Next-Generation Destroyer: News & Discussions

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by ni8mare, Dec 5, 2016.

  1. Ankit Kumar 001
    Offline

    Ankit Kumar 001 Captain THINK TANK

    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    2,497
    Country Flag:
    India
    Barak 8/ER won't be enough. We need a ship based ABM capability too.
    Either Naval S400 or ABM Aster or SM3/6 series.
     
  2. Pundrick
    Online

    Pundrick 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    493
    Country Flag:
    India
    The whole Zumwalt project should be studied, the design does looks more stealthy and no I am not suggesting to study because it is American but because it is a generation ahead and has set a target for others.

    Automation is future at the moment, we cannot allow people to carry out job like, to carry small rockets, manually reporting friendly or enemy smaller ships or to manually interpret data from different platforms. All this has more chances of committing error and navy should go for automation and have an integrated system.
     
    Abingdonboy likes this.
  3. Aqwoyk
    Offline

    Aqwoyk 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    335
    Country Flag:
    India
    Do you think that US will sell SM3/6 system to us? And who apart from US has developed a naval BMD/ASAT system?
     
  4. R!CK
    Offline

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant THINK TANK

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1,071
    Country Flag:
    India
    Next class of Destroyers will retain the same hull model albeit some refinements. Don't expect a new hull for the next class of destroyers.

    Good Day!
     
    Abingdonboy and Gessler like this.
  5. Gessler
    Offline

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Messages:
    8,911
    Likes Received:
    6,636
    Country Flag:
    India
    First of all, no one from IN has even hinted at anything like a Ship-based BMD. So we're all pretty much throwing stones in the dark here as far as BMD is concerned.

    If we have to procure the Standard Missile series, we have to procure AEGIS CMS. This will be a total shift from the currently standardized EMDINA CMSystem (centered around the MF-STAR & Barak-8), unless we can come up with some creative integration options, allowing the MF-STAR/other assets to make full use of the SM-3/6's capabilities. Too many variables and it's all gonna cost entirely too much to integrate. Rather we just develop a ship-based version of the AD-1/AD-2 missiles.

    UK/France are developing the Aster Block-II which has a limited BMD capability. The Aster round itself has nowhere near the level of kinematic performance, range or apogee to rival the SM series (it compares with our endo-atmospheric AAD, a league below the exo-atmospheric PAD/PDV).

    And ofcourse there's Russia's S-300 used on their cruisers which can also manage a BMD role against short/medium-range ballistic missiles.

    If you want full-spectrum theatre level BMD, the Aegis system with SM-series is the only ship-based system available out there. However there are 2 questions that remain to be answered -

    1) Do we need a ship-based BMD?
    2) What can we develop in-house that can go with existing/planned systems without need for a total shift?
     
  6. R!CK
    Offline

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant THINK TANK

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1,071
    Country Flag:
    India
    Its in the IN wishlist honestly, but like you rightly mentioned, there are challenges. Foreign partnership may be sought and I'd expect it to be either Israel or Russia. I personally don't think we need full spectrum level capability, something akin to s-300/400 type works for us I guess? Russians had introduced the Naval S-300 in early 80's, so we are only doing catch-up.

    Good Day!
     
  7. Aqwoyk
    Offline

    Aqwoyk 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    335
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Gessler I agree with you here but do you think AD series will make it to ship based system... Its nowhere in even talks, its IIR seeker is nowhere in sight, LRTR with 1600km range is not made yet....... we haven't modify our own Arudhra MPR for Naval version :hmm:
     
  8. Gessler
    Offline

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Messages:
    8,911
    Likes Received:
    6,636
    Country Flag:
    India
    Not sure about anything yet. With the S-400 being ordered, defense against TBMs has been partially/fully taken over by this type. Induction of 77N6/77N6N-1 rounds in the future (meant for S-500) will offer the ability to take on Chinese IRBM/ICBM-class missiles. If that happens, AD-1/AD-2 will largely lose their relevance. Much depends on how quickly and properly the agencies can deliver on the missiles+supporting network.

    Want me to make a guess? Prepare to be disappointed. We will be inducting the full spectrum of Russian S-400/500 or the US THAAD system and DODO will still be prototype-testing their shyt.

    Developing AD-1/AD-2 specifically for naval applications is not viable. In which case, sea-based BMD will be only available through joint-venture projects with Russia/US/Israel.

    ++

    On topic -

    Looking at the MF-STAR installations on the Sa'ar-5 corvette somewhat reassures me. It is indeed as flexible as the SPY-series as far as placement of arrays is concerned (similar setup will be seen on Vikrant IAC-1).

    [​IMG]

    While this is not a big deal in itself, a more interesting thing to witness would be if the MF-STAR and the SMART-L were to be mated on an integrated mast. Some literature that might prove useful for the reader:

    https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/innovation/integrated-mast

    About the I-Mast 500 ...
    http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...grated-mast-i-mast-500-at-euronaval-2014.html

    If we want to conduct a limited BMD/Area-defense against the likes of DF-21D, we'd need an Aster Block-2 analogue which needs to have something like the SMART-L EWC. Note that they said it can be linked with a SMART-L. Not integrated - Add to that the fact that I've so far haven't seen any I-Mast offering with an actual separately-available VSR in the mix. Lemme know if you all did.

    Although it'll be a considerable improvement over current systems-layout and brings some advantages in the field of stealth, easy of maintenance etc., I have my doubts on the feasibility of the whole MFSTAR+SMART-L Integrated Mast thing. MoD/IN better start working on this right away before something happens and IAI or Thales (or both) end up getting blacklisted. First step toward that would be actually selecting which AESA VSR to use for future IN warships.

    All this is of course IF the Navy wants to go ahead with the integrated mast concepts.

    What do you all think, gents?
    @Abingdonboy @PARIKRAMA @vstol jockey @randomradio @R!CK @MilSpec
     
    Aqwoyk, R!CK and randomradio like this.
  9. Aqwoyk
    Offline

    Aqwoyk 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    335
    Country Flag:
    India
    I see what you did there :troll:
    But having our own SM-3/6 like SAM is necessary for us and AD series fits into that. Even Chinese are developing hq16
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2016
  10. Aqwoyk
    Offline

    Aqwoyk 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    335
    Country Flag:
    India
    Anyone here who thinks 250 km range of MF Star is low as the present 52c/d destroyers of Chinese employ dual band AESA with 400 km range and 55d must be employing a further enhanced range radar and us with measly 250 km one.
     
  11. Gessler
    Offline

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Messages:
    8,911
    Likes Received:
    6,636
    Country Flag:
    India
    I believe 250km is the tracking range against fighter-sized targets. Maximum detection/search range is likely to be higher, might well be around 400km just like the SAMPSON (Type-45 Daring) which has similar dimensions & function.

    Besides, MFSTAR on Kolkata/Bengaluru-class DDGs has a high mast-placed array placement compared to the Type-052D/055 which have superstructure-based arrays like the Burke. High-placed radars have an advantage in that they can potentially detect sea-skimming targets at farther ranges. The T45 has such an advantage compared to the Burke.
     
    Abingdonboy, HariPrasad and Aqwoyk like this.
  12. Aqwoyk
    Offline

    Aqwoyk 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    335
    Country Flag:
    India
    May be you are right and our kolkata class destroyers are better designed when it comes to sensor placement. Even our ffGs are better designed.
     
  13. HariPrasad
    Offline

    HariPrasad 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    195
    Country Flag:
    India
    better do not believe chinese claim.
     
    Abingdonboy likes this.
  14. HariPrasad
    Offline

    HariPrasad 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    195
    Country Flag:
    India
    Very true.
     
  15. Aqwoyk
    Offline

    Aqwoyk 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    335
    Country Flag:
    India
    They are trying to achieve parity with US systems so we have to make our things equivalent to them.
     

Share This Page