The WZ-10 was originally designed by Russia’s
Kamov OKB, and was subsequently developed by the PLA’s 602nd Research Institute,
Changhe Aircraft Industries Group (CAIG) and China Helicopter Research and
Development Institute (CHRDI).
Guidance system: semi-active
laser
Launching platform: attack helicopters,
UAVs
Effective range: 2,000 metres to
7,000 metres
Diameter: 170mm
Length: 1,775mm
Weight: 47kg
Hit probability: no less than
88% within effective range
Warhead: Tandem HEAT
Penetration: 1,400 mm/0°
Stabilised EO sight
TV detection range: 10km
TV identification range: 8km
Thermal imager detection range: 6km
Thermal imager identification
range: 5km
Ground laser illuminator
Maximum illuminating range: 6km
Dear Sir
ReplyDeleteWhat is the Price per unit of this helicopter
Has the Russian Mi 35 option been dropped
ALSO please tell us about How India can counter the EIGHT Chinese Submarines that Pakistan is getting
How soon will Pakistan be able to get these Submarines
TO VIJAY: Per-unit cost is US$18 million minus the weapons package. CATIC had offered the deferred payment option (i.e. payment at low interest rates starting 4 years after deliveries have been completed) & Pakistan accepted such terms & conditions. Of course the Mi-35M option has been dropped forever.
ReplyDeleteAs for the 8 x S-30 Type 032 Qing-class SSKs, they will be armed with the Babur's SLCM version & therefore these SSKs will ne able to launch the SLCMs while staying well inside Pakistan's territorial waters. As of now, all existing & projected versions of the Babur carry conventional warheads & I don't ever foresee the day when the PAF or PN will be authorised to store or launch nuclear weapons. Consequently, the Babur & Ra'ad are all conventionally armed. No PA COAS will ever part with nuclear weapons & will therefore ensure that ALL of Pakistan's nuclear arsenals are the exclusive preserve of the PA, & will never be shared with the PN & PAF.
Prasun Da, many thanks for this thread timely needed, I request you to kindly enlighten us more about development of Babur's SLCM version,and the Qing Class SSKs, time frame of their delivery and whether India would have anything in her arsenal in future to match/counter those.
ReplyDeleteThanks in advance.
To PINTU: VMT. The Babur SLCM's 'parent', which is the CJ-10 from China, is still under development & won't be available till 2018, which is about the same time the PN will be receiving its first S-30 SSK from China's state-owned COSC. India is already developing the Nirbhay, starting with its air-launched version, & will certainly have the SLCM version as well to replace the existing Novator 3M14E Club-S SLCMs now in service with the IN.
ReplyDeleteTo RITURAJ: 1) India's option is to eventually convert the S-2/Arihant, S-3 & S-4 SSBNs into SSGNs once the larger S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs enter production. The Nirbhay's SLCM variant will be torpedo tube-launched & will therefore be capable of being launched from Scorpene SSKs as well. Existing Type 877EKM SSKs will be decommissioned after the end of their service lives. Vietnam already has 6 Type 636 SSKs on order & doesn't want any more from anyone. The Philippine Navy is still years away from acquiring SSKs. India's can't help Taiwan in any manner on military matters since India adheres to the 'One China' policy. Vietnam doesn't want the BrahMos & that's precisely why it bought the BASTION system from Russia 3 years ago. Actually, no one except India will operate the BrahMos for years to come. Folks have been talking about it since 2001 all over the world & if so far no exports sales have taken place, I'm pretty sure the same will hold true for the next decade as well. An-32RE upgrade schedule has suffered delays because of non-availability of components from those OEMs in breakaway eastern Ukraine & annexed Crimea now under Russian control. No one else from any other country can supply such spares.
ReplyDeleteTo RITURAJ: Regarding the INDIA TODAY article, here’s what been glossed over:
ReplyDelete1) Historically, all other n-submarine operators have first acquired SSNs, followed by SSGNs & finally SSBNs in order to steadily & sequentially overcome the technology curve. In India, it has been the exact opposite because the reqmts & programme implementation schedules have never been end-user-driven. Instead, scientists & technocrats have been the principal drivers, leading to lop-sided procurement plans being implemented.
2) Due to the above, the IN only by 2004 could convince the Govt of India on the need for SSNs. After all, what good will be a SSBN fleet if there are no SSN s to protect them in the deep seas when they’re on operational patrol? It was only then that the plan was hatched to acquire the Scorpene SSKs & build upon that contract to next graduate on to single-hulled SSNs with the assistance of DCNS. Sometime in July 2004, there was even a related statement to this effect (which appeared in Indian news websites) from the then New Delhi-based country representative of THALES, Mr Francois Dupont, whom I had known since 2000 when he was posted in Kuala Lumpur.
3) Therefore, to even suggest that the IN has suddenly been awoken from its deep slumber by the increasing tempo of PLAN SSN patrols in the IOR & therefore now wants to acquire SSNs as a reaction to the PLAN’s activities, is, to put it mildly, deeply insulting to the IN’s intellectual depth & its force projection/modernisation plans. The IN was wide awake to such a prospect since 1998 itself.
4) SSNs always carry torpedoes, & not SLCMs. SSGNs carry SLCMs. Therefore, to claim that the IN’s projected SSNs will carry Nirbhay-type SLCMs is patently false.
5) The PWR for the S-2/Arihant uses only 44% enriched uranium (LEU) & will therefore not be useful at all for SSNs. Since the IN’s SSN will be single-hulled & much smaller in size, the reqmt is for a smaller PWR using more than 60% enriched uranium, i.e. HEU. Laws of physics state that the higher the level of enrichment of the HEU, the smaller the reqd size of the PWR.
6) It was in 2010 that Admiral (Ret’d) Arun Prakash went public by stating that the IN has asked the DAE to develop a 190mW PWR first for the projected IAC-2, & use this very same design for the planned S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs. Therefore, no need for anyone to use phrases like ‘a retired Admiral’.
7) Lastly, as a matter of government procedure, Cabinet Committee on National Security (CCNS) sanctions a project ONLY AFTER all related paperwork has been done, inclusive of technical evaluations & acquisition cost analysis. And not the other way around. What this means is that CCNS approval opens the door for conducting procurement negotiations with various OEMs, i.e. the OEMs have already been selected by the MoD & IN & inking of a procurement contract is not far away at all. Therefore, let’s see what transpires in France when NaMo goes there.
To VIKRAM GUHA: VMT for the DARPA weblink. Was glad to see a person of Indian origin making it to the post of a DARPA Director.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the report on IAF aircraft crashes, what is noteworthy is that the report mentions such material failures occuring only in Russia-designed components which may or may not have been licence-built by HAL. But it is an accepted fact-of-life that sub-systems & components of Russian design & origin have traditionally suffered from premature failures. Reason for this is that such items have stress tolerances optimised strictly for operations in climates to be found in the northern hemisphere. That's why one will never hear of such equipment failures taking place on-board platforms/aircraft & engines of Western origin. It is for this reason that the RD-93 turbofans of the PAF's JF-17s, for instance, will start giving all sorts of problems once they clear their half-lives. The turbofans of the MiG-29Ks & MiG-29UPGs & Su-30MKIs too will start giving similar problems after logging in 50% of their service lives.
Will answer all remaining queries from the previous thread later today. AERO INDIA SHOW REPORT-1 will be uploaded within the next 7 days.
ReplyDeleteTo VIKRAM GUHA: DRDO was NEVER involved with the design or development of the EW suite of the Dhruv Mk3/4/Rudra. It was always ONLY SAABTech from the very beginning. As reported in the previous thread, the EW suite for the IA's Rudras has a narrow-band ESM sensors (RWR), while the IAF's Rudras have wideband ESM sensors.
ReplyDeletePrasun,
ReplyDeleteAbout AN-32 spare parts, why can't India buy it from China?? The Chinese Y-7 aircraft is a copy of An-26/An-32.
Maybe India will realise that there are avenues of mil cooperation with China after all.
Hi
ReplyDeleteWanted to know more about the RK of India some very quick decisions taken by him...but what abt rafael ?
and came across news of a 'stealthy' su 35 is that even possible ?
Dear Prasunji,
ReplyDeleteHappy to see new post after much wait :)
1. what kind of engine is being in WZ-10 and what is its service ceiling.
2. What is India doing to stop China's plan to build economic corridor through PoK. Isn't by doing nothing we giving de jure status to project.
Regards,
Dear Sir
ReplyDeleteWill the EIGHT Chinese Submarines
AFFECT THE BALANCE OF POWER
between India and Pakistan
Should we get MORE SCORPENES or KILO
class submarines
OR Should we get MORE P 8 I and KA 28 Helicopters
OR should we get MORE KAMORTA corvettes
Or should we go in for S 70 B Helicopters
Please give a detailed response
PrasunDa,
ReplyDeleteWhile staying with the topic of Pakistan & China's naval power, the Carnegie Inst has done a study on the second strike capability of both India & Pakistan. Here is the link
http://carnegieendowment.org/2015/03/09/murky-waters-naval-nuclear-dynamics-in-indian-ocean
It seems China is going out of its way to ensure that Pakistan has a credible second strike capability.
Also, a few Pakistani military officers are suggesting that Pakistan should use nuclear tipped cruise missiles to neutralize India's BMD capabilities.
As always,would appreciate your views.
Thanks,
Vikram
Prasun Da
ReplyDeleteI read that the LCH design as it is is not suitable as a low flying attack helicopter. Is it due to the large tail landing gear ?
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIshrat Jahan was a terrorist. Is it true??? Hedley had also decsribed her as an accomplish. Then why UPA govt. had shielded this terrorist??? Why it played with the sentiment of India??? As a common man, whom should I believe???
