What's new

Indian Naval Aviation: Modernisation and Opportunities

Marshal

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
358
Reaction score
0
New Delhi. The last time the Indian Navy bolstered its aviation arm was in the mid-1980s with a series of inductions that included the fighter/strike Sea Harrier jump jets and anti-submarine and marine commando carrying version of Seaking helicopters from the UK, submarine hunters Kamov- 28 helicopters, and the giant long range maritime reconnaissance and antisubmarine aircraft TU-142 M (Great Bear) from the erstwhile Soviet Union.

These acquisitions gave the Indian Navy a potent search and strike force which made the world sit up and notice India’s thrust on gaining a credible maritime capability in the Indian Ocean region (IOR). Even while India was gearing up for a meaningful role and rise to her potential in the region, countries like Australia viewed this development with a degree of alarm and skepticism. Therefore, it came as no surprise when Time magazine featured the rising power of Indian Navy on its cover story after the ceremonial review of the naval fleet by the then President of India in February 1988.

After the brief sparkle during that period, the aviation arm of the Indian Navy has been in ‘limbo’, so to say, for almost two decades. Blame it on whatever, resource crunch or the lack of foresightedness of defence planners and political leadership, there has been, at best, only ‘cosmetic’ augmentation of maritime airborne platforms from 1990 onwards.

On the other hand, the last ten years or so have seen India emerge as a dominant economic and political power in the IOR – a status that has attendant security implications. Given her strategic geographic location sitting astride the major sea lanes of communications (SLOCS), it becomes incumbent upon her to shoulder the responsibility for maintaining peace and tranquility in her backyard to be able to sustain that growth trajectory.

The Indian Navy has come alive to the situation at hand, and is therefore, seeking urgent remedial measures, both in the short and long term, to pull itself out of this quagmire.

To begin with, the limited upgrade programme (LUSH) of the 10 Sea Harriers is already on with the assistance of state owned HAL, Bangalore. This should see the aircraft remaining role worthy and operational for another decade or so, thereby enabling their deployment from the aircraft carrier Viraat and soon-to-be-acquired Admiral Gorshkov (re-christened Vikramaditya).

Refurbishment and upgradation of Seakings 42B and Kamov 28 is on the anvil. The troop carrying and sealift capability has received a shot in the arm with the arrival of even a small number of six UH-3H Seaking helicopters on board the INS Jalashwa (ex-USS Trenton).

The utilization of HAL manufactured Dornier, mounted with modern synthetic aperture radar and electronic warfare equipment for coastal and short range surveillance, has proved to be a success. Induction of 11 more aircraft is in the pipeline and some are being configured to carry paratroopers for marine commando operations.

Add to this, the innovative experiment of deploying Searcher and Heron UAVs, acquired from Israel, for surveillance over the sea, which has yielded encouraging results.

Collaboration with Russia for modernization and retrofitment programme of the existing three IL-38 aircraft (Navy’s mainstay for medium range surveillance) and purchase of two more to replace the ones lost in accident has reportedly run into rough weather though because of persistent delays and ‘below par’ performance of the much-touted advanced weapon-sensor management system ‘Sea Dragon’. Glitches pertaining to ordnance package for the new version are also known to have surfaced.

Three aircraft have however already arrived in India post-modernization and the remaining two are expected this year. The new aircraft are undergoing rigorous testing and evaluation trials in Indian conditions.

While the Navy continues to place faith and has ardently supported the funding of the widely brandished, but severely derailed, ‘home-grown’ Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH) and Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programmes launched in the 1980s, their ‘navalised’ versions are nowhere near seeing the light of the day.

At this point in time, the ALH has a long way to go before the programme matures sufficiently for it to undertake even basic naval roles such as search and rescue (SAR) and communication duties.

The anti-submarine warfare (ASW) version, being developed by HAL, is falling well short of naval expectations – the major constraint being helicopter’s endurance thus curtailing its time on task (TOT) in the area of threat to execute an ASW mission. Similarly, naval LCA would take some steely resolve and Herculean efforts to be ready in time for operations from its chosen platform - the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC), being constructed at Cochin Shipyard Limited and scheduled for induction by 2014.

However, what is currently in the news and where the interests of the major global aviation companies lie is in the new acquisitions that the Navy is seeking as a replacement for their ageing aerial machines.

The contract for the first major induction of Mig-29K was finalized in 2004 in tandem with the acquisition of Gorshkov. The Navy is set to acquire 16 aircraft comprising 12 fighters and four trainer versions (Mig 29KUB).

These variants are being exclusively developed for the Indian Navy using novel operation mode from the deck known as STOBAR (Short Take-Off But Arrested Landing), implying that the aircraft would use the ski-jump for short take-off (launch) and a set – possibly three – of ‘arrester wires’ for their recovery on board the ship.

The Navy can exercise the option of buying more of these aircraft for equipping the IAC.

