Turkey can make everything about a warship except engine and gas turbine. dont know about india's capability.Just curious. Turkey and India - who warship technology is better?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Turkey can make everything about a warship except engine and gas turbine. dont know about india's capability.Just curious. Turkey and India - who warship technology is better?
But India has experience in building missile destroyers. they can also build submarines. even nuclear submarines.Turkey can make everything about a warship except engine and gas turbine. dont know about india's capability.
Just curious. Turkey and India - who warship technology is better?
Although NATO technology sharing is relatively convenient. but it also comes with 'uncertainty'. For example, key components, engines, and key materials may be embargoed at any time.Turkey makes everything in house from the turbines, to sensors and weapons. Indias sensors are French and Israeli and the weapons are Indo-russian (brahmos) or Israeli (Barak 8). Their turbines are Russian as well. With that said, I don't doubt the capability of the system out together by the Indian Navy. Kalkotas, Delhis, Talwars and Shivalik are good systems (at least on Paper). The 054A are probably in the capability realm as Shivalik and Delhis while the MILGEM is be around the capability of Talwars (although they will carry more firepower than the MILGEM, though they are significantly larger).
I agree with @Bilal Khan (Quwa) on where PN should look to go in the future with 3000t ships but I think it may need all the way up to 3000-4500t. I would ideally like them to look at the modified MILGEM-G/MILGEM blk 2 design, slightly enlarged for PN Needs much like Milgem/Jinnah mods. Instead of the planned 16 cell VLS, PN needs a 32 cells. It would still take the 16 AShM capacity at midship, which is hidden behind the walls of the ship, and instead of a single CIWS like Phalanx at the rear, it should be armed with 2 CIWS and a PDMS at the rear. The VLS should be large/deep enough to equip 24 HQ-9 and 8 cells reserved for G-40 (32 quad packed 40km range missiles from Turkey). Sensors should be based on CAFRAD and a new Genesis CMS.
Does any warship under 3000 tons carry long range SAMs in world now?Ideally, the future PN mainstay ship should be under 3,000 tons, but carry enough in terms of medium and long-range SAMs,
Is it so-called "long range SAM"?israeli saar with barak8
Type 52C/D are expensive and if ever acquired by PN will likely be the Flagships of the Squadron, I hope to see more Type-54(A/B etc. )
If PN uses the Type-54s as PAF does with F-16, then Type 54A will be the flagships and then expect more J class to form the squadron.
I believe the Pakistani Navy leader is very interested in type 052D.Indeed, thus if PN gets Type 052C/D type, it be couple of units, cost of acquiring plus routine operation and maintenance. As much as I would like to see Type 052C/D in PN Service, unless economy takes a dramatic upswing and momentum is sustained the probability is very slim.
Interestingly, in 2016 the Chinese sent three types of ships to Pakistan for exercises: the Type 039A/041 submarine, the Type 054A frigate, and the Type 052C destroyer. Of those ships, the PN bought two of them, leaving the third (052)...I believe the Pakistani Navy leader is very interested in type 052D.
View attachment 615359 View attachment 615363 View attachment 615364
Interestingly, in 2016 the Chinese sent three types of ships to Pakistan for exercises: the Type 039A/041 submarine, the Type 054A frigate, and the Type 052C destroyer. Of those ships, the PN bought two of them, leaving the third (052)...
The current PN roadmap is working towards two forces, each with 2 054A/P frigates and 4 light frigates in the 2,000 to 3,000-ton class (F-22P and/or MILGEM). So, a destroyer for each could make sense, especially if it has long-range SAMs and VL-LACM capability.
The interesting thing is they are going to carry Z-20 i.e Chinese black Hawk?Turkey makes everything in house from the turbines, to sensors and weapons. Indias sensors are French and Israeli and the weapons are Indo-russian (brahmos) or Israeli (Barak 8). Their turbines are Russian as well. With that said, I don't doubt the capability of the system out together by the Indian Navy. Kalkotas, Delhis, Talwars and Shivalik are good systems (at least on Paper). The 054A are probably in the capability realm as Shivalik and Delhis while the MILGEM is be around the capability of Talwars (although they will carry more firepower than the MILGEM, though they are significantly larger).
I agree with @Bilal Khan (Quwa) on where PN should look to go in the future with 3000t ships but I think it may need all the way up to 3000-4500t. I would ideally like them to look at the modified MILGEM-G/MILGEM blk 2 design, slightly enlarged for PN Needs much like Milgem/Jinnah mods. Instead of the planned 16 cell VLS, PN needs a 32 cells. It would still take the 16 AShM capacity at midship, which is hidden behind the walls of the ship, and instead of a single CIWS like Phalanx at the rear, it should be armed with 2 CIWS and a PDMS at the rear. The VLS should be large/deep enough to equip 24 HQ-9 and 8 cells reserved for G-40 (32 quad packed 40km range missiles from Turkey). Sensors should be based on CAFRAD and a new Genesis CMS.
Interestingly, in 2016 the Chinese sent three types of ships to Pakistan for exercises: the Type 039A/041 submarine, the Type 054A frigate, and the Type 052C destroyer. Of those ships, the PN bought two of them, leaving the third (052)...
The current PN roadmap is working towards two forces, each with 2 054A/P frigates and 4 light frigates in the 2,000 to 3,000-ton class (F-22P and/or MILGEM). So, a destroyer for each could make sense, especially if it has long-range SAMs and VL-LACM capability.