Indian Navy Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta Spells Out Vision 2022

[Marshal]

Thanks for the link

but one question so many land based fighters?

Answer:1) Huge exclusive economic zone to defend compare to that the no is just to small.
2) does not have a resourse to build Aircraft carrier in quick time.
3) Probably to provide air cover to the ships petrolling our coastline at the time of war.

 

[nitesh]

Answer:1) Huge exclusive economic zone to defend compare to that the no is just to small.
2) does not have a resourse to build Aircraft carrier in quick time.
3) Probably to provide air cover to the ships petrolling our costline at the time of war.

Seems like mostly they will be based on Andaman chains and near karwar base, cos I had heard of IAF base near Tamilnadu for protection of reactors there. Seems to be correct strategy as this will free CBG for offensive roles.
But still the number 400 is not digestible. it is as good as an air force.

 

[Marshal]

Seems to be correct strategy as this will free CBG for offensive roles.

Thats the Idea.......now the carrier can never be used as a defensive ship, the basic Idea of havin carrier is to provide air cover to the ships where the land base aircrafts can not reach so the Navy can operate far away from home. It provides navy a longer reach. Carriers have to be used as a offensive ship. there is no point of having carrier if it is going to be used for the defence of the coastline where the land base aircrft can easily do the job.

 

[nitesh]

Thats the Idea.......now the carrier can never be used as a defensive ship, the basic Idea of havin carrier is to provide air cover to the ships where the land base aircrafts can not reach so the Navy can operate far away from home. It provides navy a longer reach. Carriers have to be used as a offensive ship. there is no point of having carrier if it is going to be used for the defence of the costline where the land base aircrft can easily do the job.

Good idea for foreign deployment also where carrier can support the troops.
What u say?

 

[Marshal]

Good idea for foreign deployment also where carrier can support the troops.
What u say?

yes you are right but we ll have to wait 15 to 20 years more to develope that capability........just having a carrier doesnt mean that we have the capability........ First we need to acquire large no. of amphibious vessels. then we need to develope proper training infrastructure, equipments, and wepons.... I mean we still have a lot of ground to cover. Navy seems to have some sort of long term plan for that as well otherwise I dont see any reason for the aquisition of the 16000tn very old and ageing trenton.

 

[nitesh]

yes you are right but we ll have to wait 15 to 20 years more to develope that capability........just having a carrier doesnt mean that we have the capability........ First we need to acquire large no. of amphibious vessels. then we need to develope proper training infrastructure, equipments, and wepons.... I mean we still have a lot of ground to cover. Navy seems to have some sort of long term plan for that as well otherwise I dont see any reason for the aquisition of the 16000tn very old and ageing trenton.

See Navy is operating carrier from a long time so that experience should not be a problem, but as you rightly said about amphibious vessels, jalashwa will work more as a training platform. That's what chief seems to convey we need to see how things unfold hope the ATV success cos carrier groups need dedicated sub escort also.

 

[Marshal]

some news regardin the Indian LCS program

Lockheed Martin LCS Contender in India's Project 17

NOSI has an article from The Hindu that Lockheed Martin is in the mix for the request for information (RFI) for India's Project 17, a class of multi-role, fast stealth frigates for the Indian Navy. That sounds a lot like the Lockheed Martin LCS MMC.
The Hindu reports:
Interestingly, the Navy’s requirement for stealth frigates is being looked at optimistically by the world’s biggest military contractor Lockheed Martin. It has just replied to the RFI. According to Royce Caplinger, Managing Director, Lockheed Martin Global Inc., the company has also identified an overseas shipyard, which will build the first ship of this class for the Indian Navy.

Speaking to The Hindu from Washington, Mr. Caplinger, however, refused to divulge the name or country of the identified shipyard because of proprietary obligations.

He said: “We are hopeful of continuing into the next [RFP] phase.”

This is yet another reason why I think the Navy is more likely to buy neither LCS than it is to pick only one of the two choices.
http://Lockheed Martin LCS Contender in India's Project 17

 

[Marshal]

^^above news is bit old this one is latest...
Navy to build huge ship landing docks
New Delhi: Having cleared the decks for the manufacture of large aircraft carriers indigenously, the navy is now proposing to venture into building huge ship landing docks to give it the capability to carry heavily armed troops and armaments over oceans.

The Naval Design Bureau has now finalised plans to manufacture over 20,000 tonne displacement landing ship docks patterned on INS Jalashva, which it recently acquired from the US Navy.

Along with trying its hand on manufacturing such large warships, the navy has also proposed to the government to set up two more public-sector shipyards located on the east and west coast, as its order book for vessels grow.

India, at present, only has the knowhow to manufacture smaller amphibious warships of 4,000 to 6,000 thousand tonne displacement. The navy has three such vessels on deployment but with New Delhi's commitments growing in view of demands for humanitarian assistance at sea, plans have now been cleared to go in for larger ship landing docks.

However, as in the case of aircraft carriers, the navy lacks the design expertise to build such huge warships. In the case of the indigenous carrier being built at Kochi shipyard, the navy has roped in an Italian firm Fincantieri.

In order to build the country's first ever blue water troop carrier, the navy is looking at a number of designs, including American and French.


http://http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1407571

 

[nitesh]

A lot of things depend upon how the sub program goes scorpene problems seems to be sorted out, need to look in to the second line of sub.

 

[Marshal]

India To Join the Expeditionary Era
The rhetoric regarding the possible sale of the USS Nashville (LPD 13) to India has all but disappeared over the last few months. We observe this bit of news might explain why.


Having cleared the decks for the manufacture of large aircraft carriers indigenously, the navy is now proposing to venture into building huge ship landing docks to give it the capability to carry heavily armed troops and armaments over oceans.

The Naval Design Bureau has now finalised plans to manufacture over 20,000 tonne displacement landing ship docks patterned on INS Jalashva, which it recently acquired from the US Navy.
The report did not include information regarding the desired size of this future amphibious force, but it did drop a few names regarding who the contenders are.

In order to build the country's first ever blue water troop carrier, the navy is looking at a number of designs, including American and French.
Interesting. The press may not be accurate in reporting "patterned on INS Jalashva" at 20,000 tons, but it would depend on requirements. It is interesting this comes the day after a visit by South Korean navy chief Admiral Jung Ok-keun, who no doubt discussed his own developing blue water expeditionary capability. It is very possible the Dokdo class is part of the competition.

Northrop Grumman was showing off the LPD-17 in India earlier this year, and the Mistral was involved in exercises with India just prior being ordered to the Myanmar coast following the cyclone disaster. We look forward to observing which metrics a growing regional power like India finds most appealing for a future expeditionary force in this competition.

 

[nitesh]

what about destroyers most of our destroyers are in 5-6000 tons displacement why we aren't looking for something like 8-9000 tons vessels like chinese sovernmeny class destroyers?

 

[Contrarian]

Yes but the sheer number of aircrafts and the ships especially in such ships indicates that Navy is not looking merely for defensive roles

The Navy has made it ampy clear that it is indeed NOT looking for a defensive role. It has made it clear that incase of a war, it wants the Indian Coast Guard to take up the responsibilities of defending the coastline, the Navy only wants to go offensive. They have also said that they will train and equip the Coast Guard for such duties.

In the end, they want to be a purely offensive force, with ICG incharge of defending the homeland.

 

[Contrarian]

Double Post

 

[nitesh]

marshal, now the plans are becoming a little clear:

cross post from LCA thread post no. 634
Range of vehicles
So, if one looks at just this spectrum of vehicles, five in number, I see a good potential to build all together, about 1,000 aircraft, over a period of time. The LCA could be 400 in number for the IAF, 100 for the Navy; the trainer could be 150; the medium combat aircraft 250; and 100-150 for the UACVs.

 

[Marshal]

marshal, now the plans are becoming a little clear:

But MCA is still on the paper.....????????
As far as LCA is concerned the IAF is only looking to aquire somewhere around 220....and it will take atleast 8 to 10 years....and Navy has ordered only 40 nLCA.....