Indian Navy - 3 Carriers or more

[dragonfire]

Looks like the IN has planned to deploy 3 Aircarft carriers (by next decade) with a vision to have 2 carrier groups with one back up (refit, mainteanance, repair work etc). Two would be Indian made 1. The Air Defense Ship - The Vikrant class 37K ton displacement ship. 2. A second indigenious ship with approx displacement of 70K tons will be ordered in 2010 and estimated commisioning by 2015-17. The third the Kiev class Vikramaditya (Ex-Admiral Gorshkov), the purchase of the same despite cost overruns has been given a go-ahead by the Cabinet Committee on Security.

Should the IN have 3 carriers - more or less or diff options - inputs invited

[Bang-Bang]

Looks like the IN has planned to deploy 3 Aircarft carriers (by next decade) with a vision to have 2 carrier groups with one back up (refit, mainteanance, repair work etc). Two would be Indian made 1. The Air Defense Ship - The Vikrant class 37K ton displacement ship. 2. A second indigenious ship with approx displacement of 70K tons will be ordered in 2010 and estimated commisioning by 2015-17. The third the Kiev class Vikramaditya (Ex-Admiral Gorshkov), the purchase of the same despite cost overruns has been given a go-ahead by the Cabinet Committee on Security.

Should the IN have 3 carriers - more or less or diff options - inputs invited
aa its depend on what kind of aircraft carriers are . i think indian navy must have 1 heavy AC ( such as like KITTY Hawk Of USN ) . As far as i know Adm. Gorshkov will have 12~16 Mig 29's.

[Feanor]

Do you have a source on the second indigenous carrier design?

[dragonfire]

Do you have a source on the second indigenous carrier design?

The design - no, however the plan is on as per the Indian Defence Minister A K Antony's 2007 announcement for the same, the IAC would probably use the Italian consultants as was in the first IAC's case, the carier will be fomaly announced only 2010 "when the first carrier would have reached a certain stage of completion", the Cochin Shipyard which is building the current IAC would also be responsible for the second one as well

[dragonfire]

aa its depend on what kind of aircraft carriers are . i think indian navy must have 1 heavy AC ( such as like KITTY Hawk Of USN ) . As far as i know Adm. Gorshkov will have 12~16 Mig 29's.

The Gorshkov is what i think is a Medium size carrier, the current IAC being built is of a smaller class, the second 60-70K ton displcement IAC which will be built will be a big carrier, however all the USN carriers are a class apart - popularly known as super carriers - typical dicplacement is 100K tons

Personaly i think if a carrier group and control a theater of ops lets say 500 nautical miles then size can be offset with the compliment of armaments, fighters the rest of the carrier groups etc

[Feanor]

The design - no, however the plan is on as per the Indian Defence Minister A K Antony's 2007 announcement for the same, the IAC would probably use the Italian consultants as was in the first IAC's case, the carier will be fomaly announced only 2010 "when the first carrier would have reached a certain stage of completion", the Cochin Shipyard which is building the current IAC would also be responsible for the second one as well

Ok. Do you have a source for the 2007 announcement that confirms the Indian plans?

[funtz]

Looks like the IN has planned to deploy 3 Aircarft carriers (by next decade) with a vision to have 2 carrier groups with one back up (refit, mainteanance, repair work etc).

Two would be Indian made:
1. The Air Defense Ship - The Vikrant class 37K ton displacement ship.

2.A second indigenious ship with approx displacement of 70K tons will be ordered in 2010 and estimated commisioning by 2015-17. The third the Kiev class Vikramaditya (Ex-Admiral Gorshkov), the purchase of the same despite cost overruns has been given a go-ahead by the Cabinet Committee on Security.

Should the IN have 3 carriers - more or less or diff options - inputs invited


A second ship of the class (with possibly some modifications in the design) will be ordered


We will have at least two CBGs, supported by long-range fighters and reconnaissance aircraft, modern destroyers and frigates for sea control, apart from submarines and coastal defence elements for sea denial," said Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta, in an exclusive interview to TOI.

The Navy chief, however, is not too much worried. "We are monitoring IAC's progress. It should not be delayed beyond 2012. The second IAC is already on the drawing board. At least three IACs are planned," he said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Navy_chief_Russia_has_to_honour_Gorshkov_deal_/articleshow/2586598.cms

Thats a direct quote.

The plan is to have three carriers, and two carrier groups.

[nevidimka]

only could find the rendition for the 1st carrier.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/IAC.html


If the second ship is gonna be 60 000+ ton, thats in the league of the admiral kutznetsov. Perhaps it will look like that?

Also does India plan to continue with Ski jump on that bigger vessel class or any plans for catapults?

[gf0012-aust]

The plan is to have three carriers, and two carrier groups.


That makes more sense, as you need one off for ongoing maint and refurb.

You normally have 3 types to allow 2 to stay active and one for maint and refurb.

3 active task force groups using 3 lead vessels as the flag would be unworkable in real terms. You would obviously raise, train, sustain all 3 in time of war - but in peacetime its not tenable

[Feanor]

That makes more sense, as you need one off for ongoing maint and refurb.

You normally have 3 types to allow 2 to stay active and one for maint and refurb.

3 active task force groups using 3 lead vessels as the flag would be unworkable in real terms. You would obviously raise, train, sustain all 3 in time of war - but in peacetime its not tenable

So countries with a single carrier would not be able to have it operational 24/7/365?

[gf0012-aust]

So countries with a single carrier would not be able to have it operational 24/7/365?

At some point they cannot as the vessel must come in for regular maint and refit - thats usually every 3rd year depending on its duty cycle.

The reason why multiple vessels of type are advantageous is because it provides redundancy with minimal impact on the mission cycle.

min 3 vessels means 2 fleets can be actively maintained without disrupting fleet activities for the flag
min 4 vessels means 3 fleets can be actively maintained without disrupting fleet activities for the flag

I would have thought that if the IN wants proper redundancy, and to maintain all fleets at a relevant combat level, then they need 4 assets in play.

IN naval bases at west, east and the andomans could then be maintained without seeing a degradation when the capital flag is bought offline.

[dragonfire]

Ok. Do you have a source for the 2007 announcement that confirms the Indian plans?

Feanor: heres an article which quotes A K Antony's statement made in parliament regarding the second IAC

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200705171550.htm

If the second ship is gonna be 60 000+ ton, thats in the league of the admiral kutznetsov. Perhaps it will look like that?
Also does India plan to continue with Ski jump on that bigger vessel class or any plans for catapults?

I think nevidimka you are dead on - am sure that since the first IAC is going to be a STOBAR type carrier with an elevated ski jump it will be the same kind of technology on the second IAC as well, the kutznetsov not only has the same STOBAR ops but also is in the same displacment class as of the second IAC (60-70K tons), several Indian indigenious productions have russian charecteristics and design similarities

3 active task force groups using 3 lead vessels as the flag would be unworkable in real terms. You would obviously raise, train, sustain all 3 in time of war - but in peacetime its not tenable

gf0012-aust - will India post commisioning of all three carriers in have three seperate carrier groups (support and accompanying vessels) or two carrier groups with one carrier on rotation am talking about the group apart from the carrier itself and also during the maintenance of the carrier itself what would be the role of the other vessels as carriers take longer periods of maintenance

Also gf0012-aust while on the topic could you also suggest what should be the group inclusive (pls suggest no's and class - hw many destroyers,subs, frigates or whatever)

min 4 vessels means 3 fleets can be actively maintained without disrupting fleet activities for the flag. I would have thought that if the IN wants proper redundancy, and to maintain all fleets at a relevant combat level, then they need 4 assets in play. IN naval bases at west, east and the andomans could then be maintained without seeing a degradation when the capital flag is bought offline.

gf0012-aust: now we are talking about a fourth carrier, should india have a nu-powered carrier with a higher displacment may 85-100K tons, perhaps a CATOBAR carrier, which can be used for world missions, anti-terror, anti-piracy, power projection across the world - india already has a base in Tajikistan, so maybe IN can cruise the worlds oceans in a carrier group for extended periods as nuc-power extends range

[gf0012-aust]

gf0012-aust - will India post commisioning of all three carriers in have three seperate carrier groups (support and accompanying vessels) or two carrier groups with one carrier on rotation am talking about the group apart from the carrier itself and also during the maintenance of the carrier itself what would be the role of the other vessels as carriers take longer periods of maintenance

I have no idea what the IN end result will be, but the numbers of active vessels are determined by duty cycles and maint cycles. If you have 2 then at some significant point you will only have one available for full mission cycles - the more you buy, the greater your operational redundancy. It's unavoidable


Also gf0012-aust while on the topic could you also suggest what should be the group inclusive (pls suggest no's and class - hw many destroyers,subs, frigates or whatever)

It depends on the mission cycle for the fleet as opposed to the mission capability of the flag - any vessel can be the flag - the types of ships in the fleet determine it's duty profile.

A US Task Force is different in structure to a UK or French force structure. The structure is determined by politics before its crafted by your admirals. (under an assumed "separation of powers"' decision model.

Force structure is also determined by mission, but if it was broadly capable then you'd include, ASW, AA/AW, nuke sub support, and then non combat elements


gf0012-aust: now we are talking about a fourth carrier, should india have a nu-powered carrier with a higher displacment may 85-100K tons, perhaps a CATOBAR carrier, which can be used for world missions, anti-terror, anti-piracy, power projection across the world - india already has a base in Tajikistan, so maybe IN can cruise the worlds oceans in a carrier group for extended periods as nuc-power extends range

No one model fits all - for anti-piracy missions smaller carriers or even amphibious carriers are more than adequate. It's overkill and a waste of resources to use a super carrier (Forrestal size + was defined as the first super carrier class)

There is no point in having a carrier that can engage in true blue water patrols if the support elements cannot stay sustained as well (and I use the original blue water definition which was fleet capability into any of the worlds major oceans without degrading other ocean presence) Blue water capability is now regarded as any fleet able to traverse blue water and operate with relative autonomy. The old definition was "'cold war" and applied to those nations that had multiple fleets and multiple disparately located port facilties and could act in any blue water locale with minimal force disruption (USA, USSR, France, UK)

[dragonfire]

so how does the USN sustain 11 carrier groups most of which are away all the time or do the carriers travel by themselves perhpas accompanied only by one or more nuc-subs. Dont they do it for extended periods anyways I read somewhere that when the USN Ronald Regean docked last time it was after two years, or do they travel with maybe a support vessel loaded with stuff - i mean we are talking about thousands of crew members in all the vessels put together. Also would you suggest a nuc powered CATOBAR carrier for India

[gf0012-aust]

so how does the USN sustain 11 carrier groups most of which are away all the time

The USN has type critical mass and redundancy across all its fleet support assets - thats why she can do it.

By the way, the US also has between 10 and 12 Amphibious Response style groups as well - those carriers are also bigger than most nations aircraft carriers. In effect, the USN has over 22 flat deck carriers able to deploy vertical lift fighters at a full USN squadron level (not French Naval Squadrons which are half the size)


or do the carriers travel by themselves perhpas accompanied only by one or more nuc-subs.

They don't travel at flag level by themselves.

Dont they do it for extended periods anyways I read somewhere that when the USN Ronald Regean docked last time it was after two years, or do they travel with maybe a support vessel loaded with stuff - i mean we are talking about thousands of crew members in all the vessels put together.

See above - the bulk of the information you are asking can be found on the internet.

Also would you suggest a nuc powered CATOBAR carrier for India

The IN is best placed to determine what it needs within the budget it gets allocated by Government.

I have a launcher preference, but thats irrelevant to this debate.

[dragonfire]

India has plans for 3 carriers, there have been suggestions that India should have 4 carriers to effectively have 3 active carrier groups. I suggest India acquire a retired CVG from US either the USS John F Kennedy which was retired in 2007 or perhaps the USS Kitty Hawk which is scheduled to retire end of this month.

[the road runner]

India has plans for 3 carriers, there have been suggestions that India should have 4 carriers to effectively have 3 active carrier groups. I suggest India acquire a retired CVG from US either the USS John F Kennedy which was retired in 2007 or perhaps the USS Kitty Hawk which is scheduled to retire end of this month.


You would purchase a 40 year old aircraft carrier for India?
John F Kennedy was Commissioned on the 7 Sep 1968.Its over 41 years old
USS Kitty Hawk was commissioned in 1961(i think?).Its older than 41 years.
"From 1987 to 1991 Kitty Hawk was overhauled for $785 million under the Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) "Thats $785 million in 1991 dollars,with skilled labour who know Aircraft carriers.I wonder if these ships can even be overhalled?And would it be worth it,in my opinion NO!:nutkick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Hawk_class_aircraft_carrier

Above link for US aircraft ,i knoiw its wiki,just wanted to show the cost of an overhaul and commisioning dates.

[gf0012-aust]

India has plans for 3 carriers, there have been suggestions that India should have 4 carriers to effectively have 3 active carrier groups. I suggest India acquire a retired CVG from US either the USS John F Kennedy which was retired in 2007 or perhaps the USS Kitty Hawk which is scheduled to retire end of this month.

Those ships are shagged. You'd be mad to buy into them. India should have learnt her lessons about buying second hand major capital kit already.... Esp Kitty hawk which has done considerable miles, missions and has spent a large portion of her life operating in the worst locale of all as far as "friendly" blue water sea states is concerned.

[dragonfire]

Those ships are shagged. You'd be mad to buy into them. India should have learnt her lessons about buying second hand major capital kit already.... Esp Kitty hawk which has done considerable miles, missions and has spent a large portion of her life operating in the worst locale of all as far as "friendly" blue water sea states is concerned.


Sure these ships have spent tons of time already serving and thts why they have been retired, however i dont recall either of them being involved in any major accidents etc. China bought 3 diff classes of hulls just to study them - without even having a formaly announced CVG development program. Both Indian carriers were leagcy carriers having spent tons of time already in service with other navies. Even the Gorshkov is old. The only brand new carrier IN will get is when it going to operationalize its first small IAC. A Kitty hawk could give IN the platform to study for (a) to study a big/supercarrier - also a nuc-powered carrier (b) to make a platform to study and train personnel for CATOBAR ops

[Todjaeger]

Sure these ships have spent tons of time already serving and thts why they have been retired, however i dont recall either of them being involved in any major accidents etc. China bought 3 diff classes of hulls just to study them - without even having a formaly announced CVG development program. Both Indian carriers were leagcy carriers having spent tons of time already in service with other navies. Even the Gorshkov is old. The only brand new carrier IN will get is when it going to operationalize its first small IAC. A Kitty hawk could give IN the platform to study for (a) to study a big/supercarrier - also a nuc-powered carrier (b) to make a platform to study and train personnel for CATOBAR ops

If India wishes to purchase the USS Kitty Hawk to 'study' it, I think the US would cheerfully sell her, and then proceed to laugh all the way to the bank as the saying goes...

While the vessel might not have been involved in any major accidents, she is, at least in parts, over 50 years old, having been initially laid down in 1956. With that kind of timeframe, the design is not longer current in terms of carrier construction, damage control, etc. Additionally, IMO the US would remove the most interesting and up to date systems (like radars, electronics, computers, ESM, etc) and likely the catapult system as well.

Also, the design is a conventional, as opposed to nuclear-powered carrier. As such, it would give India no additional expertise or knowledge in terms of designing a nuclear-powered vessel of their own.

If the sale were done, the likely outcome would be that India would have a large, floating hulk to would likely be too expensive to modify and re-commission, nevermind keep operational.

-Cheers

[dragonfire]

Also, the design is a conventional, as opposed to nuclear-powered carrier. As such, it would give India no additional expertise or knowledge in terms of designing a nuclear-powered vessel of their own.


Yeah i was assuming the kitty hawk class was nuc-powered but no it was enterprise which was the first one - oops

I still think we need one more carrier to be operational by 2020 (4 total in nos)

And we are already building an IAC and post which planning to build one more IAC in the Cochin Shipyard and the Mazgon Docks is already busy with the Project 15B destroyers the Project 17A frigates and the Project28A corvettes as well as the scorpene subs, besides which both the Garden Reach as well as the Goa Shipyards are ill equipped to build a big carrier and the ATVs are being built in Vishakapattanam

So simply out India is already running on capacity with its domestic shipbuilding capabilitites so if we want a 4th carrier we have to look outwards for the same, Russia is busy planning its own needs all efforts would be in tht direction, so new carriers also look hard to get from external sources - so only logical choice would be to buy a used carrier and currently the only carriers looked like kitty hawk and kennedy - hence my suggestions albeit with certain wrong expectations

[Todjaeger]

Yeah i was assuming the kitty hawk class was nuc-powered but no it was enterprise which was the first one - oops

I still think we need one more carrier to be operational by 2020 (4 total in nos)

And we are already building an IAC and post which planning to build one more IAC in the Cochin Shipyard and the Mazgon Docks is already busy with the Project 15B destroyers the Project 17A frigates and the Project28A corvettes as well as the scorpene subs, besides which both the Garden Reach as well as the Goa Shipyards are ill equipped to build a big carrier and the ATVs are being built in Vishakapattanam

So simply out India is already running on capacity with its domestic shipbuilding capabilitites so if we want a 4th carrier we have to look outwards for the same, Russia is busy planning its own needs all efforts would be in tht direction, so new carriers also look hard to get from external sources - so only logical choice would be to buy a used carrier and currently the only carriers looked like kitty hawk and kennedy - hence my suggestions albeit with certain wrong expectations

Honestly, I am less certain that having 4 carriers by 2020 makes sense for India. While yes, having 4 in total should mean that 3 are available for ops at any one time, it also means that there is an increased need for suitable escort vessels. Does, or rather will, India have sufficient resources to provide for 3 separate CBGs operating simultaneously, by 2020? If not, then IMO it makes more sense to stick with having 3, which should allow two operational at any one time, and then if there is sufficient need (and resources) grow the fleet to include a 4th carrier and third CBG.

However, if it is felt that a 4th carrier does indeed need to be built/purchased, then perhaps India should talk to France and/or the UK, as they are looking to commission carriers roughly within that time frame. OTOH, having EU, Russian and Indian-sourced CVs could make maintenance and upkeep (and interoperability) problematic.

-Cheers

[dragonfire]

However, if it is felt that a 4th carrier does indeed need to be built/purchased, then perhaps India should talk to France and/or the UK, as they are looking to commission carriers roughly within that time frame.

Since the UK is ordered the construction of the new class -Queen Elizabeth class carriers and French will be busy building their new carrier (dont know class or name but read somewhere it would be a conventional powered unlike the Chrles De Gaulle) or have they put it on backburner. I was assuming that since Italy, Spain, Russia, UK, France, US and even China would be making their own carriers we wouldnt be able to order from them as such, besides a new carrier would be in the range of 5 + Billion dollars - Varyag was acquired by China for some 20 million or its cost came (including tugging + port duties etc) to only 50 Million. So it would have made some sense econmically to buy a recently de-commisioned carrier and to refit - India is good at tht as such, the HMS Hermes was acquired after 28 yrs of service and i think we will use it till atleast 2015 which would mean 28 yrs service as an India carrier (INS Viraat) while we used INS Vikrant for 36 yrs wheras she was laid down a good 18 yrs prior to commisioning as an Indian Navy vessel

[Feanor]

I don't know what the Russian carrier program will look like given the current financial crisis, so those shipbuilding facilities may end up unoccupied after all.