The first of these new machines were set to arrive in India by late 2007, but certification clearances are apparently causing the delay and now the delivery is slated to commence by middle of this year. Meanwhile, the repair and modernization programme of Gorshkov is encountering major hurdles follwing steep escalation of the contract price by the Russians. Thus, work at the Sevmesh shipyard has almost come to a halt and the scheduled delivery date of August 2008 has slipped at least by a couple of years.

Media reports from Moscow though indicate that there could be a delay of two to three years.

The Navy is fervently scouting for a multi-capability advanced platform, equipped with state-of-the-art avionics and weapons, which could meet the growing needs of surveillance, networking and anti-submarine operations (LRMRASW) in their area of interest as a suitable replacement for TU-142M.

After intense technical scrutiny and field trials last year of the two short-listed platforms from the EADS (A 319) and Boeing (737-800), the latter is reported to have emerged as the front-runner for supplying eight aircraft to the Indian Navy.

The deal could exceed US$2 billion, inclusive of the platform, mission systems and weapons.

The platform, which is simultaneously under development for the US Navy, will be customized to Indian specifications and is being dubbed the P-8I.

This acquisition is set to propel the Indian Navy into the big league and anoint her the ability to operate seamlessly with advanced navies. But, with stringent procurement and offset procedures being adopted by the Indian defence establishment, especially for big ticket items, it would take a series of tough negotiations and some hectic negotiations on technology and bargaining before the deal materializes.

There are other ticklish issues such as end-user certification and the possibility of sanctions that need to be sorted out before the Americans get anywhere close to clinching the deal. However, given the critical requirement of these platforms, it is expected that the agreement on all issues (including the price) would be reached by early 2009 and the first of the aircraft would be delivered by end of the current fiveyear plan 2012.

(Annual budgets in India are made in accordance with five-year development plans covering all sectors, including defence).

The Navy has also floated Request for Information (RFI) for 16 multi-role helicopters as a replacement for the old Seakings.

Then, there is an immediate requirement for 15 to 20 Advanced Jet Trainers (AJT) for readying the naval pilots to operate from Vikramaditya and yet-to-be-named IAC. Though the supplier for these trainers is yet to be decided, there is much merit in establishing a commonality with the Indian Air Force insofar as the manufacture and maintenance lines are concerned.

Media reports indicate that the Indian Navy will buy 17 Hawk AJTs while the Indian Air Force has decided to buy 40 more of these jets in addition to the 66 already ordered.

Notably, naval pilots have traditionally trained with the IAF, although in the recent years, some had the opportunity to train on the US Goshawk, the carrier version of the Hawk used by the US Navy.

There is, therefore, no denying the fact that the defence planners and the political establishment have to put their act together and display deep conviction and unwavering commitment to resuscitate the naval air arm.

The timely fructification of acquisitions in the pipeline is crucial to lend credence to the potential of Indian Navy to safeguard not only her country’s interests, but also ensure peace and prosperity for the smaller littoral states in the region.

In the perspective of India’s new Defence Procurement Policies, DPP 2006, and the DPP 2008, which is around the corner, the naval requirements also mean opportunities for the Indian industry to acquire and absorb the latest technologies and for leading equipment manufacturers from across the globe, new business and perhaps some outsourcing of parts in line with the emerging trend of global supply chains.

European and global companies from other countries could comfortably build winning business strategies on their traditional footholds.

http://http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories109.htm
 
Nice article.

Navy is the only armed force that can be used to project power even durining peace time, cos they can operate in international waters.

This is a must for India to safegrard its economic interests.
 
Yes you are right,
IN is doing right thing by investing lot of money to develope its air arm.but equally importent thing is that we are participating in the bilateral and multi national naval exercieses with US, UK, France, Russia germany singapore australia japan Skoria SAfrica, Brazil etc. training is as importent as procuring the ships or aircrafts.
 
Yes you are right,
IN is doing right thing by investing lot of money to develope its air arm.but equally importent thing is that we are participating in the bilateral and multi national naval exercieses with US, UK, France, Russia germany singapore australia japan Skoria SAfrica, Brazil etc. training is as importent as procuring the ships or aircrafts.

Come on marshal,

Indian Naval aviation is in shambles that is inspite of having some of the Chiefs from that branch. Lets get down to the nuts an bolts.

Only 10 Harriers left.
Ex HMS Hermes should be in a ship breaking yard by now.
IL refit badly botched up by Russia.
Seaking yet to be replaced.
Naval version of ALH not acceptable.
Naval LCA yet to see the light.
Gorkshov not available till 2011.
Cochin AC still being built for the next 10 years.
Mig 29 being delivered this year will have to wait 3 years before you know if they can safely land on a carrier.

I could go on but I think its pointless.

Regards
 
Come on marshal,

Indian Naval aviation is in shambles that is inspite of having some of the Chiefs from that branch. Lets get down to the nuts an bolts.

Only 10 Harriers left.
Ex HMS Hermes should be in a ship breaking yard by now.
IL refit badly botched up by Russia.
Seaking yet to be replaced.
Naval version of ALH not acceptable.
Naval LCA yet to see the light.
Gorkshov not available till 2011.
Cochin AC still being built for the next 10 years.
Mig 29 being delivered this year will have to wait 3 years before you know if they can safely land on a carrier.

I could go on but I think its pointless.

Regards

I do agree with you; the IN Aviation Arm is pretty effed up currently; it, however (and this is not a justification), is at the end of its previous procurement cycle; the interesting parts are the toys being offered to us for the next procurement cycle.
 
I do agree with you; the IN Aviation Arm is pretty effed up currently; it, however (and this is not a justification), is at the end of its previous procurement cycle; the interesting parts are the toys being offered to us for the next procurement cycle.

Dear Vish,

I agree with you that it seems on paper atleast that in another 7 years you will not only have a blue water navy but also a blue water air arm till then you have to wait and watch.

Any updates on the TU replacements.

Regards
 
Dear Vish,

I agree with you that it seems on paper atleast that in another 7 years you will not only have a blue water navy but also a blue water air arm till then you have to wait and watch.

Any updates on the TU replacements.

Regards

Hey I think it is mentioned in the article only, seems u have missed it, just quoting the part regarding the TU replacements.

The Navy is fervently scouting for a multi-capability advanced platform, equipped with state-of-the-art avionics and weapons, which could meet the growing needs of surveillance, networking and anti-submarine operations (LRMRASW) in their area of interest as a suitable replacement for TU-142M.

After intense technical scrutiny and field trials last year of the two short-listed platforms from the EADS (A 319) and Boeing (737-800), the latter is reported to have emerged as the front-runner for supplying eight aircraft to the Indian Navy.

The deal could exceed US$2 billion, inclusive of the platform, mission systems and weapons.

The platform, which is simultaneously under development for the US Navy, will be customized to Indian specifications and is being dubbed the P-8I.

This acquisition is set to propel the Indian Navy into the big league and anoint her the ability to operate seamlessly with advanced navies. But, with stringent procurement and offset procedures being adopted by the Indian defence establishment, especially for big ticket items, it would take a series of tough negotiations and some hectic negotiations on technology and bargaining before the deal materializes.

There are other ticklish issues such as end-user certification and the possibility of sanctions that need to be sorted out before the Americans get anywhere close to clinching the deal. However, given the critical requirement of these platforms, it is expected that the agreement on all issues (including the price) would be reached by early 2009 and the first of the aircraft would be delivered by end of the current fiveyear plan 2012.
 
Hey I think it is mentioned in the article only, seems u have missed it, just quoting the part regarding the TU replacements.

Actually I read it but I dont agree with the author as I think the PI 8 was more for replacing the Ils and not the Tu's

Regards
 
Agreed, at present the Aviation sector is in a bad shape. Neverthless, Indian navy is moving in the right track.

As you said, in the coming years we will be armed with:

Scorpene 6+6
Indigenous Nuclear Sub

IAC
Gorshkov
Krivak IV-class guided missile frigates

P-8i LRMR
Mig 29K

Barak II
K-15 SLBM

This apart from the RFP to replace Seaking ASW Choppers and many indigenous destroyers.

However, the worst part of the delay is training the crew.
This growth is a result to economic growth. However, if the current economic slowdown continue's, we might have problems.
 
Come on marshal,

Indian Naval aviation is in shambles that is inspite of having some of the Chiefs from that branch. Lets get down to the nuts an bolts.

Only 10 Harriers left.
Ex HMS Hermes should be in a ship breaking yard by now.
IL refit badly botched up by Russia.
Seaking yet to be replaced.
Naval version of ALH not acceptable.
Naval LCA yet to see the light.
Gorkshov not available till 2011.
Cochin AC still being built for the next 10 years.
Mig 29 being delivered this year will have to wait 3 years before you know if they can safely land on a carrier.

I could go on but I think its pointless.

Regards



Well you are right that our navy's air arm is shrinking fast,
But i think the only thing we can do to improve it is to invest money in order to preserve the capability of naval air arm which we have built after years of experiance. it can not be built in a short period of time. it requires years of training.

The Navy has definately some plans to improve the current state of the Naval air arm. we have to wait and see what happen in near future. there is a talk that the navy is interested in the F/A 18, P8i posiedon, AJTs, hopefully we might get some news after the successful conclusion of the Indo-US N-deal....!!!!
 
Well you are right that our navy's air arm is shrinking fast,
But i think the only thing we can do to improve it is to invest money in order to preserve the capability of naval air arm which we have built after years of experiance. it can not be built in a short period of time. it requires years of training.

The Navy has definately some plans to improve the current state of the Naval air arm. we have to wait and see what happen in near future. there is a talk that the navy is interested in the F/A 18, P8i posiedon, AJTs, hopefully we might get some news after the successful conclusion of the Indo-US N-deal....!!!!
I think this is a good read. Although it is a comparative doc, but it gives an idea about Indian Navy plans:

Comparing the Indian and Chinese navies - upiasiaonline.com

Comparing the Indian and Chinese navies

Hong Kong, China — After 10 years of steady effort, both India and China have made significant qualitative changes in their navies. In terms of submarine capabilities – the construction of SSNs and SSBNs – China is now far ahead of India, however.
China has built two 094 SSBNs and two 093 SSNs, along with JL2 and JL1M submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) that are ready to go into service in the PLA Navy, if they have not already done so.

In contrast, India is only preparing to receive one Russian-made Akura SSN for testing purposes by the end of 2008. In February 2008, the Indian Navy also launched from under water a 700-kilometer-range K-15 ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

Nonetheless, India’s pace in the construction of large-tonnage surface battleships and an aircraft carrier is faster than China’s. Thanks to the 290-kilometer-range BrahMos supersonic multirole missile jointly developed by India and Russia, the overall technological standard of the Indian Navy’s ship-to-ship missile is superior to that of China’s PLA Navy. India’s surface battleships currently being built will all be fitted with BrahMos SSMs, according to the plan of the Indian Navy.

Ships added to the PLA Navy over the past 10 years include two 051C DDGs, two 052B DDGs, two 052C DDGs, four 956E/EM DDGs and one 051B DDG, all of which have a full-load displacement of over 6,000 tons. Six additional ships, 054 and 054A FFGs, have also been built. These surface battleships are the flagships of the modern Chinese navy.

In the Indian Navy over the past 10 years three Delhi Class DDGs and three 4,000-ton class Type 1135.6 FFGs have been commissioned, with the latter armed with 300-kilomter-range Club-N surface-to-surface missiles. The Indian Navy has also received three Type 16A FFGs with full-load displacement of 4,500 tons and armed with 16 units of H-35 surface-to-surface missiles.

As a result, in terms of the construction of surface battleships above 6,000 tons, China is temporarily ahead of India, while in the building of 4,000-ton class missile frigates, India and China are about equal, with India slightly ahead in technology.

The Indian Navy is also armed with one Hermes aircraft carrier with a full-load displacement of 28,000 tons as well as 12 Sea Harrier FRS Mk 51 fighters. Obviously, the Indian Navy’s experience in the use of an aircraft carrier is surely superior to that of the PLA Navy.

Regarding the surface battleships under construction right now, India seems to be much more ambitious than China. Since 2007, the only large surface battleship China has been building is the 054A FFG. In contrast, the Indian Navy has started to build three P-15A DDGs at its Mazagon Shipyard. This is an upgraded variant of the Delhi Class DDG, with drastic changes. So far one P-15A has already been launched.

A source from the Mazagon Shipyard told the author in New Delhi that the P-15A construction program is now giving way to the Shivalik, or P-17 FFG. The first P-17 will be delivered to the Indian Navy within this year, and the second and third will be delivered in 2009 and 2010 respectively.

The two types of surface battleships mentioned above will all be fitted with a vertical-launched version of the BrahMos SSM. The P-15A will be armed with 16 such missiles. The P15A DDG has a full-load displacement of 7,000 tons, and still uses the Shtil-1 ship-to-air missile. The P-17 is India’s indigenous stealthy FFG and has a full-load displacement of 5,300 tons. It is also armed with Shtil-1 ship-to-air missiles.

Russia’s Yantar Shipyard currently is also building a second batch of three Type 1135.6 FFGs for the Indian Navy. The first three vessels of this model were built at the Baltic Sea Shipyard, but the contract for the latest three vessels has been awarded to the Yantar Shipyard, which has no experience building this type of missile frigate.

Apparently Russia intends to bail out the Yantar Shipyard, which has not received such an order in recent years through Russia’s system of allocating contracts. For this reason, it is worth watching the progress of this construction project to see if the shipyard can deliver a quality product. India is also concerned whether the overall price of building these vessels will rise as a result of this.

India has also begun building its own indigenous aircraft carrier, which is obviously proceeding faster than China’s program. India is building its aircraft carrier at Cochin Shipyard and is expected to complete it in 2013. However, past experience has shown that the Indian Navy’s vessel construction projects are usually delayed by two to three years.

With the Italian Fincantieri Company providing design assistance, this indigenous Indian aircraft carrier has a full-load displacement of 37,000 tons and will be powered by four LM-2500 heavy-duty gas turbines, with a maximum speed of 28 knots. China’s first indigenous aircraft carrier will also very likely be powered by heavy gas turbines.

The design blueprint of the Indian aircraft carrier has already been published, with a deck length of 830 feet and a runway of 600 feet. The aircraft use ski-jump takeoff and landing. The steel plate used to build the aircraft was imported from Russia and the cutting process was completed in 2007.

As for the Gorshkov aircraft carrier that India purchased from Russia, it should have been delivered to the Indian Navy within this year accordance to the original agreement. The retrofitted Gorshkov’s full-load displacement has been increased to 45,400 tons and it will be equipped with 12 MiG-29K fighters. India and Russia held the latest round of meetings concerning this aircraft carrier in February in Moscow, and the two sides reached a final consensus on the increased price of retrofitting the carrier. The new delivery time is now set at 2011.

It is not presently known what production plans the Chinese navy has in terms of the construction of large-tonnage surface battleships before 2010. Yet judging from the current status of shipbuilding within the PLA Navy, and with two aircraft carriers entering service in the Indian Navy before 2012, India will resume its absolute technological and tonnage lead in the construction of surface battleships above 6,000 tons. Of course, with China initiating its aircraft carrier construction soon, such a trend may later be reversed.

As far as the construction of conventional submarines is concerned, China still holds an obvious lead. The PLA Navy is already armed with two Yuan Class submarines, about ten Song Class submarines, four Kilo 877 and eight Kilo 636M submarines.

The Indian Navy has a fleet of more than ten Kilo 636 and four Type 209 1500 submarines. India’s most ambitious submarine construction plan is to build Scorpene Class submarines at its Mazagong Shipyard under license, code-named P-75.

The first batch of P-75s involves importing and assembling six submarines, and India plans to assemble the first P-75 independently in 2012. After that, production of the P-75 will proceed at the pace of one submarine each year. Based on this calculation, the whole project will not be completed until the end of 2017.

India’s latest plan shows that the Indian Navy may very likely expand the Scorpene fleet to 12. In terms of shipbuilding technology and production craftwork, however, especially in such production processes as cutting, welding and spray-painting, the military vessels produced by China -- particularly those vessels built at the two shipyards in Shanghai -- are far superior to the Indian navy ships.

--

(Andrei Chang is editor-in-chief of Kanwa Defense Review Monthly, registered in Toronto, Canada.)
 
I think this is a good read. Although it is a comparative doc, but it gives an idea about Indian Navy plans:

Comparing the Indian and Chinese navies - upiasiaonline.com

Comparing the Indian and Chinese navies

Hong Kong, China — After 10 years of steady effort, both India and China have made significant qualitative changes in their navies. In terms of submarine capabilities – the construction of SSNs and SSBNs – China is now far ahead of India, however.
China has built two 094 SSBNs and two 093 SSNs, along with JL2 and JL1M submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) that are ready to go into service in the PLA Navy, if they have not already done so.

In contrast, India is only preparing to receive one Russian-made Akura SSN for testing purposes by the end of 2008. In February 2008, the Indian Navy also launched from under water a 700-kilometer-range K-15 ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

Nonetheless, India’s pace in the construction of large-tonnage surface battleships and an aircraft carrier is faster than China’s. Thanks to the 290-kilometer-range BrahMos supersonic multirole missile jointly developed by India and Russia, the overall technological standard of the Indian Navy’s ship-to-ship missile is superior to that of China’s PLA Navy. India’s surface battleships currently being built will all be fitted with BrahMos SSMs, according to the plan of the Indian Navy.

Ships added to the PLA Navy over the past 10 years include two 051C DDGs, two 052B DDGs, two 052C DDGs, four 956E/EM DDGs and one 051B DDG, all of which have a full-load displacement of over 6,000 tons. Six additional ships, 054 and 054A FFGs, have also been built. These surface battleships are the flagships of the modern Chinese navy.

In the Indian Navy over the past 10 years three Delhi Class DDGs and three 4,000-ton class Type 1135.6 FFGs have been commissioned, with the latter armed with 300-kilomter-range Club-N surface-to-surface missiles. The Indian Navy has also received three Type 16A FFGs with full-load displacement of 4,500 tons and armed with 16 units of H-35 surface-to-surface missiles.

As a result, in terms of the construction of surface battleships above 6,000 tons, China is temporarily ahead of India, while in the building of 4,000-ton class missile frigates, India and China are about equal, with India slightly ahead in technology.

The Indian Navy is also armed with one Hermes aircraft carrier with a full-load displacement of 28,000 tons as well as 12 Sea Harrier FRS Mk 51 fighters. Obviously, the Indian Navy’s experience in the use of an aircraft carrier is surely superior to that of the PLA Navy.

Regarding the surface battleships under construction right now, India seems to be much more ambitious than China. Since 2007, the only large surface battleship China has been building is the 054A FFG. In contrast, the Indian Navy has started to build three P-15A DDGs at its Mazagon Shipyard. This is an upgraded variant of the Delhi Class DDG, with drastic changes. So far one P-15A has already been launched.

A source from the Mazagon Shipyard told the author in New Delhi that the P-15A construction program is now giving way to the Shivalik, or P-17 FFG. The first P-17 will be delivered to the Indian Navy within this year, and the second and third will be delivered in 2009 and 2010 respectively.

The two types of surface battleships mentioned above will all be fitted with a vertical-launched version of the BrahMos SSM. The P-15A will be armed with 16 such missiles. The P15A DDG has a full-load displacement of 7,000 tons, and still uses the Shtil-1 ship-to-air missile. The P-17 is India’s indigenous stealthy FFG and has a full-load displacement of 5,300 tons. It is also armed with Shtil-1 ship-to-air missiles.

Russia’s Yantar Shipyard currently is also building a second batch of three Type 1135.6 FFGs for the Indian Navy. The first three vessels of this model were built at the Baltic Sea Shipyard, but the contract for the latest three vessels has been awarded to the Yantar Shipyard, which has no experience building this type of missile frigate.

Apparently Russia intends to bail out the Yantar Shipyard, which has not received such an order in recent years through Russia’s system of allocating contracts. For this reason, it is worth watching the progress of this construction project to see if the shipyard can deliver a quality product. India is also concerned whether the overall price of building these vessels will rise as a result of this.

India has also begun building its own indigenous aircraft carrier, which is obviously proceeding faster than China’s program. India is building its aircraft carrier at Cochin Shipyard and is expected to complete it in 2013. However, past experience has shown that the Indian Navy’s vessel construction projects are usually delayed by two to three years.

With the Italian Fincantieri Company providing design assistance, this indigenous Indian aircraft carrier has a full-load displacement of 37,000 tons and will be powered by four LM-2500 heavy-duty gas turbines, with a maximum speed of 28 knots. China’s first indigenous aircraft carrier will also very likely be powered by heavy gas turbines.

The design blueprint of the Indian aircraft carrier has already been published, with a deck length of 830 feet and a runway of 600 feet. The aircraft use ski-jump takeoff and landing. The steel plate used to build the aircraft was imported from Russia and the cutting process was completed in 2007.

As for the Gorshkov aircraft carrier that India purchased from Russia, it should have been delivered to the Indian Navy within this year accordance to the original agreement. The retrofitted Gorshkov’s full-load displacement has been increased to 45,400 tons and it will be equipped with 12 MiG-29K fighters. India and Russia held the latest round of meetings concerning this aircraft carrier in February in Moscow, and the two sides reached a final consensus on the increased price of retrofitting the carrier. The new delivery time is now set at 2011.

It is not presently known what production plans the Chinese navy has in terms of the construction of large-tonnage surface battleships before 2010. Yet judging from the current status of shipbuilding within the PLA Navy, and with two aircraft carriers entering service in the Indian Navy before 2012, India will resume its absolute technological and tonnage lead in the construction of surface battleships above 6,000 tons. Of course, with China initiating its aircraft carrier construction soon, such a trend may later be reversed.

As far as the construction of conventional submarines is concerned, China still holds an obvious lead. The PLA Navy is already armed with two Yuan Class submarines, about ten Song Class submarines, four Kilo 877 and eight Kilo 636M submarines.

The Indian Navy has a fleet of more than ten Kilo 636 and four Type 209 1500 submarines. India’s most ambitious submarine construction plan is to build Scorpene Class submarines at its Mazagong Shipyard under license, code-named P-75.

The first batch of P-75s involves importing and assembling six submarines, and India plans to assemble the first P-75 independently in 2012. After that, production of the P-75 will proceed at the pace of one submarine each year. Based on this calculation, the whole project will not be completed until the end of 2017.

India’s latest plan shows that the Indian Navy may very likely expand the Scorpene fleet to 12. In terms of shipbuilding technology and production craftwork, however, especially in such production processes as cutting, welding and spray-painting, the military vessels produced by China -- particularly those vessels built at the two shipyards in Shanghai -- are far superior to the Indian navy ships.

--

(Andrei Chang is editor-in-chief of Kanwa Defense Review Monthly, registered in Toronto, Canada.)

well in order to compare the two navy you also need to look at the quality of ships and weapons they are using....as far as the chinease Navy has concerned they are ahead in quantity but not much in quality. Most of their ships are just too old and if you dont count the sovermanies and their N submarines other ships are nothing as compared to other regional navies like Japan and south koria and in case of war agaisnt India the chinease navy will have to rely upon their submarine fleet as it lack the air support for its surface fleet as they dont have the Carrier. As far as the Indian Navy has concerned it has the advantage to access of the western weapon system and technology and also has the carrier but it lacks the quantity. So in the synario of a war both navies dont have the capasity or capability to make any kind of impact. chinease Navy and the Indian Navy are both still a regional Navies. Indian Navy is better in its back yard and chinease Navy is better in its own.
 
Guys this is a very good read o understand how communication is established when SSBN is on patrol , something useful when our ATV hits its patrol.

Organizing command and control systems in the NSNF - Appendix 3 - The Future of Russia's Strategic Nuclear Forces - by Eugene Miasnikov, Center for Arms Control, Energy And Environmental Studies at MIPT

Organizing command and control systems in the NSNF

Control of strategic submarines, which are on military patrol, is conducted by General Staff of the Russian Federation Armed Forces through the Navy's Main Staff with the help of all of transmitting and receiving radio centers deployed throughout Russia and space communication centers, which are continuously working. The control system of the NSNF unites the communication channels, which operate on different physical principles. This fact improves the reliability and resistance against jamming of all systems in the most unfavorable conditions. The control system includes permanent stations which are transmitting radio waves on different bands of the electro-magnetic spectrum; satellite, aircraft, and ship relays; mobile coastal radio stations; and hydroacoustic stations and relays. All elements of the control system, as a rule, are interconnected by cables and radio-relay lines of communication.
The guaranteed transmission of launch order signals to SSBNs on patrol at sea is supported by transmitting them over a group of frequencies including not less than 2 frequencies for very long waves (VLF), 5 short wave frequencies (HF) and 5 space lines of communications. The transmission of the signals is continuous in relation to the given schedule for communications with SSBNs.

Electromagnetic waves on the extremely low frequency ( ELF), a frequency of several tens of hertz, in distinction from the shorter electro-magnetic waves possess the advantage that they may penetrate to depths of up to 200-300 m. The signals of the ELF station "Zevs" which is located on the Kola Peninsula, may be sent to strategic submarines in practically any area of the globe. Since the speed for transmitting information on the ELF channel is very low, only general commands for all SSBNs on combat patrol are sent. These commands are designated ahead of time by a fixed code. For example, with separate codes one may designate the order: "Approach the surface to receive order to use weapons" or "bring to full combat readiness" During peacetime the ELF channel continuously transmits the code. That means "the situation is normal". Breaks in the transmission of this code is a signal that an "extreme situation" has been established.

Very long frequency (VLF) signals may penetrate water at depths of up to 20 m. To receive these signals submarines must rise to periscope depth or deploy their swimming receiving antennas. To provide communications on large parts of the world's oceans (except the remote waters of the southern hemisphere, the western part of the Atlantic and eastern part of the Pacific ocean) five permanent VLF stations were working on the USSR's territory and were located in Molodechno, Nizhny Novgorod, Tashkent, Krasnodar and Khabarovsk. These stations are presently functioning and are continuously broadcasting on five frequencies from 3 to 30 kHz. VLF channels are used to transmit not only general orders for all SSBNs, but also combat control signals, which constitute the release codes for launching missiles and accompanying information.

Mobile coastal and aviation VLF stations are intended for relaying orders for using weapons under combat conditions when there is a great possibility that the enemy has taken stationary transmitters out of service. To do this, the USSR created the TU-142 RTs airplane, which went into military service in 1985. The length of the transmitting antenna of this airplane reaches several kilometers. During threatening periods communication aircraft carry out "buzzing" in the regions where SSBNs are patrolling. At the end of 1992 there were 13 TU-142 RTs aircraft in Russia, seven of which were stationed in the Pacific Ocean Fleet and six in the Northern Fleet.

The network for short-wave and VHF radio communications is the most diversified. It includes a multitude of stationary and mobile ground transmitting centers and radio relay stations. This network also includes satellite, aviation and ship-board relays. At the dawn of the strategic fleet, short wave communications were the only means for transmitting operational information to submarines, which carried out military duty off the US shores, as well in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

The basic insufficiencies of HF and VHF band radio waves are that they do not penetrate deeply into water. To receive HF and UHF signals submarines rise to periscope depth and deploy a telescopic antenna above the water's surface. Modern submarines are also equipped with floating towed antennas. This allows the submarine to receive information while located at depths of up to 120-150 m from the surface. Nevertheless, a metallic antenna on the water's surface represents a vulnerable target for the enemy's radars and may be detected at distances of up to several tens of kilometers. Due to the great speed for transmitting information and comparative cheapness and convenience of using HF and UHF communications, it is the basic means for operational control of SSBNs in peacetime.

The fact that sound propagates in water at great distances served as the basis for creating not only acoustic systems for detecting submarines, but also systems to communicate with them. The basic advantage of acoustic communications is the absence of the need for a submarine to surface and use towed or telescopic antennas. Due to these advantages channels for underwater sound communications are frequently used in combination with radio communication channels. Thus, in regions where submarines patrol, there may be a near-bottom fixed station for underwater sound communication, which unites ships with coastal points relaying radio signals. Underwater sound communications are also convenient for joint tactical actions of submarines with other submarines and surface ships.

The problems with this type of communication are the significantly smaller speed of sound propagation in water in comparison to the speed of radio waves and the strong absorption of sound at frequencies, which support acceptable speeds for transmitting information (several tens of kilohertz). Therefore, the underwater communication sound system is used to transmit signals only for comparatively short distances (up to 10-30 km).
 
Guys this is a very good read o understand how communication is established when SSBN is on patrol , something useful when our ATV hits its patrol.

