Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[SlayingHell]

I basically spent 3 hours searching for these questions but couldn't even get a surface level answer
1. Can anyone tell me how silent the Arihant SSBN is? I know its not that excellent. But has there any improvements been made for later S4?
2. How deep can our Nuke Subs dive in Test Depths and Operating Depths? Because I read somewhere despite being a conventional submarine the Taigei class can dive upto 800m. What about us?
3. Do we have Torpedoes capable of striking depths such deep? Because the reasoning i heard is that at that kind of depths Torpedoes would crush themselves before they reach the target.

 

[jaijaganath]

Navy would like 2-3 more 6m size LR-MFR on ships for next 2 years timeframe.

Credit: Marich01

On which platform

 

[Binayak95]

I basically spent 3 hours searching for these questions but couldn't even get a surface level answer
1. Can anyone tell me how silent the Arihant SSBN is? I know its not that excellent. But has there any improvements been made for later S4?
2. How deep can our Nuke Subs dive in Test Depths and Operating Depths? Because I read somewhere despite being a conventional submarine the Taigei class can dive upto 800m. What about us?
3. Do we have Torpedoes capable of striking depths such deep? Because the reasoning i heard is that at that kind of depths Torpedoes would crush themselves before they reach the target.

You are asking into the void.

 

[125mm_Smoothbore]

I basically spent 3 hours searching for these questions but couldn't even get a surface level answer
1. Can anyone tell me how silent the Arihant SSBN is? I know its not that excellent. But has there any improvements been made for later S4?
2. How deep can our Nuke Subs dive in Test Depths and Operating Depths? Because I read somewhere despite being a conventional submarine the Taigei class can dive upto 800m. What about us?
3. Do we have Torpedoes capable of striking depths such deep? Because the reasoning i heard is that at that kind of depths Torpedoes would crush themselves before they reach the target.

Highly classified this data is even the pics of our boomers are very classified how would you even know if they are good/bad i would doubt every source unless the officials of strategic forces themself claim anything

 

[Bleh]

Navy would like 2-3 more 6m size LR-MFR on ships for next 2 years timeframe.

Credit: Marich01

LR-MFR id biggg. Mounting it on a destroyer would have to be like the Hobart or Fridtjof Nansen Classes, or the integrated mast concept warships... not a Kolkata-Vishakhapatnam type mast.

 

[Bleh]

LR-MFR id biggg. Mounting it on a destroyer would have to be like the Hobart or Fridtjof Nansen Classes, or the integrated mast concept warships... not a Kolkata-Vishakhapatnam type mast.
View attachment 7373View attachment 7377View attachment 7375View attachment 7378

...however by my judgement we could simply go for a dedicated Air-defense Corvette that would provide escort of larger ships to protect from AShBM & AShM.

Those could have LR-MFR while the rest continue with MF STAR

 

[Blood+]

...however by my judgement we could simply go for a dedicated Air-defense Corvette that would provide escort of larger ships to protect from AShBM & AShM.

Those could have LR-MFR while the rest continue with MF STAR View attachment 7379

Hmm... but will a corvette have enough endurance for that?? At the very least, we'd need a frigate in 6k-7k ton class.

 

[Bleh]

Hmm... but will a corvette have enough endurance for that?? At the very least, we'd need a frigate in 6k-7k ton class.

NGCs are to be 5k ton, & multi-sized ships operate together anyways... Plus these would be comparable to Saryu class OPVs with 12k km range.

Manageable

 

[Binayak95]

NGCs are to be 5k ton, & multi-sized ships operate together anyways... Plus these would be comparable to Saryu class OPVs with 12k km range.

Manageable

its not just range though, corvettes by definition wont have the full propulsion capabilities that the LM 2500 or the Zorya GTs will give - and the IN has so far refused to have single role frigates / ddgs.

And then theres the kerfukkle of actually cooling a radar that big and maintaining surplus power.
What we are likely to see is another class of full destroyer heavies (light cruisers, if you will) that have the radar integrated into the superstructure AND with the Mogami esque unified signals and comms tower.

 

[Bleh]

its not just range though, corvettes by definition wont have the full propulsion capabilities that the LM 2500 or the Zorya GTs will give - and the IN has so far refused to have single role frigates / ddgs.

And then theres the kerfukkle of actually cooling a radar that big and maintaining surplus power.
What we are likely to see is another class of full destroyer heavies (light cruisers, if you will) that have the radar integrated into the superstructure AND with the Mogami esque unified signals and comms tower.

That's possible too...

Regarding specialist ships, 3300t Kamortas are fully anti-sub & operates in such escort roles. The NGCs could be anti-air. A combination of LR-SAM, MR-SAM, VSORAD & extra Gatlings may be the difference between live vs sunk captial or supply or landing ship.

 

[Adm_Kenobi]

corvettes by definition wont have the full propulsion capabilities that the LM 2500 or the Zorya GTs will give

what capabilitiesare you taking about here?

The NGCs could be anti-air.

It will be multi role, ASW, AAW, and standard 8 SSM load. A sort of mini P17A, and the range is >=4000nmi, not 12000km.

 

[Binayak95]

what capabilitiesare you taking about here?

It will be multi role, ASW, AAW, and standard 8 SSM load. A sort of mini P17A, and the range is >=4000nmi, not 12000km.

Surge speed and keeping up with the frontline ships when you need to rush assets from Karwar to say, the Middle East.

 

[Adm_Kenobi]

Surge speed and keeping up with the frontline ships when you need to rush assets from Karwar to say, the Middle East.

NGC won't be much behind our capital ships

P15B (knots, nmi) -
Max - 30, 1000
Cruise - 18, 4000

P17A (knots, nmi)
Max - 28, 1000
Cruise - 16, 5500

NGC (knots, nmi)
Max - 26, 1000
Cruise - 16, ≥4000

NGC will be able to keep up with the other ships in the fleet, Kamorta and Talwar are behind NGC when it comes to cruising.

 

[705-Lira]

LR-MFR id biggg. Mounting it on a destroyer would have to be like the Hobart or Fridtjof Nansen Classes, or the integrated mast concept warships... not a Kolkata-Vishakhapatnam type mast.
View attachment 7373View attachment 7377View attachment 7375View attachment 7378

Isn't the LR-MFR antenna scalable?
Because I highly doubt there is any destroyer with a superstructure big and wide enough to support a 6m AAAU.
Even the Flight 3 Arleigh Burkes 4.3m AN/SPY-6 antenna.

 

[Blood+]

Isn't the LR-MFR antenna scalable?
Because I highly doubt there is any destroyer with a superstructure big and wide enough to support a 6m AAAU.
Even the Flight 3 Arleigh Burkes 4.3m AN/SPY-6 antenna.

AFAIK, the Type 346B radar panels onboard the Type 055 DDG are of 5 meter but yeah, 6 is too much for a destroyer.

 

[Fatalis]

Navy would like 2-3 more 6m size LR-MFR on ships for next 2 years timeframe.

Credit: Marich01

@Adm_Kenobi

Your views on this.

These are most probably specialised ships like Anvesh.

 

[Adm_Kenobi]

@Adm_Kenobi

Your views on this.

These are most probably specialised ships like Anvesh.

AMPL is referring to one face as one SBR (ship-borne radar), one face delivered last year and the second this year.
2-3 SBR here means 2-3 faces. Could be for ITR to test the radar as well as missile launches when Anvesh is not available. Currently, no ship in IN (other than Anvesh) can handle the 6m SBR.

 

[SlayingHell]

Feel free to refute. If the goal for Next Generation Corvette is to conduct ASW duties far away from Shore (ASWSWC takes care of Inshore), then its targets would be
1. PLAN Nuclear Attack Submarines
2. PLAN Conventional Attack Submarines
3. PN Conventional Attack Submarines
So what kind of ship(s) would be best for the role of Offshore ASW?

In another context, it would had been better if they had gone FREMM way for Nilgiri Class frigate, the role of offshore ASW would be based on a Specialist ASW Variant in Nilgiri class in addition to a AAW variant or General Purpose Variant. This would not neccesiate another Offshore ASW Corvette like upcoming NGC. Afterall if ASWSWC forms the low end in Inshore, the Nilgiri ASW would form the high end one.

 

[125mm_Smoothbore]

Feel free to refute. If the goal for Next Generation Corvette is to conduct ASW duties far away from Shore (ASWSWC takes care of Inshore), then its targets would be
1. PLAN Nuclear Attack Submarines
2. PLAN Conventional Attack Submarines
3. PN Conventional Attack Submarines
So what kind of ship(s) would be best for the role of Offshore ASW?

In another context, it would had been better if they had gone FREMM way for Nilgiri Class frigate, the role of offshore ASW would be based on a Specialist ASW Variant in Nilgiri class in addition to a AAW variant or General Purpose Variant. This would not neccesiate another Offshore ASW Corvette like upcoming NGC. Afterall if ASWSWC forms the low end in Inshore, the Nilgiri ASW would form the high end one.

(My opinions)

We are still low on modern vessels going the fremm way is wayyyy costly both in building and maintaining
For dedicated asw nilgiri class frigate sized ships are overkill what we can have a large number of komorta class corvette they are having respectable endurance

 

[SlayingHell]

(My opinions)

We are still low on modern vessels going the fremm way is wayyyy costly both in building and maintaining
For dedicated asw nilgiri class frigate sized ships are overkill what we can have a large number of komorta class corvette they are having respectable endurance

You are not understanding about tonnage. Its not about Tonnage that makes a ship expensive. Its about Electronics and Propulsion. Especially when in a ASW asset, the majority of expenses goes for Radar, SAM, TAS, HMS, Torpedoes, Gold Plated ASW Helicopters, Raft Mountings. For any ship
1. First we choose the speed regime aka what kind of speeds it would be operated? Max speeds and such.
2. After that we choose what kind of propulsion systems are available to us whether LM2500 or MT30 or Zorya Gas Turbines. When we narrow down the propulsion,
3. Then we select a Tonnage based on that. In the curve of returns vs tonnage, there is a ideal tonnage at which we get maximum returns based on speed and propulsion.

My entire argument is based on that if the Next Generation Corvette has same CODAD propulsion as Kamorta Class then the following paragraph is not applicable. Otherwise if it had some 2xLM2500, then it would be incredibly wasteful to waste the power on a lower tonnage platform like some 4000 or 5000 tons afterall how much more speed does Navy need other than going above 30knots?. If speed is the issue then the Nilgiri Class has whooping 32knots in speed ideal for Wide Area ASW for some 6500tons.

If Navy's goal is a Oceangoing ASW ship, then they should go all out and build some 6500ton ship. Afterall compared to a 4500/5000 tonish ship, it uses atmost more steel and silencing measures with same propulsion of 2xLM2500, isn't it? A Larger tonnage means more range and endurance to venture beyond Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean into chokepoints like Malacca and Indonesian Archipelago where PLAN SSK lurk.

With such size they can include a Multi Mission Bay like Type 26 where it can launch LUUVs infront of Helicopter Bay. The cost factor doesn't make sense for me.