2008 Election | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB


Go Back   World Affairs Board > Military Forums > Naval Forces
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-27-2006, 22:32 PM   #166 (permalink)
gf0012-aust
Defense Professional
 
Join Date: 05-30-06
Posts: 394
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry View Post
They have 18 now - hence they lack 6 sats. I don't know what is replacement need for the near future..... those low orbit sats are not living long.... Next year they budgeted 50% growth in millitary launches, but we don't know what they would launch.

24 sats won't give them global racetrack redundancy at a meaningful level.

numerically, 24 will give them a global constellation - but thats about it.

and I seriously doubt that they will have 24 usable platforms in place - let alone a fully redundant constellation.

edit: and noticed highseas qualification after posting.

Last edited by gf0012-aust : 12-27-2006 at 22:35 PM. Reason: clarity
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2006, 23:01 PM   #167 (permalink)
highsea
Defense Professional
 
highsea's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-10-04
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
...and I seriously doubt that they will have 24 usable platforms in place - let alone a fully redundant constellation.
That's my take too, Gf.

Another big if is the planned GSLV launches. With a 50% success rate and only 4 launches under it's belt, and the next rocket planned to use the Indian cryo stage for the first time, I would not be counting chickens. Also due to the recent failure, the GSLV schedule is bound to be kicked back at least 8-12 months.

The next Proton launch should go off on schedule.

And whether or not the Glonass-K will be ready in time is not at all certain, and that would affect the planned Soyuz launches.

Based on what we have seen in the past, it seems prudent to be a bit "cautious" wrt the schedule, if you know what I mean...
__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

Last edited by highsea : 12-27-2006 at 23:08 PM.
highsea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2006, 23:16 PM   #168 (permalink)
gf0012-aust
Defense Professional
 
Join Date: 05-30-06
Posts: 394
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by highsea View Post
Based on what we have seen in the past, it seems prudent to be a bit "cautious" wrt the schedule, if you know what I mean...
without wanting to upset the pro-russian platform club, the russians demonstrate stellar persistence in blowing out their schedules.

they are regularly 2-3-4 years in lag on major capital asset delivery at the CTD level, - let alone going "gold".

Bear in mind that the way that they wanted to short circuit the Glonas schedule was to invite India in as a participant. They are in no position to fast track anything.
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2006, 23:24 PM   #169 (permalink)
highsea
Defense Professional
 
highsea's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-10-04
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
...Bear in mind that the way that they wanted to short circuit the Glonas schedule was to invite India in as a participant. They are in no position to fast track anything.
That's why I mentioned the GSLV launches and Glonass-K. The current (pretty optimistic) schedule to get 18 sats by mid-2009 assumes no hitches on either side (and there is aready a serious hitch with GSLV)...

That's not something I would want to lay money on, lol.
highsea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2006, 23:36 PM   #170 (permalink)
gf0012-aust
Defense Professional
 
Join Date: 05-30-06
Posts: 394
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by highsea View Post
That's why I mentioned the GSLV launches and Glonass-K. The current (pretty optimistic) schedule to get 18 sats by mid-2009 assumes no hitches on either side (and there is aready a serious hitch with GSLV)...

That's not something I would want to lay money on, lol.
I was tempted to make some reference to Yakhont/Glonas/Brahmos but thought better of it.

The russians really have sucker punched the indian military on a number of levels. If I was the Indian Ex-Chequer I'd have a few senior mil-personel's "nutz in a noose" and some "please explains" coming thick and fast.

All good for the russians though... as I said before, their marketing people (and their contract managers) deserve hefty bonuses....
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2006, 23:52 PM   #171 (permalink)
highsea
Defense Professional
 
highsea's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-10-04
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,530
Lol. Don't go there, Gary...
highsea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2006, 00:31 AM   #172 (permalink)
gf0012-aust
Defense Professional
 
Join Date: 05-30-06
Posts: 394
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by highsea View Post
Lol. Don't go there, Gary...
I have no intention I've getting caught up in return fire....
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2006, 00:39 AM   #173 (permalink)
kams
Senior Contributor
 
kams's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-22-06
Location: Piscatawy, NJ
Posts: 1,437
Country:
Some time back India decided not to totally depend on either GPS or GLONASS and develop IRNSS with foot print over Indian Subcontinent.
kams is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Carrier Battle Group Essay rickusn Naval Forces 56 09-05-2007 12:27 PM
Favorite Naval Book(s) RAL's_pal? Naval Forces 62 02-09-2007 04:46 AM
An Interseting article.... rickusn Naval Forces 2 05-10-2005 06:59 AM
World Naval Rankings rickusn Naval Forces 66 03-04-2005 01:11 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:15 AM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8