Bangladesh Navy

[Penguin]

While it is true that anything that floats can be sunk. You've got one thing wrong. The P-15A(Kolkata) Destroyers are not based on the P-15(Delhi) Destroyers nor do they derive any particular or conspicuous design elements from the latter. The sensors are not the same, neither is the air defense systems, the design itself is different from the ground up down to the nitty gritties of enhancing intact stability and damage stability. A cursory look at the superstructure and the resultant difference in construction parameters itself will reveal that much. You're spot on on the Talwar class frigates though.

I suppose that's why it is Project 15A, which started out as 'improved Delhi'? Or are you also claiming e.g. project 16A (Brahmaputra class) is not a development of Project 16 (Godavari class)? Clearly, the 15A is based on the 15. See e.g. the stack arrangement, indicating it will use a similar powerplant with four DT-59 reversible gas turbines grouped in two pairs. See also the overall design and layout of the ship: the lineage is evident.

Project 15-A Improved Delhi / Bangalore / DDGHM Kolkata
Project 15 D Dehli Class Destroyer

 

[Dillinger]

View attachment 9995

I suppose that's why it is Project 15A? Clearly, it is based on the project 15. See e.g. the stack arrangement, indicating it will use a similar four gas turbines powerplant of Russian origin.

The propulsion system similarities are a matter of conscious choice, we are not going to reinvent the wheel. That hardly makes it a causative agent for stating that the P-15A is a derivative of the Delhi class destroyers. In fact the former detracts from many design and construction practices that we have used in the past..that does not mean that we shall not bank on garnered experience. Both ships are poles apart in their capabilities, a detailed look at the air defense system present on the P-15A can make that clear. Or are you asserting that using the Zorya turbines on both the projects makes one the derivative of another. A curious conclusion to say the least. That would be akin to stating that two separate delta wing aerial platforms have been derived from each other and that it correlates to their comparative performances, akin to stating that the J-10's abilities would be marginally or at least not substantially better than the J-7s because both of them share the delta wing configuration. Parity or lack thereof cannot be established through such basic comparisons.

 

[Penguin]

The propulsion system similarities are a matter of conscious choice, we are not going to reinvent the wheel. That hardly makes it a causative agent for stating that the P-15A is a derivative of the Delhi class destroyers. In fact the former detracts from many design and construction practices that we have used in the past..that does not mean that we shall not bank on garnered experience. Both ships are poles apart in their capabilities, a detailed look at the air defense system present on the P-15A can make that clear. Or are you asserting that using the Zorya turbines on both the projects makes one the derivative of another. A curious conclusion to say the least. That would be akin to stating that two separate delta wing aerial platforms have been derived from each other and that it correlates to their comparative performances, akin to stating that the J-10's abilities would be marginally or at least not substantially better than the J-7s because both of them share the delta wing configuration. Parity or lack thereof cannot be established through such basic comparisons.

The propulsion is one point (hence I used e.g.). As for choice, the entirely new P17 uses a very different plant, with very different turbines. Overall dimensions P15 (Displacement:
6,700 tonnes standard, 6,900 tonnes full load, 163 m x 17.4 m x 6.5 m) and P15A(Displacement:
6,800 tonnes standard, 7,000 tonnes full load, 163 m x 17.4 m) are another. General layout yet another (see next post). Choice of armament yet another (SAM was initially VL Shtil rather than Barak 8, and the ELTA PAR also came later).

The comparison with the delta wing aircraft is false and incorrect, as we're not dealing with a random pair of delta wing configured planes, but rather 2 consecutive planes by the same designer and maker, more like F/A-18C/D and F/A-18E/D, or F-8 and A-7, or YB-35 and YB-49.

And, your reply conveniently leaves the question of IN's project numbering unaddressed...

So, you are saying P15A is a completely new design, totally separate from P15? Seriously?

Do note that you are the one talking about each ship's capabilities, which is a matter that I have made no reference to whatsoever in previous posts...

 

[Penguin]

 

[Penguin]

Much in the same way industry proposed 'project 21956' is really an Udaloy class 'redone'

 

[Dillinger]

You are basing this on similarity in dimensions and appearance to gauge the relative difference between the two platforms? I used the delta wing analogy to simply demonstrate that design similarities do not cogently lead to the conclusion that one platform is "based" on another. The fact that both platforms are indeed our products and the P-15A is the successor to the P-15 has already been addressed when I stated that we were not going to reinvent the wheel when it comes to design elements that are proven and do not lead to any severe performance penalties.

Can you not see the difference between the Fregat MAE radar and the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR radar? Do you assert that there is any parity between these two sensors when the latter is more than a generation ahead by the simple virtue of being an AESA radar? Even to elucidate the difference between the two systems with a modicum of detail would require considerable time and information-dense posts. The performance divide between the 3S90M and the Barak-8 is glaringly large. The difference in interception range itself is rather telling with even the upgraded Shtil-1s maxing out at 35Km and the Barak-8 maxing out at 70Km. The qualitative difference in command and control functions accrued from the EMCCA Mk4 on-board the P-15A are considerable. Do these seem to come of as cosmetic differences?

Certain select design similarities, retained for the purpose of risk amortization in the early stages of the project itself, do not provide substantive data to assert that the difference in the performance parameters of the two ships shall be anything less than significant. Was it not your purpose to advocate a conclusion contrary to this through your original statement?

 

[Penguin]

Can you not see the difference between the Fregat MAE radar and the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR radar? Do you assert that there is any parity between these two sensors when the latter is more than a generation ahead by the simple virtue of being an AESA radar? Even to elucidate the difference between the two systems with a modicum of detail would require considerable time and information-dense posts. The performance divide between the 3S90M and the Barak-8 is glaringly large. The difference in interception range itself is rather telling with even the upgraded Shtil-1s maxing out at 35Km and the Barak-8 maxing out at 70Km. The qualitative difference in command and control functions accrued from the EMCCA Mk4 on-board the P-15A are considerable. Do these seem to come of as cosmetic differences?

As pointed out before (did you pay attention?), you are confusing design (the ship itself) and capability (the sensor and combat systems it carries). When the P15A started out being designed, there wasn't even a Barak-8 being developed.... P15A ships are sitting and waiting in Mumbai for those newer systems - which were added in 'after the fact' - to be delivered.

Certain select design similarities, retained for the purpose of risk amortization in the early stages of the project itself, do not provide substantive data to assert that the difference in the performance parameters of the two ships shall be anything less than significant. Was it not your purpose to advocate a conclusion contrary to this through your original statement?

AGAIN (i.e. REPEATED): I ADDRESSED NEITHER THE ABSOLUTE NOR THE RELATIVE CAPABILITIES OF P15 and P15A. I ADDRESSED THE SHIP DESIGN. WHY DO YOU ASSUME I'' M TALKING ABOUT CAPABILITY (BESIDES, WHATS IT TO YOU IF I WERE!?)

You obviously read something into my posts that simply isn't there, and that is YOUR problem.
(Maybe next time ask about purpose rather than assume?)

What is it with you guys here at this forum .... soooooo tiresome these nationalistic hangups.

 

[Penguin]

... meanwhile, please explain P16 and P16A frigates to me: is one NOT a development of the other? Or P25 Khukri and P25A Kora corvettes for that matter. And how about P17 and P17A? How come it all of a sudden it would be different with P15 and P15A? I'ld really like to know.

P17 and P17A*

 

[eastwatch]

3. Thereafter, develop capability to secure a line Vyzag to Andaman Nicobar. Thereon PLAN and Indonesian Navy should take over our interests.

PLAN and Indonesian navy, and not BN by itself????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What kind of strategy is this? Can you clap with one hand? If not then tell us what kind of military alliance BD has made with Indonesia or PLAN? I am surprised at the naivety of your suggestion.

Why China or Indonesia should interfere with a mess that may be created by ourselves? International diplomacy that we can trust them to extend to put off the fire, but no reason to believe any of them will interfere directly with a BD-India naval war. It is too easy to express such an expectation which is not real.

 

[Bamboo Castle]

does anyone know if those two South korean Corvettes,according to AMI Internetional,are actually coming or is it just on the drawing board like the f-22b?

If, what BDforever said is true and if the two Type-53H2 Jianghu III really did arrive (I highly doubt though), then the F-22B you are talking about has arrived. Type-53H2 is F-22B.

 

[Allah Akbar]

we will deploy 100 wooden fishing trawlers with the torpedo for one indian destroyer.wooden fishing trawlers are low signature in radar. similar performance like the stealth.the same way the english deploy lots of ships for bismark the result is bismark under water now RIP bismark.RIP kolkatta class too

I never showed real combat but, I have some knowledge about it.

You must give respect to a good warship. British had to deploy over a dozen warships to sink one Bismarck warship. Why? Because that was a good warship, and that was real combat.

 

[Allah Akbar]

ty penguin. i see only get what i wanted to tell. everybody is so scared about that kolkata class. i know the steath tech doesn't mean its invisible.a stealth ship shows in radar like a smallship . like a cruiseboat or a big trawler.and yes when it will on its radar its no longer a stealth.most of the people believe stealth means invisible . There is no doubt that the kolkata class is a great ship,but it doesn't make no sense its unbeatable. @ares is too overconfident and that will take him underwater with his mightyship

Low signature doesn't mean invisible. If you put some Harpoon or similar missiles back onto the Hamilton class ship, and make good use of recce and targeting platforms, and wait for the right moment, there is no reason why you couldn't knock out a Kolkata class ship. It wouldn't be easy, but then again, what is? As soon as Kolkata switches on any of it's radar's, she's detectable by ECM at much greater ranges than possin invisble by radar. A sub can detect screw noise at very long ranges. Etc.

See what a Harpoon can do to a 4800 ton decommed Type 22 frigate (who's Sea Wolf could intercept 4,5" cannon shells):
http://www.defence.pk/forums/naval-...n-navy-blows-up-its-own-ship.html#post4428611

'Stealth' helps but doesn't make a ship immune to this: Warship Vulnerability
And the Kolkata is in essence still a revamped Delhi class, much like the Talwar is a revamped Krivak III: better than the original but still a revamped version, not an entirely new design (hence, my expectations of e.g. the Shivalik would be higher)



Over confidence gets you killed right quick....

WHECs are the size of Perry's (not exactly small) and at one point also carried Harpoon, Phalanx CIWS and triple ASW tubes with associated sensor fits.

 

[ares]

Low signature doesn't mean invisible. If you put some Harpoon or similar missiles back onto the Hamilton class ship, and make good use of recce and targeting platforms, and wait for the right moment, there is no reason why you couldn't knock out a Kolkata class ship. It wouldn't be easy, but then again, what is? As soon as Kolkata switches on any of it's radar's, she's detectable by ECM at much greater ranges than possible by radar. A sub can detect screw noise at very long ranges. Etc.

See what a Harpoon can do to a 4800 ton decommed Type 22 frigate (who's Sea Wolf could intercept 4,5" cannon shells):
http://www.defence.pk/forums/naval-...n-navy-blows-up-its-own-ship.html#post4428611

'Stealth' helps but doesn't make a ship immune to this: Warship Vulnerability
And the Kolkata is in essence still a revamped Delhi class, much like the Talwar is a revamped Krivak III: better than the original but still a revamped version, not an entirely new design (hence, my expectations of e.g. the Shivalik would be higher)



Over confidence gets you killed right quick....

WHECs are the size of Perry's (not exactly small) and at one point also carried Harpoon, Phalanx CIWS and triple ASW tubes with associated sensor fits.

'Confidence' and not 'overconfidence' is the term used when you know your capability and that of your enemy's.

Another fact is the bigger they are harder they fall especially if you do not have any credible air defence against the enemy.

This Hamilton class cutter might have hosted a harpoon missile sys , and torpedo tubes in addition to a Otobreda 76 mm gun ..but it does no more ..BN wants to commission it as a frigate by installing Chinese C-802 A and FM- 90 SAM ..which are obsolete at best by today's standards.
It by far pales away in front of weapons suit of Kolkatta class.

However if an actual war were to break out b/w Bangladesh and India..it is not Indian Navy which BN will be dreading but IAF and Indian Navy airwing, because absence of airwing of their own, nor a credible ship based SAM.

This not overconfidence but experience from past conflict. Where Indian Navy solely used it carrier borne aircraft to sink almost all Pakistani ships in Chittagong, Cox's Bazar , Port of Mongla and Khulna harbors.

 

[BDforever]

'Confidence' and not 'overconfidence' is the term used when you know your capability and that of your enemy's.

Another fact is the bigger they are harder they fall especially if you do not have any credible air defence against the enemy.

This Hamilton class cutter might have hosted a harpoon missile sys , and torpedo tubes in addition to a Otobreda 76 mm gun ..but it does no more ..BN wants to commission it as a frigate by installing Chinese C-802 A and FM- 90 SAM ..which are obsolete at best by today's standards.
It by far pales away in front of weapons suit of Kolkatta class.

However if an actual war were to break out b/w Bangladesh and India..it is not Indian Navy which BN will be dreading but IAF and Indian Navy airwing, because absence of airwing of their own, nor a credible ship based SAM.

This not overconfidence but experience from past conflict. Where Indian Navy solely used it carrier borne aircraft to sink almost all Pakistani ships in Chittagong, Cox's Bazar , Port of Mongla and Khulna harbors.

1. FM 90 first introduced in 1998 and C-802A in 2006, both are obsolete ? ! ! wow i did not know that, yeap @Penguin spotted on about overconfident
2. yes of course india has air superiority which is natural because india is big country with big economy. Anyway try to attack BD before 2023 if you want to or other wise it will be hard you to keep that air superiority. BD is going to introduce 5 layer air defence system all over the country, after that it will be shooting practice

 

[Zarvan]

1. FM 90 first introduced in 1998 and C-802A in 2006, both are obsolete ? ! ! wow i did not know that, yeap @Penguin spotted on about overconfident
2. yes of course india has air superiority which is natural because india is big country with big economy. Anyway try to attack BD before 2023 if you want to or other wise it will be hard you to keep that air superiority. BD is going to introduce 5 layer air defence system all over the country, after that it will be shooting practice

Air Defence can only support Strong Air Force without strong Air Force of at least 300 Fighter Jets Air Defense systems can't do much