Indian Naval Discussion

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2517
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby manjgu » 31 Jul 2013 08:12

While its important to beef up the land forces and the navy to counter the chinese, in terms of priority i would still say developing infrastructure in the mountains, deploying additional land formations, modernising naval forces should be the way to go. Loss of land in the mountains will be very hard to regain however hard one may try. land will have to be traded for land. we will have to have the capacity to grab land in case of a conflict in some sector ..while we may lose land in some other sector. China will have to be deterred first in the mountains and then in the seas. i dont really believe loss of shipping during a conflict will in any impede chinese war effort.

Indian is also heavily dependent on sea for its fuel requirements. so we also have a choke point. can we afford such a big navy that deters the chinese and also protects its own shipping lanes ?? i am very very doubtful...chinese should think 100 times before thinking of hostilities in the mountains...

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arijitkm » 01 Aug 2013 10:14

Indian Aircraft Carrier Passes Engine Tests in Russian Sea Trials (RIA Novosti)

A Russian-built aircraft carrier due to be delivered to the Indian Navy following a much-delayed refit has successfully passed engine tests during the first stage of final sea trials in the White Sea, shipbuilder Sevmash said Tuesday.

The current trials focused on the ship's propulsion system and its ability to perform as required.

The carrier, named Vikramaditya, “showed excellent performance while being tested at various speeds,” a Sevmash spokesman said. “On Sunday, the ship attained a maximum speed of 29.2 knots.”
The Vikramaditya, which is already years past its original 2008 delivery date, was supposed to have been handed over to India on December 4, 2012, but initial sea trials in September revealed that the ship’s boilers were not fully functional.

The source of the problem, which reduced the ship’s maximum speed, was due to use of low-grade Chinese-made firebricks in the boiler insulation instead of asbestos, Russian shipbuilders said.

The boiler problems were fixed by Russian shipbuilders in February, Sevmash reported previously.

The Vikramaditya will now sail to the Barents Sea, where the ship will undertake working-up procedures including aircraft deck operations. Several MiG-29K fighters and two helicopters will be used in the flight trials.

A report on the results of the final trials must be given to the Indians on October 15, the Sevmash official said.
.......

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2801
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby prahaar » 01 Aug 2013 10:37

The above report is in conflict with the previous report which said INS Vikramaditya achieved 32 knots max speed.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3504
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 01 Aug 2013 18:50

P-15A updates:

Jingo wants photo of sea trials only .... 8)

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 79309.html

...

Sources said a fresh process of induction was initiated so that the torpedoes could be made available for all the warships and submarines in the pipeline - including Project 75 (Scorpene), 15A (Kolkata class destroyers), 15B (follow on of Kolkata class destroyers).

At the moment, navy warships are equipped with old Russian heavy torpedoes. The new torpedoes were also to be integrated with the French Scorpene submarines under construction.

Even as the torpedo issue was being sorted out, the navy was hit by the delay in project 15A for the construction of three Kolkata class destroyers

The first ship of the class, being constructed at Muzgaon Dock Limited (MDL) in Mumbai, was scheduled to be delivered in July. But technical problems were detected during the sea trials of the destroyers - the largest warships to be constructed and designed at MDL.

It is estimated that the project has been delayed by at least six months as the new destroyer would now be made available only by early 2014.

Project 15A, under which three destroyers have to be built, is already running two years behind schedule. The revised deadline for the delivery of first ship was mid-2013. The project was going on track keeping up with the revised deadline but the snag was detected during the sea trials of the ship.

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 670
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rajsunder » 01 Aug 2013 21:38

Launch Of India's 1st Indigenous Aircraft Carrier On Aug 12
India's first indigenous aircraft carrier, lead ship of the new Vikrant-class will be launched on August 12 in Kochi. ................




