Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Dec 2013 19:25

pankajs wrote:India To Construct 4 LPDs
NEW DELHI — The Indian Navy has floated a US $2.6 billion domestic tender for construction of four landing platform docks (LPDs) and bids were sent to domestic shipyards, Larsen & Toubro (L&T), Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering, and ABG Shipyard.

A senior Navy planner said the service will select a winning design based on the low bidder. State-owned Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. (HSL) then will build two LPDs based on that design and the winning company will build two.

This will be India’s first attempt to build the 20,000-ton vessels.

...

To build the LPDs in India, Larsen & Toubro has tied up with Navantia of Spain, while Pipavav Defence has teamed with France’s DCNS and ABG Shipyard has partnered with Alion of the US.

...

The LPD tender states the ship should be no more than 215 meters long and have a draft not to exceed 8 meters, in full load conditions. The ship will be powered by electric propulsion systems and have an endurance of 45 days with a maximum sustained speed of not less than 20 knots.

The LPD would operate a combination of landing craft, including landing craft mechanized to ferry tanks; landing craft, vehicle, personnel to transport troops; and the fast-moving landing craft air cushion vessels.

The LPD should be able to carry six main battle tanks, 20 infantry combat vehicles and 40 heavy trucks.

The ship also should be equipped with a point defense missile system, the close-in weapon system, an anti-torpedo decoy system, a chaff system, and heavy and light machine guns.

Special operation helicopters and large helicopters, up to 35 tons, will operate from the ship.

The LPD should be able to accommodate 1,430 personnel, including 60 officers, 470 sailors and 900 troops.

The ship would be able to conduct maritime surveillance, special operations, search and rescue, medical support and humanitarian aid.

India’s only operational LPD, the former USS Trenton now renamed as INS Jalashwa, was acquired in 1997 and can carry 900 troops, six tanks, 2000 tons of stores, four landing craft and six helicopters, and has a range of 7,700 kilometers at 20 knots.

...

So it seems this is a competition between three latest LPD designs/concepts:

Juan Carlos class -> Larsen & Toubro & Navantia of Spain
Mistral class -> Pipavav Defence & France’s DCNS
San Antonio-class -> ABG Shipyard & Alion of the US

Interesting to see which direction the IN picks.

John · Post by **John** » 16 Dec 2013 19:36

Philip wrote:Yes, no more orders to Russia.One supposes that the very successful Talwars, 6 of them were built in the US apart from the Rajputs which have served for decades! As far as I recollect the ex -Trenton,with sick Sea Kings and which killed some of our sailors is our US built rustbucket.

Jalashwa was gifted even USN had said the vessel should be moth balled but IN was desperate. Soviet vessels in IN service have a far worse track record than British or indigenous vessels. Anyway the reason Russia is not involved in this tender is because even Russians are using Mistral for their own LPD.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 16 Dec 2013 20:31

srai wrote:So it seems this is a competition between three latest LPD designs/concepts:

Juan Carlos class -> Larsen & Toubro & Navantia of Spain

Mistral class -> Pipavav Defence & France’s DCNS

San Antonio-class -> ABG Shipyard & Alion of the US
Interesting to see which direction the IN picks.

All are excellent options and successful as far as numbers go. The Juan Carlos is longer than the prescribed length - hope that does not rule it out. I would have rather have IN operate these through-deck mini carriers rather than the Jalashwa type vessels. Considering that these ships will operate till 2050 at least, it makes sense to keep options open for JSF and fixed wing UAVs.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 16 Dec 2013 20:48

X-Post

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/374 ... arwar.html

Navy takes steps to augment Karwar base capacity
Kalyan Ray, New Delhi, Dec 15, 2013, DHNS:
The naval headquarters in September, 2013 issued Expression of Interest for design consultancy service for dockyard and fleet-base buildings. DH Photo
Almost a year after the Cabinet approval, the Navy has set into motion the process to augment the capacity at Karwar base in north Karnataka, which would house 30 warships and submarines when fully ready.

But the Karnataka government's plan to use a part of the naval air base for civilian flights is unlikely to be realised as the Navy has dropped the idea of opening a full fledged fighter base at Karwar.

“Only helicopters will fly from Karwar because of a small runway. We will not develop Karwar as a base for fighter and fixed wing aircraft, for which the nearby Hansa air station in Goa can be put to use,” said a source, making it clear that Karwar naval air station could not be used for civilian flights.

The air-station was among several infrastructure projects, which will come up in the Rs 13,000 crore Phase-IIA of Project Seabird that received the Cabinet Committee on Security's nod last December.

The naval headquarters in September, 2013 issued Expression of Interest for design consultancy service for dockyard and fleet-base buildings. The responses, received till October end, are being studied at the naval headquarters to identify the vendors, who would be asked to participate in the tender process.

The expansion of Karwar naval base is one of the projects, hit by the budget cut. The finance ministry had sanctioned just about Rs 10 crore in this fiscal to carry out the consultancy activity, sources told Deccan Herald. But more funds are promised in the next financial year.

