Indian Navy News & Discussions

[Gessler]

PROJECT SEABIRD - The large up-scaling of INS Karwar naval base, the home of the Vikramaditya and
most of it's Battle Group -

 

[Penguin]

Why not just stick to the official render:

Official render is more accurate in depicting a SSM targeting radar atop the bridge (rather than a gun)

barak -8 will be ready for fitting in 2017-18

before that vikramaditya is totally useless

how will it defend itself??with shtill or barak-1??

useless carrier till 2018

Like its predecessor, with Barak 1 and AK630. Carrier defence is the role of the escorting ships.

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin you had asked for proof the INS VIKRAMDITYA would have the BARAK-2 SAM system installed on it:




Russian pooh-poohs MMRCA negotiations - The Hindu: Mobile Edition

Russian pooh-poohs MMRCA negotiations
September 26, 2013 , By S. Anandan | 2 comments
Victor M. Komardin, deputy chief of Russian defence export agency Rosoboronexport, has insinuated that the long-pending medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) deal for procurement of 126 fighters for the Indian Air Force (IAF) is unlikely to be inked before the general elections next year.

Addressing the media at the ongoing Namexpo (Naval and Maritime Expo) here on Tuesday, Mr. Komardin derisively commented that while contract negotiations between buyer (Air Force, in this case) and the lowest bidder (French company Dassault, which makes Rafale fighter aircraft) would normally witness the buyer asking for further lowering of price, the MMRCA negotiations saw the price almost double.

“What does this mean?” he asked, and said “not even a finger will move [to sign the deal] till the general elections are over.”

Ready in next 5 years

Mr. Komardin also said that the fifth generation fighter aircraft being jointly developed by India and Russia would be ready in the next five years, obviating the need for a less-capable fourth-generation aircraft India was poised to buy through the MMRCA deal.

He said Russia always believed in the politics of friendship and rated relationships over economics.

To a question, he said defence requirements of India had grown over the years, forcing it to look for other suppliers and partners. “Meanwhile, we are limited by our huge internal orders too,” he said, blaming the media for portraying Russia in poor light.

There was a rise in Russia’s export to India, but the rate of growth was not as much as it had been 15 years ago.

Price tag not agreeable

On the absence of an air defence system (long range surface-to-air missile or LR-SAM) on the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya, he said while the carrier was being refurbished, the price of a few systems was not agreeable to the Indian side, which wanted ‘some systems reduced’.

“They kept it for a later date. Once the carrier is handed over to India, it is their decision to integrate any systems on the platform,” he said acidly.

To a question on India’s plan to retrofit the vessel with Barak 8 being jointly developed by India and Israel, he said Russia being the makers of the vessel would be in the loop while the retrofitting would be done. Mr. Komardin reeled out figures like 3,000 defence contractors visiting India last year alone to fulfil the over 50 contracts the country currently had in India.

On the status of the Multi-Role Transport Aircraft, developed by the Russian United Aircraft Corporation-Transport Aircraft and Indian Hindustan Aeronautics Limited under a Joint Venture, he said the project would take time to fructify as bureaucracy made processes cumbersome and difficult.

This is the text of the link. IMHO it only refers to the refraining from installing Kashtan. I do not see any reference to Barak-8. If that were to be installed, I wonder seriously where the launchers would go and also where the MFSTAR radar required for missile guiance would go.

 

[Abingdonboy]

This is the text of the link. IMHO it only refers to the refraining from installing Kashtan. I do not see any reference to Barak-8. If that were to be installed, I wonder seriously where the launchers would go and also where the MFSTAR radar required for missile guiance would go.

I had already addressed these specific questions for your benefit sir a while back.

The FC radar for the BARAK-8 on the Viky won't be the full EL/M-2248 Multi-Function Surveillance and Threat Alert Radar (MF-STAR) as on the IAC-1 and P-17/A and P-15A. Rather the EL/M-2258/ALPHA (Advanced Lightweight Phased Array Radar) S-band active phased-array radar will be employed by the Viky and be mounted in here:

The "ALPHA":

 

[Penguin]

I had already addressed these specific questions for your benefit sir a while back.

The FC radar for the BARAK-8 on the Viky won't be the full EL/M-2248 Multi-Function Surveillance and Threat Alert Radar (MF-STAR) as on the IAC-1 and P-17/A and P-15A. Rather the EL/M-2258/ALPHA (Advanced Lightweight Phased Array Radar) S-band active phased-array radar will be employed by the Viky and be mounted in here:

Alpha is like Smart-S mk2. Only if Barak 8 is active radar seeker on the missile will the above suffice. (in other words, if ARH then no dedicated (additional) FC radar is needed. I still don't see where the missiles/launchers would go. Barak 8 is 4,5m long, so a VL launcher would need that plus a little, 2 decks depth essentially. In addition to sufficient deck area, that is (which I would take to be at least 2x8 and more likely 4x8 for any installation to be worthwhile). I'm assuming similar dimensions for the 8-cells VLU as for Mk41. Where to fit?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Alpha is like Smart-S mk2. Only if Barak 8 is active radar seeker on the missile will the above suffice. (in other words, if ARH then no dedicated (additional) FC radar is needed. I still don't see where the missiles/launchers would go. Barak 8 is 4,5m long, so a VL launcher would need that plus a little, 2 decks depth essentially. In addition to sufficient deck area, that is (which I would take to be at least 2x8 and more likely 4x8 for any installation to be worthwhile). I'm assuming similar dimensions for the 8-cells VLU as for Mk41. Where to fit?

I'm inclined to go with that assessment. Under-deck space for a VLS is only available for'd or aft of the Island. That will become clear only at the first long refit.

 

[sudhir007]

 

[Shankranthi]

We have all seen pics of Indian warships a million times.

But it would be really cool if someone can post pictures of the insides of Indian warships. Anyone ?

 

[Gessler]

We have all seen pics of Indian warships a million times.

But it would be really cool if someone can post pictures of the insides of Indian warships. Anyone ?

These are some pictures from P-17 Shivalik interiors -

 

[Gessler]

P-15A DDG

 

[Dillinger]

P-15A DDG

Good, the main sensor mast is up, still pissed about not incorporating the Ran-40l radar as the ASR though- they'll be part of the standard fitment from the P-15Bs apparently.
@Capt.Popeye Still can't figure out why we didn't opt for simple COGAG and ditch the diesel engines (Bergen ones), would have created enough space for some good firepower additions on the ship?

 

[RPK]

Russian Mig-29K fighter jets are going to operate from INS “Vikramaditya”, the carrier once part of the Soviet Navy, purchased by the Indian Navy in 2004.

The carrier is conducting its final operational tests, including day and night take off and landing practice by a Russian Mig-29K.


New images of the trials have been released, some of those are quite cool as the one showing the takeoff of the naval Fulcrum from the aircraft carrier at dusk taken from a camera located between the engines, on the tailhook.

They remind a famous scene of Top Gun shot from a flying F-14 Tomcat.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Good, the main sensor mast is up, still pissed about not incorporating the Ran-40l radar as the ASR though- they'll be part of the standard fitment from the P-15Bs apparently.
@Capt.Popeye Still can't figure out why we didn't opt for simple COGAG and ditch the diesel engines (Bergen ones), would have created enough space for some good firepower additions on the ship?

There is a reason why the IN has opted for the CODAG configuration. First of all; its economy, both in the cost of acquisition as well as cost of operation. In that respect Diesels are far ahead of GTs. While Steam Turbines are somewhere in-between. That is one reason why the Chinese went with Steam on their Sovremmnys.

Also one point to note is that Diesels are easier to maintain; in the sense that they need unitary maintenance, which if it is done as part of a PMS then 'outages' or 'down-time' can be minimised and most of all, predicted and planned.

Lastly; warships do not need to operate at full speed (or flank speed) all the time, so while cruising for long periods on patrol or on station, the Diesels work very well to do just that.

 

[Shankranthi]

There is a reason why the IN has opted for the CODAG configuration. First of all; its economy, both in the cost of acquisition as well as cost of operation. In that respect Diesels are far ahead of GTs. While Steam Turbines are somewhere in-between. That is one reason why the Chinese went with Steam on their Sovremmnys.

Also one point to note is that Diesels are easier to maintain; in the sense that they need unitary maintenance, which if it is done as part of a PMS then 'outages' or 'down-time' can be minimised and most of all, predicted and planned.

Lastly; warships do not need to operate at full speed (or flank speed) all the time, so while cruising for long periods on patrol or on station, the Diesels work very well to do just that.

That's right. The advantages of diesels are,

1) Great fuel economy - large low and medium-speed diesels have a fuel burn of less than 120 grams/bhp-hr, in contrast the most advanced gas turbines, the Rolls-Royce WR-21's on the UK's Type 45 destroyers, incorporating compressor intercooling and exhaust gas heat recuperation have a fuel burn of 142 - 145 gms/bhp-hr.

2) Extreme reliability and ruggedness - although marine gas turbines have come a long way, diesels are still more reliable. Also, their wide commercial use means there are many places/ports that can repair them.

3) Low cost - diesels are the lowest cost marine powerplants, with high-speed diesels being cheapest with best power-to-weight ratio followed by medium-speed diesels and lastly by low-speed diesels. Those figures are reversed for reliability.

4) Ability to burn a wide range of fuels - marine diesels can burn the lowest-grade residuals available on the market, even those with massive sulfur content, that no other engine will tolerate.

5) Great part-load performance - diesels can operate well over a wide range of engine speeds and do not suffer large decreases in performance or economy when operating at part load.

Diesel Disadvantages:

1) Weight and size - they are the heaviest prime movers - large 2 stroke low speed diesels are often heavier than some frigates >3000 tons per engine

2) Low power per unit mass/volume - they occupy large space and deliver relatively little power for their size - especially as the engine speed (RPM) goes down - furthermore unlike gas turbines, power increase does not scale as much with increases in weight and size.

3) Noise and vibration - diesel engines are relatively noisier and shake more than their gas turbine counterparts, they often have unfortunate harmonics that generate sympathetic vibrations in the hull and propeller systems. However IN has used Rubber mountings to address this particular disadvantage.

 

[Black Eagle 90]

I am 100% sure that IN really loves these Frigates.....