India Navy Indian Navy General Archive

[Madokafc]

That's far more potent compared your Mig29

 

[Raptor]

The best part will be integration between F-18s, US drones, and P-8I .... that will literally multiply the current efficiency , hopefully they will get the growlers too

Yes,network centric warfare completely changes the scenario.

 

[Raptor]

That's far more potent compared your Mig29

Mig-29k was a different beast,but now obsolete.

 

[crixus]

That's far more potent compared your Mig29

F-18 are best suited for the carrier-based operations , i still feel water down versions are better then Mig-29Ks

 

[Nilgiri]

That's far more potent compared your Mig29

Yes, Mig 29 was never made in first place with carrier operation in mind. Rather a quick modernized replacement for USSR to develop as saturated airforce platform into the 90s and 2000s (USSR collapsed so lot of Mig 29 promise is effectively unlocked, Russia just doesnt have the same sustenance).

India basically refloated and sustained the whole (K) program of it by the vikramaditya program. It all sounded a lot better on paper than reality in the end.

F-18 was from ground up after they took the YF-17 (AF contender) and made it navy optimised and US has assured MIC behind the program from beginning to end, no hiccups or large pauses.

Mig-29k was a different beast,but now obsolete.

It is not obsolete. It's issues are different.

F-18 are best suited for the carrier-based operations , i still feel water down versions are better then Mig-29Ks

Depends. Also India should never go for any watered down version.

There are still lot of things to happen for this to be substantial compared to twitter rumours and such.

I will welcome it though, esp if it gives an impetus for USN to look at LCA-LIFT for its carrier trainer in return.

 

[Gary]

Very nice......

 

[crixus]

Yes, Mig 29 was never made in first place with carrier operation in mind. Rather a quick modernized replacement for USSR to develop as saturated airforce platform into the 90s and 2000s (USSR collapsed so lot of Mig 29 promise is effectively unlocked, Russia just doesnt have the same sustenance).

India basically refloated and sustained the whole (K) program of it by the vikramaditya program. It all sounded a lot better on paper than reality in the end.

F-18 was from ground up after they took the YF-17 (AF contender) and made it navy optimised and US has assured MIC behind the program from beginning to end, no hiccups or large pauses.



It is not obsolete. It's issues are different.



Depends. Also India should never go for any watered down version.

There are still lot of things to happen for this to be substantial compared to twitter rumours and such.

I will welcome it though, esp if it gives an impetus for USN to look at LCA-LIFT for its carrier trainer in return.

The only positive thing with F-18s is the integration with other naval platforms and technically years ahead of what China has to offer in IOC. Regarding LCA naval trainer, its still on paper no prototypes

 

[Nilgiri]

The only positive thing with F-18s is the integration with other naval platforms and technically years ahead of what China has to offer in IOC.

Well its a very matured capable platform...I would not say its "only" positive thing. Essentially it fits the 4th gen profile at the highest setting much like Rafale...with a massive assortment of not only sensoring, integration, assurance for IN other assets, but massive weapons package and choice.

It is also demonstrably far superior in MRO and serviceability and reliability regarding that (saves opex and downtime costs etc). A similar argument could have been made maybe if IN went for kittyhawk over gorshkov too, given what needed to be done (and at what length and likely long term issues entrenched) with gorshkov to retrofit it and what it is permanently stuck with because of original design envelope...compared to kittyhawk...latter would be much more cheaper in operating costs per hour operated if done right in the alternative world. USN (retd.) buddy of mine actually talked at length with me about this some years back. Of course political considerations (and immediate financial capex etc being priority for babus compared to longer term opex and view on things) at the time made kittyhawk impossible pretty much...and such would be a hard sell to south block even today.

Anyway there are lot of positive things about F-18, because all its major problems (And it had a number of them like any platform) are well in rearview mirror. Professor of mine actually was part of team to fix an issue early F-18 had with angle of attack problem regarding LERX interaction with its vertical stabilisers. They actually developed a piezoelectric module for it. Long story in the end but eventually they fixed the issue at the root design for later blocks of F-18 and then ofc superbug was new extensive redesign from ground up.

Additionally, the geopolitical consequence of furthering relationship with US and USN also cannot be overlooked if this does bear out.

Let us see. Also this is opening up precedence for this "lease" route in general, for even other services. I wonder if IAF will lease in short and mid term to make up reqd squadron numbers.

 

[Gary]

Well its a very matured capable platform...I would not say its "only" positive thing. Essentially it fits the 4th gen profile at the highest setting much like Rafale...with a massive assortment of not only sensoring, integration, assurance for IN other assets, but massive weapons package and choice.

It is also demonstrably far superior in MRO and serviceability and reliability regarding that (saves opex and downtime costs etc). A similar argument could have been made maybe if IN went for kittyhawk over gorshkov too, given what needed to be done (and at what length and likely long term issues entrenched) with gorshkov to retrofit it and what it is permanently stuck with because of original design envelope...compared to kittyhawk...latter would be much more cheaper in operating costs per hour operated if done right in the alternative world. USN (retd.) buddy of mine actually talked at length with me about this some years back. Of course political considerations (and immediate financial capex etc being priority for babus compared to longer term opex and view on things) at the time made kittyhawk impossible pretty much...and such would be a hard sell to south block even today.

Anyway there are lot of positive things about F-18, because all its major problems (And it had a number of them like any platform) are well in rearview mirror. Professor of mine actually was part of team to fix an issue early F-18 had with angle of attack problem regarding LERX interaction with its vertical stabilisers. They actually developed a piezoelectric module for it. Long story in the end but eventually they fixed the issue at the root design for later blocks of F-18 and then ofc superbug was new extensive redesign from ground up.

Additionally, the geopolitical consequence of furthering relationship with US and USN also cannot be overlooked if this does bear out.

Let us see. Also this is opening up precedence for this "lease" route in general, for even other services. I wonder if IAF will lease in short and mid term to make up reqd squadron numbers.

Cmiiw, Tejas has the GE F414 same with a Super Hornet, this could streamline the engine choice for IN.

 

[crixus]

Well its a very matured capable platform...I would not say its "only" positive thing. Essentially it fits the 4th gen profile at the highest setting much like Rafale...with a massive assortment of not only sensoring, integration, assurance for IN other assets, but massive weapons package and choice.

It is also demonstrably far superior in MRO and serviceability and reliability regarding that (saves opex and downtime costs etc). A similar argument could have been made maybe if IN went for kittyhawk over gorshkov too, given what needed to be done (and at what length and likely long term issues entrenched) with gorshkov to retrofit it and what it is permanently stuck with because of original design envelope...compared to kittyhawk...latter would be much more cheaper in operating costs per hour operated if done right in the alternative world. USN (retd.) buddy of mine actually talked at length with me about this some years back. Of course political considerations (and immediate financial capex etc being priority for babus compared to longer term opex and view on things) at the time made kittyhawk impossible pretty much...and such would be a hard sell to south block even today.

Anyway there are lot of positive things about F-18, because all its major problems (And it had a number of them like any platform) are well in rearview mirror. Professor of mine actually was part of team to fix an issue early F-18 had with angle of attack problem regarding LERX interaction with its vertical stabilisers. They actually developed a piezoelectric module for it. Long story in the end but eventually they fixed the issue at the root design for later blocks of F-18 and then ofc superbug was new extensive redesign from ground up.

Additionally, the geopolitical consequence of furthering relationship with US and USN also cannot be overlooked if this does bear out.

Let us see. Also this is opening up precedence for this "lease" route in general, for even other services. I wonder if IAF will lease in short and mid term to make up reqd squadron numbers.

Absolutely agree with you ... I can say Admiral Goshkov plus Mig 29K was a hasty decision ....on any day western platforms are better than eastern platforms.
And the reason I personally like F-18's due to its refinement in structure and well adapted for sea-based operations

 

[Zapper]

A state-of-the-art guided missile stealth frigate was launched in Kolkata today and will soon join the fleet of Indian Navy. Called Himgiri, this is the first of the three Stealth Frigates ordered in 2015 at the cost of ₹ 19,293 crore. The frigate was launched two months ahead of schedule, said shipbuilder GRSE, by Madhulika Rawat, wife of the Chief of Defence Staff, General Bipin Rawat.

