Indian Naval Discussion

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 May 2012 10:06

they might find a place in their new large DDG class which will replace the Udaloys (if they are still in working order)

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 31 May 2012 11:21

koti wrote:Maybe the plan is to use the Viraat's Barak on the Vic.

Even so, I think there is more then just money here... Even small Corvettes get a CIWS....

This could be to speed up the delivery and/or the result of the price negotiations that were done. Anyway, Barak can't be fitted in Russia and Ak-630 can be fitted in India.(Even manufactured). However, Khastan can't. It means the CIWS for Vik will be Ak630, and not Khastan.
I wonder where the original 6 Khastan systems of the Gorshkov will be used by Russia though.

Gorshkov never had Kashtan (or rather Kortik, Kashtan is for export).

koti · Post by **koti** » 31 May 2012 12:44

^^True.
I made a mistake mixing Kuznetsov's CIWS with Gorky's.

Gorky used to have 8 Ak630 systems.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 31 May 2012 12:57

Original Vik's pictures are removed from Pilot's website. Indian delegation at Sevmash has complained.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 May 2012 13:00

8 is typical russian overkill. if ASMs are close enough to need 8 CIWS, its game over.

the nimitz class used to have 4 phalanx + 24 ESSM for a ship 3 times the size and value, the newer ones deleted these and have just a few RAM and decoy launchers.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 31 May 2012 13:14

Singha ji, I don't think it is about one ASM being too close but multiple ASMs coming from different directions. At 4 pairs, 8 seems great. Also, with the high rate of fire, ammo loaded in each one won't last long either, so spreading the work across the units is probably a good thing?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 May 2012 13:19

more Ak630 is feasible. seems to have a much lower footprint than kashtan which is the size of a small house with a big room underneath loading the ammo and missiles.
the barak-1 being separate , the big stepped island should be able to shoehorn in 32 atleast, with another 16-32 buried into the deck nearby behind a blast shield or put into overhanging verandahs near the tail somewhere.

basic ak630 has 2000 rds per gun.

the ak630-m2 has 2x30mm guns and twice the ammo 4000 rds.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... k630m2.jpg

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 31 May 2012 15:05

In pictures: Made in Gujarat,first hydrographic survey vessel ‘Makar’ handed over to the Indian Navy
Posting Inline image to show the boat. A bit of polish and it would look awesome. Nice interior pics in the link above!

Gujarat govt company Alcock Ashdown Limited today handed over a newly built Makar vessel to the India Navy.

Rs 109.89 crore catamaran hydrauligraphic survey vessel was for the first time operated today from Ghogha port of Saurashtra on maiden voyage to Mumbai.

Defense and Shipping ministries of central govt had given contract for construction of six vessels to Gujarat govt run company.

Makar is first of those six vessels.

500 tonne capacity vessel Makar is 53 meter long, 16 meter wide. It can work even in lower draft of 2.2 meter. 150 kw capacity computerized touch screen control pane, radar system, special system for emergency operation, electric control panel, AC plant, state-of-the-art survey equipments, powerful engine room, officers recreation area, VHF-VLF are some other features of this vessel.

After completion of its induction procedure at Mumbai dock yard, Makar will be known as INS Makar.

According to the release, the vessels will also be capable of limited coastal defence role in an emergency and will also have a limited search and rescue capability and limited ocean research capability.

The Indian Navy has chosen to induct a vessel with a catamaran hull form for the first time and will be one of the very few select navies in the world to operate such sophisticated platforms, the release said.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 May 2012 15:09

interesting - is the gyroscope mounted thing a compass kept around for traditional reasons? I wuz thinking compass can be offline and fed into a screen somewhere?

aditp · Post by **aditp** » 31 May 2012 15:16

Aditya G wrote:The hangar:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1179903832 ... 6172237794

Idli maker?

https://picasaweb.google.com/1179903832 ... 2233775970

Aditya_G, I get an error saying «Sorry page does not exist from both the URLs. Can you please examine?

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 31 May 2012 15:19

aditp wrote: Aditya_G, I get an error saying «Sorry page does not exist from both the URLs. Can you please examine?

The answer is here

SNaik wrote:Original Vik's pictures are removed from Pilot's website. Indian delegation at Sevmash has complained.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 31 May 2012 15:52

K Mehta wrote:In pictures: Made in Gujarat,first hydrographic survey vessel ‘Makar’ handed over to the Indian Navy
Posting Inline image to show the boat. A bit of polish and it would look awesome. Nice interior pics in the link above!

Lovely boat. A beauty.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 May 2012 16:14

Excelent pics of INS Makar.This hull/vessel could even be the perfect solution to the requirement for the littoral ASW patrol/corvette,of which 16 are supposedly on order.Hydrographic vessels carry sophisticates sensors/sonars for mapping the oceans.The stern modified with a TAS/VDS and a helideck (no hangar),to also allow an ASW helo to operate from the platform,armed with light an heavy torpedoes and ASW mortars (similar to the Pauk class armamaent) ,could be the ideal solution.Havign a common huill ,just as the Pauk ASW corvettes and Tarantula missile corvettes do,would help in standardisation and easier mantenance.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 31 May 2012 16:42

K Mehta wrote:In pictures: Made in Gujarat,first hydrographic survey vessel ‘Makar’ handed over to the Indian Navy

<snip>

Nice pics. A really beautiful ship.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 31 May 2012 21:10

Superb

http://www.alcockshipyard.com/projects1.htm

MAIN PARTICULARS

LENGTH OVERALL 53.15M.
LENGTH B.P. 45 M.
BREADTH (MOULDED) 16 M.
DRAUGHT (Max.) 4.50 M.
DEPTH ( MOULDED) 4.5 M.
DEAD WEIGHT 500 T.
SPEED 12 Knots.

Type of Vessel: Survey Vessel (Yard-257-262)
Owners : Indian Navy

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 31 May 2012 21:32

catamarans are generally good for high speed straight line dashes, not usually great at hard manouevres (i could be wrong) - does that not make it problematic for a fighting vessel?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 31 May 2012 22:05

It is not a fighting platform Lalmohan sahab!

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 31 May 2012 22:06

i know that, but
1. it is said to have light fighting capabilities (fine by me)
2. others are proposing it as the template for a fighting platform (which is what i am intrigued by)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 May 2012 22:12

if the top speed is 12 knots, its meant as a survey vessel only and will need much more powerful engines and bigger fuel store for any combat role.

John · Post by **John** » 31 May 2012 22:13

IIRC Top speed is around 18 knots and it is an all aluminum hull so it won't hold up well in a fire. It's range is pretty impressive 3,500 nm.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 31 May 2012 22:23

No, they have used this platform for higher stability and broad decks which is the hallmark of the SWATH design and ideal for hydrographics.

It is actually an interesting design. Looks like a hybrid of the SWATH and the classical catamaran design. The front part of the hull looks like SWATH for higher stability and the middle and back part of the hull follows a classical catamaran design for swallower draught.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 31 May 2012 22:24

^^^ indranilbabu, i am with you re comprehension of design concept

mayankdr · Post by **mayankdr** » 01 Jun 2012 02:09

Guys have a look on this wiki page about German Navy research vessel.
INS Makar has similar design and concept. Her speed is 15 Knots

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_class_research_ship

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 01 Jun 2012 02:35

mayankdr wrote:Guys have a look on this wiki page about German Navy research vessel.
INS Makar has similar design and concept. Her speed is 15 Knots

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_class_research_ship

Looks similar, except the German research vessel is seven times heavier (3,500 tonnes) in displacement than the Makar.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 01 Jun 2012 03:38

TimesNow: US Eyes Bangladesh for basing USN 7th Fleet

Main points from what I could gather:
1. US Navy 7th Fleet will base at Bangladesh after end of Afghan war
2. The base being sought is Chittagong
3. The possible move was discussed in Hillary's recent visit. State Deptt has denied the story.

Added later:

Americaâ€™s threat to send its seventh fleet to stop liberation of Bangladesh in 1971 is a known fact. Now, 41 years later - it is America again - which wants to park its seventh fleet in the country - for its strategic interests. Worried by increasing presence of Chinese naval bases in the South China Sea - America now eyes a counter strategy - as it wants an overall presence in Asia - right from Japan to its Diego Garicia base in the Indian Ocean.

This by parking its seventh fleet in a base in Chittagong giving it both an eye on taking on China and a strategic post in Asia as it pulls out of Afghanisthan. The US State Department denying on the record that Hillary Clintonâ€™s visits had anything to do with military co-operation.

Victoria Nuland: Please, in the back.
Question: Two questions.
Victoria Nuland: Yeah.
Question: The first one is about Bangladesh when Secretary Clinton was there. Can you confirm that she discussed the future of the seventh fleet with Bangladeshi officials? And does the State Department have a position on the future of the - home of the seventh fleet?
Victoria Nuland: That sounds like a question for the Pentagon. I will take it in terms of whether it came up in her consultations, but I donâ€™t believe it did

Off the record, confirmation of key strategic meetings between Bangladesh and America and the recent visit of US Secretary of State Clinton. Americaâ€™s concerns clearly documented in the Pentagon report as they increasingly worried over the string of pearls of Chinese bases across the South China Sea and their naval might spreading all across Asia - putting the America behind. The Bangladeshi Government remaining extremely tightlipped over the recent developments - as they have internally decided to deny it on record - fearing backlash from their own hardliners.

Reporter: Recently Hillary Clinton visited your country. She has demanded for stronger relations between Bangladesh and US. Are you exploring the options?
Ambassador: I donâ€™t know what she has discussed and in any case this is not the fora to discuss political issues.
Reporter: US had asked to allow Chittagong port to be used as their naval base? Will you allow them?
Ambassador: I am not aware of any such requests to the best of my knowledge.

This move by America could put India on the back foot if the American fleet moves to Bangladesh, all of Indiaâ€™s security installations will come under the American scanner. Bangladesh is not willing to comment on record even offering explanation to deny the developments. This Clinton visit a more strategic one than just a friendly one- the Indian establishment caught unawares--as this base could cast a shadow on Indiaâ€™s own strategic interests.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 01 Jun 2012 03:53

The opposite portent, a highly improbable one, is that a Bangladesh-United States Strategic Partnership as a bipartite security understanding at some later stage may emerge on the same pattern of United States security linkage with Pakistan and all the attendant negative security connotations in its wake for India.

However, what is definitely intriguing is the American emphasis on Bangladesh’s role in the maritime security of the Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean. One would have thought that the United States under its Strategic Partnership understandings with India would have acceded that role to India as the dominant naval power in the region. What maritime role for Bangladesh in the Bay of Bengal is the United States envisaging?
Is India being made a fool in its own backyard

The biggest impact of any evolutionary Bangladesh-United States strategic partnership would be on China with which Bangladesh has a Strategic Partnership Agreement. In Bangladesh policy circles, despite a lack of geographical contiguity, China was viewed as a countervailing power to India as the outsized and predominant power in the region.

In Chinese strategic perceptions, the coupling of the United States-India Strategic Partnership with increasing security cooperation between Bangladesh and the United States is going to be perceived as hostile.

Bangladesh would have to indulge in some very tight balancing between its China policy and the new directions unfolding in its increasing strategic engagement with the United States. Concurrently, both the United and India would have to be wary as to how China responds.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Jun 2012 04:44

Why would India be bothered by this - IF it took place? China has been doing exactly the SAME things for years!!!!!

The new Chief of IA has stated very clearly that China is not an enemy.

Before India gets worked up over this development, India needs to make up her mind which way she is headed. Smaller nations in the look-East policy are growing weary of Indian soft spine. It happened with Singapore (the nuclear stand India took) and seems to be happening with V'nam now (with the oil exploration).

It is up to India to claim her own backyard.

There are enough Indian white papers and strategic thinkers who have made it rather clear that China is a problem.

Hope this development makes India take some serious action and not sit and gripe. The rest of the world moves on.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 01 Jun 2012 04:59

NRao wrote:Why would India be bothered by this - IF it took place?

Because big powers are bothered if another power places their 7th, 5th, 2nd or whatever fleet in their backyard. If Russia, China etc. were to park their fleet in Cuba, only US will be bothered no other small country around has a need to be bothered, unless these small nations pretend to be bothered to please the unkil.

