What's new

The Indian Navy is planning to buy 120+ multi-role helicopters in a tender worth $8B

Just a dream but looks good .

AVX High-speed Multi-role Helicopter, by AVX Aircraft Company, has been picked up by the US Army for the Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstrator (JMR-TD) program.

AVX-High-speed-Multi-role-Helicopter-640x480.jpg

AVX-High-speed-Multi-role-Helicopter-1-640x380.jpg

AVX-High-speed-Multi-role-Helicopter-2-640x380.jpg

 
.
Stupid reporting as usual, this 120 figure can be broken down:

Around 70 NMRH (this deal is in its final stages with S-70B looking to be the most likely candidate, initial purchase will be for 16 with 60 on option that the IN will no doubt take. This deal will be signed in the next fiscal year for sure.

Around 50 N-LUHs the IN has already sent out RFIs and RFPs and will start looking at trails this year or the next.


A separate competition the IN will be launching in the next few months is for heavy lift helos to have on their future LHD/LPDs so the likes of S-92, AW-101 etc will take part (hopefully AW-101 will still take part).


Stupid Indian media, the first 2 projects are very much underway and not in the "planning" stages at all, IDRW are about 2 years late with this report.

Anyway this was needed 2 years ago- if not more, look at the current state of affairs- billion dollar warships operating with aged Sea King and Cheetaks! It really is pathetic. You can't look at a warship and it's embarked help as 2 separate entities, they are part of the same package and the helo is an integral part of a ship's capabilities, flying with a bloody Sea King is like going into a fight with one hand tied behind your back from the get-go.


And for all those fools talking about "desi products" you show me what Indian product could compete with the S-70B? Hmm?
 
.
Some gen on the chopper....

helicopters_04.sized.jpg

Firing the Hellfire missile

The MH-60R Multi-Mission Helicopter (MMH) is the U.S. Navy's new primary maritime-dominance helicopter, replacing the SH-60B and SH-60F aircraft. Greatly enhanced over its predecessors, the MH-60R features a glass cockpit and significant mission system improvements, which give it unmatched capability as an airborne multi-mission naval platform. These improvements include:

- Upgraded mission and flight displays

- Improved Advanced Flight Control Computer (AFCC)

- Integrated Self Defense suite

Upgraded sensors including:

- Electronic Support Measures (ESM)

- Airborne Low Frequency Sonar (ALFS)

- Multi-mission Radar Upgrade (including ISAR)

- Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR)

- A weapons suite including torpedoes and Hellfire missiles.

The MH-60R shares its cockpit with the Sikorsky MH-60S helicopter, allowing pilots to switch between the models with greater ease and train more efficiently. In addition, the commonality between the two models results in a leaner logistic support infrastructure, which translates into a significantly reduced cost of ownership.

The MH-60R is designed to operate from the Navy's frigates, destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers. Its missions include:

- Anti-submarine Warfare (ASW)

- Anti-surface Warfare (ASuW)

- Surveillance

- Communication Relay

- Search and Rescue (SAR)

- Naval Gunfire Support (NGFS)

- Logistics Support

- Personnel Transfer

Source: Sikorsky Aircraft Company. Lockheed Martin.

Is it worth $60 million a pop? You tell me!
 
Last edited:
.
I'm sure this is going to raise an eyebrow with Putin..especially with the Crimea thing and who his friends are.
which is the Russian option for multi role helo for navy
 
. .
I'm appalled literally, to observe that our MoD apparently lacks sufficient funds to assign it to the Navy, that it had to 'deliberately neglect' the Naval Command's request to release funds for acquisition of new batteries for the subs, eventually leading to the infamous tragedy.

And here we are, deals with financial commitments as high as $8billion are being processed. What a pathetic joke. The modernisation of our armed forces is actually compromising the maintenance capability, eventually affecting our operational effectiveness. Worth it?

Perhaps because these big deals provide ample of opportunities for our bureaucrats to make their already deep pockets deeper.
 
. .
I'm appalled literally, to observe that our MoD apparently lacks sufficient funds to assign it to the Navy, that it had to 'deliberately neglect' the Naval Command's request to release funds for acquisition of new batteries for the subs, eventually leading to the infamous tragedy.

And here we are, deals with financial commitments as high as $8billion are being processed. What a pathetic joke. The modernisation of our armed forces is actually compromising the maintenance capability, eventually affecting our operational effectiveness. Worth it?

Perhaps because these big deals provide ample of opportunities for our bureaucrats to make their already deep pockets deeper.
This is one of the more preposterous posts I've seen in recent times. Firstly well done for falling for the Indian media's BS. Secondly you do understand that the Indian Mil NEEDS to modernise right? I mean what exactly are you advocating? Not buying new helos? Flying the current ones until when? Until they start falling out of the sky taking countless airmen with them, all whilst compromising on the capabilities of the IN as a whole. If you're so interested in the finical side of things, tell me this- can you justify the IN inducting billion dollar frigates and destroyers and then flying 40+ year old bordering on obsolete helos off their decks? Well can you? I don't think you understand the concept of long term planning as it is these helos are LONG overdue waiting any longer is criminal.

