Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

[souravB]

I think the realization finally dawned that having 2 hangers was a waste of real estate.

The Godavari, Delhi, and Shivaliks have cumulatively spent several decades at sea with max 1 helicopter (lucky if SeaKing, mostly a Chetak). We simply do not have the budget to fund 2 helicopters for all principal surface units.

We will have 20 frigates/destroyers + 4 Kamortas in the coming decade and 24 SeaHawks to share across them. The 123 NMRH may be a decade or so away. Why waste hanger space. Better to utilize for stores, electronics, or VLS for other weapons. The DRDO is apparently coming out with a ASROC like weapon called SMART. We may see some VLS cells retrofitted for that.

The question is how many RUAV it can carry along with a MRH. Or how many UUVs or USVs. The ASW missions will progressively be taken over by UUV/USVs. So if it has space for these to be integrated in the future, it will be okay with only one MRH.

[wig]

CSIO develops targeting, navigation system for Navy -Marine Bearing Sight gives instantaneous direction of identified target
extracts

Marine Bearing Sight (MBS), it provides instantaneous azimuth of identified targets, whether on shore or in sea, other vessels and even astronomical bodies. Azimuth is the horizontal direction expressed as the angular distance between the direction of a fixed point and the direction of the object.

The MBS is used in conjunction with the Marine Compass Repeater System onboard naval ships to provide an accurate means to indicate the true north and corresponding directions of ships, according to a statement issued by the CSIO here today.
It is provided with in-built illumination for night operations. The device provides unique features of multiple focal lengths and all lighting conditions.

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/natio ... 34073.html

[Sumeet]

Excellent video on P-17A frigate:

[nam]

For all practical purpose, P17A is a destroyer. No puny primary or secondary radar. DDG style full TFTA MF-Star and a meaty search radar.

IN must have realized there is no point making two design for frigate & destroyer, given the time our shipyard take to built them.

It is better to build a single design, sensor & weapon suite and play around with tonnage. This way the shipyards would be building the same thing.. with less or more weight.

Fundamentally gives the scale without having maintain two parallel design. Now take this design, start with P15C..

[Sumeet]

For all practical purpose, P17A is a destroyer. No puny primary or secondary radar. DDG style full TFTA MF-Star and a meaty search radar.

IN must have realized there is no point making two design for frigate & destroyer, given the time our shipyard take to built them.

It is better to build a single design, sensor & weapon suite and play around with tonnage. This way the shipyards would be building the same thing.. with less or more weight.

Fundamentally gives the scale without having maintain two parallel design. Now take this design, start with P15C..

Then why just 32 SAMs, that is hardly effective against a saturated attack against your surface assets. Is that enough for dealing in a two front situation against China and TSP ?

[Rakesh]

My guess is two possibilities (and both could be equally true).

#1) Lack of budget
#2) Very high hit probability of the Barak 8 SAM.

These frigates will rarely operate solo. They will be with a CBG and thus 32 missiles (while small) will not be the only defence against a saturated missile attack.

[John]

Barak-8 have network centric capability so a barak-8 can be fired by one vessel and use mid course guidance from other vessels. Also Barak-8 system costs around 200 million each so guessing adding 32 more will raise cost substantially.

[nachiket]

Then why just 32 SAMs, that is hardly effective against a saturated attack against your surface assets. Is that enough for dealing in a two front situation against China and TSP ?

32 is the same number of SAMs as the larger P-15A and P-15B class destroyers so its not bad for the P-17A. It is the P-15X classes which should have more. Anyway, where is the space for additional SAMs on any of the three designs? IN will have to get rid of its cherished RBU's to make more space (assuming there is internal space available below them).

If more Barak-8's are too expensive they can add Barak-1s. Something is better than nothing.

[John]

^ Yes RBU have reload mechanism below deck and takes up more space than a Barak-8 vls module. SR SAM that navy procures will possibly be fitted in P-15a/b (replacing the two AK-630) but I don't see that happening with P-17a (lack of space).

[Rakesh]

Sirjee - looks like 1 helo only.

With all the topweight additions due to MFSTAR, new secondary radar, longer hull penetrating barak-8 VLS, etc, and the big ass 127mm cannon, I think perhaps only 1 helo was able to be accomodated...

Has our P-15 or P-17 vessels ever embarked two sea kings? Maybe since it was lack of not enough room for two large helos which drove the decision to have just single hanger as we are switching to mh-60r.

Check this out gentleman. And this is from a former IN naval helo pilot. Does not get any more clearer than this. He uses a lot of abbreviations due to the character limit in twitter and thus I have edited the tweet for language. I got a lot of gyan from a single tweet.

https://twitter.com/realkaypius/status/ ... 99392?s=11 ---> Correct. Two helicopters per ship is a mirage given our numbers and acquisition programs. Secondly it adds beam without concomitant* advantages. Thirdly, traversing gear issues. Fourthly, maintenance envelope around each aircraft in hangar is reduced. Fifth, a fat ship with 2 helicopters without adequate AS/ASW protection = juicy target. Enough.

*concomitant --> naturally accompanying or associated.

Above tweet is in response to this tweet below from Sandeep Unnithan. A very good naval reporter.

https://twitter.com/SandeepUnnithan/sta ... 7079649281 ---> This is very significant. The new Nilgiri / Project 17A frigate carries only a single Sea King / MH-60R class helicopter. First IN FFG since INS Vindhyagiri (1981) with a single helo hangar.

[souravB]

I would've liked to see an inverted bow design (maybe some inspiration from french Belh@rra class) and some information on UAV/UUV capability. But even without them, the ship's design look fine. Any info on the decoy launchers?

[Jay]

I would've liked to see an inverted bow design (maybe some inspiration from french Belh@rra class) and some information on UAV/UUV capability. But even without them, the ship's design look fine. Any info on the decoy launchers?

I myself would love to see a flying bow design, alas IN did not take that into consideration, what to do sir? OTH, boy is'nt the IN glad that you deem the design fine! At least one OK customer.

[souravB]

I would've liked to see an inverted bow design (maybe some inspiration from french Belh@rra class) and some information on UAV/UUV capability. But even without them, the ship's design look fine. Any info on the decoy launchers?

I myself would love to see a flying bow design, alas IN did not take that into consideration, what to do sir? OTH, boy is'nt the IN glad that you deem the design fine! At least one OK customer.

That was completely unnecessary. If you don't like a post, please report it to the mods. Would've understood if your post contained an iota of technical information on how an inverted bow would be a more unstable design. Anyhow reporting your post.

[John]

Correct. Two helicopters per ship is a mirage given our numbers and acquisition programs.

Yes but I was thinking of Helo UAV + mh-60 would be the way to go. Former would provide round the clock surveillance (replacing ka-31) and latter could be deployed on specific missions.

[VikramA]

The french have recently started a new experiment of having 2 crews per FREMM frigate like the crew arrangement followed for manning SSBN all over the world. They aim to reduce time at port of each frigate to fully utilize the limited no of ships. Any thoughts on IN trying this out considering the large IOR we need to patrol and limited no of ships and long lead times of ships under construction.

[Cybaru]

Correct. Two helicopters per ship is a mirage given our numbers and acquisition programs.

Yes but I was thinking of Helo UAV + mh-60 would be the way to go. Former would provide round the clock surveillance (replacing ka-31) and latter could be deployed on specific missions.

I am sure you can squeeze 1 MQ8C along with one MH 60R

[chola]

For all practical purpose, P17A is a destroyer. No puny primary or secondary radar. DDG style full TFTA MF-Star and a meaty search radar.

IN must have realized there is no point making two design for frigate & destroyer, given the time our shipyard take to built them.

It is better to build a single design, sensor & weapon suite and play around with tonnage. This way the shipyards would be building the same thing.. with less or more weight.

Fundamentally gives the scale without having maintain two parallel design. Now take this design, start with P15C..

Yes, it is 7K tons for goodness sakes! The Rajput is still classified as a destroyer at 4.5K tons. The P-17A is a DDG in all but name.

We do not need a new destroyer class in the P-15B weight class that is only marginally bigger.

Our next destroyer class should be in the 10K tons range or cruiser-sized.

[nam]

Our next destroyer class should be in the 10K tons range or cruiser-sized.

I am not sure about that. Our DDG are under armed for their size. What is the point of putting 40 B8 instead of 32, on a 10k cruiser? Where do we even plan to take 10K cruiser? Our adversaries are next door.

And given that our shipyards take 7-8 years to build a 8k tonner.. I don't even want to imagine the timeline for 10k.

It is better they build P17A and 8k version in numbers.

