Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[vampyrbladez]

India is not in the top 5 navies, that would be US, China, Japan, SoKo, Russia.
Def in the Top 10 though.

South Korea and Japan have no planned nuclear assets (SSN/SSBN) or Aircraft Carriers (40,000+ tons) in the foreseeable future. Without these there is no chance that you can ever have a true blue navy.

 

[Azaad]

You lost me at S.Korea. Russia-Japan-India comparison is debatable. But S.Korea, though a growing Naval power is nowhere near India. Lack of Aircraft Carriers, Nuclear Submarines, Naval Air fleet, Large replenishment ships , OPV and pretty much in every area.
The only areas they can rival India's fleet are its destroyer and submarine fleets.

The true test of any Navy is whether your Navy is able to enter their waters & win a war against them & vice versa.

As of now only the USN has that ability against any of the listed naval powers. China's fast building up capacities , it's capabilities vis a vis its manpower & quality of their equipment , training etc are another story altogether.

All other comparisons are moot & good enough only to engage fanboys with each other.

 

[darkflame]

India is not in the top 5 navies, that would be US, China, Japan, SoKo, Russia.
Def in the Top 10 though.

Japanese navy has 48 major surface combatants except their LHDs
On the other hand we have 27 frigates and destroyers now also add 4 kamorta class and 4 Kora class missile boats, our other corvettes are too small to consider so we end up around 35 major surface.
But thankfully we will induct 9 more frigates before the end of this decade.
And also 6 ngmvs. 3 rajput class destroyers will also retire. Hence we will have around 47 major surface ships by the start of the next decade

 

[Ayan Barat]

Calculating the ranking on a top 10 list may feel very straightforward, yet very informative for someone without any in-depth exposer to defence technologies. That's why you'd often find these in YouTube videos and news channels.

But doing an in-depth ranking is always going to be a very intensive task. An always, always a contextual ranking. Because saying just "top 5" leave the very important questions of "on what basis?"

1. Top 10 Navies based on number of vessels fielded.
North Korea is going to rank very high on this list, but in a practical sense how effective are those small crafts?

2. Top 10 Navies based on number of primary missiles fielded.
India is going to perform poorly in this list because we'd be competing with Mk-41 fielding and Chinese Navies.

3. Top 10 Navies based on tonnage.
We're going to rank decently in this category, but only some would know that our vessels are underarmed/overweight.

4. Top 10 Navies in terms of absolute firepower.
USA, Russia, France, China, UK and India; that's it, because no other navy has nuclear capability.

 

[Indianhawk]

Naval rankings are difficult.
General rule is that navies with nuke powered submarines and carriers are top ties because they have global reach and very long endurance which means they can take fight to enemies land.

Om this metric we are only behind the P5 nations. In 10-15 years we shall be ahead of uk ,France.

Secondly what matters is overall tonnege/ displacement which shows how much weapons and troops can be taken to the battlespace. Not just worship but auxiliary support is also very valuable to take fight away from your shores.

Om this metric india is 7th largest navy after P5 + Japan. In next 5 years we shall emerge as 5th largest and in 10 years as 4th largest.

Then there are metrics of VLS count , age of warship ( modernization) etc. but nothing is very accurate to asses naval might.

 

[rohitb3]

People are simply complicating rankings here. All these heavy words - "contextual" 'metric tonnage', "P5".
Chodo woh sab.

Take a certain fleet, say the "Destroyer fleet" and compare it with whichever Navy u wanna compare.
Some people are bringing in Uk here, so lets just compare the Destroyer fleet of both.

12 Destroyers equipped with BrahMos, Heavy Torpedo tubes, 7 of them with AESA and Cooperative Engagement Capabilities.
VS
6 Destroyers, with no Anti ship missiles on them , no torpedo tubes, and most of them anyway lying under refit due to propulsion issues.

Similarly do so with other parts of the Navy - The Carrier fleet, Frigate, Corvette, Submarine, etc and come to a conclusion.

Just because certain Navies have SSBNs/SSNs does not automatically make them better, or even in the comparative league. If that was the only criteria, i guess all navies around the world are stupid to invest Billions in Carriers, Destroyers, Frigates, etc, etc. Just put 15 Bil$ for Nuke subs and u would have them pretty quick. Doesn work like that though.

 

[Ayan Barat]

People are simply complicating rankings here. All these heavy words - "contextual" 'metric tonnage', "P5".
Chodo woh sab.

Kavi keh rahein hain ki contextual comparison nahi karna hai

Take a certain fleet, say the "Destroyer fleet" and compare it with whichever Navy u wanna compare.

Kavi keh rahein hain ki contextual comparison karna hai

 

[Hawkeye]

Any idea how the navy is planning to use LORA it ordered. LORA can only be used for static targets. I don't see IN using it as shore to shore bombardment kind of system against Pak naval bases, maybe but unlikely. No vls to launch LORA, doubt we will be using containerised system on some kind of cargo vessel. Just how are they planning to use it.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Any idea how the navy is planning to use LORA it ordered. LORA can only be used for static targets. I don't see IN using it as shore to shore bombardment kind of system against Pak naval bases, maybe but unlikely. No vls to launch LORA, doubt we will be using containerised system on some kind of cargo vessel. Just how are they planning to use it.

If a picture is worth thousand words then how much is a video!?

View: https://youtu.be/oXQnq-pYvQ4?feature=shared

 

[Azaad]

Any idea how the navy is planning to use LORA it ordered. LORA can only be used for static targets. I don't see IN using it as shore to shore bombardment kind of system against Pak naval bases, maybe but unlikely. No vls to launch LORA, doubt we will be using containerised system on some kind of cargo vessel. Just how are they planning to use it.

We specifically got THAT missile only for the name it bore. Imagine launching that missile on Paxtan , all the news channels on MSM will go beserk reporting news of it , what to speak of the headlines or the reaction on SM including the meme fest which'd naturally follow.

It's precisely for this reason the IN will go in for that very same missile even if it lacks features as you mentioned to launch it . It's the prestige of launching it which matters especially when it comes to Paxtan & the IN . Back in 1971 , the IN converted Karachi into its very own firing range.

You think the IN will let's go of such a golden opportunity now while other services have all the fun ? Not happening.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Any idea how the navy is planning to use LORA it ordered.

Against PN and PLAN? Preferably without lube.

Wait...you mean something else?

If you mean the LORA (LOng Range Artillery) missile, probably for shore support from OPVs, LSTs and FSS as a standoff munition.

The LCS and LPD will use the U.S. Army’s M870A3 trailer (towed by the M983A4 tractor) to fire the LRHW whereas the EPF will use a stern crane to hoist, suspend, and fire the LRHW missile canister.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-new...-missiles-to-the-fleet-a-case-study-analysis/