"Himgiri will provide a major boost to Indian Navy's defence preparedness," General Rawat said, congratulating GRSE and the Indian Navy for achieving this "milestone despite adverse effects of the Covid pandemic".
Speaking to the media after the launch, General Rawat spoke on a debate over what the Navy needs more -- aircraft carriers or submarines.

"Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Submarines have their separate place in the naval warfare and so does an aircraft carrier. I am in no way saying the Navy does not need its Air wing. Yes it needs an Air wing. But how to manage it and how to ensure the security and sanctity of our sea lines of communication we are thinking about," he said.


General Rawat indicated a probable alternative to an aircraft carrier.

"I think you also need to look at our Island territories that we have in large numbers. If we can leverage our Island territories to our advantage, then we can balance out... this can be used as territories to launch naval strike aircraft or do we need an aircraft carrier. Once we have studied all that in detail we will take a call," he said.

The Stealth Frigate Himgiri is 149 m long, with a displacement of approximately 6,670 tonnes and has an advanced CODOG Propulsion system enabling speed of over 28 knots.

"These complex weapon platforms are equipped with a powerful weapon & sensor package capable of neutralising threats in all three dimensions, Air, Surface & Sub-surface," a GRSE statement said.

An Italian company, Fincantieri, is the knowhow provider for technology upgrade for the project.

For GRSE, the frigate is a prestige project and one of the biggest orders it has ever got from the Defence Minister. GRSE is also currently executing two more major projects of Indian Navy – the construction of four Survey Vessel Large ships and eight ASW SWC ships.

Speaking at the launch, CMD Rear Admiral VK Saxena (Retired) said GRSE has delivered 105 warships so far. It has orders for 15 warships for the Navy to be delivered by 2027.

Other military brass present at the launch included Eastern Naval Command Commander-in-Chief Vice Admiral AK Jain and Army Commander, Eastern Command Lieutenant-General Anil Chouhan.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/sta...-launched-soon-to-be-inducted-in-navy-2338616

@Nilgiri @Paro @Cobra Arbok @Jackdaws @Gautam thoughts?

 

[Raptor]

2 carriers would be enough,CDS have a point.
We should build more advanced,stealthier submarines with lithium ion batteries.

 

[Zapper]

2 carriers would be enough,CDS have a point.
We should build more advanced,stealthier submarines with lithium ion batteries.

IN's argument is one carrier would be in repair or refit works or undergo some kinda upgrade while the other two guard each coast respectively. If all three are operational at the same time which is unlikely, the third could always be deployed in IOR. What'd break the bank is not the carrier along but building a whole CBG which includes underwater and surface fleets along with 54 fighter jets and helos.

Also, IN's options are either IAC-2 or 6x SSN's (P76 - nuclear powered). The P75I deal for diesel electric subs with AIP is independent of this

 

[Nilgiri]

IN's argument is one carrier would be in repair or refit works or undergo some kinda upgrade while the other two guard each coast respectively. If all three are operational at the same time which is unlikely, the third could always be deployed in IOR. What'd break the bank is not the carrier along but building a whole CBG which includes underwater and surface fleets along with 54 fighter jets and helos.

Also, IN's options are either IAC-2 or 6x SSN's (P76 - nuclear powered). The P75I deal for diesel electric subs with AIP is independent of this

Some reason I didnt get or skipped over the tag you gave.

Anyways yes hard naval assets work in 3's generally....extends to all manner of warship, carrier and sub.

Basically 1 is in first half of downtime (returned from duty, crew RnR, any maintenance etc)

Another is in 2nd half of downtime (getting ready for duty, can be sent to duty if push come to shove, replenishment)

Third is deployed and out at sea + active duty etc.

So having 3 (and multiples of 3 in general for policy + doctrine planning) ensures you always have 1 (of each 3) out and about and another to back it up at short notice (say war/conflict/tension).

===========

All that said I think 2 carriers are more than sufficient, we don't need a 3rd....we sorely need SSNs and more submarines in general.

Getting to 3 or more carriers can be for next evolvement of carrier (whatever that looks like)...commensurate to India force projection needs then. I think 2 covers what we need for it now.

It is better to invest and develop the institutions for submarine (and underwater tech more generally) where we are really behind...but huge force multiplication involved with better mastery and capacity there.

If it were up to me I would do whats needed relationship wise (yesterday itself, but now is better than never) to make a good relationship with UK+Dutch to always have a steady flow of IN officers to their perisher course for example. That will pay huge dividends in the 2030+ time frame.

Rest really needs to be a strong focus on MIC and raw economy + industry development and integration to even have a chance of making this any serious debate to get into about large CBGs and stuff....given what resources and capabilities those need to actually develop and deploy sustainably (The Soviets never got even close to it with all they had going for them 50 odd years).

@anmdt @#comcom @Paro @Gautam et al.

I also agree with @Joe Shearer (earlier somewhere there was a thread) that there need to be focus on detection, sensoring using smaller number of craft for our immediate local security needs in Arabian sea area...given the very serious attack that happened past all our brochure-savvy defenses when push come to shove there.

 

[Raptor]

IN's argument is one carrier would be in repair or refit works or undergo some kinda upgrade while the other two guard each coast respectively. If all three are operational at the same time which is unlikely, the third could always be deployed in IOR. What'd break the bank is not the carrier along but building a whole CBG which includes underwater and surface fleets along with 54 fighter jets and helos.

Also, IN's options are either IAC-2 or 6x SSN's (P76 - nuclear powered). The P75I deal for diesel electric subs with AIP is independent of this

Won't there be any budget problem?

 

[Zapper]

Won't there be any budget problem?

Budget for two submarine programs running in parallel!! I don't think so since the subs will be built and delivered through a decade and the payments will be made as such

Budget for P75I has already been allocated and is a done deal. All IN needs to do now is select the appropriate foreign partner and the right sub. IMO, Scorpene 2000 falls in between the current Scorpene and Shortfin Barracuda is IN's best bet to maintain commonality with our ongoing Scorpene fleet

 

[Raptor]

Budget for two submarine programs running in parallel!! I don't think so since the subs will be built and delivered through a decade and the payments will be made as such

Budget for P75I has already been allocated and is a done deal. All IN needs to do now is select the appropriate foreign partner and the right sub. IMO, Scorpene 2000 falls in between the current Scorpene and Shortfin Barracuda is IN's best bet to maintain commonality with our ongoing Scorpene fleet

So even if they go for a third AC,according to you which design it should take?
And what should be its displacement.

 

[Zapper]

So even if they go for a third AC,according to you which design it should take?
And what should be its displacement.

Per reports, IN intends to have a 65k ton carrier with EMALS, loaded with 54 fighter jets and appropriate helos

 

[Joe Shearer]

Basically 1 is in first half of downtime (returned from duty, crew RnR, any maintenance etc)

Another is in 2nd half of downtime (getting ready for duty, can be sent to duty if push come to shove, replenishment)

Third is deployed and out at sea + active duty etc.

Brilliant - seldom seen a cleaner summary. That is the core of the matter. Really, you outdid yourself. This is when jbgt90 is missed; what he has shared about subterranean procurement prospects and the addle-headed response to those is sorely missing here.

Really good one, @Nilgiri.

 

[Joe Shearer]

So even if they go for a third AC,according to you which design it should take?
And what should be its displacement.

As the @Nilgiri post a few posts earlier suggests, the three 'types' of vessels in any class, in any fleet, need to be identical and designed for two things: (1) complete interoperability of weapons systems munitions and ordnance, and linked aircraft and missiles systems; (2) complete open systems design permitting simultaneous upgrade of all units to match the latest configuration off the slips. In multiples of three, of course.