Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

[Philip]

A warning to the individual who has made personal comments. is required moderators. This is unacceptable.These are media reports not "half truths and full lies". The Adani bid and rejection is in the ET and others and the IN cutting down on acquisitions is in Def.News. If Raveen has nothing concrete to say other then displaying his ignorance and prejudice he should keep silent ,not resort to asinine and abusive comments.

[Raveen]

A warning to the individual who has made personal comments. is required moderators. This is unacceptable.These are media reports not "half truths and full lies". The Adani bid and rejection is in the ET and others and the IN cutting down on acquisitions is in Def.News. If Raveen has nothing concrete to say other then displaying his ignorance and prejudice he should keep silent ,not resort to asinine and abusive comments.

You alleged Adani was being added by GoI, I alleged (as have numerous others here) that you are Russian peddling their wares - I don't see the distinction.

[hgupta]

Raveen, I do see the distinction. You stated "Russian peddler of half truths and full lies." Like it or not, Philip's main point of assertion all along was that we can get access to high tech wares that the Indian defense industry is incapable of making or producing at a short moment of notice and cheaper. Either it takes a long gestation or we have to pay through our nose to obtain the high tech weaponry.

Whereas your assertion is pretty much an ad hominem attack.

[manjgu]

just a scenario building excercise ...in a india pak shooting match where will the a/c be stationed and what will be its role? similarly in india china shooting match where will a/c be stationed and its role??

[hnair]

Philip, IIRC we had a discussion on the private sector yards and why it is not working out, despite almost 20 years of reforms and genuine efforts by both government of the day and well-respected private players. Basically it all boils down to this - the hefty bank guarantees that the IN demands off the private builders are a huge financial stress on their day-to-day OPEX. That capital is locked up in some escrow accout kind of device. But then these bank guarantees are very much needed, because the deliverable (warship) are so expensive and Navy needs assurances about timeliness, quality, cost-overruns etc from project mismanagement.

And of the three services, though very dynamic and agile in its outlook, the IN has to deal with this issue the most, due to the gigantic cash involved in a ship-class. A catch-22 situation, where the bank guarantee is a must have, but the private entities need that money for day-to-day operations of their diversified portfolios (major chunk of which are fast turn-around civilian works)

In that situation, even a reasonably big and well-established engineering major like L&T had issues with their Kattupalli story. Only a giant conglomerate that can shrug off the hefty bank guarantee amount specified by the Navy can survive. There are only two Chaebol/Zaibatsu kind of players in India, who can raise such vast sums of money (markets or lenders) and forget about it for a few years (till the projected hulls get completed). Those are the usual suspects of Tata and Reliance (senior-bhai). These two are courted by even global majors like boeing or dassault for offset and assembly is solely because of this reason - the financial stability they bring.

Adani is a recent entry into this rarified club of deep pockets and since they have proven themselves under different political dispensations (except that one time when PC churlishly screwed them over the sec-clearance of ports) at national levels in maritime matters, lenders are willing to trust them with their monies. Expect to see a lot more of them in capital-intensive areas like defense production, airtravel etc, a lot more than before. Where they dont have expertise, they will acquire firms for the technology or usurp top management. Just ask GMR's Airport ops guys

This is pretty much what happened in west after cold-war - the smaller highly engineering oriented firms and startups, after a certain growth and maturity, keeps getting acquired by the big moneyed ones and govt approvingly looks on.

The opposition is supposed to make the noises, even while they all obediently go to some Reliance wedding in the morning and Adani reception in the evening. Doesnt mean Adanis are doing something out of turn or govt is providing them more than the usual legup

[Karthik S]

Chinese govt offers loans to chinese ship manufactures at virtually no interest. If GoI is seriously thinking of having our own Ingalls, it needs to do step in buy being the guarantor for L&T, I mean L&T have proved themselves again and again in varied projects, it's only right that they get the required help. Going forward, I believe IN will be primary power projector in IOR and beyond, we need vessels and built at good pace, similar to Chinese, we need a pvt player.

[Yagnasri]

Basically it all boils down to this - the hefty bank guarantees that the IN demands off the private builders are a huge financial stress on their day-to-day OPEX. That capital is locked up in some escrow accout kind of device. But then these bank guarantees are very much needed, because the deliverable (warship) are so expensive and Navy needs assurances about timeliness, quality, cost-overruns etc from project mismanagement.

Performance Guarantees are given for almost all the contract works. Particularly in construction and engineering work. Security for such a guarantee need not always be 100% cash deposit up front. There can be other securities. Normally the timelines and % of work or extent of work will be linked in case of major and complex works wherein the things will be derisked to some extant. This alone shall not be any problem for any professionally managed company of a reasonable size. What we seems to have is lack of professional management even in private sector. I have dealt with them and some of them are horrible.

[Philip]

The fact is that the IN has shortlisted MDL and L&T going by MOD guidelines.Adani has allegedly tried to by-pass this procedure,and yet again the decision is being recycled.This plagues the MOD.Time after time we've seen supposedly final decisions sabotaged by influence- peddlars,external and internal. What has happened to the amphob. contract which had virtually been awarded to L & T? The last news was that the MOD was trying to scuttle the entire order! We have the goal of indigenising to the max., but the tussle between less efficient DPSUs and corporate giants has to be resolved by firm GOI decisionmaking.

[Rakesh]

The Indian Navy’s All New Fuel
http://delhidefencereview.com/2020/01/2 ... -new-fuel/
20 Jan 2020

[Manish_Sharma]

Indian Navy’s Scorpene And Arihant Class Submarines To Receive Heavyweight Torpedoes From French Or German Firms
https://swarajyamag.com/insta/indian-na ... rman-firms

I hope they go for French F21 Torpedo:

[Prem Kumar]

Any particular reason the Varunastra will not go into the Scorpenes & Arihant? Granted, its not ready yet for sub-launch, but won't it be ready by the time the L1 bidder is selected and first deliveries begin?

[fanne]

Any particular reason the Varunastra will not go into the Scorpenes & Arihant? Granted, its not ready yet for sub-launch, but won't it be ready by the time the L1 bidder is selected and first deliveries begin?

or so one hopes and wishesh. But Alas, war could be fought like that. I am sure we can throw reams for certification, phd thesis, ready for production, awaiting order documents, best in the world, most cute etc. at the Pakis, and in leu of that pakis or our enemies can kill themselves, it will be great.
A plane that has been ready (not will be ready) for 4 years has not been granted production go ahead....what luck Varunastra has.
It will come, but no fast, not of that great quality. What these imported pieces does it provide us a solution in number NOW (whenever now is, at least many years ahead of indigenous one), a mature and a high end solution. In that it is the right thing to import (we also end up importing many things that can be supplemented by indigenous program NOW and of high quality, this is where we should object)

[chetak]

x posted from the missiles thread

A Closer look at #Brahmos being launched from the Navy Frigate. Incredible!


https://twitter.com/MihirkJha/status/12 ... 9427267584

[Vips]

[Karthik S]

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Mazag ... 72.8479262

Guys looks like google maps are updated, there's P-17A right next to Vizag class. There's one ship in the richie dock, can someone ID the two ships docked in the dry dock next to Kasara Basin road. may be the last ship of P-15B is ready to be launched.

[Philip]

Ournew DDGs have a limited arsenal of SAMs.There is no secondary quick- reaction SAM only the 100km B-8s.In a saturated attack,these will be quickly exhausted.New Chinese DDGs have 112+ silos for a variety of missiles. Our DDGs have barely half that number. From the design there's ample space for more but budgetary constraints appear to be thf reason. Ru corvettes and FFGs are very heavily armed as we can see without Talwars.

[John]

Ournew DDGs have a lkmited arsenal of SAMs.Therdis no sdcondary quick- reaction SAM only the 100km B-8s.In a saturated attack,these will be quickly exhausted.New Chinese DDGs have 112+ silos for a variety of missiles. Our DDGs have barely half that number. From the design there's ample space for more but budgetaryconstraints appear to be thf reason. Ru corvettes and FFGs are very heavily armed as we can see withour Talwars.

I believe they will be fitted with additional SRSAM later in their lifecycle similar to how Delhi’s were updated. That said Barak-8 is designed to allow joint engagement so you can get by operating less no of missiles.
Given that Russians cannot even afford a destroyer they need to squeeze as many missile silos as possible and worry about equipping there ship with actual missiles later on.

I will take anything China builds with grain of salt more apt comparison for P-15b would be Hobart class DDG and P-17a it should be Type 26 FFG. Hobart cost far more than P-15b so you can some compromise were done to keep costs at around billion.

[Gagan]

I haven't looked at the images, but this is likely new Nilgiri class stealth frigate

[brar_w]

I believe they will be fitted with additional SRSAM later in their lifecycle similar to how Delhi’s were updated. That said Barak-8 is designed to allow joint engagement so you can get by operating less no of missiles.

That is not universally true. Area Defense weapons can only act as point-defense weapons for other vessels if there are favorable conditions and cooperating targets. There is no Area Defense weapon that can get to a PIP against a fast sea skimming threat from all axis within the entire defended area it is providing Air Defense to. There is a reason why despite having a 200 nautical mile + weapon in the SM6-1 and a 300 nautical mile weapon in the SM-6-2 (being developed), the USN still continues to develop more and more advanced versions of the ESSM,.taking its capability right up to Short-Ranged Ballistic Missiles in its most recent iteration. This is also why prior plans to ditch a capable SAM on the Ford Class Aircraft Carrier was reversed during the CVN-21 studies because the escorts cannot provide area defense against all threats..Your point defenses need to be capable of tackling a fairly significant portions of your most advanced threats because area-defense weapons cannot provide that mission overlap against all threat types. The IN needs something like the ESSM-2. A quad packed point defense (50-60 km max range) weapon capable of defeating high supersonic cruise missiles, and sub 700 km Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles...It is only a matter of time before a VLS launched Anti Ship Ballistic missile show up in the Chinese arsenal. Against an integrated threat you need quality and quantity..MRSAM and its iterations can act as medium to long range AAW. But they need something shorter ranged that can be dual or quad packed and can provide the volume against very similar qualitative threats (just at shorter range).

[John]

^ Yes there is supposed to be SR SAM for that purpose but the whole procurement is still limbo latest news there is supposed to be RFP for outside vendor to address the immediate need with P-28s and DRDO developed system being used to fit rest of the vessels. To be honest I would fit additional Barak-8 for that rather than wait for SRSAM since it is capable of both point defense and long range engagement.

[Philip]

The Russians have analysed their fleet reqs. and found that larger numbers of smaller frigates and corvettes armed with Kalibir,etc. are more cost- effective than building fewer large capital ships in an era of super and hyper-to-come anti-ship missiles. They also have the tiny Buyan class corvettes which fired Kalibir missiles into Syria from the Caspian Sea.More subs would also be possible. Its land-based long-range bomber strength is quite formidable too with 3 types actively involved in the Syrian campaign. The imminent induction of Tsirkon on various naval platforms stated by Putin himself is awaited with intetest. Russia has a very limited expeditionary requirement,generally restricted to its " near abroad".The UKR,Crimea,Georgia and Syria protecting its boundaries to the maximum.
The US on the other hand with a doz. supercarriers requires large escorts for its CBGs which carry more than one SAM system plus gatlings.
One US report advises India to abandon its plans for an N-powered CV,etc. and to focus on acquiring greater numbers of subs for sanitising the chokepoints and IOR littorals.SSNs for
ICS and Pacific ops. We need to also build a new smaller multi-role corvette than the P-28,around 2000+t, whose primary task is ASW warfare,able to carry out 30+ day ops in the IOR.

The induction of BMos armed MKIs at the Tanjore air base meant to exterminate PLAN surface warships attempting to ingress into the IOR from the ICS is a signal development. Last year during the GS IAF mega- exercises,MKIs simulated attacks in the Malacca Straits taking ooff from Sulur even farther than Tanjore. If our airstrips in the ANC are further lengthened and facilities modernised even further, BMos MKIs could even take off from there to attack targets in the ICS too.But until BMos- NG arrives,our MKIs can carry only one missile.For saturation attacks LR bombers are needed for both the current ASM as well as the NG.

[brar_w]

The Russians have analysed their fleet reqs. and found that larger numbers of smaller frigates and corvettes armed with Kalibir,etc. are more cost- effective than building fewer large capital ships in an era of super and hyper-to-come anti-ship missiles.

Have to call BS on this one. A smaller vessel cannot defend itself against simpler threats when those threats showed up in an integrated fashion. Leave aside the higher end threats like the ones you've mentioned. These aren't disposable ships and Russians don't have them in quantity where they can be treated as such. Not only are their defenses grossly inadequate their offensive capability is extremely limited as well so even when they actually get into an area their ability to generate effects is minimal before they go winchester. The notion that they're buying large number of smaller vessels is also BS. The numbers are not really commensurate to the strength of their competitors or what others are doing.

On the contrary, their movement towards Corvettes and more recently frigates, is a reflection of their economy and the state of their shipbuilding industry and infrastructure post SU collapse. Their other competitors (US, China and EU) don't have this problem and can, are pumping out, and have plans to deliver, both SSC's and LSC's in quantities far exceeding Ru Navy's SSC acquisition. Designs for large destroyers, Cruisers and Carriers keep surfacing..but nothing comes out of them.

They also have the tiny Buyan class corvettes which fired Kalibir missiles into Syria from the Caspian Sea

Great. now put that corvette against a competent enemy at range from Russia. How will this ship defend itself? What will provide area-defense for it to operate? If it can operate, how many Kalibr's can it actually launch before it needs to head back to port? The events you describe could have been accomplished by mounting missile launch cells from an oil platform or even a commercial grade ship. There was no combat involved and when the opponent has a way to deny then those ships would be found severely lacking especially if they venture out.

An SSC dominant (that too smaller SSC dominant) strategy is effective if you can produce 2-3x your competitor's capacity. If you can't then it is not going to succeed and you will be forced to mellow your naval ambitions .

A competent combatant must be able to defend itself against high quality threats (hypersonic, Low RCS/stealthy weapons, and even Ballistic Missiles) and volumes of lower-mid tier quality threats. If it cannot, it must be supported for this role. The threat from a defensive perspective is advancing at a very high rate. This has forced some to deploy layered Area and Point defenses against Ballistic Missiles extending down to IRBM ranges in addition to highly capable point and long range AAW capability. And do these missions concurrently. China is headed the same way. They've realized that if they are going to be venturing out beyond their near-abroad they'll need that level of offense and defense. EU too is getting into LSC's and up-gunned frigates. A corvette dominant strategy is a reflection of funding levels for the RuNavy and not the actual capability they need to match their competitors.

[Prem Kumar]

A few thoughts on how things have evolved recently:

1) With satellites like GISAT 1 & 2 coming, we will have the ability (& soon, so will our enemies) to spot ships/fleets in the open oceans. Via wake tracking & AI/ML techniques to differentiate between various wake types. The traditional defense the fleets had - of anonymity in the open seas - is coming to an end.

GISATs can provide sector specific mapping every 5 minutes & the entire Indian landmass mapping every 30 minutes. Multi-spectral (including Infrared) resolution of 50m with a steerable antenna! We will be able to ID every single warship in the Indian Ocean at any point of time during day or night!

2) We should build AshBMs in numbers and station them in TN, Andaman etc. We have all the building blocks in place.

3) Agree with brar_w: we need quality & quantity. Our missile load-outs are ridiculously small for our destroyers. Especially when you look at those of the latest PLAN or SoKo destroyers. I don't think its a budget issue. I think its a thought-process & therefore design issue. The nature of naval warfare & the threats have evolved, while our thinking is a bit lagging. *Even if* its a budget issue, what's the cost of say 48 SRSAMs, compared to the cost of losing a destroyer?

[Philip]

The fact remains that today lesser level crises predominate not requiring larger warships everytime After 26/11 there has been x huge increase in the numbers of the CG as well as new patrol craft and OPVs for the IN. Corvettes are not meant to be replacements for CBG escorts,etc. but are quite competent in variants carying the same weaponry as their larger counterparts. The huge escalating costs of modern ships- of- the -line,DDGs in truth cruisers and FFGs now destroyer size, are forcing even the major navies to look at smaller combatants especially for littoral warfare.Even the US has built 2 classes of LCS for offensive ops. but inadequately armed for the task. Almost all modern corvettes do have BPDMS systems tasked for anti- missile defence.

In the IN's context they be built faster, cheaper and will be in adequate number to complement their larger counterparts.In the US context given its far greater global tasks, plus escorting 12 supercarriers, larger capital ships and escorts with greater range,endurance and firepower would be de rigeur. Nevertheless,recent reports say that the USN too is looking at corvette designs

[brar_w]

The fact remains that today lesser level crises predominate not requiring larger warships everytime

You confront"today's" crisis with equipment procured "yesterday". The equipment you buy or design today is the one that is going to be used to confront the challenges of the future.

Corvettes are not meant to be replacements for CBG escorts,etc. but are quite competent in variants carying the same weaponry as their larger counterparts.

Corvettes are great for the roles and purpose they are designed for. Buying more of them and using them as substitutes for a lack of a proper LSC force is not going to cut it in the future (and it doesn't today either).

Even the US has built 2 classes of LCS for offensive ops. but inadequately armed for the task.

LCS's are not built for offensive ops. They are not traditional corvettes either but a corvette sized force that sits below one layer of more upgunned SSC's (Frigates) and 2 layers of Destroyers and Cruisers. As such they are adequate for the USN force structure as the USN will always be a LSC dominant fleet given its unique needs and missions that it supports.

Almost all modern corvettes do have BPDMS systems tasked for anti- missile defence.

They are inadequate for AAW and Area Defense mission. The magazine is just not there to support a robust capability nor are the sensors. The magazine isn't there for the offensive side as well..Again they are great at what they are designed for. But to expect them to take over missions that even destroyer sized vessels find challenging is asking for trouble when confronted by an enemy who actually has capability and knows how to use it.

[Philip]

They aren't meant for classic warfare DDG / CG missions,but as I said for less demanding tasks.Anti- piracy for one and defending one's EEZ,etc.Such corvettes could be built at 1/2 to 1/3 rd. the cost of a much heavier combatant.

[brar_w]

They aren't meant for classic warfare DDG / CG missions,but as I said for less demanding tasks.Anti- piracy for one and defending one's EEZ,etc.Such corvettes could be built at 1/2 to 1/3 rd. the cost of a much heavier combatant.

Yes that is all well and fine because they are designed for that. But as I mentioned earlier, if you actually hit a conflict against a near peer enemy and want to deploy naval power in an offensive capacity you almost have to have a robust LSC fleet because the further out you go the harder it gets to fight with small surface combatants with tiny magazines and questionable integrated defense capabilities.

[John]

The fact remains that today lesser level crises predominate not requiring larger warships everytime After 26/11 there has been x huge increase in the numbers of the CG as well as new patrol craft and OPVs for the IN. Corvettes are not meant to be replacements for CBG escorts,etc. but are quite competent in variants carying the same weaponry as their larger counterparts. The huge escalating costs of modern ships- of- the -line,DDGs in truth cruisers and FFGs now destroyer size, are forcing even the major navies to look at smaller combatants especially for littoral warfare.Even the US has built 2 classes of LCS for offensive ops. but inadequately armed for the task. Almost all modern corvettes do have BPDMS systems tasked for anti- missile defence.

Please keep discussion pertaining to Indian navy on this thread. Indian Navy has the NGMV program I believe the Russian designs were rejected because they sacrificed speed for payload and will have tough time even catching up to any Chinese DDG on any strike missions. OT The Russian Buyan and Karakurt class corvette are just Putin prestige vessels to show that Russian navy is still maintaining their nos and to lob a few 3 million dollar missiles at jihadis with Ak-47s, the vessels don't do anything quite well. Would much rather crank out some modernized Tarantul class ships dirt cheap.

Agree with brar_w: we need quality & quantity. Our missile load-outs are ridiculously small for our destroyers. Especially when you look at those of the latest PLAN or SoKo destroyers. I don't think its a budget issue. I think its a thought-process & therefore design issue. The nature of naval warfare & the threats have evolved, while our thinking is a bit lagging. *Even if* its a budget issue, what's the cost of say 48 SRSAMs, compared to the cost of losing a destroyer?

Budget seems to be big issue see how long P-28s have gone without a SAM... As for Soko DDG, Soko DDG are far bigger as I said earlier couple pages ago a stretched P-17A can easily accommodate another 32 Barak-8 and 8 Brahmos amidship (plus provision for twin 8-16 SR SAM module) which would make it around 8000 Tons and 165 meters in length about the same size as P-15A but will displace a little more.

[Philip]

Warships are getting smaller and with more automation,smaller crews and more weaponry in corvette sized combatants are taking place.Unmanned long endurance systems like the USN Sea Hunter are taking over some ASW tasks once the staple diet of frigates. One is going to see a lot more in this direction just as UAV/ UCAVs are complementing and reducing manned LRMP aircraft.

At the other end of the fleet one sees a revival in interest of arsenal ships ,but the enormous cost and putting so many eggs in one basket ,a juicy target , is a brake on its development.
CW veterans modernised and upgraded like the Kirov now to sport hypersonic Tsirkon missiles and a huge arenal of Kalibirs,SAMs,etc. will occupy this space,but new ships of this size are unlikely unless the Chinese build a few sea dragons to support their large CVs.In the UW arena,we've seen Ohio SSBNs being converted into UW arsenal subs carrying over a hundred+ Tomahawk missiles. The same thing is happening to Ru Sov. era subs ,with Kalibir being the new weapon of choice.

PS:In the future as many warships as possible in the Ru fleet are to accommodate LR Kalibir and Tsirkon hypersonic missiles.Onyx/ BMos already exists in some. Speed of the vessel
is of far lesser consequence than its firepower.A PLAN DDG would be taken out by the missile in Q not the launching platform,
after detection and targeted by NCW. If you look at the IN's policy too,as many platforms that can accommodate BMos are being so fitted. Once BMos- NG arrives,with both MKIs and 29Ks carrying upto 5 and 3 of them respectively , land- based LRMPs and fighters like the MKIs and 29Ks will play a greater role in anti-ship warfare than before, with greater saturation attacks in conjunction with other platforms . Surface combatants are going to face greater challenges from supersonic and hypersonic missile saturation attacks, which will see an increase in sub fleets and as said earlier in smaller corvette-sized vessels providing larger numbers of combatants in the fleet.Few navies will be able to afford dozens of destroyers and frigates.

[nachiket]

Please keep discussion pertaining to Indian navy on this thread.

I would suggest everyone here to follow this, unless you want to see your posts disappearing without a trace.

[Karthik S]

I really wish govt orders 2 more P 15B to be built simultaneously, the fourth ship I think will be ready for launch in few months time anyway.

[srin]

On the SAM load out in the P 15 A and B, I'm quite disappointed. As for the argument that the missiles are expensive, there is nothing stopping us from having a 64 cell ship, with half the tubes empty.

[brar_w]

Warships are getting smaller and with more automation,smaller crews and more weaponry in corvette sized combatants are taking place.Unmanned long endurance systems like the USN Sea Hunter are taking over some ASW tasks once the staple diet of frigates. One is going to see a lot more in this direction just as UAV/ UCAVs are complementing and reducing manned LRMP aircraft.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4752&p=2409917#p2409917

[Philip]

At the larger end of the spectrum,the USN's response to RuN LR strike missiles has produced the CPS ( conventional prompt strike) ultra- LR ballistic missile with a conventional warhead for a " fast hit" anywhere on the planet. Fitted onto the Zumwalt stealth DDGs.Add to this across the board is a further Tomahawk variant in an anti-ship mode out to 900/1000km.These new missiles extend the striking range and lethality dramatically of US warships within the next two years. The RuN with LR Kalibir land attack SSMs out to 2000+ km now want to extend the same to 4500km.Tsirkon hypersonic missiles also about to make their debut within approx. the same timeframe ,fittted to we are told even corvette-sized warships is awaited with great interest.
The superpower maritime strike rivalry is entering a new phase with the induction of these new missiles.

Where does it leave the IN? BMos out to 800+ km and BMos- NG,BMos-H are in the future,but we do not have a Kalibir class missile yey as Nirbhay is stilla work in progress and Dhanush is seen to be a strat. option at sea,not a BM armed with a conv. warhead which the PLAN also claim to possess. Could a variant of the K-15, or Prithvi be fitted aboard an IN DDG? It is not without our capability to produce a compact BM equiv. should we need the option. Costs of course another matter! Ideally,an SSGN would be the best platform in carrying this option, far more survivable.

[John]

On the SAM load out in the P 15 A and B, I'm quite disappointed. As for the argument that the missiles are expensive, there is nothing stopping us from having a 64 cell ship, with half the tubes empty.

Not possible with P-15 design to fit an additional 64 cells there is no room only option is to fit a 16 Barak-8 module by removing rbu-6000 or come up with new design which means additional cost and risk . However since we have P-17a we can use that as basis for larger DDG class.

[chetak]

twitter

Rare for us to get such a great perspective of the size of the PLAN universal VLS. Taken aboard lead 055, DDG 101 Nanchang.

The quote says "this is my chocolate, where there's a need, is where it will be sent"

[tsarkar]

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Mazag ... 72.8479262

Guys looks like google maps are updated, there's P-17A right next to Vizag class. There's one ship in the richie dock, can someone ID the two ships docked in the dry dock next to Kasara Basin road. may be the last ship of P-15B is ready to be launched.

Talwar Class

[Barath]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... and-decoys


The US is looking to expand the P8 mission from the core maritime AsuW/ASW/Maritime ISR. To give it greater multi-mission strike capabilities, even against land and coastal targets.

India has P8s, and now has a CDS instead of just the p8 being in the Navy. Which theoretically might mature multi-domain thinking and break boundaries

But aside from the issues with indian procurement/budget, my WAG is that this may not filter down so quickly. For one thing, the specific sensors & weapons on the US P8 may not be handed to India so easily and it would cost money to integrate Indian/3rd party equivalents. For another, where's the discussion and doctrine thinking in India ? eg To bump up priority.

Thoughts on the Indian context from the experts here pls...

[Barath]

At the larger end of the spectrum,the USN's response to RuN LR strike missiles has produced the CPS ( conventional prompt strike) ultra- LR ballistic missile with a conventional warhead for a " fast hit" anywhere on the planet. Fitted onto the Zumwalt stealth DDGs.

What CPS missile ? Any references ?

Also, even assuming Nirbhay development is completed, it wouldn't be sub launched.. You would surely have to figure out how to canisterize it, then how to figure out appropriate VLS/tubes and get those built into an Indian sub.

we do not have a Kalibir class missile

India literally has the export version - Klub - fitted onto Kilo/Sindhughosh class and the Talwars/Krivaks. Though admittedly, to your point, range limited due to export versions/MTCR

[yensoy]

On the SAM load out in the P 15 A and B, I'm quite disappointed. As for the argument that the missiles are expensive, there is nothing stopping us from having a 64 cell ship, with half the tubes empty.

Exactly:
1. I won't be surprised if half or more of the tubes are empty on the Chinese vessels, or filled with second grade missiles/drinking water/ramen noodles
2. Ships are going to last a long time. By then our economy will be bigger and able to afford more missiles. We shouldn't cap the weaponry capability of ships based on current finances and requirements when there is a relatively cheap and easy option of adding more tubes and doubling firepower.