BEL to supply of Integrated Anti-Submarine Warfare systems
Defence PSU Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) signed a contract with the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, worth around Rs. 250 crores
forceindia.net
forceindia.net
Size of VL-SRSAM modules (cell count unknown) in comparison to 1 UKSK module (8 cells) and 4 Barak-1 modules (8 cells each). Pic from March 2022, Vizag.
It is H U G E.
I would have preferred somewhat near to the Barak 1 dimensions. But let's see.
Laying the keel of India’s third nuclear-powered aircraft carrier
While the Sea Trials of IAC were successfully completed, the debate for the third aircraft carrier began to rise. Debate centers around the fact that India must develop its requisite maritime power due to its defining feature and strategic lines around the Indian Ocean Region. An era of maritime makes a compelling case for laying the keel of the third IAC for creating technology, skills and industry for economic activities. So, that is where the India’s maritime strategy calls for maritime infrastructure and capacity for a maritime security framework across the vast expanse of oceans to deter, project or combat transnational and other security challenges. It is beyond the realm of security. Now, it is no longer a question of why but when can we get three more carriers built. What does it take then to lay the keel of India’s 3rd aircraft carrier?
The fourth phase of Sea Trials for IAC has been successfully completed on 10 Jul 22, during which integrated trials of majority of equipment and systems onboard including some of the Aviation Facilities Complex equipment were undertaken. The ship’s delivery is being targeted in end Jul 22, followed by commissioning of the ship in Aug 22. While the Maiden Sea Trials of IAC were successfully completed in Aug 21, the debate for the 3rd aircraft carrier began to rise. Debate centres around the fact that India must develop its requisite maritime power due its defining feature and strategic lines around the Indian Ocean Region.
Now, it is no longer a question of why but when can we get three more carriers built. What does it take then to lay the keel of India’s 3rd aircraft carrier?
Currently, India has operationalised only one conventional aircraft carrier, INS Vikramaditya, a modified Kiev-class carrier, on its western seaboard. INS Vikrant, India’s second aircraft carrier is undergoing sea trials since August 2021 and is set to be commissioned this year. This is to be deployed on India’s eastern seaboard after one year of infrastructural completion alongside INS Vikramaditya on the western coast.
While INS Vikramaditya was purchased from Russia for a price of US$ 2.35 billion in 2004, INS Vikrant is indigenously developed (IAC-1), the cost of the project has been estimated to be US$ 3.1-3.5 Billion. But in total, INS Vikramaditya cost India US$ 10-11 Billion. The quest for the 3rd aircraft carrier is based on nuclear powered propulsion system; A nuclear-powered carrier that can meet the space and size demands of IAC-2.
The Indigenous design and construction of Aircraft Carrier by Indian Navy and Cochin Shipyard Ltd is a shining example in the Nation’s quest for building warships of such size and scale with more than 76% indigenous content. This has led to growth in indigenous design and construction capabilities, besides development of large number of ancillary industries, with employment opportunities for over 2000 CSL personnel and about 12000 employees in ancillary industries.
The Specification of 3rd Aircraft Carrier
But if one looks at the industry requirements laid out by the Indian Navy in the letter of request it sent out to global shipbuilders in 2015, the displacement for IAC-2 was suggested as 300 metres (38 metres longer than IAC-1’s 262-metre displacement), its weight was suggested to be 65,000 tonnes (as opposed to IAC-1’s 45,000-tonne weight), and its intended speed was more than 30 knots or 56 km/h (against IAC-1’s 28 knot or 52 km/h top speed). In this context, the technological sophistication and investment required in the development of IAC-2 will naturally have to be multiple steps ahead of the current level of indigenous capabilities.
While INS Vikrant is 260 meters long and 60 meters wide vessel displacing 37,500 tonnes. The maximum speed of the ship is announced at 28 knots, with a range of 7,500 nautical miles at a speed of 18 knots. INS Vikrant is set to receive a large crew complement composed of 160 officers and 1,400 sailors. The STOBAR aircraft carrier will be able to accommodate up to 30 fighters and helicopters, including Mig-29K fighters’ jets and Ka-31 helicopters.
Why India needed a third Next-Generation Aircraft Carrier
In the words of the former Indian Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Karambir Singh, for India, “Air power at sea is required here and now”. The Indian Maritime Doctrine and Ensuring Secure Seas: Indian Maritime Security Strategy are two key official documents that deal with the subject of maritime security in India. While it is evolving the idea of strategic outreach is firmly entrenched.
A third aircraft carrier is if you want one aircraft carrier to be ready all time then there must be three aircraft carriers. In the chain, one strike group remains for the maintenance, refit or major overhaul.
The common debate on the carrier is like this: Modern warfare does not require such gigantic warships which is equally about the massive cost in tune of USD 4-5 billion. Instead, IN can build many destroyers and frigates– can strengthen the number of warships.
It is of utmost importance that debate on such critical issue of national consequence is laid out with clarity, assessing the broad argument. Where is the argument leading when it comes to the massive size of the warship in the era of unconventional warfare?
Admiral Arun Prakash served as Naval Chief and Chairman Chiefs of Staff. An aviator by specialisation, during his 40-year career, he commanded a carrier-borne fighter-squadron, a naval air station and four warships; including the aircraft-carrier INS Viraat. Speaking with the author, Admiral Arun refers to the foundational shift in the projection and the way we have laid out our conduct on national security and sovereignty. He says: “Diplomats will testify that it is not the Indian army’s 4000 tanks or IAF’s 29 squadrons of combat aircraft that make India an attractive partner for the USA or the Quad nations. It is the Indian Navy’s ability to project influence and power in distant reaches of the Indo-Pacific – largely via maritime air power.”
So, it is the era of maritime and India’s geography itself makes a compelling case for the maritime expansion and ties. The shift that we are talking about in the present context is too apparent that maritime leads the discourse in the geopolitics. The entire construct of foreign policies is now based on the strength of economic power.
Admiral Arun Prakash finds much credence in this context as he refers to the global maritime powers, says: “The US Navy slogan, advertising its carriers as, “4.5 acres of sovereign territory,” is an indicator of the value that a carrier brings to situations that require, ‘presence,’ ‘show of force,’ or humanitarian assistance and disaster relief,’ (HADR).”
Closer home where it matters, he observes: “Countries, like China, that have elected to pursue ambitious aircraft-carrier building programmes have, obviously, taken account of their economic cost and weighed their wartime risks against peacetime benefits, and concluded that the benefits far outweigh the risks or penalties.”
In this context, there is no denying that regardless of the cost differential, no combination of destroyers, frigates or attack-submarines can quite substitute the combat power and maritime influence represented by an aircraft-carrier.
The case of maritime industry 4.0
India’s maritime has 7,517 km- long coast line with nine major costal states that handle more than 2000 million tonnes of cargo every year. The realization that maritime is such an opportunity for the nations’ economic growth has taken the center stage. India’s maritime outlook is all about the discourse centered around trade, commerce, infrastructure, ecology and security. It is of course given greater attention in the context of Indo-Pacific strategy and India’s core maritime initiatives called—SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in The Region). Maritime is equally about creating technology, skills, industry which make the compelling case for economic activities.
So that is where the India’s maritime strategy calls for maritime infrastructure and capacity for a maritime security framework across the vast expanse of oceans to deter, project or combat transnational and other security challenges. How do we look at such an argument beyond the realm of security?
Former Navy Chief looks at the need for the aircraft carrier from the scale of industrial activities in addition to the often-quoted debate based on the security perspective.
“India’s warship and submarine building industries, have already made a vital contribution to its lagging industialization. Undertaking the serial construction of complex ships like aircraft-carriers has the potential to provide a huge impetus to our heavy & medium industries, and will spawn a complex of ancillaries in the MSME sector,” Admiral Arun explains.
In fact, he commanded the aircraft-carrier INS Viraat, a flagship of the Indian Navy before INS Vikramaditya was commissioned in 2013. The Royal Navy’s HMS Hermes in her new avatar—INS Viraat was sold to India in 1987 which served for almost 30 years. He talks about the such maritime industrial opportunities for the projected 3rd aircraft carrier.
“It will also go a long way in skilling our youth and creating job-opportunities by the thousands. Concurrently, it would, also, strengthen the supporting industrial base for the Indian Navy,” he says.
Take the case of IAC-1 when we analyse the sheer scale of industrial production and ancillary activities in the process. According to the Officials from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), over 76 per cent of the material and equipment on board IAC-1 is indigenous, including “21,500 tonnes of special grade steel developed indigenously and used in Indian Naval Ships for the first time”.
According to report which actually talks about the scale of economic gains in taking such exercise for emerging maritime power like India, Indian Navy has elaborated that over 50 Indian manufacturers were directly involved in the project, which is a result of the labours of more than 40,000 people who were employed directly or indirectly in its construction.
“More than three-fourths of the total project cost about INR 23,000 crore (85 percent of the carrier’s project cost) has been reinjected into the Indian economy,” reports add. The carrier also directly employs on average 2,000 people every day.
Besides, it is about the technology and skills which only five or six countries have the capability of designing and executing the construction of an aircraft carrier. The 3rd aircraft carrier will put India firmly as the blue water marine power with inherent advanced capability in the area of shipbuilding.
N- Powered Indian Aircraft Carrier
Why do we not look at nuclear-powered aircraft carrier as a third option? What is the best fit if we look at the future of warfare especially in IOR and beyond?
Aircraft carriers powered by nuclear energy and assisted by logistical escort vessels to sustain the needs of crew on deck, can truly transform the narrative of establishing a blue water navy by functionalising a renewable, long-lasting, and self-sustainable source of energy to keep the carrier moving for over 10-20 years, with a 50-year lifespan in total.
A nuclear-powered (N-powered) aircraft carrier may still appear on shore only to restock its fridges, but not to undergo the lengthy Refuelling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) processes that aviation-fuel powered aircraft carriers would require. N-powered carriers need RCOH only once in their mid-life stage (at up to 25 years after being commissioned).
Admiral Prakash makes a compelling case for it. He says: “A nuclear-powered aircraft carrier would be an ideal solution for the navy’s sea control and power projection tasks in the Indo-Pacific.
Indeed, it is about building the advanced capabilities, leveraging on the existing know-how that we have gained over the years. For example, the critical propulsion system which we learnt by working on the submarines must be put to test in building next generation system for aircraft carrier. The quest for developing indigenous capabilities in advanced areas is actually about realizing such constant endeavours. Else, our technological strength would be limited to the tested areas especially in defence. In fact, many of the existing technologies will be utterly useless in the new dimensions of the modern warfare. The 3rd aircraft will provide a great opportunity to develop next generation propulsion machinery, electrical & electronic suites, deck machinery, lifesaving appliances, ship’s Navigation and Communication systems among other critical system and sub-systems.
As Admiral Prakash put it rightly: “While our scientist has constructed (with Soviet/Russian help) nuclear propulsion plants for submarines, one is not sure whether the in-house capability exists for design & construction of nuclear reactor(s) that could propel a carrier of 70,000-80,000 tons displacement. The best way to find out would be to design and build a smaller nuclear-powered vessel – a tanker or auxiliary vessel – before taking on a nuclear-powered carrier.”
China as a factor
Should we take China as a factor in our assessment for the 3rd IAC? Whilst we are aware of the economic disparity with China? India’s $ 3.1 trillion is pitted against China’s $17.7 trillion but it does warrant a objective assessment.
China puts its Indigenously produced aircraft carriers as important component of military modernization drive. More so, it puts aircraft top of its national security and military strategies. China has already embarked on a strong naval presence—established naval ports in the Indian Ocean as an integral component of its maritime strategy.
China has already launched its third aircraft carrier, named Fujian (18) this year. And this is the right approach for the capability build-up on the existing technologies. The 80,000-ton carrier improves upon as China builds its first flat deck carrier and uses Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS)-powered catapults to launch its aircraft, in contrast to the ski jump of its other two carriers. The EMALS system can launch heavier aircraft and in much shorter timeframe.
Commodore Sujeet Samaddar, Founder SAMDeS and former adviser to Niti Aayog put it straight: “By 2030 the PLAN can deploy two 80000 DWT carriers with 100 fighters, 40 multi role helicopters, dozens of UCAVs, supported by 60-70 Frigates, Destroyers and assault ships 6 nuclear submarines and 30 conventional submarines for sea control in the IOR after having reserved twice this number for sea denial of their own sea areas. This is enough to completely disrupt the SLOCs and the national economy competing for ever scarce resources and commodities.
As per the capability roadmap, Indian Navy planned a fleet of 200 ships by 2027, which would include three aircraft carriers. Its current strength is 137 vessels, with only one aircraft carrier in service. China has already built up a 355-vessel fleet and its is already larger than the US navy.
Admiral Prakash gives the realistic overview says, we do not have the economic or technological capability to engage in a naval/armament race with China. And yet, our force-planning must take into account; (a) our vital national interests and (b) the threats that we face. In this calculus, China will certainly count as a factor.
“Can we accept a situation where China positions a carrier task-force in the Indian Ocean?” – former naval chief raises pertinent question. “With two carriers, the navy will only have one available at any given time. A third carrier is certainly required if we wish to deter the PLA Navy in the IOR,” he retorts.
As Samaddar sums up: “The Indian Navy may only be able to field 1 aircraft carrier, few Destroyers and Frigates and maybe 4-5 submarines. It’s no longer a question of why but when can we get 3 more carriers built.
S. Samaddar says– “the solution is to simply order 3 more Vikrant class on CSL with workshare to private shipyards to ensure all are delivered by 2030 in mission mode at a budgeted cost of 150,000 crores. Simultaneously the air element must be aggregated to create the scale to support atma nirbhar raksha utpadan of fighter UAVs and MRH.”
Aptly, when is often quoted toady – “whosever rules the waves, rules the world.” India’s maritime policy must act upon.
CSL doesn't even have the capacity to build 2 IAC-1 class carriers in next 8 years, leave 3.
And building 3 IAC-1 class carriers by 2030 (which is not possible) will not reap much benefit given we won't even have 3 air wing by 2030.
5 carriers by 2030 (which isn't going to happen) and just 2 air wing of foreign made jets, how different is it from 3 carriers and 2 air wing? Building another IAC-1 class will not give any qualitative advantage and will only give a 3 carriers force, after which it will be very hard for navy to push for a 4 carrier fleet with which they get a large flattop.
Navy is right to push for a larger ~300m long carrier entering service in mid 30s, a well designed 300m long carrier can provide you the capability of nearly two IAC-1, be it sortie rate, size of air wing, ammunition etcetera. Nuclear propulsion for IAC-2 is debatable.
Get basic holes filled first. If any excess funds are there, buy some torpedos for the Submarines, buy some submarines for the Navy, release the funds for SSN project, start the Minesweeper construction, order the P8Is.
Get the basic holes filled before dreaming anything big.
Building Another AC will be good for CSL to flow with work.. If not maybe some other ship.
Longer we take for AC, closer Tedbf will be to field..
There are only unused funds, not "excess" funds, the funds provided to IN will be spent to complete the MCPP/LTIPP, IAC-2 is necessary and included in the plan, funds for IAC-2 aren't some kind of "excess funds", and it is around 40-50k cr for the carrier (air wing will be separate)
Budget isn't the main issue in buying more torpedoes (I believe you are particularly referring to HWT for P-75 here) or submarines (P-75I/Indigenous subs). The main issue is procurement method and what navy had planned in the 15 yr procurement plan, P-75I was a part of it and will be procured, Indigenous SSKs aren't part of the current 15 yr plan so expect no order for such before 2027 unless something goes down. Sidelining IAC-2 won't magically give you more SSKs.
Are all the subsystems related to SSN ready? No? Well then get them ready first.
*Sidelining IAC-2 won't magically give you funds for SSNs, they are two separate platforms meant to do separate things*
Is it too hard to acknowledge that IN won't be building a dedicated manned minesweeper anymore? Minesweeping can be better done by helis, USVs and non frontline warships such as ASW SWCs.
Sidelining IAC-2 won't convince govt to clear the deal for more P-8I.
They can be done simultaneously, it's much more riskier for us to sideline any platform & focus on only 1.
CSG with a large deck carrier & integrated air wing at centre provides an unmatched capability to any navy, can't be sidelined.
STOBAR is not an optimum solution. An aircraft which can fly with 7-8 tons of external stores is limited to just 1.5-2 tons. No AWACS as well.
We should remember that we are neither US nor China. Expansion should be planned. Having an extra carrier like Vikrant is not advisable.
Indian Navy Expanding to Meet China Threat, Better Team With Allies
The INS Nilgiri, the first of Indian Navys seven new stealth frigates, in Mumbai on September 28, 2019. Indian Navy Photo
For most of its existence, the Indian Navy has been in a state of perpetual modernization. Due to its major shipbuilding programs’ long schedules and the continual need to replace older platforms with new ones – especially submarines – Delhi has been unable to meet its shipbuilding goals.
Since 1948 the Indians have wanted a two-carrier navy with a fleet of 142 ships. While the IN remains far off from achieving that goal, it is growing and adding capability to the fleet.
The bet from the Indian Navy is if it can speed up its submarine programs, improve mine-counter measures capability and shape up its carrier force and air wing – the service can stay competitive with China and operate better with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, Republic of Korea Navy and the Royal Australian Navy.
India sustains a mix of state-owned and private shipbuilders. Despite problems in keeping to schedule and budget, it’s a mark of India’s status as a major power that most of its ships and submarines – 37 out of 39 – are built in-country instead of procured from overseas. Some of its ships are built with considerable overseas technical assistance and content.
Capt. Sarabjeet Singh Parmar, until recently the executive director of India’s National Maritime Foundation (NMF), told USNI News construction capability is “the most important point to be recognized.” By supplying its navy with ships India can expand at will and with a larger force the IN can enable a “longer presence” in areas of interest and enhance the stature of India as a preferred security partner and first responder in the maritime domain, Parmar said.
Meanwhile, retired Commodore Sujeet Samaddar, the Founder and Secretary of the Society for Aerospace Maritime and Defence Studies (SAMDeS), told USNI News that the “biggest transition” for the Indian Navy took place around the 2004 to 2005 timeframe, when there was a shift in force level requirements planning from a threat-based evaluation to a capability-based perspective. This means that instead of looking at potential rivals and trying to outbuild them or replicate their numbers of platforms, the Indian Navy focused on providing specific capability improvements.
“For example, the force structure is designed to provide security from the shore out to a number of nautical miles by adding more capable ships and aircraft to the inventory with longer ranges and more sensors,” Samaddar said.
This is on display with India’s development of its surface warship fleet, which has improved with the introduction of successive classes of destroyers, frigates and corvettes. It’s also the domain in which Indian shipyards are most proficient, as they are able to build and launch multiple vessels simultaneously and at regular intervals.
INS Kalvari is the first of six Project 75 SSKs for the Indian Navy that was finally commissioned in 2017. Issues with torpedo contracts mean that the boats will use the ageing SUT before an alternative is found. The Kalvari-class are also capable of firing the Exocet anti-ship missile. Indian Navy Photo
For example, the keel was laid for the IN’s seventh Project 17A Nilgiri-class frigates on June 28 at Mazagon Docks Limited (MDL). Meanwhile, the third P-17A frigate, Udaygiri, was launched alongside the fourth Project 15B Visakhapatnam-class destroyer, Surat, on May 17.
In November, MDL delivered the first of four new Project 15B Visakhapatnam-class destroyers with the next three due to follow through 2025. At 7,400 tons and 163 meters long, the Visakhapatanam-class are based on the three Project 15A Kolktata-class destroyers that were built and delivered from 2003 to 2016. The Kolkatas themselves followed the Project 15 Delhi-class destroyers and indicates the gradual development of destroyer design and capabilities, with additional stealth, helicopter capability, and modern propulsion, sensors and armaments through the successive classes.
The improvements in capability can be seen from outfitting the Delhi-class destroyers with 16 Kh-35 surface-to-surface missiles and 48 Shtil surface-to-air missiles, whereas the Kolkata-class have long-range 16 Brahmos supersonic cruise missiles and 32 Barak-8 SAM missiles. Meanwhile, the Visakhapatnam-class ships have the same armament as the Kolkatas but have additional stealth features and networking capabilities.
“The improvements now are more in electronics,” Samaddar said.
“The packages include power management systems, integrated hull management systems, bridge management systems, fire control and combat management system,” he said, adding that there have been corresponding improvements in electronic warfare capabilities and sonar systems.
A new next-generation destroyer, sometimes dubbed Project 18, is expected to be much larger and provide a further jump in technology by employing directed energy weapons, high-power sensors, longer-range cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles. Conceptual studies are still underway, but there will be more Indian-built content in the newer classes than in prior ones.
“The Indian content has increased with each iteration as foreign systems are substituted with Indian ones,” Samaddar said. “In the Delhis it was 30 percent then Kolkatas 60 percent, the 15B is 90 percent Indian stuff and by P18 it will be 100 percent Indian.”
INS Visakhaptnam on sea trials. Since its delivery the ship last year the destroyer has been test-firing an upgraded variant of the Brahmos supersonic anti-ship missile. The class offers some significant advances in capability compared to the earlier Kolkata-class. Indian Navy Photo
For frigates, both GRSE and MDL are sharing the construction of the new Nilgiri class. GRSE is building three ships and MDL four. Production started on the 6,670-ton 149-meter-long ships in December 2017 and MDL is due to deliver the first frigate later this year. All the other ships are in different stages of construction and will be delivered by 2025. These seven frigates follow the earlier three Shivalik-class (Project 17) frigates that were built to a domestic design.
“The 17As are a follow-on of the 17s. The 17A’s are equipped with better technology and the nomenclature of 17 or 17A or for that matter any number is just to ease identification and relate to the sensors and weapon and other equipment fit onboard,” Parmar said.
Meanwhile, in December 2021 Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineering (GRSE) in Kolkata laid the keel for the fifth of eight new coastal Anti-Submarine Warfare Shallow Water Craft (ASWSC) for the service. The ASWSC are corvettes and they represent the first of the ships built at GRSE. The first four were built at privately-owned Larsen & Toubro Shipbuilding (L&T) under a subcontract with GRSE, which will build another three ships.
Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL) is building another eight ASWSC corvettes under a similar IN contract awarded to GRSE. It started production in 2020 and in December 2021 cut steel for the fourth and fifth ships. At 77 meters long (GSRE) and 74 meters long (CSL), and displacing just 750 tons, the ASWSC are coastal warships equipped with toward array sonar, hull-mounted sonar, torpedoes, ASW rockets, mine-laying rails and a small main gun primarily designed for ASW, mine warfare and constabulary operations. These ships are slated to replace the 1980s vintage Abhay-class corvettes.
The only major IN warships under construction overseas are a pair of Project 11356M Talwar-class frigates by Russian shipbuilder Yantar Shipyard. Deliveries are expected in 2022 to 2023. The IN already has six Talwar-class frigates in service that were commissioned in the early 2010s and early 2000s. Now Delhi wants to bring production of these ships to India and Goa Shipyard Limited (GSL) was contracted in 2019 to deliver a second pair for the IN, with Russian technical assistance for delivery expected in 2025 to 2026.
However, outside the surface warship domain, India has suffered difficulties in introducing capabilities for submarines, mine countermeasures, aircraft carriers and aviation.
In November the IN saw some long-awaited progress in its P-75 Kalvari-class diesel-electric submarine (SSK) project with the commissioning of INS Vela, the fourth of six boats – based on the Scorpene design from French shipbuilder Naval Group – that were first ordered in 2005 for a combined $3.5 billion. The third, INS Karanj, was commissioned earlier in March 2021. Much of the delay getting the Kalvaris into service has been the effort to update India’s conventional submarine construction expertise, which is centered at MDL. The shipyard had not built an SSK since the Shishumar-class, based on the German Type 209, in the 1980s. MDL will deliver the final pair of SSKs in 2023.
Vikrant seen here on sea trials is still awaiting a decision about its carrier-borne aircraft. Options include the Dassault Rafale-M, Boeing F/A-18E/F, Saab Gripen and Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29K/KUB. Shore-based trials are still ongoing. The IN also needs a new medium-size naval helicopter. Indian Navy Photo
The IN is running a competition for another class of six SSKs under the P-75I project as a follow-on to the Kalvari-class boats. It will seek an international design and shipyard to build the boats in India at MDL and/or L&T. The new SSKs have additional requirements for an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system and to host a vertical launch system to fire the BrahMos supersonic anti-ship cruise missile. These capabilities mean that the P-75I design will have to be larger than the Scorpene used in the Kalvari-class.
But so far two shipyards – France’s Naval Group and Sweden’s Saab – have pulled out of the project, citing difficulties meeting the tender. This leaves German shipyard ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS), which may put up the Type 214 or Type 218; Spanish shipyard Navantia with the S-80A; South Korean shipyard Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) with the KSS-III design; and Russia’s Rubin Design Bureau with the Amur 1650 design. A contract is expected in 2024, with deliveries slated to begin 2030, but it remains to be seen which of these remaining designs can best meet the IN’s requirements and which company can provide the necessary technology transfer to build them and meet the tight schedule.
“Unless we place new orders quickly with shipyards soon, we [will] be in the same situation like the 1980s again and will lose the skills and capabilities of the people that build these ships. I hope the government will continue with more orders to continue this line,” Samaddar said.
Overall, the IN has a requirement for 24 SSKs so it can have more platforms amid an increasing presence of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) fleet and replace the four aging Shishumar boats and the eight remaining Sindhugosh-class – based on the Russian Kilo-class design – SSKs that are becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and keep in service.
In terms of nuclear submarines, Delhi is also expected to confirm a new class of six nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) later this year, but it will be some time before the IN will get this capability in its service.
Meanwhile, the IN has no minesweeping capability following the retirement of the last of its 12 Soviet-era Karwar-class vessels in 2019. A request for information released in August is attempting to plug the gap with the lease or purchase of four mine countermeasures vessels while the IN tries to restart an earlier failed domestic production contract.
There is some progress to the IN’s long-delayed indigenous aircraft carrier program. In January 2022, the IN’s first indigenously built aircraft carrier, Vikrant, completed its third set of sea trials since it was delivered last year by Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL) after a lengthy construction period that started in 2009.
The 37,500-ton carrier will be commissioned in August and there are plans to buy up to 57 aircraft to operate from the ship, which will partner with the 45,000-ton INS Vikramaditya (ex-Admiral Gorshkov), the IN’s Russian-bought aircraft carrier, which operates MiG-29K aircraft. It’s a significant step forwards but it could be decades before the IN gets its third, larger, 65,000-ton carrier named Vishal, which is still in the concept phase. Vishal is likely to replace Vikramaditya.
An Indian navy MIG-29K Fulcrum aircraft flies over the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN-68) in the Bay of Bengal during Exercise Malabar 2017 on July 16. US Navy Photo
In December, GRSE launched the first of four new survey ships. The first vessel, INS Sandhayak, will be delivered later this year. Displacing 3,300 tons and at 110 meter-long, the ships will be outfitted with un-crewed platforms and small boats fitted with sensors for survey work. The company was awarded about $320 million for the quartet in October 2018. The next three will be built at L&T.
The Indian Navy also has plans to expand its amphibious capability with the acquisition of four new Landing Platform Dock (LPD) or Land Helicopter Dock (LHD)-type vessels. These will more than quadruple the existing capacity that is provided by INS Jalashwa, the former USS Trenton (LPD-14), which was a U.S. Navy Austin-class amphibious transport dock. According to an RFI released in August 2021, the new ships must deliver and sustain a full combined arms task force and be equipped with a heavy array of sensors and armaments for self-defense. Foreign designs are sought for construction in Indian shipyards.
Samaddar explained that the amphibious capability is to protect India’s Andaman and Nicobar Islands which are located far from its shores.
“They are sparsely populated and are not well-defended, making them vulnerable. We need the capability to put across a brigade-level force in the Andamans at short notice to be able to defend it or to recover if we lose it alongside corresponding airborne and [special forces]. These platforms can also do [humanitarian aid and disaster relief] for carrying cargo to distant areas and medical support,” he said.
The bet from the Indian Navy is if it can speed up its submarine programs, improve mine-counter measures capability and shape up its carrier force and air wing – the service can stay competitive with China and operate better with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, Republic of Korea Navy and the Royal Australian Navy.
Indian Navy Expanding to Meet China Threat, Better Team With Allies - USNI News
For most of its existence, the Indian Navy has been in a state of perpetual modernization. Due to its major shipbuilding programs’ long schedules and the continual need to replace older platforms with new ones – especially submarines – Delhi has been unable to meet its shipbuilding goals. Since...
news.usni.org
Funds are a problem. There's a reason why the original requirement for 10 Ka31 AEW was cut down to just 6. There's a reason why requirements of another 12 P8I was cut down to 10, and then to just 6 more.
There's a reason why the requirements of 3 squadrons of fighters were cut down to just 26 airframes.
Funds are a critical issue and having IAC 2 before 2030 is inconsequential seeing that it will actually take 2026-27 to make the IAC 1 fully operational. It as of now lacks even the MFSTAR. All this drama of induction in next month is useless PR.
Heavy Weight Torpedoes were planned in the current plans. And one reason why we are using an obsolete firing solution from new submarines is budget. While a neighbouring Navy of which we make fun of operates the 2nd best operational torpedo system available we are stuck with a generation old system.
As of today a major contention is that PMO should fund the SSN project. Isn't it ? Then surely a budget issue is there and the development of subsystems is being hampered .
Just few months back there was an RFI for leasing 2nd hand Minesweepers.
And if not a manned then whatever the solution might be fit, it needs to start being procured NOW.
Few floating IEDs can actually take out our ports today and we have no means to deal with it. The situation is so bad that even the Americans are pointing it out now.
It will considering the original requirement of 12 more were cut down because of funding issues. Nothing more.
We have 2 carriers and 0 operational CBG. Maybe work on getting that number to 1 atleast before asking for another large deck.
What Cmde Samaddar said is really important.
We currently have 45 Mig-29Ks and are planning to buy 57 SHs. That's enough for 3 carriers for now. While 3 more IAC-1s are unrealistic, not due to finances, but due to requirements, building a Vikrant sister ship right now is of utmost importance, which can be delivered before 2030. As per CSL, Vikrant's sister ship can be delivered within 5 years.
India's first indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vikrant to be handed over to Navy in May
KOCHI: The Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL) will hand over India's first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC) which will be named 'INS Vikrant' to the Indian Navy nex
The next 2 carriers can be flattops of the 50-65k category, they don't have to be nukes either. They won't deliver by 2030, but construction of both can begin by 2028 or so in CSL and L&T.
A lot of people are underestimating China way too much. The US is capable of building a supercarrier from 1 shipyard every 5 years, whereas China can do the same in 4. Plus Dalian is also gonna get into the carrier game, which will give them 2 shipyards. They are likely waiting for the mass production version based on the 100k DWT design, the Type 004. Between 2025 and 2027, they could start delivering a supercarrier every 2 years. That's at least 5-7 supercarriers after Fujian by 2035.
Which means, between 2030-35, they can ensure 24/7 carrier presence in the IOR and after 2035 they can bring 3 CBGs to a fight. And we need 2 Vikrant class in each of our own CBGs in order to match the sortie rate of just 1 supercarrier, or 6 active carriers to face off against 3 of their supercarriers. Which is why Com Samaddar recommends building 3 more Vikrants in parallel before 2030. Of course that means we will still need another 3 such carriers by 2035. We obviously need to match their numbers for equal force disposition.
As far as I'm concerned, PLAN will operate 24 supercarriers before 2050, 9 for the Pacific, 9 for the Atlantic and 6 for IOR. This will guarantee them 3-4 carriers each for the Pacific and Atlantic and 2-3 for the IOR, 24/7 presence. This is what they mean by global domination. Western analysts are making a big mistake assuming China is only looking at parity with the USN. So it's not a surprise our good commodore wants at least 5 Vikrant class carriers before 2030.
I agree on STOBAR not being an optimal solution due to lack of proper AEW&C aircraft, but the load issue for fighters can be taken care off by TEDBF (when it comes) which can take off with 23-26T MTOW from short and long take off position respectively.
never said they aren't a problem, just that they aren't the "main" problem when it comes to certain projects.
How many P-8I do we have? Ka-31 is better cancelled, it is below pathetic.
1 of which is better spares availability for MiG-29K
nobody is saying to commission IAC-2 before 2030 (except the commodore and some people who over-exaggerat PRC' capability). It is supposed to join IN in mid 30s as current plans stand, pretty sure we can spend ₹4.5k cr or more on a project per year between ~2025-35
the main issue was blacklisting of the OEM.
No
Was* PMO made it clear that navy would be funding these & sidelining IAC-2 won't help the case.
Unmanned MCM USV are to be banned by Dec 2027, project for an indigenous equivalent is going on. And some parts for helis are to be made under iDEX for mine detection.
We lack MCM vessels, MCM capability isn't non existent for the IN. We operate 8 thales MCM clip on suite.
And?
Nothing to do with DRDO lobbying for indigenous subsystems?
1 and that rarely leaves Karwar.
Even after IAC-1 is operational, we will only be able to deploy at least 1 at a time & that number won't be enough in 2030s. We need to clear IAC-2 now for it to enter service in mid 30s. Only preliminary design studies have been conducted and detailed design requires clearance. It will take at least 2 years for the design and subsystems to be finalised and steel cutting is cleared around 2025. Some 2 years to make super blocks if we plan to follow modular construction, that brings us to around 2027 for keel laying of the super block!! And around 8 years from then to build-launch-fit-sea trials-commissioning-we start training on the carrier. The need of clearing IAC-2 is now, this FY.
Another what?
It's fine. My preference or thought process was that IAC 2 (which should happen as a CATOBAR at minimum and a Nuclear EMALS one ideally) should happen. It's the timeline which I find difficult.
Commissioning of IAC 2 somewhere in the middle of next decade is the way forward in my opinion. And for that we can always look to start working on it by 2025-26. My objection is that as of now/today , IAC 2 shouldn't be a focus.
If you see it that way we are on the same page then.
Agreed, but we need to clear the detailed design and subsystem finalisation this financial year so a detailed design, build strategy and subsystems are finalised by mid 20s. The cost for undertaking such would be around >350cr, which IN is very much capable of paying in 3 years.
The main reason behind the delay or IAC-1 was the design and finalisation of subsystems, which I personally don't want DND/IN/CSL to repeat with IAC-2.
For that the Navy and even the government will need to define what exactly are their expectations. If it's just for our own backyard then we can have facilities in Mauritius/Seychelles and even ships based out from there to ensure the operations, meaning a conventional power will be enough. But if we want to use it in say SCS, we will need it to be more or less nuclear powered.
On the catapults thing, do we want the conventional Steam one or EMALS?
Are we looking to operate E2D from carrier as well or will base Netra MK2 at places/islands to support the operations.
Untill these things are finalized the design cannot move forward.