Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
kuldipchager
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:35
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kuldipchager » 23 May 2014 08:17

BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 987

No need for Kilos or Amur we could have been cranking out locally built 209s and used it to develop larger variants..




This is nice wet dream for specially for pro western lobby.

P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby P Chitkara » 23 May 2014 11:53

How so?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21060
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 23 May 2014 11:56

Pak is building 4,maybe more Agosta-90B AIP French subs,acquiring 6+ AIP Chinese subs,both will carry 200KM range sub-launched anti-ship/land attack Chinese missiles.Pak's fleet may even cross 12. The idea is for Pak to have some of its AIP subs with missiles tipped with N-warheads,a "dal-roti" alternative to expensive SSBNs like the ATV/Arihant/ class.

We need both hunter-killer subs for the littorals equipped with missiles like BMos,etc.,a cheaper option to deal with Pak,as well as a fleet of N-subs for both strategic deterrent and blue-water ops.Remember that many ASEAN nations as well as Oz have sub ambitions.We also have to train the Vietnamese in operating their Kilos and need to establish our footprint there just as China is doing at Gwadar.Within a decade the entire Kilo fleet will have to be pensioned off,leaving us with just 6 Scorpenes in the conventional kitty.Extra improved Kilos/Amurs,whatever may be the most cost-effective option.At the end of the 10 yr. lease,we may be able to buy the Akulas for a song at depreciated costs,or simply extend the lease at much reduced cost.Both are options.

The French N-sub cost is an unknown,possibly as high as those built by Britain.One will have to wait and see what the Brazilian design is like,far into the future. The ATV design is adequate to be modified into an SSGN of about 8000t +. Thee may have to be a more powerful reactor and a more streamlined sail ,as faster speeds will be required as against the Arihant SSBN class.

P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby P Chitkara » 23 May 2014 12:52

What is the last known status of P75? Another challenge now is - how do we standardize on the conventional sub part to avoid multiple types and associated cost of maintaining separate logistics trail for each type. We already have the kilo and hdw working, scorpene joining in a few years and P 75 also coming up.

Assuming hdw retiring in a few years, we will still be left with three types for a conventional sub fleet that is less than 20 in number.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Viv S » 23 May 2014 13:55

Philip wrote:Pak is building 4,maybe more Agosta-90B AIP French subs,acquiring 6+ AIP Chinese subs,both will carry 200KM range sub-launched anti-ship/land attack Chinese missiles.Pak's fleet may even cross 12. The idea is for Pak to have some of its AIP subs with missiles tipped with N-warheads,a "dal-roti" alternative to expensive SSBNs like the ATV/Arihant/ class.


Pakistan isn't building any more Agostas. Its frontline strength equals just three Agosta 90Bs, none of which are equipped with LACMs. The Yuan class has been 'likely to buy' for years now with no funding available to make it happen (and the Yuan isn't equipped with LACMs either).

Even if Pakistan was building two dozen submarines, we'll still have to counter that with ASW platforms not with an urgent Kilo class buy.

We need both hunter-killer subs for the littorals equipped with missiles like BMos,etc.,a cheaper option to deal with Pak,as well as a fleet of N-subs for both strategic deterrent and blue-water ops.


A BrahMos missile launched by a Su-30MKI or frigate is just as effective as one launched by a submarine operating in littoral waters. But much cheaper.

Remember that many ASEAN nations as well as Oz have sub ambitions.We also have to train the Vietnamese in operating their Kilos and need to establish our footprint there just as China is doing at Gwadar.


ASEAN nations don't have near complete air dominance over their areas of concern. And the prospect of training friendly navy can hardly be a factor in the selection of a very expensive piece of hardware.

Within a decade the entire Kilo fleet will have to be pensioned off,leaving us with just 6 Scorpenes in the conventional kitty. Extra improved Kilos/Amurs,whatever may be the most cost-effective option.


Within the same decade, it is also possible to augment the Scorpene fleet with another six Scorpenes. That's more sufficient with the primary thrust being on SSNs.

At the end of the 10 yr. lease,we may be able to buy the Akulas for a song at depreciated costs,or simply extend the lease at much reduced cost.Both are options.


At the end of the 10 year lease, the Russians may decide they would rather have the submarine back than accept more money and negotiate accordingly. That's also an option.

The French N-sub cost is an unknown,possibly as high as those built by Britain.One will have to wait and see what the Brazilian design is like,far into the future. The ATV design is adequate to be modified into an SSGN of about 8000t +. Thee may have to be a more powerful reactor and a more streamlined sail ,as faster speeds will be required as against the Arihant SSBN class.


With the Akula priced at $3 billion, DCNS and BAE haven't been set a very high bar. In any case, a head-to-head evaluation should clarify that as well. As far as the ATV derived SSN is concerned, while it needs to be pursued, its not realistic to expect a high degree of stealth or performance at this stage.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 23 May 2014 19:35


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 23 May 2014 19:57

the 885 Graney (yasen class) sub apparently has 8 x VL tubes with 3 yakhonts or SLCM possible per tube = 24.
seems very similar to ATV design, except twice the number of tubes as befits its larger size.

8 ICBM would be a little sub optimal - 12 or ideally 16 is best , but passable.

it will keep weight of the next family of SSBN manageable and reduce demand for more and more powerful n compact reactors which we might not be there technically.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 23 May 2014 20:56

kuldipchager wrote:
This is nice wet dream for specially for pro western lobby.


What is building U-209 have anything to do with western lobby considering we should be able to reverse engineer it and build it on our own.

member_28526
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 25
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_28526 » 23 May 2014 21:58

Why not get more scorpenes and get others like L&T to execute the orders? Perhaps we can also dangle the Mistral buy to the french, entice them to offer us their SSN

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 23 May 2014 23:08

Problem is Scorpene are simply too expensive to build in large# unless of course we can bring price down to 500-600 mill each.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 May 2014 06:43



Can't be. I mean where's the delay we planned for?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4623
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 24 May 2014 07:49

^ paid for it in the price :D

member_27718
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_27718 » 24 May 2014 08:00

Went to Boeing facility in Seattle today. Saw three more P-8I's parked there.

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 24 May 2014 08:57

kilo is a proven design & we are already using them in numbers . so rather than going to 209 or Scorpene (have many problems) why not buy the sasta he accha kilo ke bhav se.

they did provide Vietnam with kilo's in time & are producing them like sausages.(some WW2 terms)

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4067
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 24 May 2014 11:49

John wrote:
kuldipchager wrote:
This is nice wet dream for specially for pro western lobby.


What is building U-209 have anything to do with western lobby considering we should be able to reverse engineer it and build it on our own.


some one tried to reverse engineer a kilo....and 'and all the kings men '......

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 24 May 2014 16:45

tushar_m wrote:kilo is a proven design & we are already using them in numbers . so rather than going to 209 or Scorpene (have many problems) why not buy the sasta he accha kilo ke bhav se.

they did provide Vietnam with kilo's in time & are producing them like sausages.(some WW2 terms)


We're also already using 209s for 25 years now without any accident on complaint about them ever. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/images/shishumar2.jpg

As for Scorpene the real advantage is in its availability that 340 days a year, compared to 90 days a year for russian subs.

Again the same story of Mirage vs Mig 29; though 29s were more manueverable and agile, in 90s at 5 minutes notice 45 M2ks out of 50 would be fit and ready for war while 10 Mig 29s out of 60 would be ready at any given time.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_26622 » 24 May 2014 17:25

Nothing can beat an Nuke sub for endurance.

We should double down on Nuke sub building capability instead of squandering 1 billion plus on Scorpenes. Heck that price does not include even a TORPEDO :shock:

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 25 May 2014 23:31

tushar_m wrote:kilo is a proven design & we are already using them in numbers . so rather than going to 209 or Scorpene (have many problems) why not buy the sasta he accha kilo ke bhav se.

they did provide Vietnam with kilo's in time & are producing them like sausages.(some WW2 terms)


As mentioned earlier 209s are proven and we already built them. My hope is to incrementally move up and eventually build larger variants simply throwing more money at Kilos' isn't going to address not to mention we still have to rely on Russia for refits. Also another option is Germany is looking to get out of building Dolphin's for Israel we can launch joint venture to build them future subs for Israel in exchange for transfer of blue prints.

rajatmisra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rajatmisra » 26 May 2014 07:31

In the first place, why did we go for so many variants? Google says that we did exercise the option of additional 209. Then we scouted around and got scorpeone. Kola already there.

rajatmisra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rajatmisra » 26 May 2014 07:31

Did NOT exercise the option

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 26 May 2014 07:45

the U209 infra in mumbai was used for a grand total of 2 subs built before the HDW scandal blacklisted it.
rival vendors used these scandals to settle scores.
else mostly our sub fleet would be U209, and now U214 probably.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby uddu » 26 May 2014 08:27

The most realistic option is to utilize the Scorpene design for the P75I project and keep building subs at a faster rate. Its said that from 2016 onwards one sub will join the fleet at an interval of nine months. We could atleast have a plan to build the followon subs without any delays based on the Scorpene design suitably modified to accomodate the DRDO AIP and churn out atleast 10 boats upto 2030. What goes inside the sub must be indigenous stuff whenever possible, including weaponry like Varunastra torpedo.
In parallel, we must be building our own Nuclear attack subs based on Arihant technology. This will help to have adequate sub force without delays and danger or losing the edge.

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 26 May 2014 10:25

I don't get how a SSK could cost in upward of 11 billion $ for P75I

can someone elaborate on how arihant cost abt 2 Billon $(with R&D) & we are spending approx 2 Billion $ on mere SSK

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8311
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 26 May 2014 11:36

^^^

We have been seeing a delay of 2 years every 2 years for the Scorpene. Over the past few years. So unless the boat hits the water yesterday, there is no way she can join the fleet by 2016.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9274
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby brar_w » 26 May 2014 11:50

Any chance that the IN will consider the Soryu class submarine from the japs? Especially if a joint development for an advanced version is proposed. Just came to mind given Modi's apparent love for Japan etc

http://www.naval-technology.com/project ... ssubmarin/

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 27 May 2014 10:45

a fact finding PMO level mission is needed to find out exactly what is wrong in the scorpene program and who is to blame - MDL, MOD, DCN or all three.we cannot have a repeat of these issues ever, its too painful.
even a relatively basic SSN gives us way more reach and options than a $3 billion uber-SSK without the range and payload to hit hard across the ocean.

scorpene will have a mix of max 14 exocets and HWT. Arihant if it matches the 688 size will have 30 HWT/klubs and 12 more nirbhay/brahmos/klub un UVLS. thats three times more payload and 3 months of food supply with unlimited ability to sprint at top speed submerged.

we do not need any SSK submarine force vs TSP for the forseeable future as their naval threat is from subs, best dealt by ASW assets.

we are wasting national treasure on the entirely wrong line of equipment. the pathetic scorpene is at best a mediterranean sea mauler, vs the bigger sharks in deep ocean.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1654
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Sid » 27 May 2014 14:12

I think we all are judging Navy's decision based on weapon status in a very small snapshot of time.

If we travel back 10-12 years years ago, there was no certainty on either nuclear sub or conventional sub. I think there were suspicion raised (like in case of every other defense deal) on scorpion deal, but it was quickly closed (unlike any other defense deals). Due to the critical nature of weapon system no one was ready to stand in front of it.

Nuclear sub was nowhere near completion and scorpion sub was the only hope India had against puke's subs.

Now things are changing, but some people may still have vested interests in old P75 program. Things may change but not so soon.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 27 May 2014 15:07

clearly given current and future situation its time to double down on n-subs and convert the P75I pgm into a full blown hunter-killer SSN program. there are two options
- keep the same hull form as the Arihant for commonality but install a bigger 120mw reactor to improve the top speed to around 30 knots
(sure the best boats can do 35 but 30 for days is much better than 22 for a limited time that SSKs can manage)
- get rid of the UVLS on the Arihant and make it shorter and lighter, depending on the 25-30 weapons in fwd torpedo room like HWT, Klub, Nirbhay(I hope). retain the 85Mw current reactor. this will increase the top speed too.

since we do not have a great need to sprint across the pacific or atlantic , and weapons are increasingly long range...I would run with option1 if a meatier reactor can be rigged up.

KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 575
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby KiranM » 27 May 2014 15:41

Singha sir, to have a single line of logistics and greater operational tempo Arihant class will be like multirole SSGNs that also shoulder the Nuclear Detterence as additional responsibility. As Chetak/ tsarkar said (not sure who) it will be a 'unique to India' class vessel. Its displacement may increase but its mutli-role capability will never change.
So any given time we will have few boats on detterence patrol as SSBN and few as SSN with payload of torpedoes and Brahmos at key choke points. On indications of a conflict few may be loaded with Nirbhay to function as SSGN near the coast of the target.
In fact a school of thought in US is arguing for Pentagon to scrap the future SSBN program and use Virginia class to bear new ballistic missiles in their silos.
If both happen then it will be a first time of India being ahead of the 'curve'.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9274
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby brar_w » 27 May 2014 15:53

In fact a school of thought in US is arguing for Pentagon to scrap the future SSBN program and use Virginia class to bear new ballistic missiles in their silos


I do not think this will happen now. If the sequester and the liberal administration has stuck with the traditional approach future governments or secnav's and secdef's wont change the approach especially when the lead ship is to go into construction by 2021. The plan is to build a new sub borrowing a lot from the virginia block 4 that is a highly capable and latest virginia model design. The missile compartment is to be shared by the US and UK.

Here is the latest presentation on the matter released in april of this year as you can see the specifications had been firmed up in march of this year.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/217274873/ORP

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 27 May 2014 21:25

Singha wrote:a fact finding PMO level mission is needed to find out exactly what is wrong in the scorpene program and who is to blame - MDL, MOD, DCN or all three.we cannot have a repeat of these issues ever, its too painful.
even a relatively basic SSN gives us way more reach and options than a $3 billion uber-SSK without the range and payload to hit hard across the ocean.

I was skeptic of the deal since it was signed i wish i can go back and find some my posts when we first talked about this. It seemed absurd at that time building all 6 subs locally on a unproven design, rather than building 2 in France and assembling 1 here and then building rest locally. With MDL and DCNintl pushed heavily for later since both benefited from that agreement, DCN knew profit margins where much higher building the subs abroad and MDL wanted $$$, in hindsight MOD should have clearly done audit to see MDL was capable of building modern rather than taking their word for it.

If you believe what is coming out of France it seems indicate a SY that in complete disarray and seem to indicate than even Karachi SY (which had its own problem with A90B) is in better shape than MDL. I hate to say it but even if we get the subs built and in sea trials i would be surprised if they don't find even more issues ..

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 27 May 2014 22:47

^ What is SY?

rudradeep
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 37
Joined: 26 Mar 2006 02:19
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rudradeep » 27 May 2014 23:54

Dhananjay wrote:^ What is SY?


Ship Yard...

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1654
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Sid » 28 May 2014 00:19

Singha wrote:clearly given current and future situation its time to double down on n-subs and convert the P75I pgm into a full blown hunter-killer SSN program. there are two options
- keep the same hull form as the Arihant for commonality but install a bigger 120mw reactor to improve the top speed to around 30 knots


Current reactor takes up 1/3 of the total hull space (refer to one of Ruski articles posted on BR). Increase the size (without changing hull space) and we might be less by one or two silos.

Mature the current design in parallel while building additional copies of current boat. This will keep a balance between quantity and quality.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arijitkm » 28 May 2014 07:32

New power projection capabilities sought for the Indian Navy- Fleet Support Ships Saurav Jha

In a signal that the Indian Navy (IN) is looking to push further into the Southern Indian Ocean Region (IOR) besides being ready to operate for reasonable lengths of time even in areas such as the Mediterranean and the South China Sea (SCS), the service sent out request for proposals (RFPs) in April 2013 for the construction of five new fleet support ships (FSS). These new ships are to be procured under the 'buy global' category of the defence procurement procedure (DPP). The specifications laid out by the IN suggest that it is looking for serious underway replenishment capability from these ships which will have roles and capability beyond the standard fleet tankers of yesteryear. The decision to 'buy global' has apparently been guided by the fact that Indian defence shipyards are already overloaded and the ships are required on a priority basis. Indeed, any quick forward movement on this tender under Narendra Modi's dispensation may be indicative of the role the new Indian government intends to play in the Indo-Pacific.


The request for information (RFI) sent out in 2011 for these ships itself clearly spells out that the functions for the FSS include:


(a) Transfer FOLs to all Naval Surface units while underway at sea, using the abeam and stern transfer methods.


(b) Transfer all types of Stores, Victuals and Personnel to naval units, while underway at sea.


Thus beyond the role of fuelling at sea (FAS) which involves delivering fluids such as low speed and high speed diesel (LSHSD), aviation fuel (AVCAT), fresh water and feed water these ships will also perform tasks typically carried out by combat store ships and ammunition ships by being able to deliver a variety of solid cargoes to serve as true replenishment at sea (RAS) vessels. As such the RFI calls for each ship to have a heavy Jackstay rig for transfer of a loads up to 2 tons ( which incidentally is quite standard for RAS ships) and specifies that a cargo drop reel (CDR) be provided for the heavy Jackstay. The ships will also have light Jackstay rigs on either side and these will be fitted with auto tension winches to transfer loads up to 250 kg. Furthermore, each ship will also have dedicated cargo lifts for cargo spare gear, ammunition and stores.
While the above refers to connected replenishment, the FSS naturally also has to be capable of vertical replenishment. This is accomplished by the use of a multi-role helicopter that the ship has to be designed to carry and operate. As per the RFI, the FSS should be capable of staging through helicopters with max take-off weight (MTOW) of up to 16 tons. It must also use a helicopter traversing system to secure and manoeuvre the helicopter from the landing area to the hangar in all weather conditions for which the ship is designed.


Now the projected size of these ships will make them only slightly smaller than the INS Vikramaditya which recently became fully operational with its complement of Mig-29ks. With an overall length of 200 m, a beam of about 25 m and and full load displacement of 40000 tonnes, the FSS will easily count among the IN's biggest ships. These FSSs will thus be more than 10000 tonnes larger than India's latest fleet tankers of the Deepak Class. Interestingly the RFI also says that the draught of these ships should not exceed 10m thereby rendering them easily capable of traversing the Suez Canal and even shallower navigable channels.

.......
.......

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby merlin » 28 May 2014 12:23

FSS is good news indeed and the number 5 is a good start.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 28 May 2014 19:42

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_cla ... pport_ship

excellent news. the idea seems borrowed from the ship class above. its a combined oiler+food+ammo+water ship of substantial size and importantly has the speed to keep up with carrier and DDG groups, eliminating need for more (slower) ships or more types of specialized ships.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 28 May 2014 19:48

Cheen as usual already has 4 ships of this type and is no doubt building more. its called Type903..they purchased a ukrainian made ship of similar nature in 1990s to learn how to build it.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby merlin » 29 May 2014 12:10

Singha wrote:Cheen as usual already has 4 ships of this type and is no doubt building more. its called Type903..they purchased a ukrainian made ship of similar nature in 1990s to learn how to build it.


They seem to be on a massive expansion spree in every domain. Perhaps IN can also expect a modest expansion with the current GoI. At least pending items can be expedited. LPD/LPH type RFP is also pending as is the P75I. More Deepak class might also help.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 29 May 2014 12:17

Cheen is a very large shipbuilding power. churning out large hulls is not a problem. nor is funding since PLAN has been given priority.
their new 055 cruiser design will be interesting.
http://china-defense.blogspot.in/2014/0 ... -from.html
it would weigh around 12,000t being 185m long estimated.
hence a massive number of missiles could be carried.

shiver my brothers shiver...
Image


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests