Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[Blood+]

That is an interesting theory but it fails as soon as it's applied to every Russian and pre-Type-52D Chinese ships.

Type-52C for example is a 7kT ship, tad bit lighter than Kolkata but still packs 8x AShMs and 48x S-300 class SAMs
Or even Slava class (definitely bit heavy) with 16x AShMs, 64x S-300 class SAMs and 40x SR-SAMs

None of these use an Universal Vertical Launching System.

I never said money wasn't an issue, it absolutely is, it's just not the main one. Rather, poor and inefficient design choices coupled with lack of an UVLS are the main culprits behind this clusterfuck.

Just take a look at the SAM component of the Delhi and Rajput class DDGs.

*Before someone points to the Russian UVLM, then no, it's not a true U-VLS...it is called "Universal" because it can launch two similar types of surface to surface missiles, nothing more than that.

They have got two different type of VLS systems in place, since the Oniks and Zircons are far too large to fit inside an UVLS without ridiculously increasing the size of the whole system.

The Redut VLS system can house quad-packed SAMs, I think.

 

[RocketMan]

If the project 18 comes with the UNICORN comm antenna and the rolls royce engine ,Can we sing
"Mera radio hai japani, engine englistani deck peh RBU roosi fir bhi dil hai hindustani "?

Spoiler

I'll see myself out

 

[Blood+]

yup money is issue even our current VLSs remain empty

View attachment 14770

How do you know the reason wasn't insufficient production capacity rather than a scarcity of funds??

 

[shade2]

That is definitely not the main reason for it though. The real reason is a lack of an UVLS system, that's it.

I had to google this, i found one DFI thread, from that i gather that this UVLS is supposed to be able to fire any type of missile from the same cell, large AShm and smaller AA missiles per cell, is this correct?

I also read in one cell they can pack 2-4 AA missiles, is this also part of the U in UVLS?

Also makes sense since the US, Cheenq, Euro VLS systems are named but ours aren't.

 

[Blood+]

I had to google this, i found one DFI thread, from that i gather that this UVLS is supposed to be able to fire any type of missile from the same cell, large AShm and smaller AA missiles per cell, is this correct?

I also read in one cell they can pack 2-4 AA missiles, is this also part of the U in UVLS?

Also makes sense since the US, Cheenq, Euro VLS systems are named but ours aren't.

Pretty much. In our case, one cannot help but wonder whether the only concern of IN so far, has been to put as many BrahMos missiles at sea in as short a period of time as possible and all the rest was just an after thought.

 

[Binayak95]

yup money is issue even our current VLSs remain empty

View attachment 14770

the missile stocks have been offloaded to a certain country for the particular ones youve marked here.

said certain country has been facing heightened ad threats.

 

[Ayan Barat]

I had to google this, i found one DFI thread, from that i gather that this UVLS is supposed to be able to fire any type of missile from the same cell, large AShm and smaller AA missiles per cell, is this correct?

I also read in one cell they can pack 2-4 AA missiles, is this also part of the U in UVLS?

Also makes sense since the US, Cheenq, Euro VLS systems are named but ours aren't.

Nope...this is Russian "UVLM"

Just two types of missiles; BrahMos and Kalibr family. Theoretically can also fire Zircon but that's a different saga in itself.

This whole idea of Russian named their VLS Universal so they can fire SAMs too seems to be either based on some early concept that never materialized or is just pure internet lore.

Currently there are only five active VLS that can be termed a true Universal VLS because they can fire everything from cruse missile to SAM to ABM are:
> Mk-41 (or Mk-57) - USA and almost all other ships
> Sylver - European Union
> K-VLS - South Korea
> GJB 5860-2006 - China
> MIDLAS - Turkish copy of Mk-41

 

[Blood+]

Nope...this is Russian "UVLM"
View attachment 14775
Just two types of missiles; BrahMos and Kalibr family. Theoretically can also fire Zircon but that's a different saga in itself.

This whole idea of Russian named their VLS Universal so they can fire SAMs too seems to be either based on some early concept that never materialized or is just pure internet lore.

Currently there are only five active VLS that can be termed a true Universal VLS because they can fire everything from cruse missile to SAM to ABM are:
> Mk-41 (or Mk-57) - USA and almost all other ships
> Sylver - European Union
> K-VLS - South Korea
> GJB 5860-2006 - China
> MIDLAS - Turkish copy of Mk-41

As I said, they have got two types of 'UVLS' - the larger 3S14 for SSMs and the other for and smaller Redut for SAMs (and possibly smaller SSMs) as it's simply not practical to build a single system considering the size of their primary ship based anti-ship missiles.

 

[Ayan Barat]

As I said, they have got two types of 'UVLS' - the larger 3S14 for SSMs and the other for and smaller Redut for SAMs (and possibly smaller SSMs) as it's simply not practical to build a single system considering the size of their primary ship based anti-ship missiles.

Not really. In SAMs too they've two different kind of VLS system.

You've the Poliment-Redut to fire S-350 class missiles; either one 9M96E2 per cell or four 9M100 quad packed.
And then you've a more traditional naval S-300; atleast 4 different types of SAM with ABM capabilities.

Definitely more modular compared to traditional Russian VLSs but still nowhere near Murican or Chini ones

 

[Blood+]

Not really. In SAMs too they've two different kind of VLS system.

You've the Poliment-Redut to fire S-350 class missiles; either one 9M96E2 per cell or four 9M100 quad packed.
And then you've a more traditional naval S-300; atleast 4 different types of SAM with ABM capabilities.

Yeah, but AFAIK, none of their latest surface ships are carrying S-300 class missiles, that's why I chose to discount them. Do correct me if I'm wrong.

Definitely more modular compared to traditional Russian VLSs but still nowhere near Murican or Chini ones

And they never will be, again, due to the sheer size of their SSMs!! It's just not practical to make use of such large diameter cells for SAMs as well, because then there will be a lot of dead space inside them. I think IN will have to take an identical approach as well.
Just imagine if we had a system like the Mk-57 for the SAMs - we would be able to quad pack even Barak 8s, let alone the VL-SRSAMs.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Yeah, but AFAIK, none of their latest surface ships are carrying S-300 class missiles, that's why I chose to discount them. Do correct me if I'm wrong.

You're absolutely correct in you're assessment but...ab bechare surface ship bana hi kahan rahein

Their "latest" destroyer was commissioned in hecking 1993. All their latest ships are just smaller frigates and corvettes.

And they never will be, again, due to the sheer size of their SSMs!! It's just not practical to make use of such large diameter cells for SAMs because then there will be a lot of dead space inside them. I think IN will have to take an identical approach as well.
Just imagine if we had a system like the Mk57 - we would be able to quad pack even Barak 8s, let alone the VL-SRSAMs.

Again correct, Russian AShMs used to be these absolutely massive MiG-21 sized behemoths making it painstakingly hard to design a VLS that can accommodate both them and smaller SAMs. But with time they are also slowly inching towards the Western standards of ship launched missile weight categories given the advancements in technologies.

The current standard of Zircon/Onyx/Kaliber is just slightly heavier than let's say Tomahawk

 

[Azaad]

the missile stocks have been offloaded to a certain country for the particular ones youve marked here.

said certain country has been facing heightened ad threats.

Which country would that be ? If you can't name it can you drop a hint as in the geographical location .

 

[Ayan Barat]

Which country would that be ? If you can't name it can you drop a hint as in the geographical location .

Shalom Azaad Achi

...most probably

 

[shade2]

Which country would that be ? If you can't name it can you drop a hint as in the geographical location .

Shalom Azaad Achi

...most probably

why do jooz need brahmos?

 

[Azaad]

why do jooz need brahmos?

He's referring to the Barak 8 MR SAM or in case of the IN LR SAM .

 

[shade2]

Nope...this is Russian "UVLM"
View attachment 14775
Just two types of missiles; BrahMos and Kalibr family. Theoretically can also fire Zircon but that's a different saga in itself.

This whole idea of Russian named their VLS Universal so they can fire SAMs too seems to be either based on some early concept that never materialized or is just pure internet lore.

Currently there are only five active VLS that can be termed a true Universal VLS because they can fire everything from cruse missile to SAM to ABM are:
> Mk-41 (or Mk-57) - USA and almost all other ships
> Sylver - European Union
> K-VLS - South Korea
> GJB 5860-2006 - China
> MIDLAS - Turkish copy of Mk-41

Thanks for the post, googled up Sylver system and that cleared my q about VLS, that's an actual UVLS that can fire AA, anti-ship and tomahawk type cruise missiles also.
Hope we get such a system soon

they can add missiles later with budget increase

 

[Ayan Barat]

Thanks for the post, googled up Sylver system and that cleared my q about VLS, that's an actual UVLS that can fire AA, anti-ship and tomahawk type cruise missiles also.
Hope we get such a system soon

they can add missiles later with budget increase

There you go Buddy, made a cute little Excel for you


Pretty much the only truly "U" VLS that are currently operational

 

[Corvus Splendens]

they can add missiles later with budget increase

 

[Blood+]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wk03RJCTWq8
I know it's got nothing to do with us, but still, I think it warrants a discussion here.

 

[Ayan Barat]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wk03RJCTWq8
I know it's got nothing to do with us, but still, I think it warrants a discussion here.

Hehe...allow me to make it something to do with us.

This story of Chinese Navy neutralizing EA-18G is still a story; there's equal chances of it being either right or wrong. And if right then also this is something that can be countered with database update or a new pod at max. Infact they're in the process of getting a new jammer; the Next Generation Jammer.

A more obvious way in which they have "neutralized" EA-18G is by fielding J-16D.

Before this Growler was the only dedicated electronic attack platform with this level of potency.