Indian Navy Developments & Discussions (8 Viewers)

[vin pahadi (kumauni)]

we signed deal to lease akulla 3 SSN for 10 years from russia....it will come to india near 2028. this is good deal, our navy can also do training etc in this SSN. which will helpful to us, when we get our own SSN.
now its price of 3 billion dollars to lease it for 10 years is so outrageously costly. russia nd america made their 8000 nd 10000 ton SSN (yasen nd Virginia class) in 3-4 billion dollars. these SSN will serve atleast 40 years to their navy.
now fortunately we r getting SSN from russia nd we should definitely thankful to russia for that. coz no other country provide it to others. but it is coming with huge cost. russian is providing their previous (older) genration akulla SSN to us nd they r getting its manufacturing cost (3 billion dollars) by leasing it to india for only 10 years.

we r paying :- 3 billion dollars × 4 (40 year life service nd leasing of 10 year) = 12 billion dollars. we r literally paying for near american ford class aircraft carrier cost.

now we r talking with russia for one more akulla SSN lease. i dont think we should go for that. we can build a SSN in 3 billion dollars approx, that can give 40 year service to us.

 

[randombully]

russia nd america made their 8000 nd 10000 ton SSN (yasen nd Virginia class) in 3-4 billion dollars. these SSN will serve atleast 40 years to their navy.
now fortunately we r getting SSN from russia nd we should definitely thankful to russia for that. coz no other country provide it to others. but it is coming with huge cost. russian is providing their previous (older) genration akulla SSN to us nd they r getting its manufacturing cost (3 billion dollars) by leasing it to india for only 10 years.

In current money value.


Russia and China build their ssn for 3-4 billion dollars, then extra cost to operate it, extra cost of maintinence, extra cost of its weapons, extra cost of its training etc.

Operating cost of such an ssn can cross 1-1.5 billion dollars over a period of 10 years( more expensive in case of usa).

Typical life cycle of ssn's is 30-40 years.

So total operating cost, assuming 35 year life cycle.
Is 3.5-5.25 billion dollars.
Let's take the middle as 4.5 billion.
Construction cost middle as 3.5 billion

Over its 35 year life, an ssn( operating+ construction cost) costs 8 billion.
Which means 1.14 billion per 5 years.
Or 2.28 billion per 10 years.

So russia will charge India, 2+ billion dollars in current money just to break over it's own cost( also included everything russia with provide india to operate it)
Then rest is profits and other agreements and deals.
Plus agreed money will be paid over 10 years period, so cost also accounts for inflation here.

3 billion is somewhat on higher end for a 10year lease of an snn in current times, but not too higher, plus russia is the only supplier so they have leavrage.

 

[shade2]

This is precisely why the Navy should've joined the Ghatak (Remotely Piloted Strike Aircraft) programme, mainly because:

1. They actually get shit done proactively by getting involved in projects unlike you know whos.
2. This system has an endurance >24 hours while being a fast jet powered stealth aircraft that can act as a maritime patrol and anti-ship, anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare aircraft that can control the entirety of the Indian ocean.
View attachment 42190
View attachment 42191View attachment 42192



It can fit both in it's both internal weapons bays, and can act as a complementary system with the Sea Guardian UCAVs which can deploy sonobuoys to detect submarines apart from other Maritime Patrol Aircrafts, and deploy light weight Shyena torpedoes. Probably can carry total 8 such torpedoes in it's internal weapons bays.


Having stealth design, it can strike any ship anywhere in the Indian Ocean without being detected, and deploy 350km range NASM-MR missiles.


if anything it's Naval usage is much more effective than the ones in future Air Force service.

Agreed with your point, I was just thinking yesterday about how Ghatak would fit well on Navy LHD whenever they decide to build those.

However they can't do this because they don't have enough budget for their own requirements i.e ships and subs.

>MCMV on backburner till Op Sindoor ofc gave the Admirals nightmares of Paki subs placing mines
>LHD forgotten, only news you hear is about IEPS
>2nd Vikrant class ship sacrificed on the altar of 2x SSNs
>Govt will make Navy's budget pay for the upcoming 6x P8I jaziya

If they were serious about Atmanirbhar Bharat and Make in India they'd have given the Admirals some extra budget since the Admirals were doing Make in India and supporting Shipbuilding industry here, while Modiji was juking Indira G's goons during the emergency wearing disguises.

But no, they still get their usual peanuts.

We are a $4tn economy now but still capital acquisition budget is as if we are the bhooka nanga country of 6 decades ago

 

[shade2]

Navy has doctrine of having a little bit of everything, see you don't need destroyers for everything, nilgiri class was required because they are less expensive to operation for stuff like peacetime petrol or deal with houthi crisis like events. corvettes are important because they act as supplement for larger ships.

ordering 10 destroyers will leave no time for production of smaller tonnage ships which may be required in short-term basis, more shipyards are being developed , for example L&T is currently building 45k tonnage fleet support ships at their kattupalli shipyard in TN.

Matter of fact is navy needs different ships of different tonnage, the number of ships ordered from these classes reflect how navy is managing its capability requirement and capacity of our shipyards, if you order say 5 more vizag-class type ships , they would take min 5 years to enter service but they will hog the space which could have been used for 10 nilgiri type frigates.

mazgaon is making another yard in nhava sheva near jnpt, they are increasing capacity, same i heard grse is going to odisha for another yard. destroyers with more cells, more tonnage and power are needed to counter the chongs one which they have rn. if we truly want to be a blue water navy, we need destroyers too in large numbers, we have mazgaon, goa, cochin, grse which have warship building capability, we can give support and auxillary ship orders to pvt shipyards like l&t hazira/kattupalli.

*ahem*
P17b are planned to be "little enlarged" than p17a.
So , vizag class size( actually could be bigger, according to some news, it can cross 8000tons displacement) with more optimised design of nilgiri class, with obvious more modern systems.


But, some "budget" constraints can come, that can see them retain same size and minimal change in design.

Most people complain about no destroyers under construction without realizing that...

>Difference between P15A/B "destroyer"(7400 tons ) and Nilgiri class "frigate" is ~700 tons

>Nilgiri class's bow has enough Empty Space on it that you can easily fit another 8x cell of and 2x16 Barak8 VLS



>Other differences are Nilgiri having 2x Ak630 ciws, Vizag has 4, Nilgiri has light weight torpedo, Vizag has heavy, Nilgiri has hangar for one choppa, Vizag has two

P17B will def have atleast the first ship launched before the end of this decade, there are still 5 years left.

And for all y'all nibbiars know, P17B "frigate" and P15B "destroyer" might have the below relation

 

[randombully]

Most people complain about no destroyers under construction without realizing that...

>Difference between P15A/B "destroyer"(7400 tons ) and Nilgiri class "frigate" is ~700 tons

>Nilgiri class's bow has enough Empty Space on it that you can easily fit another 8x cell of and 2x16 Barak8 VLS

View attachment 42208

>Other differences are Nilgiri having 2x Ak630 ciws, Vizag has 4, Nilgiri has light weight torpedo, Vizag has heavy, Nilgiri has hangar for one choppa, Vizag has two

P17B will def have atleast the first ship launched before the end of this decade, there are still 5 years left.

And for all y'all nibbiars know, P17B "frigate" and P15B "destroyer" might have the below relation

View attachment 42209

P15A/B are more heavily armed( twice the arnament) for AsuW and ASW than p17A, while both have same AAW capability.

While it's not talked as much as vls count, but it's as big of a difference if p15 A/B had same AsuW and ASW a p17A but had twice the no. Surface to air vls, I.e. 64 vls for AAW.

 

[shade2]

P15A/B are more heavily armed( twice the arnament) for AsuW and ASW than p17A, while both have same AAW capability.

yes saar, methinks additional 8x VLS cell for brahmos can be added to current P17A hulls.
Dunno about torpedo tubes and all, ofc double helicopter hangar cannot be done.

As i've said P17B may endup being a Vizag class with GE engines for all we know.

Once Ayan Barat put a picture on this thread and said that P17A and P15B are almost sem2sem in side profile with P15B just having an extra "section" and smokestack somewhere amidships

 

[shade2]

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1941106093331218776

Not sure about this but would make sense for something like the NGMV



The French have something similar called the SIMBAD launcher for their Mistral MANPADs

 

[liberalredditor]

yes saar, methinks additional 8x VLS cell for brahmos can be added to current P17A hulls.
Dunno about torpedo tubes and all, ofc double helicopter hangar cannot be done.

As i've said P17B may endup being a Vizag class with GE engines for all we know.

Once Ayan Barat put a picture on this thread and said that P17A and P15B are almost sem2sem in side profile with P15B just having an extra "section" and smokestack somewhere amidships

are ayan barat sir kahan gaye? pehle bohot dikhte the

 

[FalconSlayers]

Agreed with your point, I was just thinking yesterday about how Ghatak would fit well on Navy LHD whenever they decide to build those.

However they can't do this because they don't have enough budget for their own requirements i.e ships and subs.

>MCMV on backburner till Op Sindoor ofc gave the Admirals nightmares of Paki subs placing mines
>LHD forgotten, only news you hear is about IEPS
>2nd Vikrant class ship sacrificed on the altar of 2x SSNs
>Govt will make Navy's budget pay for the upcoming 6x P8I jaziya

If they were serious about Atmanirbhar Bharat and Make in India they'd have given the Admirals some extra budget since the Admirals were doing Make in India and supporting Shipbuilding industry here, while Modiji was juking Indira G's goons during the emergency wearing disguises.

But no, they still get their usual peanuts.

We are a $4tn economy now but still capital acquisition budget is as if we are the bhooka nanga country of 6 decades ago

You don't need LHDs to launch and recover them. We aren't an expeditionary force that has to fight on the other side of planet. Navy can operate them the way they operate the P8i and MQ-9s. Although not much info on Ghatak's endurance and range is available, with an endurance of even 10 hours (assuming with payload?) it can have a combat radius of 3 to 4 thousand kilometres. In fact even using it from an LHD would make no sense.




Although I don't know if these endurance stats are for surveillance only or when it is carrying maximum take-off weight, that's why I presumably capped it to 10 hours.

Given the 14-16 hour endurance (upper limit here) an average 15 hour endurance means it can act as a potent submarine hunter, and it simply doesn't need an LHD/LPD to launch it for range exploitation. It if launched from Nicobar islands can reach Japan and return to base (in one way travel with minimal loitering). Reason why it's a strategic project.

 

[ArjunMK1A]

NGD / P-18 class destroyers are not going to production before 2030 at least, these ships will supposedly carry, a lot of things that are still in development, like Project Kusha SAM, hypersonic missile , DEW / Lasers.

Although they should probably think about acquiring a new class of destroyers , which will be a improvement over Vizag class, better radar from DRDO, more and SAM ( current ones carry 16 and 32 respectively ). However Navy rn has NGF ( improved nilgiri) on order along with next generation of corvettes in pipeline . NGF is certainly happening since funds are reserved for it already.

There should be an Upgraded Vizag with following technologies.
1. LRTR Radar (It is not quantum science to reduce the size of the radar).
2. VLSRSAM + Kusha M1 Combination SAM Systems.
4. + LRLACM missile Offensive weapons.
5. GE Gas turbine + Kirloskar Diesel Engine Propulsion.
6. Junk RBU with Naval Pinaka. Introduction of DEW Weapon.
7. HQ-10 equivalent based on VSHORADS.

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1941106093331218776

Not sure about this but would make sense for something like the NGMV

View attachment 42212

The French have something similar called the SIMBAD launcher for their Mistral MANPADs

Or Chinaman went with this design.

 

[randombully]

You don't need LHDs to launch and recover them. We aren't an expeditionary force that has to fight on the other side of planet. Navy can operate them the way they operate the P8i and MQ-9s. Although not much info on Ghatak's endurance and range is available, with an endurance of even 10 hours (assuming with payload?) it can have a combat radius of 3 to 4 thousand kilometres. In fact even using it from an LHD would make no sense.
View attachment 42216



Although I don't know if these endurance stats are for surveillance only or when it is carrying maximum take-off weight, that's why I presumably capped it to 10 hours.

Given the 14-16 hour endurance (upper limit here) an average 15 hour endurance means it can act as a potent submarine hunter, and it simply doesn't need an LHD/LPD to launch it for range exploitation. It if launched from Nicobar islands can reach Japan and return to base (in one way travel with minimal loitering). Reason why it's a strategic project.

14-16 hours endurance, seems unrealistic if we go by the design of wing tunnel model and swift demonstrator.
The design is that of a high subsonic flying wing aircraft, similar to chinese "Sharp Sword" I.e. Hongdu GJ-11 flying with ucav.

6 to 8 hours is more realistic assumptions.

 

[liberalredditor]

There should be an Upgraded Vizag with following technologies.
1. LRTR Radar (It is not quantum science to reduce the size of the radar).
2. VLSRSAM + Kusha M1 Combination SAM Systems.
4. + LRLACM missile Offensive weapons.
5. GE Gas turbine + Kirloskar Diesel Engine Propulsion.
6. Junk RBU with Naval Pinaka. Introduction of DEW Weapon.
7. HQ-10 equivalent based on VSHORADS.







Or Chinaman went with this design.

View attachment 42218

these are the specs of p17b ngl. maybe dew can be reserved for p18

 

[randombully]

There should be an Upgraded Vizag with following technologies.
1. LRTR Radar (It is not quantum science to reduce the size of the radar).
2. VLSRSAM + Kusha M1 Combination SAM Systems.
4. + LRLACM missile Offensive weapons.
5. GE Gas turbine + Kirloskar Diesel Engine Propulsion.
6. Junk RBU with Naval Pinaka. Introduction of DEW Weapon.
7. HQ-10 equivalent based on VSHORADS.







Or Chinaman went with this design.

View attachment 42218

Can be used, but they are
Different missiles.
These missile based ciws like american rolling frame missile system, are designed primarly to intercept incoming missiles, including supersonic missiles, they are much more faster( mach 2+)than drdo VSHORAD( 1.5+ mach top speeed), these missiles are also bigger than have heavier warhead that VSHORADS like missiles, drdo VSHORAD is primarly designed against subsonic targets.

 

[FalconSlayers]

14-16 hours endurance, seems unrealistic if we go by the design of wing tunnel model and swift demonstrator.
The design is that of a high subsonic flying wing aircraft, similar to chinese "Sharp Sword" I.e. Hongdu GJ-11 flying with ucav.

6 to 8 hours is more realistic assumptions.

CH-7 has 15 hours endurance, with 10k MTOW

Airshow China 2024: China reveals role revision for CH-7 UAV

The China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) is realigning the role of its CH-7 stealth unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) from a strategic armed...

www.janes.com

China’s Stealth CH-7 Long-Endurance Drone Emerges

The large flying-wing CH-7 drone has gone through several iterations but is reportedly due to complete its development imminently. The flying-wing drone has gone through several iterations but is reportedly due to complete its development imminently.

www.twz.com

TAI Anka-3 has 10 hours endurance.

ANKA III Releases Super Şimşek in key test for OKU Concept | TURDEF

Turkish Aerospace’s stealth UCAV ANKA III launched the high-speed Super Şimşek UAV mid-flight, marking a milestone in the OKU (Autonomous Wingman) programme.

turdef.com

Anyways, range and endurance aren't fixed values, they depend on the takeoff weight of the aircraft. And this info came from a senior scientist involved in LCA programme. Even at 8 hours endurance it can have a two way combat radius of 3000 kilometres ± the weapon range.


3000 km radius from Goa and Nicobar islands, 8 hour endurance assumed in combat mode.

 

[vin pahadi (kumauni)]

In current money value.


Russia and China build their ssn for 3-4 billion dollars, then extra cost to operate it, extra cost of maintinence, extra cost of its weapons, extra cost of its training etc.

Operating cost of such an ssn can cross 1-1.5 billion dollars over a period of 10 years( more expensive in case of usa).

Typical life cycle of ssn's is 30-40 years.

So total operating cost, assuming 35 year life cycle.
Is 3.5-5.25 billion dollars.
Let's take the middle as 4.5 billion.
Construction cost middle as 3.5 billion

Over its 35 year life, an ssn( operating+ construction cost) costs 8 billion.
Which means 1.14 billion per 5 years.
Or 2.28 billion per 10 years.

So russia will charge India, 2+ billion dollars in current money just to break over it's own cost( also included everything russia with provide india to operate it)
Then rest is profits and other agreements and deals.
Plus agreed money will be paid over 10 years period, so cost also accounts for inflation here.

3 billion is somewhat on higher end for a 10year lease of an snn in current times, but not too higher, plus russia is the only supplier so they have leavrage.

u r forgetting, maintenance will be done by ourself in this 10 year period. that cost will be paid by ourself seperately from 3 billion dollar. we already did training in akulla 2 SSN, i dont think we r paying russia again for training in akulla 3. weapon package included in 3 billion leasing cost. they cant give us SSN without weapons.

 

[randombully]

CH-7 has 15 hours endurance, with 10k MTOW

Airshow China 2024: China reveals role revision for CH-7 UAV

The China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) is realigning the role of its CH-7 stealth unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) from a strategic armed...

www.janes.com

China’s Stealth CH-7 Long-Endurance Drone Emerges

The large flying-wing CH-7 drone has gone through several iterations but is reportedly due to complete its development imminently. The flying-wing drone has gone through several iterations but is reportedly due to complete its development imminently.

www.twz.com

TAI Anka-3 has 10 hours endurance.

ANKA III Releases Super Şimşek in key test for OKU Concept | TURDEF

Turkish Aerospace’s stealth UCAV ANKA III launched the high-speed Super Şimşek UAV mid-flight, marking a milestone in the OKU (Autonomous Wingman) programme.

turdef.com

Anyways, range and endurance aren't fixed values, they depend on the takeoff weight of the aircraft. And this info came from a senior scientist involved in LCA programme. Even at 8 hours endurance it can have a two way combat radius of 3000 kilometres ± the weapon range.

Ch7 is specially designed for higher endurance.
You can see how much more spread out it's wings are compared to gj-11.

As for Turkish Anka, lots of unrealistic specs are claimed, just Don't bring Turkish claims here.
The current anka 3 is 6.3 ton mtow ucav, powered by a 26kn foreign engine.
A future larger varient with two 26kn domestic engine is planned.


Foe ghatak to have endurance of 10-15 hours, it needs to look more like CH-7 , a subsonic high lift and high endurance design, rather than looking like a high subsonic/even supersonic drone like gj-11.

Anyways, range and endurance aren't fixed values, they depend on the takeoff weight of the aircraft.

Payload of ghatak will be 1.5 tons.
It's planned mtow being 13 tons.
By removing the dead weight of 1.5 tons, with full fuel it will be 11% lighter only.
Endurance increase at most will be 10%-15%.

 

[randombully]

u r forgetting, maintenance will be done by ourself in this 10 year period. that cost will be paid by ourself seperately from 3 billion dollar. we already did training in akulla 2 SSN, i dont think we r paying russia again for training in akulla 3. weapon package included in 3 billion leasing cost. they cant give us SSN without weapons.

3 billion is the entire cost of 10 year period, it includes everything, except maybe food.

The material for low maintenance will come from russia, high end maintenance will be done by russian technicians, for even higher end, it will need to be send to russia.

 

[FalconSlayers]

View: https://x.com/SandeepUnnithan/status/1941130483250975169

 

[shade2]

View: https://x.com/SandeepUnnithan/status/1941130483250975169

Could be used for the testing of an uprated DRDO AIP module for 3k ton submarine.
The author points 4 other uses but imo this is the best use case