Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[Aaj Ka Hero]

Aight lads, I got a treat for you this Sunday. FEEL FREE TO CIRCULATE THIS ON TWITTER ETC. (Credits first: Original work from here, I built upon it.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/19ef3xh/surface_ships_of_indian_navys_western_fleet_vs/)

If all goes well & the gods are good, then Indian Navy surface fleet will double in tonnage over the next 15 years. Comparing at beginning of 2025 & 2040.


Note that, there are some assumptions & considerations.
I'm taking only the surface combat capable fleet including anti-sub & offshore patrol ships, no fast-attack crafts or minesweepers. Minor rounding off of tonnages here & there. Some silhouettes are informed guesses at best (notice LRMFR on IAC 2, P-17B & P-18).

• The IAC-2 is assumed to be a 50k ton skyjumper.
• Assumed tonnages for NG Classes are taken conservatively. P-18 is assumed 10000 tons as Wikipedia, P-17B as 7000 ton, Next generation Corvette is taken 4000 tons.
• P-17B & NGF are assumed same in absence of anything indicating otherwise.
• Retirement age is taken ±40yrs. Rajput, Brahmaputra, Khukri, Veer, Abhay Classes are removed at 2040, Delhi & Khukri stays but will then be just in line for retirement.
• INS Nilgiri is not being counted, but INS Surat is as it's expected to be delivered by December. 8 Talwars considered at 2025 as per delivery schedule.

View attachment 10215View attachment 10214

That 2040 is missing fleet tankers.

 

[Bleh]

That 2040 is missing fleet tankers.

So are the amphibious assault ships & landing helicopter docks. These are the combat fleet of proper warships.

 

[Bleh]

India Pavilion @ADAS 24 Phillipines.

View: https://x.com/i/status/1839604504079081522

 

[Tridev123]

So the Chinese Navy, PLAN has managed to sink/topple over an new nuclear powered submarine berthed at dock.

We got the Betwa warship to topple over and they as competition got an bloody nuclear submarine to topple over.
Unbelievable, now whose loss is greater.

Even the US Navy is no exemption. A few years ago an state of the art US Navy destroyer rammed another US Navy warship in the high seas.A major collision.

Sometimes really strange things happen.

 

[ArjunMK1A]

So the Chinese Navy, PLAN has managed to sink/topple over an new nuclear powered submarine berthed at dock.

We got the Betwa warship to topple over and they as competition got an bloody nuclear submarine to topple over.
Unbelievable, now whose loss is greater.

Even the US Navy is no exemption. A few years ago an state of the art US Navy destroyer rammed another US Navy warship in the high seas.A major collision.

Sometimes really strange things happen.

Naval mishaps were common. It is media who make them as sensational stuff.

Indian Navy had lot of accidents in 2010 period. But in recent years Betwa is the sole example. SOP will be fine tuned to avoid the incident in future

 

[VictorDelta4]

View: https://x.com/ajitkdubey/status/1840384074491318734

 

[Bleh]

India Pavilion @ADAS 24 Phillipines.

View: https://x.com/i/status/1839604504079081522

So I've been doing some reading on the paths to be taken by future of larger warship development l, in light of the fact that noone's sure.

Personally it's feeling like Aircraft Carrier will not retain their sole dominance for long in this drone & missile swarm era against battle-cruiser, as fighter jets themselves are becoming mere range extension taxis for stand-off weapons!
Cruiser projects like CG-21 & CG(X) of US Navy failing spectacularly, with even Zumwalt class destroyer/cruiser concept practically discarded & there being no replacement of the Ticonderoga class in sight. The 122 VLS ships were repeatedly proposed for mothballing to cut costs (we could vie for getting some, no AAD vessel in our near future will match their anti-swarm capabilities).

"Aircraft Cruiser" concepts like UXV are being re-evaluated.

Op-Ed: Is it Time for the U.S. Navy to Build the Drone Carrier Warship? - Naval News

As the Pentagon and Congress grapple on determining what to build to meet the “500-ship U.S. Navy goal,” a couple of years-old ideas and artist renderings may lead to a more flexible future for the U.S. Navy’s global operations. BAE Systems' UXV and Naval Group’s “Ocean Avenger” are Potential...

www.navalnews.com

They now think they could start building a new cruiser-sized ship in the 2030s based on, guess what, hull of the amphibious ships.

In 2013, shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls has proposed a cruiser-like ship based on the hull of the San Antonio-class amphibious ships. The enormous 25,000 surface combatant has 288 vertical launch missile silos for air defense, missile defense, anti-submarine, and anti-ship missiles and provisions for rail and laser guns. The ship would mount an S-band radar to detect ballistic missiles and flight deck and hangar for helicopters. Latest version:

Soviets once made a half-assed attempt towards helicopter cruisers, but now I'm thinking that maybe had merit. A large warships of 15k-25k tonnes range in very limited numbers like Zumwalt, that double as long-range missile ships as well a drone motherships.

