Developing the assault capabilities of the Indian Navy.

[A.Mookerjee]

If India is to develop the assault capability of her Navy, then great attention has to be paid to the development of Aircraft Carriers and Submarines. The submarine is purely an aggressive vessel, which is used more regularly than not, to sink enemy vessels. The same can also be said for the aircraft carrier. Destroyers can be used for boarding enemy vessels, and in a surface combat role. The ocean is the only medium, where one can attack the enemy, sub surface, and via the air medium. If a joint air, and submarine attack can be launched simultaneously, then the effect on the enemy will be devastating. Hence, I believe, that all navy assault missions should be carried out by the air arm, and the submarine arm of the navy, simultaneously.

 

[StevoJH]

If India is to develop the assault capability of her Navy, then great attention has to be paid to the development of Aircraft Carriers and Submarines. The submarine is purely an aggressive vessel, which is used more regularly than not, to sink enemy vessels. The same can also be said for the aircraft carrier. Destroyers can be used for boarding enemy vessels, and in a surface combat role. The ocean is the only medium, where one can attack the enemy, sub surface, and via the air medium. If a joint air, and submarine attack can be launched simultaneously, then the effect on the enemy will be devastating. Hence, I believe, that all navy assault missions should be carried out by the air arm, and the submarine arm of the navy, simultaneously.

With the current world situation i don't see the point in having a carrier fleet unless you also have a capable fleet of amphibious assault vessels to complement them.

 

[swerve]

Agreed. At present, India has a few LSTs, new ships based on the old British Round Table class (5600 tons), one very old secondhand US LPD (16000 tons), and a few Polnocny-class LSTs (1200 tons) & 500-ton landing craft This is a very limited amphibious fleet. Logistical support for amphibious operations is also limited. I would suggest that a few newer amphibious assault ships (LHDs, or a mixture of LPH/LHD & LPD) would be needed to provide a credible amphibious assault force. The Shardul-class & Magar-class LSTs could then be used for logistical support of amphibious assaults (they'd be quite good for that), supplemented perhaps by a couple of ro-ro sealift ships.

In peacetime, the logistical support vessels would be useful for supporting island garrisons, peacekeeping forces deployed overseas, & for peaceful government work.

 

[funtz]

Agreed. At present, India has a few LSTs, new ships based on the old British Round Table class (5600 tons), one very old secondhand US LPD (16000 tons), and a few Polnocny-class LSTs (1200 tons) & 500-ton landing craft This is a very limited amphibious fleet. Logistical support for amphibious operations is also limited. I would suggest that a few newer amphibious assault ships (LHDs, or a mixture of LPH/LHD & LPD) would be needed to provide a credible amphibious assault force. The Shardul-class & Magar-class LSTs could then be used for logistical support of amphibious assaults (they'd be quite good for that), supplemented perhaps by a couple of ro-ro sealift ships.

In peacetime, the logistical support vessels would be useful for supporting island garrisons, peacekeeping forces deployed overseas, & for peaceful government work.

I think the plan is to get Trenton and Nashville, based on that experience start building a class of 3-4 large amp assault ships. (vision 2022).

 

[swerve]

I wouldn't waste money on Nashville. Trenton should be enough to study & practice with, & train crews. Best to order new ships as soon as possible. The current shipbuilding industry problems give an opportunity to get good deals. There are plenty of perfectly good modern designs around, both LHDs & LPDs. There are at least 5 European & two Korean firms with designs who'd be happy to build - or oversee building in India - or (my preference) build one using some Indians on loan, oversee one built in India, then leave it to India to carry on, with perhaps a consultancy contract . . .

 

[harryriedl]

Agreed. At present, India has a few LSTs, new ships based on the old British Round Table class (5600 tons), one very old secondhand US LPD (16000 tons), and a few Polnocny-class LSTs (1200 tons) & 500-ton landing craft This is a very limited amphibious fleet. Logistical support for amphibious operations is also limited. I would suggest that a few newer amphibious assault ships (LHDs, or a mixture of LPH/LHD & LPD) would be needed to provide a credible amphibious assault force. The Shardul-class & Magar-class LSTs could then be used for logistical support of amphibious assaults (they'd be quite good for that), supplemented perhaps by a couple of ro-ro sealift ships.

In peacetime, the logistical support vessels would be useful for supporting island garrisons, peacekeeping forces deployed overseas, & for peaceful government work.

a bit like how the RN used the round table class outside wartime. The Round Tables were used as RO-RO a few times I think that why one was in Belize at the beginning of Falklands war for that reason.

 

[StevoJH]

a bit like how the RN used the round table class outside wartime. The Round Tables were used as RO-RO a few times I think that why one was in Belize at the beginning of Falklands war for that reason.

Belize only gained its independence from the UK in late 1981, the ship could have been there removing british army equipment or something.

 

[harryriedl]

Belize only gained its independence from the UK in late 1981, the ship could have been there removing british army equipment or something.

I thought it might just have been a resupply operation for the base in Belize (which I still think we have)

 

[A.Mookerjee]

Amphibious Vessels are important, when one is considering invading another seafaring nation, through the sea route. I was merely considering the destruction of the enemy navy, or the destruction of the Naval assets of the enemy navy. For the major naval powers, the conundrum is, that big naval vessels are relatively easy to hunt down and destroy, then they are to build.

 

[A.Mookerjee]

What is the exact role of the U S Marines, and the Royal Marine Force? Do they just secure the beach heads, for the other military forces in an amphibious operation? I was mainly asking about the Royal Marine Force, I know that this is not true of the U S Marines.

 

[funtz]

I wouldn't waste money on Nashville. Trenton should be enough to study & practice with, & train crews.

Best to order new ships as soon as possible. The current shipbuilding industry problems give an opportunity to get good deals.

There are plenty of perfectly good modern designs around, both LHDs & LPDs. There are at least 5 European & two Korean firms with designs who'd be happy to build - or oversee building in India - or (my preference) build one using some Indians on loan, oversee one built in India, then leave it to India to carry on, with perhaps a consultancy contract.

The request for the transfer of the second ship in the media, something should come out soon about it.

Construction in India with consulting from foriegn firms(just like the current IAC project) is the what they are going to do it, i think the process to start that is already underway, it would be clear by the end of this year.

Going what are your thoughts on the amphebious attack capability of the Cavour class?

 

[swerve]

...Going what are your thoughts on the amphebious attack capability of the Cavour class?

She's a carrier with secondary amphibious capability. She can launch heliborne assaults, but not in much force for a ship of her size. Accommodation for 325 marines. That's far, far less than the slightly smaller Juan Carlos 1. Carrying more would mean giving up something else.

It sort of makes sense for Italy, I suppose, but I think India would be better off keeping aircraft carriers & amphibious ships separate.

 

[malayphil]

The Indian navy has INS Brahmaputra,INS Sindhushstra,INS Viraat
that's more than enuf.
The Indian navy needs to concentrate on it's
special forces anti-terrorism units.
Specially after the deadly Mumbai attacks.

 

[dragonfire]

It sort of makes sense for Italy, I suppose, but I think India would be better off keeping aircraft carriers & amphibious ships separate.

I agree with you that an AC has a diff focus than a Amphibious ship, however it is a mouth watering idea for a AC starved nation that to have wider aierial coverage on the seas via VLO fighters like Harriers and maybe F-35s operating (even if temporarily-situation based) from Amphibious vessels like the Trenton. It can act as sort of a force mulitplier

 

[swerve]

The Trenton isn't suitable. No through deck, so VTOL only - which means short-range, lightly-armed patrols, especially in a hot climate. Very little force multiplication, & taking up valuable helicopter space.

If all you want is a VTOL deck park to back up an overcrowded carrier (but India has too few Harriers now to overcrowd a carrier), you might as well improvise one on a secondhand freighter, as the UK did in the Falklands. Cheaper.

For true STOVL capability, you'd need through-deck amphibious ships such as Juan Carlos 1.

 

[Josef]

Shouldn't INDIA decide what to purchase, MALAYPHIL already gave interesting views on the Indian navy purchases.

 

[tphuang]

Shouldn't INDIA decide what to purchase, MALAYPHIL already gave interesting views on the Indian navy purchases.

please stop using bold for the future on the entire post, it should only be used for the one part that you want to truly emphasize.

 

[Scott]

Not trying to be impertinent and most certainly agree that India has a right to determine how to expend its resources. Nonetheless, am curious as to why India might need multiple carrier task forces or an assault capability. Cost of constructing, maintaining, supplying and staffing has to be extremely expensive.

If purpose is to promote regional stability, it appears that most of region can be reached by land based aircraft flying out of India. Also appears biggest threats to India are it's neighbors.

Please enlighten me. Thank you. :unknown

 

[swerve]

Depends on how you define the region. Include Mauritius & the Seychelles? Sea lanes to the Gulf of Aden, or down to South Africa? They can't be covered from Indian bases. Also, India has some islands far enough from the mainland that mainland-based air cover is impractical, thus making them potentially vulnerable to an assault which made the limited local facilities unusable.