Nothing production ready can come out of this with a funding of Rs 250 cr (70% from MoD) upper limit of MAKE-1. But it's a good initial step in the right direction.
I am intersted in the figure of 40 Gas turbines. This is enough for like 20 warships.
I am sure we will not put something important like P18 or NGF for this.
But maybe P15C or NGC batch 2? Along with maybe future LPDs.
Sensible. Manpad launcher is a low cost way to add air defence capability to OPVs and corvettes.
I would like to see more focus on diesel engines though. One would imagine IC engines are an easier uplift given our automotive industry
Just a note. Keeping a general datasheet pertaining to IN fleet.
Indian Navy Fleet Composition (2024-2025)
| Ship Type | Current Strength | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Aircraft Carriers | 2 | INS Vikrant, INS Vikramaditya , |
| Destroyers | 11-13 | Various classes including Kolkata and Visakhapatnam class , |
| Frigates | 12-14 | Including new Nilgiri class frigates , |
| Corvettes | 18-20 | Various corvette and missile boat classes , |
| Submarines | 16-19 | Including conventional and nuclear submarines |
| Amphibious Ships | 9+ | 1 Amphibious Transport Dock + 8 Tank Landing Ships , |
| Support Vessels | 40+ | Various auxiliary and support craft , |
Fleet Summary Statistics
| Category | Total Numbers |
|---|---|
| Total Active Warships | 135+ warships |
| Total Fleet Units | 100-150 units |
| Aircraft & Helicopters | 300+ aircraft |
| Active Personnel | 67,252 active + 75,000 reserve |
Recent Additions (2025)
The Indian Navy recently commissioned 2 new Nilgiri Class frigates on August 26, 2025:- INS Udaygiri [F35]
- INS Himgiri [F34]
INDIAN NAVY TO STRENGTHEN ITS MARITIME DOMAIN AWARENESS CAPABILITY WITH COMMISSIONING OF INS ARAVALI AT GURUGRAM
Indian Navy will commission INS Aravali at Gurugram in the presence of Admiral Dinesh K Tripathi, Chief of the Naval Staff on 12 Sep 2025 .INS Aravali, deriving its name from the unwavering Aravali range, shall support various information and communication centres of the Indian Navy which are key to India’s and Indian Navy’s command, control and Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) framework.
Guided by the motto ‘सामुद्रिकसुरक्षायाः सहयोगं’ or ‘Maritime Security through Collaboration’, the Naval Base exemplifies supportive and collaborative ethos, working seamlessly with naval units, MDA centres and allied stakeholders.
The Crest of the base comprises central mountain imagery perfectly symbolising the unwavering and strong Aravali Range, and the rising sun representing eternal vigilance, resilience and energy, in addition to the dawn of niche technological capabilities in the field of Communications and MDA. Thus, the Crest embodies the steadfast commitment of the Base to facilitate eternal vigilance in order to defend India’s maritime interests.
A comprehensive analysis of naval warship shipbuilding capabilities among the top 10 Asian and European nations, with India prominently highlighted for comparison:
India's Position in Global Naval Shipbuilding:
- Rank: #4 globally in annual warship production capacity
- Annual Capacity: 3 warships per year
- Current Fleet: 130 vessels (2024)
- Growth Target: 160 vessels by 2030 (+30 vessels, 23.1% increase)
- Key Shipyards: Mazagon Dock (MDL), Cochin Shipyard (CSL), GRSE
- Specializations: Frigates, Destroyers, Corvettes, Submarines
Regional Dominance:
- Asian Nations: Control 85% of global shipbuilding market
- European Nations: Hold 17.3% of global market share
- Top 3 Producers: China (12 vessels/year), South Korea (6/year), Japan (4/year)
China's Overwhelming Lead:
- Produces 12 warships annually - more than any other nation
- 200x greater shipbuilding capacity than the United States
- Fleet expanding from 234 to 435 warships by 2030 (as per BBC News)
- Controls 53% of global shipbuilding market share
Comparison with Major Players:
Asian Powers:- South Korea: 6 vessels/year, specializes in Aegis destroyers and advanced systems
- Japan: 4 vessels/year, focuses on high-tech submarines and advanced technologies
- India: 3 vessels/year, developing multi-role capabilities across all vessel types
- United Kingdom: 2 vessels/year, focuses on aircraft carriers and Type 26 frigates
- France: 2 vessels/year, Naval Group produces FREMM frigates and submarines
- Italy: 2 vessels/year, Fincantieri leads EU with €7.29 billion in shipbuilding value
Fleet Expansion Race (2024-2030):
- China: +201 vessels (85.9% growth)
- India & South Korea: +30 vessels each (23.1% and 17.6% growth respectively)
- Japan: +25 vessels (16.1% growth)
Sources: BBC Analysis, CSIS Reports, Marine Insight, Naval Industry Reports (2024-2025)
What this glosses over is the parts.
Like Germany is big in ship building.
But they don't build ships they build parts, like marines engines( which compromises 30%+ of a ship's total cost).
China, Japan, SK's share shown here is of "complete assembled ships".
It does not show individual parts origin, which lot will be chinese/korean/Japanese but also american, European etc.
This is an analysis of assembly and overall capacity to launch naval ships. You're correct - this does not factor in the origins of parts (if they are being imported or domestically built). It presents an overall view of the naval shipyards and has less to do with the component manufacturing.
Indeed.
But the "share of shipbuilding" market, skews the picture in this oversimplification.
Europe and US still has quite significant share in high end components that goes into commercial ships.
This is just an overview and is inherently simple.
US is not present in this comparison. I understand you're dissatisfied, brother baba. This takes into account only EU and Asian powers with adequate capacity to roll out complete ships. It's primary purpose is gauge the ability to meet naval vessel nos. that the countries might aiming at in the near future. Commercial aspects and maritime vessels such as LNG suppliers are left out.
Now that GoI is coming up with a national shipbuilding plan, it should also look at reviving dysfunctional yards like ABG and Alcock Ashdown which were once building ships for the ICG. Also, those partially built Sachi class NOPVs at Pipavav could be towed to another yard for completion, imo. Why let them rust away into oblivion?
On the other hand, why should MoD and IN deal with the mess that comes with smaller shipyards? The troubles in bharathi, pipavav, Alcock and ABG set IN/ICG back by 10 years is not more.
We desperately needed sachi for dealing with pirates
We greatly missed the CTS that ABG was to deliver
Till date we dont have the survey vessels that Alcock was to deliver
Best give all orders to main shipyards and keep them busy
At the same time, we need to reward those private shipyards that have consistently delivered(like L&T) by giving them more contracts and expanding what they can bid on(like Frigates/Corvettes)
For Pipavav, it was just plain bad luck. When they finally settled on a design and started construction, they ran out of funds. Reliance bailed out again because of financial problems and the Sachi class ships which were in an advanced stage of construction (already fitted with 76mm SRGM) had to be abandoned. Last time I checked, they are going to be scrapped. Sad, if true.
Alcock was a govt-owned yard. It was more of a management/labour union issue that led to the Makar class prog being shut down. Ironically, some of these DPSU yards were headed by retired navy officers who couldn't care less about performance.
How Gujarat’s Shipbuilding Dream Sank: The Fall Of Alcock Ashdown
Once a trusted shipbuilder for the Indian Navy, the state-owned firm crumbled under mismanagement and mounting losses
I think you meant naval. I meant we have one major Collab with the propulsion techniques a.k.a engine for AMCA. That's a big project not in monetary terms only but strategic terms too. And I did not say that it's bad. Infact, France with Dassault and SAFRAN can be the key to build the foundation aerospace industry.
But an AC with Emals, nuclear propulsion etc.. is another huge project in strategic value. Choosing France might give them unwanted strategic leverage over our security apparatus.
And recent trends shows govts interest in enhancing underwater capabilities and limiting money flow towards an AC in near future. Thus, my rationale behind skepticism.
Meanwhile japan, SK have good expertise which we need and also with evolving US' posture, they are in market for such collabs for long term security goals. Fits right into our needs to increase Cooperation with them too.
The opposite will also happen.
Along with next gen engine collab, whose developed tech will also be used by France.
France will also partially depend on india on its future aircraft carrier project.
So I don't see the problem.
Infact it will actually further incentivize the French to not sour relations with India.
Three carrier requirements still exists, subs are important but can't bring airpower, and Vikramaditya will reach retirement age in another decades.
Collaboration with france reduces "monetary" pressure.
Neither has any experience in developing nuclear powered carrier, or even nuclear powered submarine.
Neither any experience in operating catobar carrier.
Neither are actively pursuing attempt to build a catobar carrier( in SK's case all those carrier models are from private companie).
Your points, if i'm being honest are retarded.
We do need collab with Korea or Japan but to learn how to build ships much faster than we do now namely by using modular ship building methods etc. This can be especially beneficial not only to our military warships but also to our commercial shipping industry.
As for nuclear carriers I am pretty confident we can do it completely on our own. We have the metals for aircraft carriers, we will soon have the nuclear propulsion for it (using 2 of the 190 MWth CLWR B2 reactors could power a 50-55,000 tonne carrier) and EMALS can be done if more funds and support are given to it. Rather the question as some observers have already posed is what about the air wing? Now if we are serious about TEDBF coming 2038 then perhaps it will be in time for the carrier which itself will take 15 years or more to develop.