India To Purchase Two More Israeli Surveillance Aircraft

[PARIKRAMA]

Well they've been wrong before

But I guess it would make sense to have maximum compatability for the P-15As and P-15Bs. They'll get something newer in their MLUs.

But what are your thoughts for the VSR going foreward? The IAC-1 seems to have set the precedent with the RAN-40L/MF-STAR combo.


It's coming from MDL itself so I would expect them to have the latest information, assuming all we know is correct- 64 BARAK-8 and 32 Brahmos is quite an upgrade over the P-15A.

Well RAN-40L is a costly one but probably more suited for bigger ships.. The biggest advantage LW-08 (RAWL-03 MK2) is bcz of the product being made in BEL
Source: RAWL 03 upgrade | Bharat Electronics Limited

So as you know indigenous % is important and so is also Make In India, unless RAN-40L also starts getting manufactured by BEL, the possibility of sporting it besides ACC is limited..

TBH I will again refer the dreadful SIPRI

Its showing just 01 procured as of now and that also way back in 2011

32 Brahmos and 64 barak8 just about sounds right.. Yes its a massive upgrade over 15A

 

[Abingdonboy]

Well RAN-40L is a costly one but probably more suited for bigger ships.. The biggest advantage LW-08 (RAWL-03 MK2) is bcz of the product being made in BEL
Source: RAWL 03 upgrade | Bharat Electronics Limited

So as you know indigenous % is important and so is also Make In India, unless RAN-40L also starts getting manufactured by BEL, the possibility of sporting it besides ACC is limited..

All true but clealry the LW-08 is starting to lose its potency compared to its contemporaries and I find it interesting that the IN fitted the Shivlaik class with the EL/M-2238 3D-STAR. I would be very surprised if the LW-08 finds itself on any IN vessel after the P-15Bs. The P-17As are certain to have something different and the P-18s also. I'm sure by the time the P-18 is in service (I'm thinking around 2024) the DRDO can have something cutting edge for their VSR, the MF-STAR is already being indigenised so it is certain to feature for the forseeable future on all major warships of the IN.

TBH I will again refer the dreadful SIPRI

Its showing just 01 procured as of now and that also way back in 2011

Fair enough, but if the RAN-40L was going to feature it would now only be from the P-17As onward and the first of them won't be in service before 2022 so it could be ordered in the next 24 months to feature on the P-17As but this is pure guesswork, I have no idea what VSR will be on the P-17As but am certain it won't be the LW-08.

 

[Immortan.Joe]

Before the publicly announced second stage speed of mach 5-7, i had written this back then

View attachment 296600 LR-SAM Successfully Tested From INS Kolkata | Page 6

Won't increase in speed reduce effective maneuverability?

Acceleration required for executing a turn is square to radius of the turn. Now keeping acceleration constant at 80G, if we double the speed of intercepting missile, then the minimum radius of the turn that it could be executed increase by 4 times.

Now Barak-8 was envisioned an interceptor missile that could intercept maneuverable supersonic AShM. Now in order to do it, it need ability to turn more tightly into the missile it is intercepting than the intercepted missile could change its direction.

In case on intercepting cruise missiles (which is head on interception) , I think lower speed of intercepting missile increases reliability of an intercept. By the same token, I think lower speed of this missile make it unfit to intercept aircraft as it would have pathetically small kill zone due to its limited ability to give chase.

I think this missile/system (Barak-8) has greater potential to become a land based cruise missile and PGM defense system, rather than a pure anti-Aircraft one. For AA role, its speed has to be increased to mach 4+ ,but it would degrade its AShCM role.

What do you think?

@Abingdonboy @DavidSling @gambit @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil

@MilSpec @Vauban @AUSTERLITZ @SpArK

 

[Penguin]

As of now P15B says this from tender documents

View attachment 296695
View attachment 296696
View attachment 296697
View attachment 296698

Source
View attachment 296699


So Brahmos 8 x 2 = 16 Serial no 25
SM Launch Module thats SAM module 16x2 = 32 Serial No 26
SM Launch Module thats SAM module 16x2 = 32 Serial No 39
Ak 630 - 4 nos Serial No 34
Saluting Gun - 02 Serial No 35
Mareech torpedo defense system 02 nos Serial No 38
Main Gun 01 Serial No 57


In short major missiles
8x2 = 16 Brahmos
8x4 + 8x4 - 32+32 = 64 Barak 8
4 AK 630
Main gun 127 mm Oto melara
Mareech ATDS 02 nos

Dont know whats saluting gun serial No 35 .. can it be RBU 6000?

@Abingdonboy @ni8mare @MilSpec @Penguin @AUSTERLITZ @SpArK @Taygibay @Vauban
I think all of you will find this information very interesting

EDITED: to change whats the saluting gun part.. Still unconfirmed

Essentially the same fit as 15A, IMHO
2x8 Brahmos
2x8 + 2x8 = 32 Barak 8.

It's a weird notation but, as I recall, so was that for the 15A. And we know how that turned out

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

I don't think it will be 32 brahmos.64 barak 8 is necessary however.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

2x8 + 2x8 = 32 Barak 8.

Sir you missed one small thing

Serial Number 26 SM Lnch Module (16 nos ) 2 set ----------------- 32 Missiles
Serial Number 39 SM Lnch Module (16 nos ) 2 set ----------------- 32 Missiles
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total SM Lnch Module --- 16 nos ------------ 4 set ---------------------64 Missiles

Thats 64 Barak 8s

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Won't increase in speed reduce effective maneuverability?

Acceleration required for executing a turn is square to radius of the turn. Now keeping acceleration constant at 80G, if we double the speed of intercepting missile, then the minimum radius of the turn that it could be executed increase by 4 times.

Now Barak-8 was envisioned an interceptor missile that could intercept maneuverable supersonic AShM. Now in order to do it, it need ability to turn more tightly into the missile it is intercepting than the intercepted missile could change its direction.

In case on intercepting cruise missiles (which is head on interception) , I think lower speed of intercepting missile increases reliability of an intercept. By the same token, I think lower speed of this missile make it unfit to intercept aircraft as it would have pathetically small kill zone due to its limited ability to give chase.

I think this missile/system (Barak-8) has greater potential to become a land based cruise missile and PGM defense system, rather than a pure anti-Aircraft one. For AA role, its speed has to be increased to mach 4+ ,but it would degrade its AShCM role.

What do you think?

@Abingdonboy @DavidSling @gambit @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil

@MilSpec @Vauban @AUSTERLITZ @SpArK

The 80G point comes in when it is executing a turn in sync with the hostile and keeping in pace as well as evading any other enemy defenses . As such Barak 8 i firmly believe will have almost approx 80% of its flight purely on Mach 2 speed. Its the last 15-20% which will see the second stage pulse motor accelerating it to Mach 5-7 speed in order to not let the enemy hostile use any more of evading measures and surprise it with quicker interception/lesser time to react.

Potentially the Barak 8 as an Anti Aircraft Missile needs higher speed no doubt and as you rightly pointed out around 4Mach or Mach 4.5 is more of the league of speeds it should ideally target. Owing to the fact that an aircraft can do max say 11G at very emergency maneuvers, the increase in speed can be done..

But a very important point to note is that Fighters at hi altitude will be detected much earlier and thus unless and of course the system sees a potential of more than 80% plus intercept probability based on threat assessment of updation based on speed and distance from the ship, i dont think it will initiate the firing and interception sequence. In simple words, the system is suppose to be not only just provide coverage but intelligently keep track to know what to intercept and what to let go..

Moreover Fighters will have max speed of around 2.5 Mach with all max afterburners and mostly jets around us around mach 1.6 (most jets) with afterburners.

The other method i see is a very lo flight path by the incoming hostile jet and that being detected later than a normal hi altitude fighter. In such a case by the time its detected the probability would have crossed 80% more likely and system would engage sure shot .. Owing to later detection and plane in Lo altitude flight, there is a more chance that the fighter wont be at very high speed as well as inability will be there to do too many evasive turns unless it comes up in altitude.

The question is whether IAI-DRDO will do it or not? I see an in between solution perhaps either increasing it from Mach 2 to say Mach 3 and using the same missile for AShM and AA modes. Unless, of course the intelligent system has an ability to sense the hostile as Aircraft or a missile to change modes of speed.... Or a Barak 8 missile gets divided for AShM and AA modes (seperate missile with diff speeds).

I see the first solution of Max 2.5- 3 Mach as the most probable solution for all the modes (AA and AShM)

For the record Akash speed is around Mach 2.5. So Barak 8 should do well with Mach 2 to Mach 3 speed...

OH BTW in my excel case i had considered just single stage speed not the second stage acceleration.. and i had said there later posts that doing that second stage boost to Mach 5-7 will decrease the times i had calculated further.. It was easier to consider flatter speed of Mach 2 of course..

 

[Penguin]

Sir you missed one small thing

Serial Number 26 SM Lnch Module (16 nos ) 2 set ----------------- 32 Missiles
Serial Number 39 SM Lnch Module (16 nos ) 2 set ----------------- 32 Missiles
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total SM Lnch Module --- 16 nos ------------ 4 set ---------------------64 Missiles

Thats 64 Barak 8s

No, I didn't miss that. But I recall having had a similar discussion of the 15A (either a ship tender, or a tender for a model of the ship) over a similar notation for that design, and that design ended up like the 15A we know today. Search PDF for the thread.

 

[Penguin]

Sir you missed one small thing

Serial Number 26 SM Lnch Module (16 nos ) 2 set ----------------- 32 Missiles
Serial Number 39 SM Lnch Module (16 nos ) 2 set ----------------- 32 Missiles
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total SM Lnch Module --- 16 nos ------------ 4 set ---------------------64 Missiles

Thats 64 Barak 8s

Found the thread First Project-15B Bangalore-class DDG hull : satellite pics | Page 6
It''s about the P15B model. See post 77, 83, 83, 102 onwards to around 140

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Found the thread First Project-15B Bangalore-class DDG hull : satellite pics | Page 6
It''s about the P15B model. See post 77, 83, 83, 102 onwards to around 140

This is as per the thread attachment
http://www.mazagondock.gov.in/newsite2010/pdfs/sb_pmt_aug13/Tender_no_1600000114.pdf

This is what i posted

Notice that in the attachment from the old thread after Brahmos the SM launch is 1 set of 16 nos (Sr no 2) whereas mine posted one is 2 sets (sr 26)
So originally the thread talked about
16 brahmos
48 VLSAM sites (32 barak 8 and 16 barak 1)


If i have to assume the make up of 15B its like this
16 Brahmos
32 Barak8
32 Barak1

or 16 Brahmos 64 Barak8

of course a satellite image will reveal much better

i found this

As of Jan 2015

 

[Ankit Kumar]

In case of India when we find it hard to fit more than 16 SAMs in a 3,500 ton ship ....

32 SAMs in a 7000 ton ship seems justified.

Don't even by mistake take a look at weaponry of Karmorta after viewing that of Saar 6.You may get a stroke .

PS:- Tons of Sarcasm intended.

 

[Masterhunter]

Ya SIPRI for LW-08

i am sure of 64 barak 8s.. I am yet confused for 16/32 Brahmos..

32 Brahmos is too much a number as usually a salvo of two (max three) of Brahmos with give u a sureshot hit on a vessel even a advance AD system. It will utilise it SAM cover even before that..

I think it will be 16 Brahmos +16. LACM( nirbhay).. Plus 60 barak 8/barak8ER...
Ideal Sam cover for a AD ship in a CBG shud be a bit higher..
32barak 8ER +32 barak 8 + 32 barak 1/maitri + 2 AK630/CIWS.. To give four layered defence..

 

[Abingdonboy]

32barak 8ER +32 barak 8 + 32 barak 1/maitri + 2 AK630/CIWS.. To give four layered defence..

For a ship that carries BARAK-8 I don't think there is much utility in carrying the Maitri (unless because of space constraints) given that the BARAK-8's deployment envelope begins at 500m.

 

[Masterhunter]

For a ship that carries BARAK-8 I don't think there is much utility in carrying the Maitri (unless because of space constraints) given that the BARAK-8's deployment envelope begins at 500m.

Yea it's because of space constraint only... I said it like this...
See till now we don't have a UVLS in which we can fit anything like Brahmos/nirbhay/barak8 ..neither we have capability to have quad pack SRSAM to increase number...
So maitri can be Installed 16+16 on a place where we have two AK630 is placed (like in Delhi)...
This will help in a good PDS+CIWS as last ditch effort if needed..

Also I am not I favour of having two helos... Instead that space should be used to install more missiles... We need to make Vizag class or may be P18 more as AD ships packed with missiles than using them as Multi purpose platforms...

Also, we need to make VL ASW rockets or missiles... That can be fired from UVLS

 

[Penguin]

View attachment 296771
This is as per the thread attachment
http://www.mazagondock.gov.in/newsite2010/pdfs/sb_pmt_aug13/Tender_no_1600000114.pdf

This is what i posted


Notice that in the attachment from the old thread after Brahmos the SM launch is 1 set of 16 nos (Sr no 2) whereas mine posted one is 2 sets (sr 26)
So originally the thread talked about
16 brahmos
48 VLSAM sites (32 barak 8 and 16 barak 1)


If i have to assume the make up of 15B its like this
16 Brahmos
32 Barak8
32 Barak1

or 16 Brahmos 64 Barak8

of course a satellite image will reveal much better

i found this

As of Jan 2015

I remain unconvinced. The notation remains ambiguous. I firmly believe (< my believe) that it will have 2x8 for Brahmos and Nirbhay plus 4x8 cells for Barak 8. This does not mean no changes relative to P15A:

Project 15B will retain the same hull as 15A Kolkata-class destroyers, but there will be significant changes in the superstructure that will improve the ship's stealth characteristics, it will incorporate a flush deck, include better acoustic signature and infrared signature reduction systems and more sophisticated weaponry such as: Nirbhay land-attack cruise missiles, supersonic anti-ship BrahMos and Barak 8-ER SAMs. They will also be capable of operating two helicopters simultaneously. Russia's Baltic Shipyard has been contracted to provide four sets of line shafts by 2017. Saint Petersburg's Northern Design Bureau was consulted during the design phase

Better superstructure shaping (lower RCS > more difficult to detect and track), better accoustic signature (more silent > more difficult to detect and track + better ASW), infrared signature reduction systems (> lower heat emissions e.g. exhaust spray cooling, thermal shielding > more difficult to detect and track)

Essentially, same layout and weapons/sensors outfit but with landattack missiles, longer range SAM substituted