:lungi dance: :lungi dance:

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 670
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rajsunder » 01 Aug 2013 22:44

Note sure how credible the story is but TIFWIW
Eye on future, India mulls options for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier
............
Navy vice-chief Vice Admiral RK Dhowan on Thursday said a "detailed study" was underway on the "size, type of aircraft and their launch and recovery systems, propulsion" and the like for the IAC-II project. "Yes, we are also considering nuclear propulsion. All options are being studied. No final decision has been taken," he said.
...................


vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2367
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 01 Aug 2013 23:01

Not sure if posted before so posting snippets here:

Indian Naval Aviation awaiting carriers

After a four year delay, Sevmash was on track to deliver the Vikramaditya by Dec. 4, 2012, until boiler problems cut short full power trials in late September 2012, and the ship was docked for lengthy repairs, another setback for Indian naval aviation. Vikramaditya had reached a top speed of 27.8 knots, considerably below the target of 29 knots, but well above the 22 knot minimum speed required for launching aircraft. As Norman Friedman reported, the problem was that the boilers, wrapped with a new, non-asbestos-based insulation, could not reach the temperatures necessary to deliver peak power.


Russian sources report that some 218 sorties were flown by various deck based and land based aircraft during earlier aviation trials lasting around two months. This included 41 takeoffs and landings besides numerous touch-and-go landings by two MiG-29s – a K and a KUB variant – flown by Russian test pilots. Helicopter compatibility trials using Ka-28 and Ka-31 as well as overflights by Russian Air Force MiG-31 fighters and Beriev A-50 AWACS aircraft for testing shipboard sensors and communications systems were also performed.


After operating the BAE FRS.51 Sea Harrier “jump jet” – known as “Shars” – for some 26 years, the bespoke Mig-29K fighter entered service in late 2009, thus marking a return to “tail hooking” in the IN decades after the decommissioning of the Hawker Seahawk fighters in the early 80’s.


Getting the Mig-29Ks fully operational and integrated into fleet operations took longer than expected because the IN is the first operator of the type. Indian naval aviators had to validate every weapon system and evolve the tactics, techniques & procedures (TTPs, with help from Indian Air Force pilots on deputation to the unit). Notably, in late December 2012, a MiG-29K successfully conducted the first launch of the Kh-35E anti-ship active radar homing missile on a waterborne target in deliberately difficult launch conditions – an aspect angle of about 70 degrees and a range of over 85 kilometers – the pilot using the plane’s Zhuk-ME (FGM-129) fire control radar to good effect in designating the target.


The Sea Harriers gained new “teeth” with the LUSH program under Project Tiger. The key addition was the integration of the beyond visual range (BVR) Derby air to air missile, with a range in excess of 35 kilometers (and Python short range missiles as well) along with the associated Elta EL/M-2032 multimode fire control radar. Equally important was a cooperative engagement capability (using data-links). Other changes focused on new avionics, electronic warfare (EW) systems and inflight refueling capability, which has increased endurance to more than six hours and operating range to “more than double its normal range” according to the commanding officer (CO) of INAS 300, Cmdr. Shiraz Azad. These improvements, says Azad, will keep the fighter relevant for several more years.


The IN’s three fighter squadrons – INAS 300, 303 and 552 – are all based at NAS Hansa at Dabolim, Goa on India’s western seaboard. A second MiG-29K squadron is to be formed at NAS Dega on India’s eastern seaboard within four years.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby koti » 02 Aug 2013 02:44


joygoswami
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 11 May 2010 19:08
Location: Destination Moon For 5yrs with Zaid Hamid

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby joygoswami » 02 Aug 2013 04:47

Got this from Defense.pk of IAC 1. Same pic can also be found in the NDTV REPORT

Image

Image

An old picture showing part of the main bridge under construction ^^

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_26622 » 02 Aug 2013 05:02

rajsunder wrote:Note sure how credible the story is but TIFWIW
Eye on future, India mulls options for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier
............
Navy vice-chief Vice Admiral RK Dhowan on Thursday said a "detailed study" was underway on the "size, type of aircraft and their launch and recovery systems, propulsion" and the like for the IAC-II project. "Yes, we are also considering nuclear propulsion. All options are being studied. No final decision has been taken," he said.
...................



IAC uses 4 LM 2500+ turbines, each rated at 30 MW for total power of 120 MW. INS Arihant turbine is rated at 70 MW. Two Arihant reactors will give total 140 MW enough to power a carrier up to 50K tons.

Interesting that Nimitz carriers are 100K tons and have 200MW power plants. They seem to have lower power to weight ratio than IAC?

A gas turbine can go from idle to max power really fast. A nuclear power plant will likely not match this acceleration and the container sized compactness of turbine is a plus. Power plant size will be more relevant for smaller carriers than the 100K ton behemoths...

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2712
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 02 Aug 2013 08:09

SNaik saab: I am still very confused about the differences between Barak-8 versus our LRSAM. Our LRSAM is still being tested & has DRDO-built back-end, with Israeli front end.

Barak 8 is also stated to have a dual pulse rocket motor ityadi. There is this news article that Israel is already fitting it in their warships, while LRSAM might take a couple of more years.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21144
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 02 Aug 2013 10:49

John is right.A few years ago I said that Pak had the best conventional sub building capability in S.Asia/ASEAN with their Agosta-90B programme.However,we have caught up with up nuclear sub construction,but in building conventional subs,lag behind.After HDW was cleared ,and with the experience of building/assembling the U-209s,we should've built another 4 upgraded U-boats.However,MDL is still stuck with the Scorpenes,and unless pvt. yards are roped in,indigenous sub-building is going to be a very long haul.

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 02 Aug 2013 11:00

Some Pic of INS Vikrant (its old one but never seen it)

Image

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 02 Aug 2013 11:58

nik wrote:
IAC uses 4 LM 2500+ turbines, each rated at 30 MW for total power of 120 MW. INS Arihant turbine is rated at 70 MW. Two Arihant reactors will give total 140 MW enough to power a carrier up to 50K tons.

Interesting that Nimitz carriers are 100K tons and have 200MW power plants. They seem to have lower power to weight ratio than IAC?

A gas turbine can go from idle to max power really fast. A nuclear power plant will likely not match this acceleration and the container sized compactness of turbine is a plus. Power plant size will be more relevant for smaller carriers than the 100K ton behemoths...


As a Wikilook will reveal, the N-reactor designs are significantly different for submarines and surface ships - the sub ones are more challenging for sure, nevertheless the IN will have to factor in Russian TOT, desi learning curve etc in their timelines if they want N-propulsion in IAC-2.

The power the engines generate vs. the tonnage of the vessel is a good analysis, but how efficiently the power is used is not revealed. IAC is STOBAR, the Nimitz has to power 4 steam catapults as well.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SaiK » 02 Aug 2013 18:26


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21144
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 02 Aug 2013 20:53

Russia is delivering the first of 6 new Kilos for Vietnam this Nov.All 6 will be delivered by 2016.Considering that the deal was signed only a few years ago,in 2009,and all will be finished before the first Scorpene is commissioned in 2017,acquiring a few more advanced Kilos as an interim to make up for those old ones being retired soon is a very cost-effective option to consider.The Scorpene deal by comparison for 6 smaller subs,was signed a decade ago! Just look at the cost too,6 subs for just $2 billion,whereas a single non-AIP Scorpene that carries only subsonic Exocets,is costing us almost $1 billion!

http://www.thanhniennews.com/index/page ... s-nov.aspx

Vietnam ordered the submarines in 2009, with the contract, which also includes training for Vietnamese crews in Russia, said to be worth US$2 billion.

The delivery is expected to be completed by 2016.

The first submarine successfully completed 100-day trials in July and a Vietnamese crew has been training since April this year, the shipbuilder said.

“The vessel showed excellent maneuverability and reliable work of all mechanisms during the trials.”

The underwater vessel belongs to the Varshavyanka class, an improvement on the Kilo which is described by the US Navy as “black holes in the ocean” because they are "nearly undetectable when submerged."

The Varshavyanka class has more advanced stealth technology and an extended combat range, the RIA Novosti report said.

It displaces 3,100 tons, can reach speeds of 20 knots, dive to 300 meters, and carry 52 sailors.

RELATED CONTENT
Vietnam PM inspects first Russien-built submarine

Armed with 533-millimeter torpedoes, mines, and cruise missiles, the submarine is mainly intended for anti-shipping and anti-submarine missions in relatively shallow waters.

The diesel-electric submarine has very low noise emission and can hit targets at long distances without being detected by enemy anti-submarine systems, according to the report.


A nice "titbit" on a report on Oz's notorious Collins class subs,once described as being "as quiet as an underwater rock concert"!

Currently Australia is relying on the Collins Class submarines, which Defence Minister Stephen Smith has conceded "fall substantially below any comparable international benchmark".

There are too many defects and they spend too much time in maintenance, the Coles report found.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2540
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 02 Aug 2013 21:41

Phillip
The original reason Scorpene cost more than Kilo was because former had far superior combat management system and eventually incorporate a combat system similar to SUBTICS in our nuclear platforms as well. That said i was strong supporter of continuing U-209 construction with few upgrades' such as tube launched missile capability or even get license production of kilo, let the private yards crank those out to give us cheap SSKs to counter china.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21144
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 02 Aug 2013 23:18

I think that IN also wanted to scuttle the chances of the PN acquiring Scorpenes after the Agostas. In this respect,the PN is in a quandary.They either have to upgrade the Agostas themselves,or acquire Swedish tech from Kockums.Germany is unlikely to sell them U-boats.What they now plan to do is acquire large numbers of Chinese subs which are based upon the Kilos.The plan is to develop an AIP sub that can launch a nuclear tipped Chinese UW launched cruise missile,giving Pak a non-nuclear powered sub for strategic purposes,its third leg of the triad.The Israelis are doing the very same with their Dolphin subs which have larger tubes allegedly for larger dia missiles and special forces eqpt.

The IN must force the MOD to take a decision the latest by next year.Even if another Akula is acquired ,it will take at least another 3 years.Two SSGNs will also not be enough-for independent offensive patrol,plus if tasked to protect our SSBNs or a carrier task force.If we are going to possess three carriers,then we need 3 SSGNs for this purpose alone,apart from other subs for the offensive role.This is why some analysts have recommended at least 6 SSGN/attack subs for the IN.Therefore,at least 3 Akulas are required so that at least one is available always on patrol and will ensure easier induction ,training,MRO and operations. The balance 3 could be of a newer design or new construction upgraded/modified Akulas. Our yards will be busy building our SSBNs of which at least 5-6 are required.Later SSBNs have to have ICBM missiles aboard in larger number,12-16 .


member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 03 Aug 2013 11:25



Without going down the blackhole of bemoaning the acquisitions process that results in such situations this is actually a good place to focus on the anti-air capability of the "CBG" that will be built around our carriers.

The US did this with the heavy hitter capability of the AEGIS system, first on their "Ticos" CGs, and now the Arleigh Burke's.

The Russians did this with the fearsome SAM-nest that was the Kirov (12 SA-N-6/S300 launchers :shock: )

The Brits had limited capability and paid for it in the Falklands

Is the P15A, which will have the same LRSAM as the carriers, our answer? Will it be able to handle a "swarm" attack from the air?

AbhiJ
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 29 Sep 2010 17:33
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby AbhiJ » 03 Aug 2013 16:12


srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2058
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srin » 03 Aug 2013 16:52

Sorry - I'm confused ... Quoting

For this the Russians are not to blame --- the Israelis are. The futuristic missile defence system that was supposed to be fitted on the Vikramaditya, called the Long Range Surface to Air Missile (LR-SAM), is also late by at least 3 years. The LR-SAM is a missile, fired from a warship to shoot down an incoming anti-ship missiles at ranges out to 70 kilometres. Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) is developing the LR-SAM in partnership with the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO).

On Thursday, Vice Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral RK Dhowan, said in New Delhi that the Vikramaditya would arrive without a “close in weapons system” (CIWS, pronounced sea-whiz), a ship-borne system to destroy incoming missiles and aircraft. The navy will fit an AK-630 rapid-fire gun system on the Vikramaditya when it arrives, but the more potent LR-SAM will only be fitted during the aircraft carrier’s first refit. That would be at least three years down the line.


How is LR-SAM a CIWS that can be considered an alternative to AK-630 ? Kashtan would have been nicer than AK-630, but Barak-8 ? I have no idea what Shukla is referring to ....

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21144
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 03 Aug 2013 17:17

In the interim,why can't we fit the existing Barak missiles that are already on the Viraat and other DDGs until the "B-8"s arrive?

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 03 Aug 2013 17:55

srin wrote:How is LR-SAM a CIWS that can be considered an alternative to AK-630 ? Kashtan would have been nicer than AK-630, but Barak-8 ? I have no idea what Shukla is referring to ....


The carrier is arriving without both the CIWS and the LR-SAM. The CIWS will be fitted here on arrival, the LR SAM at the time of the first major refit, in 3-4 years.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Aug 2013 18:46

Likely as mentioned previously Barak-1 will be fitted in India as CIWS for Viki perhaps even AK-630M too as OFB lic produces them.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2540
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 03 Aug 2013 19:18

^ Austin, I believe Ak-630 will be fitted in Russia similar to what we saw with latest Talwar batches.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 03 Aug 2013 20:47

srin wrote:How is LR-SAM a CIWS that can be considered an alternative to AK-630?
For high value assets like aircraft carrier, IN will use LR-SAM & OTO 76/62 as CIWS. The Vikrant shows 2 x 8 cell LR-SAM & 4 OTO-76/62. For these assets, threats need to be destroyed at greater ranges.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby krishnan » 03 Aug 2013 20:50

do they ever use missiles as CIWS, it is most likely a rapid wire type weapon system that is always used as CIWS .

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby pragnya » 03 Aug 2013 21:11

Image

Image

This reports -

The funding for this missile, called Barak 8, is largely provided from the Indian Navy’s budget, and it will be first fitted on the P 15A Kolkata class destroyers being launched from 2014 onwards. The missile, to be test-fired shortly, is likely to be made in the private sector, whose participation is being encouraged now by the Government.


as to the bolded, who in the private sector is the candidate to manufacture LR SAM?? any guesses??

a good informative report.

PS : don't know how to resize to fit the page. apologies.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Aug 2013 21:42

The BOW of IAC-1 looks more like that of a big destroyer then an aircraft carrier.

Any info from where the Gear Box Assembly has been procured from if its indigenous developed or procured abroad and which company ?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Aug 2013 21:44

John wrote:^ Austin, I believe Ak-630 will be fitted in Russia similar to what we saw with latest Talwar batches.


tsarkar has clarified it would be OTO-76/62 CIWS which is interesting , I guess higher caliber with longer ranges and intelligent rounds .....compared to the lead wall AK-630M approach.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3504
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 03 Aug 2013 22:26



Is it still a "frigate"? Why don't we classify her class a destroyer? She certainly has the armament and size for it ...

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3504
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 03 Aug 2013 22:40

tsarkar wrote:
srin wrote:How is LR-SAM a CIWS that can be considered an alternative to AK-630?
For high value assets like aircraft carrier, IN will use LR-SAM & OTO 76/62 as CIWS. The Vikrant shows 2 x 8 cell LR-SAM & 4 OTO-76/62. For these assets, threats need to be destroyed at greater ranges.


Thats interesting ... it seems Italians believe in higher accuracy and range vs ROF.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-62_mk75.htm

...The Italian Navy considers the SR to be an effective anti-missile weapon and new ships are being built with this weapon in place of the twin "Fast 40" used on earlier ships in that role. OTO-Melara estimates that, combined with the Dardo FCS, the SR can begin engaging attacking missiles at about 6,600 yards (6,000 m), with the first rounds arriving on target at 6,000 yards (5,500 m). With these ranges, a single gun can deal with up to four subsonic sea-skimmer missiles, arriving simultaneously on courses 90 degrees apart, before any reaches 1,100 yards (1,000 m)....

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 03 Aug 2013 23:01

Austin wrote:The BOW of IAC-1 looks more like that of a big destroyer then an aircraft carrier.

Any info from where the Gear Box Assembly has been procured from if its indigenous developed or procured abroad and which company ?


Elecon. Indian company.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Aug 2013 23:23


titash
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby titash » 03 Aug 2013 23:51

Aditya G wrote:


Is it still a "frigate"? Why don't we classify her class a destroyer? She certainly has the armament and size for it ...


I believe the IN thought process has more or less converged around the idea that (1) 2x heavy copters for ASW and (2) MF-STAR/Barak-8 combo for AAW, is the minimum capability expected from any warship that escorts the Carriers or LPDs (keeping in mind that we expect to have 2 + 4 = 6 flat tops in operation within a decade). The required space, electrical power, and endurance can only be provided by a large hull ~ 6500+ tons.

The classification is a moot point - almost all European AAW destroyers are officially classified as Frigates. Hell, the USN has the gall to classify it's 10,000 ton Burke heavy cruisers as destroyers :-)

Let's remember that the enemy is not only the opposing navy in wartime, but also your own budget hungry air-force in peacetime. If the game is to understate your capabilities, kala desi can play too :-)

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2540
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 04 Aug 2013 00:06

Aditya G wrote:Is it still a "frigate"? Why don't we classify her class a destroyer? She certainly has the armament and size for it ...

IIRC IN classification is based on Air defense capability of the vessel. Even Shivalik's is 6000 tons and still got the classification of FFG.

Austin wrote:tsarkar has clarified it would be OTO-76/62 CIWS which is interesting , I guess higher caliber with longer ranges and intelligent rounds .....compared to the lead wall AK-630M approach.


Not sure if it is prudent to do way with smaller point defense missiles on those vessels unless if there are plans for quad packing Derby missiles' in Barak-8 launchers.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 04 Aug 2013 12:48

Looks like AK-630M will be fitted in India

INS Vikramaditya to arrive in India early next year
When the carrier arrives in Karwar in 2014, it will not have the AK-360 close-in weapon system capable of creating a protective shield around the ship by firing 6,000 rounds per minute.

In addition, the ship would not have the Barak long-range surface-to-air missile that is being co-developed by India and Israel for naval use.

Both the Indian Navy and the Defence Research and Development Organisation are involved in the Rs 2,606-crore development programme, which is scheduled to be completed by 2015. “The CIWS (AK 360) will be fitted to Vikramaditya on its arrival. But the LR-SAM would be done only at the first refit of the carrier,” Vice-Chief of the Navy Vice-Admiral R K Dhowan said.

The reason for not fitting the CIWS, said an officer, was certain contractual obligations. Moreover, integration at the Russian yard would have shot up the project cost.


The LR-SAM is a different story. Once ready, the missile would be first fitted on to a Kolkata-class destroyer, which is being constructed at Mazgaon dock under Project-15 A. Only after installing the surface-to-air missile to a 15A ship will it be integrated with INS Vikramaditya. Delivery of the first Kolkata-class destroyer, however, is delayed.

The first of the three ships in the Rs 45,000 crore P-15A will be ready only in 2014, though originally it was scheduled to be delivered to the Navy by 2013 end, sources said.

Meanwhile, INS Vikramaditya crossed a speed barrier of 30 knots during the trial. Last year, the Kiev-class aircraft carrier failed to attain its top speed due a technical glitch in the propulsion system.

The trouble happened because of the use of low-grade Chinese firebricks in boiler insulation, instead of asbestos. This prevented Sevmash ship yard from handing over the warship to the Navy on December 4, 2012, as originally scheduled.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21144
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 04 Aug 2013 13:48

Austin,this beggars a Q.Were the Vik's boiler problems last year sabotage by the PRC,by deliberately supplying inferior firebricks? I know that this may be considered far-fetched by some (no excuse for the builder as the yard should've tested the quality firsthand) but the Chinese would've definitely have known that the firebricks were going to be used on the Gorky/Vik.What better way to sabotage the ship by such a ploy.The PRC have been conducting an unrelenting campaign against India on all fronts.This would've been a perfect tactic to use,putting back Indian carrier work-up by a whole year.Chinese intel would've been monitoring the progress of the carrier very carefully,as their own Varyag/Liaoning stole a march over the Vik being unveiled earlier.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 04 Aug 2013 15:07

^^^^
A more important question would be why was an Indian naval ship having Chinese manufactured items? If the Russians were unable to build these tiles then an Indian firm could have been tasked with building it.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests