Indian Navy (IN) News and Discussion [Archive] - Page 12

kams

February 25th, 2008, 10:02 PM

Agreed, should be interesting. There are several things Russia can leverage here.

Galrahn,

There are couple of reasons why I am sceptical about whole Kitty Hawk afair. Let me try to put my case across.

1. Cost-

Although as you pointed out Gorshkov may cost additional $600 million to 1 billion, and KH can be refitted easily in that amount (and even if KH was given free), there are other huge costs involved with KH.
- Air Wing- To fully exploit KH, IN would need 60 Superhornets - Cost $5 billion
- AEW - Hawkeye , 3 units - $1.5 billion (?) (not sure correct me if I am wrong)
- Helicopters - Additional Sea Kings, SAR, Multi-purpose helis or equivalent, Cost ??
- 3000 additional service men
- Fleet support, replenishment tankers.
- Infrastructure cost - expanding Karwar naval base to accomodate KH, Logistics etc etc.

I estimate acquisition cost to be around $8 Billion

2. Strategic implication - KH will alter regional balance forever. I am not talking about Pakistan Navy here.

3. Political - Domestic opposition - Very real chance of government falling, as commies will withdraw the support to the present government.

I really do not believe the bit about Robert Gates carrying the letter by President Bush offering KH. IMHO Presidents do not write such letters, unless they knew in advance that offer will be accepted! India turning down the offer will be a personal snub to President Bush.

But who knows, Indians may have already accepted.:)

aaaditya

February 25th, 2008, 10:48 PM

Never underestimate the Indians. If they can keep the current almost 70 years old carrier floating as also pointed out by contedicavour and Harryiedl then Kitty Hawk will definitely go more then half century.

All depends on if India is capable enough to smartly go for such a huge strategic shift as pointed out by Kams.

agreed thats a great capability of the indians,they can rebuild ,repair and renovate old technology and use them to split the neighbouring country into half leading to 90000 of the enemy soldiers to surrender,it took just 13 days to seperate bangladesh from pakistan.

Salty Dog

February 25th, 2008, 11:01 PM

Galrahn,

There are couple of reasons why I am sceptical about whole Kitty Hawk afair. Let me try to put my case across.

1. Cost-

Although as you pointed out Gorshkov may cost additional $600 million to 1 billion, and KH can be refitted easily in that amount (and even if KH was given free), there are other huge costs involved with KH.
- Air Wing- To fully exploit KH, IN would need 60 Superhornets - Cost $5 billion
- AEW - Hawkeye , 3 units - $1.5 billion (?) (not sure correct me if I am wrong)
- Helicopters - Additional Sea Kings, SAR, Multi-purpose helis or equivalent, Cost ??
- 3000 additional service men
- Fleet support, replenishment tankers.
- Infrastructure cost - expanding Karwar naval base to accomodate KH, Logistics etc etc.

I estimate acquisition cost to be around $8 Billion

2. Strategic implication - KH will alter regional balance forever. I am not talking about Pakistan Navy here.

3. Political - Domestic opposition - Very real chance of government falling, as commies will withdraw the support to the present government.

I really do not believe the bit about Robert Gates carrying the letter by President Bush offering KH. IMHO Presidents do not write such letters, unless they knew in advance that offer will be accepted! India turning down the offer will be a personal snub to President Bush.

But who knows, Indians may have already accepted.:)

The US Government never offers any defense equipment, used or new. There must be a formal request made by the customer government. If Secretary Gates is carrying a letter, it will be a response for such a request.

In this case, the Indian Government would have initiated the request. Also, it's not a done deal even should India sign an acceptance letter. The US Congress still has to approve the transfer.

kams

February 25th, 2008, 11:03 PM

Umm, for next half century? Which individual procurement decision made around 1957 defined Indian foreign policy for the last half century? USS Kitty Hawk is a mighty ship, but it won't certainly last for a half century anymore. It has limited life left for it. For the rest of it's operational life IN would be tied to US supply chain, but that won't last for a half century...

Sorry I missed your post!. I wasn't talking about KH's life, but the headstart IN will get in operating mega-carriers. That advantage will be hard to beat by others in the region.

kams

February 25th, 2008, 11:28 PM

On nuke deal scent with ‘old’ Hawk (http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080226/jsp/nation/story_8949340.jsp)

New Delhi, Feb. 25: US defence secretary Robert Gates is expected in New Delhi tomorrow for a visit that is largely intended to suss out the Indian government’s reading on the civilian nuclear deal and bolster military relations.

Neither the US embassy nor the Indian defence ministry is revealing the agenda for Gates’s talks. But the US defence secretary, who is leading a 46-member delegation, is scheduled to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee and national security adviser M.K. Narayanan apart from his counterpart, A.K. Antony. He is also slated to meet the leader of the Opposition, L.K. Advani.

A US newspaper has reported on its website that Gates is carrying a letter from President George W. Bush offering to give the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk to India, along with 65 F/A-18E/F Superhornet aircraft that may be based on it.

Indian defence ministry sources officially declined to comment on such an offer.

But India’s navy chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, said in December that India was not interested in the Kitty Hawk right now because, in his words, “it is too old”.

There have been other commentators, however, who find merit in an offer of the USS Kitty Hawk to India. A defence ministry official was ambiguous when asked if a formal offer of the ship was made and said there was “some talk” of it about two years back. ;)

Meanwhile India, Russia finalise new deal on Gorshkov (http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080042366&ch=2/26/2008%208:23:00%20AM)

Not sure about the accuracy of this report, especially the part about what Russians are installing new...all those were supposed to be new in the first place. Gorshkov didn't have arrestor gear, Ski Jump and it's boilers were changed!

tphuang

February 26th, 2008, 12:43 AM

We will have to wait for Robrt gates visit to know the truth! Can't imagine IN having the budget for 65 F18's. In addition Kitty Hawk doesn't fit in to IN's 2020 plan of having 3 Carrier groups. Unless 4000 US sailors decide to take up Indian Citizenship, IN will difficulty in manning her for next 3 years. ;)

In case KH offer is taken up by IN, it will be a political and strategic decision, which will define India's foreign policy for next half century. This is not an easy decision and GoI has to tread very carefully.

In another development Lockmart is bidding for the contract to build 7 P-17A Frigates for IN. They are tying up with India's L&T and Korea's Hundai. Aegis is on the offer.
one kitty hawk would give IN more power projection than 3 carrier groups. Of course, it would be available much less often, but that's another question. It certainly would give PLAN the excuse for their large carriers.

Meanwhile India, Russia finalise new deal on Gorshkov

Not sure about the accuracy of this report, especially the part about what Russians are installing new...all those were supposed to be new in the first place. Gorshkov didn't have arrestor gear, Ski Jump and it's boilers were changed!

I'm no longer shocked at the Russians abilities of putting positive spins on things like this.

One question. Why is India still getting into new contracts with the Russians?

Galrahn

February 26th, 2008, 01:34 AM

Meanwhile India, Russia finalise new deal on Gorshkov (http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080042366&ch=2/26/2008%208:23:00%20AM)

Not sure about the accuracy of this report, especially the part about what Russians are installing new...all those were supposed to be new in the first place. Gorshkov didn't have arrestor gear, Ski Jump and it's boilers were changed!

8 hours earlier this report from Russia said something different (http://www.domain-b.com/defence/sea/indian_navy/20080225_vikramaditya.html). Somehow I don't think India is close to a deal with Russia, as DID pointed out today, Sevmash shipyard could be on the verge of going out of business (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ins-vikramaditya-may-hit-delay-cost-increases-03283/).

Kams, India is already in the market for fighters and the E-2, which they might buy without the Kitty Hawk.I absolutely agree with your point on costs, KH would be a major cost increase over expectations of the Gorshkov.

I don't disagree with your other points either, but I think one factor should be highlighted. I think the strategic implication is intentional, from the US side, not because the US wants into the Indian arms market (hell Europeans sell better stuff for a lot of what India is buying in that regard), rather I think the US is doing all it can to build a partner in India. As far as strategic implications go, India and the US can build one of two relationships, either India becomes a regional hegemon or India becomes part of the global beat cops for a globalized economy. I think the second is much better for both India and the west.

Right now you have the US and Europe doing this global beat cop thing, and as part of that process India gains exactly what they state they are looking for strategically, influence for peace. As a regional hegemon, they have to deal with the issues that occur when other nations see the growth, success, and isolationism as a threat. India is rapidly approaching a strategic, political choice. Either go the path of China and Russia by growing through isolationism in a globalizing world, or embrace the change. India would be wise to get in that game before China does, because once China enters that game they can potentially lock India out.

Think about it.

funtz

February 26th, 2008, 03:44 AM

Is that the 1000 navy initiative? - Global cop patrolling the high sea, keeping the worlds supply safe.

Similar aspirations/will have been expressed regionally, and the IN seems to be thinking about it.
‘Indian Ocean naval summit opens’
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/India_calls_for_military_alliance_at_naval_summit_ 999.html

However this was played down for some reasons, certainly shows a will to act, though the recent situation of "outside observer" in the Sri-Lankan situation showed something missing and sure enough other players are making their moves into that area.

in this case (Sri Lanka) the problem is the internal mess that will be created with direct involvement, it has to be from the outside mostly making gun-running and illegal transportation a fatal job with no hope of life insurance, for more direct involvement India will need to cooperate with another player which might have some interest in taking up this role.:unknown
The economic/soft side of this has been worked on a lot during the last decade with trade agreements/support on the international stage/intelligence sharing etc. etc. However it still is a long way away from a solution.

As far as the regional situation goes, around Indian ocean China has made many moves, which will only help in pushing India to 'tilt' for any global initiatives.

Yesterday, the president expressing her views on the proposed nuclear agreement and all hell broke loose, our RED brothers and their leaders in Delhi clearly expressed their opinions in something like:
"If the government goes its way, we will go ours"
My my with allies like these who needs an opposition :D

However the reds have only protested on the Logistics sharing agreement between India and US once, and i have lost count of the protests on the N deal, this could be interesting.

one kitty hawk would give IN more power projection than 3 carrier groups. Of course, it would be available much less often, but that's another question. It certainly would give PLAN the excuse for their large carriers.

I'm no longer shocked at the Russians abilities of putting positive spins on things like this.

One question. Why is India still getting into new contracts with the Russians?

That may be, however 1 super carrier will not replace the need for 2 AC groups, it can only be in one place at a time and there is a huge ocean near us, it for this purpose the navy wants the carries groups (one with each fleet) and the three carriers.

India has on going and future plans with the Russians because the navy needs the ships, and plans have been made which also address financial and political concerns.

If this carries on its hard to see some future projects which have the budget for other options to go to Russian shipyards.

kams

February 26th, 2008, 09:35 AM

Galharn, I believe we are on same page.
Now some reports are emerging, where US officials are strongly denying KH story.

Gates will tell Indian officials that U.S. companies offer several advantages over competitors from other countries, said the defense officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Those include a high level of support and maintenance for products over the life of an agreement and ways of doing business that are transparent and corruption-free, they said.

One official strongly denied a report that the U.S. might sweeten the jet fighter deal by offering to sell the Indians the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk.

From here (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601091&sid=ahqT6ecUTVtM&refer=india)

SQUASH IT"
U.S. defence officials, however, denied a report that India wanted the United States to give it the USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier in exchange for New Delhi's agreement to purchase American F-18 fighters.
"Squash it," one senior official, speaking en route to New Delhi, said of the report.
"I will fall on my sword, I will hurl myself out of this airplane if there is any truth to this stupid story." :D

from here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/feedarticle?id=7337459)

However still the game is not over.

niteshkjain

February 26th, 2008, 10:19 AM

good news :)

India successfully test fires K-15 ballistic missile

Tuesday, 26 February , 2008, 13:20
Last Updated: Tuesday, 26 February , 2008, 15:17

: India on Tuesday test-fired an indigenously developed nuclear-capable submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) from an undersea location off the Orissa coast, an official source said.

“The missile was launched around 1 pm,” the source said of the sixth test of the 700-km range Sagarika missile.

Since the Indian Navy does not have a submarine capable of firing an SLBM, the test firing was conducted from an underwater launcher positioned 50 metres under the surface of the sea and 8 km off the Orissa coast.

Prahlada, Chief Controller of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) that developed Sagarika, said earlier this month it was also readying for a “crucial” test of the missile from a submarine. “We have asked the navy for a submarine to enable us conduct the test,” Prahlada told reporters during the DEFEXPO International Defence Exposition on February 16-19.

However, this could be a while away as Russia is yet to respond to the Indian Navy's request for loaning an Akula-class submarine that is capable of launching SLBMs. The navy's Russian-made Kilo-class submarines and the German-designed HDW submarines do not have the capability to fire such missiles.

The success achieved last year with exo-atmospheric (outside the atmosphere) and endo-atmospheric (within the atmosphere) anti-ballistic missiles, as also with the surface-to-air Akash missile, had apparently encouraged DRDO scientists to test the Sagarika again.

Powered by a turbojet, the missile can carry a 500-kg payload. It is 8.5 metres long and about a metre in diameter.

http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14610814

nevidimka

February 26th, 2008, 02:05 PM

If the deal is true, i think India can deal in a win win situation for both US n russia. It can use the kitty hawk, but reduce the plane cost by using 60-65 Mig29K's. They would probably only need the 3 E2c's from US.

Salty Dog

February 27th, 2008, 07:11 AM

8 hours earlier this report from Russia said something different (http://www.domain-b.com/defence/sea/indian_navy/20080225_vikramaditya.html). Somehow I don't think India is close to a deal with Russia, as DID pointed out today, Sevmash shipyard could be on the verge of going out of business (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ins-vikramaditya-may-hit-delay-cost-increases-03283/).

Kams, India is already in the market for fighters and the E-2, which they might buy without the Kitty Hawk.I absolutely agree with your point on costs, KH would be a major cost increase over expectations of the Gorshkov.

I don't disagree with your other points either, but I think one factor should be highlighted. I think the strategic implication is intentional, from the US side, not because the US wants into the Indian arms market (hell Europeans sell better stuff for a lot of what India is buying in that regard), rather I think the US is doing all it can to build a partner in India. As far as strategic implications go, India and the US can build one of two relationships, either India becomes a regional hegemon or India becomes part of the global beat cops for a globalized economy. I think the second is much better for both India and the west.

Right now you have the US and Europe doing this global beat cop thing, and as part of that process India gains exactly what they state they are looking for strategically, influence for peace. As a regional hegemon, they have to deal with the issues that occur when other nations see the growth, success, and isolationism as a threat. India is rapidly approaching a strategic, political choice. Either go the path of China and Russia by growing through isolationism in a globalizing world, or embrace the change. India would be wise to get in that game before China does, because once China enters that game they can potentially lock India out.

Think about it.

I do not see China growing through isolationism, on the contrary the Chinese are embarked on swallowing up businesses all over the world with their monetary surpluses. They have remained discreet, so few have noticed. Western businesses have also made or are making strategic partnerships with Chinese industry. China has been building her military capabilities to protect those assets. I do not envision any conflict with China at all. That would mean the crash of the Chinese economy and no country on this planet would want that to happen.

I agree with your observations on India's roles as a military power securing it's region in the global scheme of preserving the peace. In the economic world, India has been in the shadow of China, but in that shadow India's growth has been spectacular and in my opinion more stable.

With all this in mind it will be economic power which will remain a driving force in world politics. Having a strong military to back that up has importance. That's what China and India are striving to do.

Of the noteworthy emerging market economies, the BRIC countries (Brazil Russia, India, and China), it is interesting to note that three of these are in some way involved in the same region.

Salty Dog

February 27th, 2008, 07:45 AM

8 hours earlier this report from Russia said something different (http://www.domain-b.com/defence/sea/indian_navy/20080225_vikramaditya.html). Somehow I don't think India is close to a deal with Russia, as DID pointed out today, Sevmash shipyard could be on the verge of going out of business (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ins-vikramaditya-may-hit-delay-cost-increases-03283/).

Kams, India is already in the market for fighters and the E-2, which they might buy without the Kitty Hawk.I absolutely agree with your point on costs, KH would be a major cost increase over expectations of the Gorshkov.

I don't disagree with your other points either, but I think one factor should be highlighted. I think the strategic implication is intentional, from the US side, not because the US wants into the Indian arms market (hell Europeans sell better stuff for a lot of what India is buying in that regard), rather I think the US is doing all it can to build a partner in India. As far as strategic implications go, India and the US can build one of two relationships, either India becomes a regional hegemon or India becomes part of the global beat cops for a globalized economy. I think the second is much better for both India and the west.

Right now you have the US and Europe doing this global beat cop thing, and as part of that process India gains exactly what they state they are looking for strategically, influence for peace. As a regional hegemon, they have to deal with the issues that occur when other nations see the growth, success, and isolationism as a threat. India is rapidly approaching a strategic, political choice. Either go the path of China and Russia by growing through isolationism in a globalizing world, or embrace the change. India would be wise to get in that game before China does, because once China enters that game they can potentially lock India out.

Think about it.

Galharn, I believe we are on same page.
Now some reports are emerging, where US officials are strongly denying KH story.

From here (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601091&sid=ahqT6ecUTVtM&refer=india)

:D

from here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/feedarticle?id=7337459)

However still the game is not over.

India desperately needs aircraft carriers, too, as its purchase of the Russian ship Admiral Gorshkov is delayed, and India's own carrier, the INS Viraat, is aging fast. For weeks, reports have circulated in Indian newspapers and on various blogs that the U.S. would give the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk, a conventionally fueled carrier that was slated for decommissioning, to India. But a Navy spokesman in Washington, Lt. Col. Clay Doss, shot that story down. "We're not doing it," he said. "The Navy has no plans to transfer the Kitty Hawk to India, nor is this a subject of discussion between our navies at any level." He noted that any transfer of ships so huge requires congressional approval. The Navy, he added, hasn't sought such approval to transfer the Kitty Hawk to India.

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/feb2008/gb20080226_068998_page_2.htm

The rest of the article is worth a read as it covers a variety of issues with Sec. Gates visit to India.

funtz

February 27th, 2008, 02:13 PM

Vikramaditya to be ready by 2010, India offers manpower support
Sandeep Unnithan
New Delhi, February 27, 2008

A resolution of the Russian logjam seems to be in sight with the refit of the aircraft carrier Vikramaditya (ex-Admiral Gorshkov ) to be completed in the next two years. This new deadline follows a five-day visit to Russia by a delegation led by Indian defence secretary Vijay Singh which concluded on February 24.

In what could be a first, India has offered to send 500 workers from its shipyards to Sevmash, the Arctic shipyard, where the carrier is currently being refitted. This comes after the Russian side said that it needed a manpower boost if the warship was to be completed in time.

The carrier will now go into sea trials lasting 18-months after completing the refit in late 2010. The Russian side told defence secretary Vijay Singh that the refurbishment of the carrier was the highest priority for them and that they were really embarrassed about the delay.
India has agreed to pay more for the refit of the carrier. The amount is yet to be calculated but is said to be twice the earlier estimate of $ 750 million. A naval team lead by Vice Admiral Deshpande is to shortly visit the carrier and the entire technical process of finalizing the revised costs will be completed by the end of March.

Russian officials said they did not want the aircraft carrier but wanted a reaffirmation of the fact that India wanted it. India’s only aircraft carrier the INS Viraat will be phased out in 2015. Indian MoD officials said that a ship of the size of the Gorshkov would cost at least $ 4 billion (R 16,000 crore).

The renegotiation marks a major climb-down from the navy’s earlier stance of not paying more for the aircraft carrier Gorshkov and has ruled out renegotiations. “Paying more will set a bad precedent,” navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta said in December last year.

India bought the 44,000 tonne ex-Soviet aircraft carrier in 2004 after nearly a decade of negotiations. As per the contract, Russia gifted India the hulk, but India had to pay for its five-year refit estimated at $ 750 million. India also agrees to buy a squadron of MiG-29s and Ka-28 and Ka-31 helicopters to fly off the carrier for another $ 750 million.

Early last year, officials at the Russian shipyard Sevmash said that they would be unable to meet the 2008 delivery date. This was because they had planned to replace only some of the ship's wiring and later discovered that its Soviet-era fireproof insulation could not be cracked open without damaging the rest of the wiring. Hence, the entire ship has to be rewired with several kilometers of new wiring, pushing up costs.

Lack of financing and poor project management was stated as other reasons for the delay. Adding to this is the shortage of personnel. Sevmash has diverted nearly 1000 of the 1300 workers from the Gorshkov to building a series of Borey class ballistic missile submarines for the Russian navy.

By this time, India has already paid up nearly 80 per cent of the $ 1.5 billion deal. Late last year, Russia demanded $ 1 billion from India for the refit. Russian officials base their new calculation on the premise that the not only was the deal valued on 2004 dollar prices but the original estimate of $ 700 million dollars was three times less than what it should have been.

The Vikramaditya will last the navy another 30 years or at least until 2040. It will be supplanted by two other 38,000 tonne Indigenous Aircraft Carriers being built at the Cochin Shipyard Ltd (CSL).

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/russia-to-deliver-gorshkov-by-mid-2011.html

Well went through that news report, as many people have said before, India will not back out of the Gorshkov deal and no hope of the kitty hawk changing hands.

I hope the government has the decency to explain this mess to the public.

And for the poor chaps who might have to go to Russia to do the work, I hope they pay them well, and I hope its not another one of the -10 degree Celsius weather.

- And considering the rate at which the navy needs to build itself for the coming decade, do we even have 500 trained men just laying around waiting for work?

kams

February 27th, 2008, 05:02 PM

Ok now from the horses mouth.

United States Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who is visiting India, on Thursday denied that he has come with an offer to give India the aging US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk.

Speaking to a select group of journalists over breakfast in New Delhi, he brushed aside the speculation, saying, "Even I have heard about the rumour."

US not offering Kitty Hawk to India: Gates (http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/feb/28kitty.htm)

Salty Dog

February 27th, 2008, 06:03 PM

Ok now from the horses mouth.

US not offering Kitty Hawk to India: Gates (http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/feb/28kitty.htm)

Perhaps a year or so from now, 500 Indian shipyard workers in Sevmash shipyard will wish this was no rumour. <<<Sorry I just couldn't resist!!>>>

kams

February 27th, 2008, 09:58 PM

Perhaps a year or so from now, 500 Indian shipyard workers in Sevmash shipyard will wish this was no rumour. <<<Sorry I just couldn't resist!!>>>

:D :D 500 Indian workers who can't utter a single word of Russian, in a arctic Russian yard! ROFLMAO.

Someone in the negotiating team sure has sense of Humor.

Galrahn

February 28th, 2008, 01:37 AM

It is all interesting, and speculation until the deals are done.

I still think the Indians will effectively play the US card to their favor in this deal. The US doesn't officially deny the KH deal, rather the press can only find anonymous people to quote, which looks intentional. In that way the idea is in play for Indian negotiators.

Gates comment is classic Gates. "Even I have heard about the rumour." I love that, is there any doubt he is a former spook?

Just like Putin.

Jon K

February 28th, 2008, 05:09 AM

And for the poor chaps who might have to go to Russia to do the work, I hope they pay them well, and I hope its not another one of the -10 degree Celsius weather.

Just now the temperature in Severodvinsk is -5 C, the average is -16, but it isn't unusual to have temperatures below -40 C, with record low of -45C. So adjustment might be hard. As for language differences etc. the Finnish shipyards are working with a lot of Polish welders who don't speak anything but Polish and still turning out ships respected for their quality.

But, in my humble Finnish opinion, I can't understand how anyone can survive, or at least enjoy life at over +35 except in Sauna / Banya...:confused:

Firehorse

February 28th, 2008, 08:17 PM

There are already many Indians in northern Russia undergoing nuclear submarine-related training, so sending more workers to a shipyard isn't beyond their ability- and southerners adopt to cold easier than norterners to heat.
Even if the CV-63 was to be given to the IN, IMO they would still want to finish Goshkov, unless the Russians have reduced prices on other weapons deals by the same amount as India already paid them. IMHO, if the CV-63 was to be transferred at all, more logical recipient would be Australia, which is going to get new F-18 anyway.

Salty Dog

February 28th, 2008, 11:17 PM

Ozzy Blizzard

February 29th, 2008, 01:27 AM

An interest group in the State of North Carolina is looking seriously at the carrier Kitty Hawk as a museum next to the battleship North Carolina in Wilmington.

Not far from Wilmington is Kitty Hawk where the Wright Brothers carried out their early flight experiments.

I think thats a more realsitc home for kitty hawk rather than operating in the IN. They dont have the facilities, they dont have the aircraft to truely utilise the vessels capabilities, they dont have any experiance with CATOBAR, they dont have the funds to keep the god damn thing maintaned. A 3 cat 80 000t supercarrier is a maintinance & logistical HOG at the best of times, but when you've got one that is at the end of its service life it will be a maintainers nightmare. Its alot more trouble than its worth for the IN, specially since they wont be operateing a USN sized CAG. Invincable + more sea harriers would have been a more realistic option, but i guess they've had enough of STOVL + Harrier and its on to STOBAR.

kams

February 29th, 2008, 12:06 PM

, they dont have any experiance with CATOBAR,

nitpick..IN has long history of operating CATOBAR, their first carrier, INS Vikrant was CATOBAR.

swerve

February 29th, 2008, 03:28 PM

... they dont have any experiance with CATOBAR, ....

As Kams says, not true. 28 years operating catapults & arresting gear. No recent (last 19 years) experience, but a demonstrated ability to take on, from scratch (i.e. with no experience whatsoever) a CATOBAR carrier & operate her successfully, plus current experience of operating a STOVL carrier, putting them in a better position than when they first embarked on carrier ops in 1961.

Apart from that, I agree that Kitty's not suitable, but it doesn't matter, since she isn't on offer. Oh - and if the Indians were (e.g.) contemplating a French-built scaled-down CATOBAR CVF derivative & Rafales, I'd have no qualms about their ability to operate it.

contedicavour

March 1st, 2008, 03:22 PM

Salty Dog

March 2nd, 2008, 02:02 PM

Well well so no Kitty Hawk transfer and the Gorshkov isn't arriving until the end of sea trials ie in 2012. 4 more years with a decrepit 1950s light CV... India must hope it doesn't need carriers for a while ...

cheers

As their present carrier is not CATOBAR capable, I wonder how the IN will employ their Mig-29Ks they are to receive this year?

swerve

March 2nd, 2008, 02:25 PM

As their present carrier is not CATOBAR capable, I wonder how the IN will employ their Mig-29Ks they are to receive this year?

Land-based, until Vikramaditya finally arrives. And they'll practice arrested landings in the USA.

BTW, the MiG-29Ks are for STOBAR, not CATOBAR, though AFAIK they could be modified for catapult launch.

contedicavour

March 2nd, 2008, 02:30 PM

Salty Dog

March 2nd, 2008, 03:07 PM

Indian MIG29Ks training with USN and USMC F18s... that will be a sight worth watching ! Eventually they'll get so used to the F18s that they'll buy them in the Air Force new fighter contest...

cheers

That is an interesting point. IN AV-8 pilots already train in the USA for carrier qualifications.

The USN fixed wing carrier pipeline is done in three phases: is basic, intermediate, and advanced with the latter being final carrier quals (in the T-45).

I wonder if IN pilots will carrier qual in the USA or carrier qual in Russia. Russian training will also depend on the Adm Kusnetsov availability which may be quite rare.

French and Brazilian carrier pilots conduct advanced phase and carrier quals with the USN.

kams

March 2nd, 2008, 03:12 PM

Land-based, until Vikramaditya finally arrives. And they'll practice arrested landings in the USA.

BTW, the MiG-29Ks are for STOBAR, not CATOBAR, though AFAIK they could be modified for catapult launch.

IN is building (or will build this year) a Land based arrested landing strip in Goa.

swerve

March 2nd, 2008, 03:17 PM

That is an interesting point. IN AV-8 pilots already train in the USA for carrier qualifications. ...

I wonder if IN pilots will carrier qual in the USA or carrier qual in Russia. Russian training will also depend on the Adm Kusnetsov availability which may be quite rare....

India does not have any AV-8s, any more than it operated B-57s! It has Sea Harriers. Experienced IN SHAR pilots are in the USA right now (& since 2006, IIRC) re-training for arrested landings, in preparation for the MiG-29K. They qualify on US carriers.

Salty Dog

March 2nd, 2008, 04:44 PM

India does not have any AV-8s, any more than it operated B-57s! It has Sea Harriers. Experienced IN SHAR pilots are in the USA right now (& since 2006, IIRC) re-training for arrested landings, in preparation for the MiG-29K. They qualify on US carriers.

Thanks for correcting me mate!

contedicavour

March 3rd, 2008, 05:04 AM

A strip fitted with arrested landing gear onland is hardly a good training platform for Navy pilots... unless the Indians have built it on some huge hydraulic platform that can simulate the rolling seas :D

Even if the IN has Sea Harriers and not AV8B IIs, the 2 jets are so similar I'm not astonished IN pilots train with USMC. The Italian navy pilots also qualify with the USMC colleagues btw.

cheers

kams

March 3rd, 2008, 09:34 AM

contedicavour

March 3rd, 2008, 01:17 PM

Why do Indian pilots need to train with US for Sea Harriers? :confused:

Well they'd better train somewhere ... the RN has retired the Sea Harriers, so they could train in the UK on the RAF planes (the joint RAF/RN squadron) or with the USMC in the US. This would probably make more sense as the AV8Bs operate in air to air operations as well as supporting Marines and even anti-shipping...
or of course they could come to Italy after all the IAC carrier is a close cousin of our Cavour carrier ;) but at the moment we only have 17 operational AV8B Plus ...

cheers

harryriedl

March 3rd, 2008, 01:35 PM

Well they'd better train somewhere ... the RN has retired the Sea Harriers, so they could train in the UK on the RAF planes (the joint RAF/RN squadron) or with the USMC in the US. This would probably make more sense as the AV8Bs operate in air to air operations as well as supporting Marines and even anti-shipping...
or of course they could come to Italy after all the IAC carrier is a close cousin of our Cavour carrier ;) but at the moment we only have 17 operational AV8B Plus ...

cheers
thats 6 more that the Indians as figers vary from 11-9 planes. sightly OT how often do Italian carriers leave the Med

Salty Dog

March 3rd, 2008, 01:53 PM

Lostfleet

March 3rd, 2008, 02:22 PM

if CV-63 turn out real somehow, or even the Gorshkov, Indian Navy will have major task of protecting those carriers. Of course protecting the current light carrier is important as well but the bigger the carrier gets the political value increases.

Do you think Indian Navys Fleet will be up to the task, especially for ASW defence?

Galrahn

March 3rd, 2008, 04:22 PM

Do you think Indian Navys Fleet will be up to the task, especially for ASW defence?

Yes. And if they get concerned, they can always buy the rest of the Type 23s from Britain when the MoD decides to sell them.

Seriously, I think they have plenty of Navy to defend a CV.

Lostfleet

March 3rd, 2008, 06:41 PM

Yes. And if they get concerned, they can always buy the rest of the Type 23s from Britain when the MoD decides to sell them.

Seriously, I think they have plenty of Navy to defend a CV.

how is India's Long Range Aircraft ASW platforms? I guess that would ease the job on the frigates before entering to a certain region

contedicavour

March 4th, 2008, 04:40 AM

how is India's Long Range Aircraft ASW platforms? I guess that would ease the job on the frigates before entering to a certain region

A lot of Russian long range birds - have a look at this site : www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/

cheers

contedicavour

March 4th, 2008, 04:44 AM

thats 6 more that the Indians as figers vary from 11-9 planes. sightly OT how often do Italian carriers leave the Med

It depends on which missions arise. Garibaldi operated off the Pakistani coast during operations in Afghanistan, using AV8B Plus on several missions. The same ship also operated in the Indian Ocean in the 90s off Somalia.
Latest missions have been in the Mediterranean, namely off Lebanon's southern coastline to support our Marines in peacekeeping mission.
Now that we have the Cavour carrier as well, which is much larger, there is a capability to operate anywhere needed.
It is just that Italian interests rarely justify projecting power too far out of the Med. The farthest away mission was Timor, but we sent a LPD/H of the Santi class, not a carrier.

cheers

aaaditya

March 4th, 2008, 05:26 AM

how is India's Long Range Aircraft ASW platforms? I guess that would ease the job on the frigates before entering to a certain region

indian navy has provisionally selected the p8poseidon to replace the russian bears in service,currently price negotiations are going on,once inducted these aircrafts will tremendously bolster the indian naval capability.the p8 was evaluated along with the airbus a-319 and was found superior to the a-319.

Lostfleet

March 4th, 2008, 07:59 AM

I did not know A319 was considered for ASW platform,

Boeing is also developing ASW aircraft from B737 but isnt jet aircraft too fast for these kind of operations?

Sea Toby

March 4th, 2008, 09:36 AM

No, jets are not too fast, Nimrods have been around for decades. From what I have read, the problem with the Boeing 737s are their swept wings, unlike the Nimrods. But that is being addressed.

aaaditya

March 4th, 2008, 01:20 PM

I did not know A319 was considered for ASW platform,

Boeing is also developing ASW aircraft from B737 but isnt jet aircraft too fast for these kind of operations?

a319 was offered by eads as a competitor to the p8 ,it consists of a-319 platform equipped with a customisd mission system.the design is still in concept size.

Firehorse

March 13th, 2008, 08:32 PM

India needs to understand that for the next 15-20 years her dependence on Russian military hardware and spares will continue, despite frustrations in the military over delays and escalating costs.
Again the aircraft carrier saga clearly illustrates this. India's ageing Vikrant carrier needs to be replaced and Delhi has committed itself to a Russian replacement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7291477.stm

I agree with this! And they may end up using ex-Gorshkov longer than planned. I wonder, what route will it take to get to India- via the Suez or around the Cape? I would guess the Suez is cheaper & faster!

Update! Russia to ship fighter jets to India
MOSCOW: Russia will begin delivery in May of fighter jets to India for a long-delayed aircraft carrier it is refitting for sale to New Delhi, India’s navy chief was quoted by Russian news agencies as saying on Friday.
We are on the threshold of the delivery phase, Admiral Sureesh Mehta said on a visit to Russia, RIA news agency reported. The first MiG-29K will be handed over in May of this year.
Under the $700 million contract, Russia has agreed to supply 16 carrier-based fighters, including 4 training aircraft, Interfax news agency reported. There is an option in the contract to supply an additional 30 fighters by 2015.
India, one of the biggest buyers of Russian weapons, has been upset by a set of delays to Russia’s reconfiguration of the Admiral Gorshkov from a vertical-takeoff platform into a classic aircraft carrier.
Moscow has pushed back the delivery of the carrier from its Arctic port of Severodvinsk to India to 2012 and pushed up the price.
India is emerging as a leading weapons buyer, and is planning one of its biggest ever arms deals, a $10 billion purchase of 126 fighter jets. Russia is taking an active part in that tender.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=101407

mysterious

March 16th, 2008, 10:55 PM

India barred from offensive use of US warship
* Pentagon allows USS Trenton be used for relief operations only

NEW DELHI: India has signed a clause with the US restricting deployment of a warship bought from the country for offensive purposes.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) is being criticised for signing a “restrictive clause” assuring Americans that it would not deploy the war ship USS Trenton – now known as – INS Jalaswa for offensive purposes. It has also allowed regular American inspection of the 36-year old ship, purchased by India in 2005-06.