Modernisation isn't compromising the maintenance capability of current assets, keeping assets beyond their designated lives IS- don't you understand that? You seem so against modernisation and have pointed to the Kilo SSKs as an example but you're aware that these latest tragedies wouldn't have happened is the Scorpenes had come into service when they were supposed to- part of the overall modernisation of the IN.


You want to talk about operational effectiveness? What do you think offers more to the IN- 40 year old Sea Kings or state of the art S-70Bs?


I am appalled at your post to be honest...

@Abingdonboy can you confirm 159 Dhruv for navy ?
No I can't, this figure is very surprising to me and I am very cynical about it honestly. The IN has so far only got 1 operational shore-based ALH SQD with plans to set up a second but 159 is far too many given the IN won't be basing these helos on their ships because of well-known issues.
 
.
This is one of the more preposterous posts I've seen in recent times. Firstly well done for falling for the Indian media's BS. Secondly you do understand that the Indian Mil NEEDS to modernise right? I mean what exactly are you advocating? Not buying new helos? Flying the current ones until when? Until they start falling out of the sky taking countless airmen with them, all whilst compromising on the capabilities of the IN as a whole. If you're so interested in the finical side of things, tell me this- can you justify the IN inducting billion dollar frigates and destroyers and then flying 40+ year old bordering on obsolete helos off their decks? Well can you? I don't think you understand the concept of long term planning as it is these helos are LONG overdue waiting any longer is criminal.

Modernisation isn't compromising the maintenance capability of current assets, keeping assets beyond their designated lives IS- don't you understand that? You seem so against modernisation and have pointed to the Kilo SSKs as an example but you're aware that these latest tragedies wouldn't have happened is the Scorpenes had come into service when they were supposed to- part of the overall modernisation of the IN.


You want to talk about operational effectiveness? What do you think offers more to the IN- 40 year old Sea Kings or state of the art S-70Bs?


I am appalled at your post to be honest...


No I can't, this figure is very surprising to me and I am very cynical about it honestly. The IN has so far only got 1 operational shore-based ALH SQD with plans to set up a second but 159 is far too many given the IN won't be basing these helos on their ships because of well-known issues.


What you're referring to as Indian media's BS, is actually a partial analysis of the report of Parliamentary Standing Committee on defense. So anything that doesn't fit your viewpoint, is not BS.

While you've put words in my mouth and stated I'm advocating against the purchase of these new helos, I'm defo not. What I'm baffled at is the magnitude of this deal, which just isn't our immediate priority. (May be, but there are other areas which require utmost and urgent attention)

The Finance Minister apparently amused me, while he was witnessed as saying, and I quote "The MoD should spend its funds wisely". Isn't it clear the MoD has already exhausted its funds allocated for the Navy, that it sat so long on the Naval Command's multiple requests to release funds for the batteries, manufactured by Exide locally, at around 15crores per unit, which is frankly, a mere amount compared to these gigantic deals floating around.

True, this was a result of failure of the long term planning. But there is one such phrase as damage limitation. Just because the cost benefit analysis reveals investing more funds in these subs is worthless, doesn't mean you can ignore the operational demands just cause you're waiting for some French subs to arrive, or as you say, long term plan to materialise. Right now as I write this, those sailors are still sailing out there, with their lives at enormous risks. You either maintain the sea sailing worthy standards, or ground the fleet, no point in hanging in the middle of the cliff.

The failure of long term planning, though severely the preparedness of our armes forces, is not an India specific issue. Happens all around the globe, agreed a bit too often in India, but is a global phenomenon, primarily due to budgetary constraints and lack of technological breakthroughs at times.

I'm not against modernisation, as you have put it, but doesn't come across as justified to me that on one hand, we are proposing deals as big as $8billion for the so called modernisation, and on other hand, our weaponry systems are crippled with failures, primarily due to lack of funds allocated to their maintenance, with the latter costing only a fraction of the former. It is like leaving our current serving forces hanging in the middle, while we fantasize for some long term plan to materialise.

PS. Id appreciate if you don't launch any personal attacks the next time you respond too.
 
.
I'm appalled literally, to observe that our MoD apparently lacks sufficient funds to assign it to the Navy, that it had to 'deliberately neglect' the Naval Command's request to release funds for acquisition of new batteries for the subs, eventually leading to the infamous tragedy.

And here we are, deals with financial commitments as high as $8billion are being processed. What a pathetic joke. The modernisation of our armed forces is actually compromising the maintenance capability, eventually affecting our operational effectiveness. Worth it?

Perhaps because these big deals provide ample of opportunities for our bureaucrats to make their already deep pockets deeper.

I think it has something to do with the fact the US govt. is on India's *** to sign as many deals as possible to justify nuclear deal they gave us.
 
.
I think it has something to do with the fact the US govt. is on India's *** to sign as many deals as possible to justify nuclear deal they gave us.

We already returned the favour with C17 and saved US jobs at Boeing, so that should be dealt with it. However, as @Abingdonboy said, the article is mixing things here, but we should be used to it from IDRW now.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom