Indian Navy - 3 Carriers or more

[swerve]

.... The Joint Ambhibious doctrine was launched in 2008 - pl refer my previous post for the official link for the press release from Govt of India. Infact it even says that the Doctrine was a result of studies conducted since 2004 (incidentaly the same year as the tsunami :) )

The INS JalAshwa has a capacity far beyond that of the LST's of the IN, if you were to read the press releases as well as various websites, they all indicate the IN's decision to procure the INS JalAshwa came post the experiences and learnings from the tsunami, India was the first country to send (or was it the first to reach !) massive aid and relief through the IN to the affected populace of Indonesia

Even 2001 is still releatively new for a modern navy to think seriously about Amphibious capabilities
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to argue here. The IN has had amphibious capabilities for all its independent existence. It bought 4 Polnocny class landing ships & some large LCUs in the 1970s, I think in response to an appreciation of the difficulties caused by the INs previously very limited capability.. In the 1980s it bought 4 more Polnocny, plus more LCUs, & INS Magar. I'd call that thinking seriously.

I can't see any sudden switch from nothing to a full-blown amphibious fleet, but a progressive increase in capability. The "amphibious doctrine" is a codification of practice & lessons learned, not something all new. A good idea, but a result, not a beginning, like the post-1971 amphibious expansion. The IN expanded its amphibious fleet steadily & consistently from placing its first Polnocny order in the early 1970s until the 1990s, when there was a hiatus in orders until 2001 when it all started up again. The aberrant period is the ten year gap between the orders for Gharial & Shardul, not the subsequent expansion.

Yes, Jalashwa is far more capable than any of the LSTs, but less capable than the LSTs in combination. And as you say yourself, a result of lessons learned. I would imagine that the two LSTs in service then showed just how valuable they were (thus justifying the decision to build 3 more), & convinced a lot of people that the already-established move to increase amphibious capacity (exemplified by the order for the three Shardul class) should be accelerated.

BTW, Shardul & Kesari are named after retired Polnocny class ships. Magar is named after a WW2 vintage LST transferred from the RN 1949 (ex-HMS Avenger), & used in operations in December 1971. There was an abortive amphibious landing near Cox's Bazaar. I think that the failure of that landing, due to failure to recce the landing site (there were sandbars offshore which prevented the LSTs reaching the beach) may have caused the IN to take amphibious warfare more seriously.

[Salty Dog]

My pleasure

Any ideas on the capacity of the ACV vis a vi the LCMs (no of troops / tanks / APCs etc), speed is a given, besides wont the ACV be prone to disablement against ground based enemy fire which is something to be expected in a war scenario 9unless it being a covert op)

A LCM-8 can hold up to 200 troops. Not sure about an ACV.

An ACV or LCAC are prone to attract enemy fire as with any other target. However, the advantages due to ACV significantly higher speeds are you can keep your amphibious ships further away from the shore threat as well as move troops/equipment with a higher cadence.

Due to their sizes you can fit twice the number of LCM-8s into a well deck compared to an LCAC.

[dragonfire]

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to argue here. The IN has had amphibious capabilities for all its independent existence. It bought 4 Polnocny class landing ships & some large LCUs in the 1970s, I think in response to an appreciation of the difficulties caused by the INs previously very limited capability.. In the 1980s it bought 4 more Polnocny, plus more LCUs, & INS Magar. I'd call that thinking seriously.

I can't see any sudden switch from nothing to a full-blown amphibious fleet, but a progressive increase in capability. The "amphibious doctrine" is a codification of practice & lessons learned, not something all new. A good idea, but a result, not a beginning, like the post-1971 amphibious expansion. The IN expanded its amphibious fleet steadily & consistently from placing its first Polnocny order in the early 1970s until the 1990s, when there was a hiatus in orders until 2001 when it all started up again. The aberrant period is the ten year gap between the orders for Gharial & Shardul, not the subsequent expansion.

BTW, Shardul & Kesari are named after retired Polnocny class ships. Magar is named after a WW2 vintage LST transferred from the RN 1949 (ex-HMS Avenger), & used in operations in December 1971. There was an abortive amphibious landing near Cox's Bazaar. I think that the failure of that landing, due to failure to recce the landing site (there were sandbars offshore which prevented the LSTs reaching the beach) may have caused the IN to take amphibious warfare more seriously.

It's funny that we are at Loggerheads often :)

Not arguin with u

I am aware of the Legacy of IN's Amphibious capabilities, so there is no confusion regarding the capabilitites in transporting troops for amphibious ops, however the Indian Millitary doesnt have a dedicated Amphibious Force (until recently, and apart from the MARCOS spec forces - who arent the amphibious force in a USMC vs USN Seals context), which is different from transporting regular Army troops to required destinations, which is what it was - transporting troops. In the last decade some army units have been dedicated to amphibious ops, the Shardul has been paired with the 5th Armoured regiment. etc

A Modern Amphibious force should be on the lines of the USMC or Royal Marines if not on size then atleast on outlook, and the Military should be developing capabilitites for them.

There is also am sure you will agree that there is a big diff btw an LST and LPD/LPH/LHD, The Indian decision/plan to add more amphibious capacity by ordering 3 new LPH/LHD is the next step.

The way i see the evolution is that the INS JalAshwa is the begining of a new phase in Indian Amphibious capabilitites/ops etc Next Stop the INDIAN MARINES

Kudos on your research though, and pl send me a link on the attempted amphibious op for reading purposes, i have read up on most battles of the 1971 except any amhibious ones - thanks in advance


Yes, Jalashwa is far more capable than any of the LSTs, but less capable than the LSTs in combination. And as you say yourself, a result of lessons learned. I would imagine that the two LSTs in service then showed just how valuable they were (thus justifying the decision to build 3 more), & convinced a lot of people that the already-established move to increase amphibious capacity (exemplified by the order for the three Shardul class) should be accelerated.


But once the new LPH/LHD's come into operations then it would be better than an equal number of LST - ok am arguing nw slightly :)

I am basicaly gung ho about India taking big steps into areas where the capabilitites can be improved

[swerve]

Actually, I think we're pretty much in agreement, but with some difference in emphasis.

One link - http://www.indiannavy.nic.in/t2t2e/Trans2Trimph/chapters/9_naval_ops_enc.htm

Another one - The Liberation Times : Commemorating 30 Years since India's Greatest Victory (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/1971/Dec15/index.html)

And what I think is the best one - the official history, apparently.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/History/1971War/PDF/1971Chapter15.pdf

Index is here - Official 1971 War History (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/History/1971War/PDF/)

These are also quite interesting -
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA246185&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Chapter-22 (http://www.indiannavy.nic.in/t2t2e/Trans2Trimph/chapters/22_navy%27s%20growth%201965-75-1.htm)

[dragonfire]

Actually, I think we're pretty much in agreement, but with some difference in emphasis.

One link - http://www.indiannavy.nic.in/t2t2e/Trans2Trimph/chapters/9_naval_ops_enc.htm

Another one - The Liberation Times : Commemorating 30 Years since India's Greatest Victory (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/1971/Dec15/index.html)

And what I think is the best one - the official history, apparently.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/History/1971War/PDF/1971Chapter15.pdf

Index is here - Official 1971 War History (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/History/1971War/PDF/)

These are also quite interesting -
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA246185&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Chapter-22 (http://www.indiannavy.nic.in/t2t2e/Trans2Trimph/chapters/22_navy%27s%20growth%201965-75-1.htm)

Thanks Swerve those are some extensive reads about the IN and the 1971 war.

[KKR]

US clears Hawkeye E-2D aircraft for India
IANS 14 September 2009, 09:18am IST
NEW DELHI: The US government cleared yet another high technology system for India, the ‘‘futuristic’’ shipboard Hawkeye E-2D aircraft

for Airborne Early Warning (AEW) and battle management.

The clearance has been described by diplomatic sources as a fallout of the ‘‘successful’’ visit of secretary of state Hillary Clinton and the signing of the End User Monitoring Agreement (EUMA) of military equipment being supplied or sold by the US to India. Like the Boeing P 8I Maritime Multi-mission Aircraft (MMA), of which the Indian Navy has already ordered eight aircraft, the Hawkeye E-2D is the very latest and is yet to be delivered to the US Navy.

India is the second country, after the UAE, to be cleared by the US state and defence departments for sale of this sophisticated system. The US navy has sanctioned $432 million for trials of the aircraft, currently underway at the naval air station Patuxent River in Maryland. The naval systems command based there provides engineering and testing support for new naval systems and weapons.

The Hawkeye E-2D has been under the US government’s consideration for India for some time. In fact, in 2007, Pentagon sources in Washington indicated the aircraft was being cleared, but apparently the previous version, Hawkeye E-2C, was eventually offered to which the Indian navy said ‘‘no’’ in informal discussions.

The aircraft is being manufactured by Northrop Grumman, a leading US player in aerospace, warships, missiles, combat radars and electronic warfare systems.

Northrop Grumman’s programme manager for international business development Tom C Trudell told a magazine that the aircraft has ‘‘just been cleared by the US government for India’’ and that a presentation was made to the Indian navy in August in New Delhi.

Indian navy officers had witnessed the capabilities of the Hawkeye E-2C but told the US officials that as the equipment India buys would be used for years, it must be the best and the latest with future capability insertion potential.

Future aircraft carriers of the Indian navy would also have to be equipped with catapult launching systems, for which it is already looking around.

[Salty Dog]

US clears Hawkeye E-2D aircraft for India
IANS 14 September 2009, 09:18am IST
NEW DELHI: The US government cleared yet another high technology system for India, the ‘‘futuristic’’ shipboard Hawkeye E-2D aircraft

for Airborne Early Warning (AEW) and battle management.

The clearance has been described by diplomatic sources as a fallout of the ‘‘successful’’ visit of secretary of state Hillary Clinton and the signing of the End User Monitoring Agreement (EUMA) of military equipment being supplied or sold by the US to India. Like the Boeing P 8I Maritime Multi-mission Aircraft (MMA), of which the Indian Navy has already ordered eight aircraft, the Hawkeye E-2D is the very latest and is yet to be delivered to the US Navy.

