Indian Navy : News & Discussion - V

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 547

Perhaps the other two vessel has the Prairie-Masker system installed and running? This uses air bubbles to mask ship noise.

Member for

12 years 1 month

Posts: 621

I don't think Nimitz has a Prairie-Masker. Izumo wake is so prominent though that maybe she does have some sort of acoustic covering system in use.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,875

The Japanese ship is running on two shafts plus it looks like shes quite high in the water there and she has 10ft less draft to start with. I dont think theres anything strange in screws working harder, shallower in the water, leaving a more pronounced wake than a couple of larger 4-shafters alongside.

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,482

Some more good & large snaps from the recently concluded exercises.

VKD decked up with 18 x MiG-29K/KUB looks bizzare, particularly the 3 fighters lined up at the front.
Nimitz showcasing its 36 x F/A-18E/F

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_lSs0W0AEZ_dq.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_lSs0W0AEZ_dq.jpg: orig

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_ls9XXsAA-Ozf.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_ls9XXsAA-Ozf.jpg: orig

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_mAEHXgAActpd.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_mAEHXgAActpd.jpg: orig

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_lIDwXUAIKpgn.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DE_lIDwXUAIKpgn.jpg: orig

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,482

An upgrade for Talwar class with an integrated mast like that of 22350 Gorshkov class and Shtil-I VLS would be very good.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUwIwUQAAKCFK.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUwIwUQAAKCFK.jpg: orig

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUwIhVYAIAw7q.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUwIhVYAIAw7q.jpg: orig

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUrbbUQAE3ytM.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUrbbUQAE3ytM.jpg: orig

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUziqUMAATyrz.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGIUziqUMAATyrz.jpg: orig

Much smaller, yet offer better punch than its Japanese counterpart.

Member for

13 years 2 months

Posts: 1,299

I think it might be easier just to straight up buy an export variant of the Gorshkov class if the IN wants Gorshkov-esque subsystems on a Talwar frigate.

Outside of superior AShMs, I think a Talwar class FFG's sensor and weapons suite is quite a bit inferior to the Akizuki class. That isn't a knock against the Talwar class -- the Akizuki class is a larger warship by nearly 3000 tons with a much more recent sensor suite and fire control system in the form of FCS-3A, as well as the benefit of quad packed ESSMs in a 32 cell Mk-41

Member for

18 years 9 months

Posts: 13,432

Much smaller, yet offer better punch than its Japanese counterpart.

Are you sure? The 'punch' depends on fire control. Sensors, combat system etc. greatly affect its effectiveness. Also, consider the roles of these ships. Which would you rather have against submarines?

Think about the ASW capabilities. What equivalent of the OQQ-22 & OQR-3 does the Talwar-class have? It has a short-range ASW rocket launcher, but what that could match the Type 07? Teruzuki could have 24 of 'em aboard, & still carry more ESSM than Tabar has Shtil.

Member for

13 years 2 months

Posts: 1,299

@swerve

I think he may have just been talking about the anti surface/AShMs that each ship has...

In terms of air defense and ASW the Akizuki should be significantly superior to the Talwar class. (Again, not dissing the Talwar class, both ships are in different weight categories and their subsystems are of entirely different generations so that is to be expected.)

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,482

@Blitzo

I think it might be easier just to straight up buy an export variant of the Gorshkov class if the IN wants Gorshkov-esque subsystems on a Talwar frigate.

Outside of superior AShMs, I think a Talwar class FFG's sensor and weapons suite is quite a bit inferior to the Akizuki class. That isn't a knock against the Talwar class -- the Akizuki class is a larger warship by nearly 3000 tons with a much more recent sensor suite and fire control system in the form of FCS-3A, as well as the benefit of quad packed ESSMs in a 32 cell Mk-41


Going for a new platform without exploring the possibility to upgrade the existing platform/system is not a good idea. But its meant to do the job and oriented towards anti-shipping or anti-sub depending on the mission.

11356/Talwar class is like that of a T-72 family MBT, the basic design/layout is good and presents (and have shown) good upgrade potential. The current Talwar class does not have those integrated multi faceted arrays and publicized systems like Akizuki class.

Few changes/upgrades that I would love to see...

1) An integrated mast atop the bridge
2) It frees up the area aft of the island where currently the twin guidance unit and associated/other systems are installed.
3) This area can instead be utilized to install 4 x twin-quad packed Kh-35UE cells (like that of Bal-E costal syatem)
4) Larger sonar/dome
5) Podberezovik-EТ1 long range 3D radar atop the hanger

https://concern-agat.ru/images/Production/Gallery_for_ZOO_PC/BAL-E/Bal-E_02.jpg

^ Install 4 such unit amidship after clearing the area.
This is what we will get in terms of air-defence and anti-ship/land attack cruise missile numbers after a modification which is very much possible.

Integrated mast (22350 cut/modify & paste)
36 x 9M317/M (based on the displayed model)
24-32 x Kh-35UE amidship (or Klub; consideration being weight rather than space)

OR

Integrated mast (22350 cut/modify & paste)
36 x 9M317M
16 x Kh-35UE amidship
64 x 9M317M amidship (containerized like that of Buk-M3)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/INS_Trikand_%28F51%29-image10.jpg/1280px-INS_Trikand_%28F51%29-image10.jpg

^ It has got one of the most beautiful hull lines but a little cluttered above the bridge and amidship. With a good/simple modification/upgrade, even those cluttering will be gone.

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,482

@swerve

Are you sure? The 'punch' depends on fire control. Sensors, combat system etc. greatly affect its effectiveness. Also, consider the roles of these ships. Which would you rather have against submarines?

Think about the ASW capabilities. What equivalent of the OQQ-22 & OQR-3 does the Talwar-class have? It has a short-range ASW rocket launcher, but what that could match the Type 07? Teruzuki could have 24 of 'em aboard, & still carry more ESSM than Tabar has Shtil.


Yes, almost all of it depends on the sensors. But the combat effectiveness of sensors are all mostly based on publicized specs rather than based on proper combat exposure against any worthy opponents. So all those are likely to be subjective. This is not meant to say that Akizuki does not have a better integrated fit than Talwar class which is a mid-late 90s fit. I would love to see an upgrade some of which I have mentioned above.

Regarding ASW, Talwar class does have a bow mounted sonar and towed array. It can also be armed with those 40Km range 91RTE2 Klub anti-sub missiles as against the 22Km of Type07. But the max number will be limited to 8 and will be at the cost of anti-shipping missiles. So its not like Talwar class is handicapped with longer range anti-sub missiles.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEs-rzLXYAE4xCw.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEs-rzLXYAE4xCw.jpg: orig

Regarding the missile load out, If I understood the MK41 VLS correctly, with your mentioned 24 x Type07 anti-sub missiles, we are left with 8 cells for ESSM. The armament carried by both ships will looks like this -

Akizuki
- 8 x Type-90 anti-ship
- 24 x Type07 anti-sub
- 32 x ESSM (quad-pack per cell) air-defence

Compared to the much smaller Talwar class
- 8 x Klub/Brahmos anti-ship/sub
- 1 x RBU-6000 (72-96 rockets) anti-sub
- 24 x Shtil-I air-defence
- 64 x 9M311 (32 x missiles per Kashtan-M mount) air-defence

And this is a frigate which is oriented towards anti-shipping.

Member for

13 years 2 months

Posts: 1,299

@ Janggobo

Going for a new platform without exploring the possibility to upgrade the existing platform/system is not a good idea. But its meant to do the job and oriented towards anti-shipping or anti-sub depending on the mission.

11356/Talwar class is like that of a T-72 family MBT, the basic design/layout is good and presents (and have shown) good upgrade potential. The current Talwar class does not have those integrated multi faceted arrays and publicized systems like Akizuki class.

Few changes/upgrades that I would love to see...

1) An integrated mast atop the bridge
2) It frees up the area aft of the island where currently the twin guidance unit and associated/other systems are installed.
3) This area can instead be utilized to install 4 x twin-quad packed Kh-35UE cells (like that of Bal-E costal syatem)
4) Larger sonar/dome
5) Podberezovik-EТ1 long range 3D radar atop the hanger

^ Install 4 such unit amidship after clearing the area.
This is what we will get in terms of air-defence and anti-ship/land attack cruise missile numbers after a modification which is very much possible.

Integrated mast (22350 cut/modify & paste)
36 x 9M317/M (based on the displayed model)
24-32 x Kh-35UE amidship (or Klub; consideration being weight rather than space)

OR

Integrated mast (22350 cut/modify & paste)
36 x 9M317M
16 x Kh-35UE amidship
64 x 9M317M amidship (containerized like that of Buk-M3)

^ It has got one of the most beautiful hull lines but a little cluttered above the bridge and amidship. With a good/simple modification/upgrade, even those cluttering will be gone.

I'm sure that the Talwar class could be modified to have all the features that you described, but would it be more cost effective than simply buying an off the shelf Gorshkov export variant? After all, for the Talwar class to feature all of the modifications you mentioned, that means substantial redesign work that the Indian Navy will have to fork out for.

and as for this part:

Regarding the missile load out, If I understood the MK41 VLS correctly, with your mentioned 24 x Type07 anti-sub missiles, we are left with 8 cells for ESSM. The armament carried by both ships will looks like this -

Akizuki
- 8 x Type-90 anti-ship
- 24 x Type07 anti-sub
- 32 x ESSM (quad-pack per cell) air-defence

Compared to the much smaller Talwar class
- 8 x Klub/Brahmos anti-ship/sub
- 1 x RBU-6000 (72-96 rockets) anti-sub
- 24 x Shtil-I air-defence
- 64 x 9M311 (32 x missiles per Kashtan-M mount) air-defence

And this is a frigate which is oriented towards anti-shipping.

I think comparing 9M311 as an equivalent to ESSM is a bit disingenuous, 9M311 is more like a RIM-116 equivalent, and the "32 missiles per Kashtan-M mount" are below deck reloadables rather than ready to fire missiles like the other weapons systems you listed for both ships.

Considering Akizuki fields a more capable area air defence capability than the Talwar class even when 24 of its 32 VLS are used for the Type 07 VL ASROC, One can alter the Akizuki's loadout to anything like 16 or 8 Type 07s to have 64 or even 96 ESSMs in the Mk-41s to leverage an area air defence capability that vastly outstrips the Talwar class.

The Talwar class is a fine ship for its generation and for its displacement, but I think any comparison with a class like Akizuki needs to be fair as well.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,082

INS Vikrant, going the same way as INS Vikramaditya. The shipyard gets all the blame for funding and other policy/decision related problems.

Interesting. in comparison to the last image I know (from April I think) they removed all the scaffoldings.

However it does not look as if any sensors are installed ??

Deino

Member for

13 years 2 months

Posts: 1,299

Interesting. in comparison to the last image I know (from April I think) they removed all the scaffoldings.

However it does not look as if any sensors are installed ??

Deino

tbh, I'm more concerned at how it seems like all the windows/porthole openings in the island don't yet seem to have glass put in yet, and how it seems like some of the windows/portholes have yet to even have their openings cut out yet.

I assume that this is a photo not taken too recently but it's hard to tell. If this really is an up to date photo of INS Vikrant then hopefully they've been spending the last few years doing a lot of work inside the ship with only some relatively simpler outer work left to do, if they really want to handover the ship to the Indian Navy next year even if it is more of a ceremonial thing.

Member for

20 years 4 months

Posts: 6,186

CNN-News18 Travels to INS Sindhudhvaj to See How Sailors Live Inside the Submarine

Member for

13 years 3 months

Posts: 3,337

Indian Coast Guard Dhruv rescues fishermen off the coast of Gujarat during the low pressure depression that hit the coast

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DIoV-G7UIAAz9N_.jpg

Member for

13 years 3 months

Posts: 3,337

India looking at second Akula class nuclear submarine from Russia


India is moving ahead with its plan to lease a third nuclear attack submarine from old ally Russia for an estimated $ 2.5 billion. This will include the refit of the boat at a Cold War-era shipyard followed by a ten-year deployment with the Navy.

The lease plans and discussions are being kept under wraps by both sides but ThePrint has learnt that work is on at a fast pace since the agreement was signed in October last year.

Tentatively being called the ‘Chakra III’ – India has leased two nuclear-propelled submarines from Russia in the past, including one currently in service – the project is likely to take over six years to be completed at a Russian shipyard.

Sources have told ThePrint that an Indian team that visited Russia has inspected and identified the hull of a Project 971 submarine that will be modernised and undergo a thorough refit to convert it into a modern nuclear attack boat.

Negotiations are currently on to embed a team of Indian shipbuilders to go through the refit process – which will basically build up the entire submarine again from an empty hull – to give them hands-on experience with complex submarine technology.

The refit will be carried out at the Russian shipyard town of Severodvinsk, where Indian aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya was also constructed. According to officials involved in the project, it would take 78 months for the project to be completed.

The one factor the Indian side needs to work on is that the government needs to pay for both the refit and lease of the submarine – something that will require a deviation from set financial rules.

The decision to go in for a deep refit of an existing submarine was taken because building a new one could have cost twice as much. The Project 971 submarine will be taken off from the Russian Navy for the lease. ​

There has been no announcement yet on which particular submarine would be refitted, but reports have named the Kashalot (K 322).

However, sources have told ThePrint that the two Project 971 submarines that are presently docked at Zvyozdochka shipyard in Severodvinsk are the Samara ​​(K 295) and Bratsk (K 391), both of which were transported there in 2014. Indian teams are believed to have inspected both hulls.

The refit and lease of the Chakra III is particularly important for India that has cleared a project to construct a new line of nuclear-powered, but conventionally armed submarines (SSNs). The mammoth plan, expected to cost over $12 billion, is for six modern vessels to be made in India – which will require trained shipbuilders and design help.

The first official comments on the plan came in 2015, with a senior Navy officer revealing that the design work had started on the project, and the aim was to come out with a new class of submarines within 15 years.