Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[Ayan Barat]

1. Top 5 Navies with ship launched ballistic missiles - it's just China, that it. Not even Murica is there
2. Top 5 Navies with supersonic AShM - Russia, China, India and you're done with your top five list
3. Top 5 Navies with ABM capabilities - every Mk-41 equipped ship and Russian/Chinese ships. We're not even in top 250.
4. Top 5 Navies with long range SAMs - pretty much same as above
5. Top 5 Navies with long range land attack cruise missile - again, same
6. Top 5 Navies with ability to sustain multiple LSCO campaign at the same time - Just USA, no one's near it
7. Top 5 Navies with the ability to conduct Commonwealth Games on the empty spaces of its vessels - just one country

This is the level of variance you'll get in a top 5 raking by just changing the parameter on which it's being done. Instead of these stupid rankings the focus should be on identifying the threats posed by your adversary and developing counters and preferably overmatch against those. That's it.

For us it's just three at this moment
• We need ABM capabilities to protect our ships from PLAN ASh ballistic missile barrage
• We need ASh ballistic missiles to target them without entering in their kill zone
• Increasing the overall magazine depth, preferably with cost effective missile to better sustain a LSCO

Bas itta hi, uske baad itminaan se dekha jaayega top 10 aur top 5

 

[rohitb3]

Kavi keh rahein hain ki contextual comparison nahi karna hai

Kavi keh rahein hain ki contextual comparison karna hai

Haha, point taken. I didn interpret the word "contextual" correctly. Sorry sir, angrezi thoda weak hain.

 

[shade2]

View: https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1885340141645877660

A pic of the US Hippo's Well Dock and the LCM-8 landing craft sailing out
LCM-8 were purchased with the ship along with SeaKing helicopters https://www.indianembassyusa.gov.in/ArchivesDetails?id=856




Sharing these here because first time i've seen the well dock and landing craft pics

 

[shade2]

View: https://x.com/IaSouthern/status/1885331654060789958/video/1

Video of AMPHEX 2025
Is the tank shown here a T72?

 

[Bleh]

View: https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1885340141645877660

A pic of the US Hippo's Well Dock and the LCM-8 landing craft sailing out
LCM-8 were purchased with the ship along with SeaKing helicopters https://www.indianembassyusa.gov.in/ArchivesDetails?id=856

View attachment 23646
View attachment 23645

Sharing these here because first time i've seen the well dock and landing craft pics

91st Amphibious Brigade, India's 'Marines'

Regarding this. Someone please enlighten me @Binayak95 or anyone.

What's the point of the Amphibious Assault Ship & Landing Helicopter Dock?

1st is just a glorified military transport ship, & we are not gonna do any large scale sea-bourne invasion. We'll need many of them, otherwise we'll just land only 50 men like the above pic. Fine, ours is mostly for rescue missions.

But what about the 2nd one. Why would you need helis in naval warfare. Their unstealhy slow arses are not adequate for anti-ship operations, with short ranged NASM-MR. And it's not like you can launch Apaches from them for maritime strike ops along the coast, they'll get butchered without terrain cover. The ship itself will have to come too close to coast with their short ranges.

With light torpedos it may do anti-sub search ops but any Aircraft carrier can do it better. If we had STOVLs like Harriers still, they may have have come handy, but otherwise......

 

[Ayan Barat]

What's the point of the Amphibious Assault Ship & Landing Helicopter Dock?

Now answering this
LHD's are supposed to have everything of their own. The helis would clear the beach, then LCACs would deliver troops and equipment all while helis would provide close air support and during the transit to the beach the F-35B would provide CAP against enemy naval strike fighters. Definitely you'd have other ships and air cover, but on paper a LHD is supposed to be "self sufficient"

These are niche assets supposed to be used only in expeditionary attack roles (anything involving a large group of troops moving from point A to B and then attacking via the beach). Use it in any other role and the cons would start exceeding the pros

 

[Bleh]

These are niche assets supposed to be used only in expeditionary attack roles (anything involving a large group of troops moving from point A to B and then attacking via the beach). Use it in any other role and the cons would start exceeding the pros

They got lotta space to accommodate AShBMs & BMD. INS Dhruv itself is a nice platform we can build upon.
But we need either only 1 (for only reservoir missions) or like, 10 (to facilitate amphibious invasions with adequate numbers). There's no in between. No point landing 500 troops at Ghadar.

But a fund-starved Navy like ours, looking for 4 LHD!

 

[Ayan Barat]

They got lotta space to accommodate AShBMs & BMD. INS Dhruv itself is a nice platform we can build upon.
But we need either only 1 (for only reservoir missions) or like, 10 (to facilitate amphibious invasions with adequate numbers). There's no in between. No point landing 500 troops at Ghadar.

But a fund-starved Navy like ours, looking for 4 LHD!

Let's say we get 10.
Now tell me who are we using to fill those 10 LHDs? We'll need approximately 10,000 troops, specialized in landing, beachhead preparation, neutralizing defences...or in short; United States Marine Corps.

So you must understand that our doctrine is not like USA, where we're prepared to land thousands of marines anywhere on the planet and the force is so competent (2 lakh personnel, used to have some 500 MBTs, 1,000 aircraft...7 or 6th largest air-force in the world) that they on their own can win you a small country.

Rather our idea of using an amphibious force is more like a Ghatak Platoon (for lack of better analogue) or like a QRF in case something serious happens in A&N, Sri Lanka or maybe Pakistan. They're supposed to just spearhead the mission; once beachhead is secured then regular, dry infantry, I know weird terminology would start to pour in by whatever ship, boat, barge they get.

 

[Bleh]

Rather our idea of using an amphibious force is more like a Ghatak Platoon (for lack of better analogue) or like a QRF in case something serious happens in A&N, Sri Lanka or maybe Pakistan. They're supposed to just spearhead the mission; once beachhead is secured then regular, dry infantry, I know weird terminology would start to pour in by whatever ship, boat, barge they get.

I get this part...

But a fund-starved Navy like ours, looking for 4 LHD!

I'm questioning the need for such an investment of 4×25k ton boats in the 1st place. Something like that happens we'll be dropping air-bournes near coast to secure beachheads & airfields to follow by air & water.

Is it doesn't (which it's very unlikely to) is just a huge investment that we can spend anywhere else.

I just hope the 4 LPDs aren't prioritised right now!

 

[shade2]

But a fund-starved Navy like ours, looking for 4 LHD!

I just hope the 4 LPDs aren't prioritised right now!

They aren't, neither is it being prioritized, priorities are more MFSTAR/Barak8/ warships, German submarines with angular hulls, deshi SSNs and the sister ship for INS Vikrant...

LHDs are luxury purchases and so are minesweepers for the IN.

Anyway an LHD is a full upgrade over the current LSTs that we have, very diverse platform now with people coming up with shipping-container sized missile launchers placed on deck or ground attack drones being launched from LHD "runway" aside from the usual

Overall but this will be a very expensive proposition, you will also need the landing craft and the transport helis and optionally the troops transferred from army to navy for a proper "marine" force

 

[randombully]

Chalo LHD ki baat bohot ho gayi.

Ab important topics ka time hai
top 10 strongest navies ki ranking batao.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Something like that happens we'll be dropping air-bournes near coast to secure beachheads & airfields to follow by air & water.

Okay, let me give you a different PoV

I want to have 1,000 soldiers, 4x AH-64s providing fire support, 4x Mi-17s inserting MARCOS, 3x Dhruv doing CasEvac, 8x T-90s making up the frontal attack, 10x BMP-2 supporting them, 5x trucks towing 5x M777 and 3x landing crafts carrying 150 troops each at the same time, some 500km away from mainland.

Now tell me how effective is airdrop going to be for this scenario. And what are the available options that can achieve this feat.

I just hope the 4 LPDs aren't prioritised right now!

Now this is something I totally agree with you. Our current priority should simply be preventing a literal massacre by the PLAN. Then maybe we can focus on niché stuff like expeditionary fighting and force projection.