Who else will be bothered? Myamar, Sri Lanka......... nope too small to bother.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Jun 2012 05:58

Any overt US presence in large scale on foreign soil is the proverbial "kiss of death" for that nation.Just look at the US's track record after WW2.Korea,Vietnam,Iran,Haiti,Panama,Somalia,Iraq,Afghanistan-(twice) and now Af-Pak.The devastation that resulted and the chaos left behind demonstrates the incompetence of the US in using its massive military power to achieve political ends.

What is frankly the need for the US to squat in a BDeshi port? The IOR is relatively free from tension,despite the huge US nuclear presence at Diego Garcia which India was strongly against during the Cold War.Today,it sees DG less as a potential launchpad against India since Indo-US relations have (neccessarily) improved considerably.But to have the US squatting in BDesh,as it once did in the Phillipines,in an Islamic nation with a large anti-US mindset,is a recipe for disaster.India-as a friend,should warn the US of the consequences.The security of the IOR should be left to the littoral powers.The US has a traditional role in the Pacific and should instead counter the Chinese there.One ridiciculous viewpoint by Maroof (of all people) on telly,who wa scomfortable with the US sh*tting on our doorstep ,was that the nomenclature of "S.China Sea",gave China the right to dominate it,completely forgetting that the entire region has been known for centuries as "Indo-China"! This being the case,the true name for the SC Sea should be the "Indo-China Sea" which I have been advocating for aeons.

The US squatting in BDesh will destroy that country which will be racked with internal strife .Such a move too will legitimise the Chinese presence in the IOR,which they are very sensitive to criticism that that is their plan,as it would legitimise India entering the Indo-China Sea and potentially basing itself in Vietnam.Our aim should be to engage very strongly with Burma to see that the Chinese bases there are shut down.China has used cheap military sales to Burma,Sri Lanka and BDesh to establish its military presence there.India should also provide mil. eqpt. to these nations aggressively,catering to their needs and thus neutralising the Chinese mil. mischief.Any unilateral US moves in the IOR without India's concurrence will be and must be viewed as a hostile act which should be strongly resisted.The USN is already in Singapore and is once again planning secretly with the Phillipines govt. to return to that country militarily.Its Pacific island bases also give it considerable military reach .

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Jun 2012 06:08

Manish_Sharma wrote:
NRao wrote:Why would India be bothered by this - IF it took place?
Because big powers are bothered if another power places their 7th, 5th, 2nd or whatever fleet in their backyard. If Russia, China etc. were to park their fleet in Cuba, only US will be bothered no other small country around has a need to be bothered, unless these small nations pretend to be bothered to please the unkil.

Who else will be bothered? Myamar, Sri Lanka......... nope too small to bother.

Multiple points:

1. You are like my wife, you quote only part of what I tried to make as a point.

OK. Granted India should be bothered by this US thinking.

Now, what about the following:

China has been doing exactly the SAME things for years!!!!!

2. As I stated, combined with a very weak "look East policy", Indian inaction is ore bothersome. The US is bothered by Chinese expansionism, but India is not in "India's backyard"?

A topic that is supposed to be us vs. China is being portrayed as one vs. India?

IF India took care of her backyard, why would anyone poke their nose?

3. On Cuba: The US will be bothered. And, they will act. Will India act? I certainly hope so. I hope India asserts and prevents anyone from make decisions in the IOR (without Indian participation?)

But, like China, the US too seems to be occupying a vacuum created by India. Being bothered is not a policy that one can act on. Nor is griping about it.

IF this has actually taken place, it is to a great extent because of Indian inaction (NOT policy).

4. SL/Myanmar/etc: IF they were bothered they would act.

Just BTW, they all have subscribed to Chinese actions.

However, I welcome this. India wakes up ONLY when there is some cataclysmic event - Kargil. India NEEDS a Kargil every year. Sad, but true.

I would like to know what are your views on China and her pearls. TIA.

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 01 Jun 2012 07:08

Found this picture on the Indian Defence Forum, along with a bunch of other pictures of the Vikramaditya. This was the only picture with a view of the flight deck. But I don't think this is the Vik, it looks like the Kuznetsov. Am I mistaken?

- The name at the back of the ship doesn't look like Vikramaditya, I could be wrong cause it's hard to read.

- The Russian Naval Flag instead of the IN flag?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jun 2012 07:35

Thats the RuN aircraft carrier Kuznetsov

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 01 Jun 2012 07:41

Austin wrote:Thats the RuN aircraft carrier Kuznetsov

Thanks Austin! It's funny, took me one glance to lay my suspicion but folks on that forum are convinced it's the Vik because it's put along side actual pictures of the Vik.

People are strange.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jun 2012 07:44

USN presence in our backyard would be bodyblow to Indias strategic Interest , it would allow them to monitor all IN ship movement from close quarters and worst it would help them keep a tab on IN SSBN patrols in the east , mapping/monitoring of ocean floor for sensitive data for military use.

US presence in this part of the world or its desire to make it at Bangladesh coincides with IN SSBN force coming up and likely to be based in East plus the recent Chakra deployment there ....it would unnerve PLAN for sure but IN will be more harmed by this if the news is true.

The first few ships USN would deploy there would be Surtass LFA to map Ocean Floor and data on submarines in guise of helping Bangladesh find Oil and Gas in the region

I recollect how they deployed these ships outside major Chinese submarine base in Intl waters and the PLAN sent a gun boat to intimidate it.

http://www.surtass-lfa-eis.com/

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jun 2012 07:46

Anurag wrote:Thanks Austin! It's funny, took me one glance to lay my suspicion but folks on that forum are convinced it's the Vik because it's put along side actual pictures of the Vik.

People are strange.

Easy way to paint it is the 4 prominent phased array antenna which Vikramaditya does not have ,there are many others but thats the easiest one to see.

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 01 Jun 2012 08:11

Austin wrote:
Anurag wrote:Thanks Austin! It's funny, took me one glance to lay my suspicion but folks on that forum are convinced it's the Vik because it's put along side actual pictures of the Vik.

People are strange.
Easy way to paint it is the 4 prominent phased array antenna which Vikramaditya does not have ,there are many others but thats the easiest one to see.

You're right. Btw, what does the Vik have for antennas and how many?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Jun 2012 09:43

look at the vast MASS of defensive weapon just on the rear left corner - 1 x AK630, 1 RBU (yeah we could use RBU for Vikky as well), 2 x kashtan gun systems, 5 revolver VLS for SAMs and what looks like another kashtan fwd near where the waist deck ends.

must be equivalent or more along the right side upto the island area.

in a more airwing oriented ship, these overhang areas could be used to extend the store rooms or workshops along the side of the double-height hangar deck.

a good balanced armament for the vikky would
- 2 x RBU
- 48 x Barak1 SAMs in 3 units of 16 each
- 6 x AK630
- decoy launchers of all types
- kevlar armour and liners around all vital areas - nimitz style
- degaussing of the hull
- 2 x triple TT varunastra HWT launchers near the tail

- maximal hangar , living and workshop space to pack in the airwing

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 01 Jun 2012 09:44

NRao wrote:
Multiple points:
1. You are like my wife, you quote only part of what I tried to make as a point.

Sorry NRao ji, just was quoting the central part of your post, saving bandwidth no ulterior motives.

OK. Granted India should be bothered by this US thinking.

Now, what about the following:

China has been doing exactly the SAME things for years!!!!!
With China relationship is more black & white than with unkil. In case they make a base whole BR would have a consensus that its an enemy action and there is possiblity of war with China but not so much with unkil.

As has been posted before on BR about how unkil is providing porkis with daily update of India Naval movements.
Chinese gave nukes to porkis but unkil provided the delivery platforms initially until the chinese missiles came along.
Unkil has provided porkis with 500 plus BVR missiles for their F 16s.
The thing is relation with US is much into grey area, In the country their anti-India actions have tendency to slip under the radar quite easily and even if something gets highlighted it is shouted down with their supporters in DDM, politicos etc.

With US' much advanced technology/sensors they will be able to spy on us much more effectively than chinese.

In the event of war even with porkis god knows how much more underhand support to porkis they'll provide. I mean world may come to know about it 50 years later when archives are opened that Indian Shishumar Sub was actually torpedoed by US and not by a porki sub.
In case chinese are there at the time of war, Navy and AF would be very clear to take out their radar stations, ships etc. no grey area here.

2. As I stated, combined with a very weak "look East policy", Indian inaction is more bothersome. The US is bothered by Chinese expansionism, but India is not in "India's backyard"?

A topic that is supposed to be us vs. China is being portrayed as one vs. India?

IF India took care of her backyard, why would anyone poke their nose?

3. On Cuba: The US will be bothered. And, they will act. Will India act? I certainly hope so. I hope India asserts and prevents anyone from make decisions in the IOR (without Indian participation?)

Now here you are taking 180 degree turn, your first sentence in previous post was: "Why would India be bothered by this - IF it took place?" as long as their are people with your kind of support for US are there in GoI, media and commoners how could India act? You started your post protesting against the 'protest against US naval base'.

But, like China, the US too seems to be occupying a vacuum created by India. Being bothered is not a policy that one can act on. Nor is griping about it.

IF this has actually taken place, it is to a great extent because of Indian inaction (NOT policy).

Now just like Cubans won't allow US to make a base in their port, there will always be neighbouring countries which won't allow India to make a base. Even if current bangaladeshi govt. allows us to make a base, Khaleda Zia comes back and will ask us to leave.

Why is 'our friend US' so bothered about a vaccum in Bangaladesh? They have all the coverage against panda in Taiwan, what advantage in Bangladesh? If they are so concerned they should provide us with tech and provide ships for free to keep an eye. Anyway why should India make a base in Bangladesh? We are having our own coastline touching them, we can keep an eye from there itself.

4. SL/Myanmar/etc: IF they were bothered they would act.

Just BTW, they all have subscribed to Chinese actions.

However, I welcome this. India wakes up ONLY when there is some cataclysmic event - Kargil. India NEEDS a Kargil every year. Sad, but true.

I would like to know what are your views on China and her pearls. TIA.

As far as the 'pearls' are concerned, I think they are just that 'pearls', can be easily crushed at the start of hostilities. Let's say how many Brahmos/Nirbhays or Tejases can go to take out radar stations and ships they'll be sitting ducks. I guess coco islands radar eye can be called part of these pearls, few brahmos and that's it.

I'll equally be worried about IN ships in Vietnam, not much into basing few ships so near chinese. I'd rather go Karnad way, just provide Vietnamese Prithvis, Brahmos & 4 squadrons of Tejas for free and let panda get the taste of their on medicine.

My answers are in maroon bold.

koti · Post by **koti** » 01 Jun 2012 10:06

Austin wrote:USN presence in our backyard would be bodyblow to Indias strategic Interest , it would allow them to monitor all IN ship movement from close quarters and worst it would help them keep a tab on IN SSBN patrols in the east , mapping/monitoring of ocean floor for sensitive data for military use.

US presence in this part of the world or its desire to make it at Bangladesh coincides with IN SSBN force coming up and likely to be based in East plus the recent Chakra deployment there ....it would unnerve PLAN for sure but IN will be more harmed by this if the news is true............

This is a very serious issue and we need to respond to this swiftly and comprehensively.

If this happens anytime soon there are several steps we can take to maintain a balancing action.
We should not hesitate in deploying a Brahmos AShM, LACM facilities at Zopuitlang in Mizoram and Bengal immediately. Also, Expansion of Aizwal base should be done with priority.

K-15/Shourya based AShBM that we were chewing sometime back should also be given a high priority.

We can get a decent number of Tu-22M3.

Create better infrastructure in Bengal and house Littoral Guided missile Corvettes there on patrol.

Installing better Radar/Snooping stations in Mizoram and Andaman.

The fearing of offending someone should not deter us from having options balancing any advanced deployments.

Having a Fleet 100KM form Indian Landmass is something we should not take friendly for granted.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 01 Jun 2012 12:54

Elements on USN based in the BoB is a hostile act and should be considered as such.