Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Viv S »

brar_w wrote:Sure, I am not saying that there aren't turboprop options but for the higher end systems (actually integrating ) you pretty much have Airbus going up against Boeing and IAI. That is likely to play out (Boeing v Airbus) for the RN contract and for the other missions where fleet s may be a mix.

The problem here is that the system integration and development contract has gone to a few players that are now looking to offer smaller and more affordable options. Boeing obviously going to control the larger global high end market and are looking to leverage their team's development in that end to scale it down to more modest requirements and capabilities for affordability reasons. IAI seems to be looking at competing head on with this.
The RAF/RN MPA requirements aren't not relevant to India.
As far as meeting IN's options, i guess that leaves the C-130, but the problem there is that it costs close to 150 Million in its current form.
On direct acquisition costs its unlikely that any business jet based options would be substantially cheaper. And being a turboprop it would have a substantially lower life-cycle cost while retaining commonalities with the IAF's C-130Js.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by brar_w »

The RAF/RN MPA requirements aren't not relevant to India
They were not mentioned because of the IN's needs. They are important because it is being rumored that Airbus is trying to put significant R&D into improving its systems to become more competitive. Without deals like those, some of the older systems are unlikely to be upgraded in order to compete with some of the newer systems. Hence i mentioned them.
On direct acquisition costs its unlikely that any business jet based options would be substantially cheaper. And being a turboprop it would have a substantially lower life-cycle cost while retaining commonalities with the IAF's C-130Js
Remains to be seen although evidence points to them being about a 1/3 of that, however that is subject to change based on customer requirements.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

Why SC-130? Why not US-2 ASW variant instead? an MKI-ized variant (built/customized in India) could have following capabilities:

- MAD boom
- Machine guns
- Torpedos
- Sonobuoys/Depth charges
- dunking sonar to use while on surface

In any case, Nausena has a requirement for amphibs for SAR work. Plus it fits into Make in India as well.

IMHO US-2 is an ultra expensive toy if we are going to buy only for SAR.

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by brar_w »

So that means designing a system practically form scratch and have it be interoperable with the P-8 fleet. Then on top of that you also have to scrap the original tender and enter unchartered waters (system development and integration). Could be done, with a much higher risk of course. I guess you would have to justify using a specialized system designed to operate from dual surfaces (land and water) when you have pure land based systems (inherently going to be cheaper form acquisition and LCC perspective) that can do the mission. It would also involve reducing the specifications on performance.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Viv S »

brar_w wrote:They were not mentioned because of the IN's needs. They are important because it is being rumored that Airbus is trying to put significant R&D into improving its systems to become more competitive. Without deals like those, some of the older systems are unlikely to be upgraded in order to compete with some of the newer systems. Hence i mentioned them.
Without deals like those, IAI & Boeing will never recoup their investment in MPA modules either, but its still not really relevant to India.
On direct acquisition costs its unlikely that any business jet based options would be substantially cheaper. And being a turboprop it would have a substantially lower life-cycle cost while retaining commonalities with the IAF's C-130Js
Remains to be seen although evidence points to them being about a 1/3 of that, however that is subject to change based on customer requirements.
What evidence? To be best of knowledge, none of the bizjet platforms in question has had the fuselage strengthening necessary for missile carriage and testing for safe firing at altitude. And the productionalization of such a highly customized airframe will inevitably drive up the cost. As for operating costs, a cursory look at the aircraft is sufficient to conclude that there is no way a bizjet would ever cost a third as much to operate.

Bottom-line being that there is no intuitive reason to expect the IN's MRMP choice will be jet based (regardless of what the US, UK etc are up to). If the IN's does go in for a jet based solution, it will be the result of a detailed examination of the cost-capability offered by all alternatives including turboprops.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Yeah I agree. From the Boeing line up I was told last year that they expect the cost to be between 50 and 100 Million depending upon things like weaponization and sensor mix that they are offering. Much of their development cost comes directly from the P-8 program and they had as of last year secured agreements for system transfers from OEM's that they wanted to work with (Not all were US, some were from seller and french systems as well). Life Cycle Cost calculation is a very very complex data driven projection with a lot of variables that are only known to the OEM and the customer that asks for data. Only the IN/MOD can do that comparison.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Viv S »

Aditya G wrote:Why SC-130? Why not US-2 ASW variant instead? an MKI-ized variant (built/customized in India) could have following capabilities
The US-2 will always be bested at any role not involved recovery at sea, as a limitation of its design. The obvious issue here would (in addition to the pricey acquisition) would be the same as that facing C-295 i.e (relatively) low operational speed.

Personally I believe its a mistake to build, or rather assemble it in India in the first place. Unless the build order is large enough to justify local production, the Make-in-India initiative is better served by avoiding uneconomical investments with the funds saved invested in boosting the production (if not export) of genuinely local items (like the HAL LUH for example).
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Viv S »

brar_w wrote:Yeah I agree. From the Boeing line up I was told last year that they expect the cost to be between 50 and 100 Million depending upon things like weaponization and sensor mix that they are offering. Much of their development cost comes directly from the P-8 program and they had as of last year secured agreements for system transfers from OEM's that they wanted to work with (Not all were US, some were from seller and french systems as well). Life Cycle Cost calculation is a very very complex data driven projection with a lot of variables that are only known to the OEM and the customer that asks for data. Only the IN/MOD can do that comparison.
India's purchase of the ERJ-145 ran at about $110 million (at current prices) before the radar & kit was installed. So I'd be plenty skeptical about Boeing's <$100 mil claim (let alone a $50 mil claim). With the entire package it would to run to $150 mil putting it broadly in the same bracket as the SC-130J.

Life cycle is complex calculation for similar aircraft. But it doesn't require a great deal of analysis to know that the P-8I will be pricier than all other options. Similarly one can be relatively confident that a turboprop will be cheaper to operate than a swept wing turbofan, especially considering that the turboprop is already in service in fairly significant numbers.
Last edited by Viv S on 08 Mar 2015 12:52, edited 1 time in total.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

Is there a perfect solution out there?
Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Shreeman »

^^^ Aditya,

"machine guns" -- how do you propose to use this feature?
Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Shreeman »

Viv S wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Why SC-130? Why not US-2 ASW variant instead? an MKI-ized variant (built/customized in India) could have following capabilities
The US-2 will always be bested at any role not involved recovery at sea, as a limitation of its design. The obvious issue here would (in addition to the pricey acquisition) would be the same as that facing C-295 i.e (relatively) low operational speed.

Personally I believe its a mistake to build, or rather assemble it in India in the first place. Unless the build order is large enough to justify local production, the Make-in-India initiative is better served by avoiding uneconomical investments with the funds saved invested in boosting the production (if not export) of genuinely local items (like the HAL LUH for example).
Make in India ought not be about cost/economy alone. China has paid in abuse of people, pollution. India is paying in abuse of its people via the BPO trash. At least it should get some manufacturing capability in return. China, japan, russia, brazil, canada, europe, us, everybody and their uncle are building widebodies. India needs to graduate or be permanently left behind.

This has to be a piece of that puzzle.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

Shreeman wrote:^^^ Aditya,

"machine guns" -- how do you propose to use this feature?
Havent u seen the movie "expendables"? :mrgreen:
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32691
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chetak »

Received by email.


Vice Admiral Rustom Khushro Shapoorjee Ghandhi. RIP.

Image
Above right: Rustom Ghandhi

The only naval officer to have commanded ships in all the marine wars fought by India,Vice Admiral Rustom Khushro Shapoorjee Ghandhi, nicknamed RKS or simply called Rusi, wished to return to the sea which had given him so much. He jested: "I enjoyed fish all my life; now let the fish enjoy me.” Four days after his passing away on December 23, 2014 at age 90 his immediate family and a few friends sailed from Lion Gate on INS Vipul, 40 miles into the Arabian Sea. With synchronized precision the naval pall bearers carried the coffin, his three children Sandy (named Phiroze), professor emeritus of law at Reading University, Dr Yasmine Hilton, chairman, Shell companies in India, and medical practitioner Dr Delna Ghandhi jointly said some Zoroastrian prayers and placed his kusti beside him with an item each one treasured. The nailed coffin was then slid into the sea.

Image
His coffin being lowered into the sea

Characteristically unconventional, Ghandhi was the first naval officer to return to the ocean and the Navy had to do research as a precedent was created. The Navy acknowledged him with three rounds of gunfire when white uniformed officers stood at attention, the Last Post played and Ghandhi went into the waters forever.
>>
>> The previous day, on December 26, a steady stream of friends and visitors paid him their last respects at INHS Asvini, when Commander in Chief of the Western Naval Command, Vice Admiral Anil Chopra arrived with naval punctuality at the appointed time of 11.30 a.m. for the last rites. Ghandhi’s former Flag Lieutenant, Chopra, termed his senior as "one of the most natural and outstanding leaders in my 40 years in the Navy.” As other officers, friends and family members paid their tributes, officers and cadets stood motionless. A guard of honor for three-and-a-half hours caused a cadet to pass out in the scorching sun. In addition to Zoroastrian prayers recited by Ervad Khushroo Madon, the navy band played for the gathering. Not given to rituals or formal religion, Ghandhi believed in secularism.

"He had 87 glorious years and three heroic ones,” stated Dhun of his brother who suffered a stroke, borne stoically for three years before his demise. He was recipient of the Param Vishisht Seva Medal (1977) for distinguished service and gallantry in times of peace and the Vir Chakra too for conspicuous bravery in the Indo-Pakistan war of 1971 for steering INS Mysore.

The Indian naval officer began his career during World War II in the Royal Indian Navy in 1942 and Adrian Holloway who had then served with Ghandhi on HMS Suffolk said, "He was a great man and I was privileged to know him.”

During the swearing-in ceremony of the first cabinet of independent India on August 15, 1947 Ghandhi was present as aide-de-camp (ADC) to Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. In fact he was the only Indian to have been Mountbatten’s ADC and the royal had prevailed on him to be the bearer of his prized decoration — the Star of Burma — at his funeral whenever it occurred. Ultimately, there was no funeral, as the Irish Republican Army assassinated Mountbatten along with some members of his family.


Image
Left: Ghandhi (marked) at the swearing-in of the first cabinet of independent India and (below)
introducing young Rajiv Gandhi to Lord Mountbatten
Image
Patricia Mountbatten, who inherited her father’s title as Countess Mountbatten of Burma acknowledged Ghandhi’s passing away saying, "We know what a great support he had been to our father during his time in India, which he (Mountbatten) valued very much, and we all grew fond of him.”

As commander of INS Betwa, built in the UK, he sailed the ship to Indian waters via Monaco where he enjoyed the royal hospitality of Prince Rainier and Princess Grace. Similarly, the Vice Admiral’s role in Operation Vijay was a decisive factor in the liberation of Goa from the Portuguese in 1961 after 451 years of occupation. As commander of INS Betwa, he helped capture the Portuguese frigate Albuquerque with Capt da Cunha Aragao in command. This maneuver was tellingly termed Operation Chutney. Ghandhi is recorded to have taken pains to inform the family of the surrendered Portuguese chief of his well-being, through his personal contacts.

To Vice Admiral Rusi Contractor, Ghandhi was "a lion with a big heart of gold, always compassionate and forgiving.” Contractor also alluded to his "towering personality and inimitable style.” "They don’t make ’em like you any more Rusi...but you will live on in the hearts of so many you touched with your generosity and your personality extraordinaire,” remarked friend Lolly Ramdas.

With his love for the waters, he passionately supported the Sea Cadet Corps believing the future and wellbeing of the navy depended on it. After his retirement from the Navy he took on the mantle of chairman and managing director (CMD) of the Shipping Corporation of India (SCI). At a condolence meeting convened by SCI he was extolled for his integrity and his ability to say no to the government. The current CMD Arun Kumar Gupta and past CMD Prabhat Kumar Srivastava spoke as did his erstwhile executive assistant Kamal Kothari who recalled how the shipping ministry pressurized the chairman to buy ships amounting to US $ 850 million.After 18 months they ultimately bought 37 ships totaling $ 230 million from three different shipyards. When one shipyard subsequently offered him a "compensation” of $100,000 for each ship, he hurriedly ordered Kothari to send off a note to Delhi, stating that the total cost of the 15 ships was further reduced by $ 1.5 million.

On another occasion when Ghandhi had to clear a file for a senior officer of the SCI attending a course at Cambridge University, UK, he bluntly wrote, "XYZ is an old dog. You can’t teach an old dog, new tricks.” On Kothari cautioning Ghandhi that this could have repercussions and was politically incorrect, RKS recalled the file and added, "XYZ is an old dog, like me. You can’t…”

Born to Khushro and Dina (née Amroliwala), Rustom was the oldest of five brothers — Dhun, Sorab, Burzoe and Jamshed. In fact, the siblings were last together in Simla, Himachal Pradesh (HP) around 1986-87 when Rusi was governor. As governor of HP, his wife Bubbles (born Khorshed Kharegat) and he extensively toured the state to redress issues. From 1993 to 1996 he was appointed member of the National Commission for Minorities.

An unusual project for a Services man was being technical advisor on the sets of Ewan Lloyd’s film The Sea Wolves shot in Goa. The actor to play the governor being indisposed, Lloyd zeroed in on Ghandhi who looked "suitably gubernatorial” and could fit into the clothes, reveals Sandy.

He could be mistaken for a Royal Navy officer in demeanor and dress for he was always "perfectly turned out, perfect in diction and master of the kind of dripping in sarcasm which often achieved more results than any other form of admonishment,” reminisced Ranjit Rai in the India Defence Forum Analysis. Taking pride in his well-appointed table, Ghandhi who belonged to the "old guard,” had come down heavily when Rai and some colleagues invited to the Ghandhi home in Juhu for a five-course meal admitted they had eaten some chaat at the beach just prior to the visit!

Ghandhi’s flamboyance was recognized in red pyjamas — which were his style statement — as were his predictable red socks, which prompted Rear-Admiral Chotu Das to write in his condolence message to the children: "It is an end of an era, and of a style, end of a way of life. How many of us tried to emulate his charisma? How many of us tried to sport red socks and red hanky? Colorless is all we could achieve. A fighter till the end, we salute the inspiration he enthused in all of us.”

Cyrus Master
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by brar_w »

India's purchase of the ERJ-145 ran at about $110 million (at current prices) before the radar & kit was installed. So I'd be plenty skeptical about Boeing's <$100 mil claim (let alone a $50 mil claim). With the entire package it would to run to $150 mil putting it broadly in the same bracket as the SC-130J
I have no good/definitive figure to offer of what it is likely to cost other then what one of the Boeing guys told me is there target price for this platform and it is very much below 100 million depending upon the features sought. It is nowhere near 150 Million. Both this price and the 150 Million SC-130J price are obviously not full acquisition price or an FMS price per unit that includes a bunch of other stuff an services, but it includes most of the technology and sensors they plan to offer.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25112
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by SSridhar »

Maritime Perspectives 2014

Have not yet read it, but the chapters look appetizing.
ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 374
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by ragupta »

Why not just standardize on C-295W, for all propeller based needs.
Approve the Tata-Airbus venture, and let ithem make it a platform for choice for replacement of Avro, AN-32 and all medium maritime requirement.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by brar_w »

^^ It is under consideration and would be compared to the specifications demanded in the RFP, although on a first glance its advertised max cruise speed is still shy of the 300 knot requirement.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by NRao »

SSridhar wrote:Maritime Perspectives 2014

Have not yet read it, but the chapters look appetizing.
THANKS!!

Treasure trove.
member_24684
BRFite
Posts: 197
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by member_24684 »

chetak wrote:
Received by email.


Vice Admiral Rustom Khushro Shapoorjee Ghandhi. RIP.

Cyrus Master
Sir, with due respect can I share this on my Blog
Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Ankit Desai »

They are moving fast. Govt shortlists Larsen & Toubro, Pipavav for Rs 6,000 cr submarine contract
According to highly-placed sources, a high-level committee headed by vice-admiral Subhedar, which had inspected both public and private shipyards to shortlist candidates to issue the request for qualification (RFQ) for Project 75i, in its final presentation to the ministry of defence (MoD) last week, selected the two private sector shipyards — L&T’s Katupalli yard and Pipavav unit.
Project 75i is designed to purchase 6 next generation diesel submarines with Air Independent Propulsion System (AIP) technology for Indian Navy by 2022. While conventional diesel-electric submarines have to surface every few days to get oxygen to recharge their batteries, AIP systems will help the submarines to stay submerged for longer periods. Apart from AIP, the new submarines will have advanced detection range and combat management systems and better sensors for optimum performance. The weapon system would be a mix of torpedoes and missiles.
-Ankit
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Philip »

With our "Look East" wider IOR objectives,the need is first for more LRMP ASW aircrat.supported by smaller birds.Our current inventory are around 8/12 of the ultra-LRMP TU-142 Bears originally a bomber design,still used by Russia,which can fly to S.Africa and back without refueling.They still have immense capability if they carry BMos and Nirbhay in the future too.The rest are the new 8 (+4) lesser ranged modern P-8Is and upgraded 5-IL-38SDs.This type is being upgraded/built anew in Russia for the RuN.Extra IL-38s and P-8Is would be the best solution,around 12+ P-8Is and 12 IL-38s.It would help standardization too. The IL-38s would have better range,payload,loiter capability than a med. sized MRP. Since we already are building DO-228s,in service with the IN in EW roles,perhaps an ASW version could be an alternative.It would help avoid yet another type being inducted.However,if a suitable multi-role type is selected for the Avro replacement,as almost all the contenders have an MRP version,the same type could be acquired as it woiuld be "made in India".

I mentioned before that the drawback of the US-2 was lack of any ASW capability for such an expensive amphib. 8-10 bought out US-2s would be sufficient along with another 8+ASW amphibs,Berievs,whatever for the IN.We also need smaller amphibs for ultility,commns,tourism,etc.The CG could perhaps operate some of the US-2,with the bulk with the IN.There is no need as Brar says to build them in India.That will be a long laborious process and the Japanese have no experience of defence exports which is complicating the Oz sub deal,TOT,etc. Amphibs are also required for fire-fighting.We have lost large areas of forest cover due to forest fires which are getting more frequent and devastating globally due to global warming. With so many rivers,lakes,waterways and coastline of thousands of Kms,island territories,tourism,etc.,the demand for smaller amphibs will be huge. Suitable small/med versions could be identified for manufacture here.The market could easily be for a few hundred .There was also an Oz design for an amphib version of the DO-228 with a floatation device below the fuselage. This too could be built by HAL.

PS:The news that L&T and Pipavav,now swiftly placed under Reliance (Anil A) control have been shortlisted for the sub contract is v.interesting and a positive move by the govt.. According to Russian experts,L&T has the best technical expertise,even though Pip has v.good infrastructure. Furthermore,L&T have solid experience in manufacturing sub hulls for the ATV project.The Pip team will most surely opt for a Western/European partner,while L&T most likely for a Russian firm and the Amur sub. MDL and HSL appear to have been given the thumbs down because of their poor track record in building and refitting subs.Even the ATV project has L&T as the major pvt. contributor.Vizag in any case is extremely busy with the ATV and future SSNs.
Saral
BRFite
Posts: 1663
Joined: 16 Jan 2005 14:05

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Saral »

chetak wrote: Vice Admiral Rustom Khushro Shapoorjee Ghandhi. RIP.
My brother who was ADC in the late 80s and was in the Navy till the early 2000s met Rusi Ghandhi in his old age a couple of years ago.
A remarkable individual having had a role in all the wars post-independence.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/aqx84kusl5vxd ... i.pdf?dl=0
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by shiv »

Saral wrote:
chetak wrote: Vice Admiral Rustom Khushro Shapoorjee Ghandhi. RIP.
My brother who was ADC in the late 80s and was in the Navy till the early 2000s met Rusi Ghandhi in his old age a couple of years ago.
A remarkable individual having had a role in all the wars post-independence.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/aqx84kusl5vxd ... i.pdf?dl=0
Beautiful. Thanks for posting. I hope your brother is doing well.
Saral
BRFite
Posts: 1663
Joined: 16 Jan 2005 14:05

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Saral »

Shiv: Yes. He's based in Canada and was in Bangalore for a month (for Cyclotron treatment) and met with many of his services contemporaries (this support network is very good). He's feeling good now (plays tennis with one functioning arm) and has done everything humanly possible but ultimately this disease is known to progress. But he is a fighter and a highly organized/optimistic chap.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

I was researching our capabilities viz marine diesel engines.

Which diesel engines do we manufacture/assemble in India?

Cummins
MTU
Pielstick
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11242
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Gagan »

L&T's Kattipali facility has this HUGE ship lift 50m x 250m !!! It is easily India's largest shipyard, and possibly the most well equipped as well.
shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1387
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by shaun »

Interesting Pic.
Image
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Philip »

http://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis/ ... 25317.aspx
India needs to build sufficient naval prowess in Indian Ocean

Brahma Chellaney
| Updated: Mar 12, 2015

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s three-nation Indian Ocean tour attests to this region’s critical importance for Indian security, including preventing India’s encirclement by hostile powers. If China were to gain the upper hand in the Indian Ocean region, it will mark the end of India’s great-power ambitions. India thereafter will be seen as merely a sub-regional power whose clout does not extend across South Asia, with Pakistan challenging it in the west and China in the north and south.

India’s tactical and strategic disadvantages along its land frontiers are more than compensated by its immense geographic advantage in the Indian Ocean. Such is peninsular India’s vantage location in the Indian Ocean — the world’s premier energy and trade seaway — that the country is positioned dominantly astride vital sea lanes of communication (SLOCs), including China’s emergent Maritime Silk Road.

Despite India’s inherent maritime leverage, its land-frontier compulsions have instilled a landlocked mindset. With its attention fixated on the disputed land borders, India — far from exploiting its advantage on the maritime front — often has difficulty facing up to the fact that it is a major maritime country. Worse still, India diplomatically neglected the Indian Ocean region in the 25-year period from 1989 when it was governed by coalitions. Tellingly, Modi is the first prime minister to visit Seychelles in 34 years and Sri Lanka in 28 years.

India’s long neglect has become China’s strategic gain. China’s quiet manoeuvring in the Indian Ocean, where it is chipping away at India’s natural geographic advantage through multibillion-dollar projects along the great trade arteries, draws strength from its more assertive push for dominance in the South and East China Seas.

The Indian Ocean promises to shape the wider geopolitics and balance of power in Asia and beyond. India, however, finds itself on the back foot in its own strategic backyard. According to Jawaharlal Nehru, “History has shown that whatever power controls the Indian Ocean has, in the first instance, India’s sea-borne trade at her mercy and, in the second, India’s very independence itself.” The irony is that this is the only ocean in the world named after a single country.

China has been assiduously pursuing a strategy to build a “string of pearls” across the Indian Ocean so as to gain strategic clout and naval access. By rebranding the “string of pearls” strategy as a “21st-century maritime silk road” project, China has now sought to disguise its real intentions. This signature initiative of President Xi Jinping merely recasts the “string of pearls” strategy in meretriciously benign terms. Stripped of its rhetoric, the Silk Road — just like the “string of pearls” — is designed to redraw Asia’s geopolitical map by making China the preeminent power.

The Silk Road indeed exemplifies China’s use of aid, investment and other leverage to pull littoral states closer to its orbit, including through the construction of seaports, railroads and highways. Such construction may provide a counterpoint to China’s military assertiveness. Yet it is integral to a strategy that fuses soft and hard tactics to bind countries to China’s economy and security and to convince them that it is in their interest to accept China as Asia’s alpha power.

How China blends its economic and military interests was illustrated last autumn by the separate docking of two Chinese submarines at the newly opened, Chinese-majority-owned container terminal at Colombo harbour. China’s desire for permanent military presence in the Indian Ocean, where it has carried out three deployments, is being whetted by its control of Pakistan’s Gwadar port, located strategically at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz. China has operationally taken over the port it built at Gwadar to develop not its commercial value (which remains unpromising) but its potential as a key naval outpost.

Given the emerging challenge to India in its maritime backyard, Modi must develop a credible strategy to counter it. His charm-offensive tour of regional states with offers of new economic and defence tie-ups marks just a beginning. Modi did well to drop the Maldives from his itinerary, given the political mess there. But he could have delayed his Sri Lanka trip until after the forthcoming parliamentary elections there, especially given the fact that his visit comes barely a month after President Maithripala Sirisena’s India tour.

In keeping with his highly personalised imprint on diplomacy, Modi thus far has relied on bilateral summits to open new avenues for cooperation and collaboration. Diplomacy alone will not suffice. Sirisena, for example, makes his first official visits to Beijing and Islamabad soon after hosting Modi.

To prevent Chinese military encirclement, India needs to significantly accelerate naval modernisation. It must build sufficient naval prowess to potentially interdict Chinese SLOCs in the Indian Ocean and hold the Chinese economy hostage if a Himalayan war were thrust upon it again. A major holdback of tanker traffic in wartime would be a crippling jolt to the Chinese economy, though it might not alter the war’s outcome.

Even as the Chinese military keeps Indian ground forces busy in peacetime by staging Himalayan border incursions and other flare-ups, the oil and liquefied gas flowing from the Gulf and Africa to China pass through the Indian Ocean unmolested and unimpeded. Over 80% of China’s oil imports pass through the Malacca Strait chokepoint. Boosting SLOC interdiction capability would allow the Indian Navy to dominate key maritime routes and help improve the Chinese military’s behaviour along the Himalayas.

The contest for major influence in the Indian Ocean is pivotal to the success of China’s strategy to fashion a China-centric Asia. This is a contest India cannot afford to lose.

Brahma Chellaney is a geostrategist and author
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Austin »

Naval ALH ?

Indian MoD looking at responses to naval helo RfI

India's Ministry of Defence (MoD) is evaluating responses from around 10 local manufacturers to its October 2014 request for information (RfI) for its Naval Utility Helicopter (NUH) programme.

The MoD extended to 28 February a deadline to reply to the RfI, which outlines a requirement for 100 twin-engine helicopters. It was the third deadline extension after terminating its August 2012 request for proposal (RfP) to import 56 platforms.

Industry sources said the RfI responders included Axis Aerospace & Technologies, Bharat Forge, Dynamatic Technologies, Mahendra Aerospace, Larsen & Toubro (L&T), Reliance Industries, Taneja Aerospace and Tata Advanced Systems Limited from the private sector, and state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).
nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by nrshah »

Does any of these companies have manufactured forget design a help except HAL and perhaps partially TATA
chaitanya
BRFite
Posts: 221
Joined: 27 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: US

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chaitanya »

Sorry if this has been discussed before, but does the IN have a plan for improving shipbuilding capability in India or is it more of an ad-hoc improvement process? The IN is (and wants) to expand faster, and pretty clear that with Make in India such a push indian-made ships would be desired. Given the past track record of slow production of capital ships, I wonder how the added push of inducting larger carriers and more nuke subs faster would strain the system. Are there any plans afoot for integrating shipbuilding technology from Japan or other countries?

Additionally, I was wondering if Indian shipbuilding been hobbled from building economies of scale with the small order sizes in the past. Would it make sense to combine/centralize some of the government run yards to achieve these economies of scale? For example, I noticed that for the P15B, Mazgaon needs to wait on line shafts to be delivered from Russia. Given that production needs to be scaled up, wouldn't it make sense to invest in a plant that could produce these specialized parts for all the yards?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Singha »

Such strategic decisions are not our strong suit.
Someone needs to get the pmos ear for this.
Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1444
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Kersi D »

Aditya G wrote:I was researching our capabilities viz marine diesel engines.

Which diesel engines do we manufacture/assemble in India?

Cummins
MTU
Pielstick
Specify the size / capacity. Diesl engines range from 1 hp to 10000+ hp. In higher range, even above 1000 / 2000 hp there are few manufactures in the whole world.
Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1444
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Kersi D »

chaitanya wrote:Sorry if this has been discussed before, but does the IN have a plan for improving shipbuilding capability in India or is it more of an ad-hoc improvement process? The IN is (and wants) to expand faster, and pretty clear that with Make in India such a push indian-made ships would be desired. Given the past track record of slow production of capital ships, I wonder how the added push of inducting larger carriers and more nuke subs faster would strain the system. Are there any plans afoot for integrating shipbuilding technology from Japan or other countries?

Additionally, I was wondering if Indian shipbuilding been hobbled from building economies of scale with the small order sizes in the past. Would it make sense to combine/centralize some of the government run yards to achieve these economies of scale? For example, I noticed that for the P15B, Mazgaon needs to wait on line shafts to be delivered from Russia. Given that production needs to be scaled up, wouldn't it make sense to invest in a plant that could produce these specialized parts for all the yards?
I guess that delaying supplies to Indian shipyards would be one of the dirty tricks used by foreigners to ensure that the ships are delayed and we got to foreign shipyards only !!!!
shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1387
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by shaun »

L&T, Pipavav will get orders for 1 submarines each under Project 75i
The government of India recently shortlisted Larsen & Toubro (L&T) and Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Company which can compete with Public sector companies to build 6 AIP equipped Conventional Diesel Submarines under Project 75i for Indian Navy.

Reliance Infrastructure which belongs to Anil Ambani recently brought stake in Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering just before the government announced that Pipavav Shipyards have been shortlisted. According to sources close to idrw.org both Private shipyards for the first time will be awarded to built 1 submarines each and four submarines will be awarded to PSU shipyards owned by Ministry of Defence.

Recently high-level committee headed by vice-admiral Subhedar, which had inspected both public and private shipyards shortlisted candidates to issue the request for qualification (RFQ) for Project 75i. idrw.org already has confirmed in earlier report that Goa Shipyard which is based in Defence minister Manohar Parrikar Home state has already confirmed to idrw.org that they are opting out of Project 75i since their shipyard lacks infrastructures for building Submarines and Shipyards is focusing on construction of eight minesweepers for the Indian Navy which recently has been awarded to them.

Garden Reach Ship-Builders, Hindustan Shipyard, Mazgaon Docks are Public sector units which will bag orders to construct remaining 4 submarines and Mazgaon Docks might take the cake with orders to build 2 Submarines in their shipyards.

Under Project 75i, all six submarines will be built in India on the lines of the predecessor P75 Scorpene production line at MDL, next generation diesel submarines will come with Air Independent Propulsion System (AIP) technology. Potential candidates for Project 75i are French DCNS ‘Scorpene’, Russia’s Rubin Amur 1650, the German HDW Type 214, Spain’s Navantia S-80.
http://idrw.org/archives/59734
chaitanya
BRFite
Posts: 221
Joined: 27 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: US

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chaitanya »

Singha wrote:Such strategic decisions are not our strong suit.
Someone needs to get the pmos ear for this.
That's disappointing, I was hoping that the IN would have some plan at least, given their desire to indigenize. And going by the above news, it looks like they are not going to rely on private yards that much in the near future either
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Vipul »

If the GOI intends to get the PSU and Pvt firms to manufacture just one submarine each, then it is a foolish decision and will only ensure all of these firms will become jack of all trades and master of none.
If the aim is to ensure faster deliveries then it can be done by giving order of 3 submarines each to one of the pvt scetor unit and other 3 to Mazgaon Docks. IIRC, Mazgaon docks was expanding to add one more submarine line. Within 5 years after the scorpene submarines are delivered it will have no work at the its 2 submarine lines!!!
Hindustan Shipyard can be given the responsibility to make the 6 Nuclear Submarines that the govt announced last month. GRSE can deliver the Frigates/Destroyers for the Navy. Cochin Shipyard will be busy with making the aircraft carriers and Goa Shipyards can make the ships required by the Coast Guard or auxillary boats for the Navy.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by pankajs »

This IDRW report is wrong at many levels if you parse it carefully. Wonder who wrote this report? I mean it would be good to know the name so that I can read next fart in the correct frame of mind. I don't want to brand all IDRW reports as farts.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Philip »

Reward each shipyard with sufficient numbers of a particular type of warship/sub so that economies of scale can be met. Pip would be best served building the amphibs/warships,with L&T building the subs.MDL have yet to deliver on the Scorpenes.MDL p[lus a pvt. shipyard building subs,apart from HSL and the N-sub programmes,would be enough for our needs. MDL,GR,CSL,Goa and a pvt. yard can build major warships (amphibs,DDGs,CGs,etc.),smaller frigates and corvettes,missile/patrol craft,OPVs,specialised vessels like MCM ships,survey vessels,auxiliaries,etc.There are enough orders both for the IN,CG and now even exports to keep all our DPSU and pvt. yards happy. India should become one of the world's largest and best shipbuilding nations just as the Japanese,Koreans and Finns,acieved for themselves.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12413
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

Gents, any clue as to when the first Scorpene will hit the water?
Post Reply