Design your own Ship

[Singha]

first round.

Design your own 500-1000t ASW corvette
_____________________________________

List of IN tenders/RFI for new ship classes.

1) shallow water ASW craft
http://tenders.gov.in/viewtenddoc.asp?t ... no=1&td=TD

2) LPD
http://www.irfc-nausena.nic.in/rfi/RFI_ ... 6Feb11.pdf

3) P75I SSK
http://www.irfc-nausena.nic.in/rfi/P75I_RFI.pdf

4) Landing Craft Mechanised
http://www.irfc-nausena.nic.in/rfi/RFI_INTERNET_LCM.pdf

5) DSRV
http://www.irfc-nausena.nic.in/rfi/RFI_jdsmaq14dec.pdf

[Jaeger]

OK here goes...

Form factor:
Composite/GRP Hull
Trimaran hullform for volume & speed, with propulsion units in outriggers

Sensors
Hull sonar
Towed Array sonar
UUV with passive arrays to 'swim alongside' convoys/flotillas or to be 'dropped off' at specific points for loitering surveillance while the corvette continues on larger area patrol
UAV with dipping sonar & periscope-detecting radar; at the most 1 324mm torpedo - I'd rather have endurance instead of payload
3D Air/Surface Search & Track radar
IR/EO sensors
Navigation/Secondary Radar

Weapons
4xKlub ASuMs (in universal launcher, can be AShM or ASuM as per req)
4x 533mm TTs
16x Barak 1
57mm Gun
1x30mm Goalkeeper-type

ESM, EW, Decoys etc.

The focus is more on range and denial, that's why the lower weapon load. I see these babies hunting in pairs, and in any case, neither the PN nor the PLAN will have the capability for the foreseeable future to put a 6-8 sub wolfpack out to hunt in the IOR.

[Kersi D]

Ideally IN should have 3 types of ships or hulls
DESTROYER
This would be a 6000 - 7000 MT vessel with an elaborate AAW systems. In should have a minimum 6, one each for each west, east, south and A&N and balance as spare, maintainence, upgradation etc. This should succeed P 15B production

FRIGATE
This 4000 - 4500 MT vessel would be the workhorse of the IN. IN needs about 12 - 15 of these beauties, minimum

CORVETTE
This should be about 1500 MT vessel should be dime a dozen. The same hull could have a general purpose vessel and a ASW specialist. I think this should be the minimum size for all combat vessels

Then of course we can have the ambhibs of all shapes sizes and colours

I will try and work out the details.

Kersi

[Shrinivasan]

Propulsion should be Water-Jet Propulsion for supporting higher speed of operation.

[Shrinivasan]

Weapon load should have a mix of Light weight and Heavy torpedo. Four HWT and Eight LWT would be a good fit. Also we need to have one RBU 6000 anti-submarine rockets launchers.

[Kersi D]

Before we design a ship we must standardise on the weapons and ready made weapon systemS.

MISSILES
For anti shipping we use Klub and Brahmos. (What do we do with Uran ? Don't ask me, I do not know)

For anti air we use Barak and Barak 8

I strongly advocate a universal vertical missile launcher like the US Mk 41 or European A 70. We have a 4 cell and a 8 cell modules. All ships will have some combination of these modules. These launchers must eb able to launch all the missiles of IN. Copying (blatantly) we have 2 sizes / heights, the larger one can launch all the IN missiles including Brahmos / Nirbahy / successor and shorter module can launch all the except these big boys.


ASW WARFARE
We develop / buy / copy a long (50 km) ASW missile which can carry a LWT e.g. ASROC of US or Malafon of France or Ikara of Australia.

We have a triple HWT trainable launchers similar (but larger) than the existing LWT launchers. In think the Talwars etc have something like that.


GUNS
Three turret sizes should be more thna enough
100 / 127 mm on larger ships
76 mm OTO for medium / small ships
6 x 30 mm AK 630 for all CIWS as well as short range surface (against pirates & other scums)

PROPULSION
My favourite system is CODOG, diesels for cruising and GTs for hi speeds.