 

[shade2]

Our Best Look Yet At Britain’s New Dreadnought Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Design

A highly streamlined hull, x-shaped stern, pumpjet propulsion, and conformal missile carriage are all features of the Royal Navy’s forthcoming Dreadnought class SSBN. A highly streamlined hull, x-shaped stern, pumpjet propulsion, and conformal missile carriage are all features of the Royal...

www.twz.com

"highly streamlined hull"

Y'all nibbiars know what benefits the German "angular hull" design brings over the typical smooth teardrop hull design and what are the drawbacks?

Aside from Germans only the Anglos have some angular portions on the hull with the Astute class SSN

 

[Bleh]

I want to have 1,000 soldiers, 4x AH-64s providing fire support, 4x Mi-17s inserting MARCOS, 3x Dhruv doing CasEvac, 8x T-90s making up the frontal attack, 10x BMP-2 supporting them, 5x trucks towing 5x M777 and 3x landing crafts carrying 150 troops each at the same time, some 500km away from mainland.

Now tell me how effective is airdrop going to be for this scenario. And what are the available options that can achieve this feat.

A force that size will be annihilated in 12hrs if placed 500km from Indian mainland, even if it's in Bangladesh... assuming their Amphibious LHD isn't sunk by shore-based missile batteries even before they see shore.

In a near-peer scenario we'll face, probably gotta get hold of, or create, an airstrip by pumping in several thousands air-bournes only. Then send in several dozen light tanks & WhAPs & ICVs by C-130s with gunships flying off CBG. Turret dismantled T-90s may follow by C-17 if we can hold.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Our Best Look Yet At Britain’s New Dreadnought Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Design

A highly streamlined hull, x-shaped stern, pumpjet propulsion, and conformal missile carriage are all features of the Royal Navy’s forthcoming Dreadnought class SSBN. A highly streamlined hull, x-shaped stern, pumpjet propulsion, and conformal missile carriage are all features of the Royal...

www.twz.com

"highly streamlined hull"

Y'all nibbiars know what benefits the German "angular hull" design brings over the typical smooth teardrop hull design and what are the drawbacks?

Aside from Germans only the Anglos have some angular portions on the hull with the Astute class SSN

From my absolutely non existent knowledge of operating SONARs, the effectiveness of a "stealth" hull isn't very groundbreaking compared to the pains it take to make a non-teardrop hull.

1. "Geometrical stealth" works by angling the surfaces larger than the incoming wavelength to deflect waves. F-22 modifies it surfaces (in metres) according to Ka-L band (1 to 30 centimetres) radars it's supposed to face the most. Introduce a radar with wavelength bugger than the surface like VHF (1-10 metres) and the geometric stealth starts to fail.

Typical military SONARs operate in 0.6 to 10km wavelength so it's really interesting to see how one can "stealth" a 150m long vessel against it.

2. Naval sub-surface detection is completely different from radar detecting. 99% of times you're SONAR is switched off and absolute no radio wave is sent in hope of finding a return, instead you use hydrophones to listen for noises. Using active sonar for detection is like using a lighthouse for covert infiltration, so it's only used when you're near port and want to avoid obstacles.

So if there is no wavefront coming towards you from an active SONAR then what exactly are you going to deflect using your angled surface?

3. In air radio waves follow a pretty straight line of travel and reflection because physically a radar wave is also a light wave. A wave falls at an incidence angle 45° and will reflect with the same angle in opposite directions.

But sound's a matter wave and it behaves bit differently, especially underwater. You've the primary wave, then a two secondary waves reflected from surface and seafloor, more secondary waves from things like underwater geography and density variance; now all of these hit the submarine from different angles and at different times...so how are you going to predict the "direction of stealth" [like in F-22 it's the front on which it's most susceptible to encounter a radar, hence it's frontal RCS is lowest compared to other] in this scenario.

 

[Ayan Barat]

A force that size will be annihilated in 12hrs if placed 500km from Indian mainland, even if it's in Bangladesh... assuming their Amphibious LHD isn't sunk by shore-based missile batteries even before they see shore.

Fighters have combat range of 1-2,000km so they'll always there to give air-cover. We're using the limited aviation facility of a LHD only because helicopters don't have very good endurance.

From back in Normandy, this is how the SoP of beach assault works.
1. Airpower and shell bombardment is used to secure the way for the "landing party" of amphibious assualt group
2. "Landing party" secures and clears as much of the beach as possible
3. Then regular infantry starts to pour in

In a near-peer scenario we'll face, probably gotta get hold of, or create, an airstrip by pumping in several thousands air-bournes only. Then send in several dozen light tanks & WhAPs & ICVs by C-130s with gunships flying off CBG. Turret dismantled T-90s may follow by C-17 if we can hold.

This elaborate air assault plan of yours reminded me of something

View: https://youtu.be/BpINpWwAyGs?feature=shared

 

[Bleh]

Fighters have combat range of 1-2,000km so they'll always there to give air-cover. We're using the limited aviation facility of a LHD only because helicopters don't have very good endurance.

From back in Normandy, this is how the SoP of beach assault works.
1. Airpower and shell bombardment is used to secure the way for the "landing party" of amphibious assualt group
2. "Landing party" secures and clears as much of the beach as possible
3. Then regular infantry starts to pour in

This elaborate air assault plan of yours reminded me of something

View: https://youtu.be/BpINpWwAyGs?feature=shared

Welp they tried to take a well defended airfield by dropping Paras directly over it!
That has always been stupid... even during WW2 *cough*marketgarden*cough* when there were no AShMs & AShBMs to fuck-up your slow, conspicuous, lumbering invasion fleet from 2-3 trucks at random locations 500km away.

It's much easier to drop paras at a less defended coast. Planes are faster & it's harder to rush resistance to dropzones unless you know exactly where they are, unlike these fleets.

 

[randombully]

From my absolutely non existent knowledge of operating SONARs, the effectiveness of a "stealth" hull isn't very groundbreaking compared to the pains it take to make a non-teardrop hull.

1. "Geometrical stealth" works by angling the surfaces larger than the incoming wavelength to deflect waves. F-22 modifies it surfaces (in metres) according to Ka-L band (1 to 30 centimetres) radars it's supposed to face the most. Introduce a radar with wavelength bugger than the surface like VHF (1-10 metres) and the geometric stealth starts to fail.

Typical military SONARs operate in 0.6 to 10km wavelength so it's really interesting to see how one can "stealth" a 150m long vessel against it.

2. Naval sub-surface detection is completely different from radar detecting. 99% of times you're SONAR is switched off and absolute no radio wave is sent in hope of finding a return, instead you use hydrophones to listen for noises. Using active sonar for detection is like using a lighthouse for covert infiltration, so it's only used when you're near port and want to avoid obstacles.

So if there is no wavefront coming towards you from an active SONAR then what exactly are you going to deflect using your angled surface?

3. In air radio waves follow a pretty straight line of travel and reflection because physically a radar wave is also a light wave. A wave falls at an incidence angle 45° and will reflect with the same angle in opposite directions.

But sound's a matter wave and it behaves bit differently, especially underwater. You've the primary wave, then a two secondary waves reflected from surface and seafloor, more secondary waves from things like underwater geography and density variance; now all of these hit the submarine from different angles and at different times...so how are you going to predict the "direction of stealth" [like in F-22 it's the front on which it's most susceptible to encounter a radar, hence it's frontal RCS is lowest compared to other] in this scenario.

So if we go for a "non stealthy hull" design we can reduce the cost of subs significantly while no significant negative impact will happen?

 

[Bleh]

So if we go for a "non stealthy hull" design we can reduce the cost of subs significantly while no significant negative impact will happen?

Have any of y'all read the Australian report in why Type 216 wasn't chosen?

Australian Government Reveals Why DCNS Won

A professional level blog on strategic matters, especially submarines (nuclear and conventional) in English, Hindi & most other major languages.

gentleseas.blogspot.com

Aussies said they had lost the bid because their proposed Australian submarine had an “unacceptable'' level of “radiated noise". While the "stealthy shaped" subs will not reflect back Sonar as much (from mostly surface vessels), their shape made them less hydrodynamic. So the French one was simply more silent while moving under water while German one created more noise from turbulence (making them vulnerable to listening subs).

Tradeoffs. Tradeoffs.