India is the second country, after the UAE, to be cleared by the US state and defence departments for sale of this sophisticated system. The US navy has sanctioned $432 million for trials of the aircraft, currently underway at the naval air station Patuxent River in Maryland. The naval systems command based there provides engineering and testing support for new naval systems and weapons.

The Hawkeye E-2D has been under the US government’s consideration for India for some time. In fact, in 2007, Pentagon sources in Washington indicated the aircraft was being cleared, but apparently the previous version, Hawkeye E-2C, was eventually offered to which the Indian navy said ‘‘no’’ in informal discussions.

The aircraft is being manufactured by Northrop Grumman, a leading US player in aerospace, warships, missiles, combat radars and electronic warfare systems.

Northrop Grumman’s programme manager for international business development Tom C Trudell told a magazine that the aircraft has ‘‘just been cleared by the US government for India’’ and that a presentation was made to the Indian navy in August in New Delhi.

Indian navy officers had witnessed the capabilities of the Hawkeye E-2C but told the US officials that as the equipment India buys would be used for years, it must be the best and the latest with future capability insertion potential.

Future aircraft carriers of the Indian navy would also have to be equipped with catapult launching systems, for which it is already looking around.

This "clearance" AFAIK is actually just an "export license" which means a system is US Gov't approved for "marketing" purposes only. While a very good sign for India as systems details may be disclosed, it is still just an initial step in the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) process. India will still need to send a formal request which must be approved by the US Congress should the IN want to acquire the system. A big first step nevertheless.

[dragonfire]

A Modern Amphibious force should be on the lines of the USMC or Royal Marines if not on size then atleast on outlook, and the Military should be developing capabilitites for them.

There is also am sure you will agree that there is a big diff btw an LST and LPD/LPH/LHD, The Indian decision/plan to add more amphibious capacity by ordering 3 new LPH/LHD is the next step.

The way i see the evolution is that the INS JalAshwa is the begining of a new phase in Indian Amphibious capabilitites/ops etc Next Stop the INDIAN MARINES



Indian Army mulls ambitious war plan
TNN 18 September 2009, 04:16am IST

NEW DELHI: With instability in the neighbourhood and terrorists gaining ground in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Indian Army is considering the need to make its infantry capable of being an "expeditionary force" in case of an "out of area contingency".

This bid, in line with the US Marines engaging in battle in war theatres situated in remote locations at short notice, indicates an ambitious intent. This would still need adequate platforms like large transport aircraft and possibly naval support but shows a preparedness to think ahead.

Indian Army mulls ambitious war plan - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Indian-Army-mulls-ambitious-war-plan/articleshow/5023986.cms)

--

Well the article was echoing my sentiments and reflective of the new outlook of the Indian Millitary and the needs of capability of Advanced Amphibious nature

[dragonfire]

News Update

Navy launches stealth destroyer INS Kochi

Mumbai: Indian Navy added more fire power to its arsenal on Friday with the launch of country's second indigenously designed stealth destroyer INS Kochi.

Designed by the Directorate of Naval Design and built at Mazgaon Dock in Mumbai, the 163-meter long and 6,800-ton stealth destroyer was launched by the Navy Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma's wife Madhulika Verma.

Navy launches stealth destroyer INS Kochi (http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indian-navy-launches-stealth-destroyer-ins-kochi/101670-3.html)
-

The second Project 15A warship of the IN has been launched, it will be commisioned by 2011 before which the first in the class the INS Kolkata would have been commisioned by 2010. The third vessel is expected to be launched next year. Four more vessels are expected to be built a slightly advanced version which will be the Project 15B class

[dragonfire]

Another News Update :)

Navy backs Tejas with Rs 900 cr

Business Standard has learnt that the navy has okayed the placement of an order for six Naval LCAs. At an approximate cost of Rs 150 crore per aircraft, that will provide a Rs 900 crore infusion into the Naval LCA programme.

That investment in the Tejas programme is rooted in the navy’s plan to operate both light and medium fighters off its aircraft carriers. The Naval LCA will supplement the heavier Russian MiG-29K, which has already been ordered from Russia. The Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC), being built at Cochin Shipyard, Kochi, has been designed with a separate aircraft lift and maintenance facilities for the LCA, in addition to facilities for the MiG-29K. That has linked the development of the Naval LCA with the construction of the IAC, which is expected to join the fleet by 2014.

Navy backs Tejas with Rs 900 cr (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/navy-backs-tejasrs-900-cr/370736/)

-

The Navy has ordered 6 LCA's at Rs. 150 Cr each (approx 30 mill USD). The Navy is also building a shore based testing facility for simulating carrier deck operations on which the fighters will be certified before being able to be deployed on carriers. Also the engine will be the GE 404 but it will be fitted with a new engine before being deployed on the AC, the new engines can be expected by around 2013-2014

[kay_man]

Another News Update :)

Navy backs Tejas with Rs 900 cr

Business Standard has learnt that the navy has okayed the placement of an order for six Naval LCAs. At an approximate cost of Rs 150 crore per aircraft, that will provide a Rs 900 crore infusion into the Naval LCA programme.

That investment in the Tejas programme is rooted in the navy’s plan to operate both light and medium fighters off its aircraft carriers. The Naval LCA will supplement the heavier Russian MiG-29K, which has already been ordered from Russia. The Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC), being built at Cochin Shipyard, Kochi, has been designed with a separate aircraft lift and maintenance facilities for the LCA, in addition to facilities for the MiG-29K. That has linked the development of the Naval LCA with the construction of the IAC, which is expected to join the fleet by 2014.

Navy backs Tejas with Rs 900 cr (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/navy-backs-tejasrs-900-cr/370736/)

-

The Navy has ordered 6 LCA's at Rs. 150 Cr each (approx 30 mill USD). The Navy is also building a shore based testing facility for simulating carrier deck operations on which the fighters will be certified before being able to be deployed on carriers. Also the engine will be the GE 404 but it will be fitted with a new engine before being deployed on the AC, the new engines can be expected by around 2013-2014

finally a concrete order and commitment.
its a very trusting move by the navy.

[Salty Dog]

finally a concrete order and commitment.
its a very trusting move by the navy.

Or is it from arm twisting from on high?

IMHO I find the IN carrier program very high risk with carriers yet to be delivered, two fixed wing systems (Mig-29K and LCA) still unproven, and no STOBAR experience. Very ambitious indeed.

[dragonfire]

Or is it from arm twisting from on high?

IMHO I find the IN carrier program very high risk with carriers yet to be delivered, two fixed wing systems (Mig-29K and LCA) still unproven, and no STOBAR experience. Very ambitious indeed.

I doubt it - the arm twisting part

The Naval LCA was always designated to be used on the carriers, so it being a prestige project it would be desgnated for use even if it was not previously proven, will it be a succes or not only time will tell. The current order if not made then it would be too late as the develoment of the variant would start only after such an order came through and it would have negatively affected the IN if at the time of launching the carriers would have placed the order only then, as a carrier certified variant would take a long time

[shag]

Or is it from arm twisting from on high?

IMHO I find the IN carrier program very high risk with carriers yet to be delivered, two fixed wing systems (Mig-29K and LCA) still unproven, and no STOBAR experience. Very ambitious indeed.

IN has a long experience of STOBAR operations. both Viraat and Vikrant were STOBARs. You probably mean no CATOBAR experience. but then AFAIK all three new carriers are STOBARs

[Salty Dog]

IN has a long experience of STOBAR operations. both Viraat and Vikrant were STOBARs. You probably mean no CATOBAR experience. but then AFAIK all three new carriers are STOBARs

Thanks for your comments. Viraat is V/STOL and VIkrant was CATOBAR. The latter experience should help, however, it was a long time ago. Arrested landing is far more of a challenge than take off.

[shag]

Thanks for your comments. Viraat is V/STOL and VIkrant was CATOBAR. The latter experience should help, however, it was a long time ago. Arrested landing is far more of a challenge than take off.
My bad about the vikrant config. Her original configuration was CATOBAR but somewhere in the eighties the catapult was removed and the ski jump ws installed.

In any case many of the Indian Navy pilots are currently training with the US navy for carrier operations right now. In fact one of my buddies just got his golden wings after he made landings aboard the Harry S Truman. So I doubt the lack of experience with an Indian arrested recovery system would be much of an issue.

[dragonfire]

My bad about the vikrant config. Her original configuration was CATOBAR but somewhere in the eighties the catapult was removed and the ski jump ws installed.

In any case many of the Indian Navy pilots are currently training with the US navy for carrier operations right now. In fact one of my buddies just got his golden wings after he made landings aboard the Harry S Truman. So I doubt the lack of experience with an Indian arrested recovery system would be much of an issue.

As per recent reports the IN pilots are training on 2 Mig-29Ks and 2 Mig-29KUBs in russia on the AC Admiral Kuznetsov. Interesting that IN Pilots are training on the USN Carriers wonder what fighters they are training on, will training on USN fighters contrast with the requirement of operating on Russian naval fighters. Also does that have any indication towards the MMRCA winner being the Super Hornets :roll2

On a side note There's a report in todays paper that the Mig-29Ks (including the trainer version) could see an additional order of 29 more from the IN

[shag]

As per recent reports the IN pilots are training on 2 Mig-29Ks and 2 Mig-29KUBs in russia on the AC Admiral Kuznetsov. Interesting that IN Pilots are training on the USN Carriers wonder what fighters they are training on, will training on USN fighters contrast with the requirement of operating on Russian naval fighters. Also does that have any indication towards the MMRCA winner being the Super Hornets :roll2

On a side note There's a report in todays paper that the Mig-29Ks (including the trainer version) could see an additional order of 29 more from the IN

Sorry to dissapoint you but that does not mean anything for the MMRCA deal directly. The training is done on T-45 Goshaw which is a trainer aircraft highly similar to and derived from BAE Hawks. Besides the MMRCA is for the Air Force not the navy. So even FA-18 trained navy pilots wont help it in any deals for the air force's MMRCA.

[Salty Dog]

Sorry to dissapoint you but that does not mean anything for the MMRCA deal directly. The training is done on T-45 Goshaw which is a trainer aircraft highly similar to and derived from BAE Hawks. Besides the MMRCA is for the Air Force not the navy. So even FA-18 trained navy pilots wont help it in any deals for the air force's MMRCA.

Absolutely correct. The IN pilots would be completing the advance carrier pilot syllabus with the T-45 which includes final carrier qualification. There is no flying/training on the F/A-18 nor do they receive fighter pilot training. All USN pilots receive the exact same training. Once they earn their wings, they will go off to their squadrons (the RAG in the USN) where they will learn to operate and carrier qualify on their fighters. The latter is what the IN pilots should be doing with the Mig-29K

[dragonfire]

Sorry to dissapoint you but that does not mean anything for the MMRCA deal directly. The training is done on T-45 Goshaw which is a trainer aircraft highly similar to and derived from BAE Hawks. Besides the MMRCA is for the Air Force not the navy. So even FA-18 trained navy pilots wont help it in any deals for the air force's MMRCA.

Absolutely correct. The IN pilots would be completing the advance carrier pilot syllabus with the T-45 which includes final carrier qualification. There is no flying/training on the F/A-18 nor do they receive fighter pilot training. All USN pilots receive the exact same training. Once they earn their wings, they will go off to their squadrons (the RAG in the USN) where they will learn to operate and carrier qualify on their fighters. The latter is what the IN pilots should be doing with the Mig-29K

Thanks for the inputs guys, i knew my comments about the SHornets were a long way off :)

Also SD does that mean that the pilots who are in russia training on the Mig-29Ks have already done some training on the T-45 Goshaw, also wouldnt training on CATOBAR ops affect STOBAR op requirements ?

[Salty Dog]

Thanks for the inputs guys, i knew my comments about the SHornets were a long way off :)

Also SD does that mean that the pilots who are in russia training on the Mig-29Ks have already done some training on the T-45 Goshaw, also wouldnt training on CATOBAR ops affect STOBAR op requirements ?

The IN pilots that completed the intermediate and advanced carrier pilot syllabus with the USN flew the T-45.

As far as transition from CATOBAR to STOBAR, IMHO this should be done with no significant problems, however there are some considerations:
- These are rookie pilots with a low number of traps and launches making transition far more challenging.
- USN pilots have the advantage of the Instrument Carrier Landing System (ICLS) and Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) as well as the traditional Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (FLOS), "meatball". I have no idea what the Russian carriers use.
- The glide slope is probably different on the Russian carriers as well as the OLS. It would be nice for the IN if these are the same for the Kuznetsov and the Vikramaditya.
- Approaches and landings are far more critical than take offs and this will no doubt require numerous practice approaches both at the airfield and the carrier.

[Hindustan]

The IN pilots that completed the intermediate and advanced carrier pilot syllabus with the USN flew the T-45.

As far as transition from CATOBAR to STOBAR, IMHO this should be done with no significant problems, however there are some considerations:
- These are rookie pilots with a low number of traps and launches making transition far more challenging.
- USN pilots have the advantage of the Instrument Carrier Landing System (ICLS) and Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) as well as the traditional Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (FLOS), "meatball". I have no idea what the Russian carriers use.
- The glide slope is probably different on the Russian carriers as well as the OLS. It would be nice for the IN if these are the same for the Kuznetsov and the Vikramaditya.
- Approaches and landings are far more critical than take offs and this will no doubt require numerous practice approaches both at the airfield and the carrier.

well i agree to the point that landings are very crucial as compared to the take offs.
there are many incidences in USN itself that a pilot had a bad landing on the aircraft carrier and even bad crashes are seen whenn pilots can not judge the up and down movement of the carrier due to the waves in the sea and the end up hitting the carrier or missing the cables.
TRUE.

[shag]

Sorry to dissapoint you but that does not mean anything for the MMRCA deal directly. The training is done on T-45 Goshaw which is a trainer aircraft highly similar to and derived from BAE Hawks. Besides the MMRCA is for the Air Force not the navy. So even FA-18 trained navy pilots wont help it in any deals for the air force's MMRCA.

A friend(also an admin at indian-military.org) visited the Base at kingsville and took these pics of the training for Indian Navy Pilots with USN on the T-45 Goshawk.

Indian Military Database - IM.org EXCLUSIVE - Admin's visit to VT-21 "Fighting Redhawks" at US Naval Air Station,Kingsville, TX - Indian Military Blog - Reports (http://www.indian-military.org/home/reports/indian-military-blog/imorg-exclusive-admins-visit-to-vt-21-fighting-redhawks-at-us-naval-air-stationkingsville-tx.html)

Indian Military Database - IM.org EXCLUSIVE - Additional Pictures from US NAS, Kingsville, TX - Navy - Reports (http://www.indian-military.org/home/reports/navy/imorg-exclusive-additional-pictures-from-us-nas-kingsville-tx.html)

enjoy!

[Manminder]

aa its depend on what kind of aircraft carriers are . i think indian navy must have 1 heavy AC ( such as like KITTY Hawk Of USN ) . As far as i know Adm. Gorshkov will have 12~16 Mig 29's.

no i dont think so Indian needs Such a heavy class aircraft carrier, first india should backup its security the only they can go for such big decisions of having Kitty Hawk Class.........................right now steps being taken by Indian Navy is Correct!

[dragonfire]

The Indian Nay is planning to acquire Midget submarines for the MARCOS commandos. It is supposed to be in the 150 tonne class (:confused:) any ideas anyone what are the global choices avaiilable with India. Also the subs are going to be constructed in Indian Shipyards does anyone know if the Naval Design Directorate/bureau is involved in this, if yes to what extent ?. The eventual order could be in 2 digits

[kato]

The Italian "Cosmos" company is about the only one on that market right now. If we don't count North Korea.
Iirc Cosmos had a slightly larger MG110 derived vessel in its portfolio. Offhand their last sale was something like 10-15 years ago.

[Salty Dog]

The Indian Nay is planning to acquire Midget submarines for the MARCOS commandos. It is supposed to be in the 150 tonne class (:confused:) any ideas anyone what are the global choices avaiilable with India. Also the subs are going to be constructed in Indian Shipyards does anyone know if the Naval Design Directorate/bureau is involved in this, if yes to what extent ?. The eventual order could be in 2 digits

Midget submarines for commando use are normally operated from "mother ships". What are the IN plans for mother ships?

[dragonfire]

The Italian "Cosmos" company is about the only one on that market right now. If we don't count North Korea.
Iirc Cosmos had a slightly larger MG110 derived vessel in its portfolio. Offhand their last sale was something like 10-15 years ago.

Indian Navy had acquired eleven Cosmos CE-2F/X100 Midget Submarines in 1990. But this model is not an enclosed one and is a two man sub. In fact pictures of it show a bright green colored one, so i doubt the real time use is nothign more than for training purposes. Do you have any write ups on the MG110.

Midget submarines for commando use are normally operated from "mother ships". What are the IN plans for mother ships?

Am not sure how this is going to work with the IN, I dont think the range of subs India operates currently can accomadate these subs without undergoing significant upgrades. No plans for the same have been announced. Can the Kilo class subs with India able to opeate these, if not some of the under construction destroyers or scorpene subs can be outfitted for the same apart from which maybe the ACs and the INS JalAshwa

[kay_man]

Indian Navy had acquired eleven Cosmos CE-2F/X100 Midget Submarines in 1990. But this model is not an enclosed one and is a two man sub. In fact pictures of it show a bright green colored one, so i doubt the real time use is nothign more than for training purposes. Do you have any write ups on the MG110.



Am not sure how this is going to work with the IN, I dont think the range of subs India operates currently can accomadate these subs without undergoing significant upgrades. No plans for the same have been announced. Can the Kilo class subs with India able to opeate these, if not some of the under construction destroyers or scorpene subs can be outfitted for the same apart from which maybe the ACs and the INS JalAshwa

the jalashwa /trenton is a very old bird........modifying it to handle a mini sub may not be wise.....same story with india's submarine arm (kilos etc.)
maybe the scorpenes can be modified...

the best case would be to use a ballistic missile sub as a mother ship.....eg. INS Arihant

[gf0012-aust]

the best case would be to use a ballistic missile sub as a mother ship.....eg. INS Arihant

you wouldn't normally even attempt to launch a mini from another sub unless it was built for it - or was an ex boomer, there are too many issues with balancing and config etc... a nuke modified to carry a mini will be pretty obvious in its design even if photographed without the package

most small subs are launched by skimmers with well decks if done at sea.

[dragonfire]

you wouldn't normally even attempt to launch a mini from another sub unless it was built for it - or was an ex boomer, there are too many issues with balancing and config etc... a nuke modified to carry a mini will be pretty obvious in its design even if photographed without the package

most small subs are launched by skimmers with well decks if done at sea.

Not many IN assets have the well decks to accomadate a 150 ton sub, i thknk INS JalAshwa could do it without too many modifications, although tht would not be the ideal choice as it is a LPD. The choice would be nuclear submarines. Perhaps the newly under design SSN classes could be designed keeping tht requirement in mind.. Would a SSBN be a better choice than an SSN

[riksavage]

Not many IN assets have the well decks to accomadate a 150 ton sub, i thknk INS JalAshwa could do it without too many modifications, although tht would not be the ideal choice as it is a LPD. The choice would be nuclear submarines. Perhaps the newly under design SSN classes could be designed keeping tht requirement in mind.. Would a SSBN be a better choice than an SSN

More likely the Indian SF will 'walk before they can run' and invest in wet SDV's used by most credible water operators today. These are normally housed on deck behind the sail allowing the combat swimmers easy access from the airlock or are located in a dry hanger (USN coverted SSBN's). These subs are capable of carrying a small team of divers plus kit..

One of the reaons why the new Astute Class has such a large sail and flat deck is I suspect related to such deployments. Previous lessons learnt from T-Class SF deployments would have influenced the design.

The Indians may decide to take a leap of faith and go for one of these:

Sea Dagger Special Operations Submarines - Naval Technology (http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/dagger/)

I seriously doubt they would consider deploying SF from an operational ballistic missile submarine, it would require the vessel to deviate from its pre-designated patrol pattern to deploy water operators in potentially a littoral environment. No one in their right mind would risk their boomers to let-slip a few SF. This sort of activity is definitely confined to SSN's or deactivated SSBN's, which no longer host intercontinental ballistic missiles (replaced by tac-tom silos).

[shag]

you wouldn't normally even attempt to launch a mini from another sub unless it was built for it - or was an ex boomer, there are too many issues with balancing and config etc... a nuke modified to carry a mini will be pretty obvious in its design even if photographed without the package

most small subs are launched by skimmers with well decks if done at sea.

I agree with gf0012-aust on the deployment of midgets. I am not aware of any training going on in midget subs by indian navy for regular units. The midget subs are mostly used by marcos units, their operations are always classified. but historically midget subs were used in one of our operations against LTTE when a marcos unit infiltrated the LTTE port and blew up some of their boats.
Funny story about that operation, they came back again the next day and blew up some more boats. :P.

[Salty Dog]

Indian Navy keen to buy newer generation aircraft (http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20091122/836/tbs-indian-navy-keen-to-buy-newer-genera.html)

The Ministry of Defence and industry sources indicate that the RFI, issued recently, is of a 'generic' nature, looking for newer platforms and airborne technologies and what is on offer from some of the well-known manufacturers. The US Boeing and French Dassault have confirmed receipt of the RFI for their respective F18 Super Hornet and Rafale.

With new generation aircraft carriers, Mig-29K and, N-LCA yet to be inducted, the IN is looking at next generation fighter aircraft for their carrier decks. The Mig-29K is a given, so I just have to wonder if this will be the death axe for N-LCA.

[harryriedl]

Indian Navy keen to buy newer generation aircraft (http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20091122/836/tbs-indian-navy-keen-to-buy-newer-genera.html)



With new generation aircraft carriers, Mig-29K and, N-LCA yet to be inducted, the IN is looking at next generation fighter aircraft for their carrier decks. The Mig-29K is a given, so I just have to wonder if this will be the death axe for N-LCA.
Dose that mean Cats could be ordered as it doesn't seem much point use a Super or Raf with a light AtoA to get them off the deck in STOBAR. When they can carry lots of stuff

[Salty Dog]

Dose that mean Cats could be ordered as it doesn't seem much point use a Super or Raf with a light AtoA to get them off the deck in STOBAR. When they can carry lots of stuff

It would make sense for the IN to have CATOBAR should it be serious about operating the Rhino or Rafale.

[shag]

It would make sense for the IN to have CATOBAR should it be serious about operating the Rhino or Rafale.

Recent new reports suggest IN has expressed interest in one of the brit super carriers under construction. the speculation is pre mature but it may point to something.
Royal Navy aircraft carrier may be sold to India (http://www.indian-military.org/news-archives/40-indian-navy-news/279-royal-navy-aircraft-carrier-may-be-sold-to-india.html)

[shag]

here is another quote on those carriers.

"The carrier will be fitted with a ski-jump ramp, but provision will be made to adapt the the flight deck for fixed wing planes with a catapult launch and arrestor recovery system should the UK choose to operate the conventional F-35C or an Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) similar to the X-47 Pegasus."

[dragonfire]

More likely the Indian SF will 'walk before they can run' and invest in wet SDV's used by most credible water operators today. These are normally housed on deck behind the sail allowing the combat swimmers easy access from the airlock or are located in a dry hanger (USN coverted SSBN's). These subs are capable of carrying a small team of divers plus kit..



Thanks for the inputs riksavage,

The IN already operates a wet submersible - Indian Navy had acquired eleven Cosmos CE-2F/X100 Midget Submarines in 1990. This is used by the IN SF - MARCOS, however this submersible is not on the lines of the SDV in that it can accomadate only two divers, and more imp the IN has announced its plan to acquire midget subs in 150 ton class



One of the reaons why the new Astute Class has such a large sail and flat deck is I suspect related to such deployments. Previous lessons learnt from T-Class SF deployments would have influenced the design.


Does the Royal Navy currently operate any midget submarines. The Virginia class is designed keeping in mind the requirements of deploying Advanced SEAL Delivery System, whereas the LA class had to be modified for deployment. The ASDS is as per wiki about 60 tons, and yet can deliver 16 SEALs and has two crew, wonder what the IN wants, maybe some torpedoe tubes !



The Indians may decide to take a leap of faith and go for one of these:

Sea Dagger Special Operations Submarines - Naval Technology (http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/dagger/)


Again this not in the same tonnage required by the IN, which requires 150 ton subs whereas the Sea Dagger 50 to 72 tons


I seriously doubt they would consider deploying SF from an operational ballistic missile submarine, it would require the vessel to deviate from its pre-designated patrol pattern to deploy water operators in potentially a littoral environment. No one in their right mind would risk their boomers to let-slip a few SF. This sort of activity is definitely confined to SSN's or deactivated SSBN's, which no longer host intercontinental ballistic missiles (replaced by tac-tom silos).

IN is in the process of acquiring a second line of conventional subs, maybe it can be designed/modified to accomadate the midget submarines or else it would be the job of the under-design indigenious SSN class. India doesnt have any operational SSBN, the INS Arihant was just launched, i doubt it should be used for launching the midget submarines (as suggested by you), becasue the SSBNs will be part of the Operational Triad of the Nuclear Deterrence policy of India

[gf0012-aust]

I seriously doubt they would consider deploying SF from an operational ballistic missile submarine, it would require the vessel to deviate from its pre-designated patrol pattern to deploy water operators in potentially a littoral environment. No one in their right mind would risk their boomers to let-slip a few SF. This sort of activity is definitely confined to SSN's or deactivated SSBN's, which no longer host intercontinental ballistic missiles (replaced by tac-tom silos).


It's been done before and its done today. SF are deployed in whatever asset has the utility and availability for the requirement at a given point in time.

The US deployed assets like Parche as a keel scraping level during the cold war. they physically entered soviet harbours and tapped harbour located comms cables. Parche received a number of Presidential citations for this kind of work.

The truck in trade for SF is a sub - any sub. Nukes - esp SSBN's have substantial capacity for extra non standard guests. When they deploy it is the mission set which determines how far they go and what they do, so (eg) SF taxi runs don't need the same food support (which is what clutters up the spaces) (eg) sprint compared to long run to do a specific "job."

The Israelis deploy full teams in small conventionals, so the carriage opportunities (not just bodies) that a nuke brings to the table are significant. - esp boomers if and when the need arises.

[dragonfire]

It's been done before and its done today. SF are deployed in whatever asset has the utility and availability for the requirement at a given point in time.

The US deployed assets like Parche as a keel scraping level during the cold war. they physically entered soviet harbours and tapped harbour located comms cables. Parche received a number of Presidential citations for this kind of work.

The truck in trade for SF is a sub - any sub. Nukes - esp SSBN's have substantial capacity for extra non standard guests. When they deploy it is the mission set which determines how far they go and what they do, so (eg) SF taxi runs don't need the same food support (which is what clutters up the spaces) (eg) sprint compared to long run to do a specific "job."

The Israelis deploy full teams in small conventionals, so the carriage opportunities (not just bodies) that a nuke brings to the table are significant. - esp boomers if and when the need arises.

I doubt if the IN SSBNs which would come under the dual Strategic Forces and Naval command would be utilised for deploying the midget submarines, unless in extra-ordinary circumstances. It would not be its strategic role. The Arihant class is expected to have 3 nos (hulls under construction) and then a larger class of SSBNs is expected along with SSNs.

[gf0012-aust]

I doubt if the IN SSBNs which would come under the dual Strategic Forces and Naval command would be utilised for deploying the midget submarines, unless in extra-ordinary circumstances. It would not be its strategic role. The Arihant class is expected to have 3 nos (hulls under construction) and then a larger class of SSBNs is expected along with SSNs.

there are two separate issues here.

carrying the midgets into deep battle
carrying special forces

they can be mutually exclusive.

btw, the ultimate decider of what the IN will do to execute the military will of the government of the day is actually New Delhi - not the Chief of Navy. They drive the assets as temporary owners on behalf of the actual owners ie the Govt.

[dragonfire]

there are two separate issues here.

carrying the midgets into deep battle
carrying special forces

they can be mutually exclusive.

btw, the ultimate decider of what the IN will do to execute the military will of the government of the day is actually New Delhi - not the Chief of Navy. They drive the assets as temporary owners on behalf of the actual owners ie the Govt.

I was refering to the vessels which could give the piggy-back to the midget subs, SF can be carried on any vessel, Infact a decision was made today / yesterday top deploy INS Savitri - a Patrol Vessel to be deployed in the anti-piracy role near Maruitus and Seychelles. The INS Savitri will be deployed with the IN SF the MARCOS.

DAWN.COM | World | India deploys warship off Seychelles (http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/14-india-deploys-warship-off-seychelles-zj-04)

If you noticed my post i was clearly mentioning the Strategic Forces Command under which the SSBNs would come to be. The Strategic Forces Command is directed by the NCA - National Command Authority - which is a political body headed by the PM. Not only the SSBNs but the entire nuclear triad assets would be part of this command structure

[harryriedl]

Thanks for the inputs riksavage,




Does the Royal Navy currently operate any midget submarines. The Virginia class is designed keeping in mind the requirements of deploying Advanced SEAL Delivery System, whereas the LA class had to be modified for deployment. The ASDS is as per wiki about 60 tons, and yet can deliver 16 SEALs and has two crew, wonder what the IN wants, maybe some torpedoe tubes !









Yep the RN operates minsubs off its subs and is procuring a new model whos name I forgot which supposedly had the interstest of the USA
SEAL Delivery Vehicle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEAL_Delivery_Vehicle)