Organizing command and control systems in the NSNF - Appendix 3 - The Future of Russia's Strategic Nuclear Forces - by Eugene Miasnikov, Center for Arms Control, Energy And Environmental Studies at MIPT

Organizing command and control systems in the NSNF

Control of strategic submarines, which are on military patrol, is conducted by General Staff of the Russian Federation Armed Forces through the Navy's Main Staff with the help of all of transmitting and receiving radio centers deployed throughout Russia and space communication centers, which are continuously working. The control system of the NSNF unites the communication channels, which operate on different physical principles. This fact improves the reliability and resistance against jamming of all systems in the most unfavorable conditions. The control system includes permanent stations which are transmitting radio waves on different bands of the electro-magnetic spectrum; satellite, aircraft, and ship relays; mobile coastal radio stations; and hydroacoustic stations and relays. All elements of the control system, as a rule, are interconnected by cables and radio-relay lines of communication.
The guaranteed transmission of launch order signals to SSBNs on patrol at sea is supported by transmitting them over a group of frequencies including not less than 2 frequencies for very long waves (VLF), 5 short wave frequencies (HF) and 5 space lines of communications. The transmission of the signals is continuous in relation to the given schedule for communications with SSBNs.

Electromagnetic waves on the extremely low frequency ( ELF), a frequency of several tens of hertz, in distinction from the shorter electro-magnetic waves possess the advantage that they may penetrate to depths of up to 200-300 m. The signals of the ELF station "Zevs" which is located on the Kola Peninsula, may be sent to strategic submarines in practically any area of the globe. Since the speed for transmitting information on the ELF channel is very low, only general commands for all SSBNs on combat patrol are sent. These commands are designated ahead of time by a fixed code. For example, with separate codes one may designate the order: "Approach the surface to receive order to use weapons" or "bring to full combat readiness" During peacetime the ELF channel continuously transmits the code. That means "the situation is normal". Breaks in the transmission of this code is a signal that an "extreme situation" has been established.

Very long frequency (VLF) signals may penetrate water at depths of up to 20 m. To receive these signals submarines must rise to periscope depth or deploy their swimming receiving antennas. To provide communications on large parts of the world's oceans (except the remote waters of the southern hemisphere, the western part of the Atlantic and eastern part of the Pacific ocean) five permanent VLF stations were working on the USSR's territory and were located in Molodechno, Nizhny Novgorod, Tashkent, Krasnodar and Khabarovsk. These stations are presently functioning and are continuously broadcasting on five frequencies from 3 to 30 kHz. VLF channels are used to transmit not only general orders for all SSBNs, but also combat control signals, which constitute the release codes for launching missiles and accompanying information.

Mobile coastal and aviation VLF stations are intended for relaying orders for using weapons under combat conditions when there is a great possibility that the enemy has taken stationary transmitters out of service. To do this, the USSR created the TU-142 RTs airplane, which went into military service in 1985. The length of the transmitting antenna of this airplane reaches several kilometers. During threatening periods communication aircraft carry out "buzzing" in the regions where SSBNs are patrolling. At the end of 1992 there were 13 TU-142 RTs aircraft in Russia, seven of which were stationed in the Pacific Ocean Fleet and six in the Northern Fleet.

The network for short-wave and VHF radio communications is the most diversified. It includes a multitude of stationary and mobile ground transmitting centers and radio relay stations. This network also includes satellite, aviation and ship-board relays. At the dawn of the strategic fleet, short wave communications were the only means for transmitting operational information to submarines, which carried out military duty off the US shores, as well in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

The basic insufficiencies of HF and VHF band radio waves are that they do not penetrate deeply into water. To receive HF and UHF signals submarines rise to periscope depth and deploy a telescopic antenna above the water's surface. Modern submarines are also equipped with floating towed antennas. This allows the submarine to receive information while located at depths of up to 120-150 m from the surface. Nevertheless, a metallic antenna on the water's surface represents a vulnerable target for the enemy's radars and may be detected at distances of up to several tens of kilometers. Due to the great speed for transmitting information and comparative cheapness and convenience of using HF and UHF communications, it is the basic means for operational control of SSBNs in peacetime.

The fact that sound propagates in water at great distances served as the basis for creating not only acoustic systems for detecting submarines, but also systems to communicate with them. The basic advantage of acoustic communications is the absence of the need for a submarine to surface and use towed or telescopic antennas. Due to these advantages channels for underwater sound communications are frequently used in combination with radio communication channels. Thus, in regions where submarines patrol, there may be a near-bottom fixed station for underwater sound communication, which unites ships with coastal points relaying radio signals. Underwater sound communications are also convenient for joint tactical actions of submarines with other submarines and surface ships.

The problems with this type of communication are the significantly smaller speed of sound propagation in water in comparison to the speed of radio waves and the strong absorption of sound at frequencies, which support acceptable speeds for transmitting information (several tens of kilohertz). Therefore, the underwater communication sound system is used to transmit signals only for comparatively short distances (up to 10-30 km).
 
While reading the Defensenews website, I read the news of first firing of Derby BVR AAM by Indian Navy Harriers in last April,

"The Indian navy signed a $25 million contract in 2005 with the missile's maker, Rafael, for procurement of 20 Derby missiles to replace aging Sea Eagle missiles bought from BAE Systems in the early 1980s"

The link is,

Indian Sea Harrier Tests BVR Missile - Defense News

I don't think that Derby, being an Air to Air missile, can replace Sea Eagle missile being anti-ship and an error of this magnitude by a dedicated defence site is very strange.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom