Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

[John]

https://twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/126 ... 57381?s=20 ----> Chinese Navy Type-55: 112 VLS
Indian Navy Kolkata/Visakhapatnam Class: 48 (VLS+UVLM)
One thing I can't understand why Indian Navy ships carry less than Chinese counterpart. Meanwhile, the Arleigh Burke carries 96 VLS.

That’s because of these reasons:
- Brahmos is big, each UVLS with Brahmos weights as much as 2.5 Mk 41 VLS cell armed with Tomahawk.
- RBU 6000 take up a lot of space and require deck penetration. They essentially take up as much space as a 8 Brahmos UVLS cells.
- Lack of standardized VLS system means precious space is wasted due to having to maintain two different launchers for Barak-8 and Brahmos (make it 3 once SR SAM comes into picture)

A vessel like Kolkata can easily carry 48-64 Mk 41 cells in place of Barak-8, Brahmos and RBU-6000 if you compare apples to apples.

[nachiket]

- RBU 6000 take up a lot of space and require deck penetration. They essentially take up as much space as a 8 Brahmos UVLS cells.

I'm sure they adversely affect the stealth characteristics of the vessel as well. Is there no alternative to the RBU's? These are supposed to be hard-kill anti-toprpedo weapons. Other navies including the USN and the PLAN don't seem to have a need for it. What do they use for actively defending against torpedoes (beyond noisemakers/countermeasures etc.)? There has to be a way for the IN to get rid of these RBU's and reclaim the precious real-estate they use up.

[titash]

- RBU 6000 take up a lot of space and require deck penetration. They essentially take up as much space as a 8 Brahmos UVLS cells.

I'm sure they adversely affect the stealth characteristics of the vessel as well. Is there no alternative to the RBU's? These are supposed to be hard-kill anti-toprpedo weapons. Other navies including the USN and the PLAN don't seem to have a need for it. What do they use for actively defending against torpedoes (beyond noisemakers/countermeasures etc.)? There has to be a way for the IN to get rid of these RBU's and reclaim the precious real-estate they use up.

ASW mortars are a very relevant weapon system even today. Just like a fighter's gun.

1) ASW mortars are low-complexity, cheap, rugged, reliable, available in a variety of sea states when helicopter support isn't
2) Torpedoes can be decoyed away, but there is no decoying away a contact fuzed mortar bomb or a depth charge
3) The RBU 6000's indigenous version (the IRL) is made locally by L&T and the rockets are made by OFB. Therefore they're easy to maintain in-house, and ammunition can be liberally expended
4) RBU 6000 derivatives can be used against incoming heavyweight torpedoes (maybe even against divers?) as a hard-kill measure
5) Like the Baltic sea, surface sonar conditions aren't that great in the shallow Arabian sea. Effective sonar and HWT/LWT ranges may very well overlap with ASW mortars
6) It's also a fallacy that hidden Pakistani submarines will go after every Indian warship using an Exocet or Harpoon or HWT. Perhaps it's just trying to hide and stalk larger assets like Carriers, Tankers, etc. instead of giving away their position to the first frigate it comes across
7) They're used for amphibious fire support just like regular rocket launchers/mortars

[John]

RBU 6000 derivatives can be used against incoming heavyweight torpedoes (maybe even against divers?) as a hard-kill measure

Yes it can be used torpedoes, it is one of few hard kill options out there against torpedo.

If we really wanted to fit another 32 Barak-8 we could have, I feel the armament is deliberate choice to maximum value for the cost, another two Barak-8 module would cost another 100 million+ where as Rbu-6000 are quite inexpensive.

[srai]

https://twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/126 ... 57381?s=20 ----> Chinese Navy Type-55: 112 VLS
Indian Navy Kolkata/Visakhapatnam Class: 48 (VLS+UVLM)
One thing I can't understand why Indian Navy ships carry less than Chinese counterpart. Meanwhile, the Arleigh Burke carries 96 VLS.

That’s because of these reasons:
- Brahmos is big, each UVLS with Brahmos weights as much as 2.5 Mk 41 VLS cell armed with Tomahawk.
- RBU 6000 take up a lot of space and require deck penetration. They essentially take up as much space as a 8 Brahmos UVLS cells.
- Lack of standardized VLS system means precious space is wasted due to having to maintain two different launchers for Barak-8 and Brahmos (make it 3 once SR SAM comes into picture)

A vessel like Kolkata can easily carry 48-64 Mk 41 cells in place of Barak-8, Brahmos and RBU-6000 if you compare apples to apples.

Good points. If UVLS were to replace current silos, this is what it would be

• 16 (instead of Brahmos silos front)
• 16 (instead of Barak-8 silos front)
• 16 (Instead of Barak-8 silos tear)

Total: 48 UVLS cells .... same number as RN Type-45 DDG.

[John]

Also don’t forget SRSAM is also supposed to be fitted on the P-15a/b vessels (not sure about P-17a). This would give another 32 missiles and Barak-8 cells can be fitted with Barak-8 ER.

[Vivek K]

May be old news but the historical photography of SBC Vizag has interesting shots of Arihant and her sisters. Google is taking almost monthly shots of the area.

[Philip]

I'm not so sure about the limited no. of SAMs aboard our DDGs and FFGs.All vessels will face saturated missile attack,sometimes coordinated using different assets like aircraft/ helos or subs too.
Secondly ,there is a limited active layered defence. A second QR SAM as secondary anti-missile defence at shorter ranges is a must,more manoeuvrable when the missile is in its terminal phase making rapid manouevres. Galtlings throwing up a wall of lead is the last ditch method. Various decoys are also used,from EW,missile seeker jamming ,to chaff,etc.

From the designs,there appears to meet to be extra space available for later upgrades,but these should be factored in from the start,installrd when required.

[John]

I'm not so sure about the limited no. of SAMs aboard our DDGs and FFGs.All vessels will face saturated missile attack,sometimes coordinated using different assets like aircraft/ helos or subs too.
Secondly ,there is a limited active layered defence. A second QR SAM as secondary anti-missile defence at shorter ranges is a must,more manoeuvrable when the missile is in its terminal phase making rapid manouevres. Galtlings throwing up a wall of lead is the last ditch method. Various decoys are also used,from EW,missile seeker jamming ,to chaff,etc.

From the designs,there appears to meet to be extra space available for later upgrades,but these should be factored in from the start,installrd when required.

Cannot look at top down photo and say there is space, below deck some of space could be used for subsystems for UVLS, rbu6000, main gun and Barak-8. One of reasons if you mix different launchers you are wasting precious space because each launcher would require some space for all the plumbing and wiring making it hard to put different launchers close side by side.

[kit]

That’s because of these reasons:
- Brahmos is big, each UVLS with Brahmos weights as much as 2.5 Mk 41 VLS cell armed with Tomahawk.
- RBU 6000 take up a lot of space and require deck penetration. They essentially take up as much space as a 8 Brahmos UVLS cells.
- Lack of standardized VLS system means precious space is wasted due to having to maintain two different launchers for Barak-8 and Brahmos (make it 3 once SR SAM comes into picture)

A vessel like Kolkata can easily carry 48-64 Mk 41 cells in place of Barak-8, Brahmos and RBU-6000 if you compare apples to apples.

Good points. If UVLS were to replace current silos, this is what it would be

• 16 (instead of Brahmos silos front)
• 16 (instead of Barak-8 silos front)
• 16 (Instead of Barak-8 silos tear)

Total: 48 UVLS cells .... same number as RN Type-45 DDG.

Wonder if the air launched version of Brahmos can be adapted to give same performance as ship launched one ?

[John]

Wonder if the air launched version of Brahmos can be adapted to give same performance as ship launched one ?

Without the larger booster the air launched Brahmos would not work when launched from ships.

[Philip]

The RuN is equipping all its surface combatants from corvettes of around 900t to Kirov class BCNs with a mix of Tsirkon hypersonic, Onix supersonic and Kalibir LRCMs.Corvettes to carry Kalibir and Onix,while FFGs onwards could carry a mix/ selection of the others.Since we are members of the MTCR,acquisition of Kalibir should be fast-forwarded until Nirbhay is perfected and commissioned.

[John]

The RuN is equipping all its surface combatants from corvettes of around 900t to Kirov class BCNs with a mix of Tsirkon hypersonic, Onix supersonic and Kalibir LRCMs.Corvettes to carry Kalibir and Onix,while FFGs onwards could carry a mix/ selection of the others.Since we are members of the MTCR,acquisition of Kalibir should be fast-forwarded until Nirbhay is perfected and commissioned.

Kalibr was speculated to have been reportedly acquired for Kilo, as for surface combatants I have said before only Talwar and Shivalik can fire Klub highly unlikely we will acquire them just for those vessels.

[Kartik]

IN inaugurates complex to house submarine rescue system

The Indian Navy (IN) inaugurated on 10 June a complex at its naval base in the Indian eastern port city of Visakhapatnam to accommodate one of its two submarine rescue systems acquired from UK-based subsea engineering and services provider JFD.

In a statement issued the same day the service said the complex has been fitted with “state-of-the-art facilities to store the DSRV [deep submergence rescue vehicle] assets in a ‘rescue-ready’ state”.

Each of the systems, which are intended to rescue the crew of distressed submarines off India’s eastern and western coasts, comprises a DSAR-650L free-swimming DSRV, a launch and recovery system (LARS), a Transfer Under Pressure (TUP) unit, an SMD Atom intervention remotely operated vehicle, and an EdgeTech 4200 series towed sidescan sonar.

..

[lakshmanM]

I asked Vice Admiral Arun Kumar Singh about RBU launches, he said

Those who have experience of conducting ASW ops in our tropical waters will appreciate the need of RBU 6000. I have commanded subs & a DDG (with RBU 6000).

and when I asked him to elaborate

Regret cannot elaborate as ASW is complex (in tropical waters with thermoclines, high salinity, high ambient-biologocal noise it is even more complex) & is a one yr specialist course & requires many yrs at sea.

[wig]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 798505.ece

Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicle Complex opened in Vizag
extracts

Equipped with the state-of-the-art facilities, the complex is designed to accommodate the newly inducted submarine rescue system and store the DSRV assets in the rescue-ready state. The DSRV system consists of a submarine rescue vessel, a remote operations vehicle and side scan sonar and associated equipment. It has diver decompression chambers and hyperbaric medical equipment to decompress submariners after being rescued from sunken submarines. It can be mobilised by air or road to facilitate submarine rescue operationseven at distant locations.

Our Navy has inducted two such systems which will provide rescue cover to submarines on the east and west coast of India.

[wig]

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/t ... 2020-06-13

The enigmatic Amethyst The Navy reveals a hidden gem -- a model of a Soviet-built Cold War missile never seen before in public.
extracts

from the bridge of the destroyer INS Rajput, the crew saw a breathtaking sight. A giant white plume rose from the mirror-calm Bay of Bengal and a grey missile the size of a small airplane broke the surface and spread its wings, powerful rocket boosters firing it into a parabolic trajectory over the horizon. "It was awe-inspiring," said an officer on board the destroyer that day. "We had never seen anything like it."

It was sometime in mid-1988. The crew had witnessed the first launch of a submarine-fired cruise missile in Indian waters-- a P-70 'Amethyst' cruise missile fired from a nuclear powered attack submarine INS Chakra, a submarine taken on a three-year lease from the Soviet Union. The target that day, a derelict Petya class corvette, broke in two as the missile's warhead of half a ton of high-explosive smashed into it.

the origins of the amethyst

The Amethyst was an evolution of the P-15, a missile the navy had used to devastating effect in the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war. In less than half hour on December 4, three raiding Indian missile boats sank a Pakistani Naval destroyer, a minesweeper and a merchant ship, the largest use of ship-to-ship missiles in the history of naval warfare.

[NRao]

India’s Submarines Make Strategic Move To Dominate Indian Ocean

[Rakesh]

The former chief in question here is Admiral Arun Prakash (Retd)

How India Can Deter An Aggressive China: Former Indian Navy Chief Explains
https://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/ind ... f846ab8703
22 June 2020

2. The US has called India “a pillar of our common vision for free and open Indo-Pacific”. Can the US be a reliable partner for India in the Indo-Pacific?

A. The phrase “common vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific” is somewhat vague and rhetorical. Many other Indo-Pacific nations could have the same vision. Each nation, however, must always act in its own national interest. Under the current Trump regime, US actions have been erratic and whimsical and it cannot be seen as a ‘reliable partner’.

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 19841?s=20 ----> INS Rajput in Vizag port, four Brahmos inclined launchers are visible. The Rajput Class is the IN's smallest destroyers in service (~5000 tons at full load). The upcoming Nilgiri Class frigates are much larger than the Rajput Class destroyers.

[basant]

Tweets from Anatha Krishnan

Anantha Krishnan M
@writetake

ASW capability of @indiannavy received a major boost today with the conclusion of a contract for Advanced Torpedo Decoy System #Maareech capable of being fired from all frontline warships. 1/3

Release
1:50 PM · Jun 26, 2020·Twitter Web App

+

Developed by DRDO labs (NSTL and NPOL), #Maareech production will be undertaken by BEL. The prototype of this system installed onboard a nominated naval platform had successfully completed all user evaluation trials and demonstrated the features as per the NSQR.

+

Induction not only stands testimony to the joint resolve of the Indian Navy and DRDO towards indigenous development of def tech, but has also given a major fillip to the Make in India initiative and the country's resolve to become #Atmanirbhar in niche technology.

PS: Press release from PIB

Ministry of Defence

Navy Inducts Indigenously Developed Torpedo Decoy System
Posted On: 26 JUN 2020 1:53PM by PIB Delhi

Anti - Submarine Warfare capability of the Indian Navy has received a major boost today with the conclusion of a contract for Advanced Torpedo Decoy System Maareech capable of being fired from all frontline warships. Design & Development of this anti-torpedo decoy system has been undertaken indigenously DRDO labs (NSTL and NPOL). Bharat Electronics Limited, a Defence PSU, would undertake the production of this decoy system. The prototype of this system installed onboard a nominated naval platform had successfully completed all user evaluation trials and demonstrated the features as per the Naval Staff Qualification Requirements.

This induction not only stands testimony to the joint resolve of the Indian Navy and DRDO towards indigenous development of Defence technology, but has also given a major fillip to the Government's 'Make in India' initiative and the country's resolve to become 'Atmanirbhar' in niche technology.

ABB/SS/Nampi/VM/KA/DK/Savvy/ADA/MS

[basant]

Maareech Advanced Torpedo Defence System

[Philip]

Taking the many recent posts into these comments.
Yes,the RBUs are quite effective systems.Can also fire decoy rounds. However,in former Sov. era warships,the launchers were at the bows,not below the bridge as in our desi-built warships and Talwars. If you look at the new Ru Gorshkov class FFG,larger than the Talwars, there are two new rocket launchers on either side of the SAM VLS silos, with the main 100mm gun forward. This is a much neater location which also improves stealth as the two launchers do not project above the height of the flush-deck SAM silos,partly shielded by the sides of the hull too.

An alternative and perhaps better location for a single RBU would be in "A" position at the bows,as was done in former Sov. warships,,with the main gun in " B" position on the raised deck level housing the flush deck missile silos. There would be much more space for silos before the main superstructure in this arrangement.

The Gorshkov frigate also has a new ASW anti-torpedo system called Paket-NK,which is amidships hidden by hull panels and located below the main deck. These twin-tube launchers are the equiv. of mini torpedoes .A vessel of min. corvette size or light frigate of 1750t - 2000t, could field an RBU,twin heavweight TTs or a triple LW torpedo launcher,plus Paket and an ASW helo too.Paket is unique as it can attack both subs( 10km range),plus torpedoes in simultaneous mode at a range of approx 1km.

Our Pauk/ Abhay class 500t ASW corvettes,based upon the same hull as the Tarantula missile corvettes, had 4 TT launchers for SET-65E 533mm torpedoes,plus two 5 barelled ASW RBUs. It will be interesting to see what weaponry the 16 new (inshore ) shallow water ASW corvettes of approx.700+t will carry. GSL and GRSE have two different designs.

At an earlier Aero- India, the desi anti- torpedo decoy was shown, expendable cylindrical decoys about 4 ft. to 5 ft. in length ,around 8" to 9" dia, which would be housed in the hull of subs and on
warships in a 10 tube twin layered launcher,a warship would possibly have one on either beam. The towed array was also shown in an R- Day float . While Mareech is a soft kill weapon,Paket is a hard- kill one for both subs and incoming "fish".

Tx.Adm.Rax for the pic of the Rajput with the twin BMos inclined launchers.Was wondering when they would replace the second tier of old Styx SSMs on the Rajputs. The DRDO have also developed a 4 box BMos inclined launcher,but for which retrofits or new vessels?

[John]

you look at the new Ru Gorshkov class FFG,larger than the Talwars, there are two new rocket launchers on either side of the SAM VLS silos, with the main 100mm gun forward. This is a much neater location which also improves stealth as the two launchers do not project above the height of the flush-deck SAM silos,partly shielded by the sides of the hull too.

You are comparing Rbu-6000 which requires extensive deck penetration with rocket launchers you cannot stick a Rbu-6000 in the bow. You are confusing Rbu-1000/1200 with Rbu-6000.

As for inclined Brahmos launchers I believe the ones in Rajput is the older design fitted during Brahmos tests. The one displayed by L&T look different.

https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-l ... es-2612241

[Philip]

Old Parchim class 700t corvettes fielded 2 RBU-600 llaunchers in A turret position,with a single 300mm gatling in front. On larger warships ,a rearrangement can be done for a single launcher in the bows.It could even be just after the main gun ,a level higher flush with the VLS .This would still give more space for VLS silos for BMos,B-8 whatever. The Gorshkov arrangement is a good solution too. The Pauk/Abhay 1200 system uses lighter rounds with a shorter range.I think there was a report last year which said that new rounds had increased the range to 10km. Perhaps the L&T built sytem uses the new rounds. Paket's hard-kill options for both subs and torpedoes is unique and worth examining as it is flush inside the hull on each beam,saving topside space for other armament.

[vishvak]

..Each nation, however, must always act in its own national interest. ..
..

It is mentioned in chanakya niti that big/essential/necessary trade routes must be seen like sadhu ie must not be disturbed IIRC.

[Philip]

Just a quick note.I dug out an old edition of Jane's FS to ck. Sov. Kara and Kynda class CGs had twin MBU-6000 launchers at the bows. The Kyndas are smaller than our Delhi class DDGs too.

[John]

Just a quick note.I dug out an old edition of Jane's FS to ck. Sov. Kara and Kynda class CGs had twin MBU-6000 launchers at the bows. The Kyndas are smaller than our Delhi class DDGs too.

Rbu-1200 did not require deck penetration and Rbu-1000 (on Sovremenny) deck penetration is much smaller than Rbu-6000.

Kara and Kynda did not have main gun in the bow and Rbu-6000 took the place. Could have done that config for P-28 which could freed up room for U-VLS for Brahmos and done away with the main gun but we didn’t.

If we can wanted to place the Rbu-6000 by the bow they would have definitely done that but because of exhaust (you don’t want it to be hitting the VLS silos) and the deck penetration required there is not room other than after the Brahmos U-VLS.

[Philip]

The VLS silos would've been at a higher level if the RBUs were in thecbows and the main gun at the same higher level immediately behind it . The Adm.Gosrshkov FFGs have a neat arrangement,with two new ASW rocket launchers for the same rounds on either side of a long narrow deck feature containing the SAM silos. This has freed more space topsides for silos for Kalibir,Onix, and even the new Tsirkon hypersonic missile which was tested from the FFG.

In a titbit on the DM's visit to Moscow, one report said that amongst the items required to be speedily delivered were " Kilo subs". This could mean part of the "3+3" upgrades plus new subs
which earlier reports mentioned was under discussion. If from new Kilos being built from Russia ,or ftomvits existing fleet,we get one or two this year,it will be a big boost for the IN. Getting another upgraded Akula to the one under completion would be a great boost to the IN's sub fleet.Operating 3 Akulas would always rnsure that at least one was on patrol.

The top priority should be our SSBN fleet to ensure the credibility of the triad even as reports from China talk of their "1000 N-missile" ambitions. China and Pak today have an estimated combination of 500+ warheads
against our estimated figure of 125 to 130. That's a huge difference. We need to have at least 250 to 300 warheads for strategic deterrent alone with another 150 to 200 tactical N-weapons. Only such numbers plus a robust triad which is weak in the strat. bomber dept., will suffice to deter the Sino- Pak JV. We cannot rule out a surprise N-strike from them as this is the only way other than the current biological warfare gambit they've unleashed to remove India from the geo- political power bloc arena.

[chola]

As long as the Brahmos is our main AShM, we'll need to house them separately because they are such huge mijjiles.

It is not economical to have an UVLS system that can fit the Brahmos and SAMs like the MK41 does with the Tomahawk and Standards. In fact, we would get even less mijjiles with an UVLS than we do now separating the Brahmos and Baraks.

The original posts comparing the chini Type 055 to the Kolkata is wrong. The 055 is a cruiser with a displacement of 13K tons vs the 8K tons of the P-15A/B. The proper comparison is against the 7.5K tons Type 052D that has a 64-cell UVLS vs the 48-combined Brahmos/Baraks of the P-15A/B.

Chini destroyers do have the HQ-10 point-defense system
which adds another 24 smallish SAMs in a separate launcher and reload system. (Ok, that pushes the full mijjile count of the 052D to 88.)

That said, 16 Brahmos are more than match for anything the chini destroyers/cruisers carry. The main issue is the air defence load. Here, the Barak 8 allows for far more efficiency. We use one missile for short, medium and long range aerial defense. The chinis use three.

Barak 8 : 0.5 to 100km

HQ-10: 0.5 to 6km
HQ-16: 1.5 to 40km
HQ-9/B: 125/200km

[Yagnasri]

32 units of SAMs for a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visakhapa ... _destroyer are bit small for the size. Is there any way those numbers can be increased.

[Philip]

Too few SAMs to war off saturation attacks.I fear cost is the factor why so few B-8s are carried. Surely a secondary anti-air/ anti-missile SAM can also be carried without reducing the B-8 numbers in our P-15 DDGs and P-17A FFGs.
We need a new class of multi-role FFGs of 1750 to 2000t built in large number say 12 to 16, which carry all-round armament but in smaller doses, for warfare inthe IOR littorals. They could be based in the ANC too,

[mody]

A 1,500-2,000 ton missile corvette to replace the Khukri class and eventually the Kora class can be built. 8-12 nos, with armed with a one 76mm SRGM,
8-Brahmos-NG, 8-Nribhay and 16 SRSAM (derived from QRSAM). With noise reduction and stealth characteristics borrowed from the P28 class, this kind of missile corvette can be easily produced. The missing pieces are the Brahmos-NG and Nirbhay. Both are in development.

[brar_w]

Barak 8 : 0.5 to 100km

HQ-10: 0.5 to 6km
HQ-16: 1.5 to 40km
HQ-9/B: 125/200km

I think this is where most would like to be. You want to have some demarcation between the systems and the ability to tailor a load for long range engagements, medium range engagements and short range engagements for cost reasons (this is more of a "peacetime" reason as you need to buy and build up inventories..so its one thing to say that when a missile comes you can throw cost out of the window given the value of the ship but you build your inventory in peacetime, and have to live with it in wartime ) and for magazine size optimization. Same with scale.

The US Navy does that too. They can fit 4 x 50km ESSM's for every 400 km SM-6, and may even toy around with a 2 x Naval MSE's for every SM2/3/6 if they choose to go down that route (they may on their frigate force in the future given the superiority of that missile in the BMD role compared to SM2 or ESSM). The short range stuff stays outside of the VLS and will likely remain that way forever. Generally, within a fixed space you should be able to defeat a lot more saturated attacks from close in (within 50 km) while keeping medium ranged and long ranged shots for taking out shooters and missiles in their cruise phase when they are more vulnerable to being detected and targeted. In the USN, I suspect that the smaller magazine size ships (upcoming Frigates for example) will bias towards larger ESSM loads and only having a small number of SM2/6 for when they need to provide cover for larger ships..

[chola]

^^^ Brar ji, good point. Though for the IN, we lack a good affordable medium range option until the Akash or QRSAM comes online. (Wonder if Trishul can be revived in any form?) Anything else would need to be imported.

I wonder why we haven't looked at less expensive short range systems, like those based on manpads, as a secondary though.

[brar_w]

^^^ Brar ji, good point. Though for the IN, we lack a good affordable medium range option until the Akash or QRSAM comes online. (Wonder if Trishul can be revived in any form?) Anything else would need to be imported.

I wonder why we haven't looked at less expensive short range systems, like those based on manpads, as a secondary though.

QRSAM can be looked at for this and it can also be evolved into something more optimized for compressed carriage to increase magazine size when future larger diameter VL cells are developed. Unless its just a function of cost, you ought to trade longer range missiles for shorter ranged missiles for two reasons - One is so that you can pack more of them per cell, and the other is because they may be better at shorter ranged engagements etc. If you can't get either of those then their value diminishes and it just becomes a financial decision (build up inventory of XXXX for a cheaper missile vs an inventory of XXX for a more expensive missile for example).

[chola]

A 1,500-2,000 ton missile corvette to replace the Khukri class and eventually the Kora class can be built. 8-12 nos, with armed with a one 76mm SRGM,
8-Brahmos-NG, 8-Nribhay and 16 SRSAM (derived from QRSAM). With noise reduction and stealth characteristics borrowed from the P28 class, this kind of missile corvette can be easily produced. The missing pieces are the Brahmos-NG and Nirbhay. Both are in development.

Very much too optimistic, Mody ji. The Kamorta at 3.3K tons can carry 4x533mm torpedoes onlee and the Brahmos is bigger. At 2K tons, a corvette would most likely have 4 mijjiles of Brahmos'/Nribhay's size. Definitely not 8 of each. For that many, you need a destroyer like Kolkata which hold 16 Brahmos.

The chinis have an interesting (and seemingly, very successful) corvette design in the Type 056. They have over 50 in the water and are supposedly building up to 70. That thing carries torpedos, AShM (4 harpoonskis), SRSAM and 76mm gun but no helo hangar only helo deck. The Kamorta has the helo hangar but is missing both AShMs and SAMs. At twice the tonnage, the Kamorta can definitely put on more weapons. At least give it a SAM system, even though it is an anti-sub system it should be able to defend itself with more than just the CIWS!

[John]

Very much too optimistic, Mody ji. The Kamorta at 3.3K tons can carry 4x533mm torpedoes onlee and the Brahmos is bigger. At 2K tons, a corvette would most likely have 4 mijjiles of Brahmos'/Nribhay's size. Definitely not 8 of each. For that many, you need a destroyer like Kolkata which hold 16 Brahmos.

Tarantul class can be fitted with 8 Brahmos in inclined launchers . Russia even displayed 12 in one of the missile corvette variants. IMO you can can replace a RBU-6000 in Kamorta and fit a 8 UVLS in its place and remove the torpedo tubes can easily come up with a 2000 Ton missile corvette. However I would much rather focus on 500 ton Tarantul class sized vessel that can be mass built and not worry about things like stealth, air search radar and SAM silos.

[nachiket]

Tarantul class can be fitted with 8 Brahmos in inclined launchers . Russia even displayed 12 in one of the missile corvette variants. IMO you can can replace a RBU-6000 in Kamorta and fit a 8 UVLS in its place and remove the torpedo tubes can easily come up with a 2000 Ton missile corvette. However I would much rather focus on 500 ton Tarantul class sized vessel that can be mass built and not worry about things like stealth, air search radar and SAM silos.

Sooner or later all decisions about up-arming lightly armed IN ships veer towards having to remove one or both RBU-6000's. But as Tsarkar and others explained to me a while back on the thread, that is not going to happen. The IN places a lot of importance on those RBU's as defensive armament.

[mody]

A 1,500-2,000 ton missile corvette to replace the Khukri class and eventually the Kora class can be built. 8-12 nos, with armed with a one 76mm SRGM,
8-Brahmos-NG, 8-Nribhay and 16 SRSAM (derived from QRSAM). With noise reduction and stealth characteristics borrowed from the P28 class, this kind of missile corvette can be easily produced. The missing pieces are the Brahmos-NG and Nirbhay. Both are in development.

Very much too optimistic, Mody ji. The Kamorta at 3.3K tons can carry 4x533mm torpedoes onlee and the Brahmos is bigger. At 2K tons, a corvette would most likely have 4 mijjiles of Brahmos'/Nribhay's size. Definitely not 8 of each. For that many, you need a destroyer like Kolkata which hold 16 Brahmos.

The chinis have an interesting (and seemingly, very successful) corvette design in the Type 056. They have over 50 in the water and are supposedly building up to 70. That thing carries torpedos, AShM (4 harpoonskis), SRSAM and 76mm gun but no helo hangar only helo deck. The Kamorta has the helo hangar but is missing both AShMs and SAMs. At twice the tonnage, the Kamorta can definitely put on more weapons. At least give it a SAM system, even though it is an anti-sub system it should be able to defend itself with more than just the CIWS!

Chola, I have said Brahmos-NG and not Brahmos. I have also mentioned that both the Nirbhay and Brahmos-NG are currently under development.
The Brahmos-NG is expected to weigh around 1,200-1,300 Kgs. The Nirbhay will probably weigh around the same.
The Kora class at 1,350 ton currently are armed with 16 KH-35 Uran missiles. At 2,000 tons, we might be able to a load of 8 Brahmos-NG and 8 Nirbhay missiles in a new missile corvette design. The other armaments would be a 1-76 mm SRGM, 2 AK-630 CIWS, 16 SRSAMs and 1 Naval ALH.