A single such ship operating fixed-wing drone with EW mimicking fighter jets, stealthy ones doing CAP with IRST & IR-guide BVRs, rotary ones for anti-sub work etc... plus BMD & LR-AAD missiles, some AShBM, Aero-ballistic glide vehicles, ASM both stealthy & supersonic would take out the whole PN alone.

Opinions? @Blood+ @Binayak95

 

[Ayan Barat]

So I've been doing some reading on the paths to be taken by future of larger warship development l, in light of the fact that noone's sure.

Personally it's feeling like Aircraft Carrier will not retain their sole dominance for long in this drone & missile swarm era against battle-cruiser, as fighter jets themselves are becoming mere range extension taxis for stand-off weapons!
Cruiser projects like CG-21 & CG(X) of US Navy failing spectacularly, with even Zumwalt class destroyer/cruiser concept practically discarded & there being no replacement of the Ticonderoga class in sight. The 122 VLS ships were repeatedly proposed for mothballing to cut costs (we could vie for getting some, no AAD vessel in our near future will match their anti-swarm capabilities).

"Aircraft Cruiser" concepts like UXV are being re-evaluated.

Op-Ed: Is it Time for the U.S. Navy to Build the Drone Carrier Warship? - Naval News

As the Pentagon and Congress grapple on determining what to build to meet the “500-ship U.S. Navy goal,” a couple of years-old ideas and artist renderings may lead to a more flexible future for the U.S. Navy’s global operations. BAE Systems' UXV and Naval Group’s “Ocean Avenger” are Potential...

www.navalnews.com

They now think they could start building a new cruiser-sized ship in the 2030s based on, guess what, hull of the amphibious ships.


Soviets once made a half-assed attempt towards helicopter cruisers, but now I'm thinking that maybe had merit. A large warships of 15k-25k tonnes range in very limited numbers like Zumwalt, that double as long-range missile ships as well a drone motherships.
View attachment 10977
A single such ship operating fixed-wing drone with EW mimicking fighter jets, stealthy ones doing CAP with IRST & IR-guide BVRs, rotary ones for anti-sub work etc... plus BMD & LR-AAD missiles, some AShBM, Aero-ballistic glide vehicles, ASM both stealthy & supersonic would take out the whole PN alone.

Opinions? @Blood+ @Binayak95

Ultimately it just boils down to the fact that whether you want the most bang for your buck or you just want raw power.

If you're a country with limited budget (read India) that's just concerned with offence-defence then having something like an aircraft cruiser (Russian doctrine) or helicopter destroyer (Japanese) is better. A smaller ship with say 10 VTOL fighters for CAP, 5 helis for SAR/ASW and a fleet of various UAVs; all together with so much modular VLS on board that you don't any escorts whatsoever...just you and a replenishment oiler.
The biggest pro here is that you can easily have more than double the number of such vessels in the price of a carrier.

But if you want to project power and dominate not just a shipping lane, but a whole region no matter where it is...then you'll need a full fledged CBG.

 

[Bleh]

Ultimately it just boils down to the fact that whether you want the most bang for your buck or you just want raw power.

If you're a country with limited budget (read India) that's just concerned with offence-defence then having something like an aircraft cruiser (Russian doctrine) or helicopter destroyer (Japanese) is better. A smaller ship with say 10 VTOL fighters for CAP, 5 helis for SAR/ASW and a fleet of various UAVs; all together with so much modular VLS on board that you don't any escorts whatsoever...just you and a replenishment oiler.
The biggest pro here is that you can easily have more than double the number of such vessels in the price of a carrier.

But if you want to project power and dominate not just a shipping lane, but a whole region no matter where it is...then you'll need a full fledged CBG.

I'm talking bang for buck as well, mostly rather... Carriers may prove to be vulnerable white elephants (looking at you Vikky 1), especially in northern-IOR where our bigger better land-based fighters can cover most of the area, with some Islands bases.

CBG will definitely have range, I agree. But 2 20k ton battle-cruisers or aircraft-cruisers will definitely be more self-sufficient & their bang may be just as much.

 

[Blademaster]

CBG will definitely have range, I agree. But 2 20k ton battle-cruisers or aircraft-cruisers will definitely be more self-sufficient & their bang may be just as much.

Not so sure about that. WWII pretty much conclusively that battleships are obsolete. And the sinking of Moskva showed the need for air supremacy over naval assets. If there was a Russian CVB group in the Black Sea, Ukraine wouldn't be able to do much against Russian naval assets.