Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Jan 2014 07:49

Destroy the Vikrant with a Brahmos? Sacrilege old chap! Perhaps at some time a live exercise at another ex-Soviet vessel now somewhere in the Asia-Pacific.

Indo-Japan naval exercises planned.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 986457.ece

I sometimes think that BRF is like a temple where devotees come to make their wishes.During the early years in the last century,we prayed for more N-tests,miraculously they happened within days! For a decade now one wished for amphibians,that dream is now about to be turned into reality.Similarly years of praying has seen the amphib need being redressed as well as the coastal ASW patrol vessels.There are other examples.One looks forward now to the sub crisis being sorted out asap.

India, Japan Plan Naval Exercise

By Express News Service - NEW DELHI
Published: 07th January 2014

Defence Minister A K Antony with his Japanese counterpart Itsunori Onodera at the Ministry of Defence Office in New Delhi on Monday | PTI

Japanese Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera on Monday met his Indian counterpart A K Antony at the South Block here when the two sides decided to ramp up their military ties through a naval exercise along Japan’s coast later this year and holding their Secretary-level talks.

Onodera, who reached Delhi on Sunday and would be here till Wednesday, also led Japanese Defence Ministry officials in making a presentation of their nation’s National Security Strategy and Defence Programme Guidelines that were adopted in December 2013.

Antony and Onodera met on Monday as a follow up to the India-Japan Defence Ministers meeting held in November 2011.

The two sides are also on the verge of signing a deal for Japanese firm ShinMaywa’s US-2 amphibious aircraft for the Indian Navy, for operating in island territories such as Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Lakshadweep.

At the meeting, the two ministers “extensively and frankly” exchanged ideas regarding regional and global security challenges, as well as bilateral defence cooperation and exchanges between India and Japan, Defence Ministry officials said in a statement.

Among the issues of security discussed included the Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) unilaterally announced by China late last year that apparently overlapped with the ADIZ of Japan over Senkaku island. This Air Defence Identification Zone extension by China had raised a security scare in East China Sea with other nations such as South Korea and the US too making noises over it.

Antony and Onodera shared views on issues relating to the “peace, stability and prosperity” of their respective regions, the statement said.

The Japanese Minister briefed on his nation’s National Security Strategy and the National Defence Program Guidelines, which were adopted in December 2013, and this detailed briefing came in for appreciation from the Indian Minister.

The two ministers appreciated the progress on India-Japan bilateral defence cooperation and exchanges that had been achieved in a variety of fields and at various levels, including the holding of the third Defence Policy Dialogue, which was decided during the 2011 Defence Ministerial meeting, the second “2 plus 2” dialogue and the second bilateral training between the Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force and the Indian Navy, which was held from December 19 to 22 December, 2013. The two Ministers also shared views on the necessity to conduct high-level and working-level regular consultations and exchanges, deepening Services exchanges and education/academic research exchanges and making other efforts, in order to further strengthen mutual trust and mutual understanding.

They also decided to strengthen India-Japan defence consultation and cooperation, including those related to maritime security to further consolidate and strengthen the strategic and global partnership between Japan and India.

At the meeting, the two ministers shared views to promote defence cooperation and exchanges, and to conduct major cooperation and exchanges.

The two nations would hold the third “2 plus 2” dialogue and the fourth Defence Policy Dialogue at the Defence Secretary level in Delhi in 2014.

The two sides will promote exchanges on UN peacekeeping operations between Indian Army’s Centre for UN Peacekeeping (CUNPK) and Japan’s Peacekeeping Training and Research Centre, Joint Staff College (JPC) and Central Readiness Force of its Ground Self Defence Force (JGSDF).

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jan 2014 08:56

Not sure if this was posted Vikramaditya and Viraat together

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jan 2014 09:35

and we can still see the rope behind the vikky. maybe they strung up a trawl net behind the vikky to catch fresh tuna and seerfish - tired of russian canned beet and potatoes probably.

---
AN/SLQ-25 NIXIE

The Torpedo Countermeasures Transmitting Set AN/SLQ-25A, commonly referred to as Nixie, is a passive, electro-acoustic decoy system used to provide deceptive countermeasures against acoustic homing torpedoes. The AN/SLQ-25A employs an underwater acoustic projector housed in a streamlined body which is towed astern on a combination tow/signal-transfer coaxial cable. An onboard generated signal is used by the towed body to produce an acoustic signal to decoy the hostile torpedo away from the ship. The AN/SLQ-25A includes improved deceptive countermeasures capabilities. The AN/SLQ-25B includes improved deceptive countermeasures capabilities, a fiber optic display LAN, a torpedo alertment capability and a towed array sensor.

Modern acoustic towed decoys, such as the AN/SLQ-25 NIXIE and the older T-MK6 FANFAIR, employ electronic or electromechanical means to produce the required signals. The system provides an alternate target diversion for an enemy acoustic homing torpedo by stringing on cable a "noise maker", aft of the ship, which has the capability of producing a greater noise than the ship; thereby diverting the incoming torpedo from the ship to the "fish". The towed device receives the torpedoes ping frequency, amplifies it 2 to 3 times and sends it back to lure the torpedo away from the ship. They may be used in pairs or singularly.

--

it seems usn is also working on a hardkill light anti-torpedo torpedo on its high value ships like CVNs.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jan 2014 09:44

we only saw the TG in formation for photos, the Vik towing a noisemaker behind it and the TG that went to escort it indicates the threat of a "non state actor/rogue" PN submarine skipper unleashing an attack was taken very seriously.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jan 2014 09:56

The rope part is what i just saw , I suspect thats the thin lined towed array sonar that would stretch a km away from the ship may be even further .....to keep eye on unwanted submarine prowling in the area , could very well be a noise maker to mask its real prop noise.

Viraat and Vikrant together would also be a good opportunity for unfriendly subs to gather sonar data on the ship in Indian environment.

Niranjan · Post by **Niranjan** » 08 Jan 2014 23:25

Two British-built hovercrafts give teeth to Indian coastal security

Dec, 2013.

Coastal security got more muscle with the commissioning of two British-built Air Cushion Vehicles (ACVs), or hovercrafts by the Indian Coast Guard (ICG) here Monday, an official said.

Coastal security got more muscle with the commissioning of two British-built Air Cushion Vehicles (ACVs), or hovercrafts by the Indian Coast Guard (ICG) here Monday, an official said. Maharashtra Governor K. Sankaranarayanan launched the ACVs, H-192 and H-194, at a function in the Naval Dockyard here.

The governor said the ill-fated incidents of 26/11 terror attacks were “an eye-opener” for the nation, bringing into sharp focus the issue of coastal and maritime security.

“I hope the addition of ACVs to the ICG will strengthen Mumbai’s maritime and coastal security,” Sankaranarayan said on the commissioning in the presence of Vice-Admiral Shekhar Singh, IG-ICG S.P.S. Basra and other top officials.

The ACVs are 21 metre-long and capable of swift deployment with a maximum speed of 45 knots. Each craft, capable of carrying 13 crew, can undertake multifarious tasks like surveillance, interdiction, search and rescue, rendering assistants to small boats and fishermen in distress on the high seas.

Manufactured by Messrs. Griffon Hovercraft Lft, Britain, both the hovercrafts shall be based in Mumbai under the charge of commandants S.B. Nair and Sandeep Safaya.

India Navy: Tender for domestic construction of four LPDs

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 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.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Jan 2014 05:30

This tender seems to rule out the JC by a whisker,length wise.Otherwise the vessel's capabilities are perfect. However,if the ski-jump is removed,the vessel will fall within the specified length.The Mistral falls short in speed by 1.5 knots otherwise just meets the grade.Amazingly,Wik gives the cost of the two vessels as about the the same,$600M,JC just 10M Euros more despite being 6000t larger! Could this be a mistake? It is interesting to note that Oz and Turkey have chosen the Spanish ship over the Mistral.The Turkish amphib will be based upon the JC,probably slightly smaller and cheaper.The San Antonio costs $1B,last ship $2B,25,000t,but does not have a full flight deck,with only the aft portion of the ship having a fight deck. This is a major drawback to flight ops when compared with the other two designs and how its high cost can be brought down to compete with the two EU ships is a puzzle.It is going to be an interesting battle between the two European amphibs.

Class & type: Juan Carlos I class amphibious assault ship
Displacement: 27,079 tonnes (24'560 as a.c.c.)
Length: 230.82 m (757.3 ft)[5]
Beam: 32 m (105 ft)
Draught: 6.9 m (23 ft)[5]
Propulsion: 2 x 11 Mw POD
Speed: 21 knots (39 km/h; 24 mph)
Range: 9,000 nautical miles (17,000 km; 10,000 mi) at 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph)
Boats & landing
craft carried: Four LCM-1E
Capacity: 913 soldiers + up to 46 Leopard 2 tanks
Complement: Ship's company: 243
Air wing: 172
Armament: 4 x 20 mm guns
4x 12.7 mm machine guns
Aircraft carried: AV-8B Harrier II, CH-47, Sea King, NH-90.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 09 Jan 2014 13:33

^ The L61 JCI supports 1 x V-22 as well. Plus F-35 when it is available. Recently in flight refueling was proven on the V-22 and in future a rear ramp based small-AEW capability will be available as well. Given than these ships will serve till 2050, it is pertinent that at least support should be there, even if do not purchase the V-22 and F-35 in next 20 years.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 09 Jan 2014 14:24

Question to the experts from a layman like me - How does a naval vessel make use of the maximum range of a missile like Brahmos at 290 km. Can it really use it at maximum range? Even if it uses it at a range in the 100s or near about, how does it lock on that target. Using the radars on the vessel itself?

Links to any resources explaining stuff like this is just as appreciated as a direct answer. I really did try googling it and came up empty

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jan 2014 14:26

imo better to run with a Soko or Japan design for the LPDs and build new bridges. Japan has a range of serving designs. time to have a quiet chat with japan PM who is chief guest for jan26.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 09 Jan 2014 14:51

Arun Menon wrote:Question to the experts from a layman like me - How does a naval vessel make use of the maximum range of a missile like Brahmos at 290 km. Can it really use it at maximum range? Even if it uses it at a range in the 100s or near about, how does it lock on that target. Using the radars on the vessel itself?

Links to any resources explaining stuff like this is just as appreciated as a direct answer. I really did try googling it and came up empty

So, 290km is not max range for Brahmos.

Google Over the Horizon Targeting (OTH-T), and pick and choose how deep you want to go into the subject.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 09 Jan 2014 15:07

^Thanks for the help

. I did have some vague idea about using helicopters and patrol craft to relay locations. Will go more deeply and find out.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 09 Jan 2014 15:55

Singha wrote:imo better to run with a Soko or Japan design for the LPDs and build new bridges. Japan has a range of serving designs. time to have a quiet chat with japan PM who is chief guest for jan26.

While the Korean would gladly sell their designs for the Dokdo class LPD and be quite eager to sign any engineering and shipbuilding contract with India in that regard, the Japanese would be a different matter entirely. As it is Abe is jumping through hoops to sell use the US-2 as a "civilian multi purpose aircraft". Selling designs for a "military" LPD would be a major leap that despite Abe and his government's attempts at shedding their pacifist constitution, Japan may not be ready for.

IMO, since at any rate a significant portion of sensors, CIWS, radar etc will anyway have to be imported during the construction of a LPD it would be better and more cost effective in the long run for the Indian Navy to custom design its own LPD based on its own doctrine and requirements rather than try and squeeze a foreign design into its operational doctrine. This would also benefit Indian shipyards and build domestic ship design and manufacturing competencies.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jan 2014 16:08

Japan is a mature giant who has gone into a shell and locked itself into the mind of a teenager. its time they grew up and faced upto their own problems rather than escapist fantasy of being forever under US nuclear umbrella.

Cheen depends on japan for a lot of capital and technology same way it is reliant on US. if this prevents Cheen for attacking the US, so it should prevent that for japan also. japan is a rich market of 80 mil people , perhaps the 2nd biggest market in the world for costly items.

I fail to understand what is the key philosophical bedrock of japans 'pacifist mania'.
WW2 is long gone and dead and all its players.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jan 2014 18:44

japani Hyuga class which is smaller than Izumo class also fits the bill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hy%C5%ABga ... _destroyer (197m long, 7m deep)

the dokdo class is almost exactly the same size and shape.

I would say getting 4 of these is way better than 2 uber-ships of the JC class. much better force structure and uptime.

if we really want a hi-lo mix, perhaps the slumlord rotterdam class can be worked into the low end....merchant stds...almost zero ability to protect itself ... pedestrian top speed...weak..lachaar..majboor...cannot fight its way in or stand its ground against any opposition .... but useful for peacetime disaster relief or delivering stores and people cheaply to secured locations. probably much lower opex than a JC sized ship.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Jan 2014 05:27

Mitsui are a superb co.have had experience with them .

Here's an interesting site reg. Russian naval development,orders for the RuN,etc.What is intriguing is the "855" Ash class multi-purpose SSGN,which resembles in many respects our ATV,a stretched version.Check out the drawing.

http://www.russiadefence.net/t647-russian-navy-status

Designed in Marine Design Bureau "Malachite" (St. Petersburg). Water displacement 13 800 (according to other sources, 11 800) m, surface - 11 740 (8600), Vol length of 120 m, width 12 (15) m, draft 8.4 (10) m. Speed full submerged speed up to 31 node . Equipped with a single-shaft turbine nuclear power plant with capacity of 40-50 thousand liters. with. (monobloc type reactor PCF heat capacity of about 200 MW). The boat also installed propulsive "Pump-jet" water-jet type.

Armament: 8 universal launchers, where, according to open sources, can accommodate up to 32 (according to other sources, up to 24) anti-ship missiles P-800 "Onyx" (with a range up to 300 miles) or developed a new type of missile, and 8 torpedo vehicles (with the possibility of launching cruise missiles). The crew of 85 people.

Currently under construction, two submarines of this project, announced the construction of six "clear." The second and subsequent boats, according to open sources, will be based on modernized draft 885M (08851) "Ash-M.

Severodvinsk
Constructed according to Sevmash. Serial number 160. Laid down 21 December 1993. Delivery of the Navy announced in 2011. In a number of sources indicate a possible tactical number boats - K-329.

"Kazan" (Project 885M)
Constructed according to Sevmash. Serial number 161. Laid down 24 July 2009 *.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jan 2014 07:21

I think you meant 885 Yasen class. 2 boats have entered service with more building at highest priority , alongside the Borei class.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jan 2014 08:28

Singha wrote:I think you meant 885 Yasen class. 2 boats have entered service with more building at highest priority , alongside the Borei class.

Just one boat entered service Dec 31 , two are under construction and 5 more planned to be built by this decade.
( use translate option on top of page )

http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-339.html

vonkabra · Post by **vonkabra** » 10 Jan 2014 08:43

Are there any plans to upgrade the Styx missiles on the Godavari's/ Khukris? These ships still have a long way to go before being retired and it seems strange that their main armament has not been upgraded. Considering the age of the missiles, even their functionality is open to question.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Jan 2014 11:29

Stand corrected Singha,yes,it's the 885 class.If you look at the small hump aft of the sail,and the shape of the sail,it looks almost similar to that of the ATV,except that the sub is much longer.In fact the ATV's design can serve both as an SSGN or SSBN depending upon the missiles carried in the silos.There was an article about our MARVs for Agni-6 and some hint that a MARV warhead would be developed for a future LR BM for the SSBNs.

Venky,can't recollect the report that all the FFGs would be upgraded to BMos.If the Styx variants are still aboard,then they obviously have some life and purpose,since the missiles can/may have been modified over time.Their capability could be something other than in fer. books.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jan 2014 11:38

the real yasen does not have that hump.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 10 Jan 2014 12:59

vonkabra wrote:Are there any plans to upgrade the Styx missiles on the Godavari's/ Khukris? These ships still have a long way to go before being retired and it seems strange that their main armament has not been upgraded. Considering the age of the missiles, even their functionality is open to question.

INS Godavari turned 30 in Dec. INS Ganga will turn 30 in a couple of years. They are pretty old. Usually in our waters and conditions 30 years is pretty old and we should have started decommissioning them by now. But we are short of surface combatants so I don't know what the plans are.

vonkabra · Post by **vonkabra** » 10 Jan 2014 15:48

The Godavari class are getting the Barak to replace their SA-N4s. Don't think the navy would be doing that if they intended to decommission them any time soon. The the Brahmaputra/ Kora have the Uran, so the capability to upgrade is definitely available. Why they weren't upgraded long back is the other question. The IN must have its reasons, but would definitely be interesting to know those reasons.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 10 Jan 2014 17:00

The Godavaris got the Barak years ago !! Early 2000s. The first ones to get them. INS Ganga was the first I think. I'm sure there is a detailed BR article on the Godavari class. Do read that please.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 10 Jan 2014 17:40

Singha, Izumo is Hyuga class. They've evolved the design from the first ship in the class.

I'd like to see the few of these Izumo's in IN service.

BTW, the most interesting thing I found about the recent increase in Japan's defense budget is the cost of it's Soryu class submarine. Compare that to the cost of F-35A.
Clicky

If approved, big-ticket items in the 2014 budget include four Lockheed Martin F-35A fighters at ¥69.3 billion ($706 million), four Kawasaki P-1s at ¥77.3 billion ($787 million), the second 5,000-ton 25DD general-purpose destroyer at ¥73.3 billion ($747 million) and the tenth improved Soryu-class submarine at ¥51.3 billion ($522 million).

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Jan 2014 20:47

That's why the diagram is intriguing,as it resembles the ATV a lot.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jan 2014 21:41

perhaps it was another proposal for the Yasen which they sold to us as the Arihant template. their Yasen if you recall had a much delayed start...atleast by a decade so the final yasen design would have changed after we settled on our design.

Niranjan · Post by **Niranjan** » 11 Jan 2014 04:03

Japan’s amphibious aircraft not a priority for India now

Japanese defence minister’s Indian visit strengthens military ties

Sensitive Japan asks India to address safe use of nuclear energy

Top Indian official declares relationship with China “adversarial”

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Jan 2014 04:53

Tx.Niran.Xcpt from one of the links/reports.

Japan’s Maritime Self-Defence Force and the Indian Navy have begun joint exercises. India has discussed with Japan buying 15 sophisticated ShinMaywa US-2 amphibious aircraft. The Indian media has placed great expectations on Prime Minister Abe’s visit to India in January, as chief guest at the Republican Day celebrations, as a further boost to relations.

While India, Japan and the US brand China as “a threat,” the chief responsibility for rising tensions in Asia lies with the Obama administration’s “pivot.” The US is not only engaged in its own military build-up in the region, but is encouraging its main allies and strategic partners to do the same.

As it has done in the Middle East over the past decade, US imperialism is recklessly using its military might and setting the stage for conflict, in an attempt to maintain its continued dominance in Asia.

This is a most acute observation.We cannot be dragged into a Pan-Asian military bloc manipulated by the US meant to wage war with China.The outcome of that war would be the devastation of Asia and the sparing of the N.American continent,allowing the US to rule the roost for another century. We have to learn how to stand and fight on our own feet not expecting help from Uncle Sam.look how our entire strategy against Pak has been compromised by the US using the Quisling UPA?

A pity about the amphibs,but there are other contenders ,Beriev and Bombardier who are supposed to have also made their offers.As long as it happens soon,may the best aircraft win.

kit · Post by **kit** » 11 Jan 2014 10:52

OT but I think India should not go into direct conflicts or make statements like that .. what purpose does it serve ? Rather speak softly but carry a big stick versus china.Its interests are best served when the situation might be tied economically with other countries to its benefit rather than a direct conflict.For example why not get Japan and korea to invest more in india versus china using the adversarial situation existing between these counties.Also if there is more economic interaction between say china,japan and Korea but in public lash out at each other., it would be akin to a quarrel between a husband and wife., they will kiss and make up ! Any one else thinking of utilising the situation may well be in a fools paradise.Brash words and posturing is sheer stupidity.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 11 Jan 2014 10:57

Philip may be the first time an impartial observation from you. You are very right in this regard. The attempt from the U.S is to do this. How long will they succeed will be depending on the brain size of those in Beijing. CCPs arrogance, threats and hostility towards others around them is the most positive thing that's helping the U.S in this regard.
All around investment, progress of the Indian nation must be continued, with a strong military to deal with any threats arising anywhere in the world. Such capability is a must. We don't have to tie up with one to deal with the other. Those kind of thoughts are for the weak. We can have investment from whoever want to invest as long as it's in India's interest and help in our progress.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 11 Jan 2014 11:31

Just for laughs, check out the commentary on the Vikramaditya here - http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/asiapac/india.htm

Nobody believed it could have ever been done.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Jan 2014 12:39

JTull wrote:Singha, Izumo is Hyuga class. They've evolved the design from the first ship in the class.

I'd like to see the few of these Izumo's in IN service.

BTW, the most interesting thing I found about the recent increase in Japan's defense budget is the cost of it's Soryu class submarine. Compare that to the cost of F-35A.
Clicky

If approved, big-ticket items in the 2014 budget include four Lockheed Martin F-35A fighters at ¥69.3 billion ($706 million), four Kawasaki P-1s at ¥77.3 billion ($787 million), the second 5,000-ton 25DD general-purpose destroyer at ¥73.3 billion ($747 million) and the tenth improved Soryu-class submarine at ¥51.3 billion ($522 million).

So each F35A for country like Japan which aldready has Sidewinders and US A to G weaponry and related facilities will cost a measly USD 170 million each. For us it would be much much more, so that put to rest lets buy F-35 instead of MMRCA.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Jan 2014 14:09

merlin wrote:Just for laughs, check out the commentary on the Vikramaditya here - http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/asiapac/india.htm

Nobody believed it could have ever been done.

Thats coz the site on Indian Navy was last updated on "Revised 25 March 2002"

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 11 Jan 2014 14:45

Austin wrote:
merlin wrote:Just for laughs, check out the commentary on the Vikramaditya here - http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/asiapac/india.htm

Nobody believed it could have ever been done.
Thats coz the site on Indian Navy was last updated on "Revised 25 March 2002"

Oh I know that, have been following the site for long and posting from that Toppan guy on usenet for even longer.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 11 Jan 2014 14:56

Austin wrote:Not sure if this was posted Vikramaditya and Viraat together

AWESOME video. Made my day! thanks to you very much.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Jan 2014 20:55

Uddu,there is a French classic,"Barbarian in Asia" by Henri Michaux,written 80 years ago.In it he says that if the Europeans wanted to convert the Indians,they shouldn't have sent hundreds or thousands of missionaries but just "one saint"! We Indians can understand this statement well knowing the influence that "Godmen",saints and gurus have in our countrry.

Now,taking that theme forward to the post WW2 era,and the emergence of the Cold War,the world was divided mainly between the two blocs,East and West.These blocs were powerful military and nuclear-weapon entities.Proxy wars were fought all over the globe as a result.However,there was a third movement,NAM,which had a huge influence upon the newly independent states former colonies.This was mot a military alliance unlike NATO or the Warsaw pact,but independent ,sovereign,states who wanted to live in peace and harmony with each other and recognised the universality and equality of all mankind.Spearheading the NAM movement were the three giants,Nehru,Tito and Nasser,along with Sukarno,Nkrumah,Kenyatta,etc.These giants electrified the new free states and they in the main refused to join in the games being played by the superpowers.NAM attracted leaders and nations.India's stature during the NAM era was far higher than what it is today,where little minnows like the Maldives and Lanka show us the upturned finger! This was at a time when we were nowhere as militarily strong as we are today,but because of our strong moral standards,our humanity and the stature of our leaders of the time who were giants on the international stage,we were a magnet for many nations to follow.

A former foreign min. of another country and close personal friend,once told me that he was astonished how little we were influencing international events given our massive strengths,spiritualism,democracy,economy,population,military power,nuclear weapons,etc.,especially in comparison with China.He said that China had realised its strengths and was beginning to flex its muscles and that India was not taking enough notice of it and doing likewise.This was over a decade ago,at the end of the last century. Where are we today? Even in the lukewarm NAM movement today,we count for precious little.Our great mendicant of snake-oil has been observing "maun" for a decade on international crises! India has been conspicuous by its silence on key issues like Iraq,Afghanistan,the Middle East,Egypt,Syria,Libya,etc.,etc.,right upto Chinese aggression in the Indo-China Sea and IAP region.During the last decade we've abdicated our independent defence and foreign policy to Washington,preferring to play "turd" fiddle in the US military alliance against China in the region.Instead of other nations gravitating towards us as was the case during the hey-day of NAM,we are now gravitating towards the US and its supporting cast,in fact to use a nautical term,"listing" badly towards America!

India cannot be militarily strong,possessing large armed forces,well trained and equipped,but by tilting/joining a military alliance become subservient to a foreign power! It then becomes a vassal servile state,which has abdicated its sovereignty and lost its hard fought freedom.Exercises between the IN and other navies are welcome,but they should be bi-lateral,not part of larger combined fleets of which the majority are military partners. If we are truly independent,fearless and outspoken,it will be India that is a magnet which will attract other nations and their navies to join us to maintain true freedom of the seas especially in the IAP region.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 11 Jan 2014 22:38

Aditya_V wrote:So each F35A for country like Japan which aldready has Sidewinders and US A to G weaponry and related facilities will cost a measly USD 170 million each. For us it would be much much more, so that put to rest lets buy F-35 instead of MMRCA.

These are development aircraft and the sum includes initial non-recurring costs such as infrastructure, training, support as well as investment in extensive customization. The figures for development aircraft delivered to Norway, Netherlands etc are similar.

However, the cost of a bulk purchase is much lower. Israel for example is paying $144 mil each for their 19 F-35As. Canada has budgeted $9 billion for 65 aircraft ($135 mil/unit). The flyaway cost will most certain fall well under $100 mil, though it'll be higher than the $75 mil figure that LM keeps advertising.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 11 Jan 2014 22:47

Philip wrote:This is a most acute observation.We cannot be dragged into a Pan-Asian military bloc manipulated by the US meant to wage war with China.The outcome of that war would be the devastation of Asia and the sparing of the N.American continent,allowing the US to rule the roost for another century. We have to learn how to stand and fight on our own feet not expecting help from Uncle Sam.look how our entire strategy against Pak has been compromised by the US using the Quisling UPA?

A pity about the amphibs,but there are other contenders ,Beriev and Bombardier who are supposed to have also made their offers.As long as it happens soon,may the best aircraft win.

We're not joining any bloc nor has anybody proposed a military alliance with any country. And no country wants a war in Asia, not the US not India not China.

But that doesn't mean we should spurn closer ties with those who have similar concerns and objectives. We can start by taking a page out of the PRC's book. They don't have a formal military alliance with Pakistan and as such have neither an obligation nor any intention of militarily intervening in a subcontinental war. But it doesn't stop them from using Pakistan to keep India off-balance. Our relations with the US or East/SE Asian countries needn't be black or white either.

At one point you were proposing of all things that India ally with China to break a US blockade of Iran. Interesting.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... ?p=1257457

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Jan 2014 23:20

Pakistan and China are military allies.Pak has ceded Gwadar to China for use as a military base.It is providing Pak with new N-reactors that will be used to produce more fissile N-material,suspected not only for the Paki arsenal but also for the Saudis.Our planning has now factored in a two-front war involving both nations acting in unison.

The IN exercising with Japan,Vietnam,etc.,in bilateral exercises is different from taking part in Rim-Pac along with a clutch of US allies like SoKo,Oz,etc.,where the exercises are meant to hone skills against a common enemy,China.Our MILAN exercises including IOR littoral and ASEAN nations is the way to go.

2012 exercises:

The participants include Australia, Bangladesh, Brunei, Philippines, Myanmar, Thailand, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, Maldives, Seychelles and Mauritius.

"Milan basically is a biennial conglomeration of Asia-Pacific maritime navies, hosted by the Indian Navy, to foster bonds of 'friendship across the seas', boost interoperability and share views on common maritime issues. From four navies in 1995, it has grown to include 14 navies now," said an officer.

An important priority in the Asia-Pacific region is the protection of sea lanes around Malacca Strait since around 60,000 ships sail through it every year, transporting around 30% of the world trade in goods.

For India, the stakes are clearly high, with the strategic A&N Islands dominating the approaches to Malacca Strait. "India's central location in Indian Ocean, astride these major commercial routes and energy lifelines, makes us a major stakeholder in the region's security and stability,'' said the officer.