By: Rii
- 14th September 2014 at 20:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Can someone clarify the state of India's submarine acquisition programs in light of this recent ToI article?
Frustrated with seven years of debilitating delay in even kicking off the process to select a foreign collaborator to help make new-generation stealth submarines, the Navy has junked its long-standing demand for getting two of the six such vessels directly from aboard.
Defence ministry sources said Navy has now agreed that all the six new submarines, armed with both land-attack missile capabilities and air-independent propulsion for greater underwater endurance, will be constructed in India with foreign collaboration under 'Project-75-India'.
This seems ass-backward. Surely the aforementioned 7-year delay would increase the case for purchasing at least some units directly from abroad. :confused:
New
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher
- 15th September 2014 at 12:15Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Can someone clarify the state of India's submarine acquisition programs in light of this recent ToI article?
This seems ass-backward. Surely the aforementioned 7-year delay would increase the case for purchasing at least some units directly from abroad. :confused:
but it won't satisfy a govt. which wants the maximum amount of defence work to be done within the country. And to pacify them, the IN must have figured out that it could offer up the 2 subs that were to be built at the foreign yard, to the Indian yards.
In the meantime, there have been rumours of a possible hurried purchase of 2 Amurs from Russia directly. That may give them some breathing space. If the GoI agrees to that proposal, they may want all the P-75I boats to be built at Indian yards as a trade-off.
Which brings me to the P-75I program- why isn't the Soryu a part of the tender? Even the Aussies now seem to be intent on replacing the Collins class subs with the Soryu..
By: swerve
- 15th September 2014 at 13:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Japan's new rules don't allow exports of everything to anyone & everyone. Only NATO members & countries in a similar alliance (i.e. Australia & New Zealand, maybe Singapore) are pretty much unrestricted. Thus, Australia is now at much the same level as the USA as far as Japanese arms exports are concerned, & "even the Aussies' is therefore inappropriate. I'm afraid they're ahead of you in the queue. You'd have to change your foreign & military policies considerably to get their status.
New
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher
- 15th September 2014 at 15:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Japan's new rules don't allow exports of everything to anyone & everyone. Only NATO members & countries in a similar alliance (i.e. Australia & New Zealand, maybe Singapore) are pretty much unrestricted. Thus, Australia is now at much the same level as the USA as far as Japanese arms exports are concerned, & "even the Aussies' is therefore inappropriate. I'm afraid they're ahead of you in the queue. You'd have to change your foreign & military policies considerably to get their status.
The "even the Aussies" wasn't meant as a snub. As for being ahead in the queue, there is no queue so far. It's only Australia that is interested in them so far. India hasn't evinced any interest in the Soryu and if it requires changes to the foreign and military policies to get their "status" then I'm afraid it just won't fit the bill.
New
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher
- 15th September 2014 at 15:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Pics of IN MiG-29K at the newly constructed Shore Based Test Facility at Dabolim, Goa
By: Teer
- 16th September 2014 at 14:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Japan's new rules don't allow exports of everything to anyone & everyone. Only NATO members & countries in a similar alliance (i.e. Australia & New Zealand, maybe Singapore) are pretty much unrestricted. Thus, Australia is now at much the same level as the USA as far as Japanese arms exports are concerned, & "even the Aussies' is therefore inappropriate. I'm afraid they're ahead of you in the queue. You'd have to change your foreign & military policies considerably to get their status.
Modi and Abe share a good personal rapport, that might help things & Japan is the flavor of the month for the new Indian Govt. In these sort of things the right sort of nudge from top leaders can suddenly make all sorts of justifications and loopholes appear for bureaucrats and regulatory authorities.
By: swerve
- 16th September 2014 at 15:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Weellll . . . . since the relaxation of export rules is highly controversial & the opposition has sworn to revoke it if it gets into power, I think that Abe would probably be very reluctant to give them ammunition against it by 'nudge nudge wink wink' backdoor deals ignoring the rules. Japanese governments are sensitive to public opinion, & that would a major vote loser.
By: Teer
- 16th September 2014 at 17:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Weellll . . . . since the relaxation of export rules is highly controversial & the opposition has sworn to revoke it if it gets into power, I think that Abe would probably be very reluctant to give them ammunition against it by 'nudge nudge wink wink' backdoor deals ignoring the rules. Japanese governments are sensitive to public opinion, & that would a major vote loser.
Well, the increasing assertiveness by the PRC is making Japan move closer to India, plus the business friendly new Govt in India.. so I guess, its not just personal relations alone and that might be something Abe can point to, when it comes to the opposition as well. Selling the Soryu to India would be a windfall for Japanese industry & I'd wager Japanese industry is the same as any other nations and will be busy lobbying the heck out of their Govt if they see an opportunity.
The other aspect is whether it really is the best answer.. somebody who tracks these things more closely is better placed to answer that I guess... I'd rather go for improved Scorpenes to simplify logistics and build a second line around Arihant/derivatives.
New
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii
- 16th September 2014 at 17:33Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There's also the minor matter of Indo-Sino relations to consider. Buying major combatants from Japan is a sure way to heighten China's feelings of encirclement and halt any progress in Indo-Sino relations.
Defense Industry Daily is very pessimistic on the prospects for India's submarine capabilities going forward, and lays the blame entirely at the feet of govt mismanagement:
So, no tender. When there is one, we’re at 2017 for a winner. India will need to start retiring U209/ Shishumar Class submarines by 2016, or find an excuse to extend them past a 30-year safe lifespan. At the same time, 3 of the Navy’s early Kilo/ Sindhugosh Class boats would also be at or beyond a 30-year lifespan, for a total of 5 boats at risk this way before a Project 75i winner is even declared. Waiting another 8 years after a winner is declared brings us to 2025 for the 75i rollout, by which time all 4 U209s should be retired, and 8 of India’s 9 Kilo Class boats would have ages ranging from 34 – 39 years. Only INS Sindhushastra would be under the 30-year mark. That could leave India with its submarine force cut in half, when its current fleet of 13 is already acknowledged as inadequate to India’s strategic needs.
In the mid-2000s, Admiral Prakash publicly stated an objective of “24 subs in 30 years.” A more likely outcome involves cutting the current operational fleet roughly in half by 2025, and returning to the current inadequate fleet size by 2030 – 2035.
By: Roovialk
- 16th September 2014 at 20:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A three way deal between Japan to supply India and Australia with advanced submarines would make things tough for China. And I am sure that at this point with the shenanigans of China in the South and East Seas many Asian countries would welcome China having feelings of encirclement.
Throw Vietnam in the mix and update SEATO and China really has something to think about
By: verbatim
- 16th September 2014 at 23:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-------------
Comments?
I would say the cheapest and safest way to address the issue is to order a couple of improved Kilo to recapitalize the russian built SSK line, signing an option to purchase two more if 75I program won't take enough momentum.
Trying to get a second Akula on lease, while far more expensive, would be an additional approach, ensuring a real SSN presence at sea instead of having just a training platform.
No SSK can perform the long endurance patrols an SSN does, and when not in shallow waters SSK's pros are outweighted by lack of submersed range and very low patrol speeds.
It would cost a large amount of money, but pushing the 75I program on the right is anyway deferring payments earmarked to it, so what was expected to be allocated in the next few years could be diverted without much fuss.
New
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii
- 17th September 2014 at 02:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A three way deal between Japan to supply India and Australia with advanced submarines would make things tough for China. And I am sure that at this point with the shenanigans of China in the South and East Seas many Asian countries would welcome China having feelings of encirclement.
Australia is already considered an extension of the United States and its possible acquisition of Soryu class submarines changes little. The same is not true of India.
As for welcoming China's fear of encirclement, do you actually think these things through? Germany did not initiate WW1 because she felt overwhelmingly secure in her power, but because she felt increasingly vulnerable to the Franco-Russian pincer. A nation that is threatened will attempt to address that threat. The resulting increase in military spending would not only be unfortunate for humanity at large, drawing resources away from more productive pursuits, but would result in the balance of power tipping further in China's favour more rapidly than it otherwise would, because China has far more reserve capacity to draw upon than any of her neighbours, most certainly including India.
As for Indo-Sino relations more broadly, China has recently emerged as India's largest trading partner and has just announced investments in India worth $100bn -- three times the amount pledged by Japan. The new BJP government has embraced China warmly (for an overview, read here) and there is even renewed activity towards resolution of outstanding border issues.
For all these reasons India would of course be sensitive to China's strategic concerns. Given that there is no overwhelming reason to choose the Soryu boats in preference to other candidates (in fact they are likely to be even more expensive than offers from European nations, to say nothing of Russia), it is unlikely that such a purchase would be made.
I would say the cheapest and safest way to address the issue is to order a couple of improved Kilo to recapitalize the russian built SSK line, signing an option to purchase two more if 75I program won't take enough momentum.
I agree that this seems the best stop-gap solution available. BlackArcher earlier noted a similar proposal.
If true, terrible news for the IN. From prior track record, I wouldn't expect a HAL designed and built naval multirole helo to FOC till around 2030.
Look at all the issues NH Ind. is having (or had) with trying to get the NFH up and running and NH Ind (the individual companies) has decades long pedigree in helo making.
New
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii
- 26th September 2014 at 03:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I understand it the proposed new contract would entail an indigenously manufactured and indigenised form of an existing platform, similar to Su-30MKI. Given that India undoubtedly has a large eventual requirement for helicopters in this class, that strikes me as a more sensible path forward than direct import.
By: Victor
- 26th September 2014 at 04:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It makes sense to build an imported design because the eventual numbers might be in the 120s (edited) and the IN needed to replace the Seaking and Ka-28 yesterday. What doesn't make sense is to have the IN wait for the 20-ton helo that HAL is designing or thinks it's designing.
Sikorsky is offering the Romeo for the initial 16 NMRH (ASW/ASuW focused) tender under FMS. They are offering the S-70 on the follow-on tender. As is my understanding.
New
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii
- 28th September 2014 at 20:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Total displacement of Indian surface combatants displacing >1k tonnes in 2014, excluding OPVs: 135k tonnes. Projected 200k tonnes in 2025.
By: AyalaBotto
- 7th December 2016 at 21:04Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Kashin Class Destroyers Project 61ME
Hi,
I'm looking for a good/detailed photos regarding the BrahMos VLS at Kashin Class Destroyers Project 61ME of the Indian Navy but I only have the following photo of INS Ranvir D54:
Notes:
The 8× Brahmos VLS cells are clearly visible where the AFT SA-N-1 SAM Launcher use to be (close to the hangar door).
Also interesting to note is the number of Barak SAM VLS Cells: 2 modules of 8x cells on each side replacing the FWD 30 mm AK-630 CIWS.
That makes a total of 32x Barack SAM VLS cells!
Question nº1:
The Barak VLS hatches seems almost identical to the Brahmos VLS hatches. Is it possible?
Not sure if the Barak and Brahmos VLS hatches of the Kolkata Guided Missile Destroyer class (Project 15A) can be used as a baseline.... :)
Question nº2:
Does anyone has other photos with the VLS hatches onboard these ships in detail, please?
By: Jinan
- 16th December 2016 at 08:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Barak VLS hatches seems almost identical to the Brahmos VLS hatches. Is it possible?
Not sure if the Barak and Brahmos VLS hatches of the Kolkata Guided Missile Destroyer class (Project 15A) can be used as a baseline.... :)
Don't confuse the launcher for Barak-8 (as e.g. on INS Kolkata) with that of Barak-1 (as e.g. on INS Ranvir D54): they are different VLSs (Barak-8 is significantly larger).
Barak-1
Weight 98 kg
Length 2.1 m
Diameter 170 mm
Wingspan 685 mm
Barak-8
Weight 275 kg
Length 4.5 m (Booster adds 123 cm)
Diameter 225mm (missile body)/540 mm (Booster body)
Wingspan 940 m
By: Buran
- 20th December 2016 at 13:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Best and worst: preparing navies for all possible worlds Jane’s Navy International
Nor should the increasing tensions between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, marked by continuing artillery exchanges on their northern border, be ignored. Their relations will continue to shape their naval development. Although both of their navies do many other things, the building of a warfighting capability that will deter the other side remains their top priority in both operational and acquisition terms. The realisation of how vulnerable its navy ships were to Pakistan's Harpoon missiles during the 1999 Kargil conflict led the Indian Navy to invest heavily in a research programme with Israel that produced the 70 km-range Barak-8 anti-missile missile. Likewise, the news that Pakistan is to acquire eight submarines from China, alongside the appearance of Chinese nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) in the Indian Ocean, has seen India galvanise its submarine acquisition programme.
India-Russia Indra Navy 2016 drills were held in the Bay of Bengal on December 14-21.
Some 500 servicemen were engaged in the drills.
The drills involved ship-based helicopters.
The Indian side commanded the exercises.
The squadron of the Russian Pacific Fleet included the large anti-submarine ship Admiral Tributs and the Boris Butom tanker ship.
