Indian Naval Discussion

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 27 Apr 2012 05:34

Navy packs a punch with stealth frigate.

India is all set to add another swift but silent lethal punch to its blue-water arsenal by inducting a new stealth frigate with weapons and sensors for three-dimensional warfare.

The 3,970-tonne INS Teg frigate, armed with the 290-km BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles among other weapon systems, will be commissioned into the Indian Navy at Yantar shipyard at Kaliningrad in Russia on Friday morning.

Taking its name from the short, single-edged curved swords traditionally used by the Sikhs, INS Teg will be inducted in the presence of Southern Naval Command chief Vice-Admiral K N Sushil. Commanded by Captain Rakesh Kumar Dahiya, the frigate will sail with a crew of 24 officers and 229 sailors.

The other two stealth frigates, INS Tarkash and INS Trikand, ordered from Russia under a $1.15-billion contract inked in 2006, will follow in September, 2012, and July, 2013, said sources.

With an operating range of 4,500 nautical miles, these Teg-class frigates can handle many threats in all the three dimensions - air, surface and underwater. These warships pack more power than the earlier three Talwar-class frigates inducted from Russia in 2003-04, equipped as they are with BrahMos land-attack missiles, surface-to-air missiles, AK-630 close-in weapon systems, torpedoes, anti-submarine rockets and an upgraded multi-role combat suite.

The 125-metre-long INS Teg, which can operate an anti-submarine or early-warning helicopter from its deck, has innovative design features to ensure reduction in its radar cross-section, infra-red, magnetic and acoustic signatures as well as radiated underwater noise to enhance its stealthy nature.

Powered by advanced gas-turbine propulsion plants for speeds of 30 knots, the warship is also equipped with complex automated systems for NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical) defence and damage control. These three frigates and aircraft carrier INS Vikramditya (Admiral Gorshkov), which will be inducted from Russia in early-2013 under a revised refit cost of $2.33 billion, are the only warships among the 50 ordered by the Navy that will come from abroad.

srai · Post by **srai** » 27 Apr 2012 08:52

^^^

Looks like it took around 6 years to deliver the first ship from order.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 27 Apr 2012 12:10

1 x 100 m main gun
8 x VL Brahmos with range out to ~300 Km
1 x 3S-90 arm launcher SA-N-12 SAMs stored in rotary cassette below deck with range out ~30 km
2 x Kashtan CIWS systems, each with 2 x 30 mm gatling guns and 4 SA-N-11 SAMs (also with reloads below deck)
8 x Igla-1E for manual air defence
1 x RBU-6000 rocket launcher
4 x 533mm torpedo tubes

Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Apr 2012 13:19

The Making Of INS Teg

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 27 Apr 2012 13:35

Aditya G wrote:1 x 100 m main gun
8 x VL Brahmos with range out to ~300 Km
1 x 3S-90 arm launcher SA-N-12 SAMs stored in rotary cassette below deck with range out ~30 km
2 x Kashtan CIWS systems, each with 2 x 30 mm gatling guns and 4 SA-N-11 SAMs (also with reloads below deck)
8 x Igla-1E for manual air defence
1 x RBU-6000 rocket launcher
4 x 533mm torpedo tubes

Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer

No Barak-1, that could be a serous shortcoming.

koti · Post by **koti** » 27 Apr 2012 14:14

^I am not sure of that.
Barak-1 was mandatory if it had AK630 CIWS. But with Khastan, I think SA-N-11 will be good enough.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 27 Apr 2012 14:42

INS Teg inducted into Indian Navy

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Apr 2012 16:37

Aditya G wrote:
Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer

Phirgate.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 27 Apr 2012 17:09

Aditya G wrote:
Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer

Frigate that is seriously out classed by more modern UNKIL degines. EG no Univeral VLS, nor a collection of PARs.

If you ask me it is about 25 years behind the Agies ships. in terms of serious firepower.

Having said so, she is more powerful then any thing the TSP or the PRC can throw at her. So it is a good news.

However I am seriously awaiting the P 15b. ships. They will be game changers as far as IN is concerned.

John · Post by **John** » 27 Apr 2012 18:47

Pratyush wrote:If you ask me it is about 25 years behind the Agies ships. in terms of serious firepower.

Talwar is more akin to the Perry FFG not the Aegis destroyers'. A true Unversal VLS system is unlikely due to size of Brahmos and latter being launched via cold launch where as Barak-1/8 will use hot launch.

I see AK-630, Barak will likely be installed here.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 27 Apr 2012 19:59

keshavchandra wrote:Comment on INS vik. Project and its mere situation (May be some years prior) by a worker. After seeing all these current facts and design issues (Quoted), it was a real challenge for the manufacturer and its refitting, to get it under the shoe of IN. Just take a look...

can you give me a link to the Russian vesrion of the text? thanks!

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 27 Apr 2012 20:03

shiv wrote:
Aditya G wrote:
Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer
Phirgate.

Still, doesn't look all that bad

narmad · Post by **narmad** » 27 Apr 2012 20:14

SNaik wrote: can you give me a link to the Russian vesrion of the text? thanks!

http://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/458 ... 00#t132100
http://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/458 ... 68#t132868

vdutta · Post by **vdutta** » 27 Apr 2012 20:36

SNaik wrote:
shiv wrote:
Still, doesn't look all that bad

Entire album is classic. tons of treasures in there. good quality pics, all 250 of them
http://s56.photobucket.com/albums/g191/snake65/

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 27 Apr 2012 21:35

SNaik wrote:Few more pics of Vikramaditya from Oleg Kuleshov
http://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/45828.html

While the pictures are interesting, the comments are the highlight.

Some have already quoted the comments but to summarize, the points made were:
1. Deck is too small to launch fully fueled and loaded aircraft.
2. Aircraft elevator is too small and too slow.
3. Only 3 arrestor wires limiting the margin of safety.
4. Improper deck layout to allow for efficient operations.
5. Lack of any offensive armaments except the fighters compared to standard Soviet designs.

The comments also insinuate that the parts are not upto spec and the entire carrier is a hodgepodge of "too many cooks" and an incompetent dockyard.

If even half of these stories are true, the Indian Navy should get its hands on it as soon as possible so the lessons learnt can be put into the next aircraft carrier. Perhaps the smaller LCA Navy would be more suited to this carrier than the larger Migs.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 27 Apr 2012 22:50

I would not read too far into the comments, but it is quite clear that the limiting factor in Vikramaditya's design is its lack of width and inconvenient placement of deck lifts that will limit the max rate of flight operations. Having said that, the capabilities are much higher than Viraat.

Also, I have noticed "we Indians" seem to have a lot of doubt and mental complexes iabout the Gorshkov's transformation to the INS Vikramaditya, but no such sentiment of China's conversion of the Varyag. Was Varyag in any better shape when it was bought from Ukraine? It was only a floating hull.

PS: pl ID the main radar sensor in Vikramaditya ... housed in the drum type construction

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Apr 2012 23:28

I dont see Kashtan-M system there , only AK-630 , so most likely Barak-1 will be fitted once she is back in India.

Shtil-1 is a big missile much bigger then I thought it would be.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 28 Apr 2012 01:31

Pratyush wrote:
Aditya G wrote:
Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer
Frigate that is seriously out classed by more modern UNKIL degines. EG no Univeral VLS, nor a collection of PARs.

If you ask me it is about 25 years behind the Agies ships. in terms of serious firepower.

Having said so, she is more powerful then any thing the TSP or the PRC can throw at her. So it is a good news.

However I am seriously awaiting the P 15b. ships. They will be game changers as far as IN is concerned.

Hainji, how you compare destroyer to Talwar class? Compared to the wonlee existent FFG type in USN, Talwar will do. A better comparison would be with Formidable/Lafayette class or the Frithof Nansen class. The Brahmos gives these ships a very powerful offensive weapons suite not matched by Exocet/harpoon/C802 types and the Shtil provides decent enough MRSAM coverage. Very robust platform in its class.

One question - why does the Talwar class still carry Iglas?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 28 Apr 2012 02:03

Pratyush wrote: Frigate that is seriously out classed by more modern UNKIL degines. EG no Univeral VLS, nor a collection of PARs.

If you ask me it is about 25 years behind the Agies ships. in terms of serious firepower.

Comparing a 4000 tonne frigate to an Aegis cruiser is meaningless.

However I am seriously awaiting the P 15b. ships. They will be game changers as far as IN is concerned.

Even the P-15A will provide a significant increase in capability as long as the Barak-8 integration goes ahead without problems. The P-15B design is not yet finalized.

What the IN would be really looking forward to a naval version of the Nirbhay LACM. The IN doesn't have any weapon of that class. A single P-15B (hopefully) armed with 8 Nirbhay LACMs prowling the sea 700km away from Karachi will have the pakis $hitting bricks.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 28 Apr 2012 02:15

How 'bout a naval version of the Shaurya? I like the idea of hypersonic missiles at long range.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Apr 2012 05:53

Pratyush wrote:
If you ask me it is about 25 years behind the Agies ships. in terms of serious firepower.

By these standards the Taliban are 50 years behind the US in firepower, but remain a notch ahead of the US in remaining undefeated. Same story in Vietnam. There is a lot of hype about US firepower for reasons that are too vast to discuss on this thread.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 28 Apr 2012 06:05

Navy to induct atleast 5 ships a year over the next 5 years.

Adm Verma, speaking at the annual press meet had said, "The induction programme is continuing apace and over the next five years we expect to induct ships/submarines at an average rate of five ships per year provided the yards deliver as per contracted timelines. This year we have concluded eight important contracts which include contracts for four destroyers, five offshore patrol vessels, two cadet training ships, eight landing craft utility and fast interceptor craft for coastal security duties. We are also looking forward to soon concluding contracts for mine counter measure vessels and P 17A frigates."

He had then added: "Among the major projects under construction in Indian shipyards are three ships of Kolkata Class (P-15A), four P-15B ships, which are an advanced version of the Kolkata Class, and six P 75 submarines all at Mazagaon Dock Limited, Mumbai ."

"Four anti-surface warfare corvettes are being built at Garden Reach Ship-builders, Kolkata. In addition, nine naval offshore patrol vessels are under construction at Goa Shipyard Limited and a private shipyard. The construction of the indigenous aircraft carrier is also progressing. We expect to induct one Shivalik class frigate Sahyadri -- one offshore patrol vessel, one Kolkata class destroyer, one P-28 ASW corvette, three catamaran hull survey vessels and twenty five fast interceptor craft over the next one year. Among the overseas projects, the refurbishment of Vikramaditya is progressing on track and the ship is expected to be delivered in December 2012. The three follow-on ships of Talwar class (Teg is first of the three), under construction at Russia, are likely to be delivered in the time frame 2012-13," Adm Verma had said.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Apr 2012 06:40

VDutt.Excellent find.Can anyone tell me which sub design is in frame 190? It is a sub with a novel placement for missile silos (appear to be Klub),appears to be a later design than the Lada/Amur,that sub also shown with 10 silos for Klub missiles in a previous frame.The Borei class SSBNs also have a unique three-fin tail and sail shaping,worth a closer look.

The Talwar/Tegs are excellent ships and should be compared not with a huge US destroyer three times its size,but with equivelent frigate designs/displacement.They have been found so good and at reasonable cost,that even the Russians are now building them for their own navy.There has been on-of hints at another batch of 3.It would be a good idea as the P-17s/17As are taking a truly long time to arrive.

kit · Post by **kit** » 28 Apr 2012 11:05

Philip wrote:VDutt.Excellent find.Can anyone tell me which sub design is in frame 190? It is a sub with a novel placement for missile silos (appear to be Klub),appears to be a later design than the Lada/Amur,that sub also shown with 10 silos for Klub missiles in a previous frame.The Borei class SSBNs also have a unique three-fin tail and sail shaping,worth a closer look.

The Talwar/Tegs are excellent ships and should be compared not with a huge US destroyer three times its size,but with equivelent frigate designs/displacement.They have been found so good and at reasonable cost,that even the Russians are now building them for their own navy.There has been on-of hints at another batch of 3.It would be a good idea as the P-17s/17As are taking a truly long time to arrive.

Right. Having a big stick is all and nice but only thing matters is how well you can use the stick you have and when it is required !

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 28 Apr 2012 19:43

Philip, glad you enjoy my collection

Some more:

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Apr 2012 23:25

tsarkar wrote:^^ Karan, whatever you've posted, I fully agree for seeker lock. I am referring to missile lock, viz, missile being fed bearing, azimuth and approach of threat before launch and the missile knowing where it needs to go before launch. Or which target has been allocated to it in a saturation attack. Barak-8 is supposed to do this. AAD already does this.

That's still LOAL, because irrespective of how much data you provide the missile, if the seeker comes in play, it needs to lock on. Otherwise, its just command guidance as in Akash or if the seeker just homes in on reflected energy -its SARH (but still LOAL unless the target was so close the seeker locked on before launch).

All that is happening now is that the degree of information that is provided to the missile has been improved, so that it can do a LOAL, and is better than the inputs that used to be provided earlier. The data fidelity and level makes a significant difference for the amount of work the seeker itself has to do. The data that it gets can also be provided by other "non classic" sources. It can also reroute the data back to the launcher for a crosscheck (two way datalink)...but it remains, LOAL.

I got the incorrect impression from AWST that Spyder also had this, but they use good old seeker lock.

Python and R-73 (that had this capability before Python) is cued by Helmet Mounted Cueing System and knows where to go before its launched. So its locked to the target by the HMCS.

Older missiles, say Sidewinder or Magic, whenever their seekers were locked to a target's IR signature, the pilot got a tone and fired. This was seeker LOBL. From your post, I get the impression that Spyder does something similar. This is not anything radical, this is 60's tech. If the Sidewinder or Magic was fired with the target in the seeker FoV but without locking, then it was LOAL. In 1971 the Indian MiG21 fired its missiles and the missile failed to lock on th F104 that was finally shot down by gunfire.

Well, whether it is LOBL or LOAL - the basics have remained the same. The terms are broadly descriptive and quite accurately so, which means various flavours/subcategories can be then charted out. All that is happening today is the tech., used to achieve these overall objectives (LOAL or LOBL) is changing radically and making them more effective. So a SpyDer is not 60's tech per se, its far more effective, even if the concepts (LOAL/LOBL) were derived from studies/products that started being developed, inducted far earlier.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 29 Apr 2012 23:49

One more. And then it's your turn, guys, when she arrives.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 Apr 2012 15:27

Indian naval base INS Dweeprakshak commissioned at Kavaratti

vina · Post by **vina** » 30 Apr 2012 16:15

Aditya G wrote:1 x 100 m main gun
8 x VL Brahmos with range out to ~300 Km
~~1 x 3S-90 arm launcher SA-N-12 SAMs stored in rotary cassette below deck with range out ~30 km~~
2 x Kashtan CIWS systems, each with 2 x 30 mm gatling guns and 4 SA-N-11 SAMs (also with reloads below deck)
8 x Igla-1E for manual air defence
~~1 x RBU-6000 rocket launcher~~
~~4 x 533mm torpedo tubes~~

Sirji, I have only one question - is it a frigate or destroyer

Ideally, it should have been .. a VLS Shtil-1 version and we could have done away with the arm launcher and the cassette below!

Similarly, the RBU-6000 .. I could never stomach that crude looking system that launches depth charges.. Surely there are better ways to put that system.. probably on the sides /below decks somewhere. It looks hideous on the deck.

Torpedo tubes.. To use against what? Pirate Dhows ? .. Nah.. For LWT against subs ? Yes , but I do think that we really should go for these VL-Asroc type systems and clear up the top sides and fore deck of the ship ! .

Will make clutter free and you can possibly do some pretty decent stealth stuff there. As of now the launcher arm and the RBU-6000 mess up the deck and look so 1970s/early 80s!

We really should go for a MK-41 type VLS that takes all kinds of missiles including air defense, ABM, ASW, ASuW and put all the stuff below decks and clear up the top sides!

We should invest in our own version of such a system, now that we have the Brahmos and the long range and short range SAMs getting developed. All go under decks along with Brahmos in a nice tight MK-41 / Sylver kind of VLS package..

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 Apr 2012 18:23

Cain Marko wrote:How 'bout a naval version of the Shaurya? I like the idea of hypersonic missiles at long range.

Shaurya is the land version of a naval missile.

negi · Post by **negi** » 30 Apr 2012 22:19

Sir even khan was using the single arm launcher for their tfta SM back in 90s , it will take time before we come up with a VLS for our missiles. It is going to be difficult for us for we operate a mix of western and Ru missiles with stuff like Brahmos which is essentially cold launched.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 01 May 2012 00:16

vina wrote:a VLS Shtil-1 version and we could have done away with the arm launcher and the cassette below!

I believe the Shtil will be replaced by Barak-8 during MLUs. Hence VLS was not chosen for a missile that uses SARH. Until that time, the single arm launcher is good enough.

vina wrote:Similarly, the RBU-6000 .. I could never stomach that crude looking system that launches depth charges.. Surely there are better ways to put that system.. probably on the sides /below decks somewhere. It looks hideous on the deck.

ASW frigates/destroyers race at 30 knots to manoeuver faster than submarines and submarine launched torpedoes, sit on top and pound them with ASW rockets that cannot be decoyed away like torpedoes. Its the naval equivalent of Grad/Pinaka and great for saturation attacks. That is why Sweden, Finland, Poland, Russia, China and India still use these rockets, the Poles on German designed ships.

vina wrote:Torpedo tubes.. To use against what? Pirate Dhows ? .. Nah.. For LWT against subs ? Yes , but I do think that we really should go for these VL-Asroc type systems and clear up the top sides and fore deck of the ship!.

The challenge of long range rocket assisted ASW weapons is accurate designation. US has large number of ships and sensor platforms and hence can deploy LR ASW weapons. In the Indian context, the helicopter is the long range detection platform but carries its own air launched LWT. For ship detected targets, the torpedos are the best options since they coincide with ship borne sonar tracking ranges. They are 533 mm HWT rather than 324 mm LWT.

Kanson - agree with you. I was extrapolating seeker lock to missile designation, but to be factually correct, these terms refer to seeker and not the missile, no matter how accurate the designation has become in recent days.

John · Post by **John** » 01 May 2012 00:29

I believe the Shtil will be replaced by Barak-8 during MLUs. Hence VLS was not chosen for a missile that uses SARH. Until that time, the single arm launcher is good enough.

Correct me if i am wrong but wasn't VL-Shtil was developed as join venture with PLAN and China has full license to manufacture it, that alone might prevent us from ever procuring even for upgrades'. Semi active radar homing is acceptable, SM-2/ESSM use it if it is coupled with good FCR and utilizes time sharing which Shtil lack.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 May 2012 02:37

Tx SN for the "extras" and the earlier ones.V.good quality of pics.It appears that the absence of the Kashtan CIWS system on the Teg-there is only the 30mm gatling, means that Barak may be installed later at home.How neatly it can be accommodated remains to be seen.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 01 May 2012 10:22

India and Japan to hold joint Naval exercise

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 May 2012 11:18

John wrote:Correct me if i am wrong but wasn't VL-Shtil was developed as join venture with PLAN and China has full license to manufacture it

Dont think that is true , The VL Shtil-1 was offered to china just like it was offered to India for naval ships , the janes are other article on VLS Shtil-1 does not talk of any JV there.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 May 2012 11:24

tsarkar wrote:I believe the Shtil will be replaced by Barak-8

Highly unlikely unless they change the superstructure to accomodate the Elta 2248 radar and find enough space to fit in a VLS for good number of missile , integrating a Barak-1 VLS wont be much harder compared to integrating Barak-8 , its worth only on newer ships that has been designed to accommodate it.

As far as VLS ASROC type weapons , the Klub already has a variant of guided rocket torpedoes that carries a 350 mm torpedo out to a range of 40 km and they can be integrated with the universal launcher of Talwar/Teg

srai · Post by **srai** » 01 May 2012 11:39

Philip wrote:Tx SN for the "extras" and the earlier ones.V.good quality of pics.It appears that the absence of the Kashtan CIWS system on the Teg-there is only the 30mm gatling, means that Barak may be installed later at home.How neatly it can be accommodated remains to be seen.

Good observation!

Lack of Kashtan CIWS hints at lack of IN's faith in that system's capability. Or was the price too high for the capability it provided?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 May 2012 11:51

IN is standardising on Barak-1 system for all current and future ships , Kashtan only adds to logistics complexity

koti · Post by **koti** » 01 May 2012 11:53

srai wrote: Lack of Kashtan CIWS hints at lack of IN's faith in that system's capability. Or was the price too high for the capability it provided?

Saab, I think it has more to do with the weight of the system compared to Barak1/AK630.