Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

[brar_w]

High energy lasers against higher performing cruise missiles require quite high power levels and a very narrow beam. This gets even more important when you are defending yourself (laser is on the vessel) as opposed to defeating a missile headed somewhere else (where you have a different orientation to target). The idea would be to very narrowly focus a directed beam at the weakest part of a missile (could be an aerodynamic surface, could be a an imaging seeker etc etc) at enough stand-off distance to cause it to miss. But you still need a 200-300 kW class HEL (at a minimum) but likely more to effectively do this at scale (you need low dwell times to handle multiple threats) against a broad enough threat. Those type of solid state lasers are going to continue to remain a significant challenge for quite a while still and even more of a challenge when it comes to back-fitting them on vessels not designed for employing them. So this is still a far-term solution for anti-ship weapon defense and not something that becomes widely available to a point where it can begin replacing or seriously augmenting current ship point or area defenses. Stabilizing the weapon system itself, and holding the beam on a target in adverse sea states and other conditions is likely a lesser challenge. How the beam degrades in adverse weather is an area of potentially higher concern and something that is one aspect of the challenge in operationalizing this technology and is a focus around the world. The idea would be to have something that degrades gracefully instead of just becoming unusable in certain naval or airborne conditions like rain, fog, clouds, atmospheric conditions, smoke etc.

[Rakesh]

Vidur-saar, 2 heavy naval helos (and a low footprint rotary UAV for quick launch/SAR) for every major surface combatant would be my dream-chair admiral plan too. A group of three to four such vessels can effectively replace an old school ASW helicopter carrier and generate an excellent ASW grid, while adding a lot of complexity to an enemy that would need to target all of them. Plus if one vessel gets out of action, other vessels can pickup slack etc etc etc. lots of good ideas on paper.

But the CG pic of INS Himagiri above shows just one hangar which means Navy has changed its thinking from past, Maybe based on helo availability or some new ASW philosophy (which might include relying more on long range air borne assets like P8 and MALE UAVs while giving a shooter role for the ship based helos in these areas)

hnair saar, you are correct. The navy has changed its thinking. I am not sure of the reasoning, but they have shifted from two hangars to one hangar. All newly commissioned and future frigates, with the exception of the Visakhapatnam Class destroyer, now have just one helicopter hangar. Perhaps the newer helicopters have more uptimes versus the old Sea King Mk42s and Ka-28s. Perhaps John can advise more.

[Vidur]

P17 A definitely have a hangar that caters for 2 Sea King heptrs. Just like all our Destroyers and Frigates except Talwars. If you were CNS how would you allocate 24 heptrs amongst your fleet of 37 Destroyers, Frigates, Corvettes that are designed to take 60. This is not counting the 2 aircraft carriers and all other ships like patrol vessels.

Which ships would you allocate 2 to ? What would be the most effective way ? How imp is ATAS, which again we do not have ? Is it better to mate 2 heptrs with the 2/3 ships that have TAS or shall we put them on Brahmaputras and use them as dedicated sub hunters ?

[andy B]

High energy lasers against higher performing cruise missiles require quite high power levels and a very narrow beam. This gets even more important when you are defending yourself (laser is on the vessel) as opposed to defeating a missile headed somewhere else (where you have a different orientation to target). The idea would be to very narrowly focus a directed beam at the weakest part of a missile (could be an aerodynamic surface, could be a an imaging seeker etc etc) at enough stand-off distance to cause it to miss. But you still need a 200-300 kW class HEL (at a minimum) but likely more to effectively do this at scale (you need low dwell times to handle multiple threats) against a broad enough threat. Those type of solid state lasers are going to continue to remain a significant challenge for quite a while still and even more of a challenge when it comes to back-fitting them on vessels not designed for employing them. So this is still a far-term solution for anti-ship weapon defense and not something that becomes widely available to a point where it can begin replacing or seriously augmenting current ship point or area defenses. Stabilizing the weapon system itself, and holding the beam on a target in adverse sea states and other conditions is likely a lesser challenge. How the beam degrades in adverse weather is an area of potentially higher concern and something that is one aspect of the challenge in operationalizing this technology and is a focus around the world. The idea would be to have something that degrades gracefully instead of just becoming unusable in certain naval or airborne conditions like rain, fog, clouds, smoke etc.

Brar thanks for the above. I think there will also be much excess power requitements to employ these HEL systems effectively especially if you are facing a dense environment with multiple targets being engaged concurrently. High density capacitors or solid state batteries (once they mature) may help to augment power.

Has there been any research or information on how lasers behave in a saline rich environment...just curious.

Also with rain and stuff I would imagine once you reach critical mass in terms of power hopefully you can achieve burn through?

[brar_w]

Brar thanks for the above. I think there will also be much excess power requitements to employ these HEL systems effectively especially if you are facing a dense environment with multiple targets being engaged concurrently. High density capacitors or solid state batteries (once they mature) may help to augment power.

Yes you need lots of power (in addition to other things) because dwell times matter for multi-target engagement. So while the HEL itself is a speed-of-light weapon, it doesn't behave like your fire-and-forget weapons in that you don't launch and move on to next target. So how much time you spend on each target, and at what range is what ultimately decides which targets you can defeat in a given time. So practically, while a 100-200 kW HEL (with other advances elsewhere) potentially gets you in the game of maybe being able to defeat a small number of certain types of cruise missiles, you probably need a 300+ kW weapon to make this viable across a larger set of missiles and probably in the 0.5 MW range to cover the majority of the cruise (and some portion of BM) threat. Those sort of weapons will be near imposible to backfit on a vast majority of naval vessels currently deployed the world over. I'd say less than 10% of these vessels would have that much surplus power, cooling or storage to easily accept even a 100-200 kW weapon let alone a half a megawatt weapon system. And if you go down a path fo fielding a COIL (like the YAL) which is easier to scale you need even more resources that are almost lacking on modern naval vessels given how densely packed they are with electronics, weapons, and other gear that is going to be as, if not more, mission critical.

Two challenges here (just two of many) are higher power lasers, and maintaining that narrow beam at distance, through atmospheric and other environmental conditions. Power generation and storage is also one aspect of this but so is the efficiency of your SSL itself. Then, if you have a large laser and don't have a lot of power reserve just sitting around (very few ship classes have those sort of power and thermal margins sitting unutilized) then you need to store the power. This then gets into how much can you store and what the minimally viable magazine size is (before you need to take a longish break to replenish) which itself is a function of how your dwell times vary across various targets (like a quadcopter vs a cruise missile that has some level of hardening).

All these things have to move in sync before these systems are ready for prime-time. So it is quite complicated and not something that is going to be a rapid game changer. More like a slow adoption that stretches out decades given all the cost that it imposes and the fact that the vast majority of ships and ship classes around the world would need some serious modifications assuming that they can accommodate those power levels at all. So the world of naval high-energy-lasers should best be viewed (in the 10-15 time horizon) as predominantly a counter unmanned aerial system, and fast attack craft solution with some potential inroads into some classes (and limited amounts) of cruise missile defeat roles.

Not until you see someone out there demonstrating a 300+ kW SSL that is compact enough for naval usage, and a vessel capable of supporting its power, storage, and thermal needs, can we say that they, as a legitimate AsHM defeat solution, have arrived. That is a long time away.

Has there been any research or information on how lasers behave in a saline rich environment...just curious.

Yes lots fo research and real world testing and lessons learned from deploying this with operational crews in real world conditions. Though not much of the at-sea test and validation effort is published or in the open source.

[Rakesh]

P17 A definitely have a hangar that caters for 2 Sea King heptrs. Just like all our Destroyers and Frigates except Talwars. If you were CNS how would you allocate 24 heptrs amongst your fleet of 37 Destroyers, Frigates, Corvettes that are designed to take 60. This is not counting the 2 aircraft carriers and all other ships like patrol vessels.

Which ships would you allocate 2 to ? What would be the most effective way ? How imp is ATAS, which again we do not have ? Is it better to mate 2 heptrs with the 2/3 ships that have TAS or shall we put them on Brahmaputras and use them as dedicated sub hunters ?

Vidur-ji, are we sure about the P17A frigates carrying two Sea King sized helicopters? I see only one helo hangar below.

[Rakesh]

Sad news. The Indian Navy just lost a serving Vice Admiral to COVID-19.

https://twitter.com/ShivAroor/status/13 ... 23616?s=20 ----> Very sad news. The Indian Navy's ‘Grey Dolphin’ (senior most serving submariner) Vice Admiral Srikant passed away this morning in Delhi from Covid. Deepest condolences to his family & the silent service. He was to retire at the end of this month. Fine officer & gentleman.

[Vidur]

P17 A definitely have a hangar that caters for 2 Sea King heptrs. Just like all our Destroyers and Frigates except Talwars. If you were CNS how would you allocate 24 heptrs amongst your fleet of 37 Destroyers, Frigates, Corvettes that are designed to take 60. This is not counting the 2 aircraft carriers and all other ships like patrol vessels.

Which ships would you allocate 2 to ? What would be the most effective way ? How imp is ATAS, which again we do not have ? Is it better to mate 2 heptrs with the 2/3 ships that have TAS or shall we put them on Brahmaputras and use them as dedicated sub hunters ?

Vidur-ji, are we sure about the P17A frigates carrying two Sea King sized helicopters? I see only one helo hangar below.

That is my understanding. This is just a model, is it not?

[Rakesh]

Vidur-ji, I believe that model is fairly close to the real thing. Will have to wait and see.

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 48676?s=20 ---> Indian Navy to acquire 38 BrahMos (extended range variant) cruise missiles for the first two P-15B stealth guided missile destroyers.

[Vidur]

Sad news. The Indian Navy just lost a serving Vice Admiral to COVID-19.

https://twitter.com/ShivAroor/status/13 ... 23616?s=20 ----> Very sad news. The Indian Navy's ‘Grey Dolphin’ (senior most serving submariner) Vice Admiral Srikant passed away this morning in Delhi from Covid. Deepest condolences to his family & the silent service. He was to retire at the end of this month. Fine officer & gentleman.

Om Shanti. May he get sadgati.

[Rakesh]

CDS has spoken again, after Naval HQ is insisting on SSK submarines, aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, carrier borne fighters, etc.

Carrier Or Submarine For Navy? Being Examined, Says General Bipin Rawat
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/state-o ... vy-2338616
14 Dec 2020

"Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Submarines have their separate place in the naval warfare and so does an aircraft carrier. I am in no way saying the Navy does not need its Air wing. Yes it needs an Air wing. But how to manage it and how to ensure the security and sanctity of our sea lines of communication we are thinking about," he said.

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 40738?s=20 ---> Italian company, Fincantieri, is the knowhow provider for technology upgrade of the P-17A stealth guided missile frigate project of the Indian Navy.

[John]

Vidur-ji, I believe that model is fairly close to the real thing. Will have to wait and see.

P-17a to my knowledge will carry only one helicopter should be able to find images of Nilgiri that is further along that can confirm this.

[Philip]

When Fincant.,Italians,are providing us with valuable input for the IAC-1,P-17As and aux. fleet support vessels earlier,why are anti-Indian Turks ,rabidly pro-Pak,being awarded the tankers contract? Incomprehensible!

P-17As,woefully underarmed. There aren't enough SAMs to stop a few saturated missile attacks. The Talwars have more
weaponry / t than the P-17/17As. At least the 2X 30mm CIWS gatlings could've had the new Palma gun/missile system,an advancement on the Kashtan system aboard early Talwars for upto 20km close-in air defence.

Yes,the IN is woefully short of ASW helos,LUH helos,a few hundred reqd! Plus subs have no torpedoes ( Scorpenes), making do with only 60km range Exocets and legacy fish. It's been inthf babu decision-making tray gathering cobwebc for nigh on 4 to 5 years now.At the MOD babu rate of approvals, a babu with approx. 30 years of service will see around only 3 to 5 new acquisitions arrive in his entire service career.It took ( a most dubious world record) of over 20 years for the recommendations of the AM La Fontaine committee on IAF air crashes which found that there was a dire need for an AJT, to get the Hawk AJT approved.

Now reading the words of the CDS gives one great satisfaction.I applaud him! He has for the first time spoken about the need for leveraging the ANC,our island territories as forward bases for (deploying aircraft ) to counter the PLAN. This is something one has been crying for for well over a decade on BRF. The true massive IAC-3 ,the "unsinkable INS India!"
The dagger like mainland thrusting itself into the heart of the IOR and our two island territories off both seaboards in particular,offer us an unparalleled opportunity to dominate the IOR as forward maritime bases from where warships,subs and maritime strike aircraft can operate from a la Diego Garcia.In fact,the ANC islands are the equiv. of at leadt 2 DGs.One in the Andamans and the other in the Nicobar islands.

Hand over the Lakshadweep islands to the Chinks and within a few years you will have another DG from where all US strat bomber types can operate from.If you look closely at LDW, and the closeness of some of the islands with each other, one can visualise the creation through reclamation and expansion of the lanc footprint, a huge anchorage,series of anchorages ,plus runways that can support even TU-152 Bear types that operated from ARK. No doubt this rill cost plenty wampum,moolah,shekels,etc., but imagine both these territories operating Backfires,HALE UCAVs, subs both N-subs plus AIP boats and assorted surface combatants,fast,stealthy heavily armed missile corvettes and UW sensors,UUVs,etc. poised to strike at any enemy assets attempting to ingress into the IOR through the Malacca or any other Indonesiam straits,and on the west in LDW, ready to sanitise the approaches to the Red Sea and the Gulf. This may I remind one are " unsinkable" assets, not a vulnerable CV and its escort entourage.

[John]

There aren't enough SAMs to stop a few saturated missile attacks. The Talwars have more
weaponry / t than the P-17/17As.

What are you talking about Talwar only has 24 shtil-1 and 2nd batch do not have Kashtan in fact P-17 with Barak-1/Shtil are superior to Talwar 1st batch with Kashtan/Shtil. As Barak-1 is far superior to Kashtan.

Large # of missiles doesn't mean you can deal with saturation ( your confusing sustained attacks with saturation attacks) attacks it is # of targets that can be engaged simultaneously, Shtil can only engage 2 at a time on a single area due to FCR and limited to 10 seconds reload. Where as with Barak-8 can engage 32+ targets at a time.

[A Sharma]

Indian Navy to acquire 38 extended range BrahMos missiles for new warships

[VinodTK]

Indian Navy to acquire 38 extended range BrahMos missiles for new warships soon

In a bid to enhance the firepower of its warships, the Indian Navy has moved a proposal to acquire 38 extended range BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles which would be able to hit targets at around 450 kilometres.

The missiles are to be fitted on the under-construction Vishakhapatnam class warships of the Indian Navy which are going to join active service in the near future.
:
:
:
:

[nachiket]

Ps - I do not envisage more MH 60 inductions for atleast the next 10 yrs, hence its prudent to plan for ops with 24 heptrs. Destroyers and Frigates will peak at 33 by 2030. Plus we have 4 Kamortas.

This can be remedied if the MH-60's are supplemented by Dhruvs on the ships that can embark 2 helicopters. Assuming the new Naval Dhruv (ASW) version which HAL recently showed can pass muster, the Dhruv can take over most of the utility and SAR roles in addition to some ASW duties while the MH-60 is used primarily for ASW. Also the P-17A's have a single helo hangar and may be a sign of things to come. The IN may be resigned to the fact that we will never have the budget to buy enough helicopters to have 2 per vessel so it is better not to design for that and see the space wasted.

[Aditya G]

I can't understand why our enemy's bumchum Turkey is getting the contract.All details of the vessels will be given to the Pakis.
Earlier,such auxiliaries were of Italian origin and the Leonardo Group which owns Finncantieri could've been given the job especially as the V-2 new Vikrant CV has Italian design input too,if we needed a foreign design. Turkey is actually ramping up its military relations with Pak as the Pakis are in the doghouse with the Saudis and UAE after Erdo's megalomainiacal ambitions of bdcoming a latter-day Ottoman Sultan and supreme Caliph of the Muslim world!

Does our DPP cater to strategic-political considerations? if not then our babus wont act.

[sudeepj]

Is it viable to have a scaled up Trophy or Afghanit like system as a last ditch defense system against subsonic anti ship missiles?

Not really possible because trophy is meant to stop rpg and atgm which weigh no more than 30 kg in a small area. Where as with a ship is much bigger & venerable (at parts) target and Ashm weight over 700 kg you need a much bigger projectile to knock it out. Not to mention even if you engage the target 10 meters away the size and speed of missile will still ensure the debris from the missile still do tremendous damage to the ship.

So you need big projectile or a weapon system with high rate of fire which can safely engage the target more than few hundred meters away so proximity warhead or debris don't do damage to the ship. Given then You end up with what we have right now.

I do believe we should invest in new CIWS gun system than can replace the aging Ak-630. And start investing more in R&D for point defense lasers which will be game changer for missile defense.

Trophy/Afghanit do not physically 'knock out' the RPG, they just detonate or even better, deflagrate the warhead prematurely. The debris and the shrapnel from the charge still flies about, but the shaped charge is not properly formed. In the case of AshMs, the warhead is two or three hundred kilos of HE that is supposed to explode inside the confines of the ship damaging several watertight compartments and perhaps even breaking the keel.

Elementary calculation of the energy released by a 200 kilo TnT warhead (4.6 x 10^6 KJ/Kgram) vs a 300 kilo subsonic missile moving at 300 m/sec indicates that the kinetic energy of the missile is a very small fraction of the energy released by the warhead. Some of this energy will even be dissipated if the blast is, say, 10 meters away from the hull.

The difference between a missile going off inside the ship vs 10 meters away is probably the difference between a ship able to be underway on its own power and still able to be in the fight vs something that is completely out of the fight. E.g. USS Cole was bombed by a boat with a bomb equal to a missile warhead, right next to the hull. 17 people died and nearly 40 injured, but only because the shockwave went through a mess hall. If the bomb had gone off inside the ship, it would probably have sunk or have been beyond repair. 10 meters away, I bet the ship would have survived with far fewer casualties.

Considering that subsonic missiles attack in large numbers 4 or 8 or 16 and sophisticated/optimized attack patterns, and the limited time window to intercept with the ships missiles and the CIWS, an EFP based active defense system may work to reduce the damage caused by a subsonic missile that manages to sneak through.

[shyamd]

I was told by naval friends that multiple helicopters increase chances of successful ASW exponentially. That is why IN caters for 2 heptrs in all Indian built surface combatants. Its another matter that with hardly 6 serviceable Sea Kings and similar numbers of KA 28 these days a flotilla is lucky to have 0.5 heptrs per combatant. Going forward if we assume that we have 24 heptrs and 34 odd destroyers, frigates and ASW corvettes
of which 20 have capacity for 2 heptrs, how would you distribute them and use them most effectively

I am also told that apart from ASW the Sea Kings are used for many other duties- support during amphib ops, ASh roles, communication duties etc. They are very versatile.

Ps - I do not envisage more MH 60 inductions for atleast the next 10 yrs, hence its prudent to plan for ops with 24 heptrs. Destroyers and Frigates will peak at 33 by 2030. Plus we have 4 Kamortas.

Doubt all helis and ships will be available and ready at a given time. e.g. due to maintenance. Agree - allocation depends on mission but the versatility will come with trade offs. Helicopters doing AShW or ASW role have limitations compared to fixed wing a/c like P8I

[Vidur]

The main culprit for the 2.3 billion Dollar contract to Turkey is HSL. The contract was put on hold in Oct 2019 but HSL insisted that it be signed and hence it was signed in in 2020.

Our policy of apartheid towards Indian Pvt sector is costing us dear. I would encourage members to research history of HSL and how it came to be in public sector. Candidate for a scam

[Philip]

Aditya,for the v.first time FM Jai has said,and v.welcome too, that the MEA cannot formulate foreign policy on its own without taking into account security aspects and concerns of the nation. The PRC aggression in Ladakh has been a v.rude wake-up call for the MEA,whose erstwhile China policy mollycoddling the PRC,accepting their incremental shifting of the LAC to their advantage ,was torn to shreds after the Galwan clash.

For the MEA it's been a long time in coming.FM Jai wants a closer understanding with the security apparatus in formulation of India's FP, well-knowing now the limitations of " jaw- jaw" when " war-war" is unleashed upon us. I've said for decades that foreign policy and national security are two sides of the same coin. Britain in particular for centuries used the RN as its diplomatic spearhead to colonise the globe and protect the interests of the East India Co. leading to its annexation of India. The GOI should hugely increase the naval budget as the PRC has done,giving it the lion's share of its double-digit nilitary budget.In two decades it has overtaken the USN numerically and is also on the brink of overtaking the USN in nos. of subs,having approx. 76 now. As I've often said,the IN should possess at least 36 to 40 subs of all types,incl. those for strat. defence. As US analysts have noted,Putin faced with limited resources has done the correct thing in giving priority to his sub fleet,SSBNs for a strong deterrent, and a variety of attack,cruise missile N-subs ,plus conv. boats, which are the cornerstone of his maritime strength.

From Greek and Roman times,ancient India too,the strongest navies dominated the oceans and were the world's chief military powers. When nations' navies were neglected, their fortunes sank as they couldn't protect their coastlines from foreign intruders,sad case with India,resulting in 500 years of Europeandomination and colonial rule.

Therefore,the intended Pax Sinica which the PRC intends to establish in the Indo-Asia- Pacific by use of naval power, must be defeated at all costs .It requires a rethink of national strategy to secure the IOR and its littorals,plus project adequate power and sea denial even in the ICS by expanding the military muscle of the IN. Indian diplomacy in the aforementioned maritime sphere can
havf greater success in establishing diplo- military networking and securing base/ logistic facilities if the IN is greatly strengthened to be a bulwark against the PRC/ PLAN.

[AkshaySG]

Warships, jets part of maritime command; contours finalised
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/natio ... sed-185002

"India is set to create an overarching maritime command. It will have warships, fighter jets, helicopters, submarines, aircraft carriers and special amphibious brigades of the Army ,based out of Karwar (Karnataka)"

Maritime theatre commander will be responsible for securing the sea lanes of communications and maritime security along the 7,500 km coastline

Pretty significant proposal as far as restructuring goes.

[Yagnasri]

I think our destroyers (15B) have provision for 2 whereas Frigates (17A) have only one. So we have both one and two helicopter carrying ships.

[sudeepj]

When the Sivalik class/P17 (16.9 meters beam) has two choppers, why will the larger Nilgiri class/P17A (17.8 meters beam) have just one? It makes no sense. Look at the model again, once the rotor blades are folded, two sea kings can fit in that hanger.

[Rakesh]

With the exception of the upcoming Vizag Class, all future Indian Navy surface combatants will have only chopper only i.e. P-17A frigate has one helo hangar, the upcoming four Russian Krivak Class frigates also have just one helo hangar.

The gold-standard MH-60R from Sikorksy will be aboard capital ships like destroyers and aircraft carriers. Frigates could carry the MH-60R, depending on availability. Only 24 are being acquired. Corvettes will feature the Dhruv.

I am assuming the higher up-times of modern naval helicopters ensure that two are not needed. I remember when visiting INS Delhi, which has room to house a Sea King Mk 42B (for ASW duties) and a HAL Chetak (for SAR duties). I assume one chopper will do both roles.

[Cybaru]

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... lodku.html

- Kashalot getting scrapped
- Bratsk for Indian navy in 2026

[g.sarkar]

https://thediplomat.com/2020/12/indias- ... ntum-leap/
India’s New Maritime Theater Command: A Quantum Leap
The new command will help India maintain a favorable maritime balance of power when it comes to China.
By Shishir Upadhyaya, December 23, 2020
The latest announcement about the creation of India’s first Maritime Theater Command by 2021 is a seminal development and part of the long overdue transformation of India’s armed forces. Reportedly, the commander-in-chief of the new maritime theater command, who will be based at Karwar on the west coast of India, will exercise full operational control over extant western and eastern naval fleets, maritime strike fighter jets and transport aircraft from both the air force and the navy, and two amphibious infantry brigades and other assets under the Andaman and Nicobar Joint Command.
The maritime theater command will be the first new “geographical” theater command to be created, as part of the biggest-ever military restructuring plan since India’s independence in 1947 when the Indian army, navy and air force were initially structured under separate operational commands. This arrangement impacted overall operational planning and efficiency, particularly in matters related to new acquisition, compatibility of equipment, drills/ procedures, training and logistics, leading to huge wastages.
Following the appointment of General Bipin Rawat as the country’s first chief of defense staff, a slew of transformational changes — to be implemented on a war footing — have been announced. The country will now have a few and but geographically large theater commands, such as the maritime theater command, and joint functional commands such as the air defense command, and a joint logistics command.
The central location of the Indian peninsula thrusting out into the Indian Ocean and the Andaman Nicobar Islands, overlooking crucial shipping lanes and strategic choke points, has provided India with a huge geostrategic advantage over China, which is heavily dependent on shipping for its global trade and energy needs. Up to this point, this geographical advantage seems to have worked for India in maintaining a favorable balance of power with China. But the last decade has seen a rapid growth of Chinese maritime power and economic/political influence in the Indian Ocean region.
The PLA Navy’s continued deployments and activities in the region since 2009, when Chinese naval ships first entered the Indian Ocean to participate in anti-piracy patrols off Somalia, has impinged on India’s sphere of influence. In less than a decade China made quick gains in consolidating their position in the wider region by establishing its first naval base at Djibouti in 2017. Concurrently, strategic projects such as the Belt and Road Initiative have helped expand Chinese economic and political influence.
.....
Gautam

[chetak]

---

[LakshmanPST]

https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation ... 42339.html

“We will be inducting 34 fighters for aircraft carriers in place of 57. We wanted 10 P8i maritime surveillance aircraft, we are accepting 6. Navy will now induct 8 Minesweepers and two Landing Platform Docks (LPD). There is the assurance of getting them more when the economy is stronger and there is a requirement," he said.
The Navy had initially planned to get 24 Mine Sweepers, which was decreased to 12 and now 8 in numbers. Similarly, four LPDs were to be inducted.

[mody]

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 48676?s=20 ---> Indian Navy to acquire 38 BrahMos (extended range variant) cruise missiles for the first two P-15B stealth guided missile destroyers.

Each of the P15B destroyers have 16 tubes for Brahmos. How come the order placed is for 38 units only? Do they have already have the balance missiles in stock?

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 04832?s=20 ---> Due to budgetary constraints, Indian Navy is reducing number of platforms of various systems to be acquired:

1) 34-36 4.5 gen fighters for aircraft carriers in place of 57

2) 6 P-8I MPA instead of 10

3) 8 Minesweepers instead of 12

4) Two Landing Platform Docks instead of four.

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 21921?s=20 ---> * additional P-8I (total will be 18).

[Philip]

.

[Philip]

John,I meant the B-1 equipped Talwars,with both Shtil and Barak.
The newer DDGs and FFGs have only one type of SAM,B-8,with limited capacity too.At least a secondary anti-missile system apart from ADGs must be incorporated.

The GOI must bite the bullet and substantially increase the IN's budget. One critical requirement is a supersonic maritime strike bomber capable of carrying multiple nos. of BMos,BMos-H,Nirbhay in the future. Our MKIs can carry only 1 BMos ASM as of now,while just one Backfire/ Blackjack could carry approx. between 8/12 KH-101 ASMs of 4000km range reportedly.

[mody]

Most likely the VL-SRSAM, once its development is completed, will be integrated on the P15A and P15B destroyers and maybe also the P17A frigates. There is enough space for the missiles to be integrated.
Maybe 16 missiles per ship or maybe more for the larger destroyers.

[Aditya G]

What is the current status of the MCM program, aside from reducing planned numbers?

Is there any RFP etc?

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 04832?s=20 ---> Due to budgetary constraints, Indian Navy is reducing number of platforms of various systems to be acquired:

1) 34-36 4.5 gen fighters for aircraft carriers in place of 57

2) 6 P-8I MPA instead of 10

3) 8 Minesweepers instead of 12

4) Two Landing Platform Docks instead of four.

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 21921?s=20 ---> * additional P-8I (total will be 18).

[Barath]

Recently the Navy announced that it was considering lease of MCMs to fill in the gap
https://theprint.in/defence/navy-could- ... er/556788/

AFAIK, there was an RFI for TOT for construction out in May 2019
https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/content/r ... sels-mcmvs

And Russia made an offer to sell India some MCMs under a make in India scheme.

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.p ... ssels.html

I also believe that India has purchased 8 clip on influence sweeps from Thales for a limited stop gap.

There were 2 prior RFP which had been awarded to Kangnam which have both been cancelled. (2008 RFP cancelled in 2014 due to use of agents, 2016 RFP by Ms Nirmala Sitharaman due to ToT , Make in India, and indigenization issues and associated commercial complications after delays due to a single vendor situation)
https://www.businesstoday.in/current/de ... 67526.html

While GSL still has the contract for 12 vessels, it was supposed to again send out an RFP in 2018 for a foreign partner, which I haven't seen out.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... p4n1H.html

In other words, AFAIK, nothing concrete for MCM right now.

[chola]

I hope, I hope, I HOPE the LPDs get off the ground (and I hope they will be larger LHDs -- Juan Carlos or Mistral.)

But there is nothing concrete just like MCMs. Even the reduced numbers seem more aspirations than anything substantive.