India to invest over half a billion dollars to expand naval shipyard
Government-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) is looking to reclaim 10 acres of marine area near its existing Mumbai facility to create two new basins for the simultaneous construction and repair of large warships and submarines, according to the report.
The expansion will help the dockyard meet the Indian Navy's increasing demand for advanced platforms, according to the report.
It will also help double the current deadweight handling capacity from 40,000 tons to 80,000 tons. Deadweight handling capacity refers to the total weight a ship can carry, excluding the weight of the ship.
MDL has also secured a 29-year lease for 15 acres of land, where shipbuilding activities have already begun.
It currently has a capacity to build 11 submarines and 10 warships simultaneously, which is expected to increase as the shipyard works on two major submarine projects for the navy.
The Mumbai expansion is also expected to play a crucial role in helping the Indian Navy achieve its ambitious goal of having a fleet of 175 ships and reaching 100% indigenization by 2047.
Earlier this month, Andrey Puchkov, CEO of Russia's largest shipbuilding company, United Shipbuilding Corporation, said the company would like to take part in Indian defense indigenization efforts.
India is building frigates which are part of the Triput class at the Goa shipyard, with transfer of technology and design assistance from Russia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
India refutes Trump's claim it stopped buying Russia oil
India's foreign ministry has rejected US President Donald Trump's claim that New Delhi has halted purchases of Russian oil. The Indian government is unaware of any specific developments regarding Indian oil companies pausing Russian imports, the ministry stated, noting that the country's energy purchases are guided by market dynamics and national interests. 'The government is committed to prioritizing the welfare of Indian consumers. Our energy purchases will be based on price, availability and market conditions,' the ministry added. The remarks came hours after Trump claimed India had stopped purchasing Russian oil. 'I understand that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia. That's what I heard, I don't know if that's right or not. That is a good step. We will see what happens,' he told reporters in Washington, DC. 🇮🇳🇷🇺🇺🇸 Slick or Crude? Trump Claims India Halts Russian Oil Purchases - Then Admits Might Be Fake Washington on Thursday imposed a 25% tariff on goods imported from India, as well as an additional penalty for purchasing crude oil and military equipment from Russia. Trump and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized India for continuing to import the discounted oil despite Western sanctions, claiming New Delhi was 'helping to sustain the Russian war effort.' Rubio called India's energy trade with Russia 'most certainly a point of irritation' in Washington's relationship with New Delhi. India's position has long been that its energy trade is guided by its national interest and the need to sustain the rapid economic growth of its 1.4 billion people. New Delhi officials have on many occasions stated that by ramping up purchases of Russian oil despite enormous pressure from the West, India has helped global markets avoid sharp increases in crude prices.
Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
India-US ties have weathered many challenges
The India-US relationship has 'weathered many transitions and challenges' in the past and is based on mutual respect, Indian Foreign Ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said on Friday. The comments come in response to the US imposing 25% tariffs on imports from India and Donald Trump's threatening to add penalties over and above those due to New Delhi's trade and defense ties with Moscow. 'India and the US share a comprehensive global strategic partnership anchored in shared interests, democratic values, robust people-to-people ties,' Jaiswal said. He also spoke of the potential for the defense partnership with Washington. 'We have strong defense ties with the US which have been strengthening over the last several years,' he said. ❗️🇮🇳 Relationships With Other Countries Should Not Be Seen Through Prism Of A Third Country - Russia & India Have A Steady & Time-Tested Partnership- MEA Reacts To Trump's Secondary Tariffs A day after Trump said India and Russia 'could take their dead economies down together,' US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil 'a point of irritation.' In a response to these comments at the Friday press briefing, Jaiswal said bilateral relationships between two countries should not be viewed in the context of a third nation. 'Our ties with any country are based on their own merit and should not be judged through the lens of our relationship with another country,' he said. Jaiswal also highlighted that India and Russia enjoy a long-standing and robust partnership. The spokesman said India's decisions on defense purchases are driven solely by national security needs and strategic considerations, adding that the country's energy sourcing is guided by market availability and global circumstances.
Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
Trump's onslaught: Why India and BRICS will not bend
US President Trump has rattled Washington's ties with New Delhi to an unexpected degree. Countries, including, India were prepared for rough diplomatic weather after Trump won his second term, but did not anticipate the kind of onslaught he has unleashed on the global system and diplomatic norms. Trump's latest attack on India and the BRICS countries explains this underlying dynamic. The BRICS aspire to play a greater political, economic and financial role in global affairs. This aspiration is based on shifts of economic and concomitant political and financial power towards the so-called emerging powers or middle-income countries. BRICS countries have already begun to use their national currencies in trading with each other as much as possible. The use of draconian financial sanctions on Russia by the West has accelerated this process. Today, almost all trade operations between Russia and China are conducted in rubles and yuan. India too is encouraging the use of its national currency in payment transactions with select countries. A significant portion of the trade between India and Russia is now settled using a rupee-ruble mechanism. Washington cannot use secondary sanctions to prevent countries, including India, from using the US dollar to trade with Russia and then oppose de-dollarization if these countries are compelled to use alternative payment mechanisms. If the US continues to weaponize the dollar, it will inevitably lead to the very 'de-dollarization' that Trump is concerned about. India has officially disowned any de-dollarization agenda – not the least because the US is its biggest trade partner in goods and services. India seeks more investments and technology transfers from the US. In many ways, New Delhi's ties with Washington are the most important for achieving its growth and developmental goals. But that does not preclude India from establishing other partnerships to reduce over-dependence on one country, balance its external relations and hedge against the excesses of US foreign policy. Trump has exacerbated the disruptions caused by Washington's frequent use of sanctions as a political weapon by also weaponizing tariffs. He is convinced that by imposing arbitrarily determined tariffs on imports from other countries he will compel them to enter into negotiations with the US to obtain relief by lowering their high tariffs on American products. But India on Wednesday sent a clear message: it is determined to protect the interests of its own businesses, farmers and people. Trump's use of tariffs as lever, like in the case of Brazil, where he has cited President Lula's treatment of his predecessor Bolsanaro as reason for imposing 50% levies, is being closely monitored by the world's governments. Trump has repeatedly targeted BRICS since his return to the Oval Office. He had threatened the countries with tariffs if they contonie to pledge to create a new common currency or support any alternative to the US dollar. Trump appeared to harbor the illusion that BRICS was 'dead' following his threats – which have now materialized into action. In reality, the BRICS summit held in Brazil this July showed no visible signs of intimidation. On the contrary, such overt displays of American economic coercion may well drive more countries toward alliances that seek to challenge the dominance of any single global power. The administration in Washington appears to lack realism in its assessment of global trends. Trump positions himself as a peacemaker and openly aspires to win a Nobel Peace Prize, while at the same time bombing Iran and assisting Israel in perpetuating the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Similarly, threatening China as a BRICS member with 100% tariffs so casually – along with talk of bombing Beijing if the People's Republic were to invade Taiwan – makes little sense, especially given that an interim trade deal has already been reached and further negotiations are imminent. The US cannot reasonably claim that forums like BRICS have no right to determine their own agenda in pursuit of their shared interests. At the same time, the US has walked out of or subverted key international agreements and institutions. It has withdrawn from the Paris Climate Change agreement, the WHO, the UN Human Rights Commission and UNESCO. Trump seems to believe that these organizations cannot function or survive without the presence of the US and its financial contributions. In reality, the US will lose its voice and its leadership in these international forums. The space it vacates will be filled by others, especially China. Beijing has already carved out enormous influence in the UN institutions as it is now the second largest contributor to the UN. With Washington also bullying Europe and thereby damaging Western solidarity, the US absence from these organizations will have even less impact. The more the world learns to manage without the US in these international bodies, the more America's international influence will erode. These US decisions will also accelerate the dispersal of influence at the global level, as other centers of influence develop.
