Indian aircraft carrier programme: The makings of a global naval power

bose

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
4,921
Likes
5,961
Country flag
Re: Indian aircraft carrier programme: The makings of a global naval p

hi there bose ...are you really bengali ....very great folks ...one of my favorite besides mallu !!! hehheheheh
i agree with you wholeheartedly about sea denial via anything except CBG bcos the heart of it all, the AC is the biggest problem AFAIK
anyway india is making progress per your info about andaman ...so im glad
Hi Roma, Yes I am a Bengali and a proud Indian... I too have doubts on having large numbers of CBG's...

Best Wishes to you.
 

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,920
Likes
98,472
Country flag
India collaborates with USA for Building Aircraft Carriers

India collaborates with USA cofor Building Aircraft Carriers

However, a Joint Working Group has been formed under the auspices of US-India Defence Trade and Technology Initiative framework for possible co-operation in the field of aircraft carrier technologies in the future.

Aircraft Carriers are for Navy. The above mentioned technological collaboration will not aid the Indian Air Force.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri Manohar Parrikar in a written reply to Shri KC Tyagi and Shri P Bhattacharya in Rajya Sabha today.

http://nvonews.com/india-collaborates-with-usa-cofor-building-aircraft-carriers/


USA and India have formed a Joint Working Group for possible co-operation in the field of aircraft carrier technologies in the future.

The collaboration, which will result in building aircraft carriers, is expected to significantly boost the Indian Navy’s capabilities.

Indian Defence Minister Shri Manohar Parrikar released the information of the Joint Working Group in a written reply to Shri KC Tyagi and Shri P Bhattacharya in Rajya Sabha.

http://navaltoday.com/2015/08/11/us-india-to-jointly-work-on-future-aircraft-carriers/
 

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,920
Likes
98,472
Country flag
Indian Navy Role in Yemen and Beyond Highlights Range of Objectives





India is increasingly using its naval assets to support global peacekeeping and humanitarian operations. Yet, as Sarosh Bana reminds us, that’s not the whole story. New Delhi’s ongoing investments in submarines and aircraft carriers confirm that sea denial and securing territorial waters remain its top priorities.

By Sarosh Bana for East-West Center (EWC)

This article was originally East-West Center on 28 July 2015.

As a regional maritime power seeking to consolidate its reach across the seas from the Horn of Africa to the Malacca Strait and the South China Sea, India is taking concerted strides towards bolstering its navy into a three‐dimensional blue water force. The country’s protracted planning is finally leading to the enhancement of its submarine force, augmentation of its carrier battle groups and reinforcement of its air power.

Over 40 warships are on order with the Indian Navy in Indian shipyards at a cost of over Rs2 trillion (US$32.3 billion). New Delhi, however, mandates the use of the military for national defense rather than for any offensive – or hegemonic –geopolitical strategy. India’s naval build‐up and maritime outreach are hence marshalled primarily for sea denial and securing territorial waters. But they are increasingly being used for peace‐keeping and humanitarian purposes, not only close to shore, but also across the seas, and not solely to safeguard the lives and interests of Indian nationals, but to protect other nationalities, friendly forces, and maritime traffic.

This was best highlighted by Op Rahat (“relief” in the Hindi language), the mission that between March 31 and April 10, 2015 successfully evacuated 4,640 Indians and 960 nationals from 41 other countries from war‐torn Yemen. In a definitive act of military diplomacy, India staged the massive rescue effort in the midst of the humanitarian catastrophe there, having been appealed to by nations that included the United States, Germany, France, Sweden, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Turkey. The Indian Air Force (IAF) similarly rose to the occasion to undertake vigorous search and rescue

(SAR) and airlift missions in the wake of the April 25 earthquake in neighboring Nepal.

With access to airports within Yemen fraught with risk, sealift was considered the safest option. The Indian Navy’s offshore patrol vessel (OPV), INS Sumitra, which was on an anti‐piracy patrol in the Gulf of Aden, was pressed into action for the rescue mission. The Mumbai‐headquartered Western Naval Command (WNC) also dispatched a guided missile destroyer, INS Mumbai, and stealth frigate, INS Tarkash. While India’s Civil Aviation ministry diverted two Air India planes for the attendant airlift, the IAF deployed two of its Boeing C‐17 Globemaster III aircraft to transfer the evacuees from the tiny Red Sea state of Djibouti to Indian shores.

Both India and China have been conducting anti‐piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden since 2008. Indian seafarers man many foreign and Indian‐flagged ships and the Gulf is also a key trade route for the country, particularly for oil and fertilizers. While China’s counter‐piracy deployments fall under its Military Operations Other than War (MOOTW), which supports the country’s foreign policy goals, the Indian Navy is part of the Combined Task Force 151 (CTF 151), a 30‐member U.S.‐led coalition force in the Gulf. Indian naval patrols alone have foiled 40 piracy attempts to date.

In its quest to raise its profile in the littoral, Beijing deployed for the first time a nuclear submarine in the Indian Ocean for two months from December 2014. It explained the boat’s presence as part of its counter‐piracy mission in the Gulf, but it is widely understood that such an effort does not require submarine support. :D

As a reaction to the actions of territorial claimants in the South and East China Seas, Washington’s “pivot” strategy in the Asia‐Pacific is juxtaposing its decision not to take a position on specific sovereignty claims with the imperative to raise its already formidable profile in that region. Washington had envisaged India as a strategic partner in its “pivot” program, with Leon Panetta, when he was Secretary of Defense, affirming that “defense cooperation with India is a lynchpin in this [pivot] strategy.”

India had balked, anxious to project its neutrality so as not to antagonize the Chinese authorities. New Delhi has nevertheless also been concerned by other moves of PLAN to enter waters close to India, as with the docking last September of a Chinese nuclear‐powered Type‐093 attack submarine in Colombo, in Sri Lanka. This was followed two months later by a similar call at the port by another nuclear submarine, Changzheng‐2, and a warship, Chang Xing Dao. India has been mindful of the steady build‐up in undersea capabilities not only of China, but also of Pakistan, both neighbors with which it has been at war in the past.

With one of the largest fleets of attack submarines comprising six nuclear‐powered and 53 diesel‐powered boats, Beijing is close to deploying a powerful sea‐based nuclear deterrent through long‐range nuclear‐armed submarines. The U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence estimates that China has introduced three new nuclear ballistic “boomer” (SSBN) submarines. China is also reportedly selling six S20 or Yuan Class diesel‐electric submarines (SSKs) to Pakistan and two Type 035G Ming Class SSKs to Bangladesh, northeast of India.

For surveillance of its own maritime zone and to participate in multinational initiatives for securing the seas, India has established a Far East Naval Command (FENC) at its far-flung island enclave of Andaman and Nicobar in the Bay of Bengal, closer to Myanmar, Thailand and Indonesia than to the Indian mainland. This outpost helps New Delhi to collaborate in the Malacca Strait Security Initiatives (MSSI) of the littoral to ensure joint air patrol in that region. Underlining the imperative of the Indian Ocean littoral to India, Prime Minister Modi used his visits in March to the three former British colonies of Seychelles, Mauritius, and Sri Lanka to establish a Joint Working Group on the Indian Ocean. But again mindful of Beijing’s misgivings, India did not invite Japan to the preparatory talks for the 19th edition of the annual India‐U.S. Malabar Naval Combat Exercise to be held in October off India’s eastern seaboard. Last year, Japan, considered a vital ally by both India and the U.S., was an invitee to this essentially bilateral exercise. Tokyo might still be a late entrant to the October event, though Jimex, the India‐Japan naval exercise held for the first time in 2012, is being separately planned for November. New Delhi has been concerned about China’s viewing any multilateral naval grouping in the region as a security axis seeking to contain it.

While India’s naval build‐up and maritime outreach are increasingly being utilized for peace‐keeping and humanitarian purposes, the high levels of investment leading to the expansion of the submarine fleet and carrier battle groups are not solely for the purposes of humanitarian activities, and the Navy’s resources are likely to continue to be primarily marshalled for sea denial and securing territorial waters. http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail/?lng=en&id=192888


http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail/?lng=en&id=192888
 

salute

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
2,174
Likes
1,094
Re: Indian aircraft carrier programme: The makings of a global naval p

"Global naval power" :pound: :rofl: India first needs to find a way to deal with the current 60+ and rapidly growing Chinese submarine force. A couple of aircraft carriers, that too built with reliance on foreign designs and manufacturing expertise doesn't make anyone a "global naval power". In a naval war that stretches for a few months, the Chinese can easily sink the Indian Navy while rapidly replacing their own losses with indigenously designed ships and subs.

Indian shipyards on the other hand take 3-4 times longer and charge much more to build relatively inferior quality ships. Not to mention replacing a sunk aircraft carrier with a new one would probably take them half a decade by which time there might be no IN to sell it to. :lol:

Seriously, until India develops its manufacturing capability and supply chain efficiency, it has no hope of competing with China. China is far far ahead and is a true industrial power, unlike India.
yeah chinese do have pretty cheap manufacturing,they make cheap knock off of western military stuff,
india cannot compete with cheap quality of chinese manufacturing. :laugh:
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
yeah chinese do have pretty cheap manufacturing,they make cheap knock off of western military stuff,
india cannot compete with cheap quality of chinese manufacturing. :laugh:
Certainly, you can't call a fighter which has been test flying for 14 years cheap;
you can't call a training tank which took 30 years to design as a cheap product.
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
In a naval war that stretches for a few months, the Chinese can easily sink the Indian Navy while rapidly replacing their own losses with indigenously designed ships and subs.
Yeah right........... while the rest of the world watches on the sidelines.<Sarcasm>
No naval conflict between these two powers is going to last an entire month without the other world powers getting involved.
As for "rapid replacement of Chinese losses"......
1. China does not have the capability to replace a frigate or two in under a month (i.e. if a conflict lasted so long). This is not WW-II and the level of technology means that no country can replace losses by manufacturing newer vessels within the time frame of a limited conflict.
2. Replacing a loss at sea would not involve making another vessel but replacing the lost vessel with another from one of the reserve fleets or a fleet in, say, the East China Sea.

What some people often fail to notice is that navy is different from other arms of an armed force. It can engage another naval force though sea control, sea denial and maneuver even during peacetime and often before hostilities break out. (e.g.:- Read about how the Indian navy captured the Lakshwadeep islands after independence.) Sea control essentially requires aircraft carriers or a naval air arm. Sea control essentially requires CVBGs. China and India realize that and are hence moving in these directions at their own pace.
India first needs to find a way to deal with the current 60+ and rapidly growing Chinese submarine force
Another point we often forget is that the counter to a submarine force is not another submarine force but an anti-submarine force comprising of ASW (Anti Submarine Warfare) assets such as ASW frigates, ASW helicopters and planes (like the Boeing P-8Is that Indian navy has recently acquired).
(Although Hunter-killer submarines might be a good addition on the Indian side)
I agree that an accretion of capability in this is crucial (seeing as Pakistan Navy is also enhancing its sub-surface capabilities) but the Indian navy is not sitting idle. It is acquiring new A.S.W. vessels at a pace at which it can.

Now about Indian Navy being a Global force........:laugh: NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
1.We do not need that sort of a capability.
2.And if by some miracle it did happen, we would be walking in the shoes of the U.S. navy and embroiling ourselves in conflicts that have nothing to do with us.
When Indian Admiralty says its building a blue water force, it simply means that they are building a force with power projection capabilities immediately beyond our territorial waters (i.e. the Indian ocean).This allows sea control and denial capabilities against the naval force of an adversary in that adversary's own territorial waters as well as the ability to control or at least significantly influence sea trade.
The only Global Naval Force is the U.S.N. and the only other navy trying to reach this height is P.L.A.N.
:hmm:(Although Russian Navy could also become a global force if Putin had his way)
 

salute

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
2,174
Likes
1,094
Certainly, you can't call a fighter which has been test flying for 14 years cheap;
you can't call a training tank which took 30 years to design as a cheap product.
no cannot because its not fault of cheap manufacturing reasons are different of these delays for example bs govt and their corruption,

lca is best in its class,its surely better than jf junkyard.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top