Indian Navy Developments & Discussions (16 Viewers)

[Oannattar]

View: https://x.com/indiannavy/status/1930988630396240022

 

[FalconSlayers]

This is the #VISRAX, developed by DRDO’s Bengaluru-based Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS). Engineered to be scalable across a wide spectrum of ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) applications, VISRAX [Versatile ISR AESA X-Band] is a next-generation, software-defined Active Electronically Scanned Array #AESA transceiver. According to DRDO sources, VISRAX will form the technological cornerstone of the airborne maritime surveillance radar destined for integration onboard the C-295-based #MMMA (Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft) and #MRMR (Medium-Range Maritime Reconnaissance) platforms of the Indian Navy and Indian Coast Guard. Furthermore, the system is being actively proposed for a variety of emerging UAV-based ISR roles, reinforcing its adaptability and mission-readiness across domains.#Defence #MadeInIndia #DRDO #TMH #MilTech #DefTech #TMHTech
@DRDO_India

@tarmakmedia



View: https://x.com/writetake/status/1932380450724479317

 

[shade2]

This is the #VISRAX, developed by DRDO’s Bengaluru-based Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS). Engineered to be scalable across a wide spectrum of ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) applications, VISRAX [Versatile ISR AESA X-Band] is a next-generation, software-defined Active Electronically Scanned Array #AESA transceiver. According to DRDO sources, VISRAX will form the technological cornerstone of the airborne maritime surveillance radar destined for integration onboard the C-295-based #MMMA (Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft) and #MRMR (Medium-Range Maritime Reconnaissance) platforms of the Indian Navy and Indian Coast Guard. Furthermore, the system is being actively proposed for a variety of emerging UAV-based ISR roles, reinforcing its adaptability and mission-readiness across domains.#Defence #MadeInIndia #DRDO #TMH #MilTech #DefTech #TMHTech
@DRDO_India

@tarmakmedia

View attachment 38941

View: https://x.com/writetake/status/1932380450724479317

So C-295 MPA is indeed happening, I assumed Admirals decided to ignore it in favor of using that budget for submarines or P18 destroyers.

 

[FalconSlayers]

So C-295 MPA is indeed happening, I assumed Admirals decided to ignore it in favor of using that budget for submarines or P18 destroyers.

When the final assembly line in India, you have to keep it running to use it to full potential. Which is why Navy and Coast Guard are going for it, and I hope they exploit the airframe for Naval SIGINT/ELINT platform or even an aerial refueller which Navy simply doesn't have while it will be operating almost 4 squadrons of fighter aircrafts.

 

[randombully]

When the final assembly line in India, you have to keep it running to use it to full potential. Which is why Navy and Coast Guard are going for it, and I hope they exploit the airframe for Naval SIGINT/ELINT platform or even an aerial refueller which Navy simply doesn't have while it will be operating almost 4 squadrons of fighter aircrafts.

Naval land based awacs to support carrier group.
Atleast 6-8 c295 based awacs should be procured to support two carrier battle group,
can squeeze to 3-4 c295 based awacs if only carrier group active at a time.

 

[snakeeyes07]

Naval land based awacs to support carrier group.
Atleast 6-8 c295 based awacs should be procured to support two carrier battle group,
can squeeze to 3-4 c295 based awacs if only carrier group active at a time.

I don't know why IAF also doesn't consider C-295 based AEW&C? C-295 has endurance of 11+ hours and even with AEW&C modifications it should match Saab 2000 endurance of 9.5-10 hours.

 

[randombully]

I don't know why IAF also doesn't consider C-295 based AEW&C? C-295 has endurance of 11+ hours and even with AEW&C modifications it should match Saab 2000 endurance of 9.5-10 hours.
View attachment 39025

It's a turboprop, max altitude is 30k feet.
Ej-145 max altitude is 37k feet.
Meaning, c295 generally cruises below 30k feet.
Max cruising speed of c295 is 0.38-0.4 mach
Max cruising speed of ej-145 is 0.8 mach.

Altitude also helps the radar horizon.

Both of these metrics will reduce when jets are loaded with huge radar on top.


And also if IAF did managed to get ej-145 or similar one, logistics and maintinence will become easier, it also will ge easier to integrate netra mk1a radar into ej-145 as already has prior experience.

I suggested C295 for navy mainly because of its high endurance( 11-13 hours) over 5 hours endurance of ej145.
The advantage of altitude and speed of ej145 are not worth it in naval domain, when it can't even have decent loitering time over carrier group to support, as it would need to reach the carrier group first from land based airfields and then return back after mission

Another thing was also to keep cost in mind.

If navy is willing to spend more then netra mk2 based on airbus a321 would be better to buy than c295 based awacs, similar endurance but higher altitude and speed, bigger more powerful radar too.

But a321 is not a dedicates maritime plane, so to make able to handle prolong exposer to oceanic conditions would further require modifications, and unlike c295, it doesn't have short takeoff and landing capabilities.
( the islands c295 based awacs will operate can be be attacked by china, so it's a good ability to have.)

 

[snakeeyes07]

It's a turboprop, max altitude is 30k feet.
Ej-145 max altitude is 37k feet.
Meaning, c295 generally cruises below 30k feet.
Max cruising speed of c295 is 0.38-0.4 mach
Max cruising speed of ej-145 is 0.8 mach.

Altitude also helps the radar horizon.

Both of these metrics will reduce when jets are loaded with huge radar on top.


And also if IAF did managed to get ej-145 or similar one, logistics and maintinence will become easier, it also will ge easier to integrate netra mk1a radar into ej-145 as already has prior experience.

I suggested C295 for navy mainly because of its high endurance( 11-13 hours) over 5 hours endurance of ej145.
The advantage of altitude and speed of ej145 are not worth it in naval domain, when it can't even have decent loitering time over carrier group to support, as it would need to reach the carrier group first from land based airfields and then return back after mission

Another thing was also to keep cost in mind.

If navy is willing to spend more then netra mk2 based on airbus a321 would be better to buy than c295 based awacs, similar endurance but higher altitude and speed, bigger more powerful radar too.

But a321 is not a dedicates maritime plane, so to make able to handle prolong exposer to oceanic conditions would further require modifications, and unlike c295, it doesn't have short takeoff and landing capabilities.
( the islands c295 based awacs will operate can be be attacked by china, so it's a good ability to have.)

I was thinking of C-295 vs EJ145 due to cost per unit advantage. I don't know about exact cost difference but making an educated guess. Maybe for the price of 6 EJ145 Netra mk1a we can have 8-9 C-295 Netra mk1a. Logistics advantage will be with C-295 due to local manufacturing. PAF has been making it work with Saab 2000, C-295 AEW&C should be very similar to it in performance.

Anyways, I think IAF need more AEW&Cs for the entire front (from Arunachal to Gujarat) and critical points along the coast. So, there is room for C295 based AEW&Cs even when acquiring 6 EJ145 Netra mk1a and 6 A319 Netra mk2.

Apart from other advantages for EJ145 you mentioned, another is higher speed increasing defensibility as it move in and out of vulnerable zones in shorter durations.

 

[randombully]

I was thinking of C-295 vs EJ145 due to cost per unit advantage. I don't know about exact cost difference but making an educated guess. Maybe for the price of 6 EJ145 Netra mk1a we can have 8-9 C-295 Netra mk1a. Logistics advantage will be with C-295 due to local manufacturing. PAF has been making it work with Saab 2000, C-295 AEW&C should be very similar to it in performance.

Anyways, I think IAF need more AEW&Cs for the entire front (from Arunachal to Gujarat) and critical points along the coast. So, there is room for C295 based AEW&Cs even when acquiring 6 EJ145 Netra mk1a and 6 A319 Netra mk2.

Apart from other advantages for EJ145 you mentioned, another is higher speed increasing defensibility as it move in and out of vulnerable zones in shorter durations.

Na.
Ej 145 is cheaper.
Deal for 7 netra mk1a is 9000 crore.
Per unit for netra mk1a will be 180 million per unit then.

Deal for 15 maritime reconnaissance planes based on c295 for coast guard and navy is worth 3.5 billion.
Per unit cost is 233 million.

Now awacs systems cost lot more than maritime systems.
And no. Advantage is with maritime jets here

Embraer ERJ-145LR for Sale - Globalair.com

Embraer ERJ-145LR for sale - Globalair.com, The Market Place for Serious Buyers and Sellers of Aircraft around the Globe.

www.globalair.com

Ej 145 can go as cheap as 4 million per jet for older jets
C295 is brand new.

 

[liberalredditor]

Iaf gave a pretty solid reason for not choosing c295 for awacs purposes, i dont remember

c295 can be used as rapid dragon platform to release swarms

C295 if ordered by navy can be used from deck of catobar carrier with slight modification to fuselage, landing gears and underbelly but french will milk us for "india specific enhancements"

C295 can also be used for some time as a platform for indigenous p8i level asw aircraft till the time we dont get our rta 90

When we get our rta 90, it would be a game changer, rest depends on csir nal that are they serious with the project or not

 

[shade2]

India Shifts From Nomination To Tendering For Major Defence Projects | Profit Exclusive

This policy change is expected to benefit private players like Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Swan Defence and Heavy Industries Ltd., which have underutilised shipyards capable of building ships.

www.ndtvprofit.com

India Shifts From Nomination To Tendering For Major Defence Projects | Profit Exclusive

Focus of article is over DPSU shipyards vs Private ones like L&T and Pipavav/Swan
Submarines are not included, makes sense with the MDL-HSL deal to make HSL as #2 sub builder in the country

 

[IRDefense]

c295 can be used as rapid dragon platform to release swarms

Do we have rapid dragon type system in place or being developed?

 

[vampyrbladez]

Indian Navy should go for C-295 based MMRA (Naval AWACS) similar to E-2D Hawkeye.

US may proceed with more E-2D Hawkeye over the planned E-7 Wedgetail replacement for the E-3 sentry due to cost concerns and basing flexibility.

This is where the E-2D comes in. MacDonnell then added, “Ma’am, we do have in the budget $150 million in FY26 [Fiscal Year 2026] for a joint expeditionary E-2D unit with five dedicated E-2Ds, and the budget also funds for additional E-2Ds to fill the near-term gap at $1.4 billion.”

The E-2 also has less range and is far slower than both the E-3 and E-7. This means longer transit times, and the aircraft doesn’t fit in as seamlessly with the jet-centric operations for the counter-air mission the service currently enjoys. The E-2D’s AN/APY-9 radar from Lockheed Martin is hugely capable, but many of its other advanced data fusion and relay systems are unique to the Navy. These systems would either be stripped or just left unused for USAF-focused operations. It’s also possible that other systems will replace them, but this will cost money and take time to integrate and field.

Hawkeyes, being turboprop aircraft, also operate at lower altitudes, giving their radar, radio systems, and electronic surveillance suites reduced line-of-sight, limiting their range and fidelity at distance for some targets and surveillance application, in some cases.

Then there is the aerial refueling issue. The E-2D has gained this ability relatively recently, which expands its endurance. Typical missions can now last over seven hours. However, the aircraft uses the Navy-preferred probe-and-drogue refueling method, not the boom and receptacle one favored by the USAF. The USAF’s KC-46 tankers do have a hose and drogue system and some of the service’s KC-135Rs have podded hose and drogue systems. Otherwise, they require a basket attachment to their boom, often called the ‘Iron Maiden’ or ‘Wrecking Ball,’ due to its rigid metal frame and potential to smack into and damage airframes. This system makes the KC-135R useless for refueling receptacle-equipped aircraft when it is fitted. The E-2D also refuels lower-and-slower than jet aircraft. All these issues are not ‘show-stoppers,’ but they are ones that will impact operational planning and flexibility.

E-2 Hawkeye Replaces USAF E-3 Sentry, E-7 Cancelled In New Budget

The E-2D is far smaller than the E-7 and lacks some of its abilities, but it can fly from austere forward bases where the E-7 cannot.

www.twz.com

 

[liberalredditor]

can the c295 be used from carrier?? catobar mode?

 

[randombully]

N

can the c295 be used from carrier?? catobar mode?

It can from larger carriers with some modifications( more powerful engines, folding wings, strengthened fuselage and landinggears)

 

[liberalredditor]

our next carrier will be a vikrant reorder or a 65k/75k ton catobar carrier?

but nimitz as 100k ton uses 2x 550mw then our catobar carrier would require like 800mw somehow,
can a submarine reactor be used for carriers??

 

[randombully]

our next carrier will be a vikrant reorder or a 65k/75k ton catobar carrier?

but nimitz as 100k ton uses 2x 550mw then our catobar carrier would require like 800mw somehow,
can a submarine reactor be used for carriers??

Don't know.
Though I think we should have gone with French.
Basically, give reorder of modified vikrant this year, construction beginning in 2027.

And then collaborate with French on future carrier,
Currently they are going for a 75k ton carrier, nuclear, emals, construction to begin in 2031-2032.
We can join them, and if they willing to change the plans from a 75k ton carrier to
4 65k ton carriers( 2 for india, 2 for france) with construction in 2032, service entery in ~2040.
Joint development, Though not on an aircraft carrier, but We do have experience in putting a nuclear reactor in a sub, plus can work on emals systems jointly.

So by 2040, we can have two 45k ton vikrant class carrier( newer one already made with modifications for drones, older one also modified separately) and two 65k ton catobar carrier( Vikramaditya retired.)
Total 4 carrier operational.

And French can have 2 65k catobar, nuclear ton carrier operational, so one carrier is operational at all times.

@BON PLAN , what do you think?

 

[shade2]

Are India and Pakistan preparing for a naval face-off in a future conflict?

Recent signals from both governments have underscored how their navies could play a central role in their next face-off.

www.aljazeera.com

Author is Paki btw

Some Paki exfart there concedes that PN is only a coastal defence force
Unlike India's blue water navy

The author lies however than PN has 8 submarines

 

[shade2]

View: https://x.com/IN_HQENC/status/1933457426080281025

When they show the 3d model spin in this, is it just me or does the hull resemble Kamorta class hull?

 

[rohitb3]

View: https://x.com/IN_HQENC/status/1933457426080281025

When they show the 3d model spin in this, is it just me or does the hull resemble Kamorta class hull?

was waiting to see it clearly. But cluttered deck. Disappointed