Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

rsharma · Post by **rsharma** » 12 Jan 2014 03:33

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.

The Indian Navy's outlook w.r.t. the Godavri Class is pretty confusing.
They seem to have been upgraded with EL/M-2238 STAR (replacing the MR-310U Angara on the foremast) but do not carry any naval AD missile system that compliments the range of the STAR.

Even the Styx have been retained. Given the fact that even BD Navy has acquired/acquiring decent AShM systems such as the Otomat Mk2 Block IV and C802/3, the Styx are pretty much outmatched.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Jan 2014 04:22

The 'Styx' missiles have been subject to extensive in-service modification, indeed Indian sources would suggest that each of the former Soviet Navy fleets may have adapted their missiles to meet anticipated local tactical conditions. It is reported that MS-2A and IR. sensors have been retrofitted into earlier missiles together with ECCM hardware. Indian sources suggest that improvements in seeker technology developed by the Defense Research and Development Laboratories in Hyderabad and the Naval Chemical and Metallurgical Laboratories in Vishakhapatnam were adopted into the missiles of the Soviet Navy.

While the Styx is widely regarded to be obsolete today, and too large and slow to penetrate modern defences on warships, the missile remains strategically important, due to its lethality and wide deployment. Used against transports, tankers, amphibious ships and other targets without defensive systems, the missile is highly lethal. Not only does it carry a large warhead, but the unburned hypergolic fuel produces considerable incendiary effect

If the missiles,which appear to have been modified locally,have shelf life left in them,they will be retained until their expiry date.naval missiles are hideously expensive.In any case,some warships using the missiles like the Rajputs (BMos plus 2Ds),also have more lethal ones aboard.As the quote says,not every target (Chineses/Paki tanker) needs a BMos! The very heavy warhead was meant for carriers.Russian Kashins had their missile launchers facing backwards,due to their CW tactic when shadowing US carriers,to turn tail letting off salvoes of their carrier killers.We could've modified the missile to suit our needs.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 12 Jan 2014 04:51

Philip wrote: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.

A high level of cooperation does not make it alliance. When they sign a treaty obliging each side to militarily support the other in a conflict, that will be defined as a military alliance. I'm sure the Chinese already also playing war games where the confront a coalition that includes India, that does make India is part of the alliance, which itself doesn't exist at this point.

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.

Indian Navy participating in RIMPAC doesn't make India a US ally, any more than IAF's participation in Red Flag does. If and when we propose a military treaty with the US, you can start to raise doubts about our involvement in an alliance. Until then there are no grounds for complaint.

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.

Priority for whom? Piracy is at all time lows. We have warm relations with all ASEAN members, all of whom are quite secure and stable. Our priority is China, plain and simple. And while goodwill exercises like MILAN are to have, their military utility is limited. the only entity pleased by our keeping our distance from the Pacific nations is China.

John · Post by **John** » 12 Jan 2014 06:08

rsharma wrote:The Indian Navy's outlook w.r.t. the Godavri Class is pretty confusing.
They seem to have been upgraded with EL/M-2238 STAR (replacing the MR-310U Angara on the foremast) but do not carry any naval AD missile system that compliments the range of the STAR.

Same with Brahmaputra, they only primarily carry Point defense weapon system similar to the Type 23 Frigates with carrier borne aircrafts providing air support. Carrying 3D radar like STAR will greatly improve the target detection against low flying threats.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Jan 2014 06:25

Viv,are we so naive to think that the steady escalation and complexity of the exercises which stress "interoperability" (one reason why deals for US arms are being rushed through in indecent haste) does not have a greater significance? Instead of us calling the shots,and defining the scope and breadth of naval exercises with littoral IOR and Asia-Pacific states,we are willing to play "turd fiddle" in US led naval exercises in the IAP region. No one is going to reveal "understandings" made in secret.The "list" is obvious to any intelligent observer.watch the Indo-Japanese meetings which will take place when Abe is chief guest at the R-Day parade.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 12 Jan 2014 06:54

Philip wrote:Viv,are we so naive to think that the steady escalation and complexity of the exercises which stress "interoperability" (one reason why deals for US arms are being rushed through in indecent haste) does not have a greater significance? Instead of us calling the shots,and defining the scope and breadth of naval exercises with littoral IOR and Asia-Pacific states,we are willing to play "turd fiddle" in US led naval exercises in the IAP region. No one is going to reveal "understandings" made in secret.The "list" is obvious to any intelligent observer.watch the Indo-Japanese meetings which will take place when Abe is chief guest at the R-Day parade.

One, no matter how complex the joint training exercises may be, India is under no obligation to participate in any US-led military action whatsoever.

Two, if US deals were being selectively rushed through, the M777 would be already be in service. If other deals have proceeded relatively quickly, its primarily because the FMS process is streamlined.

Three, the details of all naval exercises proposed to India have their particulars vetted by the GoI and IN HQ before approval is granted. So the idea of India being forced to do something its not willing to do is just plain wrong. And yes in US-led exercises we probably do play second fiddle. When the Indian Navy (or AF or Army) hosts an exercise, it gets to write the script. That's the way its done.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 12 Jan 2014 18:52

Navy helps PSU shipyards buck slowdown

For a change, government-owned companies are doing better than their private sector counterparts. In an otherwise bleak operating environment for shipbuilders, PSU shipyards including Mazagon Dock, Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers (GRSE), Cochin Shipyard and Goa Shipyard are bucking the trend thanks to bulging order book from Indian Navy and Coast Guard. In FY13, five PSUs shipyard together reported net sales of Rs 6,341 crore and net profit of Rs 689 crore. In last five years, their combined net sales have grown at a compounded annual growth rate of 30 per cent while net profit expanded at rate of 7.1 per cent during the period.

The growth in total revenues which includes changes in inventory and treasury income was lower at 10 per cent per annum. Year-on-year revenue growth is highly volatile in the industry due to long lead times in ship building. Besides, a few months delay in commissioning (not uncommon for warships) have big impact on revenue and profit growth for that year.

The growth has resulted in a sharp improvement in the financial health of these PSUs. For example the combined debt to equity ratio of these five companies has declined to 0.17 in FY13 from a high of 0.88 in FY09. Except Visakhapatnam based Hindustan Shipyard, all PSUs shipbuilders are now debt free and were cumulatively sitting on cash & bank balances worth Rs 8700 crore at the end of March 2013, more than two and half times their networth.

In contrast, private sector listed shipyards seem to be struggling with stagnant revenues and rising indebtness. The combined leverage ratio for three listed companies – Bharati Shipyard, ABG Shipyard and Pipavav Shipyard & Defence rose to 3.2 in FY13 from 0.53 in FY08. Their combined borrowings during the period ballooned to over Rs 14,000 crore last fiscal from Rs 1346 crore in FY08. This has resulted in a sharp spike in interest burden that now exceeds their operating profit. Bharati and ABG are in corporate debt restructuring (CDR) cell to restructure their debt and help in their financial turnaround. (See chart).

The listed shipbuilders are facing financial headwinds despite reporting higher operating margins than their PSU counterparts. In last five years, the former had operating margins of 26 per cent on average against 17 per cent reported by government owned shipbuilders.
...

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 12 Jan 2014 19:14

^^ If the Indian Navy is smart it will support the private shipyards with some orders. This will help keep the private sector afloat and offer some alternatives to PSUs while also building up the industrial base in ship-building. A navy is only as good as the industry that builds it and having a wide variety of competent and experienced builders to choose from is an asset more valuable than any carrier or submarine in the long run. The GoI should declare the ship-building industry a strategic industry and support them through soft loans and tax breaks. Given enough time, experience and exposure Indian private shipyards could one day rival the great Asian shipyards of Korea, China and Japan.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 12 Jan 2014 19:19

Viv S wrote: One, no matter how complex the joint training exercises may be, India is under no obligation to participate in any US-led military action whatsoever.

Very true. The Indian Navy after all is bound by the Political decision makers who give the orders. Just because the US Navy or Pentagon says jump, the IN is not going anywhere without New Delhi giving the nod. And if there is one thing Indian politicians hate to do is make decisions, especially military decisions that involve some risk. And given the historical posture of fence-sitting that Indian leaders have transformed into an art form there will no grand armada's that the Indian Navy will be part of any time soon.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Jan 2014 07:41

As operating procedures between the IN and other navies like NATO for example ,converge,as they are with the ultimate goal of cooperative engagement ,if and when the balloon goes up,a simple decision of the politicos to join the bandwagon will see amore or less seamless integration of the IN into the "Allies" order of battle.If you read US war college papers,etc.,which I've posted before,the region is now being described as the Indo-Asia-Pacific region (IAP),formerly Asia-Pacific,where India is meant to be the "western hinge" of the US led military alliance.How more open can one get about the future role of the IN/India in US strategic plans?
Secondly,there will be a definite degree of compromise of our capabilities, as and when we repeatedly exercise with other navies who could turn belligerent in the future..Their full capabilities have been carefully obscured.A case in point the recent buzzing of the VikA by Norwegian/NATO aircraft and spy ships,where official protests were made.The USN's Littoral Combat Ship has been operating in the Indo-China Sea.Yet to take part in regional exercises.report below.

Here is a report about the shallow water ASW corvettes,which may have been posted earlier.This report has fuller details.Sorry if it is a repeat.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20131226/main5.htm

MoD clears Navy plans to get 16 shallow-water anti-sub vessels
KV Prasad
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 25
The plans of the Indian Navy to acquire 16 indigenously built shallow-water anti-submarine vessels, for which it has received clearance from the Defence Ministry, takes forward the project that fits into their overall task of defending the long coastline in the changed maritime security environment of the region.

The Defence Acquisition Council headed by Defence Minister AK Antony this week accorded Acceptance of Necessity to the Indian Navy for the Rs 13,440 crore project that envisages these vessels as a replacement for the existing Abhay-class corvettes commissioned between 1989 and 1991.

The four vessels -- INS Abhay, Ajay, Akshay and Agray -- have been in service for over two decades with the Indian Navy. These are customised variants of the Russian Pauk-class corvettes.

The Navy has expressed interest to procure new vessels under the ‘Buy Indian’ category. Under this, Indian shipyards will be asked to build these ships and the yards in turn, can seek design from a foreign partner.

Over the past few years, several Indian companies have shown interest in building ships for the Indian Navy and some of them have entered into collaboration with foreign ship builders. The effort is part of the government move to expand the domestic defence manufacturing base and begin the process of reversing over-dependence on imports.

Explaining the strategic importance of shallow-water anti-submarine vessels, Commodore Ranjit B Rai (retd), former Director, Naval Intelligence and Operations, said: “These will be a replacement for the Abhay class and will provide defence against any special operating vessels (Midgets) including those operated by Pakistan and China close to the harbour.”

The anti-submarine vessels are deployed to tackle and destroy underwater threats and also undertake low-intensity maritime operations. These are equipped with torpedoes and missiles and SONAR detection equipment to ferret out submarines in shallow waters.

The DAC clearance for acquisition of two Deep Submergence Rescue Vessels by the Indian Navy is also long pending. These vessels are required to go under water to bring up the personnel from disabled submarines.

The decision comes in the backdrop of the August 14 INS Sindhurakshak accident in Mumbai and also at a time when the Indian Navy is set to expand its fleet of underwater boats. At present, the Navy operates Kilo, Shishumar and Foxtrot-class submarines with another six Scorpene class -- currently being built with French collaboration at Mazagon docks in Mumbai -- also scheduled to join the service over the next few years.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 7&cid=1101
USS Freedom conducted patrol operations in the South China Sea: admiral

The China Youth Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Youth League, said that there were three primary reasons for the USS Freedom to conduct patrol missions in the South China Sea. First, the US Navy is trying to prove the usefulness of its littoral combat ship since Washington is under great public pressure to cut down its defense budget. Second, the United States must make sure that its position in the South China Sea will never be challenged by any regional power.

Since missiles are also mentioned,it would be interesting to see the armament of these corvettes.The ASW version of Klub comes to mind,or perhaps Medvedka with a range of 25km,apart from the MBUs which will inevitably be installed as a sort of ASW CIWS.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Jan 2014 07:55

the region is now being described as the Indo-Asia-Pacific region (IAP),formerly Asia-Pacific,where India is meant to be the "western hinge" of the US led military alliance.How more open can one get about the future role of the IN/India in US strategic plans?

Does not mean too much. There is bound to be some amount of cooperation and perhaps even expectations (both ways). But, I do not ever see the IN (or any other Indian service) functioning under another nation's flag. I would be extremely surprised if that were to happen - just do not see it at all. There is no need for it either.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Jan 2014 08:58

Philip wrote:As operating procedures between the IN and other navies like NATO for example ,converge,as they are with the ultimate goal of cooperative engagement ,if and when the balloon goes up,a simple decision of the politicos to join the bandwagon will see amore or less seamless integration of the IN into the "Allies" order of battle.If you read US war college papers,etc.,which I've posted before,the region is now being described as the Indo-Asia-Pacific region (IAP),formerly Asia-Pacific,where India is meant to be the "western hinge" of the US led military alliance.How more open can one get about the future role of the IN/India in US strategic plans?

You've bolded the wrong part of your post. The operative sentence actually is -

"decision of the politicos to join the bandwagon"

You've put it out there quite casually, but in reality the decision to go to war with Pakistan, let alone China, isn't one that any govt will make lightly. Its under no obligation to confirm with the role envisioned by the US strategic planners.

And what's so wrong with the ability to enmesh with a US fleet. Should we stop joint air exercises with the USAF and European AFs as well, lest we inadvertently end up with the ability to participate in a NATO air campaign?

How reluctant are the Chinese to train with the Pakistanis? The Chinese are not going to risk their country's security by militarily intervening in an Indo-Pak war, but that doesn't stop them from posturing to keep India off-balance. Why should we go out of our way to cater to China's sensibilities?

Secondly,there will be a definite degree of compromise of our capabilities, as and when we repeatedly exercise with other navies who could turn belligerent in the future..Their full capabilities have been carefully obscured.

'There will be a definite degree of compromise of other navies' capabilities, as and when they repeatedly exercise with the Indian Navy which could turn belligerent in the future...Its full capabilities have been carefully obscured.'

A case in point the recent buzzing of the VikA by Norwegian/NATO aircraft and spy ships,where official protests were made.The USN's Littoral Combat Ship has been operating in the Indo-China Sea.Yet to take part in regional exercises.report below.

This is a picture of a Shivalik class frigate in formation with a USN ship.

Here's a picture of the Viraat and Talwar with two Nimitz class carriers as well as a LA class sub.

They'll be plenty of photos of the Vikramaditya (and Kolkata-class) in joint exercises too, once its operational. Lets not pretend that its acoustic signature (the radars not being installed yet) remains some huge secret requiring a grand intelligence operation.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Jan 2014 19:46

Philip wrote:Here is a report about the shallow water ASW corvettes...Since missiles are also mentioned,it would be interesting to see the armament of these corvettes.The ASW version of Klub comes to mind,or perhaps Medvedka with a range of 25km,apart from the MBUs which will inevitably be installed as a sort of ASW CIWS.

No missiles.

Refer here, next to the aft funnel just before the life rafts. Do you see a single 324 mm TT?http://s019.radikal.ru/i639/1205/0e/3b0c5dcf5e83.jpg

In this picture just under the AK-630 you can see the single 324 mm TT http://s019.radikal.ru/i644/1205/18/3803a605c6a6.jpg

And here http://s019.radikal.ru/i642/1205/af/d84adfdeed84.jpg here http://i069.radikal.ru/1205/94/b310d767915f.jpg and here http://s57.radikal.ru/i156/1205/89/a2b146e4b87d.jpg just under the AK-630?

This will arm the light ASW ships. The ships themselves will be derived from GRSE WJFAC.

Thanks to member Hiten for collating the pictures.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Jan 2014 19:59

I remember during the mid 80 the Ranjit class ships were the spearhead destroyers in WNC and watching one of these as a child in the Naval Yards with their dark black paint gave it a fearsome look.

Something like this from older pic , not sure in mid 80's if they used a more darker paint on ships

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 13 Jan 2014 20:41

Austin wrote:I remember during the mid 80 the Ranjit class ships were the spearhead destroyers in WNC and watching one of these as a child in the Naval Yards with their dark black paint gave it a fearsome look.

Something like this from older pic , not sure in mid 80's if they used a more darker paint on ships

You mean Rajput class... Btw these ships are good for another 15 years with the Brahmos on them. Will remain formidable for a while!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Jan 2014 20:44

If the hulls are good, electronics and weapons improvements should do the trick.

Rupak · Post by **Rupak** » 13 Jan 2014 21:58

Philip,
The person responsible for conceptualizing these ASW vessels was very clear that these are meant as low cost vessels inspired by Turkish Tuzla Class, which are equipped with depth charges and fisheries sonars for harbour defence. So no missiles. Tsarkar has already provided further details.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 13 Jan 2014 22:12

tsarkar wrote:No missiles.

Refer here, next to the aft funnel just before the life rafts. Do you see a single 324 mm TT?http://s019.radikal.ru/i639/1205/0e/3b0c5dcf5e83.jpg

...

This will arm the light ASW ships. The ships themselves will be derived from GRSE WJFAC.

Thanks. There are so many fine details on the Delhi and Rajput class detroyers that every now and then I learn of a new detail. I have been aboard the Rana and never noticed that TT launcher. Couple of days back I noticed that the Delhi class destroyers are also equipped with the same countermeasure launchers (Zif-121) as the Vikramaditya.

Coming back to the light ASW ships, shouldnt RBU-6000 also be on the list?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jan 2014 03:22

If they are to replace the Pauks/Abhay class,then they should at least possess the same armament.Trundling depth charges off the stern like WW2 bumboats isn't going to deter a modern diesel sub/midget subs.Low cost should not mean low capability.In fact,every platform should have in the design the capability to be upgraded and carry additional armament if required.Modern lightweight ASW TTs and MBUs are essential.The Pauk-2 class carried two types of TTs,plus a VDS-the same sonar used for the Kamov helos.The Soviets standardised a lot of eqpt.Ideally,an open flight deck like that on the K class corvettes would allow ASW light helos to also operate from the vessels if there is no integral system like Medvedka.Our CG OPVs should also be equipped and tasked for ASW duties.The Chinese are going to send in large numbers of subs into the IOR in the future.Including N-subs says Adm.Arun Kumar too in an article.in addition,all ports and naval bases should have some kind of SOSUS system in place for detection of enemy undersea craft,which in the future will include UUVs which could deliver mines,etc.

PS:Japan ,close ally of the US ,now wants to join the annual Indo-US naval exercises,turning it into a trilateral affair.Earlier the proposal was dropped as it would send the wrong signal to the Chinese.What has been prevalent in the last decade is increased PLAN activity as our interaction with the US/USN has also increased.A chicken and egg situ.The PRC has also made huge political gains by funding major infrastructure projects across Africa and in the IOR in Sri lanka and are making a big play for the Maldives too. Whatever we may say about not fighting under a foreign flag,even allies do not,we are being seen increasingly as Uncle Sam's latest deputy on the high seas in Asia.It is provoking the equal and opposite reaction.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Jan 2014 03:47

It is provoking the equal and opposite reaction.

From whom?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jan 2014 03:56

China.It has embarked upon a clear and relentless exercise to surround India with states are either inimical to it ,or which have given the Chinese access to their military,esp. their navy.BDesh is now buying 2 Chinese subs,Gwadar in Chinese control,Hambantota built by the Chinese,the new massive Colombo Port City is being built by the Chinese with a 99 yr. lease on it! We are doing our best prevent the Maldives from leasing out an island or two to the PRC and it has already made significant eco inroads into Mauritius,considered a very pro-Indian entity with a large population of Indian origin.We know the Burmese connection too well,with the PLAN using an island for intel purposes to monitor Indian missile tests.The acceleration of this strategy has taken place within the last decade,esp. the last 5 years,corresponding to the era of the Cong/UPA regime and its pronounced "list" towards Uncle Sam..

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Jan 2014 04:24

Are you saying that if India were to somehow disengage with the US (and perhaps others) that china would leave the IOR? (Just trying to understand.)

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 14 Jan 2014 04:38

Philip wrote:China.It has embarked upon a clear and relentless exercise to surround India with states are either inimical to it ,or which have given the Chinese access to their military,esp. their navy.
.
.
.
The acceleration of this strategy has taken place within the last decade,esp. the last 5 years,corresponding to the era of the Cong/UPA regime and its pronounced "list" towards Uncle Sam..

And this is because we provoked them? And if we only keep our distance from the US, we can enjoy a healthy and fruitful relationship with China?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jan 2014 05:13

No,as much as our remaining in the Indo-China Sea too.However,when interests are threatened,and anti-China alliances appear to be in the offing,the intensity and effort of establishing support moves to a higher level.While China is our greatest threat and efforts must be made to strengthen ourselves to meet any eventuality,our alignment with declared anti-Chinese entities in de-facto military alliances,or "understandings" if one wants to fudge the issue,has definitely increased Chinese activity allover the IOR.10 years ago before Min MIn's love affair with the US,there was not even 10% of such activity.It would be prudent for both India and China to have frank talks with each other ,understanding the viewpoint of each other and work our a security architecture along with Russia and other smaller powers through the various international fora and bilateral talks.Under no circumstances should we get sucked into a US-Japan-China spat over Taiwan or island issues which do not concern us at all.

Incidentally,Russia is shortly to deliver the second Kilo class sub to Vietnam,the second within a month or two,with all 6 expected in record speed.3 subs to be delivered within 4 years is a great production record.Just look a the pace of our Scorpenes at more than twice the cost/sub too!

http://english.vietnamnet.vn/fms/govern ... month.html
Vietnam receives second Kilo-class sub this month

Russia’s largest news agency RIA Novosti quoted a spokesperson of the Russia Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) as saying a document to this effect will be signed in St. Petersburg in late January.

The second submarine is being given a test run, and after it passes technical tests, it will be transported to an unknown place in Vietnam via the Baltic Sea.

The first vessel, named Hanoi, was transported to Vietnam’s Cam Ranh Port and was launched on January 3. It made the first maiden voyage on January 8 and returned to Cam Ranh Port safely after a four-hour technical test.

RIA Novosti reported Russia is due to hand over the third such sub to Vietnam in 2014.
Vietnam is purchasing six Russia submarines under a 2009 contract signed during Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung’s visit to Moscow.

srai · Post by **srai** » 14 Jan 2014 05:32

tsarkar wrote:
Philip wrote:Here is a report about the shallow water ASW corvettes...Since missiles are also mentioned,it would be interesting to see the armament of these corvettes.The ASW version of Klub comes to mind,or perhaps Medvedka with a range of 25km,apart from the MBUs which will inevitably be installed as a sort of ASW CIWS.
No missiles.

Refer here, next to the aft funnel just before the life rafts. Do you see a single 324 mm TT?http://s019.radikal.ru/i639/1205/0e/3b0c5dcf5e83.jpg

In this picture just under the AK-630 you can see the single 324 mm TT http://s019.radikal.ru/i644/1205/18/3803a605c6a6.jpg

And here http://s019.radikal.ru/i642/1205/af/d84adfdeed84.jpg here http://i069.radikal.ru/1205/94/b310d767915f.jpg and here http://s57.radikal.ru/i156/1205/89/a2b146e4b87d.jpg just under the AK-630?

This will arm the light ASW ships. The ships themselves will be derived from GRSE WJFAC.

Thanks to member Hiten for collating the pictures.

For such a small ASW vessel if there are "missiles", they would be RBU-6000 which are more simpler rockets though.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 14 Jan 2014 06:05

Philip wrote:No,as much as our remaining in the Indo-China Sea too.However,when interests are threatened,and anti-China alliances appear to be in the offing,the intensity and effort of establishing support moves to a higher level.While China is our greatest threat and efforts must be made to strengthen ourselves to meet any eventuality,our alignment with declared anti-Chinese entities in de-facto military alliances,or "understandings" if one wants to fudge the issue,has definitely increased Chinese activity allover the IOR.

It really does sound like you blame India for initiating the geopolitical tussle with China. Can I also assume you blame Vietnam, Philippines, Japan etc for starting their respective disputes with China (at the instigation of the US perhaps)?

10 years ago before Min MIn's love affair with the US,there was not even 10% of such activity.

10 years ago, the PRC was in no position to operate naval bases overseas. As for its interests, its been a major arms supplier to Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Myanmar long before India-US strategic relations matured. And I hope I don't need to go into the history of Pakistan's nuclear and missile programs?

It would be prudent for both India and China to have frank talks with each other ,understanding the viewpoint of each other and work our a security architecture along with Russia and other smaller powers through the various international fora and bilateral talks.

So India and China have not been able to resolve the border dispute because of a lack of 'frankness' during talks with each other? And are you saying that this China-Russia-India security architecture that you're proposing is not really aimed at any particular nation?

Under no circumstances should we get sucked into a US-Japan-China spat over Taiwan or island issues which do not concern us at all.

I suppose its fortunate then that nobody has suggested India involve itself in any dispute over Taiwan or island issues.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Jan 2014 06:12

Under no circumstances should we get sucked into a US-Japan-China spat over Taiwan or island issues which do not concern us at all

On the contrary. FON is big issue with India.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Jan 2014 12:34

^^

To add to what Rupak said, GRSE is upgrading the engines & sonar of Abhay class, and that gives them the experience to build the next generation shallow water ASW ships. These will be the next level of ships from GRSE Rajabagan Docks that has completed its IN & ICG WJFAC orders.

DE submarines are most effective when they stalk harbours, like PNS Ghazi outside Vizag. Large surface ships have manoeuverability restrictions in shallow waters that impacts their ability to hunt submarines.

Heavier weapons will increase displacement, and negate the advantages.

RBU-6000 requires significant deck penetration for magazines, so cannot be installed on small ships. Abhay has RBU-1200.

More than quantum of firepower, accuracy of firepower is more important. 324 mm TAL torpedoes are effective weapons for these ships.

Also smaller ships can be built in greater numbers.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 14 Jan 2014 17:24

Philip wrote:Our CG OPVs should also be equipped and tasked for ASW duties.

Unfortunately there is no regulation in our system that dictates that ICG has to support Naval operations. It is widely believed that ICG will report to Naval command in times of war, but unlike the BSF-Army equation there is neither precedent nor ruling between the ICG and IN. The only synergy that comes is from the chief who happens to be a serving IN officer (in future that may change once ICG's own officer cadre reach that seniority). I will be happy to be corrected!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jan 2014 18:34

Aditya,the CG is now under the IN's overall operational control. In times of crisis,it will take its orders directly from the IN.

National Defence during hostilities (under the operational control of Indian Navy)

Synergising the capabilities of the two is the case in point in this IDSA paper.It is very lengthy,please read the entire piece.

https://www.google.co.in/search?newwind ... Bh3EpbM1XU

JOURNAL OF DEFENCE STUDIES
Synergising Indian Navy and the Coast Guard

Wartime Role of the Coast Guard

It is imperative that closer ties are established between the CG and the Navy so as to facilitate a smoother transition whenever the CG is required to fight alongside the Navy in times of war. It would be ideal to take a leaf from the US Coast Guard, which “is a military, multi-mission, maritime service ... .. and one of the nation’s five Armed Services”.19 Besides defence of the US coast, the CG ships and aircraft actively participated in the Vietnam War and made sacrifices along with the personnel of other services.20 According to the US CG policy document it along with the Navy is expected to create “fully interoperable, multidimensional, naval and maritime forces” to meet future maritime challenges. To achieve this “the Navy and Coast Guard must work even more closely”.21 In the Indian context this can be achieved in peace-time by CG participation in joint readiness exercises and multi-service interdiction training and operations. The process has been initiated and would be a catalyst in improving the CG readiness and an asset in improving the professional relations between the Navy and the CG. Coastal defence and coastal law enforcement are complementary. As brought out earlier, with careful planning, a Rupee spent on either of these missions will directly benefit the other.22 Since 1990 a non statutory forum called the Navy Coast Guard Board (NAVGUARD) has been established to resolve contentious issues and provide solutions to issues of mutual interests, covering the whole gamut from standardisation of equipment to community interactions and welfare measures.23

Reality dictates that the CG would always be most useful when it takes on the mission the Navy cannot fulfill. The Navy comprises of a force of large, high technology extremely expensive ships. The CG comprises of essentially low cost ships. It is, therefore, envisaged that the CG would take on the responsibilities where low intensity conflict exists. With the addition of some inexpensive combat systems, these ships will be ideally suited for low intensity conflicts. The CG will provide the platform and personnel and the Navy would provide combat systems for these platforms. While incorporating the combat capability in existing CG platforms, the CG will provide a low coast addition to the national defence resources.24

The CG should support the Navy as a general purpose force in being, and for operations in low to high threat environments. Generally, CG units should confine their operations to littoral waters in low threat environments. The wartime tasks of the CG should include defence of off shore installations, local naval defence of ports and harbours, examination services, control of merchant shipping, augmentation of naval resources in amphibious operations, maritime surveillance and Patrol and Logistic Support.

Reg,the IN's role in the IAP region.We do not have any direct stake in the spats between China and its maritime neighbours and meshing ourselves into military alliances however loosely they are linked brings with it inherent dangers.We are not globo-cop's deputy or part of the posse.Firstly,we cannot support such scale of operations from the economic standpoint.Our fundamental interests have to be protected.We must plan to defend and fight alone.WE cannot fall under the illusion of expecting help from Uncle Sam or anyone else.Just look at how the perpetrators of 26/11 are being protected by the US! Logistic help from many friendly nations has already been established in the IOR and expected with Vietnam in the Indo-China Sea and perhaps other nations which will help in our forward operations in case a crisis with China develops,where the role of the IN will be crucial . The paper below gives a detailed explanation of the Indo-China Sea disputes and its complexities.

THREE DISPUTES AND THREE OBJECTIVES
China and the South China Sea
Peter Dutton
http://home.comcast.net/~lionelingram/5 ... sChina.pdf

As a retired PLA major general has stated,
China’s sea area is the initial strategic barrier for homeland security. The coastal area
was the front line of growth during China’s economic development and the develop
-
China’s most developed regions are along the coastline.
The coastal area also possesses the largest population of any of the country’s regions, the highest concentration of high-technology industries, and the most modernized culture. If coastal defense were to fall into danger, China’s politically and
economically important central regions would be exposed to external threats. In the
context of modern warfare, military skills such as long-range precision strike develop
gradually, which makes the coastal sea area more and more meaningful for homeland
defense as a region providing strategic depth and precious early-warning time. In
short, the coastal area is the gateway for China’s entire national security

This is why China's emphasis upon defending the island chains is its first priority.Securing its energy and raw material supplies the other side of the coin

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Jan 2014 23:05

Here are the outline specifications for the Anti Submarine Warfare Shallow Water Craft (ASW-SWC) http://www.grse.nic.in/eoi/EOI_ASW_SWC_R1.pdf

titash · Post by **titash** » 14 Jan 2014 23:17

tsarkar wrote:Here are the outline specifications for the Anti Submarine Warfare Shallow Water Craft (ASW-SWC) http://www.grse.nic.in/eoi/EOI_ASW_SWC_R1.pdf

tsarkar-ji, is it likely to be manually loaded non-trainable RBU-1200 and 2-4 single tube 324mm launchers? In the case of an actual detection of a submarine in the shallows, won't it be more effective to have an automatic loading/reloading trainable RBU-6000 and triple tube launchers? That way, a significant amount of firepower can be delivered in a very short time and ensures a hit???

specially since the ASW rocket launched bombs are unguided in the water? I wonder if a manual 5-tube launcher delivers enough bombs...

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 15 Jan 2014 00:39

Surprisingly the tender does not envisage cwiz or even crn-91 to be installed on the vessel.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 15 Jan 2014 00:40

Philip wrote:Reg,the IN's role in the IAP region.We do not have any direct stake in the spats between China and its maritime neighbours and meshing ourselves into military alliances however loosely they are linked brings with it inherent dangers.

There is no more *inherent* danger than having Pakistan armed with nukes and delivery systems. All that happened well before India got anywhere close to the US.

Firstly,we cannot support such scale of operations from the economic standpoint.....We must plan to defend and fight alone

Do you even think before you write your verbose posts riddled with all sorts of inconsistencies ? All your rants are solely and reflexively anti-american. They have nothing whatsoever to do with making sense, let alone discuss Indian interests.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 15 Jan 2014 02:05

The required specs for the ASW corvette are very close to that of visby than FAC. The latest GRSE FAC is only 325 tonne. Why would you build them based on boats half the size? It looks like the Kamorta class will replace Kora and Kirch (I am hoping for more than 8, 12 ideally) and these ASW corvettes will replace veer and Abhay class.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 15 Jan 2014 05:48

Goa Shipyard Ltd delivers offshore patrol vessel to Navy.

The state-owned Goa Shipyard Limited today joined the elite club of ship manufacturers to have built 200 warships with the delivery of INS Sumedha offshore patrol vessel to the Navy.

"GSL today joined the elite class with the delivery of the 200th vessel. The delivery of the 200th vessel for the nation, synchronises with the handing over of the third of the Offshore Patrol Vessel (NOPV) 'INS SUMEDHA' - built and designed indigenously," a GSL release said.

The vessel was handed over to the Navy by GSL Chairman and Managing Director Rear Admiral Vineet Bakshi at a function at the shipyard, the release said.

The ship was received by Commanding Officer-designate of the vessel Commander Anand E Kulkarni.

The vessel is the largest Offshore Patrol Vessel of the Navy and the largest constructed by Goa Shipyard Limited. It is expected to help the force to meet its requirements for undertaking surveillance and prevent infiltration and transgression of maritime sovereignty.

"This vessel is suitable for monitoring sea lines of communication, defence of offshore oil installations and other critical offshore national assets and can be deployed for escorting high value ships and fleet support operations," the release said.

The first and second of the series of new 105m-class of OPVCs 'INS SARYU' and 'INS SUNAYANA' were handed over to the Navy by GSL in December 2012 and September 2013 respectively.

GSL is also building Torpedo Recovery Vessels, Fast Patrol Vessels, Extra Fast Attack Crafts, Offshore Patrol Vessels, Advanced Offshore Patrol Vessels and Naval Offshore Patrol Vessels and 126 GRP interceptor boats.

GSL is one of the few Indian shipyards equipped with an in-house design capability and most of its new shipbuilding projects are based on our own in-house design.

It is implementing a major expansion plan that is expected to significantly boost its capacity of shipbuilding facilities.

srai · Post by **srai** » 15 Jan 2014 07:34

tsarkar wrote:Here are the outline specifications for the Anti Submarine Warfare Shallow Water Craft (ASW-SWC) http://www.grse.nic.in/eoi/EOI_ASW_SWC_R1.pdf

For weapons, it mentions rocket launcher and torpedo launcher but there are no dimension specifications for them.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 15 Jan 2014 09:04

Kora kirch veer are all surface warfare ships as evidenced by their heavy missile and gun armament. Thus kamorta and small asw class cannot replace these.

Bheeshma wrote:The required specs for the ASW corvette are very close to that of visby than FAC. The latest GRSE FAC is only 325 tonne. Why would you build them based on boats half the size? It looks like the Kamorta class will replace Kora and Kirch (I am hoping for more than 8, 12 ideally) and these ASW corvettes will replace veer and Abhay class.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 16 Jan 2014 21:02

INS Vikramaditya is heading out to sea from INS Kadamba in Karwar after a brief R&R for an exercise with other ships of the Western Naval Command. After this exercise it will head to Mumbai for a ceremonial reception. Then it is heading around the country to Vizag to tango with the Eastern fleet. more details @ http://idrw.org/?p=32270

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jan 2014 23:10

On the Mine Sweepers contract with SOuth Korea which was finalised in Oct 2011 but got sabotaged by teh losing Italian bidder and a unnamed Indian politican. Good enough for MoD to stall the contract till the SoKo President brings it up in her meeting with Pranab Mukherjee. Do the Congerss ministers have any shame?

India Red Faced as South Korea brings up stalled minesweeper contract

NEW DELHI: The Posco steel plant imbroglio may have been resolved, but India was left red-faced again on Thursday when South Korea pushed for an early inking of the first-ever major bilateral defence deal that has been hanging fire for almost three years after being virtually finalized.

South Korean President Park Geun-hye, in fact, later said she had raised the pending export of Korean "minesweepers" to India with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as part of the larger "mutually beneficial cooperation in the defence industry arena" and strategic partnership.

The joint project for the mine countermeasures vessels (MCMVs) — small, high-tech warships that detect, track and destroy underwater enemy mines — has been stuck in the Indian defence ministry (MoD) due to its long-winded procurement process, bureaucratic bottlenecks and complaints of irregularities by rival vendors.

MoD sources say the price negotiation with South Korean company Kangnam Corporation was concluded way back in October 2011, and was also approved by defence minister AK Antony and the finance ministry. Under the plan, India was to acquire two MCMVs and transfer of technology for Rs 2,700 crore from Kangnam, with Goa Shipyard building another six vessels for over Rs 6,000 crore.

Just as the contract was headed for Cabinet committee on security's final nod, it was put on hold after Italy's Intermarine, one of several contenders defeated in the global tender, and a politician complained to the Central Vigilance Commission and others about irregularities in the selection process.

Since then, the deal has been cleared by the special technical oversight committee and others, with the Navy also repeatedly responding to all queries. But it remains stuck in bureaucratic red tape, with even the bid submitted by Kangnam lapsing.

Whether they are South Korean or from some other foreign vendor, the Navy needs MCMVs desperately. It had first got approval for acquisition of eight MCMVs in July 2005 but nothing much has come out of it so far.

The overall requirement, in fact, is for 24 MCMVs, 16 of them on the western seaboard because most of India's oil and other supplies come from there. But the Navy is grappling with just six Karwar-class and two Pondicherry class of minesweepers as of now, with two of them slated for decommissioning later this year.

The specialized MCMVs, made of fibre-reinforced plastics to avoid electro-magnetic signatures that activate mines, are used to clear harbour approaches or departure routes as well as offshore installations for shipping activity. Just a few well-placed "smart mines" can, after all, play havoc with ports in Mumbai, Kandla, Kochi and the like.

The almost 1,000-tonne MCMVs have high-definition sonars as well as acoustic and magnetic sweeps to first detect all kinds of marooned and drifting mines and then use remote-controlled systems like small underwater vehicles to then detonate them at safe distances.

So who was the Indian politican who complained to the CVC and what was his motive? And how come if the special technical oversight committee cleared it subsequently it is still not yet signed? The SoKo President's vist was a good time to announce the signing.

Why didn't that happen?