Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
India Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: India to have ?3-carrier Navy?
Jawan    11/15/2006 1:21:01 AM
As the construction of the first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC) is on a smooth course, naval engineers have readied plans to construct two additional home-made aircraft carriers to make the Indian navy a ?three-carrier navy?. At the Cochin Shipyard Ltd, heavy machineries are being put in place to undertake the navy?s most ambitious project ? manufacturing the 37,500 tonnes IAC to carry fighter planes and helicopters ? from the scratch in another six years at a cost of Rs 3261crore. The two existing aircraft carriers ? INS Virat and INS Vikrant are from the UK. A third Russian carrier INS Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov) is likely to be commissioned by 2008. While INS Vikrant joined the services in the early 1960s and has been made a museum after more than two decades in service. INS Virat was commissioned in 1987. ?The manufacturing facilities now being put in place would not only be for making only one aircraft carrier. The navy has a long term plan of making two more. INS Virat can serve for another 6 to 7 years during which the final decision on constructing additional carriers can be made,? said a Navy officer. Steel cutting have taken place in the IAC project, formerly known as air defence ship. According to the designs made at the Directorate of Naval Design (DND), the 840 ft ship will have 30 fighter planes and helicopters, out of which 17 can be accommodated in the hanger. For the fighter fleets, the options are MiG-29K, naval version of the light combat aircraft, Sea Harrier, advanced light helicopter and Russian Kamov-31 helicopters. While there will be foreign consultations in a few areas, the naval engineers claimed the design to be completely indigenous. Only three other nations have built such a large carrier in the past. ?Besides the ambitious project, the navy is constructing three new destroyers, each weighing 6640 tonnes at the Mazgaon docks in Mumbai,? said Commodore K N Vaidyanathan, principle director of naval design at the DND. The organisation will complete its 50th anniversary on November 17. The decision to make these three new destroyers has been taken following the success of the three Delhi-class destroyers, which are INS Delhi, INS Mysore and INS Mumbai.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
olive greens       11/15/2006 8:48:16 AM

Three Commands, three Carrier Groups - sufficient, yet not too abrasive.
 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc    But Olive   11/16/2006 2:07:03 PM
15 carrier groups of that size plus transport + sub and airdefence escorts needed. To conquer the world 3 40000 ton carriers are not enuff. We have 11 Nimitz class groups to protect us from Osama. And look where it gets us. Get more carriers.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/18/2006 11:26:36 AM
Does India also have dreams of SSBN's?
 
 
Quote    Reply

Carl D.       11/18/2006 2:56:27 PM

Does India also have dreams of SSBN's?

 

Well it looks like that is a long term goal...
http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/020218.htm

Russia to Lease Two Nuclear Submarines to India

Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov has announced that Russia plans to lease two nuclear submarines to India. The statement was made during his visit to the Amurskiy Shipyard [see map] in the Russian Far East in late January 2002. The shipyard is constructing the first submarine India would lease -- the Nerpa, a Shchuka B-class [NATO name 'Akula II'] nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN). [See Shchuka B-Class SSN Stats.] The second submarine, the Kuguar, is being constructed in the Far North at the Sevmash facility in Severodvinsk. India will provide Russia with financing to complete construction of the two SSNs, while Russia will train four Indian submarine crews and provide India with the submarines for five years, beginning in 2004. The leased submarines are expected to be armed with Club-S missiles [NATO name SS-NX-27 'Alfa'].[1] These missiles can be outfitted with supersonic 3M-54E or subsonic 3M-54EI antiship missiles, 3M-14E land attack cruise missiles or 91RE1 antisubmarine torpedoes. The 3M-54E and 3M-14E missiles can carry a warhead of up to 400 kg and have a range of about 300 km.[2] UPI quotes Russia's Rosoboronexport arms sales agency as saying that construction of the submarines will resume when India makes the first $100 million payment.[3] According to Indian External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh, during the last four years India and Russia have signed military contracts worth $10 billion.[4] The submarine lease may open the door to sales of nuclear submarines and highly enriched uranium fuel for the submarine's reactors. Although no country has ever sold a nuclear submarine, such sales are allowed under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) because the treaty does not restrict naval propulsion reactors.[5]

Sources:
[1] Vladimir Urban, "'Nerpa' vsplyvet po komande khindi," Novyye Izvestiya, 26 January 2002; in Universal Database of Central Russian Newspapers, http://www.eastview.com.
[2] "3M-54 Klub SS-N-27," Federation of American Scientists Web Site, http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/club.htm; "Klub (SS-N-27) ASCM," Bharat Rakshak Web Site, http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Klub.html.
[3] United Press International, http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=28012002-125101-1149r, 28 January 2002.
[4] "Glava MID Indii zayavlyayet o namerenii uglublyat voyenno-tekhnicheskoye sotrudnichestvo s Rossiyey," Agenstvo Voyennykh Novostey, 25 January 2002; in Universal Database of Russian Military and Security Periodicals, http://www.eastview.com.
[5] James Clay Moltz, "Closing the NPT Loophole on Exports of Naval Propulsion Reactors," The Nonproliferation Review, Fall 1998, http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/npr/pdfs/cmoltz61.pdf.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cruise_missile_to_be_tested_next_year/articleshow/416869.cms
Cruise missile to be tested next year
http://images.photogallery.indiatimes.com/images/spacer.gif" height="5" width="3">
[ 12 Nov, 2006 1555hrs ISThttp://images.photogallery.indiatimes.com/images/spacer.gif" border="0" width="3">PTI ]
NEW DELHI: Sagarika, India's first submarine-launched nuclear-capable cruise missile, will be ready for flight trials by early next year, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) sources said.

The turbo-jet powered, vertically launched cruise missile with a range of 700 nautical miles and capable of delivering a 500-kg warhead, is being developed by DRDO with Israeli assistance. India is simultaneously seeking to rope in European missile firms for the project that is being kept under wraps.

The sources said the missile's first prototype, incorporating a solid fuel booster, should be ready for a test flight by early 2008.

At the same
 
Quote    Reply

Carl D.       11/18/2006 2:59:06 PM
There's also this one...

http://www.missilethreat.com/news/200410270729.html

India Tests Underwater-Launched Missile

October 27, 2004 :: News

India today tested a naval variant of a nuclear capable ballistic missile with a range of 300km. The missile tested has been identified by news sources as a “Prithvi III,” and is said to be the longest range Prithvi tested thus far.

        The missile’s characteristics, however, seem to indicate that it is more likely the missile known as the Dhanush, which itself had been derived from the Prithvi II. The missile launched today is said to have previously been launched from a ship, which is also true of the Dhanush.

        The missile is also said to have the capability to be launched from a submarine. Today’s launch reportedly took place from a specially constructed underwater platform and canister, from the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur, in the eastern coast state of Orissa, some 230km from the city of Bhubaneswar. The missile landed in the Bay of Bengal.

        Indian and Western news services variously report that the missile consists of a single stage, and the missile reportedly has a length of 8.5 meters (28 ft) and a diameter of 1 meter. While it is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead?described by some reports as “sub kiloton”?it may also carry incendiary or fragmentary munitions. Each of these dimensions and capabilities roughly correspond to those previously assigned to the Dhanush missile. The dimensions of the missile called the “Prithvi III” are not known. The missile may indeed never have been completed.

        It would appear that India may have applied the signification Prithvi III to the missile previously termed Dhanush, or that the news reports are simply inaccurate.

        That the missile tested is in fact the Dhanush is also suggested by an October 9 report by India’s The Statesman, that such a test was planned.

 
Quote    Reply

Carl D.       11/18/2006 3:08:32 PM
Nice pictoral of the Viraat from ACIG from 2005   http://www.acig.org/exclusives/viraat/viraat_1.htm
 
Quote    Reply

Carl D.       11/18/2006 4:46:03 PM
Here's another good article from RUSI DEFENCE SYSTEMS SUMMER 2006, India's Quest for an Indigenous Aircraft Carrier... http://bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/2000s/Prakash.pdf
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates       11/22/2006 5:56:16 PM
Not that such comments would be heeded but the Indian Navy is setting themselves up for disaster with these carriers.  The Level of ASW technology and training simply isn't enough to protect their aircraft carriers during war time, at least not in blue water warfare.  What will end up happening is either the carriers will be sunk by torpedos and ASCMs OR these ships will be showpieces that will do nothing but cruise to the docks of other countries during peacetime visits and stay in Indian ports during wartime.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    India's air defense ship shows promise   11/22/2006 11:34:44 PM
 
As for how well India's navy will do with technology integration? It takes decades to learn naval aviation, surface warfare, replenishment at sea, submarine operations and show in battle those capabilities and establish a victorious TRADITION. 
 
 
 
Let me summarize the results in case the readers have not the time or the inclination to read the results. The Indian Navy accomplished three things;
 
a. defeated its opposite in their main defended naval base, Karachi by not only destroying major fleet units at anchor, but also wreck the opposing navy's logistics and infrrastructure.
 
b. blockade the enemy oceanic trade and thus conduct a strategic naval trade war forcing the enemy to the peace table through economic pressure.
 
I point out that this is the action history of a successful navy that may lack aegis cruisers and nuclear submarines, but it shows a first rate SUCCESSFUL campaign planning and execution capability as part of an overall national operational campaign plan in a major war.
 
That is something that most navies, the PLAN, for example have never shown.
 
Stealing some islands from the Vietnamese in the South China Sea in an act of piracy doesn't even come close.
 
 
Herald
 
    
 
  
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates    Indian Navy in the 1971 war   11/23/2006 3:37:08 PM
Some clearification needs to be brought up as to the performance of the Indian Navy in the 1971 war. 
 
On the one hand, their surprise attack did show a degree of tactical initiative and flexibility that is uncommon amongst Indian Military operations. 
 
But the fundemental determinant of victory had very little to do with planning or surprise and much to do with luck and equipment used by both sides.  The Indian task force didn't catch the Pakistani Navy in anchor, rather the PN's  major surface combatents were already deployed out of harbor though within the Brown water zone of the coast.  So in no way was the surprise factor the fundemental reason for the success of that operation.  What did cause it's success was 3 factors. 
 
One is the relative lack of maritime Patrol aircrafts on the Pakistani side.  They simply had no technological means of detecting and tracking the Indian naval task force in any window of time that could've allowed for a counterstrike.  Thus the Indian task force faced minimal to no risks of encountering air-strikes. 
 
The second reason is that the Pakistan Navy had no submarines in theater.  Their only long range sub was lost in Bangladesh due to an accident, and their only short range sub the Hangor was deployed in Indian coastal waters.  So the Indian task force faced no threat of submarine interdiction at all.
 
The third and final reason is that the Pakistani Navy's major surface ships (PNS Khyber , PNS Dacca, PNS Muhafiz ) within theater had no ASCMs to speak of while the Indian Task force's Soviet OSA II boats were equipped with Styx missiles. 

 


Thus, this battle is somewhat like pitting a company of riflemen against a band of blind-folded swordsmen with one hand tied behind their backs.  To commend the riflemen for skillful planning and execution with complete disregard to the equipment used by both sides is idiocy at it's finest.  Yet c
ertain Anglophile  posters continue to do just that.  
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics