Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[Bleh]

Lovely!


Right one is not possible. The hull starts narrowing at the front & it can't fit BraHmos' length at the sides.

Even 16 would be enough... The fore-section would become too have otherwise & reduce rough- seaworthyness

 

[Fatalis]

Looks like Navy is working on the doctrine of first get the vessels in numbers albit with less firepower and may be later on increase their firepower.

 

[shade2]

Looks like Navy is working on the doctrine of first get the vessels in numbers albit with less firepower and may be later on increase their firepower.

Yes, this is my theory also, the below BTS Navy ship class launched with 32 Mk41 VLS Cells

ROKS Chungmugong Yi Sun-sin (DDH-975) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sometime later they decided to move the Mk41 to the right and add 3x of their own domestic made K-VLS system to the left



Ship now has 56 VLS cells total, that is 32 Mk41 VLS cells and 24 K-VLS cells.

This ship class had additional deck space built in in order to add more VLS later on, most likely our Nilgiris are also the same.


Going only with and Barak-8 combo is long-range and expensive.

For , NASM-MR is in development as a cheaper, lower range alternative and for Barak-8 we all know about VL-SRSAM.

 

[Bleh]

View attachment 21637

We need this as an export model! Wonder why they cut out half the Nilgiri at the middle. A flush roof & covered bay should have been better.

 

[vampyrbladez]

I think missile boats in good numbers still have a role to play but then Navy knows best on how to spend their funding, especially since the funding bottleneck is the "missile" not the boat.

There are several reasons why a blue water navy may not want corvette style ships.

• Range and sea keeping are two major concerns with Corvettes and Missile Boats.

The NGMV (~2500 tons) and the NGC (~1500 tons) with 1 x LM2500 and 2 x Pielstick 12PA 6 STC6 Diesel engines have a range of 2800nm at 25 kn.

The older Kora Class corvette (~1500 tons) with 2 × SEMT Pielstick/Kirloskar 18 PA6V 280 diesel engines can do 3476 nmi at 16 kn.

The Talwar Class frigate (4000 tons) with 1 x Zorya-Mashproekt M7N.1E propulsion plant, 2 × DS-71 cruise gas turbines and 2 × DT-59 boost gas turbines has a range of 4,210 nmi at 14 kn with much more powerful armament and tonnage.

This is important since these vessels need to keep up with Carrier Battle Groups and act as Destroyer Escorts during picket duties.

The more the tonnage, the better your ship handles at higher sea states.

• Smaller vessels like NGC and NGMV are not survivable in a sustained fight

Corvettes and missile boats are not meant to be used in a pitched battle which is what we are looking at against China and perhaps Pakistan.

The Littoral Combat Ship of the USN is essentially a corvette and here is an excerpt on it's survivability.

“Navy surface ships are designed to one of three survivability standards, called Level I (low), Level II (moderate), and Level III (high). Aircraft carriers, cruisers, and destroyers are designed to Level III. Frigates, amphibious ships, and certain underway replenishment (resupply) ships are designed to Level II. Other replenishment ships, as well as mine warfare ships, patrol craft, and support ships are designed to Level I.”

“The Navy decided to design the LCS to what it calls a Level 1+ survivability standard, which is greater than the Level I standard to which the Navy’s current patrol craft and mine warfare ships were designed, but less than the Level II standard to which the Navy’s current Oliver Hazard Perry (FFG-7)-class frigates were designed, ”

https://news.usni.org/2013/01/17/navy-responds-pentagon-lcs-survivability-claims

• Limited armament and sensors

You have a much lower Return on Investment per tonnage compared to corvettes based on the number of missiles and sensors you can employ.

This is very important since only a limited number of yards can produce what you want. I'm not completely sold on L&T Kattupalli despite their 90 hr/week work ethics due to no experience in making such ships previously.

Now taking all of the points above, if I have to choose between 12 corvettes or 4 frigates, which would be more feasible for the Indian Navy?

 

[shade2]

There are several reasons why a blue water navy may not want corvette style ships.

• Range and sea keeping are two major concerns with Corvettes and Missile Boats.

The NGMV (~2500 tons) and the NGC (~1500 tons) with 1 x LM2500 and 2 x Pielstick 12PA 6 STC6 Diesel engines have a range of 2800nm at 25 kn.

The older Kora Class corvette (~1500 tons) with 2 × SEMT Pielstick/Kirloskar 18 PA6V 280 diesel engines can do 3476 nmi at 16 kn.

The Talwar Class frigate (4000 tons) with 1 x Zorya-Mashproekt M7N.1E propulsion plant, 2 × DS-71 cruise gas turbines and 2 × DT-59 boost gas turbines has a range of 4,210 nmi at 14 kn with much more powerful armament and tonnage.

This is important since these vessels need to keep up with Carrier Battle Groups and act as Destroyer Escorts during picket duties.

The more the tonnage, the better your ship handles at higher sea states.

• Smaller vessels like NGC and NGMV are not survivable in a sustained fight

Corvettes and missile boats are not meant to be used in a pitched battle which is what we are looking at against China and perhaps Pakistan.

The Littoral Combat Ship of the USN is essentially a corvette and here is an excerpt on it's survivability.



https://news.usni.org/2013/01/17/navy-responds-pentagon-lcs-survivability-claims

• Limited armament and sensors

You have a much lower Return on Investment per tonnage compared to corvettes based on the number of missiles and sensors you can employ.

This is very important since only a limited number of yards can produce what you want. I'm not completely sold on L&T Kattupalli despite their 90 hr/week work ethics due to no experience in making such ships previously.

Now taking all of the points above, if I have to choose between 12 corvettes or 4 frigates, which would be more feasible for the Indian Navy?

Thanks for the detailed explanation, I guess this is the reason why the US and the EU Big 5 navies don't bother with corvettes for their own purposes( export only ), USN is destroyer only and the EU ones are destroyers and frigates.

btw NGC is supposed to be 3500+ tons plus, since Kamorta was 3300 tons of displacement.

 

[Flanker]

next two years will be nice for IN... made this ok looking infographic so some of u lot may post it in some other social media to piss off turkroaches.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Being Blue Water doesn't mean losing Green Water, on the contrary it means so good of a Green Water that you can spare vessels for expeditionary roles.

12 corvettes

- to prowl the whole IOR; from Arabian sea to beyond Andaman & Nicobar. These smaller, but numerous vessels would have a bit of everything (324mm for ASuW, atleast 4x AShMs, Okay-ish ADS) to act as hunter killer for submarines and trawlers.
- this can also form the first layer of defensive response, forming a QRF.
- all these at the expense of limited endurance and AOR limited to coast. But in emergency can also be used for hit-and-run attacks.

Our Coast Guard is abysmally armed and on top of everything, there no "reconfigurable" vessels that can be switched between policing and combat based on peace/war like say PLAN. So you need vessels for these too.

4 frigates

- these have endurance so these are what would accompany carriers; form the second layer of offensive force
- assuming we're Blue Water Navy, we'd need occasional deployment to protect shipping lanes or act as escorts. This is where Frigates can shine; have a endurance of destroyers but won't compromise the CSG as much as sending two AD destroyer would. The World recently saw this while dealing with Houthis.

Also you've to account for the rule of third.
Generally, at any given time only ⅓ of your vessels would be available, ⅓ in transit and ⅓ under maintenance.

 

[Corvus Splendens]

There are several reasons why a blue water navy may not want corvette style ships.

• Range and sea keeping are two major concerns with Corvettes and Missile Boats.

The NGMV (~2500 tons) and the NGC (~1500 tons) with 1 x LM2500 and 2 x Pielstick 12PA 6 STC6 Diesel engines have a range of 2800nm at 25 kn.

The older Kora Class corvette (~1500 tons) with 2 × SEMT Pielstick/Kirloskar 18 PA6V 280 diesel engines can do 3476 nmi at 16 kn.

The Talwar Class frigate (4000 tons) with 1 x Zorya-Mashproekt M7N.1E propulsion plant, 2 × DS-71 cruise gas turbines and 2 × DT-59 boost gas turbines has a range of 4,210 nmi at 14 kn with much more powerful armament and tonnage.

This is important since these vessels need to keep up with Carrier Battle Groups and act as Destroyer Escorts during picket duties.

The more the tonnage, the better your ship handles at higher sea states.

• Smaller vessels like NGC and NGMV are not survivable in a sustained fight

Corvettes and missile boats are not meant to be used in a pitched battle which is what we are looking at against China and perhaps Pakistan.

The Littoral Combat Ship of the USN is essentially a corvette and here is an excerpt on it's survivability.



https://news.usni.org/2013/01/17/navy-responds-pentagon-lcs-survivability-claims

• Limited armament and sensors

You have a much lower Return on Investment per tonnage compared to corvettes based on the number of missiles and sensors you can employ.

This is very important since only a limited number of yards can produce what you want. I'm not completely sold on L&T Kattupalli despite their 90 hr/week work ethics due to no experience in making such ships previously.

Now taking all of the points above, if I have to choose between 12 corvettes or 4 frigates, which would be more feasible for the Indian Navy?

A modern equivalent of the Vidyut/Osa class missile boats, backed by airborn ISR and land based Radars from Andaman islands might be a very good investment in keeping an eye on large picnic parties coming through the malacca gap. Inclined launchers, vshorads, 30mm bow CIWS. No nonsense ships under 1000 ton displacement. Print them and post them around strategic isles far from mainland.

 

[shade2]

A modern equivalent of the Vidyut/Osa class missile boats, backed by airborn ISR and land based Radars from Andaman islands might be a very good investment in keeping an eye on large picnic parties coming through the malacca gap. Inclined launchers, vshorads, 30mm bow CIWS. No nonsense ships under 1000 ton displacement. Print them and post them around strategic isles far from mainland.
View attachment 21727

This was what i was thinking about, cheap to produce, fast and in good numbers to troll the Chings aside from the main fleet.

Then again is expensive so either we have to pump those numbers or cut out the Roosi if they're the ones making it expensive.

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

- the two guys coordinating the landing can be easily replaced by a high-performance LiDAR systems that automatically handles the whole landing sequence no matter how rough the seas are. And this is not some exotic feature, this is the standard method through which UAVs regularly land
- the two guys running up to secure the helicopter can be replaced by a deck lock type harpoon system. It's fast and there's no hazard for the crew
- after the landing, two guys you'd run up to it and together everyone would physically push the helicopter inside the hangar. All this can be replaced by just one guy with a towing robot

All good on paper, but a lot of this "automation" talk misses the point that it is simply better to do a lot of (easily automated) jobs manually. Those that can be automated, in many places, already are.

For example, point 1 is wrong - Repeatedly it has been shown that apart from technical aids, having a dude talking the pilot through landing has the least accident rate.

Point 2 ig is perfectly valid, and already exists on most Indian ships. In this video, if Im correct this is a heli issue (the heli does not seem to have the hook that catches on to the deck, maybe cause its not intended to operated of destroyers/frigates).

Same for point 3, this "dudes pushing heli" doesnt happen, if you see the channels on the deck, those are what the heli is dragged through automatically into the hangar. Also been implemented in the Indian navy.

 

[vampyrbladez]

- to prowl the whole IOR; from Arabian sea to beyond Andaman & Nicobar. These smaller, but numerous vessels would have a bit of everything (324mm for ASuW, atleast 4x AShMs, Okay-ish ADS) to act as hunter killer for submarines and trawlers.

That is precisely what the NGC (8 planned) is.

Also you've to account for the rule of third.
Generally, at any given time only ⅓ of your vessels would be available, ⅓ in transit and ⅓ under maintenance.

Agreed. However this just calls for more Frigates and Destroyers.

The US is aiming for 99 Arleigh Burke (FLT I/II/III) at a rate of 2-3 per year based on this very argument, not to mention a casual 20 Constellation class frigates and DDG(X).

A modern equivalent of the Vidyut/Osa class missile boats, backed by airborn ISR and land based Radars from Andaman islands might be a very good investment in keeping an eye on large picnic

Here is how I think a Chinese intervention in the IOR will take place.

• The Chinese reaching the Malacca Straits can happen only when they have broken the island chain and defeated the JSDF Navy, US Navy and ROK Navy (3 x the current size of the PLAN) leaving a battered PLAN.

• The Chinese will then use armed merchant vessels to strike at US Navy, Indian Navy and Royal Australian Navy assets before moving in their main fleet.

"What if I told you that, as I type this, there was a vessel, associated with the Chinese PLA, that 'could' be equipped with many dozens of anti-ship cruise missiles - and was parked less than 4 miles from the bulk of the US Atlantic Fleet. Well, guess what: it's happening - for real."

"If only, say 10%, of those containers were used for munitions, they could, for example, field 144 cruise missiles and 252 quadcopters, more than enough to devastate every warship at Norfolk, and able to reach land targets across the mid-Atlantic and well past DC."

Spoiler: SOURCE

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

• PLAN submarines will then be deployed to mop up any survivors and initial QRTs and responders. Indian Navy has been anticipating this and investing in MQ-9s, ASW-SWC and Kamorta Class for this very reason.

• PLAN will then bring forth it's 'hedgehogs' like Type 055, Type 052D and use them to lock down the Malacca Straits for area denial and anti access.
  
  
• Then depending on the beating belted out to the PLAN in the Taiwan fight, 1-2 CBG will be deployed and then used to launch strikes against Andaman and Nicobar and the Eastern Seaboard.

I understand that corvettes have their uses like armed OPVs during peacetime and hit and run attacks against PLAN, PN however using a NGMV against the 'hedgehogs' is the equivalent of using these guys to fight a 26/11 style attack.

Spoiler: Image

 

[shade2]

INS Tushil in Lagos, Nigeria


View: https://x.com/indiannavy/status/1878822920774185323

I guess this is the first clear, daytime view picture of the bow's armament

 

[vampyrbladez]

View: https://x.com/MazagonDockLtd/status/1878731204268322857

 

[Fatalis]

The US is aiming for 99 Arleigh Burke (FLT I/II/III) at a rate of 2-3 per year based on this very argument, not to mention a casual 20 Constellation class frigates and DDG(X).

Actually US Navy is planning to have 87 LSC which will include DDG(X) and AB Flight III. Also, they are planning to field 87 FFGs.

 

[Ayan Barat]

That clips not from IN, it's from USS Rodney M. Davis. I simply used it to examples of low level task from which humans can be freed.

For example, point 1 is wrong - Repeatedly it has been shown that apart from technical aids, having a dude talking the pilot through landing has the least accident rate

What I'm saying is a relatively new piece technology and only in the past 5 or so years countries have seriously started to pursue it so I'd like to see the empirical evidence you're using for this accident rate statement.
By the way, here's one recent from USN

Same for point 3, this "dudes pushing heli" doesnt happen, if you see the channels on the deck, those are what the heli is dragged through automatically into the hangar. Also been implemented in the Indian navy.

Those channels are called rails and it's an older piece of technology because even with rails you'd be needing those "dudes pushing heli" to straighten and align the helicopter with the rail after it lands, the rail simple pulls the helicopter in and out of the hangar in a straight line...for any king of maneuvering you still need good ol human Mk-1.

I'm talking about advanced versions of Rail Less Helicopter Traversing Systems. Take the example of INDAL MANTIS

Or even with rails you can have something like the Twin Claw, that doesn't require human intervention


Automation, whenever used to free up humans from simple tasks are always useful. Ask an old ATGM gunner who trained initially on Konkrus but now got MP-ATGM; what's his opinion about automation.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Actually US Navy is planning to have 87 LSC which will include DDG(X) and AB Flight III. Also, they are planning to field 87 FFGs.

That is the projected LSC for the USN however older Raleigh Burke (FLT I) may be kept in service for much longer.

Department of the Navy plans to operate 12 Arleigh Burke class (DDG 51) Flight I Destroyers beyond their 35-year expected service life.

The decision, based upon a hull-by-hull evaluation of ship material condition, combat capability, technical feasibility and lifecycle maintenance requirements, will result in an additional 48 ship-years of cumulative ship service life in the 2028 to 2035 timeframe.

https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/P...sions-for-12-destroyers-to-keep-more-ready-p/

 

[Binayak95]

That clips not from IN, it's from USS Rodney M. Davis. I simply used it to examples of low level task from which humans can be freed.

What I'm saying is a relatively new piece technology and only in the past 5 or so years countries have seriously started to pursue it so I'd like to see the empirical evidence you're using for this accident rate statement.
By the way, here's one recent from USN
View attachment 21748

Those channels are called rails and it's an older piece of technology because even with rails you'd be needing those "dudes pushing heli" to straighten and align the helicopter with the rail after it lands, the rail simple pulls the helicopter in and out of the hangar in a straight line...for any king of maneuvering you still need good ol human Mk-1.

I'm talking about advanced versions of Rail Less Helicopter Traversing Systems. Take the example of INDAL MANTIS
View attachment 21756
Or even with rails you can have something like the Twin Claw, that doesn't require human intervention
View attachment 21757

Automation, whenever used to free up humans from simple tasks are always useful. Ask an old ATGM gunner who trained initially on Konkrus but now got MP-ATGM; what's his opinion about automation.

L&T is trialing one search rail-less traversal system onboard a warship at the moment, except its far ahead of this bakchodi, think YoLo like ML model to detect the helo and orient pucks on the deck to lock onto the gears.

 

[Hawkeye]

Why packing density of Barak 8 vls unit system looks so comically low. Always felt like you could get more vls and missiles with a system like sylver or mk41. This goes same with that of vlsrsam vls block.

And on discussion about about about NGX vessels, what exactly puts the 'NG' in them. Afaik they are not getting any of the supposedly next gen features in our case like an integrated mast or maybe our own radars like that of MfStar, don't know what happened to SBR or it's supposed to come out derivatives. We are not even getting our own VLS system or even towed sonar as well. Not sure if drdo ALTAS is being inducted or not.

Only things which are in pipeline and are confirmed are
1.) VLS system for all Indian missiles. Atleast when this happens, hopefully IN can ask for mission specific missiles.
2.) A radar like Lanza-N, indicating that we are not moving away from a twin mast radar type design anytime soon.
3.) An integrated system like UNICORN of Japan which combines Tacan, elint etc etc, I mean it's an integrated mast but not really as doesn't have multi function radars, surface scan radars etc etc other active sensors on it. Collobration with Japanese
4.) Twin line towed array sonars in development, don't know if that's the future or not.
5.) Gatling CIWS with programmable fuze, own sensors and other stuff, as mentioned in tech foresight in drdo site. Not sure if that will morph into a combine gun missile system or not as IN has often asked for such a system in future requirements.

We definitely need to have our own integrated mast with all indigenous sensors in it for all of our future ships. But I haven't seen even a single mention of it anywhere.

And it's definitely a stupid thing that we have to import even a rotating S-band radar.

 

[shade2]

Why packing density of Barak 8 vls unit system looks so comically low. Always felt like you could get more vls and missiles with a system like sylver or mk41. This goes same with that of vlsrsam vls block.

1) Gareebi, and goras, chings etc have all their SAM VLS on the bow, our guys have 2x modules on the bow and 2x midships but you get 32 missiles only, for frigates this is standard world-wide.


2) As for muh Mk41, muh Sylver, those have quad-packed missiles, so an 8-cell module can carry 4 missiles per cell so 32 missiles per module, IN doesn't seem to bother with this even with VL-SRSAM and it's VLS module, besides per rumors, DRDO is having trouble with handling even a single missile within the VLU, the missile's launch puts pressure on the VLU casing etc so they're going for a redesign of VLU.