Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[ezsasa]

Does our doctrine include something like the Marine Corps? To my understanding the Marine Corps are to be used something like shock troops like the Panzer divisions in WW2 or winged hussars and the like. Does our military actually have something reserved for that role(i.e shock troops)?

next big war will decide for us, whether marines are required or not. since external factors decided major elements of our defence doctrine all this while, the marines question too will be decided by external factors.

 

[DumbPilot]

next big war will decide for us, whether marines are required or not. since external factors decided major elements of our defence doctrine all this while, the marines question too will be decided by external factors.

Fair enough, although our establishment isn't exactly known for open-mindedness : p

 

[ezsasa]

Fair enough, although our establishment isn't exactly known for open-mindedness : p

i'd say it isn't about open-mindedness, it's more about limited resources and decades of backlog which doesn't stop being updated.

global military/security scenario does not stop evolving, just because our leaderships of past couldn't find solutions in time. these things add up and we are where we are today.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

Indian nay could follow three different doctrine in the future.
First one is 'Free Rider' stance, it largely relies on outside powers to secure the sea lines of communication and requires a minimum fleet. This is India's current fleet structure. It doesn't have to capability to deny another great power access to the IOR

Next iteration is 'The constable'. This is largely defensive in nature but asserts regional pre-eminence. Fleet structure with this would be multiple AC's that would enable India to fight a defensive conflict and deny another power competitor access to the IOR if necessary but it doesn't claim hegemonic power over the IOR. Under this fleet structure India would still allow navies like the US to operate in the IOR but would be very of possible rivals like Chinese.

Last one is the 'Strong man fleet'. This is much more aggressive towards outside powers and has the potential to be offensive. This could be a 9-10 carrier fleet and this would provide India with the ability to deny access to IOR as a whole to any other competitor in addition to projecting power into the pacific, Mediterranean and the Atlantic.

India naturally will fall within the free rider and constable range. The strongman fleet is possible given its growing resources. For US national security interests, the development of a strong man navy by India would represent a serious impediment to our own ability to operate. So question becomes what can US do to both ensure that India and US remains strategic partners but also avoid [prevent] the building of the strong man fleet to begin with.

For US its imperative that it maintains access to the IOR and that it keeps India co-operative. To do this, First is arms sales. Maintaining permanent deployment of forces to the IOR and more co-operation joint exercises and joint operations keeps US involved in the day today power structure and operations. If India feels its completely exposed at the sea and feels like its living in a somewhat chaotic environment it may move towards the strong man approach. The best way to keep India co-operative and its navy moderate is to maintain an active presence in the region because once the strong man fleet is built it could change the Indian's intensions. So for US if they are on a free rider or constable fleet structure they would rely on us for a great deal of their security and that's the best way to ensure the strategic partnership and India stays co-operative.

So much to disagree with.
The video is 6 yrs old, but I'll express my viewpoint on present & future situations.
3 is oversimplified.

IN is capable of protecting Indias' SLoC & doesn't "largely relies on outside powers to secure the sea lines of communication".
Minimum fleet? What?

I'd go as far as to say these 20th-century classifications are no longer valid.
You can go offensive with "multiple AC's".
You can no longer control 1 ocean and project power into two others with just 9-10 carriers.
You can't deny access to the sea for trade purposes to other maritime power.

The maritime world is that of cooperation, no country can secure all of its interests alone, even the USN needs to cooperate with regional naval powers like JMSDF & ROK Navy, and resident countries like the Philippines to contain PRC. Largely depends on these 3 countries to secure its interests in East Asia.
Free Rider?

India can't afford *not to be" a maritime power.
Our bilateral trade is around 1.5T USD, set to grow exponentially.

Indian navy did NOT want to depend on other maritime powers to secure Indias' interests in the 20th century like he says, IN asking for 4 fleet carriers & 2 escort carriers (unrealistic IK) in the 1950s proves his argument wrong.
There's no reason for IN to want to depend on external powers like the US.

 

[Blademaster]

So much to disagree with.
The video is 6 yrs old, but I'll express my viewpoint on present & future situations.
3 is oversimplified.

IN is capable of protecting Indias' SLoC & doesn't "largely relies on outside powers to secure the sea lines of communication".
Minimum fleet? What?

I'd go as far as to say these 20th-century classifications are no longer valid.
You can go offensive with "multiple AC's".
You can no longer control 1 ocean and project power into two others with just 9-10 carriers.
You can't deny access to the sea for trade purposes to other maritime power.

The maritime world is that of cooperation, no country can secure all of its interests alone, even the USN needs to cooperate with regional naval powers like JMSDF & ROK Navy, and resident countries like the Philippines to contain PRC. Largely depends on these 3 countries to secure its interests in East Asia.
Free Rider?

India can't afford *not to be" a maritime power.
Our bilateral trade is around 1.5T USD, set to grow exponentially.

Indian navy did NOT want to depend on other maritime powers to secure Indias' interests in the 20th century like he says, IN asking for 4 fleet carriers & 2 escort carriers (unrealistic IK) in the 1950s proves his argument wrong.
There's no reason for IN to want to depend on external powers like the US.

Not only that the speaker presumes that India will fall in line and toe US's policies when it comes to the IOR. Yeah right fat chance of that happening.

 

[WolfPack86]

Navy may need 100 locally made deck-based fighters
The first prototype of the twin engine deck-based fighter (TEDBF) could make its maiden flight by 2026 and be ready for production by 2031

A proposal to design and develop an indigenous deck-based fighter for the Indian Navy is likely to be taken up by the Cabinet Committee on Security soon, with the navy’s requirement expected to around 100 aircraft, senior officials familiar with the development said at Aero India 2023 on Tuesday.

The first prototype of the twin engine deck-based fighter (TEDBF) could make its maiden flight by 2026 and be ready for production by 2031, said Girish S Deodhare, director general, Aeronautical Development Agency. The navy is looking at importing a new deck-based fighter as an interim measure to meet its requirements before the indigenous TEDBF is ready. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited will produce the new fighter at the rate of eight aircraft per year, the officials said.

The French Rafale M fighter has edged out the American F/A-18 Super Hornet in a direct competition to equip the navy with 26 new deck-based fighters for INS Vikrant, the country’s first indigenous aircraft carrier. The navy currently has two aircraft carriers – INS Vikrant and INS Vikramaditya.

The TEDBF will match the capabilities of Rafale M and F/A-18 Super Hornet, Deodhare said. The Rafale is manufactured by Dassault Aviation while the Super Hornet is a Boeing product.

“The expertise gained in developing the light combat aircraft (navy) will come in handy for the TEDBF project. It’s currently in the preliminary design stage and should move forward quickly. The wing folding design mechanism (to ensure the plane takes minimum space on an aircraft carrier) has been finalised,” Deodhare said.

To be sure, LCA (navy) is only a technology demonstrator but it showcases that India has developed niche technologies specific to deck-based fighter operations, and it will pave the way to develop and manufacture the TEDBF.

Last week, the LCA (navy) landed and took off from INS Vikrant for the first time. Two LCA (navy) prototypes are currently operating from the aircraft carrier as part of ongoing flight trials. Vikrant was commissioned into the navy last September, marking a pivotal point in the country’s quest for self-reliance in the defence sector. The flight trials on board INS Vikrant also involve the Russian-origin MiG-29K fighter jets that use the ski-jump to takeoff and are recovered by arrestor wires or what is known as STOBAR (short takeoff but arrested recovery) in navy parlance.

INS Vikramaditya also operates MiG-29K fighters. LCA (navy) landed and took off from Vikramaditya for the first time in August 2020.

Vikrant, which has an indigenous content of 76%, will operate an air wing consist of 30 aircraft. The 45,000-tonne Vikrant has been built at Cochin Shipyard at a cost of ₹20,000 crore. Only the US, the UK, Russia, France and China have the capability to build aircraft carriers this size. It has been named after aircraft carrier INS Vikrant operated by the navy from 1961 to 1997.

A second indigenous aircraft carrier to project India’s maritime power in the far seas is also on the navy’s radar.

“We are still working on some aspects of IAC-2 like what size it should be and what are the capabilities desired. But right now, we have put a hold on it (IAC-2) because we have just commissioned the Vikrant and are quite happy with the ship. We are examining whether we should look at a repeat order for IAC-1 (Vikrant) instead of going for IAC-2 to capitalise on the expertise gained during the former’s construction. We are in the discussion stage right now,” navy chief Admiral R Hari Kumar said in December 2022.

INS Vikramaditya was bought second-hand from Russia for $2.33 billion. The navy has been arguing it needs three such floating airfields given its vast area of interest.

Vikrant is the fourth aircraft carrier to be operated by the Indian Navy --- first Vikrant (British origin) from 1961 to 1997, INS Viraat (British origin) from 1987 to 2016 and INS Vikramaditya 2013 onwards.

Navy may need 100 locally made deck-based fighters

The first prototype of the twin engine deck-based fighter (TEDBF) could make its maiden flight by 2026 and be ready for production by 2031

www.hindustantimes.com

 

[Fatalis]

INS Rana - Here, one can notice the VL-SRSAM on the back.

 

[flanker99]

View attachment 194239

INS Rana - Here, one can notice the VL-SRSAM on the back.

Looks like a 8 cell and its huge compared to the barak1 it will be replacing...whats the other covered structure any idea anyone?!

 

[Fatalis]

Looks like a 8 cell and its huge compared to the barak1 it will be replacing...whats the other covered structure any idea anyone?!

The other VLS.

 

[flanker99]

The other VLS.

Why would they cover it.?

 

[Fatalis]

Why would they cover it.?

May be it was not in use/testing. IN always tends to cover the VLS when not in use.

 

[flanker99]

May be it was not in use/testing. IN always tends to cover the VLS when not in use.

Really never seen in vls covered like this can u post some pics?

 

[flanker99]

Looks like radar for vlsrsam?

 

[Fatalis]

Looks like radar for vlsrsam?

View attachment 194363

Yeah, most probably the X-band radar.

Really never seen in vls covered like this can u post some pics?

Here, you can see the Barak VLS is covered.

 

[Fatalis]

Navy to continue its search for larger aircraft carrier

NEW DELHI: In order to maintain its operational capabilities in future the Indian Navy will continue the study for its third indigenous aircraft carrier which w

www.newindianexpress.com

IAC-2 is a go. But IN should also focus on the LHD program which has been silent for far too long.

 

[Anandhu Krishna]

IN is capable of protecting Indias' SLoC & doesn't "largely relies on outside powers to secure the sea lines of communication".
Minimum fleet? What?

which is true. India can't protect its trade against a big power like the US in IOR let alone somewhere else.

The maritime world is that of cooperation, no country can secure all of its interests alone, even the USN needs to cooperate with regional naval powers like JMSDF & ROK Navy, and resident countries like the Philippines to contain PRC. Largely depends on these 3 countries to secure its interests in East Asia.
Free Rider?

Japan and Korea depends on USN for their security. USN have to co-operate because China soon will be a great Naval power. Something India will not be in the near future.

India can't afford *not to be" a maritime power.
Our bilateral trade is around 1.5T USD, set to grow exponentially.

Again, true but nobody except the Navy seems to understand this including the decision makers in the other arms of the military.

Indian navy did NOT want to depend on other maritime powers to secure Indias' interests in the 20th century like he says, IN asking for 4 fleet carriers & 2 escort carriers (unrealistic IK) in the 1950s proves his argument wrong.
There's no reason for IN to want to depend on external powers like the US.

"Indian navy asked for something" is not a good argument. IN have always been forward thinking, atleast compared to the Army and AF. They even included their potential of naval diplomacy in their doctrine a long time ago but nobody took them seriously until very recently and even now it's not that strong.

In the video, guy drawsparallel with France. French had a superior Army but the British had a superior Navy. Primary reason was that the British didn't have big power rivals knocking on its borders.

 

[Anandhu Krishna]

Navy to continue its search for larger aircraft carrier

NEW DELHI: In order to maintain its operational capabilities in future the Indian Navy will continue the study for its third indigenous aircraft carrier which w

www.newindianexpress.com

IAC-2 is a go. But IN should also focus on the LHD program which has been silent for far too long.

Navy should do a repeat order for IAC-2 and maybe join the French program for AC-3. They are designing exactly what IN was asking for.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

which is true. India can't protect its trade against a big power like the US in IOR

The US is not a threat to our commerce or territory right now, & if the US is the threat that you are referring to, then who are we "free riding" with?

let alone somewhere else.

There are only 4 countries with a stronger Navy than India- USN, PLAN, JMSDF, and the VMF respectively, & the latter three don't have enough power projection capabilities to threaten us in IOR right now.
Royal Navy & Marine Nationale are ranked below (poor anti-shipping capability) & aren't a threat.

Japan and Korea depends on USN for their security. USN have to co-operate because China soon will be a great Naval power.

They depend on (read cooperate with) each other to secure their interests, US-Japan or US-SK relation isn't one way.

Something India will not be in the near future.

Agreed, but you don't need a world-dominating Navy to secure your interests/territory.

Again, true but nobody except the Navy seems to understand this including the decision makers in the other arms of the military.

Capital budget allocated is 52,804.75cr (FY24) compared to 19,348.16cr in FY18.
From 22.37% of the three services to 35.87%.

It's representative of the shift.
I agree that a lot of work still needs to be done, but ignoring the steps taken in the past few yrs won't give you a clear picture of the future ahead.

"Indian navy asked for something" is not a good argument. IN have always been forward thinking, atleast compared to the Army and AF. They even included their potential of naval diplomacy in their doctrine a long time ago but nobody took them seriously until very recently and even now it's not that strong.

In the video, guy drawsparallel with France. French had a superior Army but the British had a superior Navy. Primary reason was that the British didn't have big power rivals knocking on its borders.

Our case is unique and can't be compared to either France or UK. (Current or past)
Our economy won't be stagnating in the foreseeable future like France or UK.
Marine Nationale is currently better off compared to the Royal Navy.

 

[Blademaster]

Adm Kenobi,

I would rate IN higher than VMF. Its performance during the Ukraine war leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Angel of War]

Adm Kenobi,

I would rate IN higher than VMF. Its performance during the Ukraine war leaves a lot to be desired.

Do we have a better surface fleet? I say yes. But the strength of VMF lies in detterence. They've got a massive fleet of SSNs, SSBNs and SSGNs to ensure deterrence against larger powers like the USN. VMF is a sub surface naval power.