“Its the beginning of a long 10 year journey. The Navy has about 11000 acres of land, out of which only 20 per cent was used in the first phase. Most of the facilities would come up in the second phase,” said a Navy officer.

India's most modern and biggest aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya, which is on its way from Russia, will be berthed at Karwar.

Inaugurated by then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in October 1986, work on the phase-I of Karwar project was completed after two decades at a cost of Rs 2,628.82 crore. In phase-I, berthing facilities for 11 ships and 10 yard crafts were created, along with an airstrip and a residential township. The initial cost estimate was Rs 350 crore.

In the second phase, 10-12 berths and 6-8 dry berths would be created along with ship-lift capability along with oil dump and weapons depot.

Looks like there has been no capacity expansion since phase 1 (11 ships )which completed in 2006. Thanks to MMS again.

John · Post by **John** » 16 Dec 2013 21:18

Speaking of that what happened to plans of ordering 2nd batch of Shardul class ?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Dec 2013 21:23

Aditya G wrote: All are excellent options and successful as far as numbers go. The Juan Carlos is longer than the prescribed length - hope that does not rule it out. I would have rather have IN operate these through-deck mini carriers rather than the Jalashwa type vessels. Considering that these ships will operate till 2050 at least, it makes sense to keep options open for JSF and fixed wing UAVs.

Those are the tie-ups. Does not mean that the Indian version would be even similar - although I am sure the Indian solution will be influenced be each of teh foreign partner.

_______________________

BTW, does India have any proposals to field "marines"?

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Dec 2013 22:22

NRao wrote:...
____________________

BTW, does India have any proposals to field "marines"?

Army and navy plan to set up a marine brigade

SHIV AROOR | MAIL TODAY | NEW DELHI, JUNE 9, 2010 | UPDATED 10:42 IST

The navy and army have sent a proposal to the government seeking permission to transport a 5,000-strong armed infantry and special forces troops, tanks and weapons - an independent brigade group (IBG) - on foreign shores for active operations. This capability has both been controversial and strategically provocative.

It has been learnt that after years of consultations, the army and navy have finally started seeing eye to eye on the modalities required to incrementally build up the capability to deliver a full brigade- strength contingent of troops - including two special forces units - with arms, ammunition, vehicles and weapons outside the Indian mainland.

"The need to move forces is in keeping with the expanded security focus on India's island territories and the ability to deliver forces expeditiously for humanitarian relief operations," navy spokesperson Commander PVS Satish said.

While the financial implications of such a capability are being worked out, they will involve integrated expenditure on larger amphibious assault vessels, equipment and joint training.

The army has an IBG, the 340 Independent Infantry Brigade under Jodhpur- based 12 Corps, for amphibious assault operations.

It re-raised the 91 Infantry Brigade early last year for amphibious warfare.

But the navy currently only has the capacity to transport a little less than two battalions on expeditionary missions. The move now is to crank up that capacity more than twice over for a full IBG. Former navy chief Admiral Arun Prakash said it was absolutely essential that the navy built up the capacity to transport a brigade- sized group across the seas. "We have 1,200 island territories. We have energy investments worth thousands of crores far from our shores. We have huge diaspora in the Middle East. If there was a Kargil-like situation on any of our island territories, we would need adequate boots on the ground for combat. There are also other liabilities such as piracy and potential hostage situations.

Being able to transport a couple of battalions isn't nearly enough," he said.

Sources said the process to obtain approval from the government began under the previous navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta, currently India's high commissioner to New Zealand.

The case is said to have been taken up afresh in February this year by the chiefs of staff committee for consideration by the defence minister.

While formal approval is yet to come, the government has indicated it is in principle inclined to approve the proposal.

The capability received a cursory mention in an official technology roadmap document published by the defence ministry last month.

Vice Admiral (retd) Madanjit Singh, navy's former western commander, said: "It is a major capability that the navy is looking at and will necessarily be a joint effort in consultation with the army. Such a capability is useful for operations, humanitarian relief and rescue operations." The Centre and South Block have always been wary about discussing expeditionary capabilities, considering the implications of such operations and India's carefully nurtured image of a country with no belligerent ambitions.

While the establishment has always guised amphibious capabilities as an imperative for more efficient humanitarian relief operations, there have been several recent signs that assault and combat are very much part of the plan.

On April 14, a detachment of Indian soldiers conducted a landmark joint amphibious assault exercise with US Marines off the coast of San Diego on board the US Navy's landing vessel, USS New Orleans . In February last year - five months after the South Block formalised India's first joint amphibious warfare doctrine - the three forces conducted the biggest joint landing operation of troops (a battalion of the 91 Infantry Brigade re-raised in 2009 as an amphibious brigade) on Gujarat's Madhavpur beach after departing the navy base at Karwar, south of Goa.

Leaving little to the imagination, the South Block had announced then that the exercise proved that the forces could conduct "swift and intense conflict during military operations". Apart from being in the market for four- six more large amphibious landing ships to augment the American-built INS Jalashwa inducted almost three years ago, there are other items on order that indicate the desired amphibious assault readiness.

The most recent was the army's expression of interest in procuring up to 4,000 amphibious assault rifles for the infantry.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Dec 2013 23:24

^^^^^

Thanks!!!

That is a boat load.

But 3 years old?

On the other hand they are moving (really?) with 4 LPDs. Will check into teh range of such LPDs. Interesting.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 17 Dec 2013 17:10

Japan Maritime Self Defence Force and Indian Navy Exercise JIMEX 2013 from 19 to 22 Dec

They are being held in the seas of Eastern Command and will practice operations in anti-surface, anti-submarine and anti-air threat scenarios. May be we learn about Japanese tactics employed against Chinese.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Dec 2013 18:00

A minor correction with respect to article on Marine infantry posted by srai - 340 (I) Mechanized bde was initially raised as an amphibious force but later converted to mechanized role. As the article states, it forms part of Jodhpur based 12 Corps and I think is based in Naseerabad in Rajasthan. No amphibious role for this formation.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Dec 2013 12:56

The IN's amphib tender if lowest price rule prevails will not be able to acquire the JC,a great shame as this class has more multi-role capability than the Mistrals.OZ is building 4 JCs while Russia building 4 Mistrals.One has always advocated a STOVL capability for the IN regardless of what carrier aircraft are used,as STOVL aircraft have great versatility and have been used in several hotspots including Afghanistan by the Brits. in the ground attack role. STOVL JSF type aircraft based in our island territories and operating like RAF Harriers in German woods during the Cold War,would obviate the need for large airstrips and could use short stretches of existing roads for TO,just as the Swedes used roads for their Viggens.The camouflaged aircraft would then become practically invisible,unlike parked aircraft or in shelters at air bases.in ops,their flexibility would be unmatched with the ability to "hop" from island to island,from one sea based platform to another.
Harriers were used from the decks of container ships earlier and would be able to use the large helo decks of DDGs too fro their "hops".When also used as part of the air element of a carrier,they would give excellent quick response in an air defence role.

The evaluation should be done first on which type provides the greatest flexibility and capability and then determine whether the price is worth it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Dec 2013 09:58

Indian Coast Guard commissions first-in-class FPV
http://www.janes.com/article/31764/indi ... -class-fpv

The rapid expansion of the Indian Coast Guard has continued apace with the commissioning of two more ships: the first of 20 Aadesh-class fast patrol vessels (FPVs) and the eighth and final Rajshree-class inshore patrol vessel (IPV).

The 50 m FPV, ICCS Aadesh , was officially inducted into service at Kochi on 13 December, two days after the 49 m IPV, ICCS Rajdhwaj , joined the fleet at Chennai.

Both ships will be assigned to maritime security roles off India's eastern seaboard, with Aadesh based at Tuticorin under the operational control of the coastguard's eastern region and Rajdhwaj , operating out of Kakinada under the control of the service's District Headquarters No 6.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 19 Dec 2013 10:08

Philip wrote:The IN's amphib tender if lowest price rule prevails will not be able to acquire the JC,a great shame as this class has more multi-role capability than the Mistrals.OZ is building 4 JCs while Russia building 4 Mistrals.One has always advocated a STOVL capability for the IN regardless of what carrier aircraft are used,as STOVL aircraft have great versatility and have been used in several hotspots including Afghanistan by the Brits. in the ground attack role. STOVL JSF type aircraft based in our island territories and operating like RAF Harriers in German woods during the Cold War,would obviate the need for large airstrips and could use short stretches of existing roads for TO,just as the Swedes used roads for their Viggens.The camouflaged aircraft would then become practically invisible,unlike parked aircraft or in shelters at air bases.in ops,their flexibility would be unmatched with the ability to "hop" from island to island,from one sea based platform to another.
Harriers were used from the decks of container ships earlier and would be able to use the large helo decks of DDGs too fro their "hops".When also used as part of the air element of a carrier,they would give excellent quick response in an air defence role.

The evaluation should be done first on which type provides the greatest flexibility and capability and then determine whether the price is worth it.

Apologies if this seems like the BR equivalent of stalking, but it is really time to let go of the STOVL shibboleth. All the STOVL Kool-Aid drinkers of the 1980s have seen that in high tempo ops, all the romantic notions of "two jets in a jungle clearing" have gone out of the window.

Even the USMC, the biggest user of STOVL today, has major gripes with their limitations in combat. They have dug in their heels on the F-35B only because of larger fears that the air component and therefore their unique way of expeditionary fighting will be taken away and they will become America's 2nd land army.

They might end up losing that battle as well.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 19 Dec 2013 10:31

Since this is get design and make, the tender could throw surprises.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Dec 2013 05:05

Do not know if this animation was posted:

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 20 Dec 2013 05:42

Il maginifico. Is the scale right? Looks kinda too large.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Dec 2013 06:02

But, why oh why F-15s?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 20 Dec 2013 06:08

Indranil, it seems our folks (and many others WW) just google for whatever equipment they want and take first available. Usually most pictures are of US/western maal.

In the past, Akash SAM poster shows it shooting down SR-71s. Pvt firm which makes stuff for OFB shows Abrams on poster. L&T poster shows some British sub as advertisement for their work on subs.

The list goes on and on and on.

The worst such case was told to me by Russian guy, apparently their poster makers to celebrate veterans of "Great Patriotic War" used Tiger Tanks on posters (to represent soviet kit). Needless to say much anger.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Dec 2013 13:34

When the USMC and RN have plumped fro STOVL JSFs for their carriers and amphib vessels,and the USMC bought all 70+ ex-RN Harriers,lock,stock,and barrel,those who jest at the capabilty of STOVL aircraft have blinkers on.These aircraft have in the past and will in the future prove their mettle.

Leaving that issue aside there is much that the CG can do for the IN.I was talking to a defence analysts recently about the various types of warships in service with the IN and CG and one of the most capable vessels with enormous potential that he and many other analysts thought was the NOPV class,where the IN and CG's OPVs can be used in times of crisis with extra weaponry.These relatively inexpensive vessels can be wired and fitted for extra ASW and anti-ship weaponry which need not be used in normal times. CG vessels can also perform mine countermeasure and coastal ASW duties as they will be tasked for the job during any crisis. The flexibility of the NATO STANFLEX "multi-role ocean patrol vessel" is a case in point.If also equipped with a multi-role SEA King class multi-role helo,these ships could peform almost the same duties as a dedicated ASW light frigate. We would be able to build them at home in large numbers.In peacetime,they would be perfect for anti-piracy duties and instead of sending a Delhi class DDG to patrol Puntland waters off the African coast,these ocean going MR vessels would be far cheaper to operate and deal with pirate bumboats and their mother ships.They would also serve well as AGIs.

We have already shown how the older OPVs have been given "teeth" with the experimental launches of Dhanush from the helo deck. The IAF have also in the past a glorious history of using transport aircraft in the bombing role in wars with Pak.Every asset has out of the box capabilities.In Delhi,Maj.Gen. Cardoso when speaking of the Karachi raids in'71,introducing one of the war hero CO's of the missile boats that partook in the raids,recounted how legendary Soviet navy chief Adm.Gorshkov who was monitoring the war closely,danced a jig in front of his shocked staff officers after he learnt news of the daring raids on Karachi by the IN's Russian built Osa missile craft meant only for coastal defence. When Gorshkov visited India after the war,he wanted to meet the heroes of the Karachi raids and I was told first person by a senior naval officer,relative who was also decorated for his role in the raid,that he said "you young Indian Navy sailors have taught us new methods of naval warfare".

Karan mentioned the misuse of other pics of vessels and aircraft by manufacturers.One prime example is that off the DRDO using a pic of an RN nuclear sub when the ATV was launched! A similar poster wa salso found during a previous Aero-India show.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 20 Dec 2013 14:36

Philip wrote:When the USMC and RN have plumped fro STOVL JSFs for their carriers and amphib vessels,and the USMC bought all 70+ ex-RN Harriers,lock,stock,and barrel,those who jest at the capabilty of STOVL aircraft have blinkers on.These aircraft have in the past and will in the future prove their mettle.

Rhetoric is easy, especially when you are the one wearing blinkers but accusing others. Care to reflect on:

a) Why when push came to shove the Brits sacrificed their Harriers (Joint Force Harrier by the way not just RN Harriers)?
b) Why the USMC used these Harriers for spares and not for expanding its fleet, if this platform was really proving so great in the current taskings?
c) Why the IN, the 3rd largest user of STOVL aircraft at one point of time, has moved away from the platform?
d) How a high-maintenance "stealth" jet like the F-35B will operate from "austere" locations?

There are internet resources by USMC professionals who are raising the flag on overhyping STOVL based on their experiences of current wars and understanding of future wars, but I guess they are "blinkered" as well.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Dec 2013 15:46

Rajit and so are the Spanish and Italians blinkered too who will field STOVL JSFs from their carriers (Juan Carlos and Cavour) ! The Brits by the way have been pilloried by their own defence chiefs for the massive budget cuts which saw their RN Harriers,former RAF Harriers and even their Sea Harriers pensioned off too early.If STOVL fighters are so passe then why did the Brits cancel their earlier decision to buy conventional JSFs? They have operated STOVL aircraft for the last 3 decades from the Falklands War and found the type ,the best type to operate from their light and med size carriers.With the Typhoon also well into service,what prevented them from developing naval variant of the Typhoon instead? Add to the list Japan and SoKo too planning to acquire JSF STOVL aircraft from their light carriers masquerading as amphibs,and the list keeps on growing.

In any spat with China,we can expect massed missile strikes (no secret) against our main airfields and bases.In such cases,as happened during the Asian tsunami,the IAF's A&N base at Car Nic was devastated.When runways are put out of action in our island territories,which type of aircraft will be able to operate in the aftermath? Only STOVL aircraft and amphibs,apart from helos.It took 3.5 months to put the airfield and base back into shape,and that was at record speed too! Moreover,the entire plot has been lost with the inability to comprehend the flexibility of the type which can operate from any type or size of flat top and has been demonstrated,even from merchant vessels like container ships too. In the Kargil War when the Viraat was unavailable in the dockyard,there were unconfirmed reports that the IN had planned for something similar.

How the RN arrived at its QE carrier design and aircraft type has been extensively detailed in this lengthy paper.Pl. read the entire feature in the link. It is extremely interesting in the context of the design of our future ICA-2,whose design has yet to be finalised.

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvf1-13.htm

Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF)
Queen Elizabeth Class
Part 13
Article Parts

1. Current Project Status and
Graphics

2. Specification

3. The Project and its Origins

4. Role

5. Smart Procurement

6. Project Schedule

7. Procurement Process I
(until Jan 2003)

8. Procurement Process II
(until July 2007)

9. Procurement Process III
(latest situation)

10. Management and Industry
Structures

11. Aviation Operations

12. STOVL or CV F-35?

13. Platform Design ...

14. ... and Redesign

15. C4ISR Facilities

16. Operational Concepts

17. Crew, Accommodation &
Habitability

18. Propulsion and Engineering

19. Manufacture

20. Build Problems and UK
Content

21. Basing and Support

22. Costs

23. Air Group

24. Aviation Requirements and
Facilities

25. Catapults and Arresting Gear

26. Armament and Armour

27. Operations

28. Names

29. CVF Links

Some interesting excerpts.Note the Northrop Grumman assertion that the AEW E-2C/D Hawkeye can operate from a ski jump ! Therefore,IAC-2 of larger size can operate Hawkeyes if required from a skijump STOBAR configuration.

nterestingly despite the official selection of the STOVL F-35 variant and an "adaptable" carrier platform, BAE Systems (and perhaps Thales) in October 2002 re-proposed a STOBAR configuration for the carrier, primarily for AEW reasons. A STOBAR carrier would have a lower cost than a full CTOL configuration but would be able to operate a wider range of aircraft than pure STOVL. Northrop Grumman were claiming that its E-2C/D Hawkeye 2000 could launch using a ski-jump launch, while the F-35C - which was increasingly seen as a likely choice for the manned element of the RAF's then planned Future Offensive Air System - could also operate from a STOBAR carrier. The MOD was not interested.

Therefore,IAC-2 could in a STOBAR theoretically operate any conventional naval multi-role aircraft,STOVL variants like the F-35B,plus Hawkeye class AEW aircraft .As the RN has wisely chosen,it would be a far more cost-effective design than one with cats which would require extra power plus cats,arrestor wires,etc.,adding a few billions to the cost.

PS:Please note that one is nott advocating using only STOVL aircraft but both conventional (larger carriers) and STOVL (from amphibs mainly).The IN can exploit its current small fleet of Sea Harriers operating from the larger Vikram in conjunction with the MIG-29Ks as mentioned in an earlier post.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 20 Dec 2013 16:41

Philip wrote:Rajit and so are the Spanish and Italians blinkered too who will field STOVL JSFs from their carriers (Juan Carlos and Cavour)

Since the only time they will take on a near peer/peer enemy is when they will be operating under US-provided air superiority (which, surprise surprise will be provided by overwhelming non-STOVL platforms) they are free to take their sub-optimal decisions, where the tail -- the type of carrier, is wagging the dog-- the air wing component.

Philip wrote:Moreover,the entire plot has been lost with the inability to comprehend the flexibility of the type which can operate from any type or size of flat top and has been demonstrated,even from merchant vessels like container ships too.

Oh the irony! All this stuff sounds good in theory.

http://dalyhistory.wordpress.com/2012/0 ... -conveyor/

The Atlantic Conveyor sailed with 31 merchant Seamen onboard, but 126 military personnel. Of these 36 officers and men formed the ships naval party, the rest were working on the aircraft carried.

She arrived at Ascension on 5 May, where she embarked 8 Sea Harriers as reinforcement for the Squadrons already in the South Atlantic, and 6 RAF Harrier GR3. Along with the amphibious group she left Ascension and arrived in the TEZ on 19 May, carrying a total of 25 aircraft. While entering the TEZ one Harrier was actually kept on deck alert, armed with Sidewinder missiles.

Although the Harriers were disembarked to Aircraft Carriers, the Altantic Conveyor retained her Helicopters onboard and remained with the Carrier Battle Group to the East while the landings at San Carlos began. She was due to sail into San Carlos Water on the night of 25 May to deliver her cargo. At 1940 that evening an air raid warning was received. Captain Ian North ordered an immediate turn to port by 40 degrees, to present th Conveyor’s strong stern doors to the direction of the threat. Emergency stations were piped, and the ships siren was sounded as an extra warning. HMS Invincible launched a Sea Harrier Combat Air Patrol. At 1942 an approaching missile was sighted by several ships, including HMS Brilliant. All of the naval ships in the vicinity fired off chaff decoys, but the Conveyor had not been given chaff. She was hit by two exocet missiles

Why did the Brits not continue to use the Atlantic Conveyor as a "improvised" aircraft carrier, keeping some Harriers on it?

Since you didn't answer my question on the IN's deliberate choice of a non-STOVL platform, knowing that China is the primary threat going forward maybe IN planners don't share your simplistic apocalyptic view of massed missile strikes or whatever else you think World War III is going to be all about.

Rather than live out some Dr. Strangelovian odyssey please let's come back to earth and talk about endurance, ordnance carriage, bringback, and logistics, all of which make non-STOVL platforms superior to STOVL platforms.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 20 Dec 2013 16:54

Philip wrote:PS:Please note that one is nott advocating using only STOVL aircraft but both conventional (larger carriers) and STOVL (from amphibs mainly).The IN can exploit its current small fleet of Sea Harriers operating from the larger Vikram in conjunction with the MIG-29Ks as mentioned in an earlier post.

This is not a PS point. It's a whole discussion in itself, when the only long-term non STOVL option is the F-35B, where as mentioned in another thread, there is no Plan B for India.

When a bankrupt but $600 billion defense budget nation is the only one with a fully developed doctrine for such ops, and even there the Marine Corps and the MAGTF/MEU formations are under severe doctrinal attack by the other services let's not be too quick to emulate them.

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 20 Dec 2013 20:41

Enjoy the IN contingent in Ruski land with a cultural exchange

[youtube]5vJ0Qmn1Jz0#t=1910[/youtube]

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Dec 2013 06:03

The RN used the Atlantic Conveyor as a transport for Harriers,etc, during a crisis.It shows the flexibility of the type.Secondly,from this experience,it designed and built HMS Ocean,an amphib assault flat top to merchantman stds.VSEL thought the design was basically a merchant ship with military hardware bolted on." Unfortunately,they forgot to add a ski jump which curtailed full Harrier ops,now irrelevant with the RN forced to retire/sell all its remaining Harriers due to colossal budget cross the board cuts by the UK,now facing heavy criticism from all quarters.

We are planning to use our carriers and future amphib flat tops for at least 40 years.During that time long period there is enough time to evaluate the JSF F-35B when it arrives in service,or develop with Russia a follow on to the Yak-141 design.In the Vikram td. I've just posted details of the comparison between STOVL and conventional aircraft ops in the Vikram td.,where STOVL was found to be significantly more capable ,why the RN chose this type for its QE carriers.
With the USN experiencing severe budget cuts too,where in the future it may have only 3-4 CBGs available,the RN,Spanish and Italian navies,as well as the Japanese and SoKo will have to fend for themselves.Uncle Sam isn't going to always be available with a carrier "brolly"!

One is completely missing the point about STOVL.It will be needed for amphib ops as well as complementing carrier ops on out CVs.It is not a replacement for conventional naval multi-role aircraft like the MIG-29Ks operating in STOBAR style from our carriers.The IN is now warming up to the idea of a large amphib capability with 4 amphibs in the future of at least Mistral class,which will require their own integral air support ,aircraft or at the very least embarked attack helos as the Russians plan with their KA-52s aboard their Mistrals.The smaller multi-role amphib vessels can be used for smaller crises instead of sending a carrier with its attenuating costs.The number of amphib vessels will only grown in the future as the planned amphib brigade expands into a division and so will the air support requirement too.We required over 125,000 troops in Sri Lanka with the IPKF's ops there.The need for a STOVL aircraft is going to be sorely felt.The IN and IAF too should look at developing a suitable aircraft for their future requirements in conjunction with Russia (with their experience) if the JSF becomes unavailable.

Reg. the IN's role in a future spat with Pak in the Arabian Sea,the armed forces are evolving into a more cohesive force than before,as the MOD/services draw closer to the appointment of a CDS from reports.The establishment of theatre commands and commanders is also on the anvil.The "Western" command will in the maritime sphere encompass what WNC's are of responsibility is.A few years ago it was tasked with "the largest operational command of the Indian armed forces" .From the Persian Gulf in the North to 16 deg. South and from the Red Sea /East African coast in the West to 77 deg. and 15' East. This area of responsibility has definitely been modified due to new challenges.The primary task for WNC was securing country's maritime interests including the safe passage of our energy supplies transiting the Gulf and Arabian Sea.

Gwadar is now firmly part of the PLAN's strategy,a naval and air base from where it and Pak can monitor and if need be impede tanker traffic from the Gulf especially using its large fleet of subs.A recent report stresses how China has developed its capable conventional sub fleet using German engines-the best of all sub engines,French sonars,and assorted mil. eqpt. mainly from Europe. We cannot underestimate its capability.One of the simplest methods by which Gwadar can be saniitised is to mine the approaches.This will be less controversial than attacking any Chinese assets,by intent or mistake during a crisis with Pak.IN subs on patrol off Gwadar could also wreak havoc with shipping using the port.However Karachi poses a closer and more dangerous threat being the main naval base of Pak.,from where its P-3s armed with Harpoons,AIP subs with Exocet and its growing number of missile armed FACs ,can strike at the IN and our land based assets.Whichever IN carrier is operating in the west,it is going to have an exciting time!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Dec 2013 17:53

Japan and India hold joint naval exercise in Indian Ocean
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 7&cid=1101

India's INS Ranvijay guided-missile destroyer. (Photo/US Navy)

Facing a common threat from the Chinese maritime expansion, the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF) and Indian Navy launched a joint naval exercise near the coast of Chennai, one of India's most populous cities, between Dec. 21-22, according to the Beijing Times.

The exercise in the Indian Ocean will help prepare both navies against enemy submarines and surface combat vessels, the Tokyo-based Kyodo News said. During the drill, the Indian Navy mobilized the INS Satpura, a Shivalik-class stealth multi-role frigate, INS Ranvijay, a Rajput-class guided-missile destroyer and INS Kuthar, a Khukri class corvette, while the JMSDF deployed its Maizuru-based Escort Flotilla 3 composed of two frigates, the JDS Ariake and JDS Setogiri.

The Hindu, a New Delhi-based paper, stated that another exercise will be launched by the two countries' respective coast guards near the coast of western Japan's Kochi prefecture. For the exercise, the Indian Coast Guard will send three vessels, one fixed-wing aircraft and one helicopter. It will be launched as an anti-piracy exercise, but analysts claim that the two nations will be considering China as the main potential threat to their maritime security, the Beijing Times said.

Fearing that the People's Liberation Army Navy may expand its sphere of influence into the Indian Ocean, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also expressed interest in buying a US-2 amphibious aircraft from Japan during his visit to Tokyo in May.

Japan meanwhile has been working to form an new partnership with India to contain the Chinese maritime expansion from east and south. Tokyo has also made strides to win support from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to condemn Beijing for the establishment of its new air defense identification zone.

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Dec 2013 18:28

INS TALWAR collides with boat.. breaking news

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/vide ... 857516.cms

with the number of warships increasing exponentially along with civilian vessels ... the region is sure getting crowded !

Will · Post by **Will** » 24 Dec 2013 18:29

Yea... this is silly the number of ships banging into others. Something needs to be done.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 24 Dec 2013 18:32

No Not Again,How come so many accidents?
it was some submarines before and INS Talwar now, was russian made Krivak III class missile frigate,how can ships collide on such open seas,with all radars and so much staffing?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2013 18:44

Radar is not a 100 % full proof way to track small targets sometimes it misses and its also possible that the mistake would be on part of the other boat or some screw up in navigation from the other ship and not Talwar.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 24 Dec 2013 20:24

^^ Bombay harbour is extremely crowded. Being Christmas Eve, most fisher-folk at Sasoon Docks will be coming back & increasing the crowd of fishing boats. How good is radar in a crowded place with no place to move?

This incident happened off Ratnagiri and 15 nm off the coast. More details need to emerge.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 24 Dec 2013 21:49

tsarkar wrote:^^ Bombay harbour is extremely crowded. Being Christmas Eve, most fisher-folk at Sasoon Docks will be coming back & increasing the crowd of fishing boats. How good is radar in a crowded place with no place to move?

All the more reason to separate out the naval facilities from the commercial ones! If its congested now and causing problems, its going to cause much bigger problems during the initial phase of any war-time surge! And problems will be similar then: commercial shipping either evacuating ports or coming into them to reach the safety of the ports.

Seems like the Navy is facing the same problems that the air-force is having with dual-use airports.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 25 Dec 2013 02:15

Two arrested after INS Talwar collides with fishing boat.

INS Talwar, the lead ship of the Talwar-class frigates of the Indian Navy, collided with a fishing vessel on Monday night. The fishing boat, AI Soban, had 27 people on board but lacked spotlights to help it navigate at night. The Ratnagiri police have registered a case against the owner and the captain.

INS Talwar was on its way to a southern naval base when it collided with the fishing boat at 9.30 pm on Monday. The incident took place 10 nautical miles from Harne port, which is 125 km north of Ratnagiri.

"We have booked the fishing boat owner and captain under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. Of 27 people on board, nine sustained minor injuries. They were admitted to a government hospital and discharged the same day," Deepak Pandey, superintendent of police, Ratnagiri, told Mirror.

"The boat did not have night operation facility, which is why the navy ship collided with it," Pandey added.

A case has been registered under sections 280 (rash navigation of a vessel), 282 (conveying a person by water for hire in an unsafe or overloaded vessel), 283 (danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation) and 337 (causing hurt by an act that endangers the life or personal safety of others) after the navy filed an official complaint against the boat owner on Tuesday afternoon.

INS Talwar didn't suffer much damage and left for its destination the same night.

Vinod Ji · Post by **Vinod Ji** » 25 Dec 2013 03:16

Vipul wrote:Two arrested after INS Talwar collides with fishing boat.

INS Talwar, the lead ship of the Talwar-class frigates of the Indian Navy, collided with a fishing vessel on Monday night. <snip>

Not a flattering picture of Indian Navy's training..

& Then booking the fishing boat navigating without lights For Pete's sake..
What if the same boat was on a suicide mission.

Reminds me of USS Cole In Middle east

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 25 Dec 2013 03:22

Anti-submarine warfare
The DAC has also approved of a Rs. 13,000 crore project that would enhance the anti-submarine warfare capability of the Indian Navy. The committee has approved indigenous development of 700 ton Anti-Submarine Warfare Shallow Water Craft that would take on submarines operating in coastal waters, within 200 nautical miles of the base port.

These vessels would watch over foreign submarines operating close to the Indian coastline and would also be capable of laying anti-ship and anti-submarine mines.

The crafts would be built by a public sector undertaking, the Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Limited (GRSE), that would work in close coordination with the Navy on the design.

I saw GRSE's Expression of Interest inviting design partners for the ASW-SWC project. Can gurus explain why the Navy needs foreign expertise to help it develop these ships, when it has designed and built the 4000-ton Kamorta-class in house?

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 25 Dec 2013 04:32

Commercial Marine navigators are navigating on a continous basis and they have the experience and skills developed with repeated operations. The equipment they use to navigate and avoid collisions are pretty simple compared to a naval vessel.

However all these fancy electronic aids are just that AIDS TO NAVIGATION. Your 5 senses in close quarters are the final say in navigating in close quarters.

So again how many years of experience did the navigating team have between them and how many of those years were spent alongside a berth?

Also as has been pointed out above what if this was a USS cole type of incident?

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 25 Dec 2013 04:41

Vinod Ji wrote: Not a flattering picture of Indian Navy's training..

& Then booking the fishing boat navigating without lights For Pete's sake..
What if the same boat was on a suicide mission.

Reminds me of USS Cole In Middle east

USS Cole was in port when it was attacked - not on the move.

Has nothing to do with "training". It's not like driving down the highway at night and colliding against a semi- the Talwar is a stealth frigate, it has very little illumination to begin with and unlike a small fishing vessel it can't turn on a dime to dodge fishing vessels that come too close or move erratically.

Finally, this is India. The Navy cannot maintain a quarantine zone and open fire on fishermen that come too close. Even the Americans don't enforce that strictly at home where the seaways are less chaotic. If the Indian navy followed maintained a strict security bubble around their ships they wouldn't be able to enter or leave port without a trail of corpses and wrecked boats behind them. America can get away with its cowboy tactics in the Middle East because the Arab dictators will execute dissenters on America's behalf and by claiming they are "shooting foreigners" to save American sailors.

Indian ports are at the best of times chaotic, at night they are down right dangerous. Imagine Indian roads, only without the traffic signals or any traffic police or indeed any limit on the span or direction of the road - its basically a mad melee of literally hundreds of small vessels going any which way as fast as they can. It is inevitable that in the choas large vessels will be unable to navigate safely no matter how hard they try. Dozens of commercial vessels have accidents too and there are dozens more "near-misses". Any Indian naval navigator is by far more adept than any merchant navigator even on their worst day. Accidents will happen as long as the Indian navy is forced to use the same ports as merchant and fishing vessels.

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 25 Dec 2013 04:48

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_sh ... tok_(2013)

According to the above post, the Russian Navy is purchasing a french mistral class carrier.

My question is why do they not build one them selves? If they do not have the tech, then what is the quality of the former Admiral Gorshkov, which India just bought. That ship is about twice the size of Mistral class, but still one starts to wonder about the quality of Russian ships. Specially in light of all the delays and cost overruns. Has the IN been screwed by the ruskies?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Dec 2013 05:00

wasn't there was another incident a couple of years ago when a merchantman collided with a Talwar class FFG,because it couldn't pick it up due to it stealth features.Small vessels like these are quit often involved in smuggling,which is why they carry no lights.

The Russians are capable of building amphibs,the Ivan Rogov lass for example,but in the light of the Georgian spat found the need for more specialised amphib vessels and chose the Mistral.It has nothing to do with the ability to build ships,as it is building all of them at home.We are similarly going to choose a design and build them at home.

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 25 Dec 2013 07:37

Brando

100 miles of Ratnagiri is not near any multi use harbour like Mumbai , In fact it is nearer to our new base at Karwar which is dedicated to Naval use. So even though there have been instances in the past of merchant and naval vessels colliding due to dual use ports , this particular case should not be clubbed together with the dual use port.

For any collision to have occured both parties have to have made mistakes. Yes the fishing boat did not have running lights, so what, the naval vessel has sophisticated eqq on board and should have been able to avoid it.

A normal merchant vessel has only two men on the bridge, and even in fishing infested zones they make in-numerable course corrections to ensure a collision does not occur.
A naval vessel has at least 10 people on the bridge so lack of manpower is not an issue.

To avoid a collision merchant navigators
1) change course 2) slow down 3) maintain a good visual watch in addition on the aids to navigation like RADAR SONAR etc
3) Illuminate the offending vessel with her searchlight 4) Use a loudhailer
I am not a professional navigator but have been on a navigating bridge often enough, to know that if vigilance is maintained the chances of this type of incidence occuring is negligable to nil.

The stealth fishing vessel got smacked by the stealth frigate. Both were caught by surprise, for the fishing vessel that basically was the end of her, for the naval vessel it showed up deficiencies in her operating procedures.

The fishing vessel is not a small one if she carried close to 30 people , therfore she has to have given a sizable radar echo, (even if built of wood)

It would not be professional to place the whole blame on the fishing vessel, The navy might be delving deeper into this incident especially since there has been a loss of life.