[titash]

Yes, it is 7K tons for goodness sakes! The Rajput is still classified as a destroyer at 4.5K tons. The P-17A is a DDG in all but name.

We do not need a new destroyer class in the P-15B weight class that is only marginally bigger.

Our next destroyer class should be in the 10K tons range or cruiser-sized.

Actually there is a very important reason for having both P-15 and P-17 type of ships. In one word - Insurance.

P-15 = russian propulsion system, proven hull form, More ASW capable due to weapons - 2 helicopters + HWTs
P-17 = western propulsion, first attempt at stealth, More ASW capable due to stealth - raft mounted machinery/silencing

[John]

Originally P-17 was not envisioned to be 6000 ton vessel the original vessel was having displacement of around 4500 tons. But size and weight grew due to changes to superstructure to reduce rcs.

There was some discussion (or at least from Russia) for a tie up with Russia on their next Gen DDG but latter is more or less dead with state of Russian economy. IMO the most viable and cost effective option is a stretched P-17a which I have discussed numerous times before.

[Vips]

Mumbai coast gets another strategic asset.

The country’s first state-of-the-art dry dock, which was successfully tested on Thursday with the warship INS Kolkata, will be commissioned on
September 28.

Naval officers said the dock will be dedicated to the Indian naval command and has the capacity to dock the aircraft carrier, INS Vikramaditya, for repair and maintenance, not to speak of nuclear submarines. With a length of 281 metres, width of 45 metres and depth of close to 17 metres—almost equivalent to a five-storey building—the dry dock is nothing short of a construction marvel.



“It will not only reduce vessel maintenance expenses that the Navy incurs at private shipyards, but will also enhance defense capability to load advanced arms and ammunition onto out premiere warships,” said an officer.

The dock, equipped with robotic machinery, can overhaul ships in quick succession. It has a facility to enable container trucks carrying ship spare parts to station themselves along repair bays, so that engineers don’t have to waste time procuring the parts from a distance.

The nine-year construction of the dock was preceded by a major operation to remove sunken ships and barges from the site, as well as the removal of bedrock to accommodate the massive structure, which comprises fit-out berths, caisson (a type of lock gate that is opened for a ship's entry into the dock) and a cofferdam.

Unlike the country’s other dry docks, the new one is built out into the sea and is surrounded with saline water on three sides. The other docks are landwards and only open into the sea.

[gpurewal]

Excellent news!

Are there any plans to construct on dry dock of the same dimensions on the Eastern Seaboard?

[Rakesh]

I hope they do. Just one is not good enough for a Navy the size that India has. These capabilities are the building blocks to a great Navy.

[kit]

One in Vishakhapatnam seems like a foregone conclusion , as the Navy intends 3 CBGs

[kit]

Yes, it is 7K tons for goodness sakes! The Rajput is still classified as a destroyer at 4.5K tons. The P-17A is a DDG in all but name.

We do not need a new destroyer class in the P-15B weight class that is only marginally bigger.

Our next destroyer class should be in the 10K tons range or cruiser-sized.

Actually there is a very important reason for having both P-15 and P-17 type of ships. In one word - Insurance.

P-15 = russian propulsion system, proven hull form, More ASW capable due to weapons - 2 helicopters + HWTs
P-17 = western propulsion, first attempt at stealth, More ASW capable due to stealth - raft mounted machinery/silencing

Disclaimer : i havent been able to corroborate the article with any other source !!

https://defenceupdate.in/project-18indi ... destroyer/

Project 18 class destroyers will be equipped with advanced systems such as electromagnetic railguns, laser-based close-in weapon systems, advanced AESA and PESA radars, and active and passive array sonars.Kakinda Shipyard in collaboration with Mazgaon docks and L&T will lay keel for the destroyers that will have a displacement of 9000 tonnes. Meanwhile, DRDO in collaboration with Bharat Electronics will be designing the next generation of radar systems. The already developed Air and Missile defence system (AMDS) is being further worked upon. The AESA and PESA are to have extended ranges and possible merger into one multi-band radar. The destroyer will also have an X-band optronic mast detector radar.

For the project, DRDO in collaboration with Bharat Electronics will be designing next generation of radar systems to be incorporated into the planned 18-class. The already developed AMDS will be worked on further. The AESA and PESA radars will see extended ranges, and possible merger into one multi-band radar. The destroyer will also have an X-band optronic mast detector radar.

Project 18-class destroyers will be able to carry enough space for a single utility helicopter. The destroyers will be equipped with advanced UCAVs and UAVs, a possible compact version to be deployed on the destroyers of the EMALS is being worked out.

Project-18 class destroyers will have following armaments
Ballistic missiles and hypersonic Bramhos-II:

The next generation of point missile defense capable of launching Brahmos II will be worked upon.
The Electromagnetic Railgun:

Electromagnetic gun replacing the famed Otobreda of Indian Navy, will be supported with laser based CIWS, in works in LASTEC of DRDO. The warship will be deployed with 300 kW of laser system, capable of shooting down the aerial threats. The planned CIWS will draw inspiration from the present Phalnax CIWS and have its own radar. Indian Army has also expressed interests in the project, for it wishes to mount laser based systems on its combat vehicles. Additionally, the warship will also be equipped with small 100 kW laser based weapon systems with faster charging rates and continuous rate of application.
Laser-based CIWS

It is being developed by DRDO’s Laser Science and Technology Centre, Delhi will employ 300 kW of laser system enough to take out any aerial threat. It will have its own radar. In addition, the warship will have a smaller 100kW laser too.
How will this mega ship be powered?

It will use Integrated Electric Propulsion (IEP). L& T and DRDO will further work on DRDO’s already launched programe GATET for marine propulsion. The planned gas turbine will deliver power up to 36 MW, and destroyer will have 2 of these to deliver a power of 72 MW, in conjugation with 2 diesel generators of 10 MW each and 2 electric propulsion motors of 20 MW. Tata Advanced Systems Ltd. (TASL) which has designed platform, bridge, and Combat Management Systems in the past will work on Diesel generators and motors.

Project-18 aims to launch the lead ship in 2028. DRDO has spared 1.5 billion dollars for the programme from its annual budget.

[gpurewal]

Project-18 class destroyers will have following armaments
Ballistic missiles and hypersonic Bramhos-II:

I'm skeptical regarding the technologies pointed out in the article like the Laser CIWS and Railguns, but adding ballistic missiles to a DDG? That I find really hard to swallow. Ballistic missiles are large and bulky and require a lot of space to house them and the associated gear to launch them (gas generators, etc). I cannot envision space in a DDG being allocated for them.

I can see a future DDG carrying a combo of Brahmos-II and Nirbhay (like the Ticonderoga-class carrying Harpoons and Tomahawks), with the Brahmos being used in an Anti-Ship role, with the Nirbhay being used to strike targets deep in enemy territory.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

[John]

^ Lot of it is fantasy not worth the time discussing, heck first set of P-17a would not be inducted till 2028. Snowballs chance in hell P-18s work would start by then.

[chola]

Mumbai coast gets another strategic asset.

The country’s first state-of-the-art dry dock, which was successfully tested on Thursday with the warship INS Kolkata, will be commissioned on
September 28.

Naval officers said the dock will be dedicated to the Indian naval command and has the capacity to dock the aircraft carrier, INS Vikramaditya, for repair and maintenance, not to speak of nuclear submarines. With a length of 281 metres, width of 45 metres and depth of close to 17 metres—almost equivalent to a five-storey building—the dry dock is nothing short of a construction marvel.

Fantastic news! Only one problem, the 65K-ton CATOBAR that the IN wants would not fit at 281M when we take into account ships of that weight class. The Kuznetsovs are 305M and the QEs at 280M (cannot play with a safety margin of 1M!)

[chola]

@nam, @titash, @kit

Remember I am talking about the possible follow-on destroyer class to the P-15B.

It would make little sense to build a 7K-ton frigate and a 8K-ton destroyer. There is too much overlap in size and role. The next DDG must be substantially larger.

There had be some news that the IN wanted a large destroyer. Not sure that the P-18 as described in that article represents what the Navy has in mind but I think they are at least looking the possibility of a large cruiser type warship.

[chola]

^^^ Trying to find a link to the NGD. The Next Generation Destroyer. I read somewhere that name is official and is already listed in some procurement documents. It is supposed to be cruiser-sized.

[Nikhil T]

What’s going on with INS Kolkata pictured in the dry dock? It looks like it’s being taken offline for work?

Added later - figured out. The pic is of INS Delhi which is getting it’s radars upgraded.

[kit]

^^^ Trying to find a link to the NGD. The Next Generation Destroyer. I read somewhere that name is official and is already listed in some procurement documents. It is supposed to be cruiser-sized.

Was trying to find the same thing for a while now, all that info seems to have disappeared from the internet !.. dont think its classified

[tsarkar]

https://defenceupdate.in/project-18indi ... destroyer/

Fake fanboy news

[John]

https://defenceupdate.in/project-18indi ... destroyer/

Fake fanboy news

Haha thanks i keep stating that, that link and along with another fantasy DDG news post keeps popping up in BR couple times a year.

[brar_w]

That fantasy cruiser is probably something not even the USN can afford

[Cain Marko]

Project-18 class destroyers will have following armaments
Ballistic missiles and hypersonic Bramhos-II:

I'm skeptical regarding the technologies pointed out in the article like the Laser CIWS and Railguns, but adding ballistic missiles to a DDG? That I find really hard to swallow. Ballistic missiles are large and bulky and require a lot of space to house them and the associated gear to launch them (gas generators, etc). I cannot envision space in a DDG being allocated for them.

I can see a future DDG carrying a combo of Brahmos-II and Nirbhay (like the Ticonderoga-class carrying Harpoons and Tomahawks), with the Brahmos being used in an Anti-Ship role, with the Nirbhay being used to strike targets deep in enemy territory.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Yeah that's a load of bs. You'd need a pucca cruiser to manage a shaurya type missile. No 9k ton ddg could hold such large missiles.

Looking at the the Russian granit, it's hosted by massive kirov class cruisers.

[kit]

I'm skeptical regarding the technologies pointed out in the article like the Laser CIWS and Railguns, but adding ballistic missiles to a DDG? That I find really hard to swallow. Ballistic missiles are large and bulky and require a lot of space to house them and the associated gear to launch them (gas generators, etc). I cannot envision space in a DDG being allocated for them.

I can see a future DDG carrying a combo of Brahmos-II and Nirbhay (like the Ticonderoga-class carrying Harpoons and Tomahawks), with the Brahmos being used in an Anti-Ship role, with the Nirbhay being used to strike targets deep in enemy territory.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Yeah that's a load of bs. You'd need a pucca cruiser to manage a shaurya type missile. No 9k ton ddg could hold such large missiles.

Looking at the the Russian granit, it's hosted by massive kirov class cruisers.

cant find another source for that article but anyway , how was the sea launched prithvi launched , as far as i know it had a sea launched version ?

https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/prithvi/

"Some reports indicate that the Prithvi-III is intended to be a sea-launched ballistic missile, and is the same development program as the Dhanush missile."

[brar_w]

You can’t really attribute a displacement for a surface combatant whereby it can carry BM. Currently, both the MK-41 and MK-57 are capable of launching what could be clubbed in SRBM-MRBM and medium ranged hypersonic weapons. These can go on large frigates or even small destroyers if those are optimized.

[gpurewal]

cant find another source for that article but anyway , how was the sea launched prithvi launched , as far as i know it had a sea launched version ?

https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/prithvi/

"Some reports indicate that the Prithvi-III is intended to be a sea-launched ballistic missile, and is the same development program as the Dhanush missile."

From what I recall, I heard of the Prithvi/Dhanush being launched from one of the Rajput class destroyers, but it was done from the helo deck. I found a picture of it being launched from a Sukanya Class patrol vessel: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... navy02.jpg

You can’t really attribute a displacement for a surface combatant whereby it can carry BM. Currently, both the MK-41 and MK-57 are capable of launching what could be clubbed in SRBM-MRBM and medium ranger hypersonic weapons. These can go on large frigates or even small destroyers if those are optimized.

I was basing my comment off of seeing the Dhanush/Prithvi being launched; i'm not aware of any other BM in the inventory that can be launched from the sea (apart from the K series for the submarines). In this case, what would be the benefit of launching an SRBM/MRBM from a FFG/DDG vs a cruise missile like the Nirbhay, which can hug the terrain to avoid being detected and have up to a 1500 km range? Is warhead payload vs mission profile the contributing factor?

[chola]

@tsarkar @marko @john @brar

If the NGD is just a fanboy dream then what is the next destroyer class supposed to look like? Our destroyer had been trending up from around 5K-tons in the Rajput, 6K in the Delhi and 7.5K to 8K in the Kolkata and Visakhapatnam. It would make sense that the next one would be around be 9K if not 10K. Especially with the P17A being 7K tons. It makes little sense for the next destroyer class to be only marginally larger than the frigate!