(Must Watch) Speech by Vice Adm. DM Deshpande about future of Indian Navy

Gessler

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
2,226
Likes
10,536
Country flag
Video from April this year.


Key points in the speech:

  • When platforms like the Delhi-class were being commissioned, things were very different. It took us at least 6-8 hours of advance knowledge in order to effectively move these platforms from place to place. Sensors and systems gave a very limited picture of the battlefield situation. Automated software-based Platform-Management Systems did not exist, it was all manual controls. Effectiveness in using offensive missile systems was at a nascent stage.
  • Compare this to the situation today - the latest commissioned DDG being the INS Chennai (Kolkata-class). There's a world of difference - in all spheres of operational capability where the ship is expected to function. There are state-of-the-art Platform & Bridge-management systems, Damage-Control systems etc. Today the C&C functions in these ships have the capability to offload a payload from other ships in the vicinity, from the C&C center on this ship.
  • The IN has a clear game plan & perspective regarding what we need to do. A Navy is not built in a day, it takes a century - 50 years of which is the actual on-task work and rest is planning.
  • IN has a Maritime Perspective Plan and a Long Term Integrated Perspective Plan (LTIPP; 2012-2027) which overlooks the kind of platforms we need to procure over that period.
  • We're looking at a Navy of 150-180 major ships and up to 400 aircraft. But it's not the numbers that matter - it's the punch that these platforms have in terms of technology and firepower.
  • The use of technology has maximized. When you look at the platform it consists of just about everything - and we are willing to invite new technologies, and going through the processes of learning, before we standardize on that technology for future use.

  • IN's three areas of operation: Surface, Air & Underwater. IN is developing the indigenous ship-development capabilities using three points: Move, Float & Fight.
  • In the Float department, we have made significant progress. Warship-building steels are being produced in-country, the local Shipbuilding agencies are graduating to Modular and Integrated forms of building.
  • In the Move department, we are not where I'd like to be. We are a couple steps short in developing Propulsion solutions in-country. But we have progressed in the dept. of integrating propulsion (engines) with the other ship systems (gearboxes, driveshafts, IPMS etc.)
  • The Fight department is a concern. We've made fair progress with systems like BrahMos and Varunastra. But not much otherwise - this is where IN requires the participation of local industry (state-run and/or private) to take this dept. forward.
Regarding the future acquisitions coming up for the IN, on the Surface dept.:-

  • Next Generation Destroyers (Project-18??)
  • Next Generation Corvettes (NGC)
  • Missile Vessels (NGMV)
  • Fleet Support Ships
  • IAC-2...which would probably be the biggest project of Navy provided we get the clearances
The Air Dept. :-

Does not talk about any specific project but states that significant progress has been made indigenously regarding development of mechanical systems & avionics, including Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ship datalinks.

The Underwater dept.:-

  • We are in the midst of inducting the Scorpene submarines, to be commissioned very shortly.
  • We have programs for building more conventional submarines & a very ambitious plan for our strategic (nuclear) submarines
  • Plans for Special Operating Vessels which should fall into place soon (is he talking about SDVs or something else?)
  • DSRV project should fructify by May 2018
 

indiatester

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
4,876
Likes
15,125
Country flag
Video from April this year.


Key points in the speech:

  • When platforms like the Delhi-class were being commissioned, things were very different. It took us at least 6-8 hours of advance knowledge in order to effectively move these platforms from place to place. Sensors and systems gave a very limited picture of the battlefield situation. Automated software-based Platform-Management Systems did not exist, it was all manual controls. Effectiveness in using offensive missile systems was at a nascent stage.
  • Compare this to the situation today - the latest commissioned DDG being the INS Chennai (Kolkata-class). There's a world of difference - in all spheres of operational capability where the ship is expected to function. There are state-of-the-art Platform & Bridge-management systems, Damage-Control systems etc. Today the C&C functions in these ships have the capability to offload a payload from other ships in the vicinity, from the C&C center on this ship.
  • The IN has a clear game plan & perspective regarding what we need to do. A Navy is not built in a day, it takes a century - 50 years of which is the actual on-task work and rest is planning.
  • IN has a Maritime Perspective Plan and a Long Term Integrated Perspective Plan (LTIPP; 2012-2027) which overlooks the kind of platforms we need to procure over that period.
  • We're looking at a Navy of 150-180 major ships and up to 400 aircraft. But it's not the numbers that matter - it's the punch that these platforms have in terms of technology and firepower.
  • The use of technology has maximized. When you look at the platform it consists of just about everything - and we are willing to invite new technologies, and going through the processes of learning, before we standardize on that technology for future use.

  • IN's three areas of operation: Surface, Air & Underwater. IN is developing the indigenous ship-development capabilities using three points: Move, Float & Fight.
  • In the Float department, we have made significant progress. Warship-building steels are being produced in-country, the local Shipbuilding agencies are graduating to Modular and Integrated forms of building.
  • In the Move department, we are not where I'd like to be. We are a couple steps short in developing Propulsion solutions in-country. But we have progressed in the dept. of integrating propulsion (engines) with the other ship systems (gearboxes, driveshafts, IPMS etc.)
  • The Fight department is a concern. We've made fair progress with systems like BrahMos and Varunastra. But not much otherwise - this is where IN requires the participation of local industry (state-run and/or private) to take this dept. forward.
Regarding the future acquisitions coming up for the IN, on the Surface dept.:-

  • Next Generation Destroyers (Project-18??)
  • Next Generation Corvettes (NGC)
  • Missile Vessels (NGMV)
  • Fleet Support Ships
  • IAC-2...which would probably be the biggest project of Navy provided we get the clearances
The Air Dept. :-

Does not talk about any specific project but states that significant progress has been made indigenously regarding development of mechanical systems & avionics, including Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ship datalinks.

The Underwater dept.:-

  • We are in the midst of inducting the Scorpene submarines, to be commissioned very shortly.
  • We have programs for building more conventional submarines & a very ambitious plan for our strategic (nuclear) submarines
  • Plans for Special Operating Vessels which should fall into place soon (is he talking about SDVs or something else?)
  • DSRV project should fructify by May 2018
Does he also cover the future of combat wrt. autonomous systems that may swarm too?
 

Gessler

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
2,226
Likes
10,536
Country flag
Video of a Q&A Session from that same FICCI Seminar:-


Some stuff related to acquisitions:

Q. What is the progress of programs like IAC-2, LPD, Project-75I?
A. We've been stuck with the LPD program for a good 5-6 years, but progress has been made at the highest level regarding the LPD acquisition. The Ministry and everyone agrees we need these ships. I'm confident that a contract for the LPDs will be signed by the end of this year. Regarding the IAC-2, this is a big ticket item. It will have to come at the expense of things.Right now there are discussions & debates within the IN regarding what type of carrier we want - everything from tonnage, type of propulsion etc. is being debated. Once the IN is absolutely clear about what we want, we will take the matter up to the Ministry.The P75I has been linked to the Strategic Partnership Model (SPM), but some things have changed and we are working on that. IN needs these submarines badly, our force levels are dropping - if the SPM model doesn't fall into place, we'll have to look for alternatives elsewhere.

Q. What about Minesweepers? Also, what are these "alternatives" to P75I if the SP model doesn't materialize?
A. Goa Shipyard has gotten into a deal with a Korean collaborator (Kangnam) for the minesweepers. There have been all kinds of delays & issues regarding the terms of contract but we are past that now. Again I'm confident that by Q4 2017 I should be in a position to sign this deal. Regarding P75I alternatives - we are discussing all kinds of possibilities, whether we'd like a follow-on to the Scorpene order, whether we'd get into a different Govt-to-Govt deal for additional submarines we haven't decided yet. IN will prefer the SPM to work out - if it doesn't, then all these options are on the table. We're keeping our fingers crossed that SPM will work.

Q. If SPM doesn't come through, how big of an issue will it be for the IN? (asked by Ajai Shukla)
A. India is currently looking at SPM for two major deals: Submarines and Aircraft. If SPM doesn't work we'll need a Plan B but the discussions regarding this (other than what he's already answered above) are very internal to the Navy.

Q. Other than conventional submarines, Navy has a sanctioned plan for 6 SSNs. Where are we on that?
A. I won't be able to answer on what's the program for this strategic project, but you're all aware that there is a strategic project on. The entire gamut of nuclear submarines (not just SSBNs) come under the strategic project and is something I wouldn't want to talk about.

Q. Regarding CNS's displeasure about LCA-Navy program and possible alternatives etc.
A. The LCA-Navy program itself has been a success story so far - unfortunately, the plane doesn't suit aircraft carrier operations.Navy has looked at the development of an LCA-2 or "LCA**" which will be more suitable for carrier operations. But till the time LCA Navy doesn't materialize, we'll have to look for alternatives. We're looking at induction of 57 aircraft and we'll have to work through the RFI processes for that, but it's at a very nascent stage at this point.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,249
@Gessler
What about bigger frigates and destroyer like the Royal Navy Type 45 and Type 26 which can provide anti air warfare and anti sub warfare with long endurance and range ?
 

rohit b3

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
652
Likes
969
Country flag
Surprised no one exactly asked the status of the Project 17A Frigates. Contract was signed in 2015 and construction was to start "early 2017". And we are entering into the 4th quarter of 2017 and no recent news.
 

rohit b3

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
652
Likes
969
Country flag
@Gessler
What about bigger frigates and destroyer like the Royal Navy Type 45 and Type 26 which can provide anti air warfare and anti sub warfare with long endurance and range ?
A very poor benchmark of comparison, probably out of the colonial mentality.

Do the Brits ever question "What about bigger frigates and destroyer like the Indian Navy Kolkata/ Vishakapatnam Class and Project 17A which can provide anti air warfare and anti sub warfare with long endurance and range ?":hmm:
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
1,337
Likes
2,623
Hell NO! Anything but a Daring class or the Future Surface Combatant like ship in the IN. the kolkata class is a much more capable ship than the Daring class - the SAMPSON AESA and Aster missiles notwithstanding.
IN is the only service which is at the cutting edge of military technology globally. We are talking of inducting platforms and technologies in numbers that will make most navi
@Gessler
What about bigger frigates and destroyer like the Royal Navy Type 45 and Type 26 which can provide anti air warfare and anti sub warfare with long endurance and range ?
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,249
A very poor benchmark of comparison, probably out of the colonial mentality.

Do the Brits ever question "What about bigger frigates and destroyer like the Indian Navy Kolkata/ Vishakapatnam Class and Project 17A which can provide anti air warfare and anti sub warfare with long endurance and range ?":hmm:
Sir the point is that these both ships has were built for blue water capabilities and force projection, also these ships were built to act in fleet and are specialized in different area of naval warfare.
Hell NO! Anything but a Daring class or the Future Surface Combatant like ship in the IN. the kolkata class is a much more capable ship than the Daring class - the SAMPSON AESA and Aster missiles notwithstanding.
IN is the only service which is at the cutting edge of military technology globally. We are talking of inducting platforms and technologies in numbers that will make most navi
Kolkata class is better in most departments but it outclassed by Type 45 in air warfare, having a 2-4 Kolkata class destroyer with similarly capability in air warfare will significantly increase fleet survival rate against cruises missiles and effect asw operations .
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,806
How many NGD will they plan on having? I would be happy if they plan on making at least four. Although I am disappointed that even with those many NGDs, our surface escort fleet would be lacking in numbers, vis-a-vis China. But we need not engage PLAN in a battle for the Largest Asian Navy title given their substantial resources and greater focus on Navy.

What concerns me the most regarding the NGD (Next Gen Destroyer) is the meager (quantitatively) armament in our existing ships (compare Kongo class of JMSDF with Kolkatta). If we come up with a 13000 ton class of destroyers, we better have a plan to equip them with somewhere in the range of 120 VLS. Another problem that we have is a lack of modularity in our VLS and missile systems, which gives the Americans and others using the Mk 41 VLS a decisive advantage.

On the topic of why our existing ship designs seem to be under-armed, could it because the Navy was waiting for Nirbhay? If so, then its not a cause for concern, however, if we under-arm our ships due to lack of effective space utilization in design phase, then that is worrisome. Although I suspect its due to delay in Nirbhay. Even the British Type 45 has a provision for 12 Mk 41 VLS for Tomahawks but its not installed yet.

The question regarding the NGD should be its armament. It needs to have an Indian long-range SAM (probably based on the AAD) in conjunction with Barak-8ER. Wonder what the offensive missiles of this class would look like. Maybe a mix of Brahmos-II and something else in the long-range segment. Hope it gets an indigenous AESA radar instead of the MF-STAR.
@Gessler
What about bigger frigates and destroyer like the Royal Navy Type 45 and Type 26 which can provide anti air warfare and anti sub warfare with long endurance and range ?
Kolkatta class outstrips Brit Type 45 in range and endurance, in firepower and in ASW capabilities. Type 45 has a greater focus on fleet air defence, whereas Kolkatta class is a more balanced design. Now once NGD (Next Gen Destroyer) comes online, nothing in the world will be able to match it, atleast in terms of firepower, other than the PLAN Type 55 and the Zummwalt and Ticonderoga of the USN.
Video from April this year.


Key points in the speech:

  • When platforms like the Delhi-class were being commissioned, things were very different. It took us at least 6-8 hours of advance knowledge in order to effectively move these platforms from place to place. Sensors and systems gave a very limited picture of the battlefield situation. Automated software-based Platform-Management Systems did not exist, it was all manual controls. Effectiveness in using offensive missile systems was at a nascent stage.
  • Compare this to the situation today - the latest commissioned DDG being the INS Chennai (Kolkata-class). There's a world of difference - in all spheres of operational capability where the ship is expected to function. There are state-of-the-art Platform & Bridge-management systems, Damage-Control systems etc. Today the C&C functions in these ships have the capability to offload a payload from other ships in the vicinity, from the C&C center on this ship.
  • The IN has a clear game plan & perspective regarding what we need to do. A Navy is not built in a day, it takes a century - 50 years of which is the actual on-task work and rest is planning.
  • IN has a Maritime Perspective Plan and a Long Term Integrated Perspective Plan (LTIPP; 2012-2027) which overlooks the kind of platforms we need to procure over that period.
  • We're looking at a Navy of 150-180 major ships and up to 400 aircraft. But it's not the numbers that matter - it's the punch that these platforms have in terms of technology and firepower.
  • The use of technology has maximized. When you look at the platform it consists of just about everything - and we are willing to invite new technologies, and going through the processes of learning, before we standardize on that technology for future use.

  • IN's three areas of operation: Surface, Air & Underwater. IN is developing the indigenous ship-development capabilities using three points: Move, Float & Fight.
  • In the Float department, we have made significant progress. Warship-building steels are being produced in-country, the local Shipbuilding agencies are graduating to Modular and Integrated forms of building.
  • In the Move department, we are not where I'd like to be. We are a couple steps short in developing Propulsion solutions in-country. But we have progressed in the dept. of integrating propulsion (engines) with the other ship systems (gearboxes, driveshafts, IPMS etc.)
  • The Fight department is a concern. We've made fair progress with systems like BrahMos and Varunastra. But not much otherwise - this is where IN requires the participation of local industry (state-run and/or private) to take this dept. forward.
Regarding the future acquisitions coming up for the IN, on the Surface dept.:-

  • Next Generation Destroyers (Project-18??)
  • Next Generation Corvettes (NGC)
  • Missile Vessels (NGMV)
  • Fleet Support Ships
  • IAC-2...which would probably be the biggest project of Navy provided we get the clearances
The Air Dept. :-

Does not talk about any specific project but states that significant progress has been made indigenously regarding development of mechanical systems & avionics, including Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ship datalinks.

The Underwater dept.:-

  • We are in the midst of inducting the Scorpene submarines, to be commissioned very shortly.
  • We have programs for building more conventional submarines & a very ambitious plan for our strategic (nuclear) submarines
  • Plans for Special Operating Vessels which should fall into place soon (is he talking about SDVs or something else?)
  • DSRV project should fructify by May 2018
@Gessler the admiral mentions (near the "navy is not built in a day" line) that there was a presentation made in that seminar by a Commodore. Do we have access to a video or some screenshots from that presentation?
Also, if I were there, I would ask why the IN was going for a larger carrier despite budget constraints, instead of making another Vikrant class carrier.
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
1,337
Likes
2,623
Video from April this year.

Today the C&C functions in these ships have the capability to offload a payload from other ships in the vicinity, from the C&C center on this ship.
Very very important line and a revelation. This means that we will soon have integrated CBGs once Vikrant comes online. The entire task force's weapon systems will be controlled by the C&C centre on Vikrant. This capability will greatly increase the TF's surveillance capabilities and ability to respond to a diverse threat matrix. Think of Area Defense and Sea Denial. This will turn any IN task force into a formidable ocean control mechanism.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top