What's new

Who Will Supply 4 LPHs And Other Related Hardware For The Indian Navy?

angeldemon_007

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
5,298
Reaction score
0
Fincantieri%2527s+LHD.jpg


HMAS+Canberra+LHD.jpg


MHD.jpg


Mistral+LPD+of+DCNS.jpg


ROKS+Dokdo.jpg


San+Antonio.jpg


Since the Indian Ocean tsunami of December 26, 2004, the landing platform dock (LPD) and the amphibious assault ship (LPH) have emerged as an instrument of soft power, with their on-board fleets of multi-purpose utility helicopters, landing craft (LCM), and air-cushion vehicles; plus their command-and-control capabilities and cavernous holds proving to be invaluable for disaster relief, small-scale policing or mass civilian evacuation operations. At the same time, the LPDs and LPHs and today emerged as invaluable tools for undertaking asymmetric warfare (against pirates in the high seas), expeditionary amphibious campaigns (such as those undertaken by the Royal Navy in 1982 to retake the Falklands Islands), and low-intensity maritime operations involving vertical envelopment tactics, which the Indian Navy calls “effecting maritime manoeuvres from the sea”.

It was in the September 2004 issue of FORCE magazine that I had penned an analysis on the need for the Indian Navy to urgently begin planning for acquiring a modest fleet of no less than three LPHs for it to undertake both humanitarian relief operations within the Indian Ocean Region whenever required, as well as prepare for the prospects of undertaking power projection-based expeditionary amphibious campaigns with its own integral naval infantry assets (as opposed to the still existing flawed practice of transporting a mere mechanised battalion of the Indian Army on board large landing ship tanks (LST-L). It came as no surprise to me when my analysis was laughed upon and ridiculed in circles within Navy HQ, but suffice to say that this state of affairs lasted only for the following three months, following which Navy HQ, headed at that time by Admiral Arun Prakash, the Chief of the Naval Staff, directed the Directorate of Plans & Operations to begin preparing the NSQRs for procuring a fleet of LPDs with a great sense of urgency. However, matters did not move swiftly enough on the procurement front, despite the articulation and unveiling by Navy HQ of its doctrines for effecting maritime manoeuvres from the sea though joint amphibious warfare operations. This, however, did not deter the Navy from setting up—on June 24, 2008—its Advanced Amphibious Warfare School and Fleet Support Complex--in the enclave that will come up along the beach road on the outskirts of Kakinada, about 500km from Hyderabad, in the state of Andhra Pradesh. It is here that the Navy is quietly but progressively raising its first of three naval infantry battalions (to eventually become a Brigade-strength formation), which will be trained and equipped to undertake both amphibious and vertical envelopment air-assault operations by 2018.

On the procurement front, matters began to move only last October when the Cabinet Committee on National Security accorded approval to Navy HQ to begin drafting the request for Information (RFI) regarding the acquisition of four LPDs and related hardware under the‘Buy and Make Indian’ clause of the Defence Procurement Policy (DPP-9). Under this clause, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) can invite proposals (based on a capability definition document) from those Indian shipbuilders from both the public sector and private sector that have the requisite financial and technical capabilities to enter into joint ventures with foreign shipbuilders and together undertake indigenous construction of the warships. In early December 2010, the Navy HQ issued its RFIs to Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Company Ltd, Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Mazagon Docks Ltd, Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd, Larsen & Toubro Ltd. These shipyards were required to forward a Detailed Project Proposal outlining the roadmap for the development of design and construction of the LPDs. After the RFI responses were submitted by March 7 this year, the Detailed Project Proposal, thereafter, was examined by a Project Appraisal Committee (PAC) constituted by the MoD’s Acquisition Wing to verify the credentials of the foreign partners, together with confirming the acceptability of the respective joint ventures between the Indian shipyard and its foreign collaborator. By the end of next week the Indian shipyards shortlisted for issue of the request for Proposals (RFP) would be intimated. Thereafter, the MoD will invite responses to the RFP only from Indian Shipyards.

A detailed analysis of the already-issued RFI brings out several interesting indicators about both the overall configuration of the desired vessel and its performance/operational capabilities. For instance, the RFI has specified that the length of the vessel should be approximately 200 metres; the draught should not exceed 8 metres; the endurance at sea must be for 45 days; the diesel-electric propulsion system of should of either twin-shaft configuration (with twin rudders and fixed-pitch propellers) or shock-graded podded propulsion; the vessel must have a suitable well-deck for carrying amphibious craft like LCMs or LCACs and LCVPs on davits and should have the capability to launch these craft when underway; the vessel must be able to house combat vehicles (including main battle tanks, infantry combat vehicles and heavy trucks on one or more vehicle deck; and the vessel should be able to undertake all-weather operations involving heavylift helicopters of up to 35 tonnes MTOW. Weapon systems and mission sensors to go on board the projected four vessels will all be pre-selected (known also as customer-furnished or buyer-nominated equipment) and mentioned in the RFI. Such hardware will include the point-defence missile system (PDMS), close-in weapon system (CIWS), anti-torpedo decoy system, countermeasures dispensing system, 12.7mm heavy machine guns, and 7.62mm light machine guns. In addition, each of the four vessels will be required to have one E/F-band combined air-surface surveillance radar, one C/D band air surveillance radar, and an integrated marine navigation system employing X- and S-band navigation radars. But the RFI, in what can only be described as an act of omission, does not specify the kinds of active/passive hull-mounted panoramic sonar (low-frequency or ultra low-frequency) and minehunting sonar suites that is desired.

From the above-mentioned specifications outlined in the RFI, we can come to some probable conclusions. Firstly, the desired vessel’s dimensions clearly call for a LPH solution (with a maximum displacement of up to 21,000 tonnes), as opposed to the conventional smaller LPD or larger LHD. Secondly, the type of heavylift helicopters desired clearly limit the options (to be exercised under a separate contract involving competitive bidding) to the AgustaWestland AW-101, and Sikorsky’s S-92 Super Hawk and CH-53K Super Stallion. Thirdly, even though C/D band (old L-band) airspace surveillance radars THALES-built Smart-L (its S-1850M variant equipping South Korea’s Dokdo-class LHDs) and Selex Sistem Integrati’s Kronos-3D NV are available, the Indian Navy, by choosing to pre-select this piece of hardware, has already decided in favour of the naval variant of the EL/M-2080 active phased-array radar from the ELTA Systems subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries, which is already on order for the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (INS Vikrant) now being fabricated by Cochin Shipyard Ltd. The same goes for the desired E/F band (old S-band) air/surface volume search radar, for which the BAE Systems-built Sampson, Lockheed Martin/Raytheon SPY-4, and THALES’ Herakles MFR-30 could have been offered. Instead, the Israel Aerospace Industries/ELTA Systems-built EL/M-2248 MF-STAR liquid-cooled active phased-array radar (which has also been selected in a four-array configuration for INS Vikrant as well as for the three Project 15A Kolkata-class guided-missile destroyers, the four projected Project 15B DDGs and seven projected Project 17A guided-missile frigates, and may well be retrofitted on to the three existing Project 15 Delhi-class DDGs in the near future) has been pre-selected. The MF-STAR, which offers superior performance in high-moisture clutter conditions like rain or fog, and is excellent for scanning and tracking within a very large volume, employs multiple beam-forming and advanced high-PRF waveforms to extract stressing, low RCS threats even in conditions of heavy jamming and dense clutter. Key performance characteristics include three-dimensional volume search, anti-ship cruise missile missile horizon search, multi-airborne target tracking, surface surveillance, helicopter detection, gunnery control and splash spotting. The MF-STAR can initiate tracks against sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles at ranges in excess of 25km, and out to more than 250km for a high-flying combat aircraft. It can also provide mid-course guidance for the Baral-2/8 MR-SAM/LR-SAM. It thus seems that the Indian Navy is terribly conservative by not embracing the concept of an integrated mast housing dual-band active phased-array radars (DBR) employing distributed S-band and X-band arrays, but using an unified back-end radar electronics and operating software. When using DBRs, a warship’s combat management system receives a single stream of data, and the radar itself is able to mix and match its antennae as the situation requires. At the design tier, this approach allows fewer radar antennae, all flush-mounted with the superstructure for maximum stealth. At the tactical tier, integration at the radar-level offers faster response time, faster adaptation to new situations, and better utilisation of the warship’s power, electronics, and bandwidth. At the life-cycle maintenance tier, it allows one-step upgrades to the radar suite as a whole. The use of active phased-array, digital beam-forming radar technologies will thus help DBR-equipped warships to survive saturation attacks. The DBR’s most salient feature is the ability to allocate groups of emitters within their thousands of individual modules to perform specific tasks, in order to track and guide MR-SAMs against tens of incoming sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles simultaneously. In addition, DBRs have uses such as very high-power electronic jammers, and/or high-bandwidth secure communications relays. As far as integrated S-/X-band marine navigation radars go, the competition is between UK-based Kelvin Hughes and Terma of Denmark.

Coming now to the weapons suite, the Navy has a choice of combinations to choose from, including the SeaRAM and Phalanx Block 1B from Raytheon, Sadral from MBDA integrated with OTOBreda of Italy’s twin-barrel 30mm/82 Compact or the Goalkeeper from THALES Nederland, the combination of Phalanx Block 1B Barak-1 from Israel Aerospace Industries, and the combined Palma PDMS/CIWS from Russia’s Tulamashzavod JSC. It is believed that the Phalanx Block 1B/Barak-1 combination is the Navy’s preferred choice. The Navy’s shipboard decoy control and launching system of choice is ELBIT Systems’ DESEAVER-MK, which is already on board the three Project 16A Brahmaputra-class and three Project 17 Shivalik-class FFGs. The combat management system and ESM/ELINT/EW suites will be procured off-the-shelf as standard fitment along with the LPHs. Although not yet specified, but depending on space availability, the selected LPH model could also house a module containing up to 12 tactical NLOS-PGMs like the ‘Prahaar’, to be employed for providing lethal and long-range indirect fire-assaults in support of friendly naval infantry forces. Also not yet stated officially is the Navy’s requirement for shipborne attack helicopters, for which the HAL-developed LCH could emerge as the logical choice.

Finally, we come to the foreign shipbuilders with their respective proposals, comprising DCNS of France with its Mistral-BPC 21,300-tonne LPH, Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems with its 20,000-tonne MHD-200 LPH (with two separate heli-decks on two levels), Fincantieri of Italy with its 20,000-tonne Mosaic LPH design, South Korea’s Hanjin Heavy Industries & Constructions Co with its 18,800-tonne Dokdo-class LPH, The Netherlands-based Schelde Shipbuilding of the Royal Schelde Company with its 16,800-tonne Rotterdam-class LPD, Navantia of Spain with its Athlas 21,560-tonne LHD and 13,900-tonne Galicia-class LPD, and Northrop Grumman Ship Systems with its 25,000-tonne San Antonio LPD-17 design. From this list, the frontrunners are expected to be Mistral-BPC, MHD-200, Mosaic LPH, and the Dokdo-class LPH. While DCNs is believed to have joined forces with Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Company Ltd, Mazagon Docks Ltd has aligned itself with Fincantieri, while Larsen & Toubro has linked up with ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems. It remains unclear whether or not GRSE and Cochin Shipyard Ltd will be invited to respond to the RFP. However, these two companies are unlikely to be left empty-handed, and are instead likely to get contracts for licence-building high-speed air-cushioned vehicles from either US-based Textron Marine and Land Systems (LCAC) or Hanjin Heavy Industries & Constructions Co (LSF-2), LCMs (with designs being offered by Navantia and Hanjin Heavy Industries & Constructions Co), or high-speed catamarans, for which France’s CNIM is likely to offer its L-CAT catamaran.

Between the expected frontrunners, the competition is expected to be fierce between the Dokdo-class LPH, Mistral-BPC and MHD-200. The Mistral-BPC has already been ordered by France (three units for €990 million) and Russia (four units for €1.12 billion). The MHD-200 is thought to cost no more than €150 million. The Mistral-BPC can carry up to 16 helicopters, four L-CAT catamarans or two air-cushion vehicles, 13 main battle tanks, around 100 other vehicles and a 450-strong infantry force. It has also facilities for the command staff required for waging a Brigade-sized expeditionary campaign, and is equipped with a 69-bed hospital. The MHD-200’s design concept is altogether different because, according to Thyssenkrupp, “the LPH needs to match container-ship technology to gray-ship thinking. For disaster relief, you need space for a big hospital--120 beds and a full trauma unit, or you need to be able to pull 2,000 people off the beach”. Another unusual feature of the MHD-200 is its stepped rear deck, which can be loaded with containerised supplies or used as an extra landing pad, with direct hangar access.

TRISHUL: Who Will Supply 4 LPHs And Other Related Hardware For The Indian Navy?
 
. .
Hate to say but this article by Prasoon is not a wild imagination..
 
. . .
ooh article from that idiot prasun gupta.. its trash ..best to delete this thread ....he spreads just bullshit....
 
. .
Am loving it!! Come 2020 no one in the region will want to F*CK with India.


I am surprised so little is known about IN's advance amphibious school near Kolkata, any info? What exactly do they do there?
 
.
I think the article may underrate the flexibility of some designs e.g. the Dutch Enforcer familiy of ships, which doesn't just consist of LPD/LSD's like the Rotterdam class (NL), Galicia class (Es), Bay class (UK) but also encompasses helicopter capable through-deck variants on the same hull base.

Enforcer_LHDLPD_1.jpg
 
.
Hate to say but this article by Prasoon is not a wild imagination..

As usual, many interesting infos, but not always very reliable, for example:

From the above-mentioned specifications outlined in the RFI, we can come to some probable conclusions. Firstly, the desired vessel’s dimensions clearly call for a LPH solution (with a maximum displacement of up to 21,000 tonnes), as opposed to the conventional smaller LPD or larger LHD.

That's his opinion, while the RFI clearly said:

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
LPD CLASS OF SHIPS FOR INDIAN NAVY

1. The Ministry of Defence, Government of India, intends to acquire Landing Platform Dock (LPD) class of shipsfor the Indian Navy under Buy and Make (Indian) category as amplified in Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2011.

http://www.tenders.gov.in/viewtenddoc.asp?tid=del371125&wno=1&td=TD


So the RFI doesn't leave much room for speculations about LHDs, or LPHs, because althought these vessels have several things in common, what MoD/IN wants is an LPD and there is no requirement of the maximum displacement mentioned, which means that it can be higher or lower. Not to mention that these specifications fits pretty much to INS Jalashwa, that IN already operates.


Secondly, the type of heavylift helicopters desired clearly limit the options (to be exercised under a separate contract involving competitive bidding) to the AgustaWestland AW-101, and Sikorsky’s S-92 Super Hawk and CH-53K Super Stallion.

Again his opinion, while the RFI says:

The ship should have capability of simultaneous operation by day/ night of Special Operation Helicopters and Large Helicopters (upto 35 tons).

The 35t is just the upper limit and don't tell us anything about what helicopters they want at the end. INS Jalashwa for example uses Sea King helicopters with a MTOW of just 10t, similarly the Sikorsky S70B that could be fielded in the ASW helicopter competition, could be procured for transport roles as well, just like the NH90.

Personally I am all for LHDs, but since the RFI is very clear about it, I don't see much hope for it.

Btw, these infos are wrong:

The Mistral-BPC can carry up to 16 helicopters, four L-CAT catamarans or two air-cushion vehicles, 13 main battle tanks, around 100 other vehicles and a 450-strong infantry force.

The Mistral can carry up to 16 NH90 class helicopters, but not that many bigger helicopters that he pointed out, also the L-CAT is an air-cushion vehicle and only 2 of them can be carried. The 450 troops is the limit for the smaller Mistral BPC 140, the bigger BPC 210 carries up to 700 troops.
 
.
An issue also seems to arise in regards to the air wing for these ships. As yet the IN hasn't inducted a NEW (brand new, excluding second-hand) helo for over 15 years and the process to aqquire more seems to be painfully slow. Also I'm not sure about if enough are being procured as it seems recent RFIs are simply to replace existing airframes and not really expand the naval air arm too much (a small increase is noted but not enough for LPD/LHDs which carry A LOT of helos).
 
.
An issue also seems to arise in regards to the air wing for these ships. As yet the IN hasn't inducted a NEW (brand new, excluding second-hand) helo for over 15 years and the process to aqquire more seems to be painfully slow. Also I'm not sure about if enough are being procured as it seems recent RFIs are simply to replace existing airframes and not really expand the naval air arm too much (a small increase is noted but not enough for LPD/LHDs which carry A LOT of helos).
We have inducted new dhruv's & Chetak's.
 
.
An issue also seems to arise in regards to the air wing for these ships. As yet the IN hasn't inducted a NEW (brand new, excluding second-hand) helo for over 15 years and the process to aqquire more seems to be painfully slow. Also I'm not sure about if enough are being procured as it seems recent RFIs are simply to replace existing airframes and not really expand the naval air arm too much (a small increase is noted but not enough for LPD/LHDs which carry A LOT of helos).

The ASW helicopter deal was for 20, but could go up to 60, if not only the Kamov helicopters, but also the Sea Kings will be replaced. For these LDPs, depending on which class of helicopter IN wants, they need 4 x 4 medium class helis like the Sea Hawk, or 4 x 2 heavier helis like the CH 53.
 
.
The ASW helicopter deal was for 20, but could go up to 60, if not only the Kamov helicopters, but also the Sea Kings will be replaced. For these LDPs, depending on which class of helicopter IN wants, they need 4 x 4 medium class helis like the Sea Hawk, or 4 x 2 heavier helis like the CH 53.

Yes but when will IN induct these? IA/IAF seem to be inducting helos at, now, a reasonable pace but IN seems to be taking far too long.
 
.
Yes but when will IN induct these? IA/IAF seem to be inducting helos at, now, a reasonable pace but IN seems to be taking far too long.

The ASW helicopter procurement might be slow, because there is no urgend need of numbers at the moment. IN has not that high numbers of Frigats so far, that additional helis would be needed, INS Viraat is more often in the dock, than in operational service at sea and the INS Jalashwa is a vessel, that will be deployed into service only in specific times. For the future with more vessels and carriers, of course the number must be much higher, that's why I also hope for a Dhruv version as the prime ASW heli on IN and ICG vessels, while LDPs would needs bigger, or longer range helicopters.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom