Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

P-15A Kolkata-class DDG : News & Discussions

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by prototype, Jun 2, 2010.

  1. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    11,117
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Makes sense after the success of BARAK-8.
    Any ideas about numbers? Ordering 3-4 vessels at a time is simply foolish at this point, at least 6-8 vessels need to be ordered in one go. Luckily 7 P-17A were ordered (even though I would have liked double this number).

    Yup, at least 16 Nirbhay can be fitted on the P-15A/B but this will take the best part of 5-6 years IMO as the land based version is still being worked on, the naval variant will have to be designed/tested/proven/certified later as well as the respective VLS for Nirbhay. Perhaps the 3rd/4th P-15B will come with the Nirbhay VLS installed and will act as a test bed wigth all other P-15A/B vessels being given this capability in their major refits.
     
    GSLV Mk III, PARIKRAMA and R!CK like this.
  2. R!CK

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    1,088
    Country Flag:
    India
    No idea bro, numbers are decided only when such a review is made and the expected per unit cost for each vessel is estimated. Bigger orders are usually made and distributed to multiple yards only when more ships are required at shorter period. I think at this point, its difficult to say if we will have 2 shipyards capable of delivering big destroyers simultaneously as P-17A will still be under execution at that stage. A natural choice might be to involve MDL and GRSE; and I don't think GRSE can cater both P-17A and destroyer project at the same time. Only time will tell honestly, but good times ahead for IN.

    Good Day!
     
    PARIKRAMA and Abingdonboy like this.
  3. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    11,117
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    You're right and the devil always lays in the detail. It had occured to me that the P-17A and P-18/P-15C are going to have overlapping production timelines and this may hamper the next class of destroyers but then this is all the more reason to augment the defence shipbuilding capacity in India and bring the private sector into the fold more. Between MDL/Pipav and L&T I am sure these destroyers can be churned out and at impressive rates. Let us not limit ourselves simply because something has not been done before, now is the time to expand the envelope and I am pretty confident in the private sector's ability to deliver, L&T in particuar have an impressive record when it comes to shipbuilding, albeit in much smaller classes, but they are more than ambitious and talented enough to rise to the challenge.

    There is serious capacity augmentation efforts ongoing across most major shipyards in India and the fruits should exist by 2020 and beyond.
     
    PARIKRAMA and R!CK like this.
  4. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    3,441
    Country Flag:
    India
    First ship of Project 15B will be ready by 2018. Changes will be minimal.
     
    Abingdonboy likes this.
  5. R!CK

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    1,088
    Country Flag:
    India
    Talking about past P15-B.
     
    Abingdonboy likes this.
  6. Gessler

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,211
    Likes Received:
    7,656
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Abingdonboy @PARIKRAMA @randomradio @vstol jockey @R!CK @Levina @WMD

    Here's what I think P-18 would/should have -

    Sensors :-

    • Integrated mast (like Thales i-Mast) housing as many active/passive sensors and ECM mounts as possible within a single large superstructure. This will eliminate the need for multiple masts, cluttered top decks etc. (provided the mast integrates both the relatively short-wavelength Fire-Control Radar (FCR) and the long-wavelength Volume Search Radar (VSR), inside of just providing a centralized array for FCR, SATCOM+other sensors not including VSR). Something like this would be perfect IMO, sensory redundancy in case of damage might take a hit, but still this has it's advantages wrt stealth, easy of maintenance etc. -

    [​IMG]

    We'll have to see how well an improved MF-STAR and a Western VSR (let's say SMART-L for sake of argument) can be housed within the same mast. Shouldn't be impossible, but I see a likely hurdle here. The mast will be one big S.O.B either way (if it has to integrate a full-fledged VSR in a distributed fashion). I see the possibility of a pyramid-isqe superstructure.

    • The new PHAROS FCR (for SRGM, CIWS & Point-Defense Guidance) could be developed as a JV between BEL & Thales. This will sit well with a new CIWS system.

    • The HUMSA family will just have to give way to a new sonar system, which should be distributed aperture as a rule, with a main bow array and smaller side arrays. A towed-array sonar should also be mandatory.

    Weapons :-

    • Surface Warfare: Ability to incorporate BrahMos-I Block-I (current ASCM), a possible VLS-based BrahMos-NG, plus the BrahMos-II/3K22 Zircon hypersonic ASCM in the surface-warfare VLS section. Minimum 16 missiles should be there, anything higher is welcome, as long as it doesn't eat into the space for additional SAMs. A larger caliber main gun can be looked at - I seriously suggest developing a Navalized version of ATAGS in 155mm/64-caliber configuration. ATAGS can be a good platform for developing an Advanced Gun System-India.

    • Land Attack: As per Prasun Sengupta, the future destroyer might have as many as 32 dedicated cells for Nirbhay LACM. Having an extensive land-attack capability on surface warships signals a significant change in IN war-fighting policy. This will free up all ~16 ASCMs for a complete surface-dominance role. Provided the base UVLM design is common, this indicates a total of 48 strike-length cells. In an age where even frigate-class vessels like Type-26 will be having 24 such cells, atleast twice that number will be necessary for a full-blown DDG.

    With guided ammunition, even the SRGM can be used in a limited land-attack role (arced trajectory, bombardment of coastal installations should be possible from a distance of ~80-100km out at sea) if actually required to do so.

    • ASW: Why hasn't IN explored the possibility of an ASROC yet? The only limitation I see is that we have few VLS cells on IN warships as it is (no VLS Farm-type installation as on Arleigh Burke etc.), but those RBU-6000s are an absolute eyesore. They ruin frontal signature-reduction efforts to an extent (IN didn't think it mattered for the present classes of ships, and that's fine. But for a post-2020 warship? NOPE.), and besides, I even began doubting their effectiveness against modern submarines. We should atleast explore a streamlined container for these launchers (if at all they're indispensable), or choose to internally incorporate them, with the rockets firing out to sea - like torpedo tubes.

    • Speaking of Torpedos, I haven't much to say. NSTL should continuously pursue working on upgrades/refinements for the Varunastra (Mk.2, Mk.2A etc.) instead of completing a design and sitting on it for a decade.

    Other significant part of ASW is conducted by the choppers, which I've covered below.

    • Air/Missile Defense: It seems BMD might be a possibility, but I'm not 100% sure about it just yet. Let me tell you why - having an effective ship-based ABM is possible only if and when the projected AD-1/AD-2 interceptors are ready. None of the existing technology demonstration platforms (that's what they are) like PAD, AAD or PDV are ergonomic enough to be considered for ship-based vertical launch. Save for AAD, the remaining two are the size of friggin' ballistic missiles for god's sake. We'll have to design a special VLM just to accommodate them, and just 6 such cells will take up impossible amounts of deck area (picture Arihant's silos, on a ship). I just don't see this happening.

    I believe the AD-1/AD-2 will be approximately the size of the US Standard Missile series. Only these can be effectively put on a ship.

    All this is ofcourse, provided we are looking at an indigenous missile platform for the BMD role. If we go for, say, a ship-based Arrow system from Israel - that presents a whole new set of possibilities. Either way, I don't think the BMD component will be ready before 2030. We might get the ships first, incorporate BMD later.

    • The Barak-8 & 8ER will be there. I'm looking at no less than 48 ready-to-launch in VLS units. We might decide to go ahead with the P-15A tradition and store another 24-48 on board as reloads, which can be effected by a Fleet Replenishment Vessel (FRV) out at sea. Accessible if travelling as part of a flotilla/Carrier Battle Group. But I think we should look at eliminating this limitation - some modular cranes (can't occupy more space than the approx area of 4 x VLS cells if we go for a big one) that can be brought up when needed and remain integrated into the decks when not - can be pretty handy. Consider both vertically-deployed designs and something that lies perpendicular to the deck when not in use and is propped up when needed.

    [​IMG]

    I'm not adamant about combined gun-missile systems, but at least a new gun-only CIWS should be looked at. There's nothing wrong with the AK-630M as far as the gun is concerned, but it's supporting guidance/target-acquisition & tracking systems and electronics are due an upgrade. I suppose OFB/DRDO might consider themselves too good to be bothered with this development, so I'm wondering if Mahindra Defence can't tie up with a European maker for licensed-building of a new-generation system. They already built stuff like the Mareech ATDS, so I reckon they know their shyt when it comes to making ship-based systems/mounts etc. At least as much as they need to know.

    • Either way, a Point-Defense Missile System (PDMS) has to be considered. It's not that I don't believe Barak-8 itself can't handle close-in, low-flying threats...it's just that Barak-8s will be too valuable to waste on both high & low-end missile/aircraft threats. I suggest we look at the SeaRAM system. I don't see Maitri PDMS getting anywhere, even if it did, I'm not sure I support PDMS in VLS units. Vertical launch is fine for engaging longer-ranged threats, but when close-range quick-reaction is a priority, a slanted launcher saves time on missile-orientation after launch. Every second counts. Only problem is that a minimum of two launchers might be required, one each for port & starboard.

    [​IMG]

    I know you don't want to go into the whole KALI-10000 business (I don't blame you, I don't wanna go there either) but still, ship-based DEWs are a thing and are already being extensively tested - and will be more so 10 years down the line. I agree right now the power of most such systems is not enough to destroy anything bigger than a hand-launched UAV or something in that region...but improvements will be here before we know it. IN has gotta stay among the cutting edge of naval technologies, and that includes exploring the possibility of prototype-testing with a navalized Gas-Dynamic & Chemical-Oxygen Iodine Lasers (GDL/COIL) that DRDO/LASTEC are already developing...it won't be anywhere near combat-certified, but will yield results that can be used further down the road for true solid-state systems.

    [​IMG]

    Vehicles/Aviation :-

    • The two-chopper formula should be maintained. Redundancy+increased efficiency when needed - a killer. A 12-ton NMRH will be needed though (not the Sea Hawk) - I believe Airbus H225M is likely (in line with ICG's decision). An array of helicopter-based systems will have to be simultaneously procured. That includes new dunking sonars, light torpedoes, and helicopter-launched cruise missiles...Kongsberg HSM comes to mind.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    • In addition, it should all be flexible enough to allow us to substitute one of the choppers for one or more unmanned VTOL platforms (depends on how many can be safely packed in the hangar). There was a proposal from Israel to jointly develop an unmanned version of Chetak called NRUAV. But the proposal went kaput, no interest was shown. But in a post-2020 scenario, unmanned air systems need to be available to deploy from surface ships - the range of uses are endless. I'm confident that purchase of the MQ-8 FireScout is possible (but it may or may not be armed).

    • Another thing to consider are small Unmanned Surface Vehicles. Extremely useful for reconnaissance and a range of other purposes. Modern warship designs (T26 included) are created to be able to deploy USVs, just like RHIBs.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Yet another thing are Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs). Not any tech-demos, but full-fledged AUVs with integrated sonar arrays, optical sensors etc. that can dive down thousands of meters, able to map the surface, the sea floor and anything in between. AUVs that can be launched through the torpedo tubes are an excellent concept IMO (like L&T's Adamya), but given the size restriction, I'm not sure about their endurance & amount of stuff they can carry.

    [​IMG]

    Anyone is free to add whatever they think will be necessary for a post-2020 IN main surface combatant!
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2016
    SR-91, Pundrick, Aqwoyk and 7 others like this.
  7. Echo_419

    Echo_419 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    126
    Country Flag:
    India
    DRDO will be able to successfully develop Rail guns & 100kw Lasers and install these on Navy's newest ships since this is a Navy project
     
  8. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    11,117
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
  9. Nilgiri

    Nilgiri Lieutenant GEO STRATEGIC ANALYST

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    1,401
    Country Flag:
    India
    Does anyone else see the in-post twitter inserts jumping/twitching around a lot?
     
  10. Gessler

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,211
    Likes Received:
    7,656
    Country Flag:
    India
    Me too!
     
  11. bharathp

    bharathp Developers Guild Developers -IT and R&D

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2016
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Nilgiri checking the styles/css shows that the box width inside twitter div is changing in size. the css is setting the width to 500px and some other css is setting the "min width" to 520 px. looks like that is causing a conflict.
     
    R!CK and Gessler like this.
  12. R!CK

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    1,088
    Country Flag:
    India
    NAVY FOCUSES ON GEN NEXT DESTROYERS

    Having inducted successfully Delhi-class and Kolkata-class destroyer ships, the Indian Navy is now working of “next generation destroyers” which are expected to give an edge to the three-dimensional blue-water force.

    Confirming this, Vice Admiral Girish Luthra, Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Western Naval Command (WNC), said on Friday: “We are now planning and conceptualising next generation destroyers which would be new in design and more potent”.

    During his interactions with media persons on board the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya, Vice Admiral Luthra said that the Navy top brass would take up the proposal with the Government of India in due course of time.

    “These (the next-generation destroyers) will have additional features than the Project 15, Project 15 A and Project 15 B,” Vice Admiral Luthra said.

    The Project 15 and Project 15 A class of ships have been commissioned. While the Project 15 involved Delhi-class destroyers INS Delhi, INS Mysore and INS Mumbai, the Project 15 A include the Kolkata-class destroyers INS Kolkata, INS Kochi and INS Chennai.


    Two Project 15 B class of destroyers – better known as the Visakhapatnam-class class ships — two are under production now. They are: Visakhapatnam and Mormugao. While the first one is expected to be commissioned in 2018, the next in the series is expected in 2020. The two others planned in the series are Paradip and Porbunder.

    http://www.dailypioneer.com/nation/navy-focuses-on-gen-next-destroyers.html

    ++++

    I'd like to add that as per internal assessment, P15B is expected to be completed much faster than anticipated if the current pace is maintained without experiencing any unexpected glitches. Therefore additional P15B may be considered if the next class of destroyers takes longer to materialize. Too early for further discussion anyway.



    @PARIKRAMA @SpArK

    Good Day!
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2016
  13. Gessler

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,211
    Likes Received:
    7,656
    Country Flag:
    India
    An interesting PR video of the Barak-8 by IAI-Rafael. Nothing we don't already know, but still give it a view...

     
    Abingdonboy and R!CK like this.
  14. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    11,117
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    An awesome weapon but the problem is how few vessels the IN is deploying with the system. From today to 2025 it looks like only 14 (maybe 15 if IAC-1 gets them) will be deployed with the BARAK-8 (3 P-15A, 4 P-15B and 7 P-17A), this is totally insufficent. I assume the 3 P-17s will get the BARAK-8 during their SLEP (maybe the Talwar class?) but even still the IN requires at least 30-40 BARAK-8 (ER) equipped ships by 2030 and the induction of a second (maybe 3rd) CBG is only going to increase the need.

    @PARIKRAMA @vstol jockey @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 001

    (for obvious reasons not factoring the proposed/imagined P-15C/P-18 or NGMVs (that likely won't house the BARAK-8) )
     
    Gessler and R!CK like this.
  15. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,700
    Likes Received:
    4,674
    IN wants 80 new ships by 2027. So expecting 30-40 Barak-8 equipped ships isn't far fetched.

    The Barak-8 can complement a new longer range missile on larger ships that are coming up.
     
    Gessler and Abingdonboy like this.

Share This Page