Navy's wavering delaying warships by years

[Daredevil]

Navy's wavering delaying warships by years

Ajai Shukla / Mazagon Dock/ Mumbai Aug 20, 2012, 00:59 IST

The Indian Navy's insistence that warships built in India must have cutting-edge weapon systems is having potentially dangerous consequences: Half-built warships rusting in the dockyard, waiting for fancy weaponry that gets more and more delayed.

Such is the story of Project 15A, the construction of three 6,800-tonne destroyers by the public sector Mazagon Dock Ltd, Mumbai (MDL), India's premier warship builder. Project 15A was sanctioned in June 2001, and construction began in 2003, with delivery of the first ship, INS Kolkata, promised in June 2008. The second (INS Kochi) and third (INS Chennai) vessels of the Kolkata Class (a warship class is traditionally named after the lead ship) would follow at one-year intervals.

Instead, as Business Standard saw on a visit to MDL, the three hulks float aimlessly, seawater corroding their steel as they wait for key systems that are not yet ready. INS Kolkata was launched in March 2006; it has already spent seven years in the water. But the navy will be lucky to get it next year, five years late. INS Kochi and INS Chennai will follow in 2014 and 2015 respectively.
Meanwhile, the navy's Maritime Capability Perspective Plan (MCPP) exists only on paper. Formulated in 2005, the MCPP projects a 160 ship-strong navy, including 90 front-line combat platforms (major warships like aircraft carriers, destroyers, frigates and corvettes). Actual numbers are far more modest. The INS Sahyadri, the navy's latest warship that was commissioned last month, is its 134th ship.

According to a 2010 CAG report on warship building, this year the navy will have just 44 per cent of the destroyers it needs; 61 per cent of the frigates; and 20 per cent of its requirement of corvettes (destroyers are heavy warships, above 6,000 tonnes; frigates usually weigh under 5,500-6,000 tonnes; while corvettes are usually below 2,500 tonnes).

The navy has only itself to blame for delays in Project 15A. With MDL having successfully built three destroyers under Project 15 (INS Delhi, INS Mysore and INS Mumbai), Project 15A was to be a follow-on class, three more destroyers built quickly using basically the same design and technologies. Instead, the navy demanded 2,363 modifications, including major changes in weaponry, sensors and helicopter systems.

According to the CAG's audit report, the Kashtan surface-to-air missile was replaced with the Long Range Surface to Air Missile (LR-SAM), which the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) is still co-developing with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). To strengthen the destroyer's anti-submarine capabilities, it was decided to include a bow-mounted sonar, the DRDO's Humsa sonar. And the entire helicopter hangar was redesigned to accommodate a bigger helicopter.

To make matters worse, many of these decisions were taken late, necessitating major reconstruction. The CAG points out that the decision on the Humsa sonar was taken "after MDL had completed the detailed design, production, assembly and erection of the bow structure without sonar", which called for major redesign. Similarly, the navy decided to change the gun mount in March 2008, after the first ship was launched. This "necessitated redesign of the entire structure around the gun mount"¦" says the CAG.

Naturally, the delays have been enormous. While Project 15 vessels were built in 108 months, Project 15A vessels will take 140 months to delivery. This is twice as long as Korean shipyards like Hyundai and Daewoo, which take 66-72 months (including the pre-build period) for a comparable warship. Western shipyards like DCNS (France), Fincantieri (Italy), or Northrop Grumman (USA) typically take 78-80 months.

MDL's new chairman, Rear Admiral (Retired) Rahul Kumar Shrawat, plays down the delay, pointing out that the vessels are now close to completion. "It is the navy's endeavour to put the latest equipment on a new warship. That is a legitimate user aspiration," he says.

But Shrawat would not like the same mistakes to be made in Project 15B, another follow on project, under which MDL will build four destroyers similar to the Kolkata Class. Shrawat hopes that Project 15B destroyers, which will start being constructed this year, will incorporate the same LR-SAM, Brahmos cruise missile and helicopter hangar that is being installed in Project 15A.

"The lesson learnt is that the systems that are proven on one platform, unless they genuinely require upgrading, should perhaps be used for the follow-on platform as well. But, as a shipyard, we do not control that. We can only recommend to the navy," says Shrawat.

The Rs 29,325 crores contract for Project 15B was concluded in Jan 2011. Production will start by year-end, with the first destroyer being delivered in 2018 and the other three at one-year intervals.

 

[agentperry]

navy should study operation reasearch

 

[p2prada]

The navy has only itself to blame for delays in Project 15A.

No my dear friend. The answer is IN is waiting for Barak 8 and the cause for the delay was Trishul, Trishul, Trishul.

DRDO held IN hostage to Trishul until it was confirmed the project failed.

The delinking of Trishul matches the time line of Barak 1 induction. Due to the 3 year delay in planned induction and delinking of Trishul, it is obvious there would be a 3 year delay in the Barak 8 at least. This is apart from all the time lost to approvals and contract negotiations for the Barak 8 program which was signed only in 2007, 4 years after Trishul was delinked or 7 years after Trishul was originally supposed to be in service. A five year Barak program would obviously mean a 5 year delay in induction.

A new sonar and changing the gun mount are not as big as they think it is.

It is nice(actually convenient) to blame the Armed forces. Why? Because the Navy cannot talk to the media about it. No loopholes there and all the fingerprints are lost. Navy cannot be taken to task anyway, because being the user who could only wait they were never at fault in the first place.

 

[Bheeshma]

IN has to take its share of blame. If trishul is to blame for P-16a delay then P-15a are delayed because barak-2 did not exist when P-15s were being constructed. Anyway its good that 4 P-15b and 7/9 P-17a have been sanctioned. They should stick to Barak-I/II combo with Ak-630 for AD and Brahmos for offense.

 

[Bushra Aziz]

It is money game and lack of commitment. Other wise there was a time few hundred years ago that one of the world best warships were built in India (please don't ask me sourse at this stage). We think that technology emits from west and Eastern nations will continue to remain backward uncless each of our national is educated on the standards of Havard University. We are in the habbit of purchasing junks or nearly junk on high prices. I have witnessed almost new ships at Ship-breaking facility t Gadani. Thanks God these were not sent for refit.
The ageing INS Viraat was out of action for almost two years in connection with its refit. Presently, it is on US' permanent duty in high seas. India is basically requiring three aircraft carriers for its Eastern Navy Command and Western Navy Command and a third one for the delay in refit. It is unfortunate that the deal of INS Viraat was linked with a lot of kickbacks and now India economy is being experimented on Admiral Gorshkov, which is undergoing a refit in Russia. India is also trying to build its indigenous aircraft carrier at the Cochin Shipyard since 2006, which will be tentatively ready by by 2017.Many critics claims that the project has become white elephant in which the expenditure has shooted up so much that at times shelving was considered. However, so far Ministry of Defence has been generious.
As I have already mentioned, the issue Israeli Barak missiles has also become a bleeding wound for the Indians. It is yet another example of corruption in Indian defence procurement. We have also the Bofors scandals. After seeing the plight of Indian economy, there is an option of indignious developmet but so far it has proved even worse. The project of developing Long Range Surface to Air (SAM) and Medium Range SAM systems with foreign collaboration is more or less relabeling of procured missiles. India and neighbouring countries need to go for sole efforts in the development of indignious projects.

 

[vishwaprasad]

It is money game and lack of commitment. Other wise there was a time few hundred years ago that one of the world best warships were built in India (please don't ask me sourse at this stage). We think that technology emits from west and Eastern nations will continue to remain backward uncless each of our national is educated on the standards of Havard University. We are in the habbit of purchasing junks or nearly junk on high prices. I have witnessed almost new ships at Ship-breaking facility t Gadani. Thanks God these were not sent for refit.
The ageing INS Viraat was out of action for almost two years in connection with its refit. Presently, it is on US' permanent duty in high seas. India is basically requiring three aircraft carriers for its Eastern Navy Command and Western Navy Command and a third one for the delay in refit. It is unfortunate that the deal of INS Viraat was linked with a lot of kickbacks and now India economy is being experimented on Admiral Gorshkov, which is undergoing a refit in Russia. India is also trying to build its indigenous aircraft carrier at the Cochin Shipyard since 2006, which will be tentatively ready by by 2017.Many critics claims that the project has become white elephant in which the expenditure has shooted up so much that at times shelving was considered. However, so far Ministry of Defence has been generious.
As I have already mentioned, the issue Israeli Barak missiles has also become a bleeding wound for the Indians. It is yet another example of corruption in Indian defence procurement. We have also the Bofors scandals. After seeing the plight of Indian economy, there is an option of indignious developmet but so far it has proved even worse. The project of developing Long Range Surface to Air (SAM) and Medium Range SAM systems with foreign collaboration is more or less relabeling of procured missiles. India and neighbouring countries need to go for sole efforts in the development of indignious projects.

You are misunderstanding that Indian Viraat is on permanent US duty in high seas...do you have any source for this? Besides even if there are delays do not forget that we are making lethal warships on our own, i.e. Delhi class, Shivalik class and many...

 

[Bheeshma]

You are trying to argue with a paki. They are inherently stupid and completely delusional. They are still under the impression that Jinnah was a great leader and not a opportunistic demagogue and british puppet. Some like the one above think the fishing fleet called PN can be of some use to IN. Pakis have no medium or long range AD. Hence the massive takleef at Barak-8 and LR-SAM (100 km range for IAF).

 

[vishwaprasad]

You are trying to argue with a paki. They are inherently stupid and completely delusional. They are still under the impression that Jinnah was a great leader and not a opportunistic demagogue and british puppet. Some like the one above think the fishing fleet called PN can be of some use to IN. Pakis have no medium or long range AD. Hence the massive takleef at Barak-8 and LR-SAM (100 km range for IAF).

Funniest part of his post is as per him our carrier is on permanent US duty. Whereas having foreign troops on soil, drone strikes against own civilians and soldiers, Remond Devis chapter shows exactly who is on permanent US duty.

Bushra, actually I don't like calling anyone's nation as client state as every nation has its own problem. Pakistan has its own share of problem and dealing with it, but seriously you should manage to get your house in order before coming here and shamelessly saying that Indian carrier is on US permanent duty. It will only end up in flame war and nothing else.