Diesels
We have barely 2 options, Wartsila or MTU

Gas Turbines
We standardise on the old workhorse, LM 2500

Gear box
We have barely 2 options, Renk or MAAG

RADARS
SONARS
C3I / C4I systems

Wheee I am tired.... Somebody please take over

With exceptions like nuclear submarine or aircraft carrier, all the ships MUST have the above mentioned systems only

Kersi

PS What do we do with the P 15 missiles ? Can we take them to Okha or another 100 kms further and fire them eastwards?
We celebrate Diwali. We can always say sorry afterwards !!!!

[uddu]

Jaeger's idea seems to be a better one for the small light weight corvette.
Regarding speed, I would like to point out certain aspects.
1. Speed is required if any other assets are detecting the sub and when the COrvette need to reach there.
2. If ambushed by sub, Max speed becomes a necessity.

Use of waterjet propulsion:
Is it stealthy as well?
Wiki has this to say

Pump jets have some advantages over bare propellers for certain applications, usually relate to requirements for high-speed or shallow-draft operations. These include:

Higher speed before the onset of cavitation, because of the raised internal dynamic pressure
High power density (with respect to volume) of both the propulsor and the prime mover (because a smaller, higher-speed unit can be used)
Protection of the rotating element, making operation safer around swimmers and aquatic life
Improved shallow-water operations, because only the inlet needs to be submerged
Increased maneuverability, by adding a steerable nozzle to create vectored thrust
Noise reduction, resulting in a low sonar signature; this particular system has little in common with other pump-jet propulsors and is also known as "shrouded propeller configuration"[1]; applications:


So having experience in building ships like the Car Nicobar class, it seems quite possible. The challenges will be the system that go onboard including the sensors that we have developed and fine tuning it to detect the subs in shallow waters. We can try out various improvements by trying to find our own Kilo class subs.

[NRao]

Requests:

1) When ever we use an acronym for the very first time please spell it out. (LWT????) Not all of us are educated on these things and it would help reduce trips to Uncle Google. Thx.

Suggestions:

1) Would one type of each do? Say for example Corvettes, is it one size fits all? Or would it be prudent to have a corvette for the A&N area, one for the Eastern sea board and one for the Western sea board?

2) Destroyers. China Sea is a must. Along with accompanying ships - flotilla or whatever you want to call it.

3) I feel India needs a set of six (groups?):
i) Western (the largest and best due to Pakistan),
ii) Eastern (as close to the Western as possible - this I do not see as an issue),
iii) Southern (smaller than the other two, but very potent - to control Sea lines of communication (SLOC)),
iv) Atti-Eastern (Atti - extreme) (read "China Sea") (smaller, but a very potent and self contained naval presence),
v) Spare and
vi) Finally one for assisting Indian Ocean Region (IOR) nations that may request help (perhaps the smallest of the group - with omni-role - yes the Rafale bug - very few ships)

What types of ships each will host will have to be fleshed out.

[Rahul M]

six what ?

LWT : lightweight torpedo.

[uddu]

LWT: Light weight Torpedo. HWT:Heavy weight Torpedo
Guys this is about designing your own Light weight Anti-Submarine Corvette, usually for shallow waters.
Something on this lines
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity ... e&_cview=1

The Indian navy has a requirement for such light weight corvettes.
OT: Another aspect I came to realize while searching for this concept is solution to another problem we face.
The use of Unmanned Surface Vehicles under the police force for patrolling the coast in support of the small patrol boats will be of great help.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_USV
The Unmanned Surface Vehicle concept? Can it be applied for Light corvette?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_surface_vehicle

[NRao]

Guys this is about designing your own Light weight Anti-Submarine Corvette, usually for shallow waters.

That was the original thought.

[Rahul M]

uddu ji, for patrolling jobs unmanned vehicles won't make economic sense for us, it is cheaper to hire 2 guys for a boat. it's different for a life threatening situation or where unmanned vehicles allow you to push the boundaries, like in a UUV.

[uddu]

^^^ There were reports of Pandus not going to sea because the sea was very rough and the boats were not designed for such high sea state. So In support of the two guys when the sea is calm and also when no boats are at sea, these kinds of boats that can patrol will be an added advantage. Not necessary as a one to one replacement but one or two at sea (for an area) will do.

