In Cheif on the future

[Adux]

FROM FORCE MAGAZINE

‘The Priority Will Be To Develop A Good Surveillance Capability And To Network It Into Our System'

Intro: Admiral Sureesh Mehta, PVSM, AVSM, ADC, Chief of Naval Staff has his job cut out. Talking at length with FORCE, in his first media interview after taking over the baton from his predecessor, a fellow aviator, Admiral Mehta says that his biggest priority would be surveillance for what he calls the Maritime Domain Awareness. In a distinguished career, Admiral Mehta has held three important positions amongst others: Flag Officer Commanding Western Fleet (during the 1999 Kargil war), director general Coast Guards and Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief Eastern Naval Command.

What are your Key Result Areas?

Let me start by saying that the navy has come a long way because of the vision and concerted efforts of my predecessors. Today, we are on a firm footing and we have comprehensive documentation laying down the navy's plans for five, 10 and 20 years from now. We have a corporate type of leadership in which everybody has a part, so there is no need or reason to divert from the charted course. There are, however, certain areas that need to be given priority and on which I would like to stress upon at this point of time. As I said earlier, we need to develop a much larger and a better surveillance capability, because our area of operations has enlarged. Today, we are operating all the way from the Horn of Africa and Persian Gulf in the West to the South China Sea in the East. Given such a large area of operation, first and foremost we need surveillance for what I call Maritime Domain Awareness. This would require a lot of aerial and even some space-based sensors. Therefore, the priority will be to develop a good surveillance capability and to network it into our system so that the picture is available in real-time right across our area of operations. Complementary to this, our units at sea would require longer legs with sustained endurance.

Further, the men and women of this fine service are its true strength. With the quantum of new technologies that are likely to be inducted over the next decade, there is a need to attract more qualified personnel. Therefore, on this front, my thrust would be to see that policies are aligned to meet both, requirements of the service and aspirations of individuals.

You have been talking about building a capability-driven Navy. What capabilities should the Navy have? And what contingencies including wartime, peace time and humanitarian, do you have in mind which would require these capabilities?

Given the long gestation periods for building naval forces amidst fast changing strategic and tactical scenarios, we consider it more prudent to have a force capable of taking on all extant and foreseeable threats to ensure the security of our interests. The composition of such a force would primarily be hinged on the versatility of their capabilities to take on a varied range of tasks. This is a ‘capability-driven’ navy. The difference between the other forces and the navy is precisely this: Naval development is not threat specific, in the sense that it will be very difficult to specify what the threats would be in the future. In today’s environment, when the country has become economically strong and her regional responsibilities have increased, who or what the enemy would be 10 years ahead is very difficult to predict. So we are now looking to develop certain capabilities which give us the ability to take charge of all aspects of naval warfare and operations across the entire spectrum of conflict i.e., low intensity conflict, actual war and need for power projection, humanitarian missions and so on. We have done this exercise, and have come up with a force structure for the future. While we presently have a capable blue-water force to undertake most tasks, we are in the process of supplementing it with additional platforms, like aircraft carriers, escorts and logistics ships.


What force levels of frontline platforms you envisage at the end of 10th defence plan (2002-2007) and the 11th defence plan (2007-2012)?

The numbers are not very important, as today we have ships capable of performing multiple roles. Nonetheless, a certain baseline in force levels is important. Presently, we have about 136 ships though they will steadily keep reducing till 2012, because the ships being de-commissioned will outnumber new inductions. This has happened because very few new orders were placed with our shipyards in the period 1985-95. The average rate of indigenous induction is three to four ships a year, which is not adequate to maintain our force levels. A few inescapable requirements may therefore need to be met through acquisitions from outside. In our 20 years perspective plan we envisage a 160-ship force. We have at the moment around 65 blue water units comprising carriers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes and submarines and about 70-odd smaller vessels. And we expect the blue water forces to go up to around 90. It is encouraging to note that indigenous ship production has now picked up momentum, and over 20 ships and submarines are in various stages of construction at our shipyards. What is important is that by the end of the 11th Plan we would have improved our capabilities substantially, given the fleet a younger look and somewhat bettered the mix of forces.


What is the status of the Long Range Maritime Patrol (LRMP) aircraft?

We have eight TU-142 maritime aircraft which need to be replaced by a suitable LRMP aircraft. We have floated the tender for the replacement aircraft that can fly for 10-12 hours, operate about 1,000 miles from the coast and with a capability to detect and attack both surface platforms as well as submarines. We have received responses and these are being scrutinised.


Which vendors have responded to the RFP?

The job of the navy is only till the RFP stage. Once this is done, the defence ministry takes over. The important thing from our point of view is that the process will take five to six years because this is not something you buy off the shelf.


Are you looking to procure more IL-38 aircraft?

We have five aircraft being modernised by Russia and no further procurement is required for the present. Two of the aircraft have come back fitted with the Sea Dragon suite which has enhanced their capabilities considerably. The third is also on its way. Air frame-wise these aircraft are alright and with the sensor and weapon upgrades undertaken, they would meet our immediate requirements and also last us for a decade or so. Eventually, these IL-38s will need to be replaced by another aircraft, which we would decide upon after the ongoing procurement of eight LRMP aircraft is concluded.


Considering that the navy pilots have been going to the US for advanced training for the MiG-29K aircraft, are you looking to procure the British Hawk or the US Goshawk?

Both aircraft are almost similar, except for different names. We require 12 trainer aircraft. Had the Navy procured the Hawks from Britain as part of the same deal under which the IAF got them, it may have worked out cheaper. But for whatever reason, this did not happen. The American option appears quite attractive. This is because it does both the jobs, the normal fast jet training and training for arrested landings on the carrier’s deck. This has been a dead art in the Indian Navy ever since the Sea Hawks and Alizes were phased out. Our pilots, who have gone to the US for training, will come back as Carrier Landing Qualified pilots. This means that they will be able to land into arrestor wires with a hook. This will be the requirement to land MiG-29K on INS Vikramaditya. The MiG-29K will be a quantum jump for our pilots and therefore it is necessary that we train our boys on these intermediate fast jet trainers.


Will the MiG-29K fly from the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC) as well?

Indeed. The IAC will have a complement of MiG-29K as well as the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).


What if the LCA does not come on time? Will you look for a replacement aircraft?

At the moment, we are fully supporting the naval LCA and as of now we are confident that it would be available in time for the IAC.


How attractive is the Hawkeye option which is on offer?

The basic fact is that none of our aircraft carriers will have a catapult for launching aircraft, which is essential for launching aircraft like the Hawkeye. Therefore, the Hawkeye does not fit into our scheme of things of being taken to sea on the carrier. But there are large tracts of area that need to be covered for which we could use the Hawkeye from shore bases if so warranted.


Given that the construction for six Scorpene submarines has commenced at MDL, is the Navy likely to open the second line as envisaged in the 30-year submarine plan?

This will happen in the fairly immediate future. According to the 30-year submarine plan, the government had agreed for two lines with six submarines to be built in each line. The Scorpene, which is the first line, got delayed otherwise the second line would have commenced by now, and we should be starting to talk about it soon.


Is the Russian Amur a solid contender for this?

The government’s procurement policy says that global tenders have to be floated and whoever offers the best option would be considered. All I can tell you is that I would be pushing for this to happen as soon as we absorb the first line, which means when the construction of the Scorpene gets underway.


Which all ships will finally be armed with BrahMos cruise missile, and in what time frame?

The BrahMos would be fitted on a few of our SNF class ships and would be our obvious choice for fitment on all future capital missile capable platforms.


What strategic lift capability is the navy looking at, at the end of the 10th defence plan (2007)?

There are two aspects here. One is to have an expeditionary strike force like the US, which can require a large force. In our case that is not so. However, we have our defined task to support the land battle. So, if there is a requirement we may need to land troops at some place, I would say, we should be able to move a brigade strength (3,500 combat soldiers) of troops. At present, the Navy is capable of lifting only a battalion group. To increase this to a brigade, we would need a minimum of three operational LPDs/LHAs, each with a lift capacity of about 650 troops plus vehicles. Apart from this, we have the benign requirements, in far-flung territories like Andamans and Lakshadweep Islands. These territories may need to be defended or the civil administration may require assistance in case of natural calamities like the Tsunami (December 2004). At that time, all the jetties in the Andamans were damaged and you could not take your ships there. Then you felt the need for landing ships. Moreover, we have the option of commandeering merchant ships for carrying troops provided there is a way to put them across at the other end. We have the standard practice of Ships Taken up from Trade (STUFT). Therefore either the ships find their own way to transfer troops or if this is not possible as was the case during Tsunami, you need platforms like the USS Trenton, which uses helicopters to ferry people.


What is the timeline and phases that you have in mind regarding navy’s network centric warfare (NCW)?

Let me say that one phase of NCW is already in place, that is the land part of it. The Navy has networked its logistics, support and operations organisations ashore. That means my operational centre here, called MOC (Maritime Operational Centre), Delhi, can talk and send the necessary images and data to other MOCs located in our bases at Vizag, Mumbai and so on. A rudimentary methodology, developed by us, is also in place whereby data and the developing operational picture can be transferred from the sea to the shore centres. But what we use over there is the normal radio frequency, which is not very secure. We want to go beyond this and cover a much larger area and the information should also flow through other mediums. This is the long term part and we are still some years away from it. We will also like to have a satellite for communication purposes. But this will take some time.


What indigenous and other Land Attack Cruise Missiles (LACM) is the navy looking at for its key operational manoeuvre from the sea task or what is called supporting the land battle?

Land Attack Cruise Missile is a priority item and I am hopeful that both the indigenous and the foreign option will eventually work. However, today advanced technologies from outside are not so easily available and neither is it an easy thing to develop. May be, four-five years down the line our indigenous efforts would succeed.


What has been achieved by exercising with friendly foreign navies?

The role of the navies today essentially implies that we interact with each other. Even in peacetime, nobody on their own can take charge of events that may arise on the seas, like hijacking, piracy, search and rescue operations. Therefore, the need is to build interoperability with other navies. In our region, we will first try and build this interoperability with our immediate neighbours. As I told you in Vizag earlier this year that our focus remains ‘Look East’ as part of the national policy. We had neglected this area for sometime, therefore countries like Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and Sri Lanka are our primary focus areas. Of course, on the other side, we are looking at friendly countries in the Gulf because so much oil comes from there. Beyond that, India has stakes in oilfields abroad and somebody has to think about their security as well. Therefore irrespective of whatever resources that I may have, I will always need inputs and maybe warnings from friendly navies about what is happening in such a vast region. This is the purpose of these exercises. We are exercising regularly with a lot of navies like the Americans, British, French, Russians, Singaporeans and so on. In this context the Navy has planned to send our ships to the East starting March 2007 for two months to places in South China Sea. All these years the Americans and Russians have been coming to us, now we will go and exercise with them at Guam and Vladivostok respectively. Our ships will also stop by in Japan, South Korea and China. In the second half of 2007, our ships will go on a friendly visit to the Gulf region. About six ships will go to the east and about four to the Gulf. In our terminology we call this ‘Shaping the Maritime Battlefield’. We do not have any enemies but we need to have friends so that we can tackle a common enemy if and when the need ever arises.


Are the exercises becoming more complex with time?

Indeed they are and they need to. The first ones are like initial forays trying to get to know each other. Now if in a far away place the Americans, let’s say, need fuel from us or we need from them, there is simply no problem as the procedures are now well understood. Following Malabar exercises (with the US Navy), the confidence levels have built up and the complexities of exercises have increased. For example, we had aircraft carrier versus aircraft carrier air operations, which was a big boon for our aviators.


What is the present strength of Marine Commandos (MARCOS)? Will there be an accretion in the strength in the 11th Defence Plan?

The MARCOS are an elite force and are factored in our operational plans and they have a key role to play in countering maritime terrorism and piracy, defence of offshore installations, Low Intensity Conflicts, anti-narcotics missions etc. In view of the special nature of this force, there is bound to be a certain amount of growth in accordance with their roles.

 

[Contrarian]

nice!!

Good to know that the Chief's have a future plan ready. Not like the old days when things were bought haph-hazardly in view of other countries procurements and was threat specific. They now have a proper future plan for 20 years atleast.

And i hope that they decude the second line of SSK soon. The Chief said its in the fairly immediate future, now in India, looking at the RFQ for the IAF which was supposed to be immediate and it has taken so many years, i can only imagine what 'fairly' imediate would mean LOL!!