[dragonfire]

I don't know what the Russian carrier program will look like given the current financial crisis, so those shipbuilding facilities may end up unoccupied after all.

It was during this recent crisis tht a go-ahead was given for 3 carriers by Prime Minister Putin, given tht funds are getting allocated for the same internaly i doubt if russian will go on the backfoot reg carrier developement, even if this goes on a back foot then its still advantage India as hopefully any skilled professionals working on the gorshkov might not be pulled for the carrier projects as such :) snigger snigger :)

[swerve]

Since the UK is ordered the construction of the new class -Queen Elizabeth class carriers and French will be busy building their new carrier (dont know class or name but read somewhere it would be a conventional powered unlike the Chrles De Gaulle) or have they put it on backburner. I was assuming that since Italy, Spain, Russia, UK, France, US and even China would be making their own carriers we wouldnt be able to order from them as such, besides a new carrier would be in the range of 5 + Billion dollars
Queen Elizabeth & Prince of Wales are budgeted at £1.9 billion each, i.e. $3 billion.

France has postponed a decision on a new carrier.

Spain is not building any new carriers at the moment. It is building an LHD with secondary STOVL aircraft capability.

Italy is not buiding any carriers. It recently built one (Cavour - 27000 tons), but she is now in service. Fincantieri (which is providing design consultancy for the IAC) would probably love to build a new carrier for India, & could provide a scaled-up Cavour with arrestor gear quite easily, & for a lot less than $5 billion. It would look just like the IAC. :D

Cavour cost 1.4 billion Euros, including design, & air defence (Aster 15) & command suites. A larger but more austere ship could probably be built for little more.

[StevoJH]

Queen Elizabeth & Prince of Wales are budgeted at £1.9 billion each, i.e. $3 billion.

France has postponed a decision on a new carrier.

Spain is not building any new carriers at the moment. It is building an LHD with secondary STOVL aircraft capability.

Italy is not buiding any carriers. It recently built one (Cavour - 27000 tons), but she is now in service. Fincantieri (which is providing design consultancy for the IAC) would probably love to build a new carrier for India, & could provide a scaled-up Cavour with arrestor gear quite easily, & for a lot less than $5 billion. It would look just like the IAC. :D

Cavour cost 1.4 billion Euros, including design, & air defence (Aster 15) & command suites. A larger but more austere ship could probably be built for little more.

Just to Nitpick a bit, ignoring JCI (which must be just about finished) Spain is currently building another pair of those LHD's for the RAN.

[dragonfire]

Italy is not buiding any carriers. It recently built one (Cavour - 27000 tons), but she is now in service. Fincantieri (which is providing design consultancy for the IAC) would probably love to build a new carrier for India, & could provide a scaled-up Cavour with arrestor gear quite easily, & for a lot less than $5 billion. It would look just like the IAC. :D

Cavour cost 1.4 billion Euros, including design, & air defence (Aster 15) & command suites. A larger but more austere ship could probably be built for little more.

That is magnificent - if India wanted to order a new carrier the Italians could build it for them and the existing IAC design is primarily italian as such (India outsources a lot of design work to Italians as such, cars too) and if its a bigger version of the Cavour then it would still have the ski jump - which is also in the IACs as well as in the Gorshkov, it could be in the same class as in the second IAC being planned with 60-70 ton displacement :) only if i were the MODefense

[AegisFC]

India has plans for 3 carriers, there have been suggestions that India should have 4 carriers to effectively have 3 active carrier groups. I suggest India acquire a retired CVG from US either the USS John F Kennedy which was retired in 2007 or perhaps the USS Kitty Hawk which is scheduled to retire end of this month.

The Kennedy was in bad shape since her SLEP was canceled in the 90's. She failed numerous inspections and in her last 5 or so years of service was barely sea worthy. Her flight deck was completely decertified to launch or recover aircraft. IF the US were to sell a carrier (and they won't) it wouldn't be the Kennedy.

If India wishes to purchase the USS Kitty Hawk to 'study' it, I think the US would cheerfully sell her, and then proceed to laugh all the way to the bank as the saying goes...

Won't happen. There are too many internal design similarities between it and the Nimitz class. It is one of the reasons given why they didn't want to turn any of the already decommed super carriers into museums and also why the America SINKEX was so secret.

[nero]

PA2 (Porte-Avions 2) is the best option , india should buy the PA2 (Porte-Avions 2) aircraft-carrier from france off the shelf

they will complement the scorpene SSks very well

as far as i know they are most likely to be armed with two 8 cell SYLVER launchers carrying the MBDA Aster 15 surface to air missiles & Giat 20F2 20 mm cannons

a 70,000 tonne displacement carrier with 20 rafales on board will pack quite a punch

[nevidimka]

PA2 (Porte-Avions 2) is the best option , india should buy the PA2 (Porte-Avions 2) aircraft-carrier from france off the shelf

they will complement the scorpene SSks very well

as far as i know they are most likely to be armed with two 8 cell SYLVER launchers carrying the MBDA Aster 15 surface to air missiles & Giat 20F2 20 mm cannons

a 70,000 tonne displacement carrier with 20 rafales on board will pack quite a punch

if India gets that spanking new French carrier off the drawing block, and get it nuke powered, it would make Indian Navy a force to be reckoned with, a true blue navy. But its not necessary to have rafales flying from it, as I think the MiG 29 is more than capable of launching using catapults. but I doubt it would happen. There will be a backlash in France for letting another country to have the jewel of their navy while they have to cancel their plans.

and regarding the IAC, why does Indis build 2 different tonnage carriers? why not go with the 60 k+ tonnage carrier from the 1st in its class? These things are not cheap, hence if they are spending big, why not make sure there are no regrets later on?

[SkolZkiy]

It was during this recent crisis tht a go-ahead was given for 3 carriers by Prime Minister Putin, given tht funds are getting allocated for the same internaly i doubt if russian will go on the backfoot reg carrier developement, even if this goes on a back foot then its still advantage India as hopefully any skilled professionals working on the gorshkov might not be pulled for the carrier projects as such :) snigger snigger :)

Have any sources on that? I haven't heard about that. I've read only about plans for beginning designation but not building.

[dragonfire]

and regarding the IAC, why does Indis build 2 different tonnage carriers? why not go with the 60 k+ tonnage carrier from the 1st in its class? These things are not cheap, hence if they are spending big, why not make sure there are no regrets later on?

I am assuming that since India did not have prior experience in carrier construction when the project started it was initiated as an Air Defense ship and am sure the intention was to patrol and defend India's Exclusive Martime Zone as well other assets in the area and once the project started (might I add surprisingly lesser inputs from russians on this one unlike the the ATV project - Italians on the other hand have partnered in the design work) the construction gave further confidence to the govt to go for a second albeit bigger carrier to be domestically build, even now they are going cautious on it. The govt of india is scheduled give the order in 2010 after "a certain stage of progression on the current construction"

[aaaditya]

3 to 4 medium sized carriers (30000 to 40000 tons),i believe would be perfect for the indian navy force projection needs,especially considering that china hopes to acquire iits own carriers,however even a single super carrier(50000+ tons) would be an overkill and considerably expensive,as it will imply a lot of change to the infrastructure,none of the indian bases have berthing capability for such a huge vessel,and as of now only cochin shipyards limited can accomodate vessels of 100000+ tons india,incidentally this shipyard will build the remaining carriers,however in the long run l and t and ruia shipbuilders would build shipyards capable of berthing such large vessels ,but then these are purely commercial ventures as of now and would not be directly under the control of the indian navy.

i would suggest a fleet of 3 to 4 carriers of 30000 to 40000 ton displacement preferably with nuclear propulsion like the french charles de gaulle.

[Bang-Bang]

3 to 4 medium sized carriers (30000 to 40000 tons),i believe would be perfect for the indian navy force projection needs,especially considering that china hopes to acquire iits own carriers,however even a single super carrier(50000+ tons) would be an overkill and considerably expensive,as it will imply a lot of change to the infrastructure,none of the indian bases have berthing capability for such a huge vessel,and as of now only cochin shipyards limited can accomodate vessels of 100000+ tons india,incidentally this shipyard will build the remaining carriers,however in the long run l and t and ruia shipbuilders would build shipyards capable of berthing such large vessels ,but then these are purely commercial ventures as of now and would not be directly under the control of the indian navy.

i would suggest a fleet of 3 to 4 carriers of 30000 to 40000 ton displacement preferably with nuclear propulsion like the french charles de gaulle.

i disgree with you adi , 3-4 medium A/C will not suit IN . They must need one Large A/C . Because if you will take 3-4 medium sized carriers you will have to built alot more escorts for them , i think IN cant manage that . instead of 2 medium sized carriers , they must build one 80,000+ tons carriers . Which carry up to 30+ Aircrafts .

[gf0012-aust]

i disgree with you adi , 3-4 medium A/C will not suit IN . They must need one Large A/C . Because if you will take 3-4 medium sized carriers you will have to built alot more escorts for them , i think IN cant manage that . instead of 2 medium sized carriers , they must build one 80,000+ tons carriers . Which carry up to 30+ Aircrafts .

Not sure where you get your numbers from - but an 80,000 tonne carrier would be carrying something in the region of 70+ aircraft (It's between the Midway and Forrestal Class in size)

Also, there is no point in only having one major asset - if you do it will be offline for at least 1 year in every 3-4-5 years for heavy maint.

You get better redundancy with multiples - and you can always merge task forces - which is what the USN had done a number of times.

[Abraham Gubler]

Not sure where you get your numbers from - but an 80,000 tonne carrier would be carrying something in the region of 70+ aircraft (It's between the Midway and Forrestal Class in size)

Also, there is no point in only having one major asset - if you do it will be offline for at least 1 year in every 3-4-5 years for heavy maint.