To WANG FUXIN: An-26 & An-32B are two distinct models sharing only a similar-looking fuselage. The similarities end there. Furthermore, the Y-7 shares similarities only with the An-26, & not the An-32B. In addition, the Y-7 is a civilian twin-turboprop powered by P & WC engines. The military version of the Y-7 is the Y-14, which uses China-developed/-made engines. Lastly, the spares support for An-32B required from abroad concerns only the An-32B’s AI-20 engines (also used by the IN’s IL-38SD MRMR/ASW aircraft) made by Ukraine’s Motor Sich JSC, which also makes VK-2500 engines for Mi-17B-5 helicopters. The logistical problems will probably be sorted out by Ukraine over the next 6 months, rest assured.
ReplyDeleteTo COMMONCENSE: Rafale M-MRCA deal will be inked over the next 90 days. Su-35 is certainly not stealthy, rest assured.
To PAWAN: The WZ-10 uses the WZ-9 engine developed by China. Service ceiling when fully armed is much the same as that of the A-129 Mangusta. There’s not much that anyone can do or needs to do, except Mother Nature, about the Karakoram Link that will connect PoK with Xinjiang. In any case, that whole region is seismically very active, with one major earthquake taking place every 7 years & therefore this link will by no means be a permanent or enduring one. That’s why since ancient times the trade linkage routes were between north-eastern Ladakh & Kasghar, totally avoiding the present-day route.
To VIJAY: No, the balance-of-power won’t be tilted against India. Instead, it will only increase the PN’s annual logistics support costs of maintaining two distinct types of SSKs in service. For the IN, the way of countering these SSKs is to devise ways of targetting their primary & secondary shore-based naval bases housing fleet communications installations with SLCMs & ALCMs. For, without command-and-control instructions emanating from shore-based naval command, control & communications centres, these SSKs will be lost at sea & will become irrelevant assets. Therefore, in order to ensure the IN’s dominance in the seas, it is imperative that the air-launched version of the Nirbhay cruise missile be operationalised ASAP, & be flight-certified to be carried by both Su-30MKIs as well as carrier-based MiG-29Ks. The SLCM version of the Nirbhay has already been sanctioned for R & D & this will arm the Scorpene SSKs.
To VIKRAM GUHA: That report 'ASSUMES’ that Naval Strategic Force Command HQ which the Pakistan Navy formally inaugurated a in 2012 is meant to exercise command-and-control over nuclear-armed Babur SLCMs. For acquiring a good understanding of the PA leadership’s mindset & its thinking on strategic deterrence, one only has to listen to what Lt Gen (Ret’d) Khalid Kidwai stated at a seminar hosted by that same institution (Carnegie) last month in the US. Nowhere does he even bother to touch upon the subject of a strategic triad comprising land-launched, air-launched or sea-launched nuclear WMDs. 99% of his presentation was devoted land-launched ballistic missiles, not even cruise missiles. On top of that, since India already has a declaratory no-first-use policy, where then is the need for Pakistan of a second-strike capability? As of now, the PN’s Babur SLCMs will be targetting what to Pakistan are strategic targets like cities housing major financial institutions, industrial infrastructure & coastal LNG/petroleum/diesel storage farms that cannot be hit by conventional air-strikes launched by manned combat aircraft, i.e. Jamnagar & Mumbai.
ReplyDeleteAs for BMD facilities, I’m sure you will admit that a truly credible BMD system CANNOT DO without a network of X-band long-range airspace surveillance/tracking radars of the type possessed by the US & Russia despite the availability of space-based missile launch warning satellites. That’s precisely why even Israel has a standing arrangement with the US to host Raytheon-built TPY-2 radars (as part of the THAAD system) in times of emergencies. What this proves beyond doubt is that mere possession of L-band EL/M-2080 LRTRs isn’t enough to field a credible BMD network. Consequently, only the day India begins deploying permanent X-band LRTRs like the US & Russia will everyone believe that India is indeed serious about deploying a functional BMD network. Not until then. The DRDO’s boffins are therefore being well-advised here by your’s truly to shut up & stop making a fool of themselves & of India by claiming that the DRDO is well on its way to develop an effective BMD solution.
To PRAV: That applied to the LCH’s TD-1. Subsequently, the LCH’s stub-wings have been re-designed & re-engineered to accommodate eight ATGMs & these can be seen on TDs 2, 3 & 4. Only missing item on-board the LCH now is a MMR capable of detecting & tracking both static/moving ground targets. Personally, I reckon the LRDE can easily come up with a lightweight, folding X-band fixed-array AESA design that can be belly-mounted. This option needs to be seriously explored.
To SOUBHAGYA: If indeed she was a terrorist, then why was she fired upon at such close-range, which is impossible if she was ambushed while she was been driven in a car? Would it not have been far better if the car were to be tailed & she & her comrades be entrapped at a pre-arranged location by either armed policemen or NSG rapid intervention personnel? Would it then not have been an intelligence bonanza by interrogating the captured ‘terrorists’? Why was there all this urge to liquidate all the occupants of the car by staging an encounter? Therefore, as a common man, all that you need to do is to use your own God-gifted common-sense & ask why were the well-devised standard operating procedures for intelligence-driven counter-terrorist operations so willfully thrown into the dustbin during this encounter incident.
Prasun Da
ReplyDeleteLong time. The P-75I foolishness continues unabated, Pakistan may be stretching its resources by opting for two different SSK designs but they still seem saner than us; we have decided that we shall operate four different types of conventional submarines (on top of the nuclear submarines we are inducting, including mixing up the leased Akulas with the prospective Indian SSNs).
I had hoped that the MoD would have taken cognizance of the effort that went into creating components for the Scorpenes in-country, to meet the stringent QC/QR, the skills that the yard had to acquire. We are all set to fritter away all of this at the cost of stretching our already perilously stretched naval maintenance footprint.
Fanboys all over are screaming from the rooftops, apparently the Soryu class subs will teach the Chinese a lesson.
A second flight of Scorpene SSKs, with a reliable and proven AIP module, would have gone a long way in securing the IOR for us and rationalizing our maintenance requirements.
Is there any indication that the MoD and the GOI will take cognizance of this?
As to the IN, it seems all their careful planning is going to be undermined. The IN has known for long that the IOR islands will never decisively pledge off supporting Chinese naval ventures till India develops credible marine capabilities. This if of course natural, IF we forsake our natural commitments and allow another nation to hold sway in the IOR then logic dictates that the IOR islands will look at said nation to be their benefactor/security provides. Smaller nations abhor absenteeism when it comes to larger nations and their expected role as a force of stability and prosperity. The GOI, successive governments, have twiddled their thumbs and the current administration cannot seem to look beyond prime-ministerial visits and MOUs. Economic cooperation, joint ventures, and diplomacy cannot succeed without being backed by hard power.
hi prasun
ReplyDeletewhy are we going for the maitri missile , when barak 8 can do the job?. 5 billion$ for 360 missiles ?!!
are we missing something here ?.The Israeli c-dome would be cheaper and effective as well. What about the radar that goes with them. Ashwini is ok for that?.The maitri looks like a stretched version of the mica missile. So in essence they will be giving us old wine in a new bottle.does this deal also include source codes. active seeker tot etc?
Dear Prsun,
ReplyDeleteIt's OK for you to expose the stupidity of intelligence dept. But what about Headley's stmt, who said that Ishrat Jahan was a part of their covert operation. Although I have god gifted commonsense, but confusing news make me more skeptical. Ki kara !!!!!!
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/maneka-frowns-on-army-animal-practices/
ReplyDeletePrasun, what are some people in this government and the BJP doing? First all this fascination with all things bovine (cow mugshots/cow urine for phenyl) ans now this?
regarding Ishrat case,Two terrorists were caught beforehand and these were used to lure rest of the module&whole module was extra-judicially executed by the police on as std SOP to tie up loose ends.There might be a variety of explanation why they were not arrested.From various media reports,the terrorists were 'interrogated'&useful info extracted(leading to rest of the module).The issue here is UPA Govt or its subservient bureaucrats went on a fishing expedition to reach Amit Shah(and by a long stretch NaMo) and use it for political purposes.The collateral damage was patriotic IB&police officials who were cleaning garbage as they should.
ReplyDeleteSir, crores of crores of taxpayers money is spent on Security of nearly 1500 azadi seeking "activists" by J&K Govt whereas there is shortage of BP vests in J&K police....isn't there anything Central govt can do about this.
ReplyDeleteHello Prasun,
ReplyDeleteHope all is well with you. Here are a couple of interesting articles I thought about sharing:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/06/dangerous-liaisons-a-pakistan-saudi-alliance/
and
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/04/06/born-red
Hope these are enjoyable.
To BHASWSAR: The earlier masterplan prepared by the IN for a fleet of 24 submarines was drafted in the mid-1990s when India had yet to decide whether or not she would become an overt nuclear weapons state. All such masterplans became irrelevant on May 11, 1998 since from then on the issue of a sea-based nuclear deterrent was not a matter of choice anymore, but a confirmed strategic imperative. Similarly, the warfighting posture from then on had to be limited to only limited high-intensity conventional wars & not all-out wars—a fact that was glaringly illustrated during mid-1999 & again in 2002 during OP Parakram. Yet, the triad of politicians, bureaucrats & technocrats then refused to heed the writing on the wall & kept dithering. Consequently, Nirbhay’s R & D phase, which should have taken off in the late 1990s, could be sanctioned only in 2007. As far as submarine fleets go, all those navies of declared nuclear weapons states that have invested in SSN, SSGN & SSBN fleets since the late 1950s today don’t have SSK fleets. In India’s case, the transition should have started in the previous decade itself. The laws of physics dictate that an SSK, whether AIP-equipped or not—will only be able to attain maximum submerged speeds of 22 Knots for no more than 5 hours, & even then it cannot keep up with a carrier battle group that’s cruising at speeds of 32 Knots. Only a SSN or SSGN can cruise at more than 30 Knots while being submerged. And as the size of the IN’s SSBN fleet grows, the SSNs of China, the UK & the US will come increasingly closer to the IN’s SSBNs to measure their acoustic signatures, & the SSNs will also try to constantly map out the likely patrolling stations of the IN’s SSBNs. In such a scenario, NOT HAVING any SSNs of its own will place the IN into a severe disadvantage. Furthermore, SSNs can do everything that AIP-equipped SSKs can, but AIP-equipped SSKs can’t do everything that an SSN can—a fact of live mandated by the laws of physics that ill-informed fanboys fail to grasp. The double-hulled Soryu-class SSKs are designed for operating in deeper waters of the Western Pacific & are sub-optimal in the shallower waters of the East, North & South China seas & the PLAN itself is on record for having stated last year that it would prefer to go for single-hulled SSKs like the Amur 1650 for operations in such seas.
ReplyDeleteBottomline: while AIP-equipped SSKs will be ideal for countering Bangladesh, Pakistan & Myanmar, SSNs will be imperative for ensuring sea-control throughout the IOR. The PLAN clearly understands this & hence the increasing number of patrols being launched by the PLAN’s SSNs within the IOR.
To SOUBHAGYA: Any confessional statement in legal terms does not translate into material evidence, meaning even if you were to confess to committing a murder, your statement cannot be held against you unless backed up by material evidence or more than one witness to that crime. That’s why Headley’s statement cannot be classified as corroborative evidence & that’s why it will be inadmissible in any court of law.
ReplyDeleteTo JAY: Extra-judicial encounters or killings are NEVER part of any SOP of any law enforcement agency of India. They are just not codified in black-and-white in any operating manual of such agencies. If the alleged terrorists were interrogated & useful information was extracted from then, then they should have been brought to trial & sentenced. Instead, from what subsequently transpired (i.e. willful murders) one can only conclude that the law enforcement agencies of Gujarat were rank amateurs & totally unprofessional. Why, because the whole game’s up the moment the dead bodies surface & they’re subjected to autopsies, which in turn bring out all the facts & expose the entire modus operandi. Loose ends could have been tied up only if the bodies were disposed off in such a way that they would never be discovered. Clearly, the involved ‘patriotic’ Police officials of Gujarat had below-average IQs & hence the massive goof-up & embarrassment. If you really want to go deep into the whole story, then you will first have to find answers to the following: who planned the Godhra train massacre & why? Who planned the retaliatory massacres & how was it implemented? Who assassinated Harin Pandya & why? Who was trying to cover up the assassination plot & why? Truthful answers to these questions will once & for all remove the mist surrounding incidents of communal violence in Gujarat back in the previous decade.
To COMMON SENSE: Well, Menaka Gandhi does have a point & in this case I will have to agree with her PoV. Show me any other military institution that adheres to such practices. In fact, I will go even one step further: why continue recruiting Gorkhas from Nepal for the IA’s various Gorkha Rifles Regiments? Aren’t such personnel all mercenaries, since they’re all Nepali citizens? If the IA of today continues to employ sich mercenaries, then in what way is it morally different from its predecessor, the Imperial Indian Army of the British raj?
But what is far more worrying is the way today’s politicians are engaging in vote-bank/identity-based politics as part of efforts to brainwash an already emotional populace & deepen the socio-economic faultlines, as brought out beautifully in this documentary, titled Muzaffarnagar Baaqi Hai:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UYPYBmpp7E
To MAYUR M MANAPURE: Law & order is a state subject & therefore all related executive decisions can be taken only by the concerned state govt’s executive arm. The centre can’t do anything in this matter. But what the Centre can do is grant permanent citizenship to all those Hindu mohajirs who left West Pakistan after partition right up to 1971 & settled down in Jammu—a task that has yet to be carried out, believe it or not. The same goes for all those Hindu refugees that have left Pakistan & sought refuge in Rajasthan & Delhi.
To RAD: Will answer all your queries (including those from the previous thread) in a consolidated format later today.
To HEBERIAN: VMT for the weblinks. Always refreshing to read products of real investigative journalism, the kind of which are absent in India. Hence, not a single TV programme in India has so far touched on the Iran nuclear agreement. In stark contrast, Pakistani current-affairs programmes are all aghast at the deal & are all praying to Allah that this deal does not become a binding agreement, i.e. prayers to ensure that it suffers the same fate as Clinton's CTBT treaty that was totally rejected by the US Congress in the late 1990s.
ReplyDeleteTo HEBERIAN: Here's another interesting read:
ReplyDeletehttp://shahamat-english.com/index.php/paighamoona/53792-commemorating-the-nineteenth-anniversary-of-the-historical-gathering-and-selection-of-ameer-ul-momineen-on-4th-april-1996-in-kandahar
Looks like the Rawalpindi-based GHQ of the PA is busy preparing the ground for the public resurfacing of Mullah Omar as head of the Quetta Shura.
You won't find me arguing against the need for SSNs (yesterday, we needed them yesterday) over SSKs.
ReplyDeleteI think you misunderstood my question. Why are we wasting money and time with the P75I program? Whether the IN decides to induct more SSKs or not is up to them but surely they cannot justify operating 3-4 different types of SSKs all from different OEMs at the same time?
My question was wrt the above, that is what I was asking you; is there any chance that the MoD will come to it's senses? Parrikar maybe quick on his feet unlike Mr. Teflon Lungi but he sure doesn't seem to be cut out for higher defence planning (who is anyway, it seems we just cannot breed politicians who also happen to understand strategy).
Also you did not address my submission about India not being able to adequately stifle Chinese adventures in IOR islands lest India acquires for itself a proper stick (proper blue water marine capabilities).
At the end I would submit, if we absolutely must procure more SSKs then let us go with the Scorpenes again.
Hell we could even set up that alternate submarine building line the GOI seems to be salivating over. The Indian companies which have gone through the task of providing components for the Scorpene should be given 2 years for them to ramp up quantum of production, more component ToT can be passed on too so as to ensure greater "indigenization" (again requiring a good 2 year period so that the companies involved can match QC/QR), in said 2 year period another yard can equip itself to build the subs and as all of this happens the French can build the first 2 subs of the second flight of Scorpenes for us. (A 2+4 split of the 2nd flight, with the French building the first two)
This way we cut down on induction time, capitalize on our past investment, set up a second submarine line on a design which we have now worked with, and accrue greater technical know-how bu building on what we absorbed the first time around.
What say you?
Prasun Da,
ReplyDeleteAre you hinting that Pak opened another front with Godhra incident during 2002 ?
Regards
Aditya
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1. DCNS has been showcasing its Barracuda SSN in almost all previous Indian Defexpos. The diesel electric version of Barracuda i.e. SMX Ocean (though Australia oriented) is also available now. Has IN ever thought about it? This submarine can be built in both SSK and SSN formats. What is the current thinking then?
2. What is RM Parrikar talking about a collaboration between Public and Private shipyards on P-75I? Who may cooperate with whom?
3. Who are the partner OEMs of L&T, Pipavav, HSL/MDL/GRSE in P75I contract?
4. Is there anything wrong between India-Japan military technology cooperation discourse?? Both high volume item procurements - US-2 aircraft and Soryu submarine - don't seem to be moving even an inch, even though hard negotiations seem to be going behind the veneer of bonhomie. What is missing? Parrikar now again wants to look into the necessity of US-2 procurement??? Is the stalled nuclear deal putting a wrench in bilateral relations?
Thanks
hi prasun
ReplyDeletethe chinese qing class sub seems to be massive for a diesel sub, 6000 tons .What is the logic?.Is it for more payload and endurance. The only other reason that comes to my mind is for the sea based nuclear deterrent via their babur aka (cj-10) missiles. Personally i dont fear too much slow cruise missiles as in tomorrows naval scene there will be awacs cover that will pick it up easily from 500km , and alert cruise missile defenses with barak and maitri missiles.
Can it be assumed that the bigger the sub more noise it will make ?.will t hey give pak the silencing tech they have acquired for their nuke subs ?..How silent are the chinese boomers and ssns?.
there were reports of a chinese sub surfacing inside a US carrier battle group . Is it true?.
hi prasun
ReplyDeletewiki claims that the drdo aip is ready?. what is truth.
If it was ready they would be tom tomming by now!.Do surface ships fear the torpedo or the anti ship missile? How effective is the latest anti torpedo torpedo made by Israel and others.
To BHASWAR: No, I didn't misunderstand you. I had already stated earlier that the P-75I project as structured & planned four years ago is today a no-go, i.e. no separate second type of SSK design will be sought. That's why the much-touted RFP has yet to be relerased despite being ready since late 2013, as per the statement of the former CNS 2 years ago. What is most likely to happen therefore is the placement of follow-on orders for at least 4 additional Scorpene SSKs, all to be built by MDL. This option makes perfect sense, since with each of the first 6 hulls completed by MDL, work proficiency increases & MDL will be able to churn out the additional four Scorpenes at a faster rate & with ever better build-quality.
ReplyDeleteIndia cannot stifle China's economic clout within the IOR if India continues to dilly-dally on decision-making. Sri Lanka, Bangladesh & Myanmar all approached India first, before turning to China. If India had set up efficient & corruption-free container transshipment terminals throughout her coastline, then where would there be even any need for building such terminals in Sri Lanka? The only reason why Sri Lanka is building such terminals to to serve only the Indian market; there are no other countries in the IOR that require such transshipment facilities in such quantum.
To TECHNOLOGY, PHOTOGRAPHY & TRAVEL: Not at all. Will dwell more on this tonight.
ReplyDeleteTo RITURAJ: 1) Why go for the Barracuda when the Scorpene's design can be easily modified to become SSN just like what the Brazilians are doing along with DCNS? Barracuda will actually become a SSGN design & such larger hulls are reqd only when the SSN or SSGN is meant for trans-oseanic patrols for long uninterrupted durations. That's not the case with the IN, which wants to patrol only within the IOR.
2) He's talking about the industrial partnership between MDL & Pipavav. It was Pipavav that did all the metal-bending for the first 4 MDL-built Scorpene SSKs.
3) L & T's logical partner is Russia's Rosoboronexport State Corp. HSL has teamed up with Hyundai. MDL already has DCNS. GRSE won't get into SSL construction. But as I stated above, the P-75I project will be junked in favour of 4 additional Scorpenes from MDL.
4) What is WRONG is the bureaucratic infighting between the Govt of India's Dept of Public Enterprises & the Dept of Industrial Promotion & Policvy. It is these 2 depts that have tied themselves up in knots over which Indian industrial party should join forces with Shin Maywa. NaMo of course is totally pissed off with such attitudes & practices. Ideally, the PMO should have nominated HAL to be the lead Indian industrial partner & HAL should also have been empowered to create a PPP partnership with the likes of TATA, Mahindra & after completion of such tie-ups within a 90-day period, this PPP group should have tied up with Shin Maywa just like the Maruti-Suzuki tie-up. How difficult can all this be? And yet it is, according to existing bureaucratic norms & practices. Totally disgusting according to me.
To RAD: Did Wiki receive any special, exclusive product briefing from anyone from the DRDO to this effect? If not, then how can anyone trust Wiki? The DRDO's AIP is presently only a shore-based technology demonstration programme & is not even configured for fitment inside any SSK's hull. Secondly, unless the AIP design is tested on board a test SSK vessel, it cannot be certified for use on any operational SSK. Check out the R & D processes of all types of AIPs developed to date in Europe, Russia, China & Scandinavia & they will all reveal that test SSK vessels were indeed a mandatory reqmt for the AIP's R & D/industrial roadmaps. Therefore, is Wiki saying that to hell with all this, because the DRDO knows best & it is the champion of all champions in this domain???
ReplyDeleteHi, the Z-10 wasn't "designed" by Kamov; even though Kamov provided work in establishing the preliminary concept, the development and blueprinting wasn't carried out by them.
ReplyDeleteHI Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThe z-10 is an interesting story. PA have been looking for a AH-1S/F replacement for a while. They have been in talks with number of nations. Turkey first offered 3 free helis ATAK A, however the definitive 'B' is still on the drawing board and they couldnt offer the deep ToT package.
Also PA is only prepared to pay around $10 million per machine, so it means lots of local components and the options to cutomise as and when PA likes (aka JF-17).
China offered these 3 Z-10s, for free trial basis only. They have not been accepted into service or purchased. The US option is also there, there is approx $600 mi dollars aid for the AH-1Z available.
Mil-35 is still on the cards, its for the assault units/ANF not AT. In fact with the coming online of the Burrak, the need for these attack choppers has disappeared a bit but the need for the armed assault is still there. PA now has a breathing space to make the next deal.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteNot sure if you looked at the Link I put on here for the Pak day parade, there you had the Babur with folded fins.
I like your take on the SFC in Pak, its bit like your 10 nukes under chinese control theory :-).
The nukes are not under COAS control but under the command of chairman JCSC. The SFC heads in each of the services do not report to COAS, CNS, CAS but directly to chairman JCSC. Just look where this gentleman visits and when....enough tea leaves to read.
The other thing you still have not understood, in pak, infomation is very tightly controlled and released when necessary. Gen Kidawi's words have far more weight to them in international scene than your RM/DRDO heads, etc... with their constant BS.
What you need to look out for is what Musharraf said PN will do, when IN released info on your first nuke sub in 2006...this is the game changer.
Looks like the Zulu is coming home:
ReplyDeletehttp://tribune.com.pk/story/865768/us-state-department-approves-pakistans-request-for-arms-worth-1b/
15 in the pipeline and 30 more to come. It has been the preferred PA option and now they have the package too.
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIndian Navy's twin engine helicopter tender (buy and make) for 100 helos is worth USD $1.5 billion. This helo will be able to lift 6-7 people at max.
But GoI is purchasing HAL Dhruv at 7-8 million per unit. This helo can lift 10-12 people and has two engines as well.
Then, what is the reason for USD $ 15 million for a twin engine light naval helo?
Thanks
Hello again Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThank you for that very interesting article. I am not sure I should have opened the url from where I am right now :)
Yes, GHQ is prepping the gullible among the Umma for the resurfacing of Mullah Omar. That hagiography made it very clear. So much for Ashraf Ghani's efforts to cuddle with the GHQ ( but I will admit that he was very good when he v visited the US recently, tugging all the right strings).
I am very curious to see how GHQ's calculus will evolve when :
Pakistan is paid/forced to fight the Houthis by the Arabs + Iran signs the Nuclear deal.
So, what do you think about the helicopters : WZ 10, or Cobra/Vipers or both?
Thank you again!
I hear you. You can't beat geographical proximity (well, you generally can't, lest you be competing against India, in which case you can given our proclivities).
ReplyDeleteBut my point was that we need a multi-dimensional approach. We need the stick too, do you disagree?
On the point of the size of the SSN, I respectfully disagree. We should not be limiting ourselves to a small SSN, it would hinder us from using its full potential. Look at us, the IN will tie itself in knots once the Chinese SSNs really settle in in the IOR, similarly we need SSNs which will be able to operate in Chinese waters (that is the whole point, the thought of a SSN shadowing their task forces and lurking about in their waters will give them pause).
A nuclear navy is a big INVESTMENT, we should not be limiting ourselves by under-utilizing it either by way of design (the actual equipment) or by way of strategy.
The dimensions of the Arihant seem to be well suited for our SSN (dimensions, not design). But, this is all academic, BARC is yet to even start tests on land with a new (more powerful) reactor.
Is the weight of the WZ-10 5.54 tons empty or loaded ?
ReplyDeleteBy a similar metric what is the weight of the LCH ..
Thank you for your replies.
Sir, what are your views on PLANs aircraft carrier programme...
ReplyDeleteTo RAW13: There you go off again with your imaginary bombastic claims that defy logic. Previously when I had challenged you to provide photographic evidence of component manufacturing of any type for any manned or unmanned aerial platform (Buraq or JF-17), you came up with zilch. Now you’re again talking about ToT? What ToT can ever be absorbed by a country that has a total reqmt of 14,000mW of electricity consumption but can produce only 8,000mW? The US offer for AH-1Z is not ‘aid’ or freebie. It is FMS, meaning a line of credit is being extended for the purchase & this amount will have to be paid back in full at a later date. For air-assault, Mi-171s from Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant for the PA already come fitted with stub-wing-mounted rocket pods. No one in their right mind will ever use Mi-35Ms or any other attack helicopter for air-assault, especially over mountainous terrain.
ReplyDeleteComing to PGMs like cruise missiles, all cannister-encased missiles come with folded fins, Even ballistic missiles & SAMs inside cannisters have folded fins. Furthermore, the TEL of Babur shown on March 23, 2015 is not at all representative of the operational TEL, which has an armoured outer cover for a degree of protection against aerial attacks.
As for nuclear command-and-control, you definitely to read up on books published by Brig (Ret’d) Feroze Khan. Until you do so, all your claims posted above can only be classified as speculation of the worst kind. Worldwide, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is only an adviser. He does not command or control any troops or assets. Consequently, the CJCS cannot ever be the operational commander of anything, leaver alone the SFC. Like I said before, do read up first to understand what command-and-control as a function is all about. As for the veracity of Lt Gen (Ret’d) Kidwai’s remarks, they’re at best laughable & at worst, are based on utopia. Clearly he’s ranked by a warfighting doctrine that the Indian Army has never ever formally adopted nor has explained to anyone, not even within the IA. Hell, it hasn’t even been wargamed as yet! There’s no available literature on anything called ‘Cold Start Doctrine’ from any respectable military institution worldwide, only personal monologues. And for Lt Gen (Ret’d) Kidwai to still get the jitters with a non-existent warfighting doctrine & use it to justify the claimed investments on a TNW arsenal only speaks volumes of the utter lack of intellectual depth & poor operational art that has been illustrated in all India-centric military campaigns waged by the PA since late 1947. Credit must be given wherever due, & I must thanks the likes of Gen (Ret’d) Musharraf for forcing the IA to take high-altitude mountain warfare seriously since mid-1999, due to which the IA is today the world’s only such army that can not only successfully counter-attack, but win decisively when surprised by a hostile pre-emptive limited conventional war. That’s what really rankles the likes of Lt Gen (Ret’d) Kidwai. So yes, information is indeed very tightly controlled and released when necessary by Pakistan’s armed forces, because if the truth gets out, Pakistan won’t have any war heroes left to be glorified. But given the present state of Pakistan’s economy, there’s no dearth of civilians in high positions who are willing to betray their country & trade the highest secrets in order to secure safe & assured sanctuary abroad, of course with India’s diplomatic financial assistance.
To BILL: Conceptual design, inclusive of ballistic tolerance limits, flight-control logic & their benchmarking specifications were ALL drawn up & finalized by KAMOV OKB. Developmental work, inclusive of detailed design, prototype fabrication & flight-testing, was conducted by China-based R & D entities as explained above in the introductory paragraph of the narrative.
ReplyDeleteTo SK: That deal is still in the RFI stage & HAL too will be bidding. Things will get clearer once ot gets into the RFP stage. And that is a long way off.
To HEBERIAN: This is not the first time nor the last time the PA trains its guns, attack helicopters, field artillery & MBTs against fellow Muslims, be they Sunni or Shia. Back in 1970 then Col Zia-ul-Haq did the same when requested by King Hussein to forcibly expel the Palestinian Black September from Jordanian soil. This has since become a habit for the PA & therefore it is at perfect ease when targetting the TTP cadres, the great majority of whom are all Pakistani citizens. And mind you, a simple check of ISPR press-releases since 2004 will show that these TTP cadres now being labelled as terrorists were then referred to as ‘miscreants’. Since beggars cannot be choosers, the PA today has no other option but to accede to the demands of the Saudis & Qataris. And the Qataris have, above all else, offered to sell their LNG to Pakistan at a price of US$18 per MBTU when the market rate is not more than US$9 at most—meaning the extra US$9 will go into the pockets of Pakistan’s civilian & military elite in foreign bank accounts. This being the case, who inside Pakistan will ever dare to say NO?
@raw13
ReplyDelete" Gen Kidawi's words have far more weight to
them in international scene than your RM/DRDO
heads, etc... with their constant BS."
Oh achha really.Someone can't take truth here hun. I suggest you to stop your own "BS" here.Oh that we see every day how seriously world listens to you;With their Eyes,Nose & Ears closed.
" What you need to look out for is what Musharraf said
PN will do, when IN released info on your first nuke
sub in 2006...this is the game changer."
Welcome to the great game known "Economic Warfare" my child.So its seems Pakistan is getting sucked in this game of great imbalance.
Its India's version of "Bleeding by thousand cuts" to you with full payback. As you can feel & see yourself your country is getting sucked into economic failure( for u guys its kinda 'BLACK HOLE) :P ;-)...
To BHASWAR: The stick has always been available in-country. What has been lacking is the inclination to use it. For instance, the IN’s MARCOS could easily have launched a few operations against Somali pirates inside Somalia’s territorial waters. And yet, the UPA-1/2 govts decided against such options by claiming that such operations will tantamount to declaration of war against Somalia—and this at a time when precedents had already been set by several NATO member-states that can conducted similar special operations both inside Somali territorial waters & over Somali territory as well.
ReplyDeleteA PWR-powered Scorpene will by no means be a small SSN, neither will it be a behemoth like the S-2/SArihant. A 4,500-tonne Scorpene with PWR will have unlimited endurance in terms of propulsion, but like any other SSN or SSGN, it too will need replenishment of perishables like food once every 60 days. Even the PLAN’s SSNs require such replenishment & that’s precisely the reason why it docked at Colombo last year. The other option is to have a fleet of submarine tenders that can be pre-positioned in the high seas for the sake of at-sea food supply replenishments & as well as crew changes. This is what the Soviet Navy used to do during the Cold War.
To PRAV: It’s the gross weight, not the all-up weight. The LCH’s gross weight is 5.8 tonnes.
To MAYUR MANAPURE: It is a well-structured programme. PLA Navy’s (PLAN) future aircraft carrier designs—titled CV-17, CV-18 and CV-19—indicate that the PLAN wants to have at least three aircraft carriers so that one is always available for operational missions, while the second is used for training and the third is re-supplied and retrofitted. Like Liao Ning CV-16, the CV-17 also has a ski-ramp. The nameplate accompanying the scale-model cites a length of 315 metres, width of 75 metres, draught of 9 metres, and cruising speed of 31 Knots. CV-17 is also credited with a standard displacement of 65,000 tons and a full displacement of 80,000 tons. The CV-17’s smokestack shape and exhaust stack arrangement, however, suggests a transition to all gas-turbine propulsion, or even a diesel-gas turbine combination, instead of nuclear pressurised water reactors (PWR) and steam turbines. The CV-17’s scale-model model boasts a hydrodynamic projected bulbous bow. Another curiosity is its incorporation of both a ski-jump and two catapults. While certainly odd, this is not completely outlandish and even makes some sense for China’s “narrow-the-gap-from-behind-” or, ideally, “catch up-” style development of carrier operations. Such a setup could offer a platform for pilots to start working on catapult launches before transitioning to a full-up flat-top aircraft carrier. Far less clear are the associated systems. Roughly 70 carrier-based aircraft are posited: J-15 ‘Flying Shark’ combat arcraft, Kamov Ka-31 airborne early warning (AEW) helicopters, Z-9 anti-submarine warfare (ASW) helicopters, and Z-8 transport helicopters. The following items of weaponry are listed: 4 sets of 24 Hong Ki (Red Flag) 16 long-range sirface-to-air missiles (LR-SAM), the FL-3000N (HQ-10N) close-in air-defence system, four 30mm automatic guns, three 12-tube anti-submarine torpedo launchers, and seven chaff rocket launchers.
ReplyDeleteCont’d below…
It is with the CV-18 that things really get interesting. Advertised as an “indigenously produced nuclear-powered aircraft carrier,” the catapult-equipped flat-top closely resembles the US Navy’s Gerald R Ford-class CVN in configuration, with a similar hull layout and the island far back. Yet there are also echoes of the Nimitz-class CVN-68 aircraft carrier. This hull is 330 metres long and 76 metres wide (no draught is given). Standard displacement is 88,000 tons, while full displacement is 101,800 tons. Broadly speaking, the CV-18’s listed speed, hull-form, and PWRs are a bit closer to that of the USS Nimitz, while the exterior depicted in the scale-model is a closer to that of the Gerald R Ford-class CVN. Two PWRs will provide nuclear propulsion. Each PWR will drive two sets of main turbines, for a total of four turbines, which will connect with four shafts delivering 260,000 hp. One turbine per shaft is conservative, but consistent with US practice. Total power will be 194 megaWatts (mW)—presumably not thermal output, but power after all inefficiencies are accounted for; a cruising speed 33 Knots. This implies the ability to cruise as fast as the USS Nimitz on 15mW less power.. Puzzlingly, however, whereas the Gerald R Ford’s bow represents the latest in civilian hydrodynamics—not just bulbous and projecting, but also tipping up—the CV-18’s bow more closely resembles the Liao Ning’s style than CV-17’s. There are also four sets of emergency diesel engines for a total of 8mW. China has considerable experience with low-RPM diesels through its civilian merchant ship production. Implementing this in practice would make the CV-18/CV-19 the first hulls of only the second class in the world to have both a nuclear power and a conventional propulsion plant arrangement. The CV-18’s 70 carrier-based aircraft complement is identical to that of the CV-17, with the following exceptions: attack UAVs are added, while Ka-31 helicopters are eliminated, presumably because more-advanced JZY-01 AEW aircraft (derived from the Sukhoi Su-80 STOL aircraft) can take off from the flat deck. Weaponry will be similar to that on that for the CV-17: 6 sets of 30mm single-tube naval guns, four sets of HQ-10Ns, four sets of laser-based anti-missile systems, and 4 x 30mm Type 1030 gun installations. Electronic equipment will include a “battle of chaff-induced injection device” and a SLQ-29 radar warning and jamming system. As for the CV-19, it will be identical to that of CV-18.
ReplyDeleteTo VIJAY: 15 x AH-1Z with Hellfires under a FMS deal (it is still only a proposal & has 29 remaining days within which it has to be approved by the US Congress) is no big deal at all. Firstly, they will replace the existing AH-1Fs whose spares support is no longer assured from the OEM. Secondly, since this is a FMS deal, it will be structured in such a way that the PA will have only 28 days of assured spares supplies in-stock in-country at any time, while the rest will be held in storage in the US. In other words, a very light leash will be maintained. Logically, therefore, the PA will be far better off to reject such a deal & instead opt for the WZ-10/Blue Arrow-7A package.
ReplyDeleteYes, we have had the ability to execute certain special operations in the IOR; but, that is hardly a proper stick. A stick would be a formal marine force with the proper means to assail and engulf any island nation (short of Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka could very well be our Cuba for better or worse, although things are looking up at the moment) which seeks to overtly side against our interests despite all persuasions.
ReplyDeleteThat is the sort of stick we need to carry with us as we proffer our hand in friendship and development (and it must be proffered, in good faith too, if we wish to see the region develop in accordance to our interests without conflict).
This will of course require more than just LHDs, we will need an adequate number of landing platform docks (to constitute the bulk of said marine force, considering that operating a dozen LHDs is cost prohibitive). The Chinese appear to have had the right idea with developing the Type-071 LPD (a total of 6 were planned with 3 active atm)and then progressing to LHDs. Four LHDs may be a good start (most definitely adequate for HADR operations and scaring Mauritius) but it needs to be backed by smaller LPDs (something we don't seem to be planning for) if we want a credible expeditionary marine force to go along with the CBGs.
While designing and building such a ship will be challenging (I don't think we have ever built anything with a well deck on it) but we should be endeavoring to do so. Unless we wish to be confined to 4 LHDs and the ageing Jalashwa.
Vertical envelopment of the NE stands next to impossible today, the next conflict will be in the IOR (not much of a revelation to anyone, not even the GOI).
Also, Kidwai jee needs to be given a tour of Andaman perhaps, exactly WHY would we put nuclear tipped missiles aimed at Pak on those islands? Mainland India itself is ginormous, we could hide a dozen TELs in western UP alone and no one would be the wiser (least of all Pakistan).
Anyway, if Pakistan wants to waste money and resources, or Kidwai jee wishes to waste his breath against the supposed nukes on Andaman, be our guest.
On to a Scorpene derived SSN, at 4500 tons it would be no less than a DCNS Barracuda at that point. If we do opt for said option, what sort of component commonality (Indian produced components on the current flight of Scorpenes) will we see transferring over the SSN?
Also is it wise to be leasing a 2nd Akula (as per reports)?
Also, you are quite right, apparently no one has told DRDO that precision targeting of in bound BMs will require quite a powerful ground based X-band radar. It's one thing to knock out missiles you know are heading your way, definitely proves you can make the interceptor, quite another thing to set up the sensor network required to cue the interceptors and cover India's land mass. They will have to realize that they will need space based early warning systems before the shield becomes viable.
To BHASWAR: That’s precisely why a Strategic Defence Review is urgently required, so that optimum force structuring can take place. For instance, why should the IA have a Southern Command when the threat orientations are from the north-west & north? Would it not be better to re-deploy formations of this Command up north, instead of raising four new Mountain Infantry Divisions? For the southern front, would it not be better for the IN to assume the leadership role & be given authorisation for raising at least two naval infantry brigades (one mechanised & one air-mobile that’s capable of air-assault/vertical envelopment)? Four LPHs will suffice for the time-being, but what’s also required are at least high-speed catamaran-type Ro-Ro logistics support vessels that can act as first responders during humanitarian evacuations like the ones taking place in Yemen. Such vessels can also be used for ferrying heavy engineering equipment & raw materials to India’s offshore islands for infrastructure development & land reclamation purposes.
ReplyDeleteAs for commonality between a Scorpene SSK & its SSN variant, the percentage level will be as high as 70%. The only internal fitments peculiar to the SSN will be the PWR itself, & an all-electric integrated propulsion system that will see the electric propulsion motor attached to the propeller, thereby doing away with the reduction gears & long transmission shaft. GE-Alsthom is the world’s pioneer in this area & it is due to this that’s the world’s smallest, most compact SSNs have to date been built only by France.
Leasing a second Project 971A Shchuka-B SSGN has become imperative as a stop-gap measure in order to 1) monitor the movements of PLAN SSNs, & 2) ensure flank protection for the IN’s SSBN fleet, which will grow to 2 by 2018.
Perhaps the MoD can first fix the IA's issue with how it spends its budget, the revenue to capital proportion. If I am not wrong the split goes around 80 paisa to revenue per rupee.
ReplyDeleteThe Akulas (given what the Americans thought about them when they came online) will indeed present a severe threat to the current crop of Chinese vessels (both surface and sub-surface).
A good proposition for sanitizing the IOR would be to convert the Arihants into carriers of a mixed payload of hypersonic BrahMos and Nirbhay SLCMs. Paired with a space-based ocean surveillance system for tactical geolocation of Chinese naval assets in the IOR and ELF comm. setup such a payload could allow the submarine to pose a serious threat to even large and well protected battle groups. Growing Indian ISR capabilities will really open up new avenues for such platforms.
Btw, an Idrw article claims that DRDO might be getting ready to offer a VLS Astra SR-SAM system. Might not be the best idea to offer said system given that the DRDO is not considering an IR seeker based article, and how would such a system fit in Maitri's context?
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1. Does Indian Army have any airborne or air-assault corps? Are they moving towards these capability augmentation?
2. What is the production rate of HAL helicopters namely, HAL Dhruv and HAL Rudra? One report mentioned that IA AAC would require helicopters in hundreds for vertical-envelopment operations. So is the production matching up with the necessity?
3. Is RM considering any reorganisation of OFBs and DPSUs? What happened to suggestions of converting OFBs into multiple DPSUs? Also any news on HAL reorganisation?
4. There is practically absence of any news item on engine development programs. Diesel, GT and aviation engines were all being pushed. Any news on that?
Thanks
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWhat is your opinion on podded propulsion and azimuth thrusters? Related, which LPH/LHD is being considered seriously by IN and why? Which shipyard is in better position to get it? Is it really going to be 40,000 ton? If yes, then there are hardly any models available for design borrowing? Will it also be supported by LPDs?
Pipavav is participating in every tender possible but its financial position is not strong. Its also come up that Gandhi brothers were grabbing GOI orders with unbelievable prices just to show their order books to potential buyers. They have a track record for that and I believe they were the ones even pushing for 100% FDI in defence as well. I wonder whether they are the right candidates for the P-75I project? Also, as you mention that there will be large commonalities between P-75I and SSN project, isn't it better to go ahead with L&T with MDL cooperation? That will help develop two submarine shipyards at both coasts.
Any information on IN's requirement for replenishment/oiler ships?
Please give your opinion and point out errors in my line of thought, if any. Thanks a ton.
Prasun Da,
ReplyDeleteLooks like Make In India is not working as expected.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Lapsed-tenders-hurt-Modis-Make-in-India-defence-industry-push/articleshow/46846119.cms
Executives cited unrealistic quality demands from the Indian armed forces
I also heard that the Indo-Russian MTA project is stuck because the IAF wants an engine that can the IAF wants an engine that can relight at an altitude that is beyond the capabilities of the PS-90A76
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWhere did you get the figures for the LNG from Qatar? I know you do better than this:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/pakistan-close-to-deal-for-lng-supplies-from-qatar-for-power-plants-1424197572
Quote
" Nicholas Browne, a senior manager at Wood Mackenzie, an oil and gas consultancy, said typical pricing for Qatari LNG would be 14% to 15% of the price of oil. At 14%, Pakistan would be acquiring the fuel at $7 per million BTU, an attractive price, said Mr. Browne.
“From a buyer’s perspective, it is a great time to be in the market for LNG, in terms of both price and availability,” said Mr. Browne, because the price of oil has fallen and there is a substantial increase in supply expected in the next couple of years, as Australia and the U.S. bring new output onto the market. "
ARAB source:
http://gulftoday.ae/portal/b67839cb-7ead-4393-8461-248259e6560b.aspx
"14.85% off brent crude price"
PAK source:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/841333/pakistan-finalises-21b-lng-deal-with-qatar/
" Under the terms of the agreement, Qatar will supply Pakistan with 500 million cubic feet per day (mmcfd) of LNG under a pricing formula that translates to a current price of LNG of $7 per million British thermal units (mmbtu), "
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteI am not sure if its the same person replying today. Previously you had said you dont take Brig (Ret’d) Feroze Khan book seriously, that it was all fiction and now you are basing your points on it?
FYI I have the book and read it, could you point me to the relevant pages?
Pictures from inside PAC for proof: I like it ;-)
For those that dont know Hellfire II:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.army-technology.com/projects/hellfire-ii-missile/
Why 1000 HELLFIRES ? because PA always buys incrementally. Total requirement is for around 50 AH-1Z. In the coming days and months it will become clear who paid for these. The US military aid has not been utilised and Pak cannot spend it on F-16s.
The PA Mil-17 (various versions) are all civilian versions, the only thing they can have is drop tanks on the stub wings. The Mil-35 is for the SOFT (new assult force). Mil-35 is able to drop 8-9 troops and still hang around for long enough to provide serious firepower.
PA also know how good the Mil-24/35 are. If it wasnt for the stingers, they had pretty much wiped the floor with the Mujahideen.
raw13, nobody takes your pathetic country seriously. its a breeding ground for terrorists, has zero technical capability and a single indian city has more technology generation capability than whole of pakistan today..go figure.
ReplyDeleteissue is egypt is not prepared to put troops on the ground, unless pakistan does. iran FM will be in pakistan soon. pakistan is trying to play the peace maker. if pakistani troops do go in, pakistan has told saudi, they expect same compensation as egypt if not more. egypt already has recieved 17 billions. indian defence planning could all go out of the window.
ReplyDeleteVMT for the reply.
ReplyDelete1)Don't you think Development of J-15 will take a hit due to Ukrainian crises.
2) when will be the Design and specifications of IAC 2 frozen and when will its production start..
Recently on YouTube i came across something so rare that i didn't believe that it even existed.
ReplyDeleteI found a genuinely non-dillusional Pakistani.
His name's Tarek Fatah ,he calls himself an Indian born in Pakistan who is a Canadian citizen. Do check out this guy on YouTube. Ist so refreshing to hear a Pakistani Muslim talking sensibly and rationally
To BHASWAR: Presently, revenue expenditure accounts for 70% of annual defence spending, whereas capital expenditure is left with only 30%--a totally lop-sided sum game. It needs to be the other-way-around so that there’s never any shortage of force modernization funds. The term ‘Akula’ represents the Project 941 Akula SSBN, which is referred to as Typhoon by NATO. The correct term for the SSGN in service with the IN is Project 971 Shchuka-B. It is therefore best to stick to formal designations of the OEMs, instead of adopting the style of Tom Clancy buffs. The S-2/Arihant, S-3 & S-4 will eventually become SSGNs once the S-5, S-6 & S-7s SSBNs become available. Ocean recce satellites are far too expensive to acquire & operate & therefore a network of OTH-R backscatter radars on eastern & western seaboards will be a more cost-effective option. As for Maitri, what is most baffling is that while both the DRDO & MBDA open their mouths about the missile, no one talks about the radar-based fire-control system that’s reqd for such a missile. Which radar will be used for giving mid-course guidance cues to the Maitri missile? Has anyone paid heed to this requirement? Unless that is done, all talk about an SR-SAM is futile, since the SR-SAM is not equipped with any IIR seeker to make it a true fire-and-forget system. The same applies to any VL version of the Astra.
ReplyDeleteTo SK: 1) Nope. Only 50 Parachute Regiment & SF (Para) are airmobile-qualified. At most, therefore, there’s only a lightly armed airborne brigade that can be mustered by the IA. 2) Less than 30 per annum. Of course production needs to be ramped up to 36 per annum. For vertical envelopment operations, ALH-type helicopters won’t be enough. Mi-17V-5s with greater internal capacity are reqd. 3) Nothing at all. All concerned are twiddling their thumbs. The RM is dreaming about HAL setting up a helicopter assembly line in Goa, when logic dictates that it should be the assembly line of the US-2I amphibian that should be sited in Goa’s coastal belt. 4) Only HAL is developing the HTFE-25, while GTRE is gearing up for another round of airborne high-altitude flight-tests in Russia with a re-jigged Kaveri that makes extensive use of components made of ceramics-based alloys.
To RITURAJ: Navantia appears to be the most technically qualified to make an LPH offer that incorporates an integrated all-electric propulsion system. Contrary to fanboy speculation, it won’t reach a displacement of 40,000 tons at all. No LPDs are reqd. Between the LPD & LHD, the LPH solution is the best. Not only Pipavav, but all private-sector shipyards have to face unfair competition from the DPSU shipyards, since the former are not shielded from foreign currency valuation fluctuations, while the DPSU shipyards are fully shielded. In addition, private-sector shipyards have to buy the warship design & its IPRs that are quite expensive, whereas the DPSU shipyards don’t have to, since the Naval Design Bureau provides the design FOC. L & T’s design offer (whose IPR is Russia-owned) for SSN is a double-hulled solution, i.e. the same as the S-2/Arihant, which is not reqd since the IN prefers a single-hulled solution.
ReplyDeleteTo SUJOY MAJUMDAR: This is not surprising at all, since there’s no collective national will to think matters through in a logical, common-sensical manner. That’s exactly why the IAF incredulously clings on to hopes for the HJT-36 IJT while ignoring the reqmt for a LIFT like Tejas Mk1 tandem-seater, while Su-30MKI’s pilot & WSO have an inflight quarrel that leads to disastrous consequences! If anyone naively believes that ‘Make in India will take off by just striking strategic partnerships with friendly countries, then I’m afraid he/she is living in cuckooland. OEMs frfom advanced countries will set up shop in India only if India becomes an ‘alliance partner’ like the NATO member-states, Japan & Australia. Not until then. Also reqd is India’s signature to the Logistics Support Agreement, without which US-based OEMs won’t arrive in India. Finally, a chain of military R & D institutions needs to be set up like what China has done since the late 1970s. If existing regressive mindsets dictate that only the BARC & DRDO have a monopoly over nuclear reactor physics & reactor engineering & therefore, the IN has no need for its own nuclear engineering institutions of excellence, then there’s no hope of breaking out to seek out new horizons.
The only viable powerplant for the MRTA is a variant of the CFM56. Take it from me.
To RAW13: Haven’t you been following the revelations of your country’s Public Accounts Committee throughout last month? The newspaper report you’ve quoted is two months old. For accuracy, refer to the PAC’s reports tabled in your country’s Parliament. As for data on nuclear command-and-control, do reefer to the book EATING GRASS: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb by Feroz Hassan Khan, Chapter 17 starting from page 321 Pages 333 to 337 clearly explain all that I had touched upon earlier. If you stull can’t figure it out, then do revert back & I will spell it all out. PA’s Mi-171s & PAF’s Mi-171Shs all have hardpoints for carrying either external fuel tanks or rocket pods. PA’s Mi-171s are by no means civilian versions since most of them are armoured to MILSPEC standards.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@3.07PM: A good indicator of Pakistan’s intellectual capacity is the annual list of honours announced on the eve of March 23 every year. A simple check of that list year after year easily reveals who is being honoured & for what. Particularly interesting is the very small number of PhD-holders from PAEC, which in any case has a manpower force numbering only 350 & that too the great majority of them are engineers & technicians. Scientists devoted to fundamental or applied nuclear research won’t number more than 10.
To ABHIJIT: Will the GCC member-states & Arab League listen more to India or Pakistan? Compared to parasitic Pakistan, two-way trade between India & GCC is robust & is ever-growing. Egyptians on the other hand always joke about Pakistan by saying that “Pakistanis like to believe that Islam & Pakistan were both born together on August 14, 1947”. No right-minded GCC country will therefore ever consider such frivolous Pakistani pleas. Iran too knows only too well how to keep Pakistan at boiling point. And then there are the usual ‘Sarkari Jihadis’ based inside Pakistan who will spare no effort to embarrass Pakistan. Read this:
http://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/world/afghan-militants-vow-to-send-thousands-of-fighters-to-yemen/ar-AAazPpv
To MAYUR MANAPURE: China has been working wikth Ukraine on the J-15 project since the late 1990s & by now has successfully obtained each & every design blueprint required for fabricating all components of the J-15. 2) IAC-2’s design will take a long time to be frozen. Not before 2018.
ReplyDeleteTo JAY BHANUSHALI: His YouTube weblinks were posted in an earlier thread more than 2 years ago by ABS.
To RAD: As for Maitri, what is most baffling is that while both the DRDO & MBDA open their mouths about the missile, no one talks about the radar-based fire-control system that’s reqd for such a missile. Which radar will be used for giving mid-course guidance cues to the Maitri missile? Has anyone paid heed to this requirement? Unless that is done, all talk about an SR-SAM is futile, since the SR-SAM is not equipped with any IIR seeker to make it a true fire-and-forget system. The same applies to any VL version of the Astra.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThere is a hint of good sense previaling
http://idrw.org/more-men-or-better-technology-government-rethinking-strategy-to-counter-china-sources/
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your answers. The lack of an airborne/air assault corps in IA is quite worrisome. One would think that MoD would learn from the global developments but they are still stuck in 1970s.
1. I was wondering if you could explain reasons why Indian Air Force has come under quite substantial criticism in last few months. I don't care about fanboys and online warriors (some of them called IAF as full of air drivers, which is unfair and below the belt). But even mature scholars have started asking serious questions from IAF on its inventory policy, logistical chain management, training schedule and overall combat approach. It intrigues me as to why IAF has started losing its credibility in people's eyes?
2. As you explained above, L&T's SSN design is Russian origin and outdated. Then, who is in the lead for Scorpene style SSN manufacturing? Will it again be MDL, who is choke-a-bloc with orders?? It would be unfair making only one shipyard capable of sub manufacturing.
3. All three American helicopter orders seem to have gone onto backburner. S-70 for Navy was being claimed to be ready for sign when Obama was coming. Chinook and Apache were similarly threatening for price increase after March. It is April now, yet no news on conclusion. Is this country ever going to follow some deadline or everything is ad-hoc?
4. Also, if S-70 is going to be Navy's MRH then why another tender for 123 helicopters again? Wouldn't S-70 be better for inventory and logistic simplicity?
Honestly, its so frustrating to see this entire Indian approach to defence.
Hi prasun
ReplyDeleteI believe that the maitri has an active radar seeker so after the initial launch it would go active.I assumed that the aswhini aesa radar would be tied to this maitri system.Personally i believe it is better to go in for dual band IIR seeker of the mica missile as it wont be fooled by flares and as DIRCM are still far away.
Can the MOD take a su moto stance and order seahake torpedoes from atlas electronic.Rather than this cumbersome tender business which ultimately drags for years?.We seem to be getting subs without torpedoes.
does the barak 8 have IIR seeker as well ?, some reports suggest to the same. 5 bill $ for how many missiles??.
PrasunDa/All,
ReplyDeleteGitHub is providing FREE storage of large files. Plz find the link here
https://git-lfs.github.com/
Re Tarek Fatah those interested can follow him on Facebook, but you will soon realize that he is more of a maverick.
https://www.facebook.com/tarekfatah
BTW- There is a rumor doing the round that CIA isforcing Google to takeover Twitter, apparently because Twitter is not following "rules" set by the CIA.
Regards,
Vikram
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the response, will look at that chapter. With regards to PAC, well lets say the less said about it the better, they are like your newspapers:
One of the three links i gave you is from mid March and here is another:
http://www.dawn.com/news/1171218
this one is from 29 March:
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-3-309438-Pakistan-to-sign-Qatar-LNG-deal-in-April
This agreement was followed very closely in pak, why? because it was originally started by Zardari and was struck down due to high price and other regularities.
Open corruption is getting hard to get away with in pak now and nawaz is under extreme pressure.
IP(+C) will also get a go-head next week and the price of that will be lower per BTU.
Space bases ISR assets maybe expensive but we still need them. A whole fleet of carriers, capital ships and nuke boats is expensive too, under-utilizing said fleet because we short change ourselves on its eyes and ears would be foolish.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I would say it would be more than just simply expensive. It will require technology being developed on various levels in country. The ISR satellites themselves and a system to launch them as needed given the proliferation of ASAT weapons (China). This means that we will have to (like the Americans and Soviets) keep spare sats in stock and preferably have a reusable launcher at hand.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWhy r we still testing Dhanush when we are never going to us it?
http://idrw.org/dhanush-missile-successfully-test-fired-from-ship/
Thanks
Swarop
Prasun Sir
ReplyDeleteI have read in articles that were published a month or so back that the maitri is being offered with an IIR sensor . Perhaps the nature of the deal has changed since then.
Twitter's one of the main share holders is Saudi Prince Alwaleed. And other Saudi clans may have also some holdings. No wonder why India Twitter head is a Kashmiri Separatist, who openly advocate Kashmir to be taken over by Pakistan and prefers terrorist attacks against Armed Forces and inside India.
ReplyDeleteRaviN
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteI wonder why Pakistan wants to send the Indian People it rescued from Yemen to India in a special plane? Just for 11 people it is arranging special plane!
Does it want to have "Stockholm Syndrome" among the rescued people? :) Just curious!
RaviN
From the above readings, I suddenly understand that Pakistan666 is Neo-muslamic. Nayaa mulla nau namaaz.
ReplyDeleteSir. What Happened to Helina ? When will it enter service?
ReplyDeletePrasun Da,
ReplyDeleteJust came across a news item from an Indian journalist that Modi has decided to cancel the MMRCA deal and instead will offer France an option to sell 60 Rafales to India in a direct Govt to Govt deal.
http://nitinagokhale.blogspot.in/2015/04/big-breakthrough-in-rafale-deal-likely.html?spref=tw&utm_content=buffer18e75&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIn your opinion what has been the main prohibiting factor from that has led to Brahmos not being ordered by any country apart from India?
The RMN's Scorpenes are to undergo a refit thus year. Why is there a need for a refit after being in service for less than 5 years and apart from maintenance work on the hull; overhauling the engines and generators and replacing worn out equipment; what other work will be done as part of the refit?
In the event that MESMA is fitted to both boats; will it offer any major advantages given that the RMN operates its both mostly in a littoral environment?
Would you agree that despite its high price tag, that the Rafale will probably - due to national interests- be selected to replace the RMAF's Fulcrums?
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIt has been confirmed that NSM has been selected for the RMN's LCS. The NSM apparently has certain advantages over the MM-40. In your opinion should the RMN have continued with the MM-40 rather than going for a new missile that has only been ordered by 2 countries to date?
Given how dependent Pakistan is on Arab goodwill; what is the possibility that Pakistan will commit assets, including ground troops, to Yemen?
Would you agree that just like with Syria, the main reason Saudi and the other Sunni Gulf states are so determined to be involved in Yemen is to check mate Iran?
To VIKRAM GUHA: SHABBASH!!! At last the Prime Minister is being prime ministerial & as a last resort taking recourse to logical reasoning & common-sense. The next LOGICAL decision should be to authorise, after selection on a competitive bidding basis, a winning consortium of private-sector companies, to tie-up with Dassault Aviation, THALES, SNECMA Moteurs & MBDA for the sake of offering guaranteed through-life product-support & future upgrade options for this Rafale M-MRCA fleet. And since the Rafale, unlike other combat aircraft, does not require depot-level MRO, the IAF too should be instructed not to insist on doing any such work on any of its BRDs. 1st & 2nd line MRO can be done within the air base itself, while 3rd line MRO reqmts will be met by the consortium of private-sector companies that will also be required to set up bonded warehouses for stockpiling of all rotables & consumables, which in turn will ensure high levels of aircraft serviceability/availability rates.
ReplyDeleteFollow this above-outlined roadmap (which I had elaborated upon a few times before) & there will be no hiccups at all.
A G2G deal would be a welcome sign of maturity in the GOI. Not to mention it will be cheaper than building the planes in India.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, HAL is likely to throw a BIG hissy fit!
Although only 60 Rafales are unlikely to properly mitigate the IAF's force depletion issues.
Very bold and rightful decision by Modiji reg direct G-to-G purchase of 63 Rafale from OEM. This decision will pave the way not only for today but also for future. After passing through this impasse it will be easier to decide whether more of the Rafale are required or not. This will also facilitate the modified Su-30Mki, T-50/FGFA, Tejas-Mk2 or if possible the AMCA to systematically fulfill the projected futuristic needs and requirements.
ReplyDeleteBTW other related suggestions of Sri PKS shall also be applied word by word, so in future no one can say that why this was not told to us earlier.
To BHASWAR: HAL should not have any reason to behave like a sissy since it too can become part of the Indian industrial consortium & offer all its existing avionics workshop capabilities that, for instance, service the same kind of avionics like the SIGMA-95N RLG-INS that is on the Rafale, MiG-29UPG, Mirage 2000H/TH, Tejas Mk1 & Su-30MKI. 60 is a good start & follow-on orders can always be placed in tranches. This is what the French had proposed way back, albeit for 40 units at that time. But we Indians have this dirty & uncanny habit of smelling something foul in everything a Caucasian offers India & always trying to smell a rat when there is none, i.e. Indians can do no wrong & the wily Caucasian is always out to screw the Indian who is always without fail a holier-than-thou figure.
ReplyDeleteTo RAJESH MISHRA aka Mr RA 9: VMT. It will be a huge cost-saver, since all the funds reqd by HAL for its industrial modernisation would have had to come from the MoD. It is far better & cleverer to throw the ball at the court of the private-sector for acquiring the necessary capabilities for through-life product support, since the private-sector entities, unlike HAL, can raise funds at very short timeframes from the capital (stock) markets. HAL on the other hand can then focus on the Tejas Mk1/2 & LCA (Navy) Mk1/2 projects & also on the FGFA. And by 2018 HAL will also have its hands full with the Super Sukhoi upgrade project. In other words, HAL has nothing to cry about, since its order-books are overflowing.
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteYou seem very positive on FGFA T-50. Whereas almost everyone, starting from Shukla to even Janes Defense, are saying that T-50 has technological problems. The engine, radar and stealth features all are under circumspect and now even IAF has stopped talking to Russians about it. IAF team was even refused access to a burnt T-50 in Russia.
Given all this, will IAF still be eager to go for it? And, what is the capability of this aircraft globally?
To RITURAJ: IAF's reticence regarding the FGFA was due to the impasse on the Rafale deal. Now that matters have been sorted out, the IAF will resume its negotiations on FGFA procurement schedules. In any case, the FGFA is still in the R & D stage & unless & until the DRDO's DARE finalises the architecture of the non-Russian avionics package, there's nothing the Russians can do. Stealth features, inclusive of cloaking techniques, & radar performance have all been validated in the T-50 flying prototypes. Only the definitive turbofan is now awaited.
ReplyDeleteI'm highly amused by your belief that the claims of certain Shuklas & Jane's somehow enjoy greater credibility, when evidence-on-the-ground paints an altogether different picture.
Sir,
ReplyDeleteby ordering direct 60 planes, India would save some money, but what about the production technology that HAL would have got from France? HAL could have used the same technology in Tejas and AMCA?
@prasun da
ReplyDeletewhat happened to the answers from previous thread
btw
as i had predicted IA finally tested a Brahmos in Nicobar isles (possibly) but then withdrew the statement within hours, any guess why?
thanks
Joydeep Ghosh
Prasun Da,
ReplyDeleteAh !!! at last some nice intelligent decissions being made at a fast paced manner by the government ... now we make sure LCA MK2 would be really a MRCA for the airforce ,,, no more time wasted ... just go ahead keep the spares ready for some 25 years of operations and wartime scenarios ... in my opinion we should start using mig 21 as UCAVS for scenario say for each LCA MK1 and LCA MK2 2 mig 21's become the missile carrying ship so each mig 21 can launch say 1 small Air Nirbhay or 3 Long Range BVR and land back or carry the Jamming pods for the Mission where 3 Mig 21's would carry the Jamming POD and Jam the enemy and LCA MK 1 would lauch theier missile and come back and the radar cueing can be done by the AWACS ,
hi prasun
ReplyDelete5 bill$ for the maitri ?. i would rather buy 40 more rafales ! and go for the c-dome mod for sr sams requirement. Are the germans reliable as the french when it comes to defense.? They should be going mad with envy about the multi bill doll deals with france. A good start would be manufacturing torpedoes.
PrasunDa,
ReplyDeleteHere is an old document(2006) that compares the cost of procurement of fighter aircraft. However, they do not say how they arrived at this figure
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf
Re this P-75i deal I think that GOI is making some un necessary comments. Parikar said in an interview to Japan Times that India is very interested in the Soryu class submarine and this is why MoD is asking Japn to enter the P 75i competition.
Prasun da,
ReplyDeletequite funny indeed. After having an extravaganza of MMRCA contract from 2007 -2015 and all the hype and hue, now the government decides it will go for off-the shelf purchase of Rafales.
Indeed financially it sounds very sound.
To my earlier query regarding the same, that can we purchase a lower number of Rafales, just to keep the deep strikes possible but at the same time not burning our pockets, you had replied that the figure 126 is arrived at by necessity and it would go to 189 eventually.
in this context a mere 63 (4 squadrons?) would be grossly insufficient. Is there a possibility that on a later date we can go for additional numbers, like say 32 more with the same conditions?
Having to maintain just 63 fighters doesnot make any sense. You yourselves say the logistic nightmare.
Ofcourse i understand beggars are not choosers and this is what we could get in budget. But my question is why this wisdom was elusive so far. Had it been conceived some time back we would have Rafale squadrons flying now!!!
In another aspect, like fighter aircrafts do the submarines also have IOC and FOC. The context is that if scorpene sub is inducted to Navy, from the day 1 is it operational?
thanks,
Sreenivas R.
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteNope, Its not my belief in Shukla or Janes or anyone.
Its a virtual psychological and media war going on between French Rafale and their supporters and Russian FGFA and their supporters. It has become very difficult to differentiate between a real fact and a manufactured fact, when everyone has been claiming that they are "seeing" MoD documents !!! I wonder what Mr Ajit Doval is doing when all these documents get out?
The FGFA and Rafale shall not be really comparable as they both belong to different generations. However the Indian lobby was putting the pressures on Rafale by praising the Su-30Mki & FGFA to gain the maximum possible techno-commercial advantages from Rafale. On the other hand, the Rafale lobby was drilling the FGFA to outsmart them and get the Rafale order through. Most judiciously Modiji selected the best possible optimum path available. Now the level playing field is available for everyone i.e. MOD, HAL, IAF, DRDO, French, Russians and Indian private sectors to show their best and most competitive. Purely based on their performance the exact shape of the future of IAF will be decided.
ReplyDeletePrasun Da,
ReplyDeleteLast heard the IAF had not finalized the specs for the Super Sukhoi 30.
Any idea when these spec will be finalized and an order placed for these aircraft?
Thanks,
Sujoy
It is 36 Rafales in flyaway condition off-the-shelf from Dassault Aviation, & not 60 or 63. 32 single-seaters & four tandem-seaters.
ReplyDeleteSir, The deal is yet to be signed. It has just been announced. And is it separate from the original tender ?
ReplyDeleteTo AKASH: Of course it is different from the original tender. Contract will be signed in New Delhi within 15 days from today. All procurement contracts for the Govt of India are always signed on Indian soil & that too ONLY by the Defence Secretary. No Indian PM or RM has ever signed any procurement contract so far, as per the gazetted manual called 'Rules of Business of the Govt of India'.
ReplyDeleteCongratulations to IAF. Modiji will not let the country down.
ReplyDeleteSir,As per this contract when will deliveries start? And what is the situation on the original 126 Rafale deal ? Any news on the per unit cost? Dassault has its hands full with Egyptian orders as of now .
ReplyDeleteDeliveries will start within 36 months.The original procurement plan will be overhauled. Most probably the next tranch of 36 will be in semi-knocked-down condition. Dassault, unlike HAL isn't state-owned & therefore can ramp-up production-levels rather quickly. Unit-cost will will depend on all this, plus the cost of procuring spare engines, a flight simulator, a cockpit procedures trainer & a maintenance simulator. All of this will comprise the order for the first tranche of 36 aircraft.
ReplyDeleteWhen shipyard will produce project 75i submarines. Which type do you feel will be selected
ReplyDelete