at the IAC aircrafts in isolation. The N-LCA will operate the same engine as the IAF LCA. This means we will be operating close to 250 engines of the same type (maybe 500 if the MRCA winner also operates the same engine). Maintenance and overhaul of such large nos of engines will be easy and cost effective and profitable for HAL. But, it is not only about the engine, the same logic applies to the aircraft also. Maintenance of 250 aircrafts of same/similar type is much easier and cost effective as compared to aircrafts of various types. Also, since most of the parts/components going into the N-LCA are indigenous, we won’t be susceptible to unnecessary delays caused by Russia which has become a regular feature nowadays. All this is apart from the fact that a Mig-29K will cost us twice as much as the N-LCA.

I think you missunderstand me here! I also said that the maintenance will be cheaper, but a carrier has only a limited payload like you said before and carrying spares, engine parts and different weapons of different fighters will be a logistic problem and would be easier and cheaper they has only one type of aircraft.
I would say the cheap costs of N-LCA are not a real point for IN, otherwise they would get them in huge numbers and don't you think? But they are not and getting numbers of expensive Migs and shows even interest in more expensive, but also more capable fighters. So they are ready to pay for a capable main fighter!

I said it before, there is no real need for N-LCA, neither from a capability point of view, nor because it is cost-effective. I think we only get it to have also an indigenous carrier aircraft.

 

[DesiGuy]

India's solitary aircraft carrier INS Viraat will be fully-operational in another two months or so after undergoing an 18-month-long
comprehensive refit to bolster its longevity as well as weapon and sensor packages.

The ageing INS Viraat, with its complement of Sea Harrier jump-jets, helicopters and 1,500-crew, has been out of action since early-2008, first at the Mumbai harbour and then at the Cochin Shipyard, as was first reported by TOI.

"INS Viraat has now come out of the dry dock at Kochi after most of the refit work has been completed. The rest of the work at Kochi should finish by August-end," said an officer.

"The warship will then undergo a work-up phase and trials off Mumbai before it becomes fully ready for operations. Though it is 50 years old now, we will be able to run it smoothly for another five years," he added.

Navy has been forced to go in for another refit of the 28,000-tonne old warhorse due to failure of successive governments to undertake long-term defence planning to build military capabilities in tune with the country's geostrategic objectives.

Navy has time and again told the political leadership that India needs three aircraft carriers — one each for the eastern and western seaboards, while the third undergoes repairs — to protect its growing strategic interests stretching from Africa's eastern coast right up to Malacca Strait.

But to no avail. The long-delayed 40,000-tonne indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC) being built at the Cochin Shipyard, for instance, will be ready only by 2015 at the earliest.

Then, of course, India will get the refurbished 44,570-tonne aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov, undergoing a refit at the Sevmash Shipyard in North Russia, only by 2013 now.

INS Viraat to be fully operational in 2 months - India - NEWS - The Times of India

 

[xebex]

She is old now, all i can hope is INS Vikramaditya and our indigenous AC will be ready to take over Indian ocean when INS Viraat retire.

Plus Kochi is where am born and grown...miss a lot.:-(

 

[luoshan]

Great news
But I cannot understand why refit for 2 years for a life extension of only 5 years?? Doesn't make sense. What kind of refit was done and why does it take 2 years for that?