Indian Navy News & Discussions

[Dillinger]

I thought FAD was applicable to the Indian air force with their shoddy flying equipment.

My FAD is a bit different, dare to fly over the waves and be ready to die for it, all that which Varuna encompasses must be our element.

But then as I said, no fixed wing AEW so no love there. The Muricans are hard selling the E-2D for the Vishaal, ready even to let us put up EMALS (how that will work dunno, given that even nuc boat will struggle with the power requirement of a system like the EMALS).

 

[Chronos]

My FAD is a bit different, dare to fly over the waves and be ready to die for it, all that which Varuna encompasses must be our element.

But then as I said, no fixed wing AEW so no love there. The Muricans are hard selling the E-2D for the Vishaal, ready even to let us put up EMALS (how that will work dunno, given that even nuc boat will struggle with the power requirement of a system like the EMALS).

I do mean to ask you though, what is with the recent spate of submarine and aircraft explosions.

Lack of quality control?

 

[MilSpec]

Yet, this requires that the precise position of these system be known. That too is a sorting job that may not prevent a launch of the missile. In addition, the Chinese were advertising a C-803 based shore system with the ability to receive off board targeting.. say from a sensor system such as the ZDK-03.
That offers a rather unique tactical capability in having SSM systems sitting essentially silent electronically before being given coordinates to launch.

Let me put this in no unclear terms, the PN has NO answer to the Kolkata as such with its current force. When I say that I mean that there is no system within the PN that can match the Kolkata machine for machine, nor is there a system that can provide a silver bullet. What may work is a synergy of tactics by which a ship such as the Kolkata may be taken down. That synergy however stands on thin ground as it requires that those assets, and specifically the surface assets survive to be a part of that effect.

When your surface assets are going to have holes bored in them by the Brahmos, then there is no point in trying to include them in the equation to deny India sea space.

I have a suspicion that you might be underestimating he role of surface ships, as you are purely looking at them from defensive perspective.

The point is not about countering surface ships or Air arm or the submarine ships but the combination of them.
More importantly what would be actively denying Blockade, at say 800NM or larger. Offensive Consolidated battle groups for PN is the need of the hour. Each group with Missile Destoyers, Anti Sub Friggates.Corvettes, CM armed FAC's with Diesel electric subs. Atleast 6 of such OCB's with Maritime Air cover is needed to mitigate the risk of an effective blockade, Defensive posture even if watertight, invites offense, what PN lacks is offensive assets which will make IN think twice before deployment, and Yes Subs and Maritime CAP lets you do that, but still lacks severely in effective deploy able units in the role.

 

[Dillinger]

Assuming Barak 8's engagement range is 100 km, that still puts the massive Kolkata within firing range of a Exocet/C802/CM400......no?

Its 70Km, and the CM400 will have a hard time hitting the target with a Barak ramming right into it, AAW is meant to intercept inbound missiles as well as inbound aircraft, why else do you think we shelled that much money for specifically picking on the ungodly amount of lateral acceleration. High inbound speed means little in terms of a head on intercept, although if we attempted area defence then the Barak would be woefully unsuited for the task if it ended up in a tale-chase.

In its end-phase dive the CM will be running on its last leg even if it runs on a dual pulse motor (it is derived from a NLOS-BSM) and I have traced its lineage in the CM thread with details of end phase interception. Speed kills, but in today's world only when the speed is mated with a sea skimming in-bound since the radar horizon of even the best available sensors is limited to 25-35km at that cruising altitude (in fact a sea skimming mach 3 AShM will provide almost half the warning time as opposed to a Mach 5 lofted trajectory AShM).

Lastly, any aircraft launching the CM needs to get past the BARCAP of 29ks and Okoeye stationed 200nm (well beyond the CM's range) out from the CBG oriented at the most likely vector of attack (the JFT's limited combat radius does not allow for multiple vectors as it cannot loiter, move around, avoid, prod and then chose a vector hitherto uncovered, when aircraft with greater endurance appear along with the CM then the threat level will progress commensurately, a J-15 armed with the same would be a very bad foe to fight sans fixed wing and persistent AEW cover). All of this has been covered between Capt.Popeye, Oscar and me quite comprehensively in the concerned thread.

I do mean to ask you though, what is with the recent spate of submarine and aircraft explosions.

Lack of quality control?

For the IN, lack of any substantial funds made available for MRO while the quantum and pace of deployment is increasing year on year at an astonishing speed. The IN simply does not have the on-shore assets, the graded MRO system (graded as in qualified in terms of adequate spares stocked in inventory as per the vintage of vessels being operated), it has to berth its subs in the Mumbai harbor, it has to operate on batteries which are close to going boom without spares pouring in, sharing two spare batteries allocated for 6 boats or more.

Without planned expenditure (under panned heads rather than year on year ad hoc) and non lapse-able funds for the same and aggressively building up on-shore facilities (Kadamba is coming up, Project Seabird was FINALLY given the go ahead by the new NDA govt) things will not improve.

 

[danger007]

Why should India go to deep sea somewhere near coast of somalia or south Indian ocean when Pakistan is not even 100nm ? During Kargil war, India had already created a blockade and shown an example.

common dude don't bring speculated views... à while ago you claimed Chinese flanker.. now DF -21... IN don't need to come close to your ports. ..

 

[thrilainmanila]

the only thing pakistan can do is invite PLAN to gwadar and karachi to set up major naval bases there, thats the only thing we can do, Indias navy is way to good at this point and in the future, i'm not sure what we can do to deter it. the only thing we could do is get submarines from germany and have a really advanced SAM belt on our coast to stop the Indian navy from sending there aircraft to out coast,
and having Cruise missile batteries in multiple locations. In short were fucked if it comes to war any time in the near future. all our hopes are in the economy making massive improvements.

 

[Viper0011.]

At a $1 billion each this 7000 tonne warship is the most advanced and most costly in South Asia.
It carrys up to 72 barak SURFACE TO AIR MISSLES. getting an air strike even close will be enormously hard
Brahmos cruise missles means it can not only sink ships but attack land targets

Good that you are spending so many billions of $$$. Btw, what happens when the 72 missiles fired during a massive cruise missile attack?

 

[Contrarian]

Billion Dollar Ships can be brought down by few hundred thousand dollars worth of Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles.

I love those odds. Please build more of these TUBS for our Target practice....

Unbeknownst to simple minded folks, those billion dollar ships carry a high number of SAM systems, in certain ships they carry Fleet air defense SAM cover.

Good that you are spending so many billions of $$$. Btw, what happens when the 72 missiles fired during a massive cruise missile attack?

Nothing happens.
A single AAW destroyer carries over 72 LR-SAMs. That means long range fleet defense air cover.

And in any SAG - Surface Action Group, there is more than one AAW destroyer, not to mention all individual ships of importance/capital ships carry their own SRSAM.

 

[Donatello]

Its 70Km, and the CM400 will have a hard time hitting the target with a Barak ramming right into it, AAW is meant to intercept inbound missiles as well as inbound aircraft, why else do you think we shelled that much money for specifically picking on the ungodly amount of lateral acceleration. High inbound speed means little in terms of a head on intercept, although if we attempted area defence then the Barak would be woefully unsuited for the task if it ended up in a tale-chase.

In its end-phase dive the CM will be running on its last leg even if it runs on a dual pulse motor (it is derived from a NLOS-BSM) and I have traced its lineage in the CM thread with details of end phase interception. Speed kills, but in today's world only when the speed is mated with a sea skimming in-bound since the radar horizon of even the best available sensors is limited to 25-35km at that cruising altitude (in fact a sea skimming mach 3 AShM will provide almost half the warning time as opposed to a Mach 5 lofted trajectory AShM).

Lastly, any aircraft launching the CM needs to get past the BARCAP of 29ks and Okoeye stationed 200nm (well beyond the CM's range) out from the CBG oriented at the most likely vector of attack (the JFT's limited combat radius does not allow for multiple vectors as it cannot loiter, move around, avoid, prod and then chose a vector hitherto uncovered, when aircraft with greater endurance appear along with the CM then the threat level will progress commensurately, a J-15 armed with the same would be a very bad foe to fight sans fixed wing and persistent AEW cover). All of this has been covered between Capt.Popeye, Oscar and me quite comprehensively in the concerned thread.



For the IN, lack of any substantial funds made available for MRO while the quantum and pace of deployment is increasing year on year at an astonishing speed. The IN simply does not have the on-shore assets, the graded MRO system (graded as in qualified in terms of adequate spares stocked in inventory as per the vintage of vessels being operated), it has to berth its subs in the Mumbai harbor, it has to operate on batteries which are close to going boom without spares pouring in, sharing two spare batteries allocated for 6 boats or more.

Without planned expenditure (under panned heads rather than year on year ad hoc) and non lapse-able funds for the same and aggressively building up on-shore facilities (Kadamba is coming up, Project Seabird was FINALLY given the go ahead by the new NDA govt) things will not improve.

You're making too many idealistic assumptions. Barak's real time performance has yet to be seen, that's why i brought the CM400AKG up, since it is not combat tested as well. However, since the Chinese are putting it's idea forward as a anti-aircraft carrier weapon (which always is guarded by LR SAMs,) it seems plausible that CM400AKG can score a hit. Even if i missile hits the Kolkata, the job is done. You don't have to sink it, you have to disable it. Would IN be willing to risk it's main combatants for fire?

@Oscar

 

[Contrarian]

You're making too many idealistic assumptions. Barak's real time performance has yet to be seen, that's why i brought the CM400AKG up, since it is not combat tested as well. However, since the Chinese are putting it's idea forward as a anti-aircraft carrier weapon (which always is guarded by LR SAMs,) it seems plausible that CM400AKG can score a hit. Even if i missile hits the Kolkata, the job is done. You don't have to sink it, you have to disable it. Would IN be willing to risk it's main combatants for fire?

Barak 1 has been tested against every AShM in Indian Navy inventory by the Indian Navy, barring the PJ-10 BrahMos.

 

[Dillinger]

You're making too many idealistic assumptions. Barak's real time performance has yet to be seen, that's why i brought the CM400AKG up, since it is not combat tested as well. However, since the Chinese are putting it's idea forward as a anti-aircraft carrier weapon (which always is guarded by LR SAMs,) it seems plausible that CM400AKG can score a hit. Even if i missile hits the Kolkata, the job is done. You don't have to sink it, you have to disable it. Would IN be willing to risk it's main combatants for fire?

@Oscar

Of course, any system can fail, this works both ways for the missile and the SAM.

I didn't make assumptions as to the performance, as known, of the system, that is based on data collated and contributed by senior members such as Oscar and Secur.

The base line lateral acceleration required for intercepting a terminal phase ballistic missile as calculated by the USN when testing the SM-2 was rounded off at 60g, an inbound which is hurtling at high hypersonic velocity (mach 7-8 plus) being intercepted with a mach 3.5 interceptor is well and doable, the problem is that were the inbound to "shift" with aid of attitude thrusters (easier on liquid fueled inbound) then the interceptor would require an immense amount of lat acceleration to reorient itself. The Barak-8 has been specifically designed, as evidenced by its design choices- of extremely high lateral acceleration (80g compared to the Aster's 12g, and mind you the Aster is seriously meant for TBM interception in concert with a proper L-band solid state VSR) at the cost of absolute velocity and slant range, for anti-AShM role.

Of course this doesn't mean that the CM400AKG is a dud, if a competent AAW system could render all munitions irrelevant then no one would opt for said munitions, even when one moves from the amateur notion of platform centric warfare to the actual prevalence of net centric warfare one realizes the summation of capabilities at hand and any form of comparison only lead to likelihoods in terms of probable or improbable and not possible or impossible. So, yes anything could come to pass in terms of possibility, its just very improbable that a hostile flight will first avoid detection from the deployed Okoeye AEW, then penetrate the BARCAP, get a clean shot and that the munitions will strike home. Furthermore, systems like the AKG are not new at all, the USSR had a bolt to bolt copy of said system (and I mean bolt to bolt, shape, size, range, speed, even warhead weight) in the early 70s and yet after successful operational deployment of the system they abandoned it in favor of sea skimming supersonic AShMs due to the advent of high performance interceptors, and mind you the USSR was the original patron of the strategy of deploying a massive number of AShMs (air launched by the bears, coastal and submarine) in order to execute a saturation strike against hostile CBGs and SAGs.

 

[Kompromat]

@Storm Force - Another look at my undies thread by you. Typical!

China, Pakistan set for submarine deal by end of year, say officials - IHS Jane's 360

 

[Donatello]

Barak 1 has been tested against every AShM in Indian Navy inventory by the Indian Navy, barring the PJ-10 BrahMos.

But not against the adversary's weapons. Mock tests and flights are one thing, operating out in the open seas is another story. We all know what happened with the USS Cole or Israeli INS Hanit.

 

[Neptune]

How about the 7,000t TF2000 class AAW frigate.

 

[Donatello]

Of course, any system can fail, this works both ways for the missile and the SAM.

I didn't make assumptions as to the performance, as known, of the system, that is based on data collated and contributed by senior members such as Oscar and Secur.

The base line lateral acceleration required for intercepting a terminal phase ballistic missile as calculated by the USN when testing the SM-2 was rounded off at 60g, an inbound which is hurtling at high hypersonic velocity (mach 7-8 plus) being intercepted with a mach 3.5 interceptor is well and doable, the problem is that were the inbound to "shift" with aid of attitude thrusters (easier on liquid fueled inbound) then the interceptor would require an immense amount of lat acceleration to reorient itself. The Barak-8 has been specifically designed, as evidenced by its design choices- of extremely high lateral acceleration (80g compared to the Aster's 12g, and mind you the Aster is seriously meant for TBM interception in concert with a proper L-band solid state VSR) at the cost of absolute velocity and slant range, for anti-AShM role.

Of course this doesn't mean that the CM400AKG is a dud, if a competent AAW system could render all munitions irrelevant then no one would opt for said munitions, even when one moves from the amateur notion of platform centric warfare to the actual prevalence of net centric warfare one realizes the summation of capabilities at hand and any form of comparison only lead to likelihoods in terms of probable or improbable and not possible or impossible. So, yes anything could come to pass in terms of possibility, its just very improbable that a hostile flight will first avoid detection from the deployed Okoeye AEW, then penetrate the BARCAP, get a clean shot and that the munitions will strike home. Furthermore, systems like the AKG are not new at all, the USSR had a bolt to bolt copy of said system (and I mean bolt to bolt, shape, size, range, speed, even warhead weight) in the early 70s and yet after successful operational deployment of the system they abandoned it in favor of sea skimming supersonic AShMs due to the advent of high performance interceptors, and mind you the USSR was the original patron of the strategy of deploying a massive number of AShMs (air launched by the bears, coastal and submarine) in order to execute a saturation strike against hostile CBGs and SAGs.

Good post, but here you simply discussed about aerial threats. There will be sub surface combatants too. Searching for sub sea while keep guard up in the air will one hell of a job. It will be up to the IN to strategize and see how they implement their tactics in such a scenario. Like i have stated here multiple times, an electric submarine, lurking silently beneath at 1-2knots, and the massive Kolkata passing over it, would be ready to ambush. The submarines can hear you, they know your wake, but you can't hear him. Perhaps that's why PN is intending to place a 6 submarine order for newer SSKs, rather than surface ships.