The acceptance of a “restrictive clause” in the contract for the ship worth $50 million is set to further embarrass Manmohan Singh government embroiled in the Indo-US nuclear deal. The allied Left Parties on Saturday asked the government to order a probe into the “dubious” purchase of the US warship. Adding woes to the government, Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in its latest report has said the ship was purchased even without physical assessment.

In accepting the Pentagon’s condition that the ship should not be used for “offensive deployment” but only for relief – such as after the Tsunami of December 2004 – the Indian Navy has given up its right to use the vessel for the purpose for which it was built. “There is no way that you would purchase a weapon system if you cannot use it for offensive action,” said former Navy Chief Admiral (rtd) Arun Prakash.

Though, it was during his tenure (2005-06) the deal was clinched, Prakash said “ultimately it is not the navy chief or naval headquarters that takes these decisions,” putting the onus on the Union Cabinet, which has final say in signing multi-billion dollar deals. The Trenton was used for eviction during the Israeli-Hezbollah war of 2006. It has been also used for offensive actions like landing marines from the sea to attack an enemy and capture hostile territory. The ship is a troops-carrier and is capable of taking within its hold armoured vehicles and tanks.

The Jalashva’s six embarked SH-60 helicopters are capable of being used both for surveillance and attack. The Indian Navy intends using its small landing craft to transport its marine commandos (Marcos) in stealthy offensive and sabotage missions. Last month, six of the Jalashva’s crew died after a gas leak on board the vessel during a drill in the Bay of Bengal. A naval board of inquiry is investigating the cause of the leak but prima facie reports have pointed to a defect inherited by the Indian Navy.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\03\17\story_17-3-2008_pg4_17

Looks like the USS Trenton will be restricted to training & relief Ops.

kams

March 16th, 2008, 11:06 PM

Looks like the USS Trenton will be restricted to training & relief Ops.

Hehe, In the unlikely event that IN had to use her for offensive action, it will be used and IN may apologise to US gov. later. There is very little any one can do to prevent that from happening (short of bombing and sinking her).

Tasman

March 16th, 2008, 11:08 PM

Looks like the USS Trenton will be restricted to training & relief Ops.

It is certainly a strange condition to impose when selling an amphibious assault ship. It surprises me that the Indian Government agreed. As mysterious has said, this will effectively limit the ship to training and relief type operations.

Tas

EDIT:

Just read kam's post and of course he is right. If necessary she will be used as required. An appropriate apology would be made and the US, after some jumping up and down, would most likely end up accepting the apology.

Salty Dog

March 16th, 2008, 11:57 PM

India barred from offensive use of US warship
* Pentagon allows USS Trenton be used for relief operations only

NEW DELHI: India has signed a clause with the US restricting deployment of a warship bought from the country for offensive purposes.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) is being criticised for signing a “restrictive clause” assuring Americans that it would not deploy the war ship USS Trenton – now known as – INS Jalaswa for offensive purposes. It has also allowed regular American inspection of the 36-year old ship, purchased by India in 2005-06.

The acceptance of a “restrictive clause” in the contract for the ship worth $50 million is set to further embarrass Manmohan Singh government embroiled in the Indo-US nuclear deal. The allied Left Parties on Saturday asked the government to order a probe into the “dubious” purchase of the US warship. Adding woes to the government, Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in its latest report has said the ship was purchased even without physical assessment.

In accepting the Pentagon’s condition that the ship should not be used for “offensive deployment” but only for relief – such as after the Tsunami of December 2004 – the Indian Navy has given up its right to use the vessel for the purpose for which it was built. “There is no way that you would purchase a weapon system if you cannot use it for offensive action,” said former Navy Chief Admiral (rtd) Arun Prakash.

Though, it was during his tenure (2005-06) the deal was clinched, Prakash said “ultimately it is not the navy chief or naval headquarters that takes these decisions,” putting the onus on the Union Cabinet, which has final say in signing multi-billion dollar deals. The Trenton was used for eviction during the Israeli-Hezbollah war of 2006. It has been also used for offensive actions like landing marines from the sea to attack an enemy and capture hostile territory. The ship is a troops-carrier and is capable of taking within its hold armoured vehicles and tanks.

The Jalashva’s six embarked SH-60 helicopters are capable of being used both for surveillance and attack. The Indian Navy intends using its small landing craft to transport its marine commandos (Marcos) in stealthy offensive and sabotage missions. Last month, six of the Jalashva’s crew died after a gas leak on board the vessel during a drill in the Bay of Bengal. A naval board of inquiry is investigating the cause of the leak but prima facie reports have pointed to a defect inherited by the Indian Navy.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008317story_17-3-2008_pg4_17

Looks like the USS Trenton will be restricted to training & relief Ops.

I seriously doubt the validity of the article that a "restrictive clause" of the nature mentioned was signed. A FMS (foreign military sales) contact is pretty much "boilerplate language" and includes EUM (end use monitoring) as standard items required by the US Government. Especially in the transfer of a used ship.

The actual verbage used is "purchasers must agree to use articles, training, and services only for their furnished purpose".

The main concern of the US Govermment is that the purchaser not use the articles, training, and services for non-military action, e.g. against civilians.

See the instruction: http://www.dsca.mil/samm/Chapter%2008%20-%20End-Use%20Monitoring%20(EUM).pdf

National defense is a legitimate end use purpose.

aaaditya

March 17th, 2008, 01:05 AM

the indian navy had acquired the trenton for disaster relief ,as a command and control platform during natural disasters,and training roles ,they never intended it for amphibious assault roles(lpd),however they intended to study its use in their naval structure.

indian shipyard grse was studying the french mistral to find out about the mistral's suitability for the indian navy and wether they would be able to licence produce these vessels for the indian navy.

aaaditya

March 18th, 2008, 05:19 AM

hey guys,it seems that boeing is slated to win the tender for the supply of maritime patrol aircrafts to the indian navy.

here is the link and the article:

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Boeing-set-to-bag-order-for-8-patrol-aircraft/285460/

Major global defence aircraft supplier, US-based Boeing may be poised to bag the Indian order for eight maritime patrol planes.

Industry officials expressed confidence that the Boeing P-8i Poseidons long-range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) patrol aircraft would be selected over their rivals, in what could signal a further strengthening of India’s defence engagement with America.
A high-level delegation from the company is coming to India in the end of March, and is likely to sign the $2 billion, eight-aircraft agreement with the Indian Navy. The ‘commercial price negotiations’ between the ministry of defence (MoD) and Boeing officials, for the direct ‘foreign military sale’ contract under a government-to-government arrangement, concluded recently.
The P-8i, based on the Boeing-737 commercial airliner, was competing with the European Aeronautic Defence and Space (EADS)’s A-319 maritime patrol aircraft and other contenders in meeting ‘qualitative requirements’ in the technical trials held by the Navy. The P-8i, a customised version for the Indian Navy, is based on the hugely successful Boeing-737 commercial airliner. The navy had, in November 2006, expressed an interest in the aircraft as a replacement for its existing fleet of Il-38 aircraft. The navy has also sought details from Lockheed Martin about the P3C Orion aircraft, which the Pakistan Navy currently uses. The Indian Navy plans to initially buy eight aircrafts and possibly a few more, later. “Under the contract that is expected to be inked soon, the first P-8i will be delivered within 48 months, that is, in mid-2012 and all the eight by mid-2015. These machines would replace the eight Tupolev-142Ms,” a source said.</I></B>

aaaditya

March 18th, 2008, 05:23 AM

hey guys,recently indian navy selected italian shipbuilder fincantieri for the supply of fleet tankers and oceanographic research vessels,can someone provide images and specifications of these vessels or similiar projects of fincantieri,i have tried googling but to no use,also if possible images and specifications of fincantieri designed landing platform docks and landing helicopter docks and the russo-italian s1000 submarine designs.links of italian navy websites and fincantieri websites would also be highly appreciated.

aaaditya

March 18th, 2008, 05:41 AM

hey guys,italy seems to be benefitting a lot from indian naval expansion plans.

1) fincantieri has been selected as a consultand for the indian naval indigenous aircraft carrier project and may also be selected for the second aircraft carrier.

2) fincantieri has been selected to supply fleet tankers,(i believe indian navy will acquire atleast 3 -4 of these vessels ),currently indian navy operates 3 vessels built by germany and poland.

3) italy is also bidding to supply indian navy mine counter measure vessels with transfer of technology to goa shipyards limited for the construction of 8 vessels in india.

4) supply of oceanographic research vessel to the indian navy,the first of this class the sagar nidhi has been commissioned recently ,one more is expected to be purchased.

5) italy is one of the countries invited to bid for the 5000+ton displacement p-17a frigates of which 7 are likely to acquired.

6) fincantieri is also offering its lhd and lpd designs to the indian navy ,indian shipyard grsl is studying the french mistral design as an offer to indian navy.

7) india was interested in joining the russo-italian s-1000 submarine project which is based on the amur design,however not much is known about it.

Salty Dog

March 18th, 2008, 09:08 AM

kams

March 18th, 2008, 09:33 AM

Fleet Tanker details,

From Fincantieri website (http://www.fincantieri.com/CMS/Data/prodotti/000470.aspx?cms640909ff=001ffb5a3320481a912fb01126 1bb57d&menu_key=7fca13e5&CMSKEY_categoria=VESSEL&CMSKEY_tipo=Replenishment+Ship&CMSKEY_armatore=SW5kaWFuIE5hdnk=&CMSKEY_anno=&CMSKEY_sottotitolo=)

Main Characteristics
Shipowner:Indian Navy
Year:2010
Type:Replenishment Ship

Length, overall 175 m
Length between perpendicular 162.7 m
Breadth, moulded 25 m
Depth to flight deck (Deck 01) 19.05 m
Depth to main deck (Deck 1) 16.30 m
Full load displacement , About 27,500 t
Corresponding draft from B.L. abt. 9.1 m
Transported Useful Cargoes abt.15,760 t
Economical speed 16 knots
RAS speed 14 -16 knots
Max speed at full load 20 knots
Range at 16 knots 10,000 NM
MCR of Propulsion Diesel Engines 2x10,000 kW
Accomodation
crew + additional personnel 248
Flight Deck
Hull: double skin side, responding to the new MARPOL rules on environmental protection
Capability to refuel 4 ships at time

Salty Dog

March 18th, 2008, 11:08 AM

kato

March 18th, 2008, 11:52 AM

Salty Dog

March 18th, 2008, 12:19 PM

It means there are four fuel booms (one forward-midships rig, one aft-midships rig, as seen on the linked site).

Depends on purpose mostly. A lot of (modern) multi-product replenishment ships have a single rig to retain more container space on the deck. Ships that don't carry any TEU on the deck usually have two rigs. Note that the ship here doesn't carry much in the way of TEU - there might be space for 16 or so TEU between the forward rig and the forecastle with the crane, but that's next to nothing.

Refueling from astern pretty much hasn't been done since the 50s or so btw.
It's pretty susceptible to parting lines, and additionally to lines being caught in the ship's screws. Abeam refueling was introduced after WW2 (by the British first), and is the standard pretty much since then.

Understood mate. However, that still does not show how four ships will simultaneously RAS!

Taking away the astern RAS, you will only have one ship to port and one ship to starboard, period!

How do you get four?

By the way, there are only two STREAM stations on each side for cargo or fuel, never both at the same time at the same station. You never use the crane for RAS, it's for inport/at anchor cargo handling only.

Have a look:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/unrep.htm

aaaditya

March 18th, 2008, 12:54 PM

kato

March 18th, 2008, 01:07 PM

How do you get four?
Anchor them at just the right positions. It only says "it can refuel" there, not "it can refuel underway".

By the way, there are only two STREAM stations on each side for cargo or fuel, never both at the same time at the same station.

Ah, but that depends on the ship's outfit.

Salty Dog

March 18th, 2008, 03:05 PM

Anchor them at just the right positions. It only says "it can refuel" there, not "it can refuel underway".

Ah, but that depends on the ship's outfit.

There is no point in constructing a ship for FAS/RAS unless you will CONREP at sea. If you refuel at anchor, just use a barge, it`s far cheaper. Still, the Indian Navy may have a refueling-at-anchor requirement.

Besides, even at anchor, trying to get the fueling stations to line up between the transfer ship and receiving ship, will most likely allow only one ship at a time per side to refuel.

The Fleet Tanker on Fincantieri website shows two FAS/RAS stations per side. The US Navy Supply class AOE has six FAS/RAS stations on each side.

Salty Dog

March 18th, 2008, 04:05 PM

Here's a link to information on the ETNA class FSV also built by Fincantieri. It's smaller in size and displacement to the IN Fleet Tanker.

The ETNA FSV is able to "be in position to refuel the squadron, including the air wing of the carrier, and also provide full logistic support in terms of repair workshops, spare parts, ammunition replenishment and supplies.

ETNA is also capable of performing civil protection roles at times of crisis. The ship has high autonomous capacity to provide electrical power, fresh water and prepared meals and also has fully equipped hospital and medical facilities on board."

An interesting difference between the ETNA and the IN Fleet Tanker is the ETNA is twin screw whilst the IN ship just has one. The Italians probably have a higher speed requirement than the Indians.

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/etna/

Salty Dog

March 21st, 2008, 01:21 PM

Just now the temperature in Severodvinsk is -5 C, the average is -16, but it isn't unusual to have temperatures below -40 C, with record low of -45C. So adjustment might be hard. As for language differences etc. the Finnish shipyards are working with a lot of Polish welders who don't speak anything but Polish and still turning out ships respected for their quality.

But, in my humble Finnish opinion, I can't understand how anyone can survive, or at least enjoy life at over +35 except in Sauna / Banya...:confused:

You can see the ex-Gorshkov sitting "on land" in the Russian shipyard on Google Earth. Fly to 64°34'35.08"N, 39°48'57.79"E

kay_man

March 22nd, 2008, 04:19 AM

[QUOTE=aaaditya;136402]

5) italy is one of the countries invited to bid for the 5000+ton displacement p-17a frigates of which 7 are likely to acquired.

i thought the p-17a (project 17 ) was a destroyer not a frigate. the project p17 is the kolkata class destroyer, a stealthy craft tht is going to replace the rajput class destroyer, being built indegenously.

kato

March 22nd, 2008, 07:04 AM

i thought the p-17a (project 17 ) was a destroyer not a frigate.

Around that displacement, it seems not to matter anymore these days what you call them. The destroyer definition has been largely pushed to the 7000+ ton section.

aaaditya

March 22nd, 2008, 09:55 AM

[quote=aaaditya;136402]

5) italy is one of the countries invited to bid for the 5000+ton displacement p-17a frigates of which 7 are likely to acquired.

i thought the p-17a (project 17 ) was a destroyer not a frigate. the project p17 is the kolkata class destroyer, a stealthy craft tht is going to replace the rajput class destroyer, being built indegenously.

the kolkata class destroyer is the p15a class ,a follow on ,enlarged and stealthier version of the p15 delhi class.

Aliph Ahmed

March 23rd, 2008, 11:00 PM

US-made Jalashwa a lemon: CAG
15 Mar 2008, 0202 hrs IST,Rajat Pandit,TNN

NEW DELHI: Has the US sold a lemon to India in the shape of the huge amphibious transport warship USS Trenton ?

Yes, says the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) about the 37-year-old ship rechristened INS Jalashwa by Indian navy.

Being the first-ever American warship to be inducted by the navy, INS Jalashwa has been brandished as a visible symbol of the rapidly-expanding strategic embrace between India and US ever since it was bought for $50.63 million in 2006-2007.

The latest CAG report, tabled in Parliament on Friday, however, has rapped the UPA government for buying the ‘ageing ship’ in a ‘hasty manner’ without ‘proper physical assessment’ and technical evaluation of its sea-worthiness.

Considering that an officer and five sailors were killed on board INS Jalashwa just last month, due to leakage of toxic hydrogen sulphide from sewage pipes, the CAG report will only fuel the criticism over its procurement.

The navy, however, pooh-poohs such talk. "Accountants can pick holes in virtually everything. We got the ship cheap. It gives us immense strategic sea-lift capabilities since it can transport 1,000 soldiers or material over long distances," said a senior officer.

The CAG report holds that since the ship has already outlived a major part of its service life, which is envisaged to be 40 years, the decision for its acquisition 'does not appear to be prudent'. CAG, in fact, notes the US navy was to decommission the 173-metre-long USS Trenton , which entered service in 1971, in 2006 after finding that nothing much could be achieved by further modernization.

The US, however, offered to sell it to India at 10% of its original cost in September 2004. But the ship's 'poor condition' entailed significant changes in the scope of the refurbishment work, with the cost going up, for which the navy had not taken prior approval from the 'competent financial authority'.

It was finally in June 2007 that the Indian navy commissioned the 16,900-tonne INS Jalashwa , making it the second largest warship in its fleet after the 28,000-tonne aircraft carrier INS Viraat , following an extensive refit in US that cost $36.94 million.

The navy promptly proclaimed the ship would run for a good 12 to 15 years more. Rubbish, says the CAG, holding that 'no basis' for reaching this conclusion has ever been furnished. Moreover, the ship's cost is bound to go up further since it would require upgrades and modifications.

In fact, negotiations are already in progress with a foreign firm to refurbish the weapon system installed on-board the ship. This apart, the six helicopters to operate from the ship have cost another $39 million.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/US-made_Jalashwa_a_lemon_CAG/articleshow/2867453.cms

To date, India lost 5 Indian lives and spent $124.18 million on this ship (called a Lemon by the Indian CAG) plus further expenditure are on their way in the name of refurbishing the weopon systems installed on board the ship which is 37 years old and had an envisaged service life of 40 years. Indian Navy seems confident that they can pull another Virat by keeping this amphibious ship floating beyond its service life though the idea has been labelled as " Rubbish " by the Indian CAG.

I "was" under the impression that IN was the most sensible among the three arms and use the money carefully.

Sea Toby

March 24th, 2008, 03:11 AM

As I noted before, and I will repeat, the Indian navy knew when they bought the ship this ship is old. They bought the ship dirt cheap, spending only several million dollars above the last refit. The US Navy isn't going to sell the ship for less than its scrap value.

Keep in mind the ships replacing it will costs the US Navy over a billion dollars. Also keep in mind the US Navy operates and deploys their ships throughout the world, so therefore, as they say in America's used car business, don't expect a cream puff.

She will be good enough to study her during the next 10-15 years as India operates the ship. Eventually, I expect India to know more about amphibious warfare and this type of ship to build one of their own at a later date. Hopefully, for less than a billion dollars.

Her helicopters are old too. Brand new helicopters are not cheap either. New Zealand spent like $50-60 million each for eight brand new NH-90s. India got four(?) for less than $40 million.

No, India did not get a brand new ship. Newer ships and helicopters of less age are not available at this moment or will cost much much more. But since India will be in the market for a new one soon, it is a great idea to learn as much as possible with an old, cheap one. Whether India decides to buy new LHDs similar to Australia or buy new LPDs similar to the British will be decided in the future.

And yes, future new buys will probably costs ten time as much. You will discover this ship will be a great asset with humanitarian missions after natural disasters. She can haul heavy equipment along with the manpower. She has a small hospital. She carries a few helicopters for search and rescue missions. Frankly, she is a much better ship than a brand new frigate with humanitarian missions.

kams

March 25th, 2008, 03:15 PM

Sea Harrier upgrade,

HAL has contracted with Indian Navy to upgrade 14 Sea Harrier aircraft with new Fire Control Radar, Combat maneuver Monitoring and flight recorder, Multi function display unit, Ring laser gyro, Inertial Navigation and Ground Positioning System, Modified Radar hand controller & stick top and Beyond visual range missile with launcher.
The contract was signed on 30 March 2005 for Rs. 476.69 Crores (US $ 120 million approximtely). As per contract the flight test completion of two prototype aircraft is scheduled in Feb 2007. Two prototype aircraft are currently being upgraded and flight trials are planned in Feb 2007. The series upgrade of 12 aircraft are scheduled from April 2007 to March 2008.

From report of standing committee on defence, 2006-7.

Salty Dog

March 25th, 2008, 05:08 PM

It's unfortunate that crewmembers perished due to H2S gas on the INS Jalashwa, however, H2S is present in waste systems on even the most modern ships, so there must have been a serious safety deficiency vice age of the ship.

As Sea Toby mentioned, India would not have found a better value in acquiring the ex-Trenton with helos. Most importantly, the INS Jalashwa is operational and available now. Any new build or development program would only put a similar hull in use after a decade, seeing how procurement timelines seem to extend themselves.

AegisFC

March 25th, 2008, 05:18 PM

It's unfortunate that crewmembers perished due to H2S gas on the INS Jalashwa, however, H2S is present in waste systems on even the most modern ships, so there must have been a serious safety deficiency vice age of the ship.

It wouldn't surprise me if in the end the cause of the gas leak was due to unfamiliarity and a lack of training with the Trenton's CHT system. Their is a post a couple pages back that mention the Trenton used a sewage system completely different than any other used in the Indian navy.

Salty Dog

March 25th, 2008, 05:46 PM

It wouldn't surprise me if in the end the cause of the gas leak was due to unfamiliarity and a lack of training with the Trenton's CHT system. Their is a post a couple pages back that mention the Trenton used a sewage system completely different than any other used in the Indian navy.

You are spot on mate. The ex-Trenton does have the CHT system common on earlier USN ships. Sewage goes directly overboard or into the holding tank to be pumped out later at sea or into a barge/sewer system inport. This is unique to the IN as the rest of the fleet have STP (sewage treatment plants) that treat the sewage and pump it over the side continuously.

kams

March 27th, 2008, 10:20 PM

US Navy Secretary's visit to India to maintain momentum of high profile exchanges (http://www.domain-b.com/defence/sea/indian_navy/20080325_us_navy.html)

It may be pertinent to point out here that Lockheed Martin has offered to build three surface combat ships for the Indian Navy. Though the type of ships have not been specified, it could easily be the LCS as some production lines at the Mazgaon Docks are lying idle, awaiting fresh orders from the Indian Navy.

Though the LCS will be a corvette size ship, smaller in size than the larger combat ships that the yards can handle, the advantage is that production lines can be activated. For that matter, the orders could easily go to other yards, such as the one at Goa, which has traditionally constructed corvette size ships for the Indian Navy.

The Israeli requirement for launchers for the Barak missile system finds commonality with Indian Navy ships as well, or they too deploy the Israeli system.

Another possible advantage for the Navy would lie in the modular type of construction that the LCS allows, which will see a larger turnover of ships at the yard. The Indian Navy has been trying desperately to enhance its fleet size for quite some time, trying to overcome a historical legacy when the yards sat idle for almost a decade awaiting orders from the government.

In terms of operational profile, the LCS may also fit in well with the Navy's need to maintain watch over a host of littoral countries in the region, even as it deploys its main assets for long-range operations.

The Israeli version could well become a joint Indo-Israeli version leading to a larger order for Lockheed. This would also favourably impact the economics of the project, for larger orders bring down prices.

During Defexpo 08, there was a report that Lockmart (with Hyundai and L&T as partners) has bid for IN's tender for seven 6000 T AAW Frigates. However I am skeptical of the above story that Lockmart has offered LCS. I really don't see a role for a 45 knot/hr specialized corvette size vessel in Indian Navy. Mazgaon Docks has her order books full till 2012 or so.

kams

March 28th, 2008, 02:44 PM

No curbs on India’s deployment of troop carrier: US official (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/no-curbs-on-indias-deployment-of-troop-carrier-us-official_10032373.html)
New Delhi, March 28 (IANS) There are no restrictions on the manner the Indian Navy deploys a troop carrier it has purchased from the US, a top American official said Friday. “There is no unique language associated” in the contract for the purchase of the USS Trenton, now renamed the INS Jalashva, US Navy Secretary Donald C. Winter told reporters here.

“We do not limit the use of a ship by a sovereign nation in support of its national defence objectives,” Winter added.

His remarks came in response to objections raised by India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) that “restrictive clauses” in the $50.63 million deal for the purchase of the ship “raise doubts about the real advantages” of the acquisition.

There were “restrictions on the offensive deployment of the ship” the CAG maintained in his report tabled in parliament earlier this month.

The CAG also objected to the permission granted to the US government “to conduct an inspection and inventory of all articles transferred under the end-use monitoring clause of the LOA (letter of offer and acceptance)”.

The CAG had slammed the purchase per se, saying that the “ageing” ship was acquired “without physical assessment” of the vessel, leading to the cost of its refurbishment rising by nearly $2 million.

The Jalashva had joined the Indian Navy fleet late last year. And accident on board, while participating in an exercise in the Bay of Bengal, soon after had claimed the lives of five sailors.

On his part, Winter maintained the US could learn from its experience in refurbishing the Jalashva.

“There are many options on the table. We are examining if we can do a similar life extension (on the nine troop carriers similar to the Jalashva the US Navy currently operates),” he maintained.

On Friday, Winter met Indian Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta and other civilian and defence officials. On Thursday, he had visited the premier Mumbai-based Western Naval Command and the Mazagon Dockyard Limited where the first of six French-designed Scorpene submarines are being constructed.

“Both our countries have significant maritime and security interest and there is much we can share on this. We’ve had a good set of sessions on furthering this,” Winter said.

kams

March 28th, 2008, 02:48 PM

SIMBEX is an acronym that stands for 'Singapore India Maritime Bilateral Exercises' and is an institutionalised and regular series of annual exercises conducted between the Indian Navy and the navy of the Republic of Singapore (RSN). The Indian Navy's operational interaction with the RSN, which commenced with modesty – pitched anti-submarine training exercises in 1994, has grown steadily and impressively over the past 14 years. 'SIMBEX 2008', currently being conducted on India's Eastern seaboard between the 16th and 30th of this month.

For SIMBEX-2008, Singapore fielded one 'Endurance class' landing platform dock (RSS Persistence), one 'Formidable class' frigate (RSS Formidable), two 'Victory Class' guided- missile corvettes (RSS Vigilance and Valour), and one 'Fokker-50' maritime patrol aircraft. Indian participation in the exercise included one guided missile destroyer (INS Rajput), one guided-missile frigate (INS Gomati), two guided-missile corvettes (Kirch & Kuthar), two missile vessels (Vinash Vibhut), one fast attack craft (INS Trinkat), one submarine(INS VAGLI) shore-based fighter aircraft(IN Kiran & IAF MIG-27s) medium-range maritime patrol aircraft (Dornier) and shipborne helicopters. Bilateral interaction was progressed at sea as well as in harbour. Whilst the harbour phase focussed on sharing operational experiences through professional interaction, the sea phase concentrated upon the conduct of a plethora of exercises ranging from surface firings and anti aircraft engagements to anti submarine warfare exercises and serials involving the deployment and coordination of maritime patrol aircraft as well as shore based fighters.

The Indian Navy lays great stress on enhancing and sustaining bilateral ties, as also on improving mutual understanding with regional navies, through exercises such as those of the SIMBEX series. These exercises not only provide immense training value to our sea going personnel but also help in fostering mutual trust and friendship between our respective nations, adding strength to our commitment and resolve to tackle common challenges with the maritime domain.

http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=36965

India-Singapore defence co-operation is growing exponentially. Indian and Singaporean army held a large scale exercise in Kurukshetra last year. Both countries have signed an agreement on joint training of Air force.

Salty Dog

March 28th, 2008, 03:52 PM

No curbs on India’s deployment of troop carrier: US official (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/no-curbs-on-indias-deployment-of-troop-carrier-us-official_10032373.html)

From a previous posting:

I seriously doubt the validity of the article that a "restrictive clause" of the nature mentioned was signed. A FMS (foreign military sales) contact is pretty much "boilerplate language" and includes EUM (end use monitoring) as standard items required by the US Government. Especially in the transfer of a used ship.

The actual verbage used is "purchasers must agree to use articles, training, and services only for their furnished purpose".

The main concern of the US Govermment is that the purchaser not use the articles, training, and services for non-military action, e.g. against civilians.

See the instruction: http://www.dsca.mil/samm/Chapter%2008%20-%20End-Use%20Monitoring%20(EUM).pdf

National defense is a legitimate end use purpose.

kams

March 28th, 2008, 06:49 PM

harryriedl

March 28th, 2008, 06:59 PM

Reports indicate that IN's sole carrier INS Viraat will be undergoing major refit/up gradation which will last till Mid 2009. Upgradation will include Propulsion, Sensor fit, Weapons and underwater hull sections. I think the by the time Viraat upgradation program is completed, Harriers should be ready with their own upgrades.

Interestingly, Standing committee on Defence reports from 2006-7 indicate that IN was aware of slip ups in Gorshkov program and repeatedly brought up the issue with Russians, only to be assured that it will be completed on time.

Lot of money is being wasted in these upgradation programs.
just wondering what will the Harriers train on for a year as the sole carrier is out of service. I do agree that Viraat upgrade is unnecessary but they don't have much choice as Goskove could take forever and the indgions carrier is taking a very long time and won't be finished till after Viraat decommissioned

kams

March 28th, 2008, 07:08 PM

just wondering what will the Harriers train on for a year as the sole carrier is out of service. I do agree that Viraat upgrade is unnecessary but they don't have much choice as Goskove could take forever and the indgions carrier is taking a very long time and won't be finished till after Viraat decommissioned

Oh Viraat upgrade is very much necessary now, what I meant was with some foresight it could have been avoided. If only GoI had released the adequate funding for IAC from the word go and had not got itself trapped with Groshkov, this would not be necessary.

As to Harriers, I think they are also undergoing upgradation, hence the timing of Viraat's refit program.

contedicavour

March 29th, 2008, 06:22 AM

Why update now the Viraat if it takes it out of service until mid-09 if the old carrier is anyway supposed to decommission around 2010-11 ? Couldn't it have just been patched up without costly upgrades ?
Or should this be taken as yet another sign that Gorshkov and the IAC aren't coming until after the latest known dates, respectively 2010 and 2012 ?

cheers

kams

March 29th, 2008, 09:03 AM

Sea Toby

March 29th, 2008, 01:38 PM

I am sure if India wished to wait for the new ships, and decommissioning their old carrier today, they would. But while the Indians wish for an early delivery, they also have to maintain their old carrier until at least one of the new carriers are delivered. They do not wish to go two or three years without a carrier. I suspect in the eyes of the navy leaders, the old carrier needs a refit.

contedicavour

March 30th, 2008, 04:56 AM

Gorshkov is supposed to start Sea Trials in 2010 and commissioning in to IN in 2012. IAC in 2012-2014. So Viraat had to undergo refit.

Ah okay, 2012 and 2014 as in service dates for Gorshkov and IAC are even worse than I thought... so it makes sense to patch up the Viraat yet again

cheers

Salty Dog

March 30th, 2008, 12:00 PM

Ah okay, 2012 and 2014 as in service dates for Gorshkov and IAC are even worse than I thought... so it makes sense to patch up the Viraat yet again

cheers

It also makes sense for keeping personnel qualified and training new ones. They will certainly form the cadre for all IN aircraft carriers to follow.

Alternatively they can send IN personnel onboard other navy's aircraft carriers as "shipriders" to gain knowledge and expertise.

Firehorse

April 2nd, 2008, 05:32 PM

USN refutes Indian claim about sale of vessel (http://www.janes.com/news/defence/naval/jdw/jdw080402_1_n.shtml)

US: No curbs on use of Jalashwa (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-2908581,prtpage-1.cms)
29 Mar 2008, 0209 hrs IST,TNN

NEW DELHI: The US on Friday declared there were no special restrictive clauses against the deployment of the amphibious transport warship USS Trenton, bought by India for $50.63 million in 2006-2007, for offensive roles.
"There was no such unique terms or language associated with the warship's transfer. The same terms apply to the hundreds of our warships that have been transferred (to other nations)," said visiting US Navy Secretary Donald C Winter.
"There are no limits on the use of the warship by a sovereign nation in support of its national defence objectives," he added, responding to queries about the CAG report which has expressed concern over the "restrictive clauses" in the Trenton contract.

So, where is that "restriction" issue came from?

Salty Dog

April 2nd, 2008, 09:19 PM

Once again . . . .

I seriously doubt the validity of the article that a "restrictive clause" of the nature mentioned was signed. A FMS (foreign military sales) contact is pretty much "boilerplate language" and includes EUM (end use monitoring) as standard items required by the US Government. Especially in the transfer of a used ship.

The actual verbage used is "purchasers must agree to use articles, training, and services only for their furnished purpose".

The main concern of the US Govermment is that the purchaser not use the articles, training, and services for non-military action, e.g. against civilians.

See the instruction: http://www.dsca.mil/samm/Chapter%2008%20-%20End-Use%20Monitoring%20(EUM).pdf

National defense is a legitimate end use purpose.

Aliph Ahmed

April 3rd, 2008, 09:45 PM

Sea Toby

April 4th, 2008, 08:03 AM

Unfortunately, the rest of the world have bought used US equipment, have the same boiler plate language on their contracts, yet, none of the other nations have thin skins as much as the Indians. As Salty Dog has said several times, national defense is a legitimate usage of the ship. Offensive or defensive. Indians act as if they have never bought used US equipment ever before.

Just sign on the dotted line and forget the document. Its easier. You can do whatever you want with your new ship. You don't see the Israelis holding anything back when it comes to their defense.

The Boiler Plate language is for legal reasons, the US don't want to held liable with whatever India does with the ship. The boiler plate language ain't for auditors.

niteshkjain

April 4th, 2008, 11:25 AM

AegisFC

April 4th, 2008, 12:36 PM

Auditors when passing opinions be them qualified or disqualified leave a bunch of paper trail based on which the final conclusion is issued.

Now I do not know how good the standard of Accounting in India is but going by the general standard of Auditors globally, I would take the word of Indian Auditors anyday over some politically affiliated spokesperson.

The problem is that it certainly does appear that in this case the Auditor did use or was instructed to make this a political issue and blow way out of proportion a very standard document.
So far the only real problem India has had with this ship was the unfortunate gas leak, which turned out to be caused by a lack of training on an unfamiliar system.

aaaditya

April 5th, 2008, 01:40 AM

Navy's ambitious plans

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aw/dti0408/index.php?startid=22
I cant copy the content. It mentions that india wants to have 60k + ton carrier:) hmmm lot of action in this front. Gurus please comment

india has plans for constructing a second ads carrier ,the project is to be launched in 2010 at csl,this carrier will be of 46000 ton displacement,india also has plans for acquiring upto 6 lhd's these are likely to be built at grse kolkatta,grse is currently studying the french mistral design,however the last choice would be indian navy's.

60000 ton carrier is not impossible to build considering that csl has the ability to build 100000 ton vessels,however it does not meet india's requirements.

in my opinion india will not build a 60000 ton carrier and will concentrate more on its nuclear submarine programme.

Sea Toby

April 5th, 2008, 06:25 AM

I believe India wants three aircraft carriers, they are building two and are buying one from Russia of about the same size, about 45,000 tons displacement. This will provide most of the time one carrier to the east and west of the subcontinent, with a third carrier in a maintenance period.

India may decide to build a larger carrier at a later date, but I think India would be better off building an LHD/LPH ships instead, and probably more than one. They can be used as an amphibious assault ship or as a small carrier. I believe India will be testing the old Trenton's well dock, deciding after its experience with a well dock whether to incorporate a well dock with their LHDs. The key factor is whether India will be able to acquire more jump jets in the future, or will India be happy with troop and attack helicopters instead.

Frankly, its my opinon a 45,000 ton carrier will provide plenty of aircraft for offensive and defensive air operations. Adding a larger carrier won't greatly increase the number of aircraft, whereas adding a few LHD/LPH with or without a well docks will provide more power projection for the joint forces.