The Indian Navy was represented by INS Ranvir a guided missile destroyer, INS Satpura an indigenous frigate and INS Kamorta an indigenous Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) corvette.
In the course of the drills, the participants fired reactive depth charges at a simulated enemy submarine in the Bay of Bengal.
The first joint Russian-Indian naval drills were held in 2003.
The joint naval exercises were also held in 2005, 2007, 2014 and 2015.
The official ceremony and debriefing took place on board of Indian INS Satpura frigate.
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 14th September 2014 at 20:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Can someone clarify the state of India's submarine acquisition programs in light of this recent ToI article?
This seems ass-backward. Surely the aforementioned 7-year delay would increase the case for purchasing at least some units directly from abroad. :confused:
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher - 15th September 2014 at 12:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
but it won't satisfy a govt. which wants the maximum amount of defence work to be done within the country. And to pacify them, the IN must have figured out that it could offer up the 2 subs that were to be built at the foreign yard, to the Indian yards.
In the meantime, there have been rumours of a possible hurried purchase of 2 Amurs from Russia directly. That may give them some breathing space. If the GoI agrees to that proposal, they may want all the P-75I boats to be built at Indian yards as a trade-off.
Which brings me to the P-75I program- why isn't the Soryu a part of the tender? Even the Aussies now seem to be intent on replacing the Collins class subs with the Soryu..
Australia leaning towards buying Soryu class subs
Posts: 13,432
By: swerve - 15th September 2014 at 13:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Japan's new rules don't allow exports of everything to anyone & everyone. Only NATO members & countries in a similar alliance (i.e. Australia & New Zealand, maybe Singapore) are pretty much unrestricted. Thus, Australia is now at much the same level as the USA as far as Japanese arms exports are concerned, & "even the Aussies' is therefore inappropriate. I'm afraid they're ahead of you in the queue. You'd have to change your foreign & military policies considerably to get their status.
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher - 15th September 2014 at 15:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The "even the Aussies" wasn't meant as a snub. As for being ahead in the queue, there is no queue so far. It's only Australia that is interested in them so far. India hasn't evinced any interest in the Soryu and if it requires changes to the foreign and military policies to get their "status" then I'm afraid it just won't fit the bill.
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher - 15th September 2014 at 15:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Pics of IN MiG-29K at the newly constructed Shore Based Test Facility at Dabolim, Goa
Posts: 2,118
By: Teer - 16th September 2014 at 14:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Modi and Abe share a good personal rapport, that might help things & Japan is the flavor of the month for the new Indian Govt. In these sort of things the right sort of nudge from top leaders can suddenly make all sorts of justifications and loopholes appear for bureaucrats and regulatory authorities.
Posts: 13,432
By: swerve - 16th September 2014 at 15:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Weellll . . . . since the relaxation of export rules is highly controversial & the opposition has sworn to revoke it if it gets into power, I think that Abe would probably be very reluctant to give them ammunition against it by 'nudge nudge wink wink' backdoor deals ignoring the rules. Japanese governments are sensitive to public opinion, & that would a major vote loser.
Posts: 2,118
By: Teer - 16th September 2014 at 17:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well, the increasing assertiveness by the PRC is making Japan move closer to India, plus the business friendly new Govt in India.. so I guess, its not just personal relations alone and that might be something Abe can point to, when it comes to the opposition as well. Selling the Soryu to India would be a windfall for Japanese industry & I'd wager Japanese industry is the same as any other nations and will be busy lobbying the heck out of their Govt if they see an opportunity.
The other aspect is whether it really is the best answer.. somebody who tracks these things more closely is better placed to answer that I guess... I'd rather go for improved Scorpenes to simplify logistics and build a second line around Arihant/derivatives.
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 16th September 2014 at 17:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There's also the minor matter of Indo-Sino relations to consider. Buying major combatants from Japan is a sure way to heighten China's feelings of encirclement and halt any progress in Indo-Sino relations.
Defense Industry Daily is very pessimistic on the prospects for India's submarine capabilities going forward, and lays the blame entirely at the feet of govt mismanagement:
Comments?
Posts: 343
By: Roovialk - 16th September 2014 at 20:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A three way deal between Japan to supply India and Australia with advanced submarines would make things tough for China. And I am sure that at this point with the shenanigans of China in the South and East Seas many Asian countries would welcome China having feelings of encirclement.
Throw Vietnam in the mix and update SEATO and China really has something to think about
Posts: 261
By: verbatim - 16th September 2014 at 23:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would say the cheapest and safest way to address the issue is to order a couple of improved Kilo to recapitalize the russian built SSK line, signing an option to purchase two more if 75I program won't take enough momentum.
Trying to get a second Akula on lease, while far more expensive, would be an additional approach, ensuring a real SSN presence at sea instead of having just a training platform.
No SSK can perform the long endurance patrols an SSN does, and when not in shallow waters SSK's pros are outweighted by lack of submersed range and very low patrol speeds.
It would cost a large amount of money, but pushing the 75I program on the right is anyway deferring payments earmarked to it, so what was expected to be allocated in the next few years could be diverted without much fuss.
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 17th September 2014 at 02:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Australia is already considered an extension of the United States and its possible acquisition of Soryu class submarines changes little. The same is not true of India.
As for welcoming China's fear of encirclement, do you actually think these things through? Germany did not initiate WW1 because she felt overwhelmingly secure in her power, but because she felt increasingly vulnerable to the Franco-Russian pincer. A nation that is threatened will attempt to address that threat. The resulting increase in military spending would not only be unfortunate for humanity at large, drawing resources away from more productive pursuits, but would result in the balance of power tipping further in China's favour more rapidly than it otherwise would, because China has far more reserve capacity to draw upon than any of her neighbours, most certainly including India.
As for Indo-Sino relations more broadly, China has recently emerged as India's largest trading partner and has just announced investments in India worth $100bn -- three times the amount pledged by Japan. The new BJP government has embraced China warmly (for an overview, read here) and there is even renewed activity towards resolution of outstanding border issues.
For all these reasons India would of course be sensitive to China's strategic concerns. Given that there is no overwhelming reason to choose the Soryu boats in preference to other candidates (in fact they are likely to be even more expensive than offers from European nations, to say nothing of Russia), it is unlikely that such a purchase would be made.
I agree that this seems the best stop-gap solution available. BlackArcher earlier noted a similar proposal.
Posts: 1,732
By: Victor - 26th September 2014 at 03:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
GoI to Scrap Current Naval Multi-Role Helicopter (NMRH) Procurement in Favor of Buy and Make Indian? Advantage HAL!
If true, terrible news for the IN. From prior track record, I wouldn't expect a HAL designed and built naval multirole helo to FOC till around 2030.
Look at all the issues NH Ind. is having (or had) with trying to get the NFH up and running and NH Ind (the individual companies) has decades long pedigree in helo making.
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 26th September 2014 at 03:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I understand it the proposed new contract would entail an indigenously manufactured and indigenised form of an existing platform, similar to Su-30MKI. Given that India undoubtedly has a large eventual requirement for helicopters in this class, that strikes me as a more sensible path forward than direct import.
Posts: 1,732
By: Victor - 26th September 2014 at 04:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It makes sense to build an imported design because the eventual numbers might be in the 120s (edited) and the IN needed to replace the Seaking and Ka-28 yesterday. What doesn't make sense is to have the IN wait for the 20-ton helo that HAL is designing or thinks it's designing.
Sikorsky is offering the Romeo for the initial 16 NMRH (ASW/ASuW focused) tender under FMS. They are offering the S-70 on the follow-on tender. As is my understanding.
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 28th September 2014 at 20:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Total displacement of Indian surface combatants displacing >1k tonnes in 2014, excluding OPVs: 135k tonnes. Projected 200k tonnes in 2025.
Assumptions:
Inductions to 2025
2x Project 15A Destroyer
4x Project 15B Destroyer
3x Kamorta Corvette
4x Kamorta follow-on
7x Project 17A Frigate
Could be more Kamorta follow-ons, but on the other hand not all Project 17As may be in service by 2025.
Retirements to 2025
5x Rajput Destroyers
3x Project 16 Frigates
4x Khukri Corvettes
By way of comparison, using the same criteria Chinese Navy >1k tonne surface combatants today total 300k tonnes, projected 490-600k by 2025.
Posts: 86
By: AyalaBotto - 7th December 2016 at 21:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Kashin Class Destroyers Project 61ME
Hi,
I'm looking for a good/detailed photos regarding the BrahMos VLS at Kashin Class Destroyers Project 61ME of the Indian Navy but I only have the following photo of INS Ranvir D54:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Yoga_onboard_INS_Ranvir.jpg
Another photo of INS D54 Project 61Me Kashin class destroyer:
High resolution photo link:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Flickr_-_Official_U.S._Navy_Imagery_-_Exercise_Malabar_2012._%281%29.jpg
Notes:
The 8× Brahmos VLS cells are clearly visible where the AFT SA-N-1 SAM Launcher use to be (close to the hangar door).
Also interesting to note is the number of Barak SAM VLS Cells: 2 modules of 8x cells on each side replacing the FWD 30 mm AK-630 CIWS.
That makes a total of 32x Barack SAM VLS cells!
Question nº1:
The Barak VLS hatches seems almost identical to the Brahmos VLS hatches. Is it possible?
Not sure if the Barak and Brahmos VLS hatches of the Kolkata Guided Missile Destroyer class (Project 15A) can be used as a baseline.... :)
Question nº2:
Does anyone has other photos with the VLS hatches onboard these ships in detail, please?
Thanks.
Regards,
Ayala Botto
Posts: 547
By: Jinan - 16th December 2016 at 08:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Don't confuse the launcher for Barak-8 (as e.g. on INS Kolkata) with that of Barak-1 (as e.g. on INS Ranvir D54): they are different VLSs (Barak-8 is significantly larger).
Barak-1
Weight 98 kg
Length 2.1 m
Diameter 170 mm
Wingspan 685 mm
Barak-8
Weight 275 kg
Length 4.5 m (Booster adds 123 cm)
Diameter 225mm (missile body)/540 mm (Booster body)
Wingspan 940 m
See this, for VLSs on INS Kolkata
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/dd91cab7c966d9afac8d2c3217d66bedd36b3dc9/r=x1683&c=3200x1680/http/cdn.tegna-tv.com/-mm-/e0d196cc1ccdcf4492f3f2c87a7fbde839e1bbef/c=0-337-3819-2495/local/-/media/2015/11/27/DefenseNews/DefenseNews/635842106952923455-Barak-8.jpg
http://drop.ndtv.com/albums/NEWS/galleypictures1/g6.jpg
http://drop.ndtv.com/albums/NEWS/ins_kolkata_gallery/imagesnew_ndtv_24x7_c_290066_6.jpg
http://i.ndtvimg.com/i/2015-09/ins-kochi-special-page_1300x670_81443495447.jpg
As opposed to the BArak-1 launcher e.g. on Vikramaditya, Viraat, Kamorta, Shivalik, Delhi, Godavari, Rajput classes.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/2/21/VLS_Barak_Indian_Carrier_Viraat.jpg
http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/25m5buse51im36jkt0pt.jpg
Here's a couple of nice ones of INS Ranvijay
http://s004.radikal.ru/i208/1205/9d/8c0d24741526.jpg
http://s57.radikal.ru/i156/1205/89/a2b146e4b87d.jpg
Posts: 412
By: Buran - 20th December 2016 at 13:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Best and worst: preparing navies for all possible worlds Jane’s Navy International
Nor should the increasing tensions between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, marked by continuing artillery exchanges on their northern border, be ignored. Their relations will continue to shape their naval development. Although both of their navies do many other things, the building of a warfighting capability that will deter the other side remains their top priority in both operational and acquisition terms. The realisation of how vulnerable its navy ships were to Pakistan's Harpoon missiles during the 1999 Kargil conflict led the Indian Navy to invest heavily in a research programme with Israel that produced the 70 km-range Barak-8 anti-missile missile. Likewise, the news that Pakistan is to acquire eight submarines from China, alongside the appearance of Chinese nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) in the Indian Ocean, has seen India galvanise its submarine acquisition programme.
Posts: 6,186
By: Austin - 27th December 2016 at 09:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Indra Navy 2016 exercise: The Indian side commanded the exercises this year
India-Russia Indra Navy 2016 drills were held in the Bay of Bengal on December 14-21.
Some 500 servicemen were engaged in the drills.
The drills involved ship-based helicopters.
The Indian side commanded the exercises.
The squadron of the Russian Pacific Fleet included the large anti-submarine ship Admiral Tributs and the Boris Butom tanker ship.
The Indian Navy was represented by INS Ranvir a guided missile destroyer, INS Satpura an indigenous frigate and INS Kamorta an indigenous Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) corvette.
In the course of the drills, the participants fired reactive depth charges at a simulated enemy submarine in the Bay of Bengal.
The first joint Russian-Indian naval drills were held in 2003.
The joint naval exercises were also held in 2005, 2007, 2014 and 2015.
The official ceremony and debriefing took place on board of Indian INS Satpura frigate.