[arya]

first round.

Design your own 500-1000t ASW corvette
_____________________________________

Sir in "Nikat bhavisya" we will need lots of thread like= design your own Tank/Missile/CVG/Rocket and lots of

[uddu]

^^^Those two are already over, we have already designed the FMBT and Tejas Mark-II
This is just free flow of idea rather than anything else, if you are interested, you can also participate. that's all.

[Kersi D]

Requests:

1) When ever we use an acronym for the very first time please spell it out. (LWT????) Not all of us are educated on these things and it would help reduce trips to Uncle Google. Thx.

Suggestions:

1) Would one type of each do? Say for example Corvettes, is it one size fits all? Or would it be prudent to have a corvette for the A&N area, one for the Eastern sea board and one for the Western sea board?

2) Destroyers. China Sea is a must. Along with accompanying ships - flotilla or whatever you want to call it.

3) I feel India needs a set of six (groups?):
i) Western (the largest and best due to Pakistan),
ii) Eastern (as close to the Western as possible - this I do not see as an issue),
iii) Southern (smaller than the other two, but very potent - to control Sea lines of communication (SLOC)),
iv) Atti-Eastern (Atti - extreme) (read "China Sea") (smaller, but a very potent and self contained naval presence),
v) Spare and
vi) Finally one for assisting Indian Ocean Region (IOR) nations that may request help (perhaps the smallest of the group - with omni-role - yes the Rafale bug - very few ships)

What types of ships each will host will have to be fleshed out.

I think it is advisable to have as minimum types as possible. The differences should be functional rather than regional
The basic hull, superstructure and propulsion system should be common, sensors and weapons will change from the role. Please note that I am NOT suggesting a STANFLEX type of ship.

I do not think that the time is ripe for us to go to South China Sea. Our ships could be sitting ducks for Chinkis subs and aircraft. Our submarines are another story.

Kersi

[Kersi D]

first round.

Design your own 500-1000t ASW corvette
_____________________________________

Sir in "Nikat bhavisya" we will need lots of thread like= design your own Tank/Missile/CVG/Rocket and lots of

DON'T WORRY. WE ARE READY !!!!

[bmallick]

My design for the Small ASW corvette.


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/40/unled3cz.jpg

Legend: distance between each grey vertical as well as horizontal like is 3 m. There is a scale below the design, with vertical marks at 30 m distance.

Displacement - 600 tons
Length - 60 m
Beam - 9 m
Draft - 2.5 m

Weapons: (marked in red)
1. 57 mm gun in front at A position.
2. RBU-6000 rocket launcher in B position, ahead of the bridge.
3. 2 x Triple LWT launchers amidship. One on each side of the funnel.
4. 2 x 30 mm Ak-630.
5. 2 x 12.7 mm Heavy machine gun, aft.

The Grey door on each side. just below the funnel would house a RHIB/Small Boat on one side & UUV's on the other.
The section at the aft, below the HMG's & 30 mm AK-630s would house the Low frequency Towed sonar in center and Light weight mine racks on each side. Bow mounted sonar. If required, maybe we can put in a 8 cell Barak-1 Launcher just aft of the Funnel, between the AK-630's. However, since these vessels would be mostly operating in near our home waters, maybe we can do away with the Barak-1.

I have not shown a few more antenna's etc that are required. Just giving you a general idea of whats in my mind.

[Kersi D]

My design for the Small ASW corvette.


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/40/unled3cz.jpg

Legend: distance between each grey vertical as well as horizontal like is 3 m. There is a scale below the design, with vertical marks at 30 m distance.

Displacement - 600 tons
Length - 60 m
Beam - 9 m
Draft - 2.5 m

Weapons: (marked in red)
1. 57 mm gun in front at A position.
2. RBU-6000 rocket launcher in B position, ahead of the bridge.
3. 2 x Triple LWT launchers amidship. One on each side of the funnel.
4. 2 x 30 mm Ak-630.
5. 2 x 12.7 mm Heavy machine gun, aft.

The Grey door on each side. just below the funnel would house a RHIB/Small Boat on one side & UUV's on the other.
The section at the aft, below the HMG's & 30 mm AK-630s would house the Low frequency Towed sonar in center and Light weight mine racks on each side. Bow mounted sonar. If required, maybe we can put in a 8 cell Barak-1 Launcher just aft of the Funnel, between the AK-630's. However, since these vessels would be mostly operating in near our home waters, maybe we can do away with the Barak-1.

I have not shown a few more antenna's etc that are required. Just giving you a general idea of whats in my mind.

I am thinking something similar. But I cannot resist making some changes.

1) Which 57 mm gun are you considering for yr vessel ? Me think the Russian twin 57 mm may be too heavy. Is there any other light weight 57 mm gun from say Oto Melra ? I think we should have a single or two AK 630 guns in lieu of a single 57 mm gun

2) Considering the emphasis on ASW I suggest two RBU 6000 launchers. (By the way can they be reloaded ?)

3) If it is feasible I would have a triple 21" HWT torpedo tubes

4) The two aft AK 630 can retained

5) Rather than HMGs, there should be provision for SA-N-5 Igla / Strela launchers

There must be a HMS and VDS / towed array. One or two tracking/control radars for the AK 630. A small light weight search radar.

Propulsion should be diesel only. I guess 2 x ~ 15,000 hp can give about 25 knots as maximum speed which should be quite sufficient.

I think we have a shrunk version of the Khukri class corvette. But all this may not fit into a 600 T hull, it may go upto 800 to 900 T.


K

[bmallick]

I am thinking something similar. But I cannot resist making some changes.

1) Which 57 mm gun are you considering for yr vessel ? Me think the Russian twin 57 mm may be too heavy. Is there any other light weight 57 mm gun from say Oto Melra ? I think we should have a single or two AK 630 guns in lieu of a single 57 mm gun

2) Considering the emphasis on ASW I suggest two RBU 6000 launchers. (By the way can they be reloaded ?)

3) If it is feasible I would have a triple 21" HWT torpedo tubes

4) The two aft AK 630 can retained

5) Rather than HMGs, there should be provision for SA-N-5 Igla / Strela launchers

There must be a HMS and VDS / towed array. One or two tracking/control radars for the AK 630. A small light weight search radar.

Propulsion should be diesel only. I guess 2 x ~ 15,000 hp can give about 25 knots as maximum speed which should be quite sufficient.

I think we have a shrunk version of the Khukri class corvette. But all this may not fit into a 600 T hull, it may go upto 800 to 900 T.


K

1. I am thinking of the Bofors 57 mm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/57_Mk3
2. Yes the RBU Launchers are re-loadable. Hence the B-Position is raised and one level higher. Since we have the re-loadable launchers, hence I have chosen a single launcher. However, considering the beam is 9 m, I think we can fix in 2 launchers.
3. Well since the RFI called for LWT's hence I have opted for LWT. However, I think we can have triple or twin HWT launchers in the place where the Boats are and move the boats beside the funnel.
5. RFI specifically mentions 2 HMG's. The reason for not having SAM's is because these vessels are intended for coastal operations. As mentioned in my earlier post, if SAM is required, would rather go for the Barak-1 between the 30 mms, rather than IR ManPad. Better to have automatic system.

Yes we have a shrunken Khukri class. However if you see the Pauk class at 550 tons, fits in a 76 mm gun, 4 HWT's & 2 RBU's. Hence fitting almost the same weapon fit, with better sensor, should be possible betwwn 600-800 tons.

How about podded propellors. An al electric ship, with a possibility of few banks of batteries for silent operations.

[John]

1. I am thinking of the Bofors 57 mm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/57_Mk3
2. Yes the RBU Launchers are re-loadable. Hence the B-Position is raised and one level higher. Since we have the re-loadable launchers, hence I have chosen a single launcher. However, considering the beam is 9 m, I think we can fix in 2 launchers.

1. Not sure what the advantage of using Mk 110 (turret has same weight has Oto 76mm) is considering we are more or less standardized around Oto 76 mm.
2. Yes RBU 6000 requires deck penetration for its reload mechanism and rounds, the system itself takes up considerable space and weight. Fitting two into 600 ton vessel will make the vessels overcrowded (like the Poti class) will be ok with one.

[bmallick]

Yes, the Oto 76 mm, gun sounds great, if weight is not much of an issue.

I am also thinking of a version of this same design, whereby we stretch the hull in the middle by 8-12 ms. Thus creating a open space in the deck, just aft of the funnel. This space can be used for having a 4-5 HWT launchers in ASW version and 6-8 AshM for Anti ship version. Also this open space would be covered, thus creating a long flat stretch heli-deck aft.

[ashdivay]

Super sized , hull made of special alloy liter then steel but stronger then it.
2 photon torpedo launchers in the rear, 4 in front, phaser arrey all around top and bottom.
Federation class V warp drive capable of Warp 9.9. Federation Type IV impulse engines, Thruster for small manuvers, Romulan Type-4 Cloaking device, 4 Transporter rooms and 2 cargo transports, Livign quarters for 600 crew members, hows that ?

[Kersi D]

Super sized , hull made of special alloy liter then steel but stronger then it.
2 photon torpedo launchers in the rear, 4 in front, phaser arrey all around top and bottom.
Federation class V warp drive capable of Warp 9.9. Federation Type IV impulse engines, Thruster for small manuvers, Romulan Type-4 Cloaking device, 4 Transporter rooms and 2 cargo transports, Livign quarters for 600 crew members, hows that ?

Cannot understand your language.

[ashdivay]

Super sized , hull made of special alloy liter then steel but stronger then it.
2 photon torpedo launchers in the rear, 4 in front, phaser arrey all around top and bottom.
Federation class V warp drive capable of Warp 9.9. Federation Type IV impulse engines, Thruster for small manuvers, Romulan Type-4 Cloaking device, 4 Transporter rooms and 2 cargo transports, Livign quarters for 600 crew members, hows that ?

Cannot understand your language.

its a joke, nevermind. lol

[Singha]

proposed P17A-mki next-gen std frigate:
====================================

displacement fully loaded - 6500t
length - as long as the P17 Shivalik class + maybe 5m
propulsion - same as shivalik class (codag - pielstick and ge lm2500)

armament - fore to aft
====================
Oto 127mm long range cannon, using AA, HE and vulcano ER shells
32 x barak8 cells on foredeck
2 x stealth RBU turrets mounted at same level just behind the SAMs
2 x HWT TT on each beam near main funnel hidden behind flush sliding doors
6 x Brahmos/Nirbhay in inclined high angle tubes in a concave "well" area behind main funnel (nothing visible from side)
no helicopter hanger
2 x 16 barak1 fitted one on each beam beside the rear mast
3 x AK630 - one on each beam, one atop the heli hanger area.

four options for fitment in ex-heli hanger volume:
- AAW oriented "A" model - 32 cell Barak8
- strike oriented "B" model - 24 cell brahmos/nirbhay VL array
- marine support oriented "C" model - 32 cell prahaar MLRS array
- ABM defence "D" model - 24 AD1 / AD2 interceptor missiles

This would be such that with few days of dockside work, the systems are interchangeable...so any model can morph into any model with a few days of rework.

helicopter deck with hauldown system but no hanger or repair facility


Sensors:
=======
MF-Star arrays on main mast
upgraded Revathi on the after mast (400km surveillance in 3d), in ABM "D" model this would be deleted and instead a powerful "Swordfish2" radar fitted to track inbound missiles
BEL-Elop 360' rotating IRST sensor atop main mast
BEL-Elisra radar decoy launchers
various ESM and ECM measures
anti torpedo decoy pulling system in the stern
rotary firescout type UAV launcher (and small hanger) and control station
high frequency mine hunting sonar
UUV launcher to help navigate shallow areas and mine infested waters
ability to network with other IN ships and "take over and guide" barak8s fired from nearby platforms.
laser system to hunt mines and talk to submarines

Crew - world class accomodation a couple notches better than P17, 5* kitchen with the best of food service, sun/exercise deck for crew in the "well" area behind main funnel, internal 5* gym to workout


Goal - except for the ASW helicopters, this ship would be overwhelmingly powerful and stealthy compared to the P15 or P17 classes it would replace. Hull shaping and multi functional antennas to produce a look equivalent to the Type45 or Lafayette class

Guideline Cost - $700 mil - $1b each depending on A/B/C/D model

[Rahul M]

hmmm, P17A is not going to replace P15 or P17 anytime soon, it is the godavari and kashins that will be replaced.

I have a couple of objections, the 2 helos per capital ship is a policy IN adopted after much thought and analysis and IMHO it would be unwise to mess with that.
second is that I think the frigates should have decent all round capability throughout the class. they are usually used for stand alone escort duties and should be able to carry out that job on their own.
specialization should be done on the larger destroyers like the P15B and follow-on classes.

a ship operating stand alone means 4 basic capabilities need to be there
ASW
ASuW
AAW
SAR and limited SF support for boarding and similar activities. (warships usually carry a small unit of MarCo's)

if you cut down one helo then either the SAR/commando support or the ASW helo will have to be sacrificed.

IMO frigates shouldn't be tasked with land attack beyond what is possible with a main gun (which is a LOT for the oto 127mm/vulcano combo) and a couple of brahmos rounds.

[uddu]

The P17A's will have two helis. It seems that capability cannot be compromised with the threats from subs keep increasing.
The P17A's are supposed to solve the problem to have more weapons by being slightly broader and longer compared to P17s.
http://www.stratpost.com/ins-shivalik-s ... multiplier
According to Captain Suresh, an IAF AWACS can share data with the Shivalik, allowing it to conduct conduct mandated operations in its area of deployment. This potential, once fully developed, could yield huge dividends in terms of operational flexibility, especially once, more of these and the follow-on Project 17A frigates, start flying the Indian ensign.

The Defense Acquisitions Council has approved the construction of seven Project 17A frigates, the stealth frigate class following on from the Shivalik. Admiral Malhi says the P17A class frigates are ‘likely to be longer and broader’ and will carry indigenous weapons systems like the Brahmos (jointly developed by India and Russia) and the Barak NG (jointly developed by India and Israel). According to him, MDL is to build four Project 17A frigates and GRSE (Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers) three such warships.

The Arleigh Burke, design to be broader is said to have helped the ship to be more stable.
Also lighter superstructure made of composite materials may be used to reduce weight.

[uddu]

For the massive weapon carrying capability mentioned by members here. it seems a cruiser is better suited to do that job. India must have some number of cruisers of about 15000 tons (May be reduced tonnage with use of composite materials). Say 5-6 in numbers. Don't know whether the time has come to start it's construction. May be beginning of construction in 2014 and completion in 2020 will be good.
P15B class of destroyers may have some limited number of Nirbhay's onboard. But that's not enough. We may need dedicated ships, but lesser in numbers.
But overall the main problem that's with Indian shipbuilding is the huge time frame. The reduction of timeframe by utilizing modern construction techniques is a necessity. Heard that modular construction techniques will be used on P17A's and P15B's.
The next generation technique in warship construction is going to be massive use of composite materials and overall construction using composite materials. We must start mastering this from now on and start making our ships lighter in whatever ways possible.
Pdf file

[Singha]

the ship I outlined is a frigate only in chankian sense, its a DDG++ for all intents and purposes given its massive firepower. so let me restate it to say P15B instead of P17A. you can keep the helis and make it 10m longer and 1.5m wider than the initial ppt.

however its the P18 dedicated AAW ship which interests me a lot.

full load 9500t (around the DDG51 size)
===================================
64 cell barak8 array on foredeck
76mm rapid fire oto gun loaded with smart AA/anti-missile rounds
32 cell barak1 for self-defence
4 x ciws guns
64 cell barak8 array between funnel and heli hanger
full ABM capable radar on rear mast
16 cells amidships for AD1/AD2/AAD abm weapons for sea based missile defence
Mf-star v2 on main mast
2 helicopters (AEW ka31++)

we could build 3 of these ships as principal escorts for our 3 a/c carrier groups. there is no way we can afford 50, but perhaps 3 in phase1 and 3 in phase2.

the ability to detect and target a serious attack by PLANAF Flankers and J-10c should be designed in from the outset in terms of missile loadout, radar, multi target guidance, ECM , networking with other shooters, ability to merge picture with awacs/ka31 etc....minimum should be guide a pack of 8 in-flight missiles into a 90' quadrant and total 32 in-flight missiles spread 8,8,8,8 into the four quadrants. that should be enough to beat back a squadron sized attack....rest of it co-operative handoff to other ships like P17 and P17A should target

this will be our desi "Aegis" - this ship rather than P17A is where the Type45 expertise of UK would come in handy.

[bmallick]

Proposed P-17A. Modified Shivalik. Please note that the drawing is not to scale and does not contain loads of details, especially of sensors. It just shows the layout.


http://imageshack.us/f/824/p17a.jpg
Standard Fit:
1. 12 Brahmos
2. 1 RBU
3. 32 Barak-1
4. 2 x 2 HWT
5. 2 x AK630
6. 2 x Heli-Hangar

Apart from the above weapons the main flexibility being envisaged is the 56 cell Universal VLS, which can take the following:
1. Barak-8
2. Klub ASW
3. Nirbhay

Hence the loadout of these missiles would depend on the mission being proposed. For example the layout can be ( as already mentioned in another thread):
1. 56 Barak-8, for AAW mission.
2. 32 Barak-8, 8 Klub ASW, 16 nirbhay, general purpose.
3. 24 Barak-8, 32 Nirbhay for Land Attack.

Infact even if we reduce the VLS to 48 total, that still gives us decent numbers.
1. 48 Barak-8, for AAW mission.
2. 24 Barak-8, 8 Klub ASW, 16 nirbhay, general purpose.
3. 24 Barak-8, 24 Nirbhay for Land Attack.

[Singha]

they key challenge will be this universal UVLS thing as the diameter of each missile is different, sub caliber adapter tubes are needed to accomodate the smaller ones, with the fattest one defining the main tube size and using no adapter.

in mk41 vls they are able to pack 4 x ESSM in place of 1 x SM2 which is a superb arrangement and avoids separate arrays or boxes of ESSM. the Aster30 and Aster15 seem to use same diameter tubes albeit there are 3 models of Sylver each with varying depths ....

for us I guess we can keep barak1 and its SR successors like maitri separate and focus on sub caliber adapters for the big missiles alone.

[bmallick]

The key definitely is the Universal VLS. However the flexiblity provided by a U-VLS is tremendous, hence we should take this into account in all our missile developments. The VLS can be used by all services. The same idea is shown with respect to the Prahar missile for example. If Pinaka and Prahar, and other tactical missiles use the same Launcher, then we do not need dedicated trucks for each system. Every truck mounted system can be used for all work. What this means that if the army has 500 such trucks, then it has 500 Pinaka launchers or 500 Prahar launchers as the need be. Same for the naval vessels.

Hence the U-VLS has to be designed and all missiles designed with this in mind.

Infact, what prevents the VLS being used in inclined position? If nothing, then just design a Universal Launcher. Which can be used both in inclined as well as Vertical mode. All the dancing for orientation is anyway done by the missile and not the launcher.

[John]

Infact, what prevents the VLS being used in inclined position? If nothing, then just design a Universal Launcher. Which can be used both in inclined as well as Vertical mode. All the dancing for orientation is anyway done by the missile and not the launcher.

You mean a below deck inclined launchers Russians have tried that. To reduce the risk involved with cold launch but it uses up more space than vertically configured launchers and little more of a hassle to reload.

Brahmos would require changes to be adapted for hot launch and heck even if we can we need to design a new VLS launcher since it can't even fit into Mk 57 vls system. So a common VLS system for Barak-8 and Brahmos is unlikely.

IMO we should make sure whatever VLS system is used for Barak-8, this is also capable of firing Nirbhay and we need to build a family of missiles around it (Ashm, ASROC etc).

[bmallick]

You mean a below deck inclined launchers Russians have tried that. To reduce the risk involved with cold launch but it uses up more space than vertically configured launchers and little more of a hassle to reload.
IMO we should make sure whatever VLS system is used for Barak-8, this is also capable of firing Nirbhay and we need to build a family of missiles around it (Ashm, ASROC etc).

When I said a Universal launcher for both Vertical & Inclined launch, I was not restricting the idea to naval platforms only. A launcher which would be vertical on large ships & land based silos and inclined on smaller ships & land mobile platforms.

[John]

^ Brahmos' L&T launcher is the same for vertical and inclined configuration iirc. Unless you are speaking of a hot launch mechanism? In which case why do we need to worry about diverting exhaust in an inclined launch or worry about a fail launch for that matter. All you need is a simple steel structure to hold the missile canister and absorb the shock.

[Mark Walpole]

Wont it be more desirable and prudent to create a single modular platform with removable mission components and weaponry to suit the required mission profiles. A 3t to 5t vessel with the same external hull and similar super structure. Mission components manufactured as blocks to be added when required. Weapon system to be mated to the structure as removable pods/ cells allowing conversion from different specs..

A set number of kashtan CIWS systems around the structure, blocks for VLS systems to allow for AA, LCM's and ASW. A receptacle for allowing different Oto Melara gun systems.
I do realize that this is a lot to ask and required tech in these areas to be realized with humongous investment required but in today's battlefields a systems adaptability will be its greatest asset. This would also potentially reduce the turnaround times for newer ships as the same set of blueprints can be used to create multiple hulls across the various ship yards and the weapon / C4I EW suites etc integrated by a separate section.
This is very much a dream but i would like to think that Indian industry would finally get streamlined in the near future to allow for creation of such systems.

MS

[Singha]

Blohm and Voss of germany was one of the pioneers of modular weapons units in the 1980s. it means all the stuff needed by the weapon system is contained in a "box" below it and uses std electrical and data interfaces provided from rest of ship and other stuff like control boxes and radars are also housed in discrete containers.
later the whole industry has adopted it.

what you say goes one level beyond it - for this, we need UVLS systems with necessary adapters for all types of missiles and back-end control systems and radars that are totally multifunctional and can handle all this diversity smoothly. same goes for CIC, power plants, HVAC system , living areas designed from ground up for incremental scaling up with ship tonnage and necessity. maybe the MEKO family of ships use that idea?

so far except for sher khan using SM2 , ESSM and tomahawks from Mk41 vls, have not seen anyone there yet...the french will fit naval Scalp onto Sylver A70 vls with aster15 & 30 and be the 2nd past the post probably.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEKO

its good idea if you are producing multiple ship classes in parallel with same levels of tech, not slow coach like us who take 10 yrs for FFG and hence have to jump one gen with each flight of ships

[AbhiJ]

the ship I outlined is a frigate only in chankian sense, its a DDG++ for all intents and purposes given its massive firepower. so let me restate it to say P15B instead of P17A. you can keep the helis and make it 10m longer and 1.5m wider than the initial ppt.

however its the P18 dedicated AAW ship which interests me a lot.

full load 9500t (around the DDG51 size)
===================================
64 cell barak8 array on foredeck
76mm rapid fire oto gun loaded with smart AA/anti-missile rounds
32 cell barak1 for self-defence
4 x ciws guns
64 cell barak8 array between funnel and heli hanger
full ABM capable radar on rear mast
16 cells amidships for AD1/AD2/AAD abm weapons for sea based missile defence
Mf-star v2 on main mast
2 helicopters (AEW ka31++)

we could build 3 of these ships as principal escorts for our 3 a/c carrier groups. there is no way we can afford 50, but perhaps 3 in phase1 and 3 in phase2.

the ability to detect and target a serious attack by PLANAF Flankers and J-10c should be designed in from the outset in terms of missile loadout, radar, multi target guidance, ECM , networking with other shooters, ability to merge picture with awacs/ka31 etc....minimum should be guide a pack of 8 in-flight missiles into a 90' quadrant and total 32 in-flight missiles spread 8,8,8,8 into the four quadrants. that should be enough to beat back a squadron sized attack....rest of it co-operative handoff to other ships like P17 and P17A should target

this will be our desi "Aegis" - this ship rather than P17A is where the Type45 expertise of UK would come in handy.

Also could be Accommodated with 24 Nribhays.

[Bala Vignesh]

Abhij,
why should a dedicated Anti Air Warfare ship carry subsonic Land attack cruise missile??