Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[rishivashista13]

http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/58122dcb788e3/mp4.mp4
Empty your mind , and FEEL the Submarine ...............

Sent from my Micromax Q380 using Tapatalk

 

[WolfPack86]

Blueprint To Bluewater: The Indian Navy’s Journey From Carriers To Supercarriers

• If India is to face off against the threat from foreign navies, it needs carriers – several of them. A navy without airpower is a sitting duck.
• The Indian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 states that the future fleet will be based on three carrier battle groups (CBGs).
• Although the old dream of making the Indian Ocean an India’s ocean is no longer part of the navy’s doctrine, dominating the blue waters is part of the plan.

In August 1947, within a week of India attaining independence from British rule, an Outline Plan for the reorganisation and development of the Indian Navy was prepared by Naval Headquarters. In its preamble, the plan paper said:

India will never attain security or pre-eminence till she is in a position to maintain her position against every aggressor....A navy commanding the respect of the world is not a luxury for her but a vital necessity.
Two years later, naval strategist Keshav Vaidya wrote in The Naval Defence of India that the newly independent country should try to be the undisputed power over the waters of the Indian Ocean. The Indian Navy, he emphasised, should become “an invincible navy to defend not only her coast but her distant oceanic frontiers”.

The lofty ambitions of India’s strategists were, however, brought down to earth by the political leadership which was adamantly opposed to beefing up the military. Barring a few, like Deputy Prime Minister Sardar Patel, who supported a “strong navy”, the Gandhians, including Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, had an aversion for the military.

Luckily for India, Britain had a partly built aircraft carrier – a legacy of the Second World War – which the Royal Navy was looking to offload. Governor General Louis Mountbatten prevailed upon Nehru to buy the 16,000-tonne vessel. Mountbatten hoped that by offering it a British carrier, the Indian Navy could be persuaded into becoming the bulwark of a Commonwealth naval alliance. Plus, the Royal Navy would pocket some cash in the bargain.

India did not toe the line on alliances with its former oppressors, but it agreed to buy the vessel. So, instead of being consigned to the scrapyard, the warship was completed and commissioned into the Indian Navy on 4 March 1961 as the INS Vikrant. And that’s how India achieved the miracle of a poor country acquiring an aircraft carrier.


Carrier strategy pays off ::

The Indian Navy’s early investment in the carrier paid handsome dividends. In the 1971 War, INS Vikrant, supported by just two warships, bottled up the Pakistan Navy’s eastern wing in Chittagong harbour. More than 97,000 Pakistan Army troops were planning to escape on board these ships, which were to make a dash for the open sea. Vikrant’s vigil – and the sinking of several Pakistani merchant vessels by its jets – hastened the largest capitulation of troops since General Paulus’ Sixth Army surrendered in Stalingrad in 1943.

The Indian Navy received another bonus, thanks to its flagship. In November 1971, well over a month before the declaration of war, the Pakistan Navy had despatched an American-gifted submarine named PNS Ghazi – with the mission to sink the Indian carrier.

When Indian intelligence got wind of the Ghazi plan, the navy hid the carrier in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands – over 1,500 km from the mainland. The navy then built an elaborate ruse that lured the Ghazi. First, it positioned its largest warship, the INS Rajput, off Visakhapatnam harbour and created heavy radio traffic that mimicked the Vikrant’s. Secondly, the port authorities placed huge orders for food and supplies that would normally be required when a ship of Vikrant’s capacity sails in.

The Ghazi took the bait and started laying mines in the port’s channel. But the hunter became the hunted on 4 December that year, when it blew up and sank in the harbour. While the Indian Navy claimed that it was INS Rajput’s depth charges that caused the explosion, the Pakistanis say their submarine was destroyed by an internal explosion. Whatever caused the explosion, the Indian Navy definitely got good bang for its carrier.


No power like sea power ::

Despite the proliferation of new carrier missiles from Russia and China – which has spent billions on the development of a ballistic anti-carrier weapon – the carrier continues to inspire awe. “The aircraft carrier in the 21st century continues to remain the most conspicuous symbol of a nation’s maritime power,” says former Commodore and author C Uday Bhaskar. “Nothing projects raw combat power like these citadels of maritime power.”

In the 2009 report ‘China’s Maritime Rights and Navy’, Senior Captain Li Jie, an analyst at the Chinese navy’s strategic think tank, Naval Research Institute, agrees: “No great power that has become a strong power has achieved this without developing carriers.”

If India is to face off against the threat from foreign navies, it needs carriers – several of them. Providing security cover to its maritime trade with land-based airpower solutions would require a huge number of aircraft. It would also require treaties – that may be revoked – for landing on foreign bases.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
A navy without airpower is a sitting duck. Says Bhaskar:
Can India afford not to have aircraft carriers for air-defence and anti-submarine roles? The survival of the surface fleet in the modern world is highly suspect without carriers for their defence. Technology has altered the equation and the carrier is (now) needed to protect the surface fleet.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

But despite Vikrant’s stellar performance, India’s political leadership did not shed its continental mindset. No effort was made to construct a carrier at home, and India continued to rely on hand-me-down carriers from Britain (INS Viraat in 1987) and Russia (INS Vikramaditya in 2013).

The upshot: the navy is down to a single carrier after Viraat sailed into retirement last year. Worse, the sole carrier, Vikramaditya, is currently in dry dock, which means if war breaks out, the navy will have to manage without its 44,000-tonne flagship.


New breed of Carriers ::

The Indian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 for the first time states that the future fleet will be based on three carrier battle groups (CBGs). This means if one is undergoing refit or repairs, there will always be two carriers available – for the eastern and western seaboards.

The first of India’s new-generation carriers is the 40,000-tonne Vikrant class IAC I, or Indigenous Aircraft Carrier I. It will feature STOBAR (short takeoff but arrested recovery) and ski-jumps. The carrier was floated out of its dry dock at Cochin Shipyard Ltd (CSL) on 29 December 2011 and launched on 12 August 2013.

Ship construction involves the following stages: production, keel laying, launch, outfitting, basin trials, contractor sea trials and final machinery trials. Currently, INS Vikrant is at the outfitting stage, and the final bill is estimated at $3.76 billion.

While INS Vikrant will be smaller than India’s current flagship, INS Vikramaditya, the next vessel, INS Vishal (IAC II), will be a 65,000-tonne beast. This new supercarrier will purportedly feature significant design changes, including possible nuclear propulsion and catapult-assisted takeoff but arrested recovery (CATOBAR) and the electromagnetic aircraft launch systems (EMALS) from the United States (US).

In the summer of 2015, Russia, France, the United Kingdom (UK) and the US received requests for technical and costing proposals regarding the design of India’s new aircraft carrier. The two top contenders are Russia and France, given that India operates aircraft from both countries. However, the dark horse appears to be the US, which could nose ahead with its EMALS.


Russian Shtorm ::

Russia has offered its Shtorm supercarrier design. Powered by either nuclear or conventional propulsion, the ship can remain at sea for 120 days and sail up to 30 knots or 55kph. It can accommodate a crew of up to 5,000 and can carry 80-90 deck-based aircraft.

There are two problems with this offer. One, Russia has never built a nuclear-powered carrier before, although it has plenty of experience in building other types of large nuclear-powered vessels, including submarines. Second, the 1,082 foot long Shtorm will have a displacement of 1,00,000 tonnes, which is well over India’s initial requirement. Does India need such overkill?

Going by the past record, Russia may have the edge. Not only does Shtorm dovetail with the ‘Make in India’ pitch, but Moscow also has a good record of transferring cutting-edge technologies to Indian manufacturers.


Says Russian military analyst Ilya Kramnik ::

It is important to eliminate the Americans from the possibility of participating in this project. All that Washington can really do under these circumstances is to try to push India to abandon the idea of using a nuclear power plant, and then attempt to sell New Delhi a converted boiler and turbine aircraft carrier of the ‘Kitty Hawk’ variety. The option is possible, especially if India decides it needs to save money.
According to Kramnik, the US usually refuses to work in consortiums with competitors, especially Russians. “The situation, in which India suddenly would place MiG-29K fighter jets on an American-built carrier, is almost impossible,” he explains.

It can be assumed with a high degree of probability that, in accordance with the longstanding tradition of the Indian military, none of these bidders will be chosen as the “sole” contractor. Rather, a multilateral consortium will be built, in which each participant will play a well-defined role.
American pitch

It would be unprecedented if the US goes ahead with the transfer of EMALS technology to India, which is not a close ally like the UK, Norway or Italy.

However, the US appears to be seriously wooing India. Chief of US Naval Operations, Admiral John Richardson, says India and the US are making progress in talks on the joint development of an aircraft carrier, potentially the biggest military collaboration between them.

Richardson said the two sides had held talks on a range of issues relating to the next-generation Indian carrier from its design to construction. "We are making very good progress, I am very pleased with the progress to date and optimistic we can do more in the future. That’s on a very solid track," Richardson said while in India in February this year.

India and the US have formed a joint working group on aircraft carrier technology cooperation, but there is no clarity on whether the Americans will offer EMALS technology for Indian aircraft carriers.


EMALS could be a game changer. Defence News explains ::

Using electromagnetic technology, the system delivers substantial improvements in system maintenance, increased reliability and efficiency, higher-launch energy capacity, and more accurate end-speed control, with a smooth acceleration at both high and low speeds. By allowing linear acceleration over time, electromagnetic catapults also place less stress on the aircraft.
In simple language, carrier-based aircraft operate under suboptimal capacity because of their short takeoffs. For instance, the stated combat range of a MiG-29K is 700km, but in real combat it would be a lot lower because it cannot take off with a full tank of gas. EMALS makes life easier for navy pilots.


Vikrant and Vishal: Less than smooth sailing ::

While talks proceed on the future carrier, Vikrant’s construction has not kept in step. A report tabled by the Comptroller & Auditor General (CAG) on 26 July 2016 says the programme has suffered delays because of drastic revisions right through the carrier’s timeline.

While the Defence Ministry and the Indian Navy insist the ship’s final delivery timeline is December 2018, the CAG report, ‘Union Defence Services Navy and Coast Guard’, says the delivery of the carrier with completion of all activities is likely to be achieved only by 2023.

A key area where things went wrong is General Arrangement or GA – the document based on which the ship is designed and constructed. The GA drawings principally represent volumes, spaces, compartments, bulkheads, hull forms, decks and main equipment.


According to the CAG report,

There were more than 4270 changes to the GA document by the Indian Navy and, due to design changes, more than 1150 modifications in hull structure had been done by the shipyard. Frequent modification to the hull structure was one of the main reasons for a delay of approximately two years in hull fabrication.
Steep learning curve

CSL clearly lacked the experience required to handle a project of such a gigantic scale. A technical audit of the shipyard carried out by France’s DCN discovered the shipyard had “never built warships and was not used to the complexity of their designs, hull and systems”.

The shipyard’s organisation was mostly vertical without enough functional links between various departments. “It had no real project management central organisation and was working with many separated departments.”

To adapt CSL to produce an aircraft carrier, DCN prescribed basic proposals with respect to augmentation of the shipyard’s infrastructure, organisation and human resources, which included creation of a shipyard project management team and a liaison team.


CAG observes ::

Since CSL was constructing an aircraft carrier for the first time, it was incumbent upon them to fully implement the DCN proposals so as to execute the project within approved timelines.
However, this was not done, and the project management team remained a weak one.

Delays are inevitable because this is India’s first aircraft carrier project. But it really shouldn’t take 24 years to construct a medium-sized aircraft carrier. After all, it takes the US only seven years to authorise, construct and deliver a 1,00,000-tonne carrier with nuclear propulsion.


Nuclear vs Conventional ::

According to Eric Wertheim, the author of Combat Fleets of the World, the odds of India needing the bluewater capability a nuclear carrier would bring, are small. “If you’re looking at regional operations, then I think it makes less sense to do nuclear propulsion,” he told the US Naval Institute.

However, the Maritime Doctrine of 2015 lays out that the India Navy’s strategic vision will no longer be limited to the northern Indian Ocean, but will extend to the southeast Indian Ocean, Red Sea, western coast of Africa and the Mediterranean Sea. The new carriers are not only aimed at countering the growing Chinese presence in the near seas but if needed, the Indian Navy must have the capability to sail out to distant troubled spots.

In terms of gas mileage, conventional aircraft carriers are the biggest guzzlers of fuel. The USS Independence, for instance, consumes well over 5,67,000 litres of fuel a day. An oil-importing country like India can ill afford to burn that much fuel.

Nuclear-powered carriers cost more to build but are more energy-efficient. They can remain at sea for up to a year or more and only need to return to port for crew rotation. They also require less downtime during maintenance as compared with a conventionally powered ship.

In a paper titled ‘Nuclear Propulsion For Naval Platforms: The Navy's Perspective’, Captain Vikram Bora and Commodore K J Singh argue that if India wants to take full advantage of the latest technologies, then nuclear is the way to go. “In the case of large surface combatants like aircraft carriers, nuclear power provides high propulsive power and long endurance, whilst also catering for the requirement of short bursts of very high electric power for aircraft launch systems on certain state of the art platforms,” they say.

“Nuclear propulsion is an area of technology which is essential for any navy aiming for a global presence,” the authors maintain. “The technology has enormous potential, both for surface combatants and submarines.”

On the flip side, decommissioning a nuclear power carrier is a nightmare and can take years, compared with just weeks for a conventional ship. The cost is estimated at $500 million per ship.


Way forward: Look to the past ::

Since Rig Vedic times up to the last Chola kings, the Indian Ocean was literally India’s ocean. However, in the later half of the previous millennium, India became dominated by land-centric rulers from Central Asia who had little maritime knowledge or interest. Consequently, India yielded control of the sea to the European powers.

However, with the rise of the Marathas in the early eighteenth century, the focus on sea power returned. The Marathas enjoyed many tactical successes against the western navies. Notable among these was the Maratha blockade of British-held Mumbai port that led to the British East India Company ceding a ransom of 8,750 pounds. In the year 1721, the Maratha Navy even defeated a Portuguese-British combined assault on Alibagh.

The Maratha Admiral of the Fleet, Kanhoji Angre, defeated the Western navy of his day. For 33 years until his death in 1729, the Indian fleets remained undefeated. Wrote British historian Charles Kincaid in the History of the Maratha People: “Victorious alike over the English, Dutch and the Portuguese, the Maratha admirals sailed the Arabian Sea in triumph.”

Although the old dream of making the Indian Ocean an India’s ocean is no longer a component of the navy’s doctrine, dominating the blue waters is part of the plan. Or to use former Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat’s words, enhancing India's force projection capability is a “national requirement on the strategic frontier, not at the doorstep”.
http://www.defencenews.in/article/B...-Journey-From-Carriers-To-Supercarriers-28983

 

[Prashant12]

Navy scouting for corvettes under 'Make in India' banner

NEW DELHI: The Indian Navy is scouting for seven "next generation" heavily armed Corvettes that will come as a boost to the domestic industry since it will be a 'Make in India' project running into several thousand crore of rupees.

Private shipyards like the Reliance Defence and Engineering Limited (RDEL) are likely to respond to the navy's Request for Information (RFI) along with state-run shipyards.

"We will be pitching for it strongly. We have made different types of warships in our shipyard and we are the only ones to have delivered earlier than schedule," Chairman and Manging Director of Goa Shipyard, Rear Admiral Shekhar Mital (Retd) told PTI.

The corvettes will be capable of carrying out surface-to-surface missile attacks, anti-submarine warfare operations, and the navy wants the ships to be delivered from 2023.

While the exact value of the project is yet to be determined since it all depends on the kind of weapon platform that will be on board, sources said it is safe to assume that each corvette would cost about Rs 1,500 to Rs 1,800 crore.

The criteria for the new vessels are largely similar to the Khukri-class boats they will replace -- 4,000 nautical mile range, maximum and sustained top speeds of 25-27 knots.

The 120-meter-long single hull corvettes, or small warships, will have low radar, acoustic, magnetic, visual and infra-red signatures.

The ships should able to carry a minimum of 8 surface-to-surface missiles and engage sea-skimming missiles, flying 3-5 metres above sea level, upto maximum speed of Mach 3 (three times the speed of sound).

Active towed array sonar, two light-weight torpedo launchers should be on board fitted to the corvettes, a navy document says.

There are at present at least 45 ships and submarines under construction in India.

India has already built four anti-submarine warfare corvettes under Project-28, the first of which was handed over to the navy in 2014. This was built by Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Ltd.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...make-in-india-banner/articleshow/55182820.cms

 

[busesaway]

I presume that the main focus is on anti-submarine frigates/destroyers? In order to counter Chinese aggression?

 

[Adioz]

I presume that the main focus is on anti-submarine frigates/destroyers? In order to counter Chinese aggression?

Quite right, but these are not ASW corvettes.
Read the red parts in this:-

• They want 7 of these NGCs (Next Generation Corvettes)
• Size will be somewhat between a Talwar-class frigate and a Kamorta-class corvette.
• 8XSSM complex (same as that on Talwar)
• Not sure about the SAM. Hopefully it will be a Barak-8.
• "The ships should have Low Radar, Acoustic, Magnetic, Visual and Infra Red Signatures".
  
• 1 helo (ALH or Naval Utility Helicopter) carrying capacity with helo launched light weight torpedos.
• Navy wants these to act primarily as surface-warfare vessels with secondary ASW capability. Hence no RBU-6000. Only light weight torpedo capability.
• No hull mounted SONAR (only bow-mounted and towed arrays)
• They even suggested MF-STAR radar.
• I think these are the surface warfare counterparts of the Kamorta-class.

Also, ASW asset surge in Indian Navy is not only to counter PLAN. As a general trend in Asian navies, submarines are growing (no doubt due to increasing PLAN submarines and assertiveness in disputes) with newer submarine forces emerging out of nations that did not initially have these. It is only obvious that the Indian Navy needs more ASW assets if the number of submarines in Indian Ocean are rising.
That said, the main focus is to counter PLAN and newer Pakistan Navy submarines.

 

[busesaway]

I notice that India is purchasing courvettes and frigates, instead of destroyers, for ASW. I think this is one of the aspects where merging the forces can help India save money.

I divide India's problems into two conflicts:
- Middle East (Horn of Africa, Arabian Sea, Levant, Pakistan)
- China (Tibet, South China Sea, Chinese Naval Bases In Indian Ocean)

I hope India has sucess in courting an external defense treaty with Sri Lanka and Maldives in order to counter Chinese agression in the Indian Ocean.

 

[republic_roi97]

Indian Navy SSN Programme
This little paragraph is the only thing latest that I found about the SSN program,
Source:-http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/second-russian-nuclear-submarine-to-replace-ins-chakra-116102300780_1.html

Meanwhile, as part of the established Russia-India partnership in nuclear submarines, Russian experts continue supporting the Indian Navy’s indigenous SSN programme, which New Delhi plans to develop into four-six indigenous SSNs. The Chakra and its successor are intended to develop the expertise needed to operate these.

 

[republic_roi97]

So maybe, our future SSN might be based on the arihant class ??

 

[cobra commando]

Locally made underwater sensors for Navy

 

[republic_roi97]

Indian Navy warship out of action for weeks after freak accident
Navy officials confirmed that the incident occurred saying the accident was a minor one and that the warship was standing aside a jetty.

 

[republic_roi97]

....................................................

 

[republic_roi97]

......................................................

 

[charlie]

......................................................

it's too expensive for the capabilities it's bring to the warfare I guess.

 

[republic_roi97]

..............................................

I never knew DRDO is working on Railgun for IN

 

[Indx TechStyle]

..............................................

I never knew DRDO is working on Railgun for IN

Then, you didn't read it in past.
India's navy wants 100 technologies by 2031 including railguns, hypersonic weapons and lasers

 

[republic_roi97]

..........................................................

 

[republic_roi97]

.....................................................

 

[republic_roi97]

...........................

 

[airtel]

it's too expensive for the capabilities it's bring to the warfare I guess.

The US May Finally Get a Cheap Alternative to the $70 Million V-22 Osprey

Slide: 1 / of 7. Caption: Caption: Bell Helicopter says its V-280 Valor offers today’s military a smaller, lighter, cheaper, and potentially more versatile spin on the tilt-rotor concept.Bell Helicopter

Slide: 2 / of 7. Caption: Caption: For less than a third the price of each $70 million Osprey, the Army will get nearly the same performance, along with a slew of benefits any military operation would savor.Bell Helicopter

Slide: 3 / of 7. Caption: Caption: Compared to its official competition, the Black Hawk, the Valor offers a serious upgrade in range (800 miles, compared to 360) and top speed (350 mph, instead of 183), along with the ability to deliver gear and soldiers into tight spaces. Bell Helicopter

Slide: 4 / of 7. Caption: Caption: Where the Osprey tilted the entire turbine engines to go between horizontal and vertical flight, the V-280 will only shift its 35-foot rotors and forward drive shafts.Bell Helicopter

Slide: 5 / of 7. Caption: Caption: Those non-rotating engines, meantime, won’t burn grass or landing pads during takeoff and landing. Bell Helicopter

Slide: 6 / of 7. Caption: Caption: The Osprey still holds the strength advantage, carrying roughly double the V-280’s 14 soldiers or 10,000 pounds of gear. But Bell says it can offer the V-280 for just $20 million a pop, compared to the Osprey’s $70 million price tag. Bell Helicopter

Slide: 7 / of 7. Caption: Caption: The first version, for the Army, should take to the air by the end of 2017, though full deployment wouldn’t happen until about 2030.Bell Helicopter

• 
  
  The Marine Corps may have yet another reason to question its famously complicated and hideously expensive V-22 Osprey. Bell Helicopter says its V-280 Valor offers today’s military a smaller, lighter, cheaper, and potentially more versatile spin on the tilt-rotor concept.
  
  Bell unveiled the V-tailed aircraft, which looks straight out of Halo, last week at the Farnborough International Airshow. It designed the machine for the US Army, which is looking to replace its venerable and menacing UH-60 Black Hawk with a next-gen vertical-lift darling of Army aviation.
  
  So while it’s no direct threat to the Osprey, the Marines might soon envy their colleagues. For less than a third the price of each $70 million Osprey, the Army will get nearly the same performance, along with a slew of benefits any military operation would savor.
  
  Compared with its official competition, the Black Hawk, the Valor offers a serious upgrade in combat range (920 miles, compared to 360) and top speed (350 mph, instead of 183), along with the ability to deliver gear and soldiers into tight spaces. That makes it just as fast as the Osprey, but even more long-legged (the V-22 has a 426 mile combat radius).
  
  
  
  • 
    The V-280 does that by combining the fixed wing aerodynamics of a plane with the rotors and vertical capabilities of a helicopter. Sure, the Osprey offered the same blend, and that ended up coming with a whole pile of other problems. But in the 27 years since the Osprey’s first flight, Bell has learned a lot.
    
    For starters, the V-280 will use a simpler rotor-tilting process. Where the Osprey tilted the entire turbine engines to go between horizontal and vertical flight, the V-280 will only shift its 35-foot rotors and forward drive shafts.
    
    Furthermore, the V-280’s smaller size and weight—coupled with its nearly identical rotor diameter to the Osprey—means it will be able to take off and land with less effort, kicking up less of the dust that can hamper pilot and crew visibility. It can also worm into the engines, hurting power and long-term engine life.
    
    Those non-rotating engines, meantime, won’t burn grass or landing pads during takeoff and landing. Their placement allows troops to hop in from the sides, instead of using only the rear ramp, like on the Osprey. And they’re oriented so the V-280 to carry forward-firing and side-facing weaponry, which on the Osprey threatened to hit the engines or rotors.
    
    The Osprey still holds the strength advantage, carrying roughly double the V-280’s 14 soldiers or 10,000 pounds of gear. But Bell says it can offer the V-280 for just $20 million a pop. It’s also pitching the tiltrotor to the Navy, offering a revised design that could fit on cramped aircraft carrier decks and inside hangars. The first version, for the Army, should take to the air by the end of 2017, though full deployment wouldn’t happen until about 2030.
    
    First, though, Bell, which is working with Lockheed Martin here, needs to win the Pentagon’s joint multi-role technology demonstrator program competition. Boeing and Sikorsky are in the running, too, with a high-speed helicopter they call the SB-1 Defiant, also pegged to start flying late next year.
    
    Even if the Valor wins out, it won’t render Marines’ Osprey instantly obsolete. Yes, the V-22 had its problems early on: Four accidents during development left 30 people dead. But the aircraft has since proven reliable and safe, if challenging for pilots. “The V-22 Osprey isn’t controversial anymore,” says Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute. “But it’s still pricey, and the V-280 delivers all the versatility of tiltrotor technology at a lower price.”
    
    That’s the upside of learning from your mistakes—and American troops now stand to benefit

https://www.wired.com/2016/07/bell-v280-valor-v22-osprey-replacement/

 

[airtel]

KMML’s first consignment of titanium sponge for Indian Navy
Published November 22, 2016
SOURCE: THE HINDU

The maiden consignment of titanium sponge produced by the titanium sponge plant (TSP) of the public sector Kerala Minerals and Metals Limited (KMML) for strategic purposes was despatched from the company at Chavara, near here, on Monday morning.

The consignment comprising 4.5 metric tonnes meant for the Indian Navy loaded in a truck was flagged off to Kochi by KMML Managing Director K.K. Roy Kurien in the presence of the titanium sponge unit employees.

Hitherto, this product from the KMML was purchased only by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) on a buy-back arrangement. The ISRO had funded the Rs.95-crore TSP based on a technology developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation.

With the commissioning of the KMML TSP in 2011, India joined a group of only seven countries to produce the strategic metal. The plant was commissioned with the aim of making India self-sufficient in titanium sponge.
While the defence sector of the country requires about 1,500 MT of titanium sponge annually, this is the first time that indigenously produced titanium sponge for strategic applications was being purchased by a defence wing from the KMML.

The KMML titanium sponge product is certified by the Hyderabad-based Regional Centre for Military Airworthiness, Midhani. The TSP has capacity to produce 500 MT annually..