INDIA’S DRIVE FOR A ‘BLUE WATER’ NAVY : Dr.David Scott - Page 2

mweber24 · 04-17-2008, 18:08 PM

I agree with your analysis, but I still don't see why they need aircraft carriers to accomplish their strategic objectives in the IO. Why not used long range land based air power? Wouldn't this be cheaper? I believe an aircraft carrier is a good sea control ship, but is only really necessary if operating far away from your strategic base (like on the other side of an ocean), and even then ONLY useful if you can defend them, which India cannot (against a diesel submarine). This just seems like a case of national pride to me. Of course, as a SWO I think the US has too many carriers as well..

Cactus · 04-17-2008, 18:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mweber24

If India finds itself with so much accumulated wealth as to replicate what the US and Britain have already established, more power to them, but I would think that dealing with about 750 million impoverished people would be a higher priority to a democratic nation. Trust me, voters seriously question the need for a Navy when they are shown the cost

India faces serious commitments on the landward side to ever attempt to replicating the British or the American effort. It will instead attempt to replicate the fraction of the old Royal Navy's efforts at securing India alone. The Royal Navy did it very creatively, including making itself relevant to the landward defense.

For Indian votes defense spending is not a big issue - as India spends only about 2.3% of its GDP on defense expenditure, but gives pretty good returns on the investment. The military also keeps a very low and professional profile in India, so its the old adage "out of sight, out of mind". The real wastage that is keeping the aid and opportunity from reaching the millions is in civil-government corruption. It is a true, if black joke that if Indian government were to replace its paper applications (submitted to clerks) with computers, the Indian GDP will automatically clock a 50% increase. Everybody knows that there is money, just that some are using it honestly while others are padding their Swiss accounts.

gamercube · 04-17-2008, 18:47 PM

This is quite interesting...and I've never heard the reverse happen (China sending its ships into the Indian ocean):

"One milestone was reached in 2000, when a powerful naval flotilla of five capital ships (INS Delhi, INS Kora, INS Sindhuvir, INS Rajput, and INS Kuthar), one submarine and a tanker (INS Aditya) entered and operated in the South China Sea; with elements of it also making port calls in Singapore, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and Indonesia. Indian naval officers described it as part of a “detailed plan to expand the horizons of our maritime diplomacy.”123 This deployment lasted over one month, and was rightly judged by Mehta to be “a quiet show of strategic reach” by the Indian Navy.124 It was also seen as a “challenge” to China in China’s backyard and in an area claimed by China; with China raising a “diplomatic furore” when the plans were first released, but then allowing a friendly enough port call at Shanghai"

gamercube · 04-17-2008, 19:17 PM

More on the Indian Navy's excursions outside the IOR:

Quote:

"India’s presence in these far eastern waters has been maintained since then. Three separate appearances by Indian units into the South China Sea were seen in 2004. In May INS Rana, INS Khukri, INS Ranvir, INS Kora and INS Udaygiri were deployed for ‘Presence-&-Surveillance Missions’ through the Malacca and Sunda Straits into the South China Sea. Similar ‘Presence-&-Surveillance Operations’ were carried out by INS Savitri in the Malacca Straits and South China Sea during August. Finally, October-November saw another substantial entry of India into the South China Sea, “to further project its blue water capability.”

Again, this was not just one lone vessel. Instead the Indian Navy deployed five of its frontline warships - two Kashin-class destroyers INS Ranjit and INS Ranvijay, the frigate INS Godavari, the missile corvette INS Kirch, and the offshore patrol vessel INS Sukanya, as well as its fleet tanker INS Jyoti. Indian commentators saw this as “in line with the larger objective of carving out a greater role for itself in the strategically important South China Sea…to enhance India’s maritime security requirements…an exercise in power projection.” Donald Berlin reckoned that they were being deployed specifically in order “to familiarize the navy with a potential theater of operations - the South China Sea - that probably would be important in any contingency involving conflict with China;” and that generally “as stated by an Indian Navy spokesperson, the deployment would also demonstrate the navy's ability to operate far from home.” Naval diplomacy was in evidence as bilateral exercises and port calls were carried out with the Philippines, Vietnam and Indonesia, as well as South Korea and Japan.

India’s naval presence in these sensitive waters has been maintained since 2004. February-March 2005 saw more Indian units appearing in the South China Sea, “blue water bound.” Here the Kashin-class destroyers INS Rajput and INS Ranvijay, the frigate INS Gomati, the Indian-built corvettes INS Kora and INS Karmuk and the fleet tanker INS Jyoti made up a strong Indian flotilla operating with Singaporean units in their SIMBEX 2005 exercises. A similar strength flotilla, INS Rana, Rajput, Jyoti, Kirpan and Kulish operated in the South China Sea during June 2006. April 2007 saw India’s five-ship flotilla steaming through the South China Sea on its way to exercises further afield in the Far East.

Vietnam has long been a strategic partner for India. They have common concerns over restraining Chinese expansionism, and both have fought wars with China - India in 1962 and Vietnam in 1979. Defense agreements drawn up in 1994 and 2000 have strengthened their naval links. August 2005 saw India’s dispatch of INS Magar, an amphibious ship, with 900 boxes weighing 150 tons of Petya and missile boat spares for Vietnam’s navy. Such naval deployments and discussions lie behind Karnad’s sense in 2005 of India’s “strategic and theatre level reach and punch…east of Malacca Straits, including Vietnam.” Joint exercises with the Vietnamese navy took place in May 2007.

India’s naval presence has been creeping further and further around the Pacific Asian littoral. Consequently, India’s naval strength and its reach now make it a factor in the current maritime balance of power in the Taiwan Straits. Still further along, bilateral defense links have been established with South Korea and Japan, with bilateral exercises by Indian ships in these distant waters. A four-ship flotilla from the Indian Navy participated in the International Fleet Review in South Korea in October 1998, sent by India “as part of its policy to raise its profile in the Asia Pacific.” Bilateral naval exercises were carried out in 2000, 2004 and 2006.

An even bigger Pacific splash was caused by the four-month dispatch of a powerful Indian flotilla deep into the Asia-Pacific in Spring 2007, made up of the frontline advanced guided missile destroyers INS Mysore, INS Rana and INS Ranjit, as well as the guided-missile corvette INS Kuthar and fleet tanker INS Jyoti. Joint exercises, SIMBEX 2007, were carried out with the Singapore navy, before the Indian flotilla made its way through the South China Sea, to carry out joint war game exercises with American ships off Okinawa for the MALABAR 07-1 exercises in April 2007. Trilateral exercises with American and Japanese units were then carried out by INS Mysore, INS Kuthar and INS Jyoti off Yokosuka; with INS Rana and Ranjit exercising with the Chinese Navy off Qingdao. The whole Indian flotilla subsequently reunited to go northwards for the INDRA 2007 exercises, rendezvousing with elements of the Russian Pacific Fleet off Vladivostok, and near to the oilfields of Sakhalin. On their return from INDRA 2007, further maritime exercises were carried out with Vietnam and the Philippines during May. Altogether, Spring 2007 witnessed a particularly significant ‘blue water’ deployment by the Indian Navy in terms of size, distance and length of time.

The Pacific Basin has been increasingly visited by Indian naval units. India has strengthened its involvement in WPNS, the Western Pacific Naval Symposium. Though still an ‘observer’, her destroyers INS Mysore and INS Tarasa (having participated in the inaugural maritime security exercise at Singapore in May 2005) were dispatched to the 10th WPNS held 29 October- 2 November 2006 at Hawaii. Long range Indian naval deployment into the South Pacific has also been part of India’s maritime diplomacy. INS Tabar - India’s advanced Talwar-class missile frigate was sent deep into the Pacific during summer 2006, as “India showcases maritime capability.” She left the Indian waters and headed eastwards towards Indonesia and then Australia in June 2006. From there she went outwards to New Zealand, a visit picked up by PRC sources, who considered INS Tabar having “an impressive range of weapons.”

At a reception in New Zealand for INS Tabar, the Indian Commissioner Kadakath Ernest stressed how “as India emerges steadfastly as a major global economy, it is important that the country establishes itself as a maritime nation;” in which “the oceans of the world, their wealth and the maritime lines of communication are all central not only to trade and commerce but also the security and integrity of India.” From New Zealand, INS Tabar then went further into the Pacific, to Tonga and Fiji, before returning to the Indian Ocean via Papua New Guinea and Singapore. May 2007 saw Indian ships working with New Zealand naval forces, on their way back from exercises with various other navies in East Asia."

kams · 04-17-2008, 19:39 PM

What that news report doesn't mention is Indian Kilo was tracked the whole way by Aussies! What's the big fuss about 5 ships entering South China sea in peace conditions? It's international water after all! Now try to imagine what will happen under wartime, keeping in mind Chinese land based aircraft.

To understand IN's need for Aircraft carriers, one has to read Pannikars essay written more than 50 years ago (which inturn was inspired by Mahan). It's available for free online at Indian digital library.

kuku · 04-18-2008, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mweber24

I agree with your analysis, but I still don't see why they need aircraft carriers to accomplish their strategic objectives in the IO.

Why not used long range land based air power?
Wouldn't this be cheaper?
I believe an aircraft carrier is a good sea control ship, but is only really necessary if operating far away from your strategic base (like on the other side of an ocean), and even then ONLY useful if you can defend them, which India cannot (against a diesel submarine).
This just seems like a case of national pride to me. Of course, as a SWO I think the US has too many carriers as well..

India needs aircraft carriers, because the Navy needs aircraft carriers and was able to secure funding for the aircraft carriers

.

Quote:

Adm Arun Prakash responds to "Do we really need an aircraft carrier?"

Responding to the post about the induction of a INS Kesari, one of our commenters, Ankur, suggested that the real need for an aircraft carrier in the Indian fleet was questionable, since a carrier battle group was "simply an offensive weapon". I told Ankur that I'd get the best person on the subject to offer us his views. Former Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Arun Prakash, who has served on INS Vikrant, and commanded India's sole present aircraft carrier INS Viraat, has very kindly offered LiveFist the following insights on the matter:

Admiral Arun Prakash: It is not quite appropriate to say that an aircraft-carrier's sole purpose is to project power, and that a battle group (CBG) is therefore only an offensive unit/formation... So why does India need one? This is an old debate and could go on for a long time, but let me just make a couple of brief points:

An aircraft carrier's raison d'etre is to provide comprehensive support to maritime forces, and not the other way round. This support can be to forces operating at sea, as well as ashore. At sea, the support is in all three dimensions. For example: it would take many hours/days of search by LRMP (long-range maritime patrol) aircraft or ASW (anti-submarine warfare) ships to localise a diesel submarine (SSN or SSBN in the very near future) in the Indian Ocean. Thereafter, it will require a force of 6-8 large ASW helicopters operating around the clock to search and locate such an elusive target, and attack it if required. Only a carrier can provide this kind of sustained ASW support within a few minutes of flying time and for as long as required.

If our maritime forces are going to operate within range of enemy air threat, which could be from strike aircraft, or missile-armed LRMP machines, they will require fighter protection within a matter of minutes, and 24x7. Again, only a carrier operating in support of the force can provide this kind of cover.

The carrier's fighters will also make sure that no surface ship (missile armed or otherwise) can get anywhere near 150-200 miles of a maritime force.

Finally, carriers are an invaluable asset in littoral and amphibious warfare, because of their manifold capabilities, including sea-lift as well as heli-lift. Carrier critics will of talk of the size & vulnerability of a carrier. Nothing at sea is invulnerable, and certainly not in war. But carriers, by virtue of their integral aircraft and helicopter force can keep any threat at bay. And if hit, by virtue of their size can absorb far more damage than any other ship. - AP

From livefist Shiv Aroor's blog on defence matters.

Adux · 04-18-2008, 02:50 AM

India spend 1.9% for defence this year, and for the past 5 years had an average of 2.72%. So let us leave the poor improvished people statement as aside. A country cannot and should not spend less than 3% on defence. Unfortunately that is what India is doing. Our social programs are some of the biggest and well funded I might add, though I concede our problems are just as massive if not more. But we cannot spend any less in defence.

Our defence and energy security has a direct impact on our economic growth which has direct impact on our poverty eradication.

Deltacamelately · 04-18-2008, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adux

India spend 1.9% for defence this year, and for the past 5 years had an average of 2.72%. So let us leave the poor improvished people statement as aside. A country cannot and should not spend less than 3% on defence. Unfortunately that is what India is doing. Our social programs are some of the biggest and well funded I might add, though I concede our problems are just as massive if not more. But we cannot spend any less in defence.

Our defence and energy security has a direct impact on our economic growth which has direct impact on our poverty eradication.

Atleast 4 CVBGs and anything between 6-10 SSBNs.

Sea Toby · 04-18-2008, 04:36 AM

Mahan wrote a good book, but he wrote the book after the debacle at Samoa. At that time the Americans allowed their Civil War built fleet rot.

Mahan wrote the book to change America's policy of Manifest Destiny, the occupation of our West. The Army was receiving all of the funds, to win the West from the native Americans. The Navy got nothing. His book changed this, and America started building a steel navy which won the Spanish American war during 1898.

gamercube · 04-18-2008, 04:37 AM

Quote:

Our social programs are some of the biggest and well funded I might add, though I concede our problems are just as massive if not more.

What social programs?

Adux · 04-18-2008, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamercube

What social programs?

Healthcare, Free schooling etc

Adux · 04-18-2008, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

Atleast 4 CVBGs and anything between 6-10 SSBNs.

4 CV's will be a reality by 2020, hopefully the its comprising battlegroup too.
I aint that sure about the SSBN's. I have no clue, There will be atleast 3 I am sure.

bolo121 · 04-18-2008, 07:10 AM

Well I must admit I'm no naval expert but..

4 CVs and that too by 2020! that would cost a fortune!! The air wings alone would be very costly. What about the Air Defence and ASW forces needed for their BGs? From other threads I have seen here the general consensus seems to be that ASW especially is very important and is very difficult to master.

gamercube · 04-18-2008, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Healthcare, Free schooling etc

LOL! The quality of healthcare one receives in government hospitals is absymal....you should go there if you want to die sooner than your disease will kill you! As for government schools, more than half the teachers are on permanent vacation, the rest aren't qualified to teach, and AFAIK they don't stretch all the way upto 12th grade at least in my state.

To talk about "social programs" in India is a joke.

kams · 04-18-2008, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kuku

I know, what is it with that ship?
Experimenting with stuff or waiting for stuff?

Latest report of Standing committee on defence indicates some new weapons suit is being fitted out!

Stop seeing IN within the confines of Pakistan or China. Time and again great powers have tried to intimidate modern India in order to safe guard their own interests which run contrary to India's supreme national interest. The prime objective of building a true blue IN is to prevent that from repeating yet again. Next 30 years will be interesting to watch.

04-17-2008, 18:08 PM	#16 (permalink)
mweber24 *Military Professional* Join Date: 03-18-08 Location: Colorado Springs Posts: 78 Country:	I agree with your analysis, but I still don't see why they need aircraft carriers to accomplish their strategic objectives in the IO. Why not used long range land based air power? Wouldn't this be cheaper? I believe an aircraft carrier is a good sea control ship, but is only really necessary if operating far away from your strategic base (like on the other side of an ocean), and even then ONLY useful if you can defend them, which India cannot (against a diesel submarine). This just seems like a case of national pride to me. Of course, as a SWO I think the US has too many carriers as well.. __________________ The SWO

04-18-2008, 04:36 AM	#24 (permalink)
Sea Toby Patron Join Date: 01-24-06 Posts: 223	Mahan wrote a good book, but he wrote the book after the debacle at Samoa. At that time the Americans allowed their Civil War built fleet rot. Mahan wrote the book to change America's policy of Manifest Destiny, the occupation of our West. The Army was receiving all of the funds, to win the West from the native Americans. The Navy got nothing. His book changed this, and America started building a steel navy which won the Spanish American war during 1898. __________________ http://homepage.mac.com/donclark/.Public/waglogo.gif

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
INDIA’S NEW "COLD START" WAR DOCTRINE STRATEGICALLY REVIEWED	Ray	Land Forces	125	06-20-2008 23:33 PM
Any Life Left!?	Bella	Battleships Forum	253	06-10-2008 01:22 AM
World Navies in Review	rickusn	Naval Forces	7	06-14-2007 23:51 PM
UK Drawdown?	rickusn	Naval Forces	19	05-03-2007 11:22 AM
BMD Article	rickusn	Naval Forces	6	02-05-2007 23:04 PM

04-17-2008, 18:47 PM	#18 (permalink)
gamercube Banished *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 11-20-06 Location: Barbados Posts: 771 Country:	This is quite interesting...and I've never heard the reverse happen (China sending its ships into the Indian ocean): "One milestone was reached in 2000, when a powerful naval flotilla of five capital ships (INS Delhi, INS Kora, INS Sindhuvir, INS Rajput, and INS Kuthar), one submarine and a tanker (INS Aditya) entered and operated in the South China Sea; with elements of it also making port calls in Singapore, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and Indonesia. Indian naval officers described it as part of a “detailed plan to expand the horizons of our maritime diplomacy.”123 This deployment lasted over one month, and was rightly judged by Mehta to be “a quiet show of strategic reach” by the Indian Navy.124 It was also seen as a “challenge” to China in China’s backyard and in an area claimed by China; with China raising a “diplomatic furore” when the plans were first released, but then allowing a friendly enough port call at Shanghai"

04-17-2008, 19:39 PM	#20 (permalink)
kams *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-22-06 Location: Piscatawy, NJ Posts: 1,437 Country:	What that news report doesn't mention is Indian Kilo was tracked the whole way by Aussies! What's the big fuss about 5 ships entering South China sea in peace conditions? It's international water after all! Now try to imagine what will happen under wartime, keeping in mind Chinese land based aircraft. To understand IN's need for Aircraft carriers, one has to read Pannikars essay written more than 50 years ago (which inturn was inspired by Mahan). It's available for free online at Indian digital library.

04-18-2008, 02:50 AM	#22 (permalink)
Adux Banished Join Date: 07-29-05 Location: Cochin Posts: 2,931 Country:	India spend 1.9% for defence this year, and for the past 5 years had an average of 2.72%. So let us leave the poor improvished people statement as aside. A country cannot and should not spend less than 3% on defence. Unfortunately that is what India is doing. Our social programs are some of the biggest and well funded I might add, though I concede our problems are just as massive if not more. But we cannot spend any less in defence. Our defence and energy security has a direct impact on our economic growth which has direct impact on our poverty eradication.

04-18-2008, 07:10 AM	#28 (permalink)
bolo121 *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 12-19-07 Location: india Posts: 885 Country:	Well I must admit I'm no naval expert but.. 4 CVs and that too by 2020! that would cost a fortune!! The air wings alone would be very costly. What about the Air Defence and ASW forces needed for their BGs? From other threads I have seen here the general consensus seems to be that ASW especially is very important and is very difficult to master.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)