Make in India: L&T outguns global rivals to bag Rs 5,000-crore Indian Army deal

[Arya Desa]

Partnership with Samsung?

 

[MilSpec]

But only 16 brahmos can be fitted on these uvlm,also any destroyer/frigate required carry minimum antiship missiles and can't replace all these 16 brahmos with nirbhay.
One thing I am not understanding is that despite being comparable tonnage with US Burk class Kolkata carries only 32+16 vertical launched systems where as Burk can carry 96.

AB has a 20M beam compared to a 17.4M on kolkatta class. I am assuming based on the length and the beam, draft is smaller on the kokatta too, AB's 90 cell comes from a Mk41 mod2 - with 29 cell VLS forward and 61 on the Aft spar of the ship. What I wonder is if there is an internal magazine to resupply the UVLM.

 

[surya kiran]

What I wonder is if there is an internal magazine to resupply the UVLM.

I remember in another discussion @Penguin saying this is not possible. And he had posted some pics with respect to the same.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

If you're talking about the baraks, comes with what you see.

 

[Penguin]

What I wonder is if there is an internal magazine to resupply the UVLM.

No, there isn't: that would negate the entire advantage of having VLS relative to magazine fed single or twin rail launcher(s)

 

[ni8mare]

kamorts hull platform being used as 8x2 Brahmos UVLM with small 32 cell Shtil module and retaining the 533mm torp tube would compliment the Missile boat Idea pretty well. Could even match Talwar class Destros. Or even an saryu class OPV with 8 cell UVLM and a 16 cell Shtil.

instead of going for Shtil we have to find smaller solution ....shtil is quite big and heavy both kamorta and saryu class don't have space for 32 and 16 shtil sam .....some thing like CAMM will be good which is compact and low weight

I don't how you can put 16 and 8 brahmos in kamorta and saryu ......brahmos ng might be not the present form

Nirbhay is 6m in length,

6m without booster with booster its 7.5 m so yeah it can be in used in UVLM

It will be even better when hypersonic Brahmos 2 and/or NG-Brahmos(mini) replaces Brahmos1. And the surface fleet gets long range land assault capability with Nirbhay blocks. And possible long range, 200-300 km SAM, that DRDO is developing under their "missile autonomy mission".

It's only just began really.





For sure, for it's tonnage, they carry fewer sams and assault missiles compared to it's contemporaries. They also left a lot of space between LRSAM and the Brahmos missiles. Surely they'll add more, at least I think.

They could've put another 16 Baraks there.(?)

Even in the upcoming Vizag class, this isnt changed for some reason.

It's disappointing, but I dont know their planning behind it.

instead for going for more B8 ....it will more useful to go for more 16/24/32 CAMM/Maitri and 16/24/32 Very long range theatre area defence SAM like what drdo trying to Long-range SAMs, cruise missiles for all platforms: Avinash Chander - The Hindu
Mr. Avinash said DRDO would like to compete with the best in the world and develop long-range SAMs of 300 km range and air-to-air missiles with more than 100 km range.

 

[Zarvan]

Turkish Artillery Gun same as K-9 as for features of M-109 A told in article they are wrong

 

[ni8mare]

Turkish Artillery Gun same as K-9 as for features of M-109 A told in article they are wrong

M-109 is not turkish but american SPH.....where as K9 is a south korean..both are different

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

I was bored at work and loking at INS kochi specs, looking into the Frigates and destroyers of IN, I was in awe of the offensive firepower these puppy's have, shivalik and Talwar class are almost destroyers, got me thinking about the kamorts hull platform being used as 8x2 Brahmos UVLM with small 32 cell Shtil module and retaining the 533mm torp tube would compliment the Missile boat Idea pretty well. Could even match Talwar class Destros. Or even an saryu class OPV with 8 cell UVLM and a 16 cell Shtil.

Kamorta will not have brahmos as brahmos is costly and Kamorta is pure ASW ship as per IN doctrine.Kamorta's large size is not to pack more huge weapon load but increase endurance of ship so it can act as blue water escort ahead of CBG looking for enemy subs.Kamorta will have i think 24 or 32 maitri SAM.Or if that project doesn't happen barak-1 for point defence.
A kamorta hull used as a guided missile frigate is an interesting idea though.Successor to kora class.However i'm quite sure shtil won't be used on any new ships except maybe 3 more talwars and upgrading the old shtil with VLS ones.
Saryu will probably have brahmos,and shipyard that makes these ships already offered to integrate them.But not shtil.

It will be even better when hypersonic Brahmos 2 and/or NG-Brahmos(mini) replaces Brahmos1. And the surface fleet gets long range land assault capability with Nirbhay blocks. And possible long range, 200-300 km SAM, that DRDO is developing under their "missile autonomy mission".

It's only just began really.





For sure, for it's tonnage, they carry fewer sams and assault missiles compared to it's contemporaries. They also left a lot of space between LRSAM and the Brahmos missiles. Surely they'll add more, at least I think.

They could've put another 16 Baraks there.(?)

Even in the upcoming Vizag class, this isnt changed for some reason.

It's disappointing, but I dont know their planning behind it.

Kolkata class has enough space to accomodate twice the current load of barak-8s.At least 64 VLS cells can be put there.I think cells will be added during mid life refit.Nirbhay will also be added most likely.

 

[Argon Prime]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-F5vnPb-rKnQ/U7-2MCKzuuI/AAAAAAAAWyA/0fAU9P3Pa2g/s1600/DSC_0163.JPG

@Water Car Engineer ,@MilSpec , Guys,just look at the portions where forward and aft missile bays are located and also around the platform where the twin RBU 12000 are placed,see how much space is left underutilized??There are enough place for at least a further 60 Barak 2 cells along with 8-12 Brahmos UVLS!!

instead for going for more B8 ....it will more useful to go for more 16/24/32 CAMM/Maitri and 16/24/32 Very long range theatre area defence SAM like what drdo trying to Long-range SAMs, cruise missiles for all platforms: Avinash Chander - The Hindu
Mr. Avinash said DRDO would like to compete with the best in the world and develop long-range SAMs of 300 km range and air-to-air missiles with more than 100 km range.

Since India does not face any ballistic missile threat,emanating from the sea,therefore there remains no need to equip the IN surface ships with such heavy and big theater missile defence interceptors,which would be more or less useless against inbound sea skimming anti ship cruise missiles,which IN ships are expected to face in immediate future.Barak 2,with its 90 km range and its superb horizontal acceleration of 64 g (later,the ER with 140-160km range) and its light weight will be the ideal defence against a multitude of threats including manned fighters,cruise missiles and also tactical ballistic missiles.
And as for the QRSAM is concerned,I think the best course of option would be to turn the existing Astra MkI into a QRSAM,by adding a booster and retractable fins,which will potentially give it the capability to engage targets out to a distance of at least 35-40 km,and therefore can act as both an MRSAM and QRSAM at the same time.This will be a much better option than to go for a new development like the Maitri QRSAM,will reduce the logistical trails as same missile components can be used with fighters,making the whole system cheaper to operate and at the same time,will have longer target engagement range than Maitri.And if the DRDO and Navy can show some far-sight of developing a Mk41 type VLS system,then a single cell will be able to carry four such missiles,I think it's high time IN sits with DRDO and pulls their socks up to sort out this mess of useless duplication of technologies,which serves no purpose other than delaying system inductions and complicating a problem,for which much simpler and more effective solutions are already in place!!

 

[ni8mare]

Since India does not face any ballistic missile threat,emanating from the sea,therefore there remains no need to equip the IN surface ships with such heavy and big theater missile defence interceptors,which would be more or less useless against inbound sea skimming anti ship cruise missiles,which IN ships are expected to face in immediate future.Barak 2,with its 90 km range and its superb horizontal acceleration of 64 g (later,the ER with 140-160km range) and its light weight will be the ideal defence against a multitude of threats including manned fighters,cruise missiles and also tactical ballistic missiles

So according to you we should always play defensive role instead of offensive-defensive .......instead of taking out the aircraft or making damage to enemy we should just shoot the coming AShm and run out of B8.....and then enemy come up with more AShm and shoot the sitting duck called INS kolkata..nice logic bro

What i don't understand is that why people are so fetish about shooting down AShm ?

what the range of B8?............mere 90 km............. what it gonna do ?nothing ...............our enemy has SOW of more than 200km so what IN gonna do with 90 KM B8 ? shoot couple of AShm and run out of B8 then what?

Or is it not better to have a 200 KM + and shoot down the hostile aircraft before it empty its belly.......more what if PN gets SU-35 or J-11 then what ?

who said that IN dont face any ballistic missile threat,emanating from the sea??..............doesent chinese is not have DF-21.......lets say it does work then what ?

I never said that in place of B8 ............VLRSAM be used but both should be just like AB uses ESSM and SM-6 together

And as for the QRSAM is concerned,I think the best course of option would be to turn the existing Astra MkI into a QRSAM,by adding a booster and retractable fins,which will potentially give it the capability to engage targets out to a distance of at least 35-40 km,and therefore can act as both an MRSAM and QRSAM at the same time.

Presently there is no Maitri or VL astra ..............and Astra can not be used in its present design its bulky and heavier and does not have fins like in SYPDER to intercept AShm

A design needed to develop but using astra core system like seeker dual pulse motor etc
this is what MICA VL looks like

this is what CAMM looks like

this is what SYPDER looks like

See theirs design and specs you will to know about why astra VL cannot be used

This will be a much better option than to go for a new development like the Maitri QRSAM,will reduce the logistical trails as same missile components can be used with fighters,making the whole system cheaper to operate and at the same time,will have longer target engagement range than Maitri.And if the DRDO and Navy can show some far-sight of developing a Mk41 type VLS system,then a single cell will be able to carry four such missiles,I think it's high time IN sits with DRDO and pulls their socks up to sort out this mess of useless duplication of technologies,which serves no purpose other than delaying system inductions and complicating a problem,for which much simpler and more effective solutions are already in place!!

this is i agree with you instead of going different and duplication of work go with one for tri-services......

 

[Argon Prime]

So according to you we should always play defensive role instead of offensive-defensive .......instead of taking out the aircraft or making damage to enemy we should just shoot the coming AShm and run out of B8.....and then enemy come up with more AShm and shoot the sitting duck called INS kolkata..nice logic bro

Well clearly you do not have got the slightest of idea of what you are talking about,do you now??Ok,first thing first - you are simply deluding yourself when you believe that a small low powered radar,like that on-board a SAM,with a antenna diameter of no more than 16-30 cm,can defeat the powerful escort jammers the modern strike fighters come equipped with.
Secondly,when you are trying to intercept an inbound sea skimming cruise missiles,or a fighter aircraft that can make high alpha maneuvers,lateral acceleration the interceptor can pull, becomes the determining factor between a hit and a miss.And in this case,simply having a higher slant range will not count for SH!T unless of course the interceptor can pull high lateral acceleration.And the the so called long range interceptors,like the S 300PMU2 or the SM2 can not do the same,because they had to sacrifice agility for range,since more range means adding more fuel,which adds to its mass and size,increasing the air drag and all these accounts to a reduced agility.But then again,these missiles were never designed to be used against manned fighters or sea-skimming cruise missiles,rather they were developed as defenses against high altitude strategic bombers,recon air crafts and tactical ballistic missiles.They had developed other missiles for the role of intercepting cruise missiles and manned fighters.
And that's where missile like Aster 30 or Barak 2 come in.The Barak 2 can pull lateral acceleration of more than a hopping 60 g!!The highest known so far!!Why??Because it was specifically designed to combat a particular threat,that of inbound supersonic highly maneuverable AShMs,tactical ballistic missiles and manned fighters too.And besides,the ER version is already under development with reported intention of having a range of more than 160 km,which should be more than enough considering the fact that countries soon will become deploying low observable strike fighters,making longer range detection and tracking increasingly difficult.
So,after all said and done,if you want your warships to carry such missiles which will be more or less useless against the threats they are more likely to be faced,go ahead,knock yourself out champ.But too bad,the professionals won't seem to be agreeing with your 'logic'.

What i don't understand is that why people are so fetish about shooting down AShm ?

That's because you do not have a clear idea about the topic at hand,no offense.

what the range of B8?............mere 90 km............. what it gonna do ?nothing ...............our enemy has SOW of more than 200km so what IN gonna do with 90 KM B8 ? shoot couple of AShm and run out of B8 then what?

Yes,that's pretty much all they can do for the time being,considering the gigantic leap that has been achieved in electronic warfare,with the tiny winy radars (seekers if you may) to overcome and get past the powerful Escort jammers the enemy strike fighters will come equipped with and also due to the lack of good lateral acceleration capabilities of the heavier long range SAMs of today.
And besides,you should take a look at the defences fielded by the first world countries against the type of threat we are discussing - Like the MBDA Aster 30 or the ESSM or the Shtil variants, fielded by Russians.
If the so called super long range SAMs had been a 'one size fits all' type of solution to every threat there is,then there wouldn't have been any necessity to go through all those pain and expenses of developing and deploying such medium range SAMs.Got it??

Or is it not better to have a 200 KM + and shoot down the hostile aircraft before it empty its belly.......more what if PN gets SU-35 or J-11 then what ?

Of course it would have been better,but sadly that isn't the case,not yet at least.The SM6 looks promising though,but its effectiveness against high end strike fighters still remains questionable at best.

who said that IN dont face any ballistic missile threat,emanating from the sea??..............doesent chinese is not have DF-21.......lets say it does work then what ?

Wow!!I did not know that there is a sea between India and China!!Or did we just shifted our entire country in the middle of the Pacific,so as to save ourselves from our annoying Western Border??
Frankly speaking,you need to brush up your knowledge of Geography.Wait,do you even recon the meaning of the phrase - "threat emanating from the side of the sea"??If not,then in that case,I would suggest you to brush up your knowledge on English.
And if you meant to say that PLAN might fire a DF-21D against a ship,then well,there ain't no PLAN ship that come equipped with the said missile.So in this case,I would suggest you to brush up your knowledge about this very subject we are discussing now.

And lastly,all these talks about an anti ship ballistic missile is nothing but pure hogwash.Even the Russians and Americans could not do it,and somehow they managed to overcome the multitude of problems just like that??!!Gimme a break!!And how do you know the Marak 2 can not counter the threat of a tactical BM??Even the older Akaash can do the same in idea situation.

I never said that in place of B8 ............VLRSAM be used but both should be just like AB uses ESSM and SM-6 together

And when did I say you said that??But in such a case,I would rather put more numbers of Barak 2 (later ER) along with VL Astras,quad packed into a Mk41 type VLS arrangement.

Presently there is no Maitri or VL astra

Thanks Mr Obvious,as if we did not know that already.

..............and Astra can not be used in its present design

That's just one of your opinions,every one has got em.Do not try to pass it as a fact,boyo.

its bulky and heavier

ARE YOU SH!T KIDDING ME BOY??!!Ok,enough of your unsubstantiated claims,lets stop for a moment to compare the facts,shall we??

Astra :
Weight 154 kg
Length 3570 mm
Diameter 178 mm
Flight ceiling 66,000 ft
Speed Mach 4.5+
Range 110 km head on when launched from an altitude of 15 km,44 km when fired from an altitude of 8 km.
Lateral Acceleration +40 g

Derby :
Weight 118 kg
Length 3620 mm
Diameter 160 mm
Speed Mach 4
Range 50 km head on

ESSM :
Weight 620 lb (280 kg)
Length 12 ft (3.66 m)
Diameter 10 in (254 mm)
Operational range 27nm+ (50km+) [This is range when used as SAM,can't comment on the potential air-air range)
Speed Mach 4+

CAMM :
Weight CAMM: 99 kg
CAMM-ER: 160 kg (<250 kg, missile with canister)
Length CAMM: 3.2 m
CAMM-ER:4.0 m
Diameter CAMM:166 mm
CAMM-ER:190 mm
Operational range
CAMM: <1–25+ km
CAMM-ER: <1–45+ km
Speed Mach 3 (1,020 m/s)

So if the vastly bulkier ESSM can be quad packed in the Mk41 VLS cells,then I see no reason why the same can not be done with the Astra MkI in its present form,especially when it demonstrates very similar or even better performance capabilities in different categories compared to the Derby.So again stop pulling arguments out of thin air,which you can substantiate with hard facts.

and does not have fins like in SYPDER to intercept AShm

SAY WHAT??!!ARE YOU FUCKKING KIDDING ME??!!Take a look at this and inform yourself you delusional fool!!

See them large fins??Those are what that gives the Astra such a high g turn rate.And that's not it,there are also plans to fit thrust vectoring at a later stage.

A design needed to develop but using astra core system like seeker dual pulse motor etc

this is what MICA VL looks like

this is what CAMM looks like

this is what SYPDER looks like

No,the present design is already quite agile with a lateral acceleration of 40+ g,which again makes it one of the most maneuverable BVRAAM in its class.And besides,it has got twice the range of the ones you mentioned at a fraction of extra weight,barring the CAMM ER.But hey,as we can see from the above spec charts,it's clearly evident that CAMM ER is significantly bulkier and heavier than the Astra MkI is in its current form!!So what the hell was your point exactly??

Oh,and as for seekers,DRDO has already developed,miniaturized and tested a plethora of different RF and IR seekers for different missiles,so seekers won't be a big problem now.

See theirs design and specs you will to know about why astra VL cannot be used

Oh I did see those specs,in fact I went farther than that and took the trouble to post them right here,so that others may see as well.Only thing I found out by looking at those spec charts is your epic comprehension failure and your lack of will to follow the mantra of practicing what one preaches.

this is i agree with you instead of going different and duplication of work go with one for tri-services......

Good.

 

[Penguin]

Kolkata class has enough space to accomodate twice the current load of barak-8s.At least 64 VLS cells can be put there.I think cells will be added during mid life refit.Nirbhay will also be added most likely.

The original P15A model (pre-Barak 8) only had 2x24 VL Shtil, essentially replacing the 2x Single rail launcher, each with magazine capacity of 24 missiles. It doesn't show VL Barak 1 but 2 pairs of AK630. (Note: newer Talwar's and Russian navy equivalents have also settles on a mix of VL Shtil and 2 single AK630). Models with Barak 8 have consistently had 2x16 of these missiles. And no closer in missile either, just pairs of AK630. So, while the design could probably accommodate retrofitment of a compact close in missile system, replacing 1 AK630 of each pair, I'm not quite sure this is the intention. Likewise, the design can probably host 2x16 additional Barak-8. However, I think the choice for going down to 2x16 from 2x24 is deliberate (perhaps a cost saving measure?) and refitting with additional VLUs is not a given. Remember, what we've seen so far for P17A impressions has exactly half the missiles fit of Brahmos and Barak 8 of the P15A, just like P17/Talwar has half that of the P15 (although Talwar batch 1 and P17s have inner layer SAMs).

 

[Argon Prime]

The original P15A model (pre-Barak 8) only had 2x24 VL Shtil, essentially replacing the 2x Single rail launcher, each with magazine capacity of 24 missiles. It doesn't show VL Barak 1 but 2 pairs of AK630. (Note: newer Talwar's and Russian navy equivalents have also settles on a mix of VL Shtil and 2 single AK630). Models with Barak 8 have consistently had 2x16 of these missiles. And no closer in missile either, just pairs of AK630. So, while the design could probably accommodate retrofitment of a compact close in missile system, replacing 1 AK630 of each pair, I'm not quite sure this is the intention. Likewise, the design can probably host 2x16 additional Barak-8. However, I think the choice for going down to 2x16 from 2x24 is deliberate (perhaps a cost saving measure?) and refitting with additional VLUs is not a given. Remember, what we've seen so far for P17A impressions has exactly half the missiles fit of Brahmos and Barak 8 of the P15A, just like P17/Talwar has half that of the P15 (although Talwar batch 1 and P17s have inner layer SAMs).

Hmm..good point.But still,there are plenty of unused spaces on-board each and every new IN ships,wonder why.

 

[#hydra#]

Hmm..good point.But still,there are plenty of unused spaces on-board each and every new IN ships,wonder why.

May be to provide more spece for crew.