Indian Navy boosts its air fleet in $1.5 billion deal

The Navy has started a $1.5 billion overhaul of its ageing Soviet-era fleet of aircraft, seeking to boost its air power in an Indian ocean region where a growing China is threatening its traditional dominance.

The investment is one of the biggest the Indian Navy has made in recent years and reflects New Delhi's urgency to modernise its military, a move that rival Pakistan says could spark an arms build-up and destabilise an already roiled South Asia.

India plans to buy 16 new MIG-29 fighter jets, half a dozen light combat aircraft, unmanned patrol planes and multi-role helicopters.

The Indian Navy is also upgrading its Sea Harrier fighter jets, IL-38 maritime anti-submarine warfare planes and acquiring five Kamov KA-31 patrol helicopters.

"We are acquiring new fighters and helicopters to supplement a new aircraft carrier we are getting soon," Commander PVS Satish, the navy spokesman said in New Delhi on Thursday.

Analysts said the upgrade of the Navy was long due.

"It is almost a matter of time before ships from China arrive in India's backyard," said Brahma Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at New Delhi's Centre for Policy Research.

India and China are locked in a battle to lead Asia. New Delhi fears China is creating an arc of influence in the Indian Ocean region, bolstering claims over what has traditionally been seen as India's backyard.

Indian officials said Pakistan, too, was modernising its navy.

Pakistan's National Command Authority (NCA), which oversees the country's nuclear weapons, said last week India's arms modernisation plans could destabilise the regional balance.

INS Savitri returns after anti-piracy missions

After successfully carrying out surveillance and anti-piracy missions in waters of Mauritius and Seychelles for over a month, Indian Navy's Offshore Patrol Vessel INS Savitri returned to its base.

The ship was sent to the region after the Mauritian government sent formal requests to India for ships to carry out surveillance and anti-piracy patrols there, officials said.

"INS Savitri with a Chetak helicopter and Marine Commandos effectively sanitised far-flung sea areas of the Mauritian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), beyond the reach of Mauritian surveillance assets," they said.

During its deployment there, the ship imparted training to marine commandos of the Mauritian Coast Guard for undertaking operations at sea and acquainted two helicopter pilots of the Mauritian Police Helicopter Squadron in deck landing on board the ship at sea, officials said.

Deck not ready yet, navy scouts for aircraft

The Indian Navy has invited five global makers of combat planes, including the US-led F-35C Joint Strike Fighter, to participate in a competition for deck-based aircraft that it wants to buy.

Deck-based aircraft for navies have special requirements — like foldable wings because of limited space in carriers and ability for short/vertical take-off and landing.

India’s biggest military hardware supplier, Russia, which was asked for information on the Sukhoi-33, has opted out of the race saying it is phasing out the plane, a navy source told The Telegraph.

But Russia is negotiating with China to sell 50 Sukhoi-33 aircraft for the Chinese PLA Navy’s aircraft-carrier programme.

The first four of 12 Russian-made MiG 29K fighter aircraft contracted for the Indian Navy, however, reached India earlier this month. The aircraft are yet to be assembled because they were delivered in a knocked-down condition.
A MiG 29K deck-based aircraft at an airshow

The MiG 29K are to be based on the INS Vikramaditya, as the Indian Navy has rechristened the Gorshkov carrier for which a re-negotiated price is yet to be contracted.

Essentially, the Indian Navy is now beginning to get the aircraft without the carrier to base them in. So it has fashioned an airstrip that is mimicking the Gorshkov’s flying deck in the INS Hansa, the naval base in Goa, to induct the MiG 29K.

Among the five aircraft for which the Indian Navy has sent Requests for Information (RFI) are the F-18 Superhornet (made by Boeing for the US Navy), Eurofighter Typhoon (EADS supported by a European consortium) and France’s Dassault Aviation for the Rafale.

The Indian Navy had originally not sent an RFI to Sweden’s SAAB but the company expressed interest and was sent a request for the naval variant of the Gripen JAS 39.

The Superhornet, Eurofighter, Rafale and the Gripen are among six aircraft (the other two being the F-16 Super Viper and the MiG 35) contending for the biggest fighter aircraft competition going in the world today — the Indian Air Force’s order for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft that could be worth more than $12 billion.

The Indian Navy’s overt interest in the F-35C Lightning II is a bit of a surprise. The F-35C is the US Navy variant of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme being implemented by Lockheed Martin and is known in the aviation industry as the only fifth-generation aircraft.

The naval variant was rolled out of Lockheed’s plant in Fort Worth, Texas, only in July this year. It is yet to be flight-tested.

Apart from the US, nine other countries are participating in developing the JSF — the UK, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore and Turkey. India has separate agreements with Russia to co-develop a fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) but that is nowhere near the stage of development that the JSF has reached.

The navy officer said the plan was to raise a squadron (between 16 and 20 aircraft) for the aircraft carrier that India is building on its own in Kochi (called IAC for Indigenous Aircraft Carrier). The IAC will be at least eight years in the making (2018).

The deck-based aircraft competition is being thrown open to global makers as a contingency measure because India’s own Tejas Light Combat Aircraft is inordinately delayed.

The Indian Navy’s only aircraft carrier, the INS Viraat, that sails with British vintage Sea Harrier aircraft onboard was refitted after being in the dry dock for nearly two years till November.

Its fleet of aircraft is also depleting fast with not enough back-ups. The navy now has less than a squadron-strength of the aircraft.


source:Times of India

Indian Navy is planning to buy new multi-role aircraft

Looking for an enhanced presence, the Navy is planning to buy a state-of-the-art, multi-role, new generation carrier-based fighter aircraft. And in pursuance of this, the Navy has sent out a request for information (RFI) to some of the world’s leading aircraft manufacturers.

The aircraft firms included: the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) for their Eurofighter Typhoon, the Boeing Integrated Defence System (for the F/A-18 Super Hornet), Sweden’s SAAB (who are offering the Gripen JAS 39) and France’s Dassault (for the Rafale).

The new naval aircraft are meant for deployment on the Navy’s third aircraft carrier, which is expected to be commissioned around 2018.

While the Rafale and the F/A-18 are natural choices for naval operations as they were built specifically for carrier-based multi-role operations, the manufacturers of the Typhoon and the Gripen have indicated that their aircraft could be suitably modified for naval carrier-based flying.

All four aircraft (along with the Russian MiG-35 and the American F-16) are already in contention for another mega Indian defence forces’ deal — the $10 billion -$12 billion Indian Air Force’s plans to acquire 126 medium, multi-role combat aircraft.

The Ministry of Defence sources told The Hindu that the Navy has the go-ahead from the government for the purchase. The RFI has not specified the exact number of aircraft that the Navy is keen on acquiring, nor the modalities that will be specified for their manufacture or offset requirements.

Once the manufacturers provided their information, the Navy will send out a request for proposal detailing the Naval Staff Qualitative Requirements that the fighter should possess.

After the receipt of the proposals, the Navy will short list, setting in motion the process of flight evaluation trials, selection, commercial negotiations and finally the acquisition.

The new aircraft, which will be in the 25-30 tonne class, will be in addition to the 16 Russian-manufactured MiG-29Ks that India is acquiring, and the naval version of the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft Tejas (12-14 tonnes class) which is presently being designed.

The Navy on December 4 received in knocked-down condition, the first of its MiG-29Ks.

While the MiG-29Ks will be on the deck of the 44,570-tonne Kiev class Admiral Gorshkov (to be rechristened INS Vikramaditya), the naval Tejas is earmarked for the 40,000-tonne, indigenous aircraft carrier that is being built at the Cochin Shipyard.

The Navy’s only fighter aircraft now is the British-made Sea Harrier jump jets which are deployed on the Navy’s sole aircraft carrier, INS Viraat.

Official sources said that the Sea Harriers, which were decommissioned by the (British) Royal Navy in March 2006, will be in the inventory as long as the INS Viraat is deployed (could be till 2019)

India's water power hit by delays

New Delhi: The government seems to be merrily sleeping while India's underwater combat arm sinks deeper and deeper. As it is, the Rs 18,798 crore

Scorpene project to construct six submarines at Mazagon Docks (MDL) has been hit by huge delays and cost escalations.

And now, the government is dawdling through the proposed Rs 30,000 crore programme, called Project-75I, for the second line of submarines. After the Navy pressed the panic buttons for P-75I's quick finalisation, the Defence Acquisitions Council chaired by defence minister A K Antony did meet on Tuesday but not much headway was made.

The identification of a domestic shipyard -- either public or private -- to build the six new-generation submarines is still to take place despite Navy stressing the "criticality'' of fast decision-making.

"It's only after the shipyard is identified that the RFP (request for proposal) or global tender will be issued to submarine manufacturers like Rosoboronexport (Russian), DCNS/Armaris (French), HDW (German) and Navantia (Spain),'' said a defence ministry source.

"MDL is already loaded with the Scorpene project under P-75. So, a new shipyard will have to tie-up with the foreign manufacturer for P-75I. At this rate, it will take five years for P-75I to get going,'' he added.

As per one projection, India will be left with only nine out of its present fleet of 16 diesel-electric submarines -- 10 Russian Kilo-class, four German HDW and two virtually obsolete Foxtrot -- by 2012. The number may dip to just five by 2014-2015.

This when both China and Pakistan are rapidly adding to their underwater muscle. Pakistan is now looking to induct three advanced Type-214 German submarines, equipped with AIP (air-independent propulsion) to enhance their operational capabilities, after inducting three French Agosta-90B submarines. China, of course, already has a staggering 62 submarines, with around 10 of them being nuclear-powered.

With problems dogging the French Scorpene project, Navy is keen that P-75I gets underway parallely as soon as possible. Under it, all the six submarines will have AIP systems, stealth, land-attack capability and ability to incorporate futuristic technologies.

As was first reported by TOI, the Scorpene project, under which the six submarines were to roll out one per year from 2012 onwards as per the contract inked in October 2005, is running well over two years behind schedule.

A major factor for this delay is the jacking up of prices of `MDL procured material (MPM) packages' -- sensors, propulsion and the like -- from around 400 million Euros to 700 million Euros by French company M/s Armaris (DCNS-Thales joint venture). In effect, it's demanding India pay an additional Rs 2,000 crore to it.

Both Project-75 and 75I are part of the 30-year submarine-building perspective programme approved by the Cabinet Committee on Security a decade ago. The basic aim was to acquire indigenous capability in design, development and construction of submarines, with a total of 24 submarines to be manufactured in a phased manner.

sorce:Times of India

Navy for second line of submarines construction

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence in its latest report to Parliament last week mentioned that the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) had during March 2003 directed that the Navy should not let the force level fall below 140 ships as against the existing force level of 130 ships

Close on the heels of the Parliamentary Standing Committee that took serious note of the shortage of ships and submarines, the Indian Navy on Tuesday pushed the envelope asking the government to identify shipyards to begin construction of the second line of submarines as per plans.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence in its latest report to Parliament last week mentioned that the Defence Acquisition Council(DAC) had during March 2003 directed that the Navy should not let the force level fall below 140 ships as against the existing force level of 130 ships .

“The Committee take note of the shortage of the ships and submarines seriously and would like to recommend that all efforts should be made to expedite the acquisition/ Construction of the ships/submarines so that at least the existing fleet of ships/ Submarines do not fall below the minimum required level,” the Committee report said.

At the latest meeting of the DAC here, the Navy said it is time to start identifying shipyards where six submarines of the French-Scorpene series could be taken up.

Sources in the Ministry said the Navy’s push also comes as its submarine force level is depleting and as per current estimates it is expected to drop to 60 per cent of the current level of 16 odd submarines over the next five-six years and touch 50 per cent by 2020.

sorce:The Hindu

Indian Navy Foils Piracy Attempt Again

At about 5:30 PM on 19 Dec 09, while proceeding to effect rendezvous with Merchant Ship MV SEAMEC II, Indian Naval Warship deployed in the Gulf of Aden picked up a distress call from MV SANDERLING ACE, of sighting a white skiff (speed boat) approaching her at 20 Knots. MV SANDERLING ACE also raised an alarm on Ship Security Alert System. On receiving the alarm, the Indian Naval Warship immediately launched her Chetak helicopter to intercept the skiff. On sighting the helo, the SKIFF broke off from the merchant vessel. Subsequently, when the helicopter fired warning shots, the SKIFF stopped. Ship thereafter closed the skiff. During the process of investigation by the ship, nothing suspicious was found onboard. The seven pirates in the boat expressed inability to understand any language other than Arabic. As no other piracy triggers were observed, the skiff was released after investigation.

New Indian intrest to buy (yet to be verified)

You couldn't have missed the buzz in the British press about the UK receiving a firm "expression of interest" from India to purchase the UK's second (still under construction) super-carrier, the HMS Prince Of Wales, the second of the Queen Elizabeth-class 65,000-ton carriers. More on this soon, stay tuned.

India needs self-sufficiency in ship building

by Abhijit Bhattacharyya

One does not have to be an Admiral Gorshkov (the longest serving Soviet naval chief) or Alfred Thayer Mahan (the guru of the maritime doctrine) or a Sir Julian Corbett, the Royal Navy Admiral, to state the obvious. That a navy is not built in a day and no nation can aspire to be a naval power by being at the eternal mercy of foreign suppliers and manufacturers, which can arm twist the ship users’ lack of knowledge and technology at will by taking advantage of its expertise and experience in ship building thereby resulting in the importer’s weakness and helplessness. In fact, naval history of the world is replete with instances of nations which prospered and developed during last 500 years inevitably had the advantage to traverse the entire two-thirds of the global lake in ships built in their own shipyards.

Traditionally, there have never been very many fighting ship-builders either in the 20th or the 21st century. Thus, during World War II Japan was virtually the sole Asian naval power by virtue of its ship building capacity and capability, restrictions imposed by the Washington naval disarmament conference of 1922 notwithstanding. In the west of Suez, Anglo-American supremacy was over, and superiority to the perceived “land-powers” like Germany and its European allies could never match the marine powers’ strength, stamina, endurance and industrial productivity. Hence the war ended in victory for the superior, combined naval strength of the West and defeat for the sole maritime Japanese foe.

Post-World War II, however, the rise of the Soviet Navy was the sole non-Western, non-capitalist state to pose a threat to the virtual monopoly of the Anglo-Saxon naval axis. And it happened, thanks to the Soviet Deputy Minister of Defence-cum-Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Navy, Admiral Sergei Georgiyevich Gorshkov, who initiated an unprecedented construction plan and timely execution of all ships required by the state. The Soviets challenged the West in the sea because the Soviets made the ships in their own shipyard. Hence they did not have to bank on the charity and worry about the whims of foreigners resulting in time and cost overrun.

In the post-Soviet era, it is the turn of China to pick up the thread which already has built a formidable navy with an apparent single-point agenda of an indigenous ship construction programme. True, the Chinese Navy still has a few ex-Soviet/Russian inventories in its fleet, but the variety and range of Beijing’s vessels today is simply awesome. And there lies the strength of its fleet. Thus China today, according to Jane’s Fighting Ships, 2009-2010, has a total of 54 submarines (of various class), 27 destroyers, 49 frigates and 275 fast attack and patrol craft. Of these, only 16 ships are of non-Chinese (i.e. Russian) make; 12 kilo class submarines and 4 Sovremeny destroyers.

Little wonder, the Chinese feel much more free and confident to flex their muscles and show their ships in out-of-area operations. Jane’s refers to Chinese enterprise thus, “Future historians may come to regard 2009 as the year that the Chinese Navy finally came of age.”

In the midst of the Soviet challenge to the West till the 1990s and the Chinese Navy’s “coming of age in 2009”, where does the Indian fleet stand today? How strong and self-sufficient is the navy of New Delhi? To this writer, the scenario appears to be a mixed bag of success and shortfall. The positive sides of India’s defence is the technical competency and mastery over the English language, expertise in aircraft carrier operations and combat capability in both surface and sub-surface warfare.

However, the not-so-positive factor lies in Indian inability (should one say traditional inertia!) to be self-sufficient in ship building expertise for long. The deficiency on this front is so conspicuous that one still finds all 16 submarines of the Indian Navy to be of foreign make (10 Russian ‘Kilo’,‘2Foxtrot’ and 4 German HDW class). Its sole aircraft carrier Viraat (ex-Hermes) is of British origin, 5 Rajput (Kashin class) destroyers are made in Nikolayev North shipyard (Russia), the 3 Talwar class frigates also are of Moscow origin (with three more likely to follow suit). At least five out of 12 Veer (Tarantul class) corvettes are of Russian make and so are the 4 Abhay class anti-submarine warfare patrol boats.

On the positive side, however, the Indians have made tremendous improvement in ship design, construction time reduction and planned delivery thereof. The pride of Indian ship building has been reflected in the Delhi and Kolkata class destroyers, Shivalik, Brahmaputra and Nilgiri class frigates; Kora, Khukri, Veer, Abhay and project 28 corvettes and the top of the line project of indigenous aircraft carrier Vikrant which has been going on at Kochi shipyard.

Despite the mixed bag of success and shortcoming, a horrible mess appears to have been created by the failure of the Russians to stick to the delivery time schedule of the proposed refurbished and refitted Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier to India. This inordinate delay only results in an avoidable spiralling cost, which in turn affects a balanced fleet development. Indeed, one suspects that perhaps the Russians are no longer capable of producing the same quality vessels for which they made a name for themselves during the Soviet era. The period after the demise of the Soviet Union could have resulted in an acute shortage of naval technical experts thereby creating an all-round vacuum in ship-building capability of Russian shipyards.

Else, how does one justify the report that “the French government has given the go-ahead to the possible sale of a helicopter-and-troop carrying ship to Russia”? Is Russia now incapable of building even its own 15000-18000 tonne helicopter-and-troop-carrying carrier? If so, then how would the Russians be able to re-manufacture a sophisticated 45000 tonne aircraft carrier for India? Indeed, the scenario appears rather intriguing. Gorshkov has been badly delayed already. Diplomatic talks have been upgraded from the Joint Secretary to the head of government level. In between, the Captains, Admirals and Defence Ministers are failing to achieve any breakthrough. And yet the “price rise” haggling is going on.

Amidst all this, the Russians are reportedly negotiating with French civil shipbuilders STX and combat ship company DCNS for potential purchase of a Mistral class warship. Although referred to as the amphibious assault ship by Jane’s Fighting Ships 2009-2010, this 21600 tonne vessel has a range of 11000 nautical miles at 15 knots an hour and is capable of up to 16 attack helicopters in its deck thereby giving it enough teeth for offensive operations. If indeed Russia manages to clinch the deal for this ship (two of which are in the French fleet), then its navy would be able to play a role of “forward pressure, force projection, logistic support for the deployed force (ashore or at sea) . . . and command ship for combined operations.”

All indications suggest that the Russian Navy is keen on an early acquisition for a force multiplier mission in the ocean. As an Indian, one certainly cannot possibly have any grudge if a long-standing friend like Moscow acquires a floating airstrip from Europe. But why does Moscow not look into the need of its friendly South Asian navy with the same sense of urgency and sensitivity? Is the “price rise” really that grave as to delay the delivery of India’s maritime defence? One wonders!

The writer is an alumnus of the National Defence College of India and a Member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London.

Inidan Navy Vision 2020

Modernisation” of a Navy is a continuous process - and each major upgradation takes time and needs to be planned well in advance. The “Great White Fleet” which circum-navigated the globe in 1908-09, and announced to the world that the USA had arrived on the world scene, took twenty years to build. It took the FSU, under the dynamic leadership of Admiral of the Fleet Gorshkov, almost 25 years to build the Soviet Navy to a level where it could challenge the western allies.

The Indian Navy of 2010-20 is already being built – the Air Defence Ship at Kochi, the Vikramaditya (Ex Gorshkov) at Russia, along with its complement of MiG 29K, the Naval LCA at Bangalore, the Scorpene submarines at MDL, and at last count about 22 Destroyers, Frigates, corvettes, LSTs , OPVs, and FACs at various shipyards around the country. We must, therefore, look at what is needed, and what is possible, for the time frame of 2020-2030, and what else is needed to fill the voids prior to 2020. In arriving at the final figures we must take into account the probable security challenges and maritime threats that we will need to counter and the maritime interests that we will need to protect, preserve and indeed promote; India’s stature and position in the comity of nations; our economic potential; and finally our design, industrial and ship-building capability. A little “crystal ball gazing” is, therefore, an essential part of the planning process – never an easy thing to do at the best of times.

Security Environment and Challenges Geo-strategic Location. Geography, they say is the handmaiden of strategy – and geography has indeed been very kind to us. It has bestowed on India many strategic opportunities, options and indeed advantages some of which are:-

*
A coastline of 7516 Km, which includes the mainland as also the Island territories.
*
12 major, 21 intermediate and 164 minor ports.
*
A total of 1197 Islands, which provide Defence in Depth and also give us a huge EEZ. At 2.01 million sq km our EEZ is 2/3rds of our land area. After demarcation of the continental shelf our EEZ is likely to be 2.54 million sq km.
*
A very favourable geo-strategic location astride the vital East-West trade routes, which enables us to control, when necessary, this energy/trade lifeline. Position matters – on land as on the Sea.
*
Moreover, the ocean that laps our shores is itself unique. Unlike other oceans, it is not “open-ended”. It is closed to the North by the Indian sub-continent and has a few “choke points” that afford entry into it.

Unregulated Ocean Space. Speaking to the press at Singapore on 12 Nov 2003 I had described the Oceans as “the largest unregulated space in the world”, a quote that has appeared in the editorial of the 2005 edition of “Jane’s Fighting Ships”. As the editorial points out, this may seem strange considering that the UN Convention on the Laws of the Sea is now in place. But the fact is that while the UNCLOS has given various rights to nations, the right to freedom of navigation has not changed, nor have the attributes and essential characteristics of the oceans that constitute 70% of the surface of the globe. These attributes are:-

*
Large parts of the Oceans remain Unowned. While nations have sovereign rights over their territorial seas and commercial rights to all the resources in their EEZ, no nation “Owns” the “High Seas”.
*
Because the High seas are largely unowned, they are uncontrolled. It’s a case of “No Policeman-No Law”. On the high seas there is nobody, but nobody, to control your movements.
*
Because the High Seas are unowned, there are No Boundaries at Sea. This is what makes the Navy different to all other Services, which work within the confines of national boundaries. The Navy works in an International arena on a daily basis. Twelve miles out of port and we are in International waters.
*
Because of these attributes of the Oceans, the Sea is One.

Thus, all nations with a coastline are maritime neighbours.

Maritime Terrorism. The new scourge of terrorism has taken the world by storm. So far major acts of terrorism have by and large been restricted to land areas. But as security on land is tightened, the ease of access and movement across the world’s ocean areas will tempt terrorists to take their “trade” to sea. The war on terror at sea cannot be fought by individual nations. It will have to be a worldwide effort that will require Navies of the world to work together – as countries are doing ashore.



Nuclear Backdrop. We are now a declared nuclear weapon state (NWS) and, after some hiccups, the world has accepted this reality. Our nuclear doctrine clearly states that we will maintain a “Credible Minimum Deterrent” based on a triad of weapon delivery systems. We are also a declared “No First Use” (NFU) NWS. Any country with an NFU policy must ensure that it has an assured second-strike capability. Missile silos, airfields and aircraft are easily detected by satellites and are hence easy targets. A nuclear submarine is very, very difficult to detect. Even if detected, it is extremely difficult to target, as it is constantly on the move at speeds of twenty knots or more.

Territorialisation of the Seas. Maritime powers have always wanted (as they still do) as much freedom of the seas, as possible; whereas non-maritime powers want as much ownership of the seas, as possible. With the UNCLOS, both have got much of what they wanted. Almost 40% of the ocean areas have become the Exclusive Economic zones of countries. The full claims for the world’s EEZ have yet to be submitted by many countries and agreed to by the UN, and more important, by neighbouring states. Earlier we had neighbours and boundaries only on land. Now we have them at sea as well. The more the neighbours, the more are the problems. The larger the EEZ, the greater is the area of responsibility of the maritime Services.

Global Governance. Globalisation has made countries more inter-dependent and States will increasingly work together to ensure their economic development, as also to promote peace, stability and combat common threats. In future, therefore, one sees a form of “Global Governance” slowly but surely creeping to seaward to ensure that the “Freedom of the Seas”, that the west holds so dear, is not misused by terrorists. The ISPS code, the Container Security Initiative and the Proliferation Security Initiative are manifestations of this trend. This will require the Indian Navy to patrol its area of interest, and work with other Navies, much more than it has done in the past.

Strategic Frontiers. What then is The Indian Navy’s “area of interest”? Our land frontiers are well known. So also are our maritime boundaries with our immediate maritime neighbours. But our current area of interest lies far, far beyond our territorial sea and the EEZ. It extends all the way to the choke points that afford entry into the North Indian Ocean as shown in the map below.

Extra-Regional Presence. Any nation with the capability can traverse the Oceans and arrive in force at the doorstep of another maritime state- no matter how distant it may be. Powerful Navies have indulged in “Gun Boat Diplomacy” in the past. While the phrase may be out of fashion these days, Navies continue to be used for the same purpose, by whatever name it may be called. It is well known that the strategic focus of the world has once again shifted to the North Indian Ocean, due to a combination of Terrorism and world energy reserves. The presence of extra-regional powers in the Indian Ocean is bound to last well into the foreseeable future. The Indian Navy consequently has to operate in the same waters as are being patrolled by the world’s most technologically advanced nations.

Defence of Trade. Trade is the lifeblood of any economy–and so it is with India. Our economy is booming and this trade will continue to soar. Today 90% of the crude oil we use comes from across the oceans – be it imported or produced in our offshore oil fields. Our dependence on natural gas is increasing by the day. Over 95% of our trade by volume comes across the oceans. Any disruption of this trade lifeline, particularly any disruption in the flow of oil, will endanger the economic prosperity and security of the country. Defence of trade has always been a major mission of the Navy and this will continue to be so.

Maritime Diplomacy. The Navy works very closely with the External Affairs Ministry to further the interests of the country around the world. Towards this end it sends ships on overseas deployments to show the flag and build “Bridges of Friendship” – which was also the theme of the Navy’s very successful Inter-national Fleet Review in 2001. Towards this end the Navy also trains a considerable number of foreign Naval personnel in its many training institutions. With many small nations on the Indian Ocean rim now getting huge EEZs there is a growing demand for assistance and suitable vessels to patrol these areas. It is in India’s interest to meet these demands and supply equipment as and when requested. Since many of these countries cannot afford to buy such vessels we must be willing and ready to supply them at short notice, and free of cost. Budgetary provisions must be regularly made for such assistance.

Regional Naval Expansion. The Naval development plans of maritime states in the Asia-Pacific region clearly indicate that all are giving greater importance to maritime security then ever before – a trend that we must take note of.

The Threat. Very often I have been asked to identify the “Threat” that the Indian Navy is going to face. The immediate threat is well known, but I have always desisted from identifying others because “to name an enemy is to make one”. But more important is the fact that in this respect the Navy has to think and plan differently than the other two services, which can clearly identify the threat across our borders. Because of the unregulated ocean space, ease of access and movement a threat can develop from the sea very quickly. So, unlike the other two Services, Navies are not built purely to counter known threats but to protect maritime interests. The larger a country’s dependence on the oceans, and the larger its interests at sea, the larger its Navy has got to be.



Fleet Modernisation

Availability of Funds. The Navy is a capital intensive Service and it takes a long time to design, develop and build ships. The larger the ship, the longer is the time taken to design and build it. Taking a typical destroyer/frigate (The work horses of any Navy) it takes around 10 to twelve years from Government approval to commissioning, if the ship is to be designed and built in India. Assured funding over three plan periods (i.e. 15 years) is absolutely essential for any planned modernisation. Historically, the fate of Navies has been linked to the fate of their country’s economy. Fortunately for us the Indian economy is doing very well and modernisation of the Navy (and indeed of the Armed Forces) can be easily funded over the next three plan periods in particular, and for the future in general. This statement is supported by published/stated figures for the Indian economy and the assumptions at sub-paras (d) and (e) below:-

*
The GDP in 2004-05 was around Rs 2658750 Crores.
*
The GDP has been growing at an average rate of 6.35% and very recently the PM announced that this year it will grow at 7% (for the first time the GDP growth in the first half of the fiscal year has been over 8%) and there is every possibility that it could touch 10% in the future.
*
The percentage of GDP allocated for Defence during the latter 1980s varied from 3.08 to 4.24%. Since then this has gradually dropped, and from 1991 to 2005 the percentage has varied from 2.77 to 2.24. This was quite inadequate to fund the modernisation of the armed forces.
*
We have been able to afford 3 to 4% of GDP for defence in the past and we can easily do so in the future. It must become stated Government policy that we will spend 3% to 4% of GDP for defence;

Besides making adequate money available for defence, it will also enable planned modernisation which has not really been possible in the past as, more often than not, the Budget has driven the “Plan” rather than the Plan driving the Budget. Assuming a modest 6.35% growth rate, the expected GDP at five yearly intervals is likely to be:

*
10-10 Rs 36,17,137 Crores
*
15-15 Rs 49,20,989 Crores
*
20-20 Rs 66,94,835 Crores
*
25-25 Rs 91,08,091 Crores
*
30-30 Rs 123,91,243 Crores





Share of the Defence Cake. How much each Service should get from the allocations for Defence has always been somewhat contentious. The Navy being the smallest of the three Services, has always received the least. As early as in 1988, General Sundarji had stated that by 2000 the Navy should get 20% of the Defence budget. He realized the value of a Navy in World affairs. Regrettably, this has not happened and it was only in 2002-03 that the Navy crossed the 15% mark and received the highest ever allocation of 17.6% in 2003-04. Since then it has hovered around the 17% mark and this should gradually be increased to 20% as India will certainly need a powerful Blue Water Navy as it takes up greater responsibility in world affairs. The peace process currently underway will ultimately give us a Peace Dividend that will allow us to reduce troops on the border. (Sub-continental Armies are perhaps the only ones that are amassed on the borders. The rest of the world takes boundaries for granted and respects them) For planning purposes, however, let us assume an allocation of 17%. Even with this, the expected allocations to the Navy as shown below (assuming only 3% of GDP is allocated for Defence) would be adequate to fund the projects/modernization being recommended :-

*
XI Plan 2007-08 to 2011-12 Rs 92586 Crores
*
XII Plan 2012-13 to 2016-17 Rs 125960 Crores
*
XIII Plan 2017-18 to 2021-22 Rs 171366 Crores





Aircraft Carriers. For many years now the Indian Navy has been stating that it needs a minimum of three aircraft carriers to fulfill its missions. One is required to be operational on each coast and the third will normally be under maintenance. After much delay (it took over 15 years!), the Government finally approved the construction of the Air Defence Ship to replace the INS Vikrant, which was phased out in 1997. It took 8 years to get government approval to induct the Ex-Gorshkov (now christened Vikramaditya), which will replace Viraat in 2008/09. It is time now to place the order for the third carrier, which should really be a repeat of the ADS. Batch building of ships and standardization greatly reduce the life cycle costs of a ship. Moreover, for the third carrier we will not have to invest in a separate carrier air wing, as the intention and requirement is to have only two carriers operational at any one time. If approved now, we will have three carriers in the 2020s.



Strategic Forces. Now that India is a declared Nuclear Weapon state with a No First Use Policy it is absolutely essential that we put our second strike capability in Nuclear Submarines as soon as possible. There are many advantages in doing so and the actions of existing NW States are good indicators of the direction in which we should go. The Government should approve, start and fund such a programme at the earliest, as it is vital for the security of the country. The ultimate aim should be to have at least four such submarines so that at least one, if not two, are on patrol at all times.



Destroyers and Frigates. These ships are really the workhorses of the Navy, both in peace and war. Today, we have 11 destroyers and 11 frigates, which are far too few. In fact, after the 1962 war a study had recommended that the Navy should have 28 such warships – a target that the Navy has never been able to achieve. Forty years down the line much has changed and the responsibility of the Navy has increased manifold. In the next 20 years this figure must go upto at least 20 of each type. Five Leander Class frigates are already well past their prime and need immediate replacement. (One was earlier decommissioned without a replacement) Three project 17 Frigates under construction will replace the first three Leanders. The three Godavri class frigates will need to be replaced between 2010 and 2015 by which time they will be between 25 to 30 yrs old. Thus there is an immediate need to place orders for at least six more P17 frigates, just to maintain the current force levels of Frigates. Additional orders will need to be placed on MDL and GRSE to take the frigate numbers to twenty by 2025.



As far as destroyers are concerned, the first of the Kashin class destroyers will be 25 years old this year and the youngest (Ranvijai) will be 17 years. They will all need to be replaced between 2010 and 2020. Three Project 15A destroyers are already on order and it would be cost effective to increase this order to five so that they replace the five Kashins.



It will thus be seen that Mazagon Docks, the shipyard building both the P17 Frigates and the P 15A Destroyers, must deliver 9 x P 17 frigates and 5 x P15A destroyers between now and 2020 i.e. almost one ship a year – assuming that orders are placed well in time and no delays are introduced. Going by their past performance they will not be able to meet this target and so the only option to maintain present force levels will be to exercise the import option and a repeat order for the Talwar class destroyers recently imported from Russia is a very attractive option. A minimum of four should be immediately ordered to maintain force levels. Additional orders for the Talwar class and/or the Delhi Class must be placed a little later to take the destroyer fleet upto 20 by 2025.

Submarines. Submarines are a vital part of the Naval Fleet and ideal for dissuasion and sea denial operations, particularly against a vastly superior Navy. Their operational value in the Indian Ocean is much greater than in the other oceans as the hydrological conditions in our waters afford the submarine many advantages. Some years ago the Navy had 18 operating.

India sanctioned budget for production of LCA Tejas for IAF & IN

In a major leg-up for one of the country’s most crucial indigenous defence initiatives, the Centre has sanctioned a massive Rs 8,000 crores to begin production of the fighter jet Tejas for the IAF and Indian Navy.

The lion’s share of this outlay, Rs 5,000 crores, will be for the manufacture of the jets for the IAF, while the rest will be for the development of a variant for the Navy, P.S. Subramanyam, director of the Aeronautical Development Agency which coordinates the Light Combat Aircraft programme, told this newspaper. "This is very good encouragement for a homegrown programme, but the challenge ahead is that we must deliver the jets on time. The first of these fighters will join the IAF’s fleet early 2011. The Air Force has ordered one squadron (20 fighters), and is in the process of ordering another squadron," he said.

Official sources said the IAF has committed to the purchase of 140 more jets, for seven squadrons, with more powerful engines. Next year, the LCA programme will cross another milestone with the maiden flight of the naval version. This variant will be designed to operate from aircraft carriers INS Vikramaditya and the Air Defence Ship.


source:asian defance

India: Global hub for warship-building

Strategic circles are abuzz with rumours that the United Kingdom will soon offer India one of the new-generation aircraft carriers that it is constructing, since they are turning out too expensive for the Royal Navy to afford. Interestingly, India will almost certainly turn down the offer.

The Royal Navy had planned to build two Carrier Vessels Future (CVFs): the 65,000 tonne HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. With the budgeted price of US $6.4 billion (Rs 30,000 crore) for the pair, now apparently the cost of each, building a third and selling it abroad is an option being considered to reduce the unit price. But, in contrast to this exorbitant price, the cost of India’s 44,000 tonne Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC), under construction at Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL), is barely a third of the Queen Elizabeth. And the Indian Navy’s next IAC, a 60,000 tonne behemoth like the Queen Elizabeth, will cost less than half its British counterpart.

In the gloomy framework of Indian defence production, warship-building has emerged as a silver lining. The Kolkata class destroyers, being built at Mazagon Dock Ltd, Mumbai, will cost the navy Rs 3,800 crore each, one-third the global price for comparative warships. The INS Shivalik, now completing sea trials, is a world-class frigate built at Indian prices. Earlier this year, addressing an industries body, the Indian Navy’s chief designer, Rear Admiral MK Badhwar, called for making India a global hub for building warships.

While his appeal might have been tinged with strategic motivation — a larger warship industry would bring down unit prices, providing the navy with even more bang for the buck — there is little doubt that shipbuilders would profit more from crafting warships than from slapping together merchant vessels. India has developed the capabilities, including, crucially, the design expertise, to produce world-class warships. But the defence shipyards do not have the capacity to meet even the Indian Navy’s needs; playing the international warship market needs clear-sighted government intervention to synergise the working of public and private shipbuilders.

Building a merchant ship is a relatively cheap and simple process, from design to outfitting. Essentially, it involves welding together a hull (often from imported steel) and then installing imported systems such as engines, radars, the steering, navigation and communications systems, and some specialist systems, e.g. for cargo handling. Imported components form the bulk of the cost, with little value addition within the shipyard. A commercial shipyard’s business plan revolves around bulk manufacture, compensating for the small profit margins by churning out as many ships as possible.

Creating a warship is infinitely more complex, and expensive. The design process is critical, with complex software shaping the “stealthiest” possible ship, virtually undetectable to an enemy. Next, a host of sensors and weapons must be accommodated to deal with different threats: enemy ships, submarines, aircraft and incoming missiles. Harmonising their different frequencies, and canalising information and weapons control into a single command centre, involves weaving an elaborate electronic tapestry.

Actually building the warship is a labour-intensive task, which involves painstakingly duplicating key systems so that the vessel can sail and fight even with one side blown out by the enemy. More than 400 kilometres of wiring must be laid out inside, all of it marked and accessible to permit repair and maintenance. A modern frigate has 25 kilometres of pipelines, built from 10,000 separate pieces of piping.

All this generates many jobs. An army of skilled craftsmen, many more than in merchant shipbuilding, does most of this work manually, through an elaborate eco-system of 100-200 private firms feeding into each warship. And these numbers are growing as defence shipyards increasingly outsource, using their own employees only for core activities like hull fabrication; fitting propulsion equipment; and installing weapon systems and sensors.

In this manpower-intensive field, India enjoys obvious advantages over the European warship builders that rule the market. These advantages are far less pronounced in merchant shipbuilding, where Korean and Chinese shipyards are turbocharged by a combination of inexpensive labour, indirect subsidies, and unflinching government support.

What makes India a potential powerhouse in warship-building is not so much its labour-cost advantage as a strong design capability that the navy has carefully nurtured since 1954, when the Directorate General of Naval Design first took shape. The importance of design capability has been amply illustrated in the bloated CVF programme. The UK, having wound up its naval design bureau, has already paid over a billion dollars to private companies to design the aircraft carrier. And with every minor redesign, not unusual while building a new warship, the design bill and the programme cost goes higher.

India has everything it takes to be a warship-building superpower: the springboard of design expertise; cheap and skilled labour; and mounting experience in building successful warships. What it lacks is capacity, which the government can augment with the help of private shipyards. This will significantly augment private shipyard revenue, boost defence exports, and provide the government with another strategic tool for furthering its interests in the Indian Ocean region.

source:Business Express

Arakonam naval air station to be vital hub for Indian Navy

Arakkonam naval air station, 70 km west of Chennai, is all set to be a hub for modern maritime reconnaissance with the Indian Navy planning to station eight long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft Boeing P81 to be bought from the US aircraft manufacturer.


"The aircraft will be capable of long-range maritime patrol, anti-submarine warfare, anti surface warfare, intelligence gathering and search and rescue missions. It will be fitted with the best available sensors in the market," said assistant chief of naval staff (Air) rear admiral S M Vadgaokar, at the passing out of helicopter pilots from Helicopter Training School at INS Rajali in Arakonam on Saturday.

India signed a $2.1 billion contract with Boeing for acquiring these aircraft in January 2009. They will replace the eight Russian Tupolev-142M turboprops. "Eight aircraft are included in the contract. But, we have an option to buy four more which may be bought from another manufacturer. Delivery of the aircraft will start by end of 2012. The last aircraft will come in 2015," Vadgaokar said.

The P-81 planes with an operating range of 600 nautical miles are expected to help plug the existing voids in Navy's maritime capabilities. The aircraft will be customised for India and will be based on the Boeing 737 -800 commercial airliner. "The first few pilots will be trained abroad with Boeing. India has expertise in piloting these planes. Many private commercial airlines have these B737-800 aircraft," he added.

Fourteen pilots from Indian Navy and two pilots from Indian Coast Guard have passed out in the 73rd Helicopter Conversion Course on Saturday.

Navy would need around 150 pilots because it was planning to replace its multi-use helicopters by inducting 100 new helicopters for ships, he said, and added that the need for more pilots could be filled in two to three years. "The navy will induct a large fleet of aircraft -- 200 helicopters, 30 medium-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft, 30 multi-role aircraft, 14 unmanned aerial vehicles and 135 fighter aircraft -- in the coming years as part of the maritime capability perspective plan drawn up till 2022."

Vadgaokar said there was no attrition of pilots in the Indian Navy. "Many move out when they reach a seniority after which they may not be able to carry on as operational pilots." Lieutenant A Garud won the best all-round trainee pilot Governor of Kerala rolling trophy while sub lieutenant K Banerjee came first in merit in flying.

source:Times of India

Indian Navy to build four Landing Platform Docks (LPD)

Aiming at adding more teeth to its amphibious warfare capabilities, the Navy is planning to build four Landing Platform Docks (LPD) to join the fleet, alongside INS Jalashwa, a US warship bought by India in 2007. The Navy is already in the process of getting the design for the LPDs ready in the next year or two and will move the government for sanction to build these warships.

“The plan is to add four more LPDs to the fleet and these would operate alongside INS Jalashwa, the only LPD currently in service,” a senior Navy officer told PTI here on Sunday. “In the coming year or two, we are going to finalise the design for the LPD, which is somewhat akin to INS Jalashwa.

The government sanction for building these ships would be obtained next,” he said. INS Jalashwa - a Sanskrit name for Hippopotamus - is a replenishment and amphibious warfare ship with capacity to embark, transport and land a 1,000-men battalion along with equipment and tanks to support operations on enemy shores.

Being the second largest ship in the Navy inventory after aircraft carrier INS Viraat, Jalashwa is also capable of undertaking maritime surveillance, special operations, search and rescue, medical support as well as humanitarian aid. Jalashwa was originally commissioned in the US Navy as USS Trenton and had served for 36 years when India bought it for USD 48.44 million and commissioned it in its Navy in June 2007.

After a refit programme at Norfolk, US, Jalashwa joined the Indian Navy service late in 2007 and is based under the Eastern Naval Command in Visakhapatnam. Jalashwa became the first ship the US transferred to India. It is also the first LPD in the Indian Navy service.

“The need for such a landing transport amphibious warship was felt in December 2004 when Tsunami waves hit Indian coast including the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Southeast Asia,” the officer said. India had rushed its warships with medical aid and food to the countries hit by Tsunami, but an LPD, which could be converted into a multi-bed hospital, would have made a difference, they said.

“But more than that, LPDs provide the Navy strategic reach to operate far away from Indian shores and support amphibious warfare,” they added. Jalashwa also carries four mechanised landing craft and eight landing assault craft, which could be launched by flooding the ship’s well deck, a speciality of LPDs. These craft could reach enemy shores and dock to deliver infantry and mechanised troops, tanks and equipment.

It also has a flight deck for operating four medium helicopters simultaneously, apart from operating Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) aircraft such as Sea Harriers, which the Navy possesses, in special circumstances.

source:The Hindu

Indian Navy Dornier to patrol in Maldives

As part of the overall strategy to prevent China from further spreading its influence in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR), India is sending a Dornier aircraft to Maldives to help the country in maritime surveillance.

Defence ministry sources said an Indian Navy Dornier would begin its maritime reconnaissance missions from Male over the weekend. This comes in the backdrop of defence minister A K Antony's recent visit to Maldives, where he promised measures to bolster defence cooperation with Maldives.

Under the new plan, India will apparently help Maldives set up a network of ground radars in all its 26 atolls and link them with the Indian military surveillance systems.

Moreover, amid fears in Male that one of its island resorts could be taken over by terrorists, India will also provide Maldives with a couple of helicopters, as also help patrol its territorial waters with both warships and reconnaissance aircraft.

India has taken several steps to build bridges with IOR nations, which range from joint patrols with Indonesian and Sri Lankan navies and exercises with Singapore and Oman to providing seaward security for international summits in Mozambique.

Maldives, in particular, constitutes an important part of this strategy since China is making persistent moves in the region as part of its military diplomacy.

India, on its part, has always been willing to help Maldives in times of crisis. Indian paratroopers and naval warships, for instance, were rushed to Maldives in November 1988 by the Rajiv Gandhi government under Operation Cactus to thwart the coup attempt against the Abdul Gayoom government.

Similarly, India had deployed two ships and four aircraft to Maldives after the killer tsunami struck in end-2004. "In April 2006, India gifted a fast attack craft INS Tillanchang to Maldives as a goodwill gesture. Apart from training, hydrographic and military assistance, our ships visit the country regularly,'' said an officer.

Indian Navy to procure five midget submarines

To strengthen its capabilities of carrying out special underwater operations, the Indian Navy is planning to procure five midget submarines for the Marine Commandos (MARCOS).Submarines weighing less than 150 tonnes are classified as midgets and are used by the Navies to carry out underwater covert operations and surveillance missions.

The Navy has already initiated the process of procuring these vessels and recently issued a Request for Proposal to Indian shipyards including Hindustan Shipyards Limited, ABG and Pipavav shipyards, Defence Ministry sources told.Initially, Navy is planning to get only five of these vessels but the inductions can be doubled later on.The induction of these midgets is part of the Navy's efforts to strengthen its operational capabilities after the 26/11 terror strikes in Mumbai last year, sources said.