The USN started building supercarriers (Forrestal class, ~80,000 tonnes) so they could operate all year round in the very rough northern waters off the Soviet Union. As long as India isn't planning on fighting a major naval battle off the Kerguelen Islands in the south of the Indian Ocean then medium sized carriers would be adequate platforms.

For operations inside the Indian Ocean conventional power is the best option as it doesn't limit the ship's endurance too much when they are so 'close' to home (2-3,000km at the most) and of course costs so much less. The complexity and risk of building nuclear power alongside building a carrier for a Navy that doesn't need to fight on the far side of the world would be a huge waste and program delaying mistake.

Since the Indian Navy has the tradition of naming their carriers with a word starting with V would they call a carrier Vishnu? Certainly I would imagine an INS Vijay would join the Vikrant, Viraat and Vikramaditya.

[tphuang]

The USN started building supercarriers (Forrestal class, ~80,000 tonnes) so they could operate all year round in the very rough northern waters off the Soviet Union. As long as India isn't planning on fighting a major naval battle off the Kerguelen Islands in the south of the Indian Ocean then medium sized carriers would be adequate platforms.

For operations inside the Indian Ocean conventional power is the best option as it doesn't limit the ship's endurance too much when they are so 'close' to home (2-3,000km at the most) and of course costs so much less. The complexity and risk of building nuclear power alongside building a carrier for a Navy that doesn't need to fight on the far side of the world would be a huge waste and program delaying mistake.

Since the Indian Navy has the tradition of naming their carriers with a word starting with V would they call a carrier Vishnu? Certainly I would imagine an INS Vijay would join the Vikrant, Viraat and Vikramaditya.
totally agree, medium sized carriers is absolutely appropriate for what they are doing. At least for the medium term, India's goal is dominate the Indian Ocean region. 45,000 tonne class shipe is certainly adequate for this, although I think they'd eventually look for something in the Queen Elizabeth class.

[dragonfire]

i disgree with you adi , 3-4 medium A/C will not suit IN . They must need one Large A/C . Because if you will take 3-4 medium sized carriers you will have to built alot more escorts for them , i think IN cant manage that . instead of 2 medium sized carriers , they must build one 80,000+ tons carriers . Which carry up to 30+ Aircrafts .

The IN has so far been a single carrier navy and it has been assesed that only one carrier (esp old ones) limit the operational availability of a carrier round the clock. Carriers are designed keeping in mind long service periods (the recently retired carrier and the one being retired this month-USN- wll have serrved approx 40 yrs each) which also requires these carriers to be continously updated (atleast once in 5-8 yrs apprx) with new and improved systems(the Viraat was recently upgraded with a SAM system - i think barack) apart from which they will need refits as well as regular maintenance and repair work - which for a hughe ship would mean a longer time.

Big or small IN would need more than one carrier to have a carrier operating round the clock

[dragonfire]

As long as India isn't planning on fighting a major naval battle off the Kerguelen Islands in the south of the Indian Ocean then medium sized carriers would be adequate platforms.
For operations inside the Indian Ocean conventional power is the best option as it doesn't limit the ship's endurance too much when they are so 'close' to home (2-3,000km at the most) and of course costs so much less.


Since the Indian Navy has the tradition of naming their carriers with a word starting with V would they call a carrier Vishnu? Certainly I would imagine an INS Vijay would join the Vikrant, Viraat and Vikramaditya.

The IN stated doctrine is to be a Blue Water Navy and for this purpose it's philosophy has been that of long range missions - it has in the last 5 yrs made so many port calls (am not even including the sailing ship which visited about 80 countries - i think - in its circumnavigation trip) and displayed its flag - these goodwill missions are also to display the INs prowess. During the the Tsunami the Indian Navy was the first navy to reach Indonesia with relief supplies (5450 kms) The IN is now near Somalian waters (approx 3200 kms) India has a listening post in madagascar (about 5500 KMs). India needs a navy which can dominate the Indian Ocean as the primary naval power. It will also need access to the gulf of aden and the gulf of oman as well as the persian gulf as this area is of vital economic and security concerns to India (tens of millions of Indians work and send home much valued forex - foriegn remittances are actualy India's largest source of forex - even bigger than IT and ITES industry, also India has large investments in oil exploration and releated areas)

[Wooki]

The IN stated doctrine is to be a Blue Water Navy and for this purpose it's philosophy has been that of long range missions - it has in the last 5 yrs made so many port calls (am not even including the sailing ship which visited about 80 countries - i think - in its circumnavigation trip) and displayed its flag - these goodwill missions are also to display the INs prowess. During the the Tsunami the Indian Navy was the first navy to reach Indonesia with relief supplies (5450 kms) The IN is now near Somalian waters (approx 3200 kms) India has a listening post in madagascar (about 5500 KMs). India needs a navy which can dominate the Indian Ocean as the primary naval power. It will also need access to the gulf of aden and the gulf of oman as well as the persian gulf as this area is of vital economic and security concerns to India (tens of millions of Indians work and send home much valued forex - foriegn remittances are actualy India's largest source of forex - even bigger than IT and ITES industry, also India has large investments in oil exploration and releated areas)Just quietly, I'm not so sure carriers are the way to go about (to paraphrase) "dominating the Indian Ocean".

The Indian Ocean is a big place, with very few land masses and/or population centers within it. This creates very few SLOCs, 1 with heavy traffic density, 1 medium density and 4 lightly traveled.

Therefore the Indian Ocean can be "dominated" by a reasonably decent recon and survelliance operation with assets (submarines are a good example) to act upon the information.

If you were to use carriers to do same (as above) then 2 groups would be required to provide influence over the densely travelled SLOC (East and West) and they would have little to no impact upon the other SLOCs (although Indian Ballistic Missile tests have an irritating habit of disrupting some of the others with falling debris).

Seems like the IN already have a reasonable idea of what they want to do and how to do it.

my 2c

cheers

w

[dragonfire]

Therefore the Indian Ocean can be "dominated" by a reasonably decent recon and survelliance operation with assets (submarines are a good example) to act upon the information.


I too believe tht subs would be the ideal platform for patrols in the straits of Malacca (am assuming thts the SLOC u meant having the highest traffic). India needs long range nuc-attack subs for tht, pl refer to the thread below regarding the same

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8604&goto=newpost


If you were to use carriers to do same (as above) then 2 groups would be required to provide influence over the densely travelled SLOC (East and West) and they would have little to no impact upon the other SLOCs

Precisely why i think India needs 4 carrier groups with one in rotation while the other SLOCs can be monitored by the subs and long range marine recon planes (India just signed a deal for 8 P-81 with the US)


(although Indian Ballistic Missile tests have an irritating habit of disrupting some of the others with falling debris).

Am surprised that Indian tests disprut traffic, the primary Indian test site is chandipur in orissa on the Bay of bengal, but i guess with the IGMDP coming to maturity (except perhaps the rumoured Surya ICBM) and the recent procurement of a new test site by the DRDO it looks like this will gradualy phase out - till India plans out a big cruise missile program (long range unlike brahmos )

[swerve]

I too believe tht subs would be the ideal platform for patrols in the straits of Malacca (am assuming thts the SLOC u meant having the highest traffic). India needs long range nuc-attack subs for tht, pl refer to the thread below regarding the same

A few problems with that idea. Firstly, the Malacca Straits are shallow, with the deep channel in some parts being no more than 25 metres deep. Very poor water for nuclear attack subs. Secondly, they're very congested. And third, they're mostly territorial waters of the littoral states.

BTW, what would you envisage nuclear attack subs doing in such waters? I don't see a role they could perform there that couldn't be done better by cheaper assets.

[dragonfire]

A few problems with that idea. Firstly, the Malacca Straits are shallow, with the deep channel in some parts being no more than 25 metres deep. Very poor water for nuclear attack subs. Secondly, they're very congested. And third, they're mostly territorial waters of the littoral states.

BTW, what would you envisage nuclear attack subs doing in such waters? I don't see a role they could perform there that couldn't be done better by cheaper assets.

Ofcourse - the idea is not to patrol the channel but rather at the choke points where it enters into the indian ocean. In the channel itself a sub itself looks pretty vulnearble besides which for a "friendly" navy it would only cause tensions with Malaysia and Indonesia. The context is patrolling effectively all the SLOCs in the Indian Ocean region and since it is a high traffic area the idea would be to remain submerged and undetected nuc-subs can do this much better than conventional subs - indian subs need to come up every now and then to recharge batteries etc, a nuc sub has a great range and doesnt need to surface and monitor silently the going ons. Current sub bases in india are a good 5400 kms away from this area and conventional subs wouldnt be the choice

[swerve]

That choke point can be covered by surface & air surveillance from the Andaman & Nicobar islands. Everything passing Malacca passes near them. If you want constant sonar coverage (why?), build a passive sonar array, or have ASW vessels based in the islands.

Using a nuclear submarine for constant surveillance of a choke point which is also one of the worlds busiest sea lanes is expensive & inefficient, & I can't see what purpose it serves. What exactly do you expect a nuclear attack sub to do at the mouth of the straits? You're not going to be taken by surprise by the PLAN sortieing through there.

[gf0012-aust]

That choke point can be covered by surface & air surveillance from the Andaman & Nicobar islands. Everything passing Malacca passes near them. If you want constant sonar coverage (why?), build a passive sonar array, or have ASW vessels based in the islands.

which is what already has happened.... :)

You're not going to be taken by surprise by the PLAN sortieing through there.

As the PLAN discovered during the 2004 Tsunami....

India already runs ferrets up and down the andoman end of the straits.

I agree that a nuke on that kind of a mission is a woftam. an overhead surveilance asset will see more and cover more for that mission than a sub will by at any stage....

[Lostfleet]

One thing Indian Navy has to be careful for is the protection of the carriers.

The more carriers you have, you will need more frigates and destroyers for both ASW and AA defense and more scouting subs ahead of the fleet for enemy subs.

Big, Medium, Small it does not matter, to sink an aircraft carrier is a big political event of course it is a big strategic loss as well, so all of the enemy armed forces would concantrate to sink an aircraft carrier.

So whatever the Indian Navy is planning, I hope they are having a gradual increase in their fleet defence in both number of platforms and technology.

[gf0012-aust]

The more carriers you have, you will need more frigates and destroyers for both ASW and AA defense and more scouting subs ahead of the fleet for enemy subs.

no such thing as a "scouting sub" - all subs are ISR platforms to varying degrees - even the SLBM trucks...

the task force make up is determined by the area of op and likely respondent. eg going into the south china sea would see a broader and more robust mix than loitering off Myanmar

Big, Medium, Small it does not matter, to sink an aircraft carrier is a big political event of course it is a big strategic loss as well, so all of the enemy armed forces would concantrate to sink an aircraft carrier.



size does matter - it determines capability and intent when things go belly up.

you don't need to concentrate your forces to go for a carrier - the cold war solution is not necessarily relevant with current capabilities.

[Lostfleet]

well yes I am thinking this in the line of cold war which might be outdated here, however didnt subs were send back then ahead of the carrier task force to make sure there are no cruise missile carrying subs in the way? ( nasty soviet ssgn's to be precise). Of course I dont know if the Indian Navy would have a similiar threat.

About the size of the carrier, I was trying to say that the size of the carrier will not matter politically and in the view of the public. For the public it would not matter if it is a small carrier or a big carrier, it will be still an aircraft carrier and have a greater impact on morale if something happened to it.

[gf0012-aust]

well yes I am thinking this in the line of cold war which might be outdated here, however didnt subs were send back then ahead of the carrier task force to make sure there are no cruise missile carrying subs in the way? ( nasty soviet ssgn's to be precise).

No. That was not their job. Their job was to kill the enemy SSN's and SSK's.

Other US SSN's were tasked to hack Soviet SSBN's and the very few SSGN's.

[dragonfire]

I doubt that Indian carier groups would field any subs as such, they would ASW assets ofcourse, subs in the current scheme of things would be putting "all eggs in the same basket" as such beacuse IN does not have currently even have enough subs, out of 16 subs only about 10 are active at any given point in time.

[dragonfire]

As the PLAN discovered during the 2004 Tsunami....


gf0012-aust: Could you please elaborate wht happened, are you refering to the fact tht india dispatched navy ships to indonesia for support and humanitarian mission or something else


India already runs ferrets up and down the andoman end of he straits.


Is this referring to some kind of Passive sonar or towed array sonar on subs or something totaly diff - ididnt get wht a ferret is here

[gf0012-aust]

gf0012-aust: Could you please elaborate wht happened, are you refering to the fact tht india dispatched navy ships to indonesia for support and humanitarian mission or something else

The PLAN sub definitely was not on a humanitarian mission. :)

Is this referring to some kind of Passive sonar or towed array sonar on subs or something totaly diff - ididnt get wht a ferret is here

A ferret is an ISR event. It usually means that your asset is out harvesting in your "enemies" backyard - and they don't know that you're there - or can't do anything about it

[dragonfire]

The PLAN sub definitely was not on a humanitarian mission. :)

A ferret is an ISR event. It usually means that your asset is out harvesting in your "enemies" backyard - and they don't know that you're there - or can't do anything about it

Ok, am a Defence Buff not pro, you said the ferret is activity in the enemy's backyard, you also said this was in the Andoman straits tht this 'ISR' activity took place, so am confused beacuse Andoman is still Indian teritory.

Also reg the PLAN sub - you are teasing us, pls give us some concrete input or even if some site is there where we can read about this pls point us in the right direction

[Feanor]

I think he means that the PLAN was running a ferret in the INs back yard.

[gf0012-aust]

I think he means that the PLAN was running a ferret in the INs back yard.

Thank you. :)

In 2004 a US nuke was hacking a PLAN sub that was hacking an IN sub. The US knew that both subs didn't have sensitive gear on board as they started to detect the beginnings of the Tsunami and sent an alert - the IN and PLAN subs continued on as the Tsunami evolved.

There has been a view that the PLAN sub got caught in an event and was severely damaged. It was in USN Proceedings early 2005.

So, there was a conga line of subs following each other.

[dragonfire]

Thank you. :)

In 2004 a US nuke was hacking a PLAN sub that was hacking an IN sub. The US knew that both subs didn't have sensitive gear on board as they started to detect the beginnings of the Tsunami and sent an alert - the IN and PLAN subs continued on as the Tsunami evolved.

There has been a view that the PLAN sub got caught in an event and was severely damaged. It was in USN Proceedings early 2005.

So, there was a conga line of subs following each other.

Very interesting - tnks for the decryption

Well this is precisely why IN should have more subs esp nuc-subs

I also read somehwere tht PLAN subs have in the past shadowed US carrier group(s) as well. Now wht kind of ASW assets should an Indian carrier group have against such submarine threats. also wht are the typical USN boats detection ranges against other subs

[dragonfire]

News Update

http://www.hindu.com/2009/01/27/stories/2009012759521300.htm

Team to hold talks on Gorshkov price

NEW DELHI: In an effort to bring finality to the long-pending aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov) deal, a team of four officials left for Russia on Monday.

The team will work on fixing a final price for the aircraft carrier, being refitted by the Russians. Once it takes a view, there will be a final round of talks at the Defence Secretary-level, authoritative sources in the Defence Ministry said. . . . .

-
Well looks like another round of discussion -OMG. Well atleast there is some progress towards India getting an aircraft carrier, hopefuly the Indian and russian teams come to a conclusion and resolve the pending issues or its gonna go to the cold storage or by the time the carrier is finaly inducted it would be very very late

[dragonfire]

News Update (it's posted here bcauz the other IN thread is locked)

A feature on the Indian Navy will be aired on the discovery channel from feb 2nd at 9PM (IST) onwards - maybe the coverage will be available across the subcontinent. I Think the name of the show is Future Navy or some such thing..

[dragonfire]

Thank you. :)

In 2004 a US nuke was hacking a PLAN sub that was hacking an IN sub. The US knew that both subs didn't have sensitive gear on board as they started to detect the beginnings of the Tsunami and sent an alert - the IN and PLAN subs continued on as the Tsunami evolved.

There has been a view that the PLAN sub got caught in an event and was severely damaged. It was in USN Proceedings early 2005.

So, there was a conga line of subs following each other.

Well now an Indian sub was allegedly caught hacking Chinese warships in Al-Mandab Strait in the Indian ocean near the gulf of Aden. The indian press is reporting a report in the Chinese publication South China Morning Post

http://www.rediff.com/news/2009/feb/04india-china-face-off-in-the-indian-ocean.htm
--

February 04, 2009 12:21 IST
Last Updated: February 04, 2009 12:22 IST
In the first military stand-off between the two Asian giants since 1986, an Indian submarine and two Chinese warships came close to a confrontation in the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, but the situation was resolved when the submarine left the site, the South China Morning Post reported on Wednesday.

--

How would the ships have forced the submarine to surface i dont understand though, unless there was some aggressive attack tactic employed by the warships - any ideas ?

[tphuang]

Well now an Indian sub was allegedly caught hacking Chinese warships in Al-Mandab Strait in the Indian ocean near the gulf of Aden. The indian press is reporting a report in the Chinese publication South China Morning Post

http://www.rediff.com/news/2009/feb/04india-china-face-off-in-the-indian-ocean.htm
--

February 04, 2009 12:21 IST
Last Updated: February 04, 2009 12:22 IST
In the first military stand-off between the two Asian giants since 1986, an Indian submarine and two Chinese warships came close to a confrontation in the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, but the situation was resolved when the submarine left the site, the South China Morning Post reported on Wednesday.

--

How would the ships have forced the submarine to surface i dont understand though, unless there was some aggressive attack tactic employed by the warships - any ideas ?

yeah, I wouldn't trust in SCMP for its accuracy, but the part about Indian Sub trailing Chinese fleet is undoubtedly true. And I'm sure if the fleet was accompanied by a 093 as I expected, then the Indian sub would've been detected too. I'm sure a LA sub was near by too.

[Todjaeger]

yeah, I wouldn't trust in SCMP for its accuracy, but the part about Indian Sub trailing Chinese fleet is undoubtedly true. And I'm sure if the fleet was accompanied by a 093 as I expected, then the Indian sub would've been detected too. I'm sure a LA sub was near by too.

Or a Virginia, or maybe even a Seawolf... It would be pretty interesting if there was a real conga line with a Trafalgar, Rubis and Akula present too...

Seriously though, I would imagine in such a situation if the PRC skimmers switched to heavy active pinging, then the Indian sub would most likely start to heading away from the Chinese vessels. It also becomes a question of just how closely the sub(s) followed the skimmers.

-Cheers

[dragonfire]

yeah, I wouldn't trust in SCMP for its accuracy, but the part about Indian Sub trailing Chinese fleet is undoubtedly true. And I'm sure if the fleet was accompanied by a 093 as I expected, then the Indian sub would've been detected too. I'm sure a LA sub was near by too.

Or a Virginia, or maybe even a Seawolf... It would be pretty interesting if there was a real conga line with a Trafalgar, Rubis and Akula present too...

Seriously though, I would imagine in such a situation if the PRC skimmers switched to heavy active pinging, then the Indian sub would most likely start to heading away from the Chinese vessels. It also becomes a question of just how closely the sub(s) followed the skimmers.

-Cheers

How could a warship make a submarine surface, are there any tactics to do this, i mean without actualy launching torpedos or depth charges (are they even in use today?), wht kind of manovers would make this happen - am very curious to know

[Todjaeger]

How could a warship make a submarine surface, are there any tactics to do this, i mean without actualy launching torpedos or depth charges (are they even in use today?), wht kind of manovers would make this happen - am very curious to know

I will check with friend of mine, and ex-nuke boat crewman. AFAIK there is no real way to force a sub to surface, unless operating in shallow or restricted waters...

As for the use of torpedoes, depth bombs/charges, etc the use of which in International waters would constitute an act of war. IMO not something advisable for either, and most likely therefore the employment of weaponry would not be done lightly.

-Cheers

[dragonfire]

I will check with friend of mine, and ex-nuke boat crewman. AFAIK there is no real way to force a sub to surface, unless operating in shallow or restricted waters...

As for the use of torpedoes, depth bombs/charges, etc the use of which in International waters would constitute an act of war. IMO not something advisable for either, and most likely therefore the employment of weaponry would not be done lightly.

-Cheers

The report said that an Anti-Sub Heli was launched from one of the chinese vessels, is there any way (withouting surfacing or using the periscope) a submarine can identify enemy air borne assets overhead or target them with some kind of weaponry

Tnks for your inputs :)

[gf0012-aust]

The report said that an Anti-Sub Heli was launched from one of the chinese vessels, is there any way (withouting surfacing or using the periscope) a submarine can identify enemy air borne assets overhead or target them with some kind of weaponry

Tnks for your inputs :)


Yes, there are any numbers of ways to ident incoming aircraft - the favourite was the soviet "bear" as it was so easy to detect.

it is also possible to detect when the other side is arming, but thats not going to get much play in here.

submariners never talk about capability - even those I know who have been inop for over 20 years are very selective about who and what they chat to and about.

nobody who could will discuss sub tactical issues in here

[dragonfire]

I also wanted to know abt the other way around how can an airborne ASW asset on a stand by basis (not connected to any friendly assets in the vicinity ) identify, track and target a submerged submarine on its own, do they drop some sonar devices or something

[Todjaeger]

The report said that an Anti-Sub Heli was launched from one of the chinese vessels, is there any way (withouting surfacing or using the periscope) a submarine can identify enemy air borne assets overhead or target them with some kind of weaponry

Tnks for your inputs :)

I am not really aware of any way to target an airborne ASW asset from a sub. At least not without surfacing. A couple of sub designs, the Soviet/Russian Akula- and Kilo-class and the German/Israeli Dolphin-class have SAM systems. The system used aboard the Israeli SSKs, the Triton system is intended to be fired while the sub is submerged. I do not know about the ones aboard the Kilo and Akulas, as it is a navalised version of the SA-7 or -14 Grail (SA-5-N or SA-8-N Strela).

As for being able to at least detect the presence of airborne ASW, I would expect that is quite possible. Remember what the primary sensors of an airborne ASW are, namely MAD, dipping sonar and sonobuoys. The acoustics of actively pinging sonobuoys should be an immediate indication that some airborne asset is present, even if it does not provide indication as to what type...

-Cheers

[aaaditya]

News Update (it's posted here bcauz the other IN thread is locked)

A feature on the Indian Navy will be aired on the discovery channel from feb 2nd at 9PM (IST) onwards - maybe the coverage will be available across the subcontinent. I Think the name of the show is Future Navy or some such thing..

the feature on the indian navy is not being aired on the discovery channel ,but is being aired on the national geographic channel.

[dragonfire]

the feature on the indian navy is not being aired on the discovery channel ,but is being aired on the national geographic channel.

Yeah am so sory about tht ppl, also it is not a show on the Navy rather a reality show on how 5 contenders take part in various events in IN assets to win a chance to travel on a IN vessel in international waters

The name of the show is Mission Navy and the second episode will air on Monday -9th Feb 09, the first episode showed how the 5 finalists were selected, which involved pressure tests in a hyperbaric chamber, running on hands and legs, running backwards, team excercises involving logical obstacles etc, which are all part of the IN's selection process

I recently read n article apparently the winner of the show was on the ship i think INS Delhi or Mysore which took part in the Anti - Pirate mission near Somalia

[Bang-Bang]

if we read whole article, it says Submarine was trailing them since they entered Indian Ocean.

http://i44.tinypic.com/3534az9.jpg (SELF Edited)

please take a look at this map

that brings up a lot of questions.

Did Submarine trailed undetected for thousands of miles?

if Chinese detected the submarine near Yemen, how did they even know it was trailing them from Malacca?

How is it possible to force a submarine to surface? without using depth charges or torpedoes.

And when they did find them, they dispatched a "ASW chopper with torpedos ready"

its a big thing for PLAN that they got themselves tailed that far and came to know it only when the sub surfaced.

:vamp Think Tanks Please Reply :vamp

[dragonfire]

How is it possible to force a submarine to surface? without using depth charges or torpedoes.

And when they did find them, they dispatched a "ASW chopper with torpedos ready"



Pl read the posts above - we are already discussing the same

as per article and another one i read today in the papers the sub allegedly tried to disrupt the sonar scanning by the PLAN vessels which is when the sub was detected and then they started evasive/aggresive movement and launched the heli

[Bang-Bang]

Pl read the posts above - we are already discussing the same

as per article and another one i read today in the papers the sub allegedly tried to disrupt the sonar scanning by the PLAN vessels which is when the sub was detected and then they started evasive/aggresive movement and launched the heli

ok sir i got it , so i will follow the thread to get answer of my queries . but sir you didnt answer my full post :unknown ....


if IN sub chase the PLAN new warships , so they must got the SIGN & ELEC Waves of them ??? Correct me if am wrong

[dragonfire]

ok sir i got it , so i will follow the thread to get answer of my queries . but sir you didnt answer my full post :unknown ....
If IN sub chase the PLAN new warships , so they must got the SIGN & ELEC Waves of them ??? Correct me if am wrong


that brings up a lot of questions.
Did Submarine trailed undetected for thousands of miles?
if Chinese detected the submarine near Yemen, how did they even know it was trailing them from Malacca?


Hi Bang Bang - pls no need to use "sir" etc as long as we are cordial to each other; I have posted here an article from TOI


Indian sub stalked China warships?
5 Feb 2009, 0153 hrs IST, TNN
NEW DELHI: Jostling for the same strategic space in Indian Ocean Region (IOR), a cat-and-mouse game reminiscent of the tussle between US and Soviet navies during the Cold War is taking place between India and China in full earnest.

Indian submarines, maritime reconnaissance aircraft and warships closely tracked, "buzzed'' and photographed two Chinese destroyers and a supply ship making their way to the Gulf of Aden off Somalia recently for anti-piracy patrols.


The Link http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Indian_sub_stalked_China_warships/articleshow/4075792.cms

This article says that the Chinese vessels were 'buzzed' several times by Indian assets. This could be a reality and the vessels would have recorded these overhead flights and it would have happened right from the time the chinese vessels entered the Indian Ocean through Malacca Straits. The submarine would have followed silently the group but would have engaged in trying to block the sonar only near yemen.

Also my first article talks of each navy's asset trying to figure out the gaps in Sonar etc am assuming the opportunity of trying to figure out the electronic signature of sorts of the new PLAN assets would be why IN would have sent the sub and other surveilance assets in the first place

I am posting below the complete article from SCMP (only beacuse one has to create a user login to get the complete article) which is the primary source.
Chinese navy sees off Indian sub
Chow Chung-yan
Feb 04, 2009

Chinese warships sent to fight piracy in waters off Somalia were stalked by an Indian attack submarine and the two sides became locked in a tense standoff for at least half an hour, mainland media reported yesterday.After rounds of manoeuvring during which both sides tried to test for weaknesses in the other's sonar system, the two Chinese warships managed to force the Indian submarine to surface. The Indian vessel left without further confrontation.

The incident was reported by Qingdao Chenbao yesterday and was widely carried by major mainland websites such as Sina.com and QQ. Both Beijing and New Delhi were silent about the matter. This is the first reported military standoff between China and India since a bitter border war in 1962.

The incident took place on January 15 in waters near the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, which separates Yemen and Djibouti, at the western end of the Gulf of Aden. The Chinese destroyers had picked up an unidentified submarine on their sonar, the report said.

The Chinese navy soon identified it as a 70-metre-long vessel armed with 20 torpedoes. Although the report did not directly specify the model, it provided a file photo of a Kilo-class submarine belonging to the Indian navy, which fit the description. The submarine tried to evade the Chinese warships by diving deeper. But the warships continued the chase. The report said the Chinese ships sent an anti-submarine helicopter to help track the submarine, which had tried to jam the Chinese warships' sonar system. But the two destroyers eventually cornered the submarine and forced it to surface. The report said the submarine had been trailing the Chinese ships since they had entered the Indian Ocean on the way to Somalia. It said that at one point the Chinese commander even ordered the helicopter to have its anti-submarine torpedoes ready. The Indian submarine is believed to have been collecting electronic signals and sonar data from the Chinese warships. Such information would be crucial in naval conflicts.

The two destroyers China sent to Somalia are among its most advanced warships. One of the destroyers, Haikou, was commissioned in 2005. It is rare for mainland media to report such a close encounter between the Chinese navy and foreign warships. Although deemed a provocative and unfriendly gesture, it was not unusual for one country to send submarines to collect other navies' information. In 2006, a Chinese submarine was detected stalking the US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk near the Japanese island of Okinawa. The Chinese submarine eventually surfaced close to the US battle group.

[dragonfire]

IN is dening any such activity, I have posted one link below which suggests snooping activity as the chinese would have passed from straits of malacca towards gulf of aden, there is another one which denied any IN sub having surfaced near the gulf of aden

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=HomePage&id=96bd9e1a-81c0-4848-b49e-2f963fddbe6f&MatchID1=4922&TeamID1=4&TeamID2=2&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1244&MatchID2=4908&TeamID3=8&TeamID4=6&MatchType2=2&SeriesID2=1238&PrimaryID=4922&Headline=No+snooping+on+Chinese+warships%3a+Navy

http://www.hindu.com/2009/02/05/stories/2009020557900100.htm

[Todjaeger]

Hi Bang Bang - pls no need to use "sir" etc as long as we are cordial to each other; I have posted here an article from TOI



The Link http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Indian_sub_stalked_China_warships/articleshow/4075792.cms

This article says that the Chinese vessels were 'buzzed' several times by Indian assets. This could be a reality and the vessels would have recorded these overhead flights and it would have happened right from the time the chinese vessels entered the Indian Ocean through Malacca Straits. The submarine would have followed silently the group but would have engaged in trying to block the sonar only near yemen.

Also my first article talks of each navy's asset trying to figure out the gaps in Sonar etc am assuming the opportunity of trying to figure out the electronic signature of sorts of the new PLAN assets would be why IN would have sent the sub and other surveilance assets in the first place

I am posting below the complete article from SCMP (only beacuse one has to create a user login to get the complete article) which is the primary source.

It is also quite possible that India is seeking to build up an acoustic library. Depending on the quality of the sensors, as well as the computer system and algorithms used, it is possible to ID a specific class, or even individual vessel, off the various machine noises the vessel emits.

AFAIK the best harvesters for this sort of data are subs. The only thing which does not make sense to me, is the Indian sub attempting to "disrupt" the Chinese sonar. The only methods I am aware of doing so, would be for the Indian sub to start emitting itself, or dropping a noise-maker. Either of which would then reveal the sub's presence, if not exact location.

-Cheers

[gf0012-aust]

It is also quite possible that India is seeking to build up an acoustic library. Depending on the quality of the sensors, as well as the computer system and algorithms used, it is possible to ID a specific class, or even individual vessel, off the various machine noises the vessel emits.

the place is starting to get populated - so I would be very very surprised if the IN does not have a philosophy to start seeding. after all, some very significant issues were raised post Tsunami

AFAIK the best harvesters for this sort of data are subs. The only thing which does not make sense to me, is the Indian sub attempting to "disrupt" the Chinese sonar. The only methods I am aware of doing so, would be for the Indian sub to start emitting itself, or dropping a noise-maker. Either of which would then reveal the sub's presence, if not exact location.

-Cheers

it makes no sense at all - I'd suggest an enthusiastic but technically illiterate journalist is at work.....

[Type59]

Does each Kilo submarine have its own individual acoustic signiture or all make the same noise?

Lets look at what we concretely know; China has the same kilo's as the Indians have, so we should be 100% correct in saying they have trained against similiar vessels.

[gf0012-aust]

Does each Kilo submarine have its own individual acoustic signiture or all make the same noise?

Lets look at what we concretely know; China has the same kilo's as the Indians have, so we should be 100% correct in saying they have trained against similiar vessels.

each sub is unique - each manufacturer leaves "tells" as well.

an indian kilo is not the same as a PLAN kilo

[tphuang]

Hi Bang Bang - pls no need to use "sir" etc as long as we are cordial to each other; I have posted here an article from TOI



The Link http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Indian_sub_stalked_China_warships/articleshow/4075792.cms

This article says that the Chinese vessels were 'buzzed' several times by Indian assets. This could be a reality and the vessels would have recorded these overhead flights and it would have happened right from the time the chinese vessels entered the Indian Ocean through Malacca Straits. The submarine would have followed silently the group but would have engaged in trying to block the sonar only near yemen.

Also my first article talks of each navy's asset trying to figure out the gaps in Sonar etc am assuming the opportunity of trying to figure out the electronic signature of sorts of the new PLAN assets would be why IN would have sent the sub and other surveilance assets in the first place

I am posting below the complete article from SCMP (only beacuse one has to create a user login to get the complete article) which is the primary source.
honestly, the writer just sounds like he has no clue what he is talking about. I'm sure something happened, but only the people on the ships would know exactly what that is.

Lets look at what we concretely know; China has the same kilo's as the Indians have, so we should be 100% correct in saying they have trained against similiar vessels.

The Chinese ones should be of a more advanced variant.

[dragonfire]

After the IN has formaly denied these reports and we still havent seen an official version yet from the PLAN; apart from which there are anomalies like the sub actualy surfacing and the part about disrupting sonar to give away position/presence; am inclined to doubt if such an incident ever happened, although like they say there cant be smoke without fire ;)

But on a serious note does any one know how this so called 'buzzing' happens, beacuse i feel like Todjaeger said tht India would have tried to do some activity to accumlate data on the electronic signatures of the chinese assets

[dragonfire]

the place is starting to get populated - so I would be very very surprised if the IN does not have a philosophy to start seeding. after all, some very significant issues were raised post Tsunami


Pls elaborate for non techies like me wht seeding means, and wht r the issues raised post the tsunami you are referring to

tnks


sorry for the double post - i keep getting logged out every like 60 secs or something :lul

[funtz]

honestly, the writer just sounds like he has no clue what he is talking about. I'm sure something happened, but only the people on the ships would know exactly what that is.

The Chinese ones should be of a more advanced variant.

The way the writer states his source, the patrol and surveillance aircrafts would have followed the ships and collected what ever data they could along with the surface and subsurface ships as was expected of them.
Nothing too fancy in that.

Project 636? (PLAN kilos i.e.), did any news article about the club missile systems performance on the PLAN submarine come out recently?

[Iam]

The Chinese ones should be of a more advanced variant.

That's like saying my AK-47 is better than yours, cause it's got a butt stock ;)

I would put my money on sensors, crew experience ( training ), and battle awareness any situation.

Given that no crew with knowledge and experience is ever going to comment, leave alone the capabilities, our knowledge is redundant.

We may also consider the points of tension in the Indian ocean which is one of the biggest shipping lanes. (the oil tankers aint that quiet)

[Type59]

The Chinese ones should be of a more advanced variant.

More advantage to the Chinese then. I know China operates two variants of Kilo's, thus they have first hand knowledge on the general capabilities of all Kilo's.

Indian navy submarine fleet is not in good shape. Many articles stating how long domestic retrofits are taking much longer (5 years plus for SundiKurti). Plus most of hulls are origionally made in 80s.

[dipgroy]

So the topic turns from IN AC to so-called indo-china conflict..... may be interesting and worthy to discuss but I am more interested to know about the esscort and other helping-hands efforts which are taken/under consideration to make an AC more effective ........ plz some one put some light on that as alone an AC is somewhat uneffective by all mean.

[dragonfire]

So the topic turns from IN AC to so-called indo-china conflict..... may be interesting and worthy to discuss but I am more interested to know about the esscort and other helping-hands efforts which are taken/under consideration to make an AC more effective ........ plz some one put some light on that as alone an AC is somewhat uneffective by all mean.

The topic still remains the same its just tht the Indian Navy thread has been closed for some time and this thread was discussin related topic, i have requested the moderators to unlock the other thread - still waiting though

And its not at all discusising an Indo China conflict at all, it merely discussing news reports concerning either navies alleged confrontation.

As far as i Know although India has fielded two carriers before there werent any announced carrier groups as such, am assuming the mission role dictated the compliment as such, the typical compliment of vessels accompanying the carrier could be

ASW assets
Guided Missile destroyers
Missile frigates

I doubt if a AC by itself is as uneffective as u may be assuming, in fact it was very useful in effecting a naval blocade of East Pakistan (Bangladesh) in '71 and the harriers decimated many targets in the coastal regions after being deployed of the carrier INS Vikrant

[dipgroy]

I doubt if a AC by itself is as uneffective as u may be assuming, in fact it was very useful in effecting a naval blocade of East Pakistan (Bangladesh) in '71 and the harriers decimated many targets in the coastal regions after being deployed of the carrier INS Vikrant

Yes it true but again you cant ignore the time line and geographycal (Read geo-polytical also) situation of the counter part. Even the threat came in form of "Ghazi" which destroyed by the INS Rajput as pre planed. That shows how much support needed to make a safe passage for an AC. The situation became much more worse nowdays. You must not forget an AC is not only a high-cost ,moral booster its also a strategic stronghold on the water which available in a very few number, thus a obvius prime terget for the opponents.

In my personal oppinion their must be a scouting viz attacking sub to secure the path. so if 3 Ac deployed it means 3 more Sub also needed along with several other assets. After all you just dont want to send your war-marshal in the battelfield without other soldiers no matter how much skillful he is, even if he is the worlds strongest.

[tphuang]

That's like saying my AK-47 is better than yours, cause it's got a butt stock ;)

I would put my money on sensors, crew experience ( training ), and battle awareness any situation.

Given that no crew with knowledge and experience is ever going to comment, leave alone the capabilities, our knowledge is redundant.

We may also consider the points of tension in the Indian ocean which is one of the biggest shipping lanes. (the oil tankers aint that quiet)
you may want to check up on the version of kilo each country got. Btw, Chinese kilos have also went through extensive works in Chinese shipyards afterward to upgrade sensors and such. If you ever seen one of the pictures of the command center for Indian kilo, you'd see how archaic it is. I can't comment on crew training, since nobody knows what it is for both countries.

Project 636? (PLAN kilos i.e.), did any news article about the club missile systems performance on the PLAN submarine come out recently?

I think things are a little better now. They finally did test launches last year for the first time, I think the results were satisfactory.

[Type59]

The topic still remains the same its just tht the Indian Navy thread has been closed for some time and this thread was discussin related topic, i have requested the moderators to unlock the other thread - still waiting though

And its not at all discusising an Indo China conflict at all, it merely discussing news reports concerning either navies alleged confrontation.

As far as i Know although India has fielded two carriers before there werent any announced carrier groups as such, am assuming the mission role dictated the compliment as such, the typical compliment of vessels accompanying the carrier could be

ASW assets
Guided Missile destroyers
Missile frigates

I doubt if a AC by itself is as uneffective as u may be assuming, in fact it was very useful in effecting a naval blocade of East Pakistan (Bangladesh) in '71 and the harriers decimated many targets in the coastal regions after being deployed of the carrier INS Vikrant

Was India fighting a modern military in East Pakistan? I am right to assume Pakistan is not a major world power especially in the 1970s.

[Salty Dog]

the typical compliment of vessels accompanying the carrier could be

ASW assets
Guided Missile destroyers
Missile frigates


Don´t forget the AO (replenishment tanker) that accompanies the carrier force. Those ships can't cruise around forever without refueling. Along with the carrier, the AO is another unit to be protected by the screening escorts.

[funtz]

So the topic turns from IN AC to so-called indo-china conflict..... may be interesting and worthy to discuss but I am more interested to know about the esscort and other helping-hands efforts which are taken/under consideration to make an AC more effective ........ plz some one put some light on that as alone an AC is somewhat uneffective by all mean.
The timeline for the 3 carriers in service is 2020-22.

the developments by that time is supposed to be
- 3 project 15A destroyers, 4 project 15B destroyers
- 7 project 17A frigates, 3 project 17 frigates, 3 modified talvar class frigates.
- 12 ASW corvettes, Project 28 and its modifications
- 9 OPV's
- 3-4 LPD's
- 8 MCMV ships
- 2 new tankers.
- 6 submarines from Project 75 (scorpene submarine line 2012-2017).
- 6 submarines from Project 75I (the follow up submarine line around 2017-2022).
- 5 submarines from the ATV project (nuclear submarine project).

I doubt if a AC by itself is as uneffective as u may be assuming, in fact it was very useful in effecting a naval blocade of East Pakistan (Bangladesh) in '71 and the harriers decimated many targets in the coastal regions after being deployed of the carrier INS Vikrant
Hawker Sea Hawks not harriers.

Lovely planes.

Was India fighting a modern military in East Pakistan? I am right to assume Pakistan is not a major world power especially in the 1970s.
Irrespective of that the Vikrant carrier still played a role in the conflict, threat scenarios are different for different nations, its not sane nor human to fight a war for the sake of fighting it, with any nation, world power or not.

[Iam]

you may want to check up on the version of kilo each country got. Btw, Chinese kilos have also went through extensive works in Chinese shipyards afterward to upgrade sensors and such. If you ever seen one of the pictures of the command center for Indian kilo, you'd see how archaic it is.

As if any Navy would give you actual pictures of the command center !!!

The Indian Kilos are the older versions which were literally inducted with hand down prices, but have recently ( or undergoing ) upgrades in Russia. They may still have antiquated prop's.

As we can see IN from recent years opted for western assets eg. scorpenes, even though the newer version kilos were available. The second line of subs ( which may take some time ) may very well be a German one.

[funtz]

As if any Navy would give you actual pictures of the command center !!!

The Indian Kilos are the older versions which were literally inducted with hand down prices, but have recently ( or undergoing ) upgrades in Russia. They may still have antiquated prop's.

As we can see IN from recent years opted for western assets eg. scorpenes, even though the newer version kilos were available. The second line of subs ( which may take some time ) may very well be a German one.
old pics
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Images/Kilo1.jpg
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Images/Kilo7.jpg

not much available online about the upgrade outside of BR

The mid-life refit involves a complete overhaul of the submarine, including its hull structure.



An upgrade package is also part of this extensive refit, which has been designed by Zvyozdochka's Onega Research & Development Technological Bureau and costs roughly US $80 million.



The refit sees the submarines being installed with the Klub-S ASCM (a maximum of five missiles can be carried) and the associated Lama-ER control system, new sonars (probably the MGK-400EM), electronic warfare systems, new control systems from Avrora such as the Palladij-M machinery control system and the AICS (Automated Information & Control system) integrated weapon control system. These boats are likely being updated to a Type 636 standard.

The submarine has also been fitted with a Panchendriya package, which includes an Indian sonar (USHUS) developed by NPOL (Naval Physical Oceanographic Laboratory) of the Indian Navy and by BEL (Bharat Electronics Limited) and a fire control system developed by the WEESE (Weapons Engineering & Electronics System Engineering) unit of the Indian Navy and BEL.


The remaining submarines due for their mid-life refits, are to be fitted with this new indigenous Panchendriya package. The USHUS sonar reportedly offers superior performance over similar Russian models.



Other than this not much information is available online.

[tphuang]

As if any Navy would give you actual pictures of the command center !!!

The Indian Kilos are the older versions which were literally inducted with hand down prices, but have recently ( or undergoing ) upgrades in Russia. They may still have antiquated prop's.

As we can see IN from recent years opted for western assets eg. scorpenes, even though the newer version kilos were available. The second line of subs ( which may take some time ) may very well be a German one.

as shown with funtz's pictures. The major upgrade is really to allow it to fire the overrated Club missile, outside of that, I'm not sure what they really did. Of course now, Scorpene subs would be more advanced, but they are not in service yet.


The timeline for the 3 carriers in service is 2020-22.

the developments by that time is supposed to be
- 3 project 15A destroyers, 4 project 15B destroyers
- 7 project 17A frigates, 3 project 17 frigates, 3 modified talvar class frigates.
- 12 ASW corvettes, Project 28 and its modifications
- 9 OPV's
- 3-4 LPD's
- 8 MCMV ships
- 2 new tankers.
- 6 submarines from Project 75 (scorpene submarine line 2012-2017).
- 6 submarines from Project 75I (the follow up submarine line around 2017-2022).
- 5 submarines from the ATV project (nuclear submarine project).

There is no question that's a very impressive force if things are built on schedule. In the case of ATV, I'm a little confused. It sounds like ATV is going to be a SSBN, which is fine. But don't you want some SSN to protect it? What's the point of protecting 5 SSBNs with a bunch of diesel submarines and possibly 2 SSNs?

[dragonfire]

Don´t forget the AO (replenishment tanker) that accompanies the carrier force. Those ships can't cruise around forever without refueling. Along with the carrier, the AO is another unit to be protected by the screening escorts.

Yes thanks SD for tht, support components should also be there for any carrier group, I have requested this forum in the past to suggest (none did) wht kind of vessels should india deploy as a carrier group along with the ACs - would you suggest


Hawker Sea Hawks not harriers.


Yeah sorry - Vikrant had Hawks and Viraat has Harriers

There is no question that's a very impressive force if things are built on schedule. In the case of ATV, I'm a little confused. It sounds like ATV is going to be a SSBN, which is fine. But don't you want some SSN to protect it? What's the point of protecting 5 SSBNs with a bunch of diesel submarines and possibly 2 SSNs?

Tell me about it, however the second strike capability is the most crucial one which India needs as a declared no - first use nuc power, and tht is where if a choice was there btw an SSBN and an SSN; India would have choosen to develop a SSBN first

However I hope India develops/proccures SSNs as well as SSGN apart from more SSBN. Man I wish India got some good capabilitites like a DDS enabled sub and/or something like the ASDS which the US has, but most imp India needs to develop more effective SLBMs which is shorter and has more range than the Sagarika, also a longer range Brahmos (sub launched version) would be a good choice for a future SSGN, also Photonics masts for all its new subs

Aside - why does a SSBN need other vessels to protect it, it has its own torpedos right ?

oh and India definetely needs longer subs (all pics of the insides of Indian subs i have seen so far look majorly cramped for space)

[funtz]

There is no question that's a very impressive force if things are built on schedule. In the case of ATV, I'm a little confused. It sounds like ATV is going to be a SSBN, which is fine. But don't you want some SSN to protect it? What's the point of protecting 5 SSBNs with a bunch of diesel submarines and possibly 2 SSNs?
Was stating the programs which are planned along with the IAC program for the poster dipgroy.

Funds for increasing capacity of the various shipyards are a part of the different projects, i think the costs of the projects will show these funds. The government is encouraging private firms to enter the field, and the response has been positive.

Still i do not think its easy to avoid delays as many of the parts are procured from foriegn sources and a single delay anywhere in the chain translates into the whole program and the ones that have to follow being delayed, it keeps on adding up.

The possible two SSNs do not look like coming online anytime soon, so it is what it is, from what is available online the SSBNs are not like the 5 nuclear powers. (The india today report posted the SSBNs as being capable of carrying 12 700km missiles that were tested sometime back (sagarika) or 4 5000+km missiles (agni missile).

The nuclear boats will themselves take a lot of time, the boat has to undergo the trails (which i suppose for something so complex as a nuclear submarine will not be easy) and then the subsequent submarines have to be produced allowing for any modifications that might be required.

Not much information is available about the program.

[Transient]

Aside - why does a SSBN need other vessels to protect it, it has its own torpedos right ?

From what I know, only if the SSBN is noisy enough that it requires protection. In that case a bastion strategy is used whereby SSNs would be used to sanitise an area and keep it sanitised for the SSBN to operate safely. The western submarines didn't need escorts.

[kato]

The western submarines didn't need escorts.
Ummm, no. They do. In vast amounts. The Groupe d'Action Sousmarine, whose primary purpose was to protect the Force Oceanique Strategique, contained about a third of the French Fleet as an example. Full 3D spectrum sanitization.

[Transient]

Ummm, no. They do. In vast amounts. The Groupe d'Action Sousmarine, whose primary purpose was to protect the Force Oceanique Strategique, contained about a third of the French Fleet as an example. Full 3D spectrum sanitization.

Ok, west minus the french then. :D But I certainly haven't heard of the US or the UK requiring escorts for their SSBNs. Have you heard of anything on this? Maybe gf-aust can provide someinput?