Indian Navy News & Discussion - 22 April 2015

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 02 Jul 2015 18:47

I think Lithium ion batteries will replace any AIP work going forward.

Soryu has 400 tons of battery.
Kilo has 192 tons of battery.

Some new tech breakthroughs:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NE ... 23/366762/

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 02 Jul 2015 20:26

Another good report by our Maz here http://www.janes.com/article/52703/grse ... ndian-navy

Note the good range (2,000 n miles at 12-14 kt), armament (Armament consists of a 30 mm CRN-91 gun mount and associated stabilised optronic pedestal for fire control, machine guns, and man-portable Igla surface-to-air missiles.) and communications, including Rukmini! (navigation radar, a LINK II tactical datalink and satellite communication (SATCOM) antenna for connectivity to the Indian Navy's 'Rukmani' SATCOM network.)

The older Seaward Defence Boats, built at GRSE, used to have Seaking's dunking sonar & depth charge rails. Hope a similar low cost ASW variant is built with the Abhay / ALTAS sonar and L&T TT exploiting the high sprint speed (35 knots) and endurance (2000 nm) of this platform.

Maybe what looks suspiciously like a single lightweight TT on a traversing mount next to aft funnel of INS Ranvijay can help https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 35-400.jpg

INS Ranvijay is probably the only ship in the world with two types of TT launchers, 533 mm and 324 mm.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 02 Jul 2015 20:28

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/rest-of ... -at-vizag/

Indian MIG-29K Finally Arrive at Vizag

The latest space snapshots acquired by the commercial satellite firm DigitalGlobe show eleven of the carrier-based aircraft parked on the south apron of the airbase at Vizag. It appears the aircraft arrived since previous imagery was taken in March. Two Hawk Mk 132 trainer and a new aircraft hangar (under construction) were also visible on imagery at the time of capture...

For the past few years India has been talking about putting a MIG-29K squadron at Vizag’s naval air station, INS Dega. Vizag is home to India’s Eastern Naval Command and its strategically important nuclear submarines.

The Navy has said it will establish up to three squadrons flying the Russian-built platform, one for each of its flanks and another for training. Its first squadron, INAS 303 aka the “Black Panthers,” was already stood-up at Goa-based INS Hansa in 2013 — three years after India began taking delivery of the aircraft. The squadron, comprised of 12 fighters, is led by veteran Sea Harrier pilot Captain A.D. Theophilus.

Deploying the MIG-29K at INS Dega suggests that India is preparing to announce the formation of its second squadron of the multi-role fighters. It also underscores the further importance of the airbase which already supports maritime surveillance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft. Now India appears to be taking the next step in plans to support aircraft aboard a future carrier, its first subordinate to its Eastern Naval Command.

However, it should be noted that those plans are still over three years away. INS Vikrant, India’s second carrier to sport the aircraft, won’t be ready for operation until December 2018 — if then. In late May, the carrier missed it’s undocking date due to “unfavorable conditions” — a development not surprising given India’s shipbuilding record. In fact, the boat is already four years behind schedule.

In the meantime, India expects delivery of 12 more MIG-29K from Russia during the 2015-2016 period. According to SIPRI’s arms trade database, India’s total MIG-29K numbers should reach 45 aircraft after final delivery. Future numbers should be interesting to watch given India and the US announced the development of an aircraft carrier working group. If the US and India agree on some type of technology sharing for India’s second homegrown carrier, it’s likely the South Asian country will move closer to the US and by extension acquire US-built fighters.

Beyond the Indian Navy’s newer MIG-29Ks, the Indian Air Force also flies 66 older MIG-29s. Those aircraft are being upgraded to MIG-29UPG (MIG-29SMT) variant by Russia.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 02 Jul 2015 20:32

tsarkar wrote:Another good report by our Maz here http://www.janes.com/article/52703/grse ... ndian-navy

Note the good range (2,000 n miles at 12-14 kt), armament (Armament consists of a 30 mm CRN-91 gun mount and associated stabilised optronic pedestal for fire control, machine guns, and man-portable Igla surface-to-air missiles.) and communications, including Rukmini! (navigation radar, a LINK II tactical datalink and satellite communication (SATCOM) antenna for connectivity to the Indian Navy's 'Rukmani' SATCOM network.)

The older Seaward Defence Boats, built at GRSE, used to have Seaking's dunking sonar & depth charge rails. Hope a similar low cost ASW variant is built with the Abhay / ALTAS sonar and L&T TT.

is this normal to see water mark on the hull as if they have been out in the elements for couple of years for a new ship..?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 02 Jul 2015 20:46

Yes, very common, for all ships. Ships show rust marks even on a single deployment. Here is a TFTA ship showing rust marks in the real world on just a single deployment
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... DG-79).jpg
http://www.combatindex.com/hardware/ima ... g79_15.jpg

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 02 Jul 2015 21:08

Prithwiraj wrote:https://www.bellingcat.com/news/rest-of ... -at-vizag/

Indian MIG-29K Finally Arrive at Vizag

The latest space snapshots acquired by the commercial satellite firm DigitalGlobe show eleven of the carrier-based aircraft parked on the south apron of the airbase at Vizag. It appears the aircraft arrived since previous imagery was taken in March. Two Hawk Mk 132 trainer and a new aircraft hangar (under construction) were also visible on imagery at the time of capture...

For the past few years India has been talking about putting a MIG-29K squadron at Vizag’s naval air station, INS Dega. Vizag is home to India’s Eastern Naval Command and its strategically important nuclear submarines.

The Navy has said it will establish up to three squadrons flying the Russian-built platform, one for each of its flanks and another for training. Its first squadron, INAS 303 aka the “Black Panthers,” was already stood-up at Goa-based INS Hansa in 2013 — three years after India began taking delivery of the aircraft. The squadron, comprised of 12 fighters, is led by veteran Sea Harrier pilot Captain A.D. Theophilus.

Deploying the MIG-29K at INS Dega suggests that India is preparing to announce the formation of its second squadron of the multi-role fighters. It also underscores the further importance of the airbase which already supports maritime surveillance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft. Now India appears to be taking the next step in plans to support aircraft aboard a future carrier, its first subordinate to its Eastern Naval Command.

However, it should be noted that those plans are still over three years away. INS Vikrant, India’s second carrier to sport the aircraft, won’t be ready for operation until December 2018 — if then. In late May, the carrier missed it’s undocking date due to “unfavorable conditions” — a development not surprising given India’s shipbuilding record. In fact, the boat is already four years behind schedule.

In the meantime, India expects delivery of 12 more MIG-29K from Russia during the 2015-2016 period. According to SIPRI’s arms trade database, India’s total MIG-29K numbers should reach 45 aircraft after final delivery. Future numbers should be interesting to watch given India and the US announced the development of an aircraft carrier working group. If the US and India agree on some type of technology sharing for India’s second homegrown carrier, it’s likely the South Asian country will move closer to the US and by extension acquire US-built fighters.

Beyond the Indian Navy’s newer MIG-29Ks, the Indian Air Force also flies 66 older MIG-29s. Those aircraft are being upgraded to MIG-29UPG (MIG-29SMT) variant by Russia.

So our Philip's dream-cum-prediction is coming true !!

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 02 Jul 2015 21:43

Philip wrote:Come on Kersi,be realistic.The Gorshkov was a one-off deal. In retrospect,it was very poorly detailed and negoitiated,especially as it was originally built in the UKR which reportedly couldn't even hand over all plans of the ship.The issue has been flogged to death and the carrier is now in service with the IN for well over a year without any major problems,the most potent force in the IN's fleet.If one wants to talk about bad deals,what about the Scorpene sub scandal and its ever increasing pricing and repeated delays for brand new subs not a complicated conversion of a cruiser-carrier into a regular flat top?!

Philip. I agree that "he Gorshkov was a one-off deal. In retrospect,it was very poorly detailed and negotiated" which means that Russia took us for a ride.

The situation regarding T 90 is similar. I am not too sure regarding the SU 30MKI.

Two wrongs do not make one right.

Yes the others also may have played such tricks on us

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 03 Jul 2015 00:17

Excellent report. Good to see multiple ships being launched together, but it still took them 2 years to reach this stage.

Tarmugli (T 91),
Tillanchang (T 92)
Tihayu (T 93)
Tarasa (T??)

Aside from Tihayu, the other three names have been carried forward from retired/transferred hulls.

They skipped pennants T87 - T90 for some reason.

http://orbat.info/cimh/navy/Indian_Navy ... essels.pdf

tsarkar wrote:Another good report by our Maz here http://www.janes.com/article/52703/grse ... ndian-navy...

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 03 Jul 2015 01:34

Chuck Hill picked up this report:

http://chuckhillscgblog.net/2015/06/26/ ... ith-ascms/

India’s leading defence shipyard, Goa Shipyard Ltd (GSL) has submitted a proposal to the Indian Navy to construct offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) armed with missiles.

“We have submitted a proposal to the Indian Navy that all the future OPVs should be developed with the missile on board.

That will give more combat muscle to the vessel. If fitted with missile, the pricing of the vessel goes up only by ten per cent,”

The debate on IN's choice of armaments apparently not confined to BRF alone...

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 03 Jul 2015 01:51

IMHO, i would like to configure Saryus with:

Option-1 (General Purpose):

1. Revathi air search radar.
2. HUMSA-NG

Option-2 (ASW):

1. HUMSA-NG
2. ALTAS
3. HWT

Option-3 (GP-light):

1. Lynx U2
2. SIMBAD style air defence missile system

Needless to say, a medium heptr with AShMs, torps stowage aboard.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Jul 2015 11:33

A year back while in the capital was debating the same issue with one-in-the-know. Underutilisation of the OPVs,which have great scope for being more lethal. If we examine our surface fleet strength,two areas of concern are mine warfare vessels and ASW combatants,esp. for coastal duties. This is being taken care of by the proposed shallow water ASW corvettes,approx. 750T+,which would put them in the Nanuchka type class/size. However,if made a little larger,they could field an open helo deck,or even a hangar below as featured in an ingenious Ru corvette design,along with a TAS/VDS at the stern. MBUs and TTs would make up the rest of the ASW weaponry package. The same hull could be used for developing an MCM,unless one wanted the entire hull to be of an anti-magnetic material.

The OPVs on the other hand are ocean-going,have a helo hangar,but need more punch,both for all round self defence,ASW prosecution and anti-surface weaponry.This would give them a "pocket frigate" capability,but as they are available in large number,would be v.useful in the support cast.

PS:Tsarkar,v.interesting about the two types of TTs aboard the R class DDG.Any feedback about the same? The Soviet Pauk (Abhay)class corvettes also had two types of tubes,16" and 21",not sure whether any had both.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jul 2015 23:20

@Philip - The single TT is probably for trials. The export Pauks have 533 mm tubes while the Soviet ships had the smaller tubes. Indian ships have the 533 mm tubes.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 05 Jul 2015 22:28

http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/09/24/t ... destroyer/

A comparison between Kolkata class and Chinese 52D class. 52D edges out Kolkata because of the reason we all discussed about, the later is really under armed for its size and class.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 05 Jul 2015 22:44

Air Defense has been broken into 3 separate categories to ensure the Chinese win. Individually, Kolkata still trumps the Chinese Boat in each of these categories even against saturation attack. While it does not have the quantity in projectiles, it has quality in spades combined with superior sensor.
Kolkata will loose out if it has to protect simultaneously from saturation attack from near range, far range as well as area defense due to lesser number of missiles. But the enemy will also have pyrrhic victory for mounting such an attack. So IN designers took a prudent decision unlike the designers from our north.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 05 Jul 2015 23:31

Not sure if it was to "ensure" Chinese win because we concur with the reason that Kolkata is under armed and Kolkata scores higher points in other departments in the comparision. We can't assume that the enemy will have a pyrrhic victory, because in Chinese case, they have numerical advantage both in terms of missiles and warships(saw a news report that said they are building 10 destroyers now).

John · Post by **John** » 06 Jul 2015 00:16

Karthik S wrote:http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/09/24/t ... destroyer/

A comparison between Kolkata class and Chinese 52D class. 52D edges out Kolkata because of the reason we all discussed about, the later is really under armed for its size and class.

It doesn't take into account Type 52D great weakness is its low Type 348 radar placement greatly reduces its radar horizon against sea skimming missiles, P-15A will have 60-100% range superiority in detection range of missiles.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 06 Jul 2015 12:26

John wrote:
Karthik S wrote:http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/09/24/t ... destroyer/

A comparison between Kolkata class and Chinese 52D class. 52D edges out Kolkata because of the reason we all discussed about, the later is really under armed for its size and class.
It doesn't take into account Type 52D great weakness is its low Type 348 radar placement greatly reduces its radar horizon against sea skimming missiles, P-15A will have 60-100% range superiority in detection range of missiles.

It's the same to say that Arleigh Burke is inferior to Daring in missile detection just because of the lower radar placement.

John · Post by **John** » 06 Jul 2015 14:33

SNaik wrote: It's the same to say that Arleigh Burke is inferior to Daring in missile detection just because of the lower radar placement.

Yes Type 45 superior detection range against missiles has been brought up numerous times by royal navy enthusiasts. During design of type 45 royal navy believed that increasing height of mast greatly increases its survivability against missile saturation attacks than adding more vls cells to the design.

As for burke Spy 1 is still placed in higher location than its counterpart in 052d and also USN isnt sweating over thst since it mainly relies on E2C to detect missiles.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 Jul 2015 15:40

John wrote:
Karthik S wrote:http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/09/24/t ... destroyer/

A comparison between Kolkata class and Chinese 52D class. 52D edges out Kolkata because of the reason we all discussed about, the later is really under armed for its size and class.
It doesn't take into account Type 52D great weakness is its low Type 348 radar placement greatly reduces its radar horizon against sea skimming missiles, P-15A will have 60-100% range superiority in detection range of missiles.

To be fair, it did take that into account - gave the Kolkata 10/10 each on the 'radar' and 'missile defence', compared to 8/10 each for the Type 52D.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 06 Jul 2015 16:36

^I don't think he mentioned the height per se. His higher score for Kolkata was on account of the better Israeli radar, which anyone with any brains knows is streets ahead of any copied crap the chinese can put out.

John · Post by **John** » 06 Jul 2015 21:34

Yes i didn't see anything mentioned regardless that. Also 52D lacks a good long range secondary air search like LW-08, granted in future i hope P-15A's LW-08 is replaced with good 3D radar such as EL/M-2238 or larger version of 3D CAR so it can be used as backup weapons control radar for barak-8.

Plus P-15A there is still many questions which are left unanswered. So one cannot do any comparison till rest of vessels are inducted:
- Will Barak-1 be fitted on the vessel taken of course from retiring ships?
- Oto SR will be replaced with Oto 127mm? Janes article indicates they will used to be Shivalik and Delhi would make sense to include P-15A as well if P-17 are getting Oto 127mm.
- Barak-8 ER?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jul 2015 22:20

The LW-08 is L-Band, correct? That has its uses. Plus BEL has mastered the LW-08 design, it works and we are good at supporting it.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 Jul 2015 23:19

Karan M wrote:The LW-08 is L-Band, correct? That has its uses. Plus BEL has mastered the LW-08 design, it works and we are good at supporting it.

D-band. (IEEE: L-band).

Technical Specifications

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 06 Jul 2015 23:56

John wrote:...- Oto SR will be replaced with Oto 127mm? Janes article indicates they will used to be Shivalik and Delhi would make sense to include P-15A as well if P-17 are getting Oto 127mm...

I am not very convinced whether 127 mm is the right way ahead, given that we dont have a strong use case for Naval Gun Fire Support.

76 mm cannons are considered excellent air defence weapons, and can even work as a CWiz, which IMHO is a more important role. I would rather have two more Otos replacing 2 AK-630 installations amidships.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Jul 2015 00:21

Agree Aditya - when was the last time we or anyone else sent a ship into harms way against an organized state with heavy weapons, missiles, some 40-50 km off the coast to do naval gunfire support?
It seems a niche capability only useful against non state actors.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 07 Jul 2015 01:26

IMHO Kolkata class needs subsonic AShM and SR SAM, right now it's weaponry is either high-end long range (Brahmos and B8)or short range (RBU and AK 630).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Jul 2015 01:52

Viv S wrote:
Karan M wrote:The LW-08 is L-Band, correct? That has its uses. Plus BEL has mastered the LW-08 design, it works and we are good at supporting it.
D-band. (IEEE: L-band).

Technical Specifications

I meant IEEE itself - don't quite remember the other conventions. Anyways, good to have a L Band radar - should give us some sensor diversity versus LO targets optimized against the "lower" X/S Bands.
We can then use it to cue a high power beam from the S Band MF STAR for weapons control and guidance. The Chinese seem to be doing the same concept on their 52D with two types of radar (though arguably their early warning set is even better from the band angle, being VHF though imprecise) and we seem to have a similar intent as well.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Jul 2015 01:53

Karthik S wrote:IMHO Kolkata class needs subsonic AShM and SR SAM, right now it's weaponry is either high-end long range (Brahmos and B8)or short range (RBU and AK 630).

Mind you Nirbhay won't come cheap either (smaller production runs than Brahmos) and the SRSAM will have French involvement aka expensive.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 07 Jul 2015 02:10

Cybaru wrote:I think Lithium ion batteries will replace any AIP work going forward.

Soryu has 400 tons of battery.
Kilo has 192 tons of battery.

Some new tech breakthroughs:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NE ... 23/366762/

I wonder if the Kilos can be upgraded using LiIon batteries for much greater 'electric only' endurance. Will also be safer as charging the LiIon batteries does not release hydrogen.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 07 Jul 2015 02:40

Karan M wrote:
Karthik S wrote:IMHO Kolkata class needs subsonic AShM and SR SAM, right now it's weaponry is either high-end long range (Brahmos and B8)or short range (RBU and AK 630).
Mind you Nirbhay won't come cheap either (smaller production runs than Brahmos) and the SRSAM will have French involvement aka expensive.

I was referring to Kh-35 types. Not sure if there is enough space in Kolkata to carry a meaningful load of Nirbhays.

John · Post by **John** » 07 Jul 2015 02:55

Karthik S wrote:
I was referring to Kh-35 types. Not sure if there is enough space in Kolkata to carry a meaningful load of Nirbhays.

L&T UVLS should be able to fire other canisterized missiles that can fit in it.

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 07 Jul 2015 03:39

Karthik S wrote:http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/09/24/t ... destroyer/

A comparison between Kolkata class and Chinese 52D class. 52D edges out Kolkata because of the reason we all discussed about, the later is really under armed for its size and class.

I would not break a sweat on this comparison. It's quite clear that our Navy designed Kolkata class to triumph over 'any' surface combatant in IOR, including type 52d.

It's another story if we venture 'alone' outside of IOR, by that i mean without been part of a carrier task force. But that is not going to happen anytime soon and when we do venture outside IOR, Kolkata will be armed to the brim with 'newer' missiles to match type-xyz.

A lone destroyer in high seas is a risky mission by itself, immaterial of what it is carrying to defend/attack - sign of desperation.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2015 08:34

there is no clarity on kolkata class as no cutaway drawings have been released. there might be space upfront and in the back ahead of the helicopter hangar to take more VLS, but only claims for now.

a ship as wide as the DDG51 or Daring class is best if you want a lot of VLS cells. our ships are narrower.

amit · Post by **amit** » 07 Jul 2015 08:52

nik wrote:
Karthik S wrote:http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/09/24/t ... destroyer/

A comparison between Kolkata class and Chinese 52D class. 52D edges out Kolkata because of the reason we all discussed about, the later is really under armed for its size and class.
I would not break a sweat on this comparison. It's quite clear that our Navy designed Kolkata class to triumph over 'any' surface combatant in IOR, including type 52d.

It's another story if we venture 'alone' outside of IOR, by that i mean without been part of a carrier task force. But that is not going to happen anytime soon and when we do venture outside IOR, Kolkata will be armed to the brim with 'newer' missiles to match type-xyz.

A lone destroyer in high seas is a risky mission by itself, immaterial of what it is carrying to defend/attack - sign of desperation.

My reading of the report seems to suggest while the Chinese 52D class is at the end of its evolutionary cycle, the Kolkata class is just at the beginning with a lot of empty space for future upgrades. Also hasn't the Kolkata class been designed to be part of our future carrier battle groups? If that's the case then a lot of the so called deficiencies vis a vis the 52D get negated.

Another point is the radar, the MF-Star is definitely better than the Chinese knock off of Ageis system that they obtained through espionage. I would bet Kolkata would get a first look at the Chinese vessel in any one-to-one confrontation.

vina · Post by **vina** » 07 Jul 2015 09:55

a ship as wide as the DDG51 or Daring class is best if you want a lot of VLS cells. our ships are narrower.

Thumb rule. Long, narrow and deep, best . The Chinese D51 is 9m shorter than Kolkata and has 1000 tons more displacement. It has to be wider. It will a fatter, shorter, boat. Not the better design choice of the two from pure hydrodynamics.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 07 Jul 2015 10:06

Karan M wrote:
Karthik S wrote:IMHO Kolkata class needs subsonic AShM and SR SAM, right now it's weaponry is either high-end long range (Brahmos and B8)or short range (RBU and AK 630).
Mind you Nirbhay won't come cheap either (smaller production runs than Brahmos) and the SRSAM will have French involvement aka expensive.

I cannot comment on the cost of Nirbhay as I don't have clue !!
But I think Nirbhay will have a long production run. I am sure IA, IAF and IN will buy it in substantial quanities. Its import contentoudl be lower than say Brahmoso it may be economical for Idian service to buy it in "substantial" numbers
K

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 07 Jul 2015 10:11

An aam aadmi question

Which type ship has better shiphandling characteristics, higher or lower length-to-width ratio. Common sense tell me that a vessel with a lower length-to-width ratio would sail better through stormy weather, but my common sense is very un common !!!!
K

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2015 11:20

my nautical experience is limited to one boat trip in a big lake in upstate NY. as the master and commander of 4 munnas with 1 swimmer among us, I asked the lady at the rental shop what would be best for such seasoned mariners like us - long and narrow speedboat with a powerful engine or a flat bottom square shaped pontoon boat with twin booms in the water and a small engine.

she took one look and advised us strongly to go for the wide twin-hull pontoon as that was more stable in waves...her hubby added that we should avoid going into the main part of the lake as wind could whip up waves 3 feet high there if the weather turned south(it did in the afternoon).

we stayed within 100m of the shore and went into a river of sorts later...on way back managed to ground the boat on a sandbank...the swimmer guy got down into knee deep water and pushed us off again

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Jul 2015 11:48

Hull dynamics can only be proven at sea despite extensive simulation,hydro model trials. One clue,when the Delhis were first put into service,there was a quote from a naval offr. that they were so easy to handle "like a corvette". The Kol class however does have some extra topside weight with the mainmast and radar.,supposedly going to be altered in follow on variants. The Russian hulls,both Kashin and Krivak, from which the Delhi and Talwar classes are derived from,have proven their robustness of the design for decades.

However,as some are saying,the Kol class needs a greater "defence in depth" with both SR and LR SAMs,a BPDMS/CIWS like the Pantsir (Palma),lighter and more compact than the Kortik/Kashtan,plus Nirbhay.
With Nirbhay aboard,the striking range of our surface fleet will be truly enhanced giving us a Tomahawak class capability. BMos/Bmos-M though absolutely deadly in any mode,has an official range of only 300km due to the MTCR. No doubt it may have a higher classified range,but how much more? Certainly not 1000km.

A Kol with both LR and SR SAMs,plus a gun/missile BPDMS like Pantsir( details below),would give a triple layer of anti-air.missile defence in the form of 3 SAM types plus gatlings. Accompanied by EW and other soft-kill systems ,it would give the DDG a v.good defensive capability against air.missile threats.Western equiv BPDMS systems could also be evaluated.The Israelis offered us the C-Dome,seen at Aero-India,not sure of its actual range and it lacks a gun/gatling.
However,the system is based upon the proven "Iron-Dome" anti-rocket system and has great other application possibilities for smaller combatants,oil rigs/platforms,etc.

http://in.rbth.com/economics/2014/09/05 ... 38081.html

e Russian Navy will receive the new Pantsir anti-aircraft missile and gun system in 2016. It is lighter, more compact, and efficient than its Kortik predecessor, although it may require the modernization of Russian warships. The export prospects of the new anti-aircraft missile and gun system (AAMG) are also still vague, experts say.

Service testing of the Pantzir AAMG, which was designed for use by naval forces, has been completed. After 2 years, the sailors will have a promising anti-aircraft gun mounted on the deck of their ships, and it will replace the outdated Kortik model (exported under the name Kashtan). A contract for the supply of the marine Pantsir AAMG was signed with the Russian Ministry of Defence, as stated on the website of the Rostec State Corporation.

Cruise missile killer

The Tula Instrument Design Bureau has been developing a marine AAMG for a long time, modelled after the land version of the Pantsir. These systems are designed to destroy cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, aircraft, and ground targets within a radius of 20 km and at an altitude of 15 km. The velocity of an AAMG fired rocket is 1300 metres per second. The layout of the marine model under the label Pantsir-ME was first presented to the public in 2011.

“The Pantzir M, which is going to replace the Kortik AAMG, is lighter, more compact, and efficient than its predecessor,” Said Aminov, an independent expert on air defence told RIR. The advantage of such a combined ship system AAMGs is the combination of two types of weapons, which complement each other by providing coverage of aerial targets to the outermost line of defence.

AAMGs can destroy a missile flying by inertia with a very high rate of fire, even at the extreme borders, said Aminov.

Powerful, but not alone

After replacing the Dirk AAMG, the Pantsir-M will not be the only operational AAMG in the Russian Navy. Currently, the Palash AAMG (exported under the name Palma) will soon also have to replenish the arsenal of the Russian fleet. The Palash will ensure the protection of the new Russian frigates of Project 22350 and other ships of the Russian Navy.

The Pantsir-M is a more powerful weapon than the Palash AAMG, which, incidentally, is already on the Gepard patrol ships sent to Vietnam (Project 11661). First of all, the Pantsir is superior to the Palash with its anti-aircraft missiles. The range of the Pantsir-M’s SAMs will be up to 20 km, and the Palash Sosna-R SAMs shoot up to 6-8 km. The Anti-aircraft machine guns in both systems are identical – six-barrel 30mm machine guns, as in the previous Kashtan/Kortik system, Aminov said.

The main drawback of the Kortik AAMG was its inability to “lead” and fire at multiple targets. The Pantsir-M should address this shortcoming and improve the firing performance of the AAMG system

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2015 11:54

cant we use older decommisioned oil rigs positioned offshore as a site for akash SAMs seaward defence of jamnagar, mumbai, karwar ?