Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.


Xsizor

Junior Member
Registered Member
It's too big to be called non existent. Lot of Indian civil ships & Naval ships are made in India.

Here I agree.

Stealth is generated from design and EW capabilities. Stealth is clear from the design.

Absolute trolling with nearly no knowledge about the particular topic.

I just look logged in on Sinodefence after a long time to say high to everyone. But seems that just like other forums, it too has become an echo chamber. Much more humble as moderators are still very rational. But agenda pushers haven't left any place. Sad.....

Anyways, I will start on posting again when I am able to spare time.
Regards
To call out someone a troll just because you can't digest their opinion is immature. I tried to reason out why there is a clearly visible difference between the exterior build quality of the frontline destroyers of 3 countries above. Indian shipbuilding industry is very small. They don't feature in any list of prominent shipbuilding nations. Afaik, Indian shipbuilders are mainly undertaking government projects. As for the Indian destroyers, I don't know about the technology housed within such shoddy hulls BUT since India imports a lot of critical technology from other nations, i'd assume them to be a lot better in that area.

Stealth isn't clear from just design. Tolerances and attention to details regarding acoustics and vibrations play an important deal in stealth of submarines. If the exterior of the frontline destroyers are like this then it'd be hard to convince anyone that India, with little experience in submarine shipbuilding ( let along nuclear submarines) would churn out SSBN of atleast mediocre quality.
Your point being that judgement as a troll is therefore rubbish.

My third point was that Russian engineers would be facing difficulties in "equipping" new indian hands with necessary skill. It is a fact that nuclear reactors and subsystems used in Indian SSBN are of Russian origin or has been made with assistance from Russia with Russian specialists cooperating with the build. Are you implying that Indian technicians require no support from Russia or any other country to build an SSBN ? India would not be building Scorpenes ( a diesel electric) without the paid assistance of French engineers of DCNS . Enough a point.

This thread sure can turn into an echo chamber BUT hey, since you are here after a LONG time, i'd be not wrong in assuming that you'd invest some time to make this thread a bit balanced ?
 

Tri Nitro Toluene

Junior Member
Registered Member
To call out someone a troll just because you can't digest their opinion is immature.
Making an opinion based on prejudice isn't sane. And mixing it humourous exaggeration is what we call trolling.

Either you have edited your post or I was drunk at that time to reply as took the post in that tone. If latter is true, my apologies, if not I maintain what I said.
I tried to reason out why there is a clearly visible difference between the exterior build quality of the frontline destroyers of 3 countries above. Indian shipbuilding industry is very small. They don't feature in any list of prominent shipbuilding nations.
May not be prominent but its still far from being called non existent. India lags behind Western World, Russia & East Asia.

We take around 10 years for making a ship right now which needs 5 years on global average.

And all its limted success is attributed to India being lower middle income country relatively new to defense industry.
Ahead of most countries of its own class but because of size while lags behind other major powers.
Afaik, Indian shipbuilders are mainly undertaking government projects. As for the Indian destroyers, I don't know about the technology housed within such shoddy hulls BUT since India imports a lot of critical technology from other nations, i'd assume them to be a lot better in that area.
There are lot of technologies produced India to be "good enough" and used by armed forces. When Indian armed forces have money for better goodies and homegrown stuff is not upto mark, they go for import. In case they can't buy that out because of global restrictions like in case of strategic weapons, they get it from home.
Gradually, share of imported material on Indian inventory has been falling and defense exports have increased by 6 times in last 3 years.
Industry will mature once it gets used to new projects it receives.
Stealth isn't clear from just design. Tolerances and attention to details regarding acoustics and vibrations play an important deal in stealth of submarines.
That is why DCNS was involved. We will build submarines on our own if none agrees for TOT. TOT is a guarantee of technology and over time, India will become independent. As of now, idea is to buy foreign submarine design with the condition that the design will be completely owned by India and India can manufacture unlimited submarines once the 6 submarine contract of P75I is completed.

There are some design risks as making submarine with AIP, missiles etc will need some design change from scorpene. So, it may cause delays. India currently has enough money to spare and hence prefers to have this risk free path. If none agrees, then India will make its own submarines.

Otherwise, we will keep gaining technology from others till we have enough.
If the exterior of the frontline destroyers are like this then it'd be hard to convince anyone that India, with little experience in submarine shipbuilding ( let along nuclear submarines) would churn out SSBN of atleast mediocre quality.
Mediocre quality isn't what I'm talking about. Submarines need even more special welding techniques. Design still plays a great role in stealth & roles of vibrations & projections appear thereafter. Signature is low, not that quite however.
My third point was that Russian engineers would be facing difficulties in "equipping" new indian hands with necessary skill. It is a fact that nuclear reactors and subsystems used in Indian SSBN are of Russian origin or has been made with assistance from Russia with Russian specialists cooperating with the build. Are you implying that Indian technicians require no support from Russia or any other country to build an SSBN ? India would not be building Scorpenes ( a diesel electric) without the paid assistance of French engineers of DCNS . Enough a point.
Probably its framing on previous post tempted me.
The russian instructors might be having a tough time coaching new hands.
There are actually a couple of countries including PRC whose military industry is based on USSR/Russian stuff.
Hence, "tough time" particularly for one doesn't mean anything.
This thread sure can turn into an echo chamber BUT hey, since you are here after a LONG time, i'd be not wrong in assuming that you'd invest some time to make this thread a bit balanced ?
Updated, I'm not here to balance.

There are rarely any active Indian members on this forum. I may be one. And since this forum doesn't have flame baiting problem what I face elsewhere, I will get a better platform to post too.
 

FactsPlease

Junior Member
Registered Member
First IAF AH-64E (I) handed over -
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
1) Is that a long-bow standard?
2) I believe this marks the latest 1st-line combat equipment provision from USA, other than P8I and M777 gun. Now that F-21, F-18 (naval version), and aircraft carrier design, including EMALS and nuclear engine, will be next big items to watch.
 

gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
I doubt it is a long-bow type since I do not see the mast radar. Then again in some variants you can add the radar on the field.
The US can't even get EMALS working for themselves yet. I agree that the Super Hornet would be a good purchase.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
1) Is that a long-bow standard?
2) I believe this marks the latest 1st-line combat equipment provision from USA, other than P8I and M777 gun. Now that F-21, F-18 (naval version), and aircraft carrier design, including EMALS and nuclear engine, will be next big items to watch.
E model is classified as the Apache Guardian. It has Longbow was the AH64D model.
I doubt it is a long-bow type since I do not see the mast radar. Then again in some variants you can add the radar on the field.
The US can't even get EMALS working for themselves yet. I agree that the Super Hornet would be a good purchase.
The radar is removable. Without the radar an Apache Longbow would still be called an Apache Longbow. However the Indians didn’t buy Apache Longbows they bought Apache Guardians.
As to EMALS it works it’s just ironing out the wrinkles. Like any new technology it’s loaded with issues to be solved.

However India seems to have dropped the N from their CVN program.
 

Mohsin77

Junior Member
Registered Member
This Apache deal has been riddled with incompetence from the start, since the MoD decided to give these beasts to the Air Force instead of the Army:

"The Indian Air Force is refusing to give up control of its AH-64 Apache helicopter gunships, insisting these helicopters are crucial for certain air combat missions (attacking air defense radars and other helicopters). The army generals are furious and demanding that the government set the air force straight. "

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


... what a total waste.

E model is classified as the Apache Guardian. It has Longbow was the AH64D model.

The radar is removable. Without the radar an Apache Longbow would still be called an Apache Longbow. However the Indians didn’t buy Apache Longbows they bought Apache Guardians.
The Guardian has Longbow capability; however the Indians bought less Longbows than the Apaches. For the 6 ship order, they only bought 4 radars. I'm guessing the same proportion applied to the 22 ship order. I'm guessing they did it because they plan on swapping the radars off the ships in maintenance... at least that's the only explanation that won't be completely ridiculous. Since the top mounted Longbow is the most important part of the Apache!
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
The Guardian has Longbow capability; however the Indians bought less Longbows than the Apaches. For the 6 ship order, they only bought 4 radars. I'm guessing the same proportion applied to the 22 ship order. I'm guessing they did it because they plan on swapping the radars off the ships in maintenance... at least that's the only explanation that won't be completely ridiculous. Since the top mounted Longbow is the most important part of the Apache!
You have missed a detail here. The Gaurdian has data links as such a single Longbow radar equipped Apache can beam its data to its unequiped siblings. They can use the Longbow birds like scouts.
In the high hot of the Hindu Kush even Apache helicopters get winded not deploying longbow radars saves some energy for the lift capacity of the helicopter.

Little known fact the AH1Z Vipers that have been sitting in the US boneyards for Pakistan also can mount longbow radars. It’s just they use a wing tip station as opposed to the mast.
 

Top