This is a discussion on Indian Navy - 3 Carriers or more within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by dragonfire
.... The Joint Ambhibious doctrine was launched in 2008 - pl refer my previous post for ...
.... 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.
Last edited by swerve; September 7th, 2009 at 10:46 AM.
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.
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
Quote:
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
)
.jpg)
