Indian Naval Discussion

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2570
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 05 Sep 2013 10:07

Cosmo_R wrote:
chandanus wrote:Was in a city , noticed a guy carring some parts n PCBs on back of a bicycle..a little chat revealed that they were parts for homing head our home grown torpedo :shock:


It's all part of a chankian strategy to hide in plain sight. from.


not any longer , i guess :mrgreen:

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 132
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arijitkm » 09 Sep 2013 09:26

Anti-missile shield for frontline Navy warships fast eroding

NEW DELHI: The anti-missile defensive shield protecting 14 frontline warships, including aircraft carrier INS Viraat, is fast eroding but the government is dragging its feet on taking a decision one way or the other due to an ongoing CBI probe into the original deal.

The Navy has been pressing panic buttons for quite some time about its fast depleting stock of missiles to arm the Israeli Barak-I anti-missile defence (AMD) system - which intercept hostile incoming sea-skimming missiles at a 9km range - fitted on INS Viraat as well as guided-missile destroyers and stealth frigates.

Sources said that Navy chief Admiral DK Joshi has even written to defence minister AK Antony for an early decision on the acquisition of an additional 262 Barak-I missiles, at a cost of over $150 million, since it was a "critical operational requirement".

But the defence ministry had expressed helplessness due to the pending CBI investigation into the infamous Barak kickbacks case registered in October 2006. The law ministry and the attorney general, however, have now left it on the MoD to decide on the fresh procurement case. "The ball is firmly in the MoD's court now," said a source.

The law ministry had earlier held the case should not be sent to the Cabinet Committee on Security for approval till the CBI probe was completed. But the CBI has failed to make much headway "due to pending letters rogatory (letters of request)" in Israel and UK. "With Navy pressing for a fresh legal opinion, it was held the MoD get an external evaluation or audit done. Now, even that caveat has been removed," said the source.

But in the backdrop of the VVIP helicopter and other scams ahead of the 2014 general elections, the MoD seems reluctant to take a decision even though it "understands" the urgency for the Barak-I missiles.

It was after Pakistan acquired sea-skimming Exocet and Harpoon missiles, coupled with the failure of the indigenous Trishul AMD system, that the then NDA government had inked the initial Rs 1,160 crore deal for nine Barak-I AMD systems, along with 200 missiles worth Rs 350 crore, with Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Rafael in October 2000.

Subsequently, under the UPA-1 regime in October 2006, the CBI registered the FIR in the Barak kickbacks case to name former defence minister George Fernandes, his party associates Jaya Jaitly and R K Jain, alleged arms dealer Suresh Nanda and former Navy chief Admiral Sushil Kumar among the accused.

The irony is that the UPA government has refrained from blacklisting IAI and Rafael, despite banning other firms like Israeli Military Industries, Singapore Technologies Kinetics, Rheinmetall Air Defence (Zurich) and Corporation Defence of Russia in other corruption cases, on the ground that it would be counter-productive.

IAI and DRDO, for instance, are collaborating in two major but delayed projects to develop a long-range surface-to-air missile (LR-SAM) system for Rs 2,606 crore to arm Indian warships and a medium-range SAM system for IAF at a cost of Rs 10,076 crore.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 495
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 09 Sep 2013 12:00


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21765
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 09 Sep 2013 13:02

SNaik , When will the trial end any dates are they done with it or some more things are remaining ? Thanks

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 495
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 09 Sep 2013 13:40

They are finishing the flight tests in September and then heading back to Severodvinsk for final coat of paint. Handover ceremony is scheduled for 14-15 November.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15356
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Karan M » 09 Sep 2013 18:42

arijitkm wrote:Anti-missile shield for frontline Navy warships fast eroding

NEW DELHI: The anti-missile defensive shield protecting 14 frontline warships, including aircraft carrier INS Viraat, is fast eroding but the government is dragging its feet on taking a decision one way or the other due to an ongoing CBI probe into the original deal.

The Navy has been pressing panic buttons for quite some time about its fast depleting stock of missiles to arm the Israeli Barak-I anti-missile defence (AMD) system - which intercept hostile incoming sea-skimming missiles at a 9km range - fitted on INS Viraat as well as guided-missile destroyers and stealth frigates.

Sources said that Navy chief Admiral DK Joshi has even written to defence minister AK Antony for an early decision on the acquisition of an additional 262 Barak-I missiles, at a cost of over $150 million, since it was a "critical operational requirement".

But the defence ministry had expressed helplessness due to the pending CBI investigation into the infamous Barak kickbacks case registered in October 2006. The law ministry and the attorney general, however, have now left it on the MoD to decide on the fresh procurement case. "The ball is firmly in the MoD's court now," said a source.

The law ministry had earlier held the case should not be sent to the Cabinet Committee on Security for approval till the CBI probe was completed. But the CBI has failed to make much headway "due to pending letters rogatory (letters of request)" in Israel and UK. "With Navy pressing for a fresh legal opinion, it was held the MoD get an external evaluation or audit done. Now, even that caveat has been removed," said the source.

But in the backdrop of the VVIP helicopter and other scams ahead of the 2014 general elections, the MoD seems reluctant to take a decision even though it "understands" the urgency for the Barak-I missiles.

It was after Pakistan acquired sea-skimming Exocet and Harpoon missiles, coupled with the failure of the indigenous Trishul AMD system, that the then NDA government had inked the initial Rs 1,160 crore deal for nine Barak-I AMD systems, along with 200 missiles worth Rs 350 crore, with Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Rafael in October 2000.

Subsequently, under the UPA-1 regime in October 2006, the CBI registered the FIR in the Barak kickbacks case to name former defence minister George Fernandes, his party associates Jaya Jaitly and R K Jain, alleged arms dealer Suresh Nanda and former Navy chief Admiral Sushil Kumar among the accused.

The irony is that the UPA government has refrained from blacklisting IAI and Rafael, despite banning other firms like Israeli Military Industries, Singapore Technologies Kinetics, Rheinmetall Air Defence (Zurich) and Corporation Defence of Russia in other corruption cases, on the ground that it would be counter-productive.

IAI and DRDO, for instance, are collaborating in two major but delayed projects to develop a long-range surface-to-air missile (LR-SAM) system for Rs 2,606 crore to arm Indian warships and a medium-range SAM system for IAF at a cost of Rs 10,076 crore.


LOL at the court of St Antony...he neither prevents corruption nor can he stop corruption. All he stops is modernisation.

Ravishankar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 43
Joined: 30 Aug 2008 16:32

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ravishankar » 09 Sep 2013 20:35

Can't recall if this was posted.

Sweeping mines, salvaging looted gold after the 1971 War

http://indrus.in/blogs/2013/08/31/sweep ... 28955.html

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 13 Sep 2013 09:40

DSEI news.The RN's new carriers and their intended expanded tasks.It would be interesting to see what the complement of aircraft and helos is being intended both for the Gorky/Vikram. and the Vikrant-2.

U.K. Royal Navy Widening Scope Of Carrier Use
By Anthony Osborne tony.osborne@aviationweek.com

The U.K. Royal Navy is broadening the scope of how it might use its future fleet of Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.

The first of the two ships, HMS Queen Elizabeth, is 80% complete internally according to Rear Admiral Russell Harding, the head of the U.K. Fleet Air Arm, speaking at the Defence Services Equipment International (DSEI) exhibition in London Sept. 10. The vessel is due to be launched “some time in 2014” while work on the sister ship, the HMS Prince of Wales, is proceeding apace.

The carriers will form the centerpiece of the Responsive Force Task Group (RFTG), capable of embarking a wide variety of rotary-wing platforms as well as a squadron of the U.K.’s planned F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters. Although the last Strategic Defense and Security Review (SDSR) called for an embarked complement of 12 JSFs on the ship, Harding suggested that a new Joint Air Maneuver Package could be developed in support of amphibious operations.

A surge force of up to 24 JSFs could deploy on the ship along with what he described as a Maritime Force Protection package of nine Merlin Mk. 2 helicopters equipped for the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) mission, while a further four or five would be available to provide an airborne early warning capability. A littoral maneuver package also is envisaged, potentially using the Royal Air Force’s Chinooks, the upgraded Merlin Mk. 4, Army Apache attack helicopters and the Wildcat helicopter.

Studies are being carried out by the U.K. Defense Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) to see if the ship can operate safely with more landing spots than the six currently planned. Harding suggests that by adding a further four landing spots, the ship will be able to lift a company-sized unit of troops (up to 250 soldiers) in a single group lift using medium helicopters. “This is possible,” Harding said. “We just need to decide how we paint the lines on the flight deck.”

Significant work has gone into reducing the manpower levels of the ship. Current crew complement for the vessel alone is 679 sailors, compared to 3,200 for a Nimitz-class carrier of the U.S. Navy. Harding said such savings were possible through the use of greater automation. He described the weapon-handling system as similar to that found in an “Amazon.com warehouse.”

As the entry into service of the carriers nears, the U.K. is planning to send more than 300 personnel from officers to sailors to gain experience in carrier operations with the U.S. Navy on its CVNs and with the U.S. Marine Corps on its LHDs. And while more pilots will be involved in exchanges with Navy Hornet squadrons and Marine Harrier units, one officer will exchange on the French navy’s Dassault Super Etendard carrier-borne fighter bomber in a bid to gain experience flying operations from small deck carriers.

The future of the HMS Prince of Wales is currently unclear. In the 2010 SDSR, it was decided that the ship would go into “extended reserve.” Harding told delegates that the final decision would be made during SDSR 2015 but said that with the money spent on the ship, retaining it as a backup to the Queen Elizabeth on an extended readiness might be a cost-effective solution.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21765
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 13 Sep 2013 09:42

Hopefully we get this for our Scorpene , quite an intresting concept in Submarine Air Self Defence

A3SM: Submarine Self Defence against Threats from the Sky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlxIVCurxc4

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2570
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 13 Sep 2013 16:17

Austin wrote:Hopefully we get this for our Scorpene , quite an intresting concept in Submarine Air Self Defence

A3SM: Submarine Self Defence against Threats from the Sky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlxIVCurxc4


Is it ever a good idea for a sub to take shots at a anti sub helo or aircraft ? Not giving away its position is better idea since no sub can travel faster than sound , its location may be easily sanitised.

gauravjkale
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 75
Joined: 29 May 2007 15:32
Location: Mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby gauravjkale » 13 Sep 2013 16:29

As the clip showed the sub is already discovered with active sonar...so its just the matter of who kills whom first....

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21765
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 13 Sep 2013 16:36

^^ Thats a last ditch measure when Sub has been trapped by Airborne ASW asset and has no way to retaliate ( hard kill ) at all but rather hope that it manages to get out using depth and countermeasures ( soft kill )

With ability to retaliate sub has one more card to play with and a potent one.

Considering Scorpene has been advertised with such capability hope we get them.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2570
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 13 Sep 2013 16:53

Definitely an interesting concept ..but i think if a submarine can track a ship and helo at very long ranges it can change the entire game , get the helo even before it drops its sonobuoys ..the astute presumably could track ships in NY harbor even while stationed almost half across the ocean !..come to think of it , doable too if the submarine is able to communicate in real time with tracking satellites..but again a limiting factor will be the band width of such a com system.. the US is reportedly using a broad band commun system as a next gen follow upto to its laser comm system to communicate with its nuclear subs..so the capability does exist.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21765
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 14 Sep 2013 21:10

Mig-29K completes night flying test on Vikramaditiya ( use translator/some good photos )

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/614596.html

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21765
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 14 Sep 2013 23:23

Navy's wait for minesweepers continues as Govt is yet to ink the deal

At least 24 minesweepers needed; and at one time, Indian Navy had 18 of them.

Even after completing the contract negotiations with a South Korean shipyard for building eight minesweepers for the Indian Navy, bureaucratic red tape and procedural wrangle have over the past one year have delayed inking the deal as the files are still doing the rounds in the Defence Ministry.

The process to acquire badly needed minesweepers for the Navy was initiated 13 years ago and the Government is yet to sign the deal with the South Korean firm Kangam which had emerged as the lowest bidder. As a result, Navy’s wait to add to its already depleted strength of minesweepers still continues and the already negotiated deal, estimated to be worth Rs. 24,000 crores, appears to be in a state of limbo.

Though the deal with South Korea denotes New Delhi’s “strategic” partnership with Seoul, the uncertainty in signing the deal is only adding to the woes of the South Korean firm which had emerged as L1 or the lowest bidder in the tendering process in April last year, highly placed sources in the Navy said. Kangam had beaten Italian firm Intermarine and won the bid.

According to the deal, first two minesweepers also called Mine Counter Measure Vessels (MCMV) will be constructed at Pusan, South Korea and the remaining six will be built at the Goa Shipyard through the route of technology transfer. Each of the specialised vessel is likely to cost around Rs. 3,000 crore.

The Navy needs at least 24 minesweepers and at one time had 18 of them. Minesweepers are specialised warships which are used in clearing the sea mines. These vessels are capable of acting as minesweepers and mine hunters. Informed sources said the contract could not be signed after Intermarine of Italy, the Kangam’s competitor, approached the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).

Senior Navy officials say the CVC was informed about the selection process of Kangam and it was thought that the matter has been settled. Navy officials say that India’s ports face the threat of undersea mines that could be planted, putting merchant ships at risk and affecting the trade route that could cripple the country’s economy.

“The role of Navy during the conflict is to also ensure free flow of trade. If harbours are not clear of undersea mines, you can imagine how badly it will hit the country’s economy,” a senior official said. MCMVs are needed to provide safe passage at exit and entry points to a harbour which is critical to Naval operations. Under water mines can be laid easily and these self-contained explosives can pose grave threat to warships and merchant vessels. India boasts of 186 ports of which 13 are major ports.

Minesweepers or the MCMVs use specialised composite material and high grade steel and are equipped to detect all kinds of underwater mines. The Indian Navy operates 12 minesweepers of the Pondicherry and Karwar class but these vessels have become outdated. “If the deal is signed today, Kangam will deliver the first two MCMVs by 2017 and it will take another three or four years for the Goa Shipyard to build its first minesweeper after getting the technology. After that the shipyard can deliver one vessel every year,” sources said.

maz
Webmaster BR
Posts: 328
Joined: 03 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby maz » 15 Sep 2013 00:14

There are only 7 'Natya'/ Pondicherry/Karwar class MCMV in service, not 12.

Granted 4 or 5 have received major system upgrades but this number is totally inadequate. As a limited stopgap measure, at least 12 LMSC towed minehunting sonar systems have been imported from Edgetech which could be installed on vessels other than MCMVs so, in theory, up to 12 vessels could be equipped for minehunting.

As an industry source quipped, "guess Kangnam opened the bottle of soju too soon!" Jokes apart, it is sad to see these delays/ indecision on the part of the MoD which only serves to escalate costs and does nothing to close critical capability gaps that exist.

maz
Webmaster BR
Posts: 328
Joined: 03 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby maz » 15 Sep 2013 00:22

IN getting more fast interceptor/ patrol craft - this time with ONGC funding. ONGC to hand over 23 ISV by early 2014 to the IN for patrolling ODA. 14 ISV are from Craftway Engineers/SHM Shipcare in Darukhana and 9 from Abu Dhabi Shipbuilding to a Rodman Polyships design.


http://freepressjournal.in/navy-gets-in ... allations/

http://www.shmshipcare.com/

http://www.diabgroup.com/en-GB/Cases/Ma ... e-in-India

This means the SPB now operates/ has on order 15 Couach built FIC, at least 4 (and possibly as many as 12 ) Solas Marine built FIC from 80 ordered and 3 ISV from 23 ordere. i addition, there are a number of leased fast craft in use by the SPB. Totals add up to 118 FIC type vessels at a minimum within the next 3 years or so. Quite encouraging.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 15 Sep 2013 02:59

13 years and still no decision on the minesweepers! This is a critical requirement.Our minesweepers are truly vintage Soviet era stuff and it is inexplicable how the MOD fast tracks some requirements and delays indefinitely others.Surely there must be a list of top priorities on AKA's table? Or does he read the M.Manorama as a priority? Subs,minesweepers,naval SAMs.There was a recent statement by the Chinese def.min exhorting the PLAN to achieve more and faster.There is no lack of support from the PRC for its navy which gets top priority.

sudham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 26 Mar 2004 12:31
Location: bangalore

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sudham » 15 Sep 2013 05:57

Hi RahulM,

Unable to pm you. Let me know if the plan is still on and I will include my email id here.

Thanks and Regards
Sudham

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 15 Sep 2013 16:13

Hi Maz,

Many thanks for this post. ONGC funded acquisition of vessels by the Navy sounds like a first time such a model has been adopted.

Till now Bombay High was in private ONGC security for routine patrolling. So I think this is a significant development for Navy to take over the security - or is it only for on demand support?

We are acquiring a diverse number of designs for auxilliary vessels. Better to concentrate on 2-3 designs at max.

maz wrote:IN getting more fast interceptor/ patrol craft - this time with ONGC funding. ONGC to hand over 23 ISV by early 2014 to the IN for patrolling ODA. 14 ISV are from Craftway Engineers/SHM Shipcare in Darukhana and 9 from Abu Dhabi Shipbuilding to a Rodman Polyships design.


http://freepressjournal.in/navy-gets-in ... allations/

http://www.shmshipcare.com/

http://www.diabgroup.com/en-GB/Cases/Ma ... e-in-India

This means the SPB now operates/ has on order 15 Couach built FIC, at least 4 (and possibly as many as 12 ) Solas Marine built FIC from 80 ordered and 3 ISV from 23 ordere. i addition, there are a number of leased fast craft in use by the SPB. Totals add up to 118 FIC type vessels at a minimum within the next 3 years or so. Quite encouraging.

dinakar
BRFite
Posts: 153
Joined: 03 Jul 2008 17:17

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby dinakar » 15 Sep 2013 19:29

Aditya G wrote:Hi Maz,

ONGC funded acquisition of vessels by the Navy sounds like a first time such a model has been adopted.

Till now Bombay High was in private ONGC security for routine patrolling. So I think this is a significant development for Navy to take over the security - or is it only for on demand support?

Mumbai High's security is not with any private security group. It's security has been taken care by ODAG (Offshore Defence Advisory Group) which consisits of personnel from navy and cosat guard.

maz
Webmaster BR
Posts: 328
Joined: 03 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby maz » 15 Sep 2013 20:27

If I remember correctly, ONGC (or some other entity) also funded the Sukanya class OPVs. It is not unusual for state owned oil companies to fund naval/ CG platforms.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 15 Sep 2013 22:23

dinakar wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Hi Maz,

ONGC funded acquisition of vessels by the Navy sounds like a first time such a model has been adopted.

Till now Bombay High was in private ONGC security for routine patrolling. So I think this is a significant development for Navy to take over the security - or is it only for on demand support?

Mumbai High's security is not with any private security group. It's security has been taken care by ODAG (Offshore Defence Advisory Group) which consisits of personnel from navy and cosat guard.


Indeed, and FODAG is even funded by ONGC.

Nevertheless;

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/inte ... urity-i/0/

Bombay High, 160 Kilometers off Mumbai produces a third of the country’s oil. But what is the real security presence around these oil rigs? An on the spot check two years ago by the author had revealed that re-labeled fishing boats were hired by ONGC to keep trawlers 500 meters away from the platforms (See Photograph).

Question is if these ISVs will replace this arrangement.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 538
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sankum » 16 Sep 2013 00:51

Image

Line drawing of hanger of INS Vikramaditya. The length is taken as 128m and maximum width as 22.5m. The firescreen is at 36m and 73m from the left/aft side. The 3nos automated rail which move the aircraft is at 4.5m, 10.5m and 16.5m from the top side.

The second figure gives max 13 Mig26K and 4 Kamovs which can be carried in high density config.

The third figure gives 9 Mig 29K and 8 Kamovs in flexible config. The folded dimensions of Mig 29K is at 17.3m by 7.8m while of Kamov is 12.25m by 3.8m.
Last edited by sankum on 16 Sep 2013 01:57, edited 1 time in total.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3728
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Vipul » 17 Sep 2013 02:47

Navy to induch 4-5 warships every year: Vice chief.

The Indian navy plans to induct 4-5 warships every year in the coming decade, Vice Chief of Naval Staff R.K. Dhowan said Monday.

Vice Admiral Dhowan was speaking at the curtain raiser ceremony of the first naval and maritime exposition and conference being organised by industry body CII from Sep 23 to 27 in Cochin Port Trust, a statement said here.

"Over the decades, our efforts in indigenisation have helped us achieve global shipbuilding standards, resulting today in 46 of the 47 warships and submarines on order for the Navy being constructed in Indian shipyards," he said.

He said the navy is poised to grow and modernise and this provides an opportunity to the Indian shipyards and industry to adopt a collaborative approach to induct state of the art weapons, sensors and combat management systems into the navy.


Ajit.C
BRFite
Posts: 160
Joined: 10 Sep 2008 13:15
Location: Middle East
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ajit.C » 17 Sep 2013 15:33

Check the below article out from Strategy page I find the suggestion hilarious
http://www.strategypage.com/dls/article ... 6-2013.asp
Corrupt Classrooms Cripple Indian Navy Expansion
by James Dunnigan
September 16, 2013
The Indian Navy leadership believes that in the next two decades the American Navy will have fewer ships based in or around the Indian Ocean. At the same time the Chinese Navy will, in effect, try to replace the Americans. India does not want that. After all, it’s not called the Indian Ocean for nothing. The Indian response is to nearly double the size of their navy. That means manpower needs will nearly double, from the current 8,700 officers, 50,000 enlisted sailors, and 43,000 civilians to 10,600 officers, 85,000 sailors, and 75,000 civilians. The navy believes this personnel expansion will be much more difficult than obtaining more ships.

Finding more sailors is difficult in India because of some unique problems, mostly having to do with corruption. A major economic problem for India is the lack of education, especially for younger children. Corruption has crippled the existing public education system, with many teaching and administrative jobs in schools considered patronage (to be given to supporters of politicians rather than those qualified to teach). The patronage jobs are often of the “no-show” (except to collect pay) variety. Patronage teaching jobs have long been a major problem in India and the reason India has such a difficult time providing qualified workers for technical jobs (those that at least require basic reading and math skills).

For the Indian military this education system corruption has been a growing problem. As the military acquires more high-tech gear there is a growing need for better educated troops to operate and maintain it. The Indian economy has been growing rapidly for the last two decades and offers better pay and working conditions to the educated young men the military wants. Then there is the problem with obtaining officers, who must also possess more education and technical skills. Again, the civilian economy offers more attractive careers for the same people the military wants as officers. The Indian military has been suffering growing officer shortages over the last decade, and the navy expansion plans recognize this by acknowledging that the expansion will make the naval officer shortage worse. The navy is only expecting (at best) to increase officer strength by a quarter when it needs twice as many.

The corrupt education system also cripples Indian efforts to build its own warships. For most of the last sixty years India bought its warships from foreign firms. First there was World War II surplus vessels obtained from Britain, followed by new built ships from the Soviet Union during the Cold War. But in the last decade India has been trying to build its own, with mixed success. Again it’s the corruption and education problems.

China has much less corruption in education and a better educated workforce. This means the Chinese Navy has better educated personnel and fewer personnel shortages. The Chinese got into commercial and military shipbuilding before the Indians did and had many of the same problems with quality control and corruption. But the Chinese persevered and now compete with Western ship builders, mainly on price. That still required minimum quality standards, and the Chinese industry weeded out the firms that could not compete and created a shipbuilding industry that could also produce competent warships. India never had the advantage of being a competitive commercial shipbuilder and is thus struggling with corrupt and inefficient warship builders.

India’s plans to expand its navy look good on paper, but the reality is that these plans crippled from the start because of corruption and education problems.


Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16366
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 17 Sep 2013 15:38

we used to have a standing moratorium on posting stuff from strategypage. ^^^ should go to the humour thread, not here.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15356
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Karan M » 17 Sep 2013 15:43

Rahul M wrote:we used to have a standing moratorium on posting stuff from strategypage. ^^^ should go to the humour thread, not here.


Exactly. Good for a laugh at best..

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2453
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 17 Sep 2013 15:56

maz wrote:If I remember correctly, ONGC (or some other entity) also funded the Sukanya class OPVs. It is not unusual for state owned oil companies to fund naval/ CG platforms.
It was indeed ONGC that funded Sukanya class OPVs.

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 17 Sep 2013 18:51

Take a deep breath, cross your fingers, hang out the nimbu-mirchi, and pray to whichever god...

INS Vikramditya in November

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 17 Sep 2013 19:15

In November sevmash will be ice lovked. So it will me next may onlee. Unless she sets sailin mid October, in order to reach Mumbai by mid November.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 495
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 17 Sep 2013 19:31

It's not ice-locked in mid-November yet. Last Nov it was around 5-7 cm, you don't need an icebreaker.

Sanjay
BRFite
Posts: 1225
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Chaguanas, Trinidad

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Sanjay » 17 Sep 2013 19:59


tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2453
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 17 Sep 2013 20:18

http://indiannavy.nic.in/about-indian-navy/fodag
The primary functions of FODAG include following:-

(a) To advise the GoI including the Ministries of Defence, Petroleum & Natural Gas and Shipping and Civil Aviation through the Chief of the Naval Staff on all planning and policy aspects of offshore security and defence covering territorial waters, the Continental Shelf, the Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones of India as defined in the MZI Act 1981. These aspects include:-

(i) Coordination of the functioning of offshore security arrangements.

(ii) Identification of various threats to offshore installations and terminals.

(iii) Identification and defining of military threats in situations short of war.

(iv) Examination and proposing of appropriate security measures in respect of all entities engaged in offshore exploration and other measures necessary for the security of offshore installations and terminals

(b) To exercise command and control over mobile forces and static defenses in the defence of offshore installations, as directed by the respective Commander -in-Chief’s.

(c) To monitor mercantile traffic for transit through recommended routes/ fairways in the vicinity of offshore areas, in coordination with the concerned civil authorities.

(d) To inspect vessels engaged in offshore work, prior to their being deployed, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with the security clearance accorded by competent authority.

(e) FODAG is also the member of Offshore Security Co-ordination Committee (OSCC), which manages offshore security. He is also the chairman of the Joint Venture Offshore Protection Advisory Committee (JVOPAC) which is a Sub Committee of the OSCC and a forum to facilitate the exchange of security and offshore issues between the OSCC and the offshore JV/ private oil companies, as Joint Venture/ private companies do not have representation in OSCC.


Also "advises" private infrastructure like ports & K G Oil Fields.

East India Company's Marine was established in 1612 for asset protection. Older than oldest Indian Army regiment that has now become 1 Para.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50066
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby ramana » 17 Sep 2013 23:49

Pratyush wrote:In November sevmash will be ice lovked. So it will me next may onlee. Unless she sets sailin mid October, in order to reach Mumbai by mid November.


You have become our resident Cassandra!!!

:)

maz
Webmaster BR
Posts: 328
Joined: 03 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby maz » 18 Sep 2013 10:56

What OLS and TACAN will be on the two Viks? Luna-M OLS? What about the TACAN? Will there be some sort of ILS using lasers?

Will IAC-1 get the same systems as the Gorky?

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 18 Sep 2013 11:10

Ramana ji, I hope that I don't have the curse of Cassandra. That I am always right and am never herd by any one. Resulting in the loss of Troy.
:)

On a serious note, I recall the first report about the Gorshokov back in 1993 - 94. That the ship will be a gift from the Russians.

So we are approaching the 20th anniversary of the initial offer, for the ship at the time of her delivery.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 495
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 18 Sep 2013 11:53



Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest