Cruisers for the IN- A discussion

[uoftotaku]

Now in 2017 IN can logically go for Cruisers , at least 4 , with conventional diesel - electric propulsion ( for low installation & maintenance cost ). Equip them with S400 , Barrack 8 , Spyder & Akash QR SAM , CIWS , guttling guns , 32 BrahMos , 32 BrahMos II , 32 hypersonic Zircon anti-ship , Agni II , III & IV 8 each , 48 P - 700 Granit anti ship missile ( we are in MTCR NOW), 64 Dhanush( for land attack ) & space for Nirvoy Installation.For ASW RBU 6000 Smrech 2 & RBU 1000 Smerch 3 rocket pods .With them 4 main gun of 155 calibre & 16 nos of 76mm gun.

If we choose it to be close to 20000 ton then 8 F 35B & 6-8 ASW helicopter & 4 utility helicopter can be on board. Like 2 carrier battle group we can form to 2 cruiser battle group adding 3-4 submarine ,1 destroyer, 2-3 stealth frigate , 2 stealth corvettes , 1 amphibius assult ship & replanishment ships. The other 2 can be used to put an umbrella over carriers in combat situations.

Cruisers of given specs can bring hell upon any enemy. With the given fire power a single cruiser will be able to exterminate the entire PAK navy along with Karachi & Gwadar ports. For PLAN we would have 2 carrier battle group & 1 cruiser battle group free.

Why not throw in some death star laser, tractor beams and Gundam also while you're loading it?

Chillax...

 

[Adioz]

Now in 2017 IN can logically go for Cruisers , at least 4 , with conventional diesel - electric propulsion ( for low installation & maintenance cost ). Equip them with S400 , Barrack 8 , Spyder & Akash QR SAM , CIWS , guttling guns , 32 BrahMos , 32 BrahMos II , 32 hypersonic Zircon anti-ship , Agni II , III & IV 8 each , 48 P - 700 Granit anti ship missile ( we are in MTCR NOW), 64 Dhanush( for land attack ) & space for Nirvoy Installation.For ASW RBU 6000 Smrech 2 & RBU 1000 Smerch 3 rocket pods .With them 4 main gun of 155 calibre & 16 nos of 76mm gun.

If we choose it to be close to 20000 ton then 8 F 35B & 6-8 ASW helicopter & 4 utility helicopter can be on board. Like 2 carrier battle group we can form to 2 cruiser battle group adding 3-4 submarine ,1 destroyer, 2-3 stealth frigate , 2 stealth corvettes , 1 amphibius assult ship & replanishment ships. The other 2 can be used to put an umbrella over carriers in combat situations.

Cruisers of given specs can bring hell upon any enemy. With the given fire power a single cruiser will be able to exterminate the entire PAK navy along with Karachi & Gwadar ports. For PLAN we would have 2 carrier battle group & 1 cruiser battle group free.

This is what I read: Equip a 20,000 ton warship with every missile we have, will have, might have in our inventory and equip it with a flight deck and hangar to carry an aircraft that we may never buy.

Spoiler: Reactions of primers of Pakistan China and USA

From left to right: Sharif, Jinping and Trump

As for the single cruiser destroying the entire PN, read this:-

If we can take out their [Pak Navy's] submarines, the rest of their fleet will be relegated to their territorial waters, or maybe withdrawn to their shipyards. In such a case, two Kolkatta class destroyers will be enough to sink their entire fleet.
BTW, those Kolkatta class ships will be docked outside Dwarka when they take out the entire Pak fleet.

A cruiser is justified iff:-

1. We have enough Destroyers and Frigates to defend the number of Carriers and Cruisers we wish to field. (We don't have enough for the 5 carriers we plan to field)
2. We plan to install a radar and missile capability that cannot be installed on a ship as small as a Destroyer.
3. We have enough OPEX to justify fielding a Cruiser.(Which we don't)

In the future (post-2035) we might think of a Cruiser-class. But that is if we plan to mount some very powerful long range sensors on-board and if we are able to develop a Naval VLRSAM-cum-BMD-cum-ASAT system based on our current BMD programme.

We need to understand that making a large ship with multiple VLS costs a shipload of money, but filling those VLS with missiles that have a limited shelf life also costs a shipload of money. The other maintenance charges also cost a shipload. After all of that, we get a system that can exert dominance over a single place at one time. For the same amount of money and effort, we can today build 3-4 destroyers which can be at 3-4 places at the same time. Apart from USN, PLAN, Russian Navy, JMSDF and French Navy, all other Navies in the world can be intimidated with a single one of the Destroyers we now possess. The major Navies can also be deterred by multiple IN ships in IOR. The Cruiser we will need when we plan to confront PLAN (pun intended) in SCS.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

India has cruiser since it created Delhi class, Its a long range blue water ship with effective Anti-ship, Anti-sub and Anti-air capabilities so does with medium sized helicopters for SAR and other duties ..

Now, As per doctrine the Kolkata is modern avatar of Delhi class cruiser disguise under designation of destroyers, Asian Navies have tendency to disguise cruiser and carriers under designation of destroyers ..

======================
======================

INS Delhi was a Leander-class light cruiser built for the Royal Navy in 1933 as HMS Achilles,

Length: 555 ft 6 in (169.32 m)
Beam: 56 ft (17 m)
Range: 5,730 nmi (10,610 km)
Displacement: 7,270 long tons

========

One of the first imported cruiser, INS Mysore was a Fiji-class cruiser commissioned in the Indian Navy in 1957.

Length: 169.3 m (555.5 ft)
Beam: 18.9 m (62 ft)
Displacement: 8,530 tonnes standard
Range: 6,520 nmi ( 12,080 km ) at 13 knots (24 km/h)

========

Delhi Class..

Length: 163 m (535 ft)
Beam: 17 m (56 ft)
Displacement: 6,200 tons (full load)
Range: 5,000 mi (8,000 km)

========

Kolkata Class..

Length: 163 m (535 ft)
Beam: 17.4 m (57 ft)
Displacement: 7,500 tons
Range: 8,000 nmi (15,000 kms)

 

[Adioz]

A

India has cruiser since it created Delhi class, Its a long range blue water ship with effective Anti-ship, Anti-sub and Anti-air capabilities so does with medium sized helicopters for SAR and other duties ..

Now, As per doctrine the Kolkata is modern avatar of Delhi class cruiser disguise under designation of destroyers, Asian Navies have tendency to disguise cruiser and carriers under designation of destroyers ..

======================
======================

INS Delhi was a Leander-class light cruiser built for the Royal Navy in 1933 as HMS Achilles,

Length: 555 ft 6 in (169.32 m)
Beam: 56 ft (17 m)
Range: 5,730 nmi (10,610 km)
Displacement: 7,270 long tons

========

One of the first imported cruiser, INS Mysore was a Fiji-class cruiser commissioned in the Indian Navy in 1957.

Length: 169.3 m (555.5 ft)
Beam: 18.9 m (62 ft)
Displacement: 8,530 tonnes standard
Range: 6,520 nmi ( 12,080 km ) at 13 knots (24 km/h)

========

Delhi Class..

Length: 163 m (535 ft)
Beam: 17 m (56 ft)
Displacement: 6,200 tons (full load)
Range: 5,000 mi (8,000 km)

========

Kolkata Class..

Length: 163 m (535 ft)
Beam: 17.4 m (57 ft)
Displacement: 7,500 tons
Range: 8,000 nmi (15,000 kms)

I would not label our destroyers "Cruisers" based on displacement and blue-water capability alone. Our destroyers have weapons that are excellent in their class, but still are short ranged. Apart from that, there are capabilities like ASAT and BMD that our Destroyers do not posses.

Cruisers are supposed to be heavily armed major surface combatants around which an entire fleet can be based. These ships should be not only be capable of excellent air, surface and sub surface warfare but also have the capacity to work as the command ship of a fleet. A cruiser is capable enough to be the capital warship of a Surface Action Group. To the enemy, it should be as important a target as an aircraft carrier is.

Lets take a look at who has what:-

• Indian Destroyer: Kolkatta / Vishakhapatnam classes
  • Air Defence: 32 X Barak-8 90 km range.
  • Anti-Ship: 16 X Brahmos 450 km range.
• USN Cruiser: Ticonderoga class
  • 122 X VLS modular
• USN Destroyer: Arleigh Burke class
  • 96 X VLS modular
• Russian Cruiser: Kirov class
  • Air Defence: 96 X S-300M and 128 X Tor SRSAM
  • Anti-Ship: 20 X P-700 (planned to be replaced by 40 X Tsirkon)
• PLAN Destoryer: Type 52 D class
  • 64 X VLS modular

Other than our destroyers, these ships are heavily armed. A single one of these can overwhelm a formidable air defence shield. They can also provide a very good air defence cover single-handedly. They can also engage multiple well defended surface targets simultaneously.

The Atago-class, Arleigh Burke class or even the Type 52 D can be called a Cruiser Masquerading as a Destroyer. Ours certainly are not in that category.

If we ever get a ship that is:-

1. Very heavily armed.
2. Is capable of embarking the entire command staff of a fleet.
3. Has powerful longer-range weapons and multilayer defenses.
4. Has stronger onboard sensors.
5. Has BMD or ASAT capability.

then I might call it a Cruiser.

I may be wrong but I feel that the Indian Navy underarms its ships to bring down peace-time OPEX. I believe that there is some space left on-board most IN ships for addition of more VLS.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You are talking about specs of a heavy cruisers or heavy battle cruiser which are primarily meant for combat ..

A cruiser is defined by its size and long range ability, With fighting capability which can be useful for protecting itself and the fleet ..

A

I would not label our destroyers "Cruisers" based on displacement and blue-water capability alone. Our destroyers have weapons that are excellent in their class, but still are short ranged. Apart from that, there are capabilities like ASAT and BMD that our Destroyers do not posses.

Cruisers are supposed to be heavily armed major surface combatants around which an entire fleet can be based. These ships should be not only be capable of excellent air, surface and sub surface warfare but also have the capacity to work as the command ship of a fleet. A cruiser is capable enough to be the capital warship of a Surface Action Group. To the enemy, it should be as important a target as an aircraft carrier is.

Lets take a look at who has what:-

• Indian Destroyer: Kolkatta / Vishakhapatnam classes
  • Air Defence: 32 X Barak-8 90 km range.
  • Anti-Ship: 16 X Brahmos 450 km range.
• USN Cruiser: Ticonderoga class
  • 122 X VLS modular
• USN Destroyer: Arleigh Burke class
  • 96 X VLS modular
• Russian Cruiser: Kirov class
  • Air Defence: 96 X S-300M and 128 X Tor SRSAM
  • Anti-Ship: 20 X P-700 (planned to be replaced by 40 X Tsirkon)
• PLAN Destoryer: Type 52 D class
  • 64 X VLS modular

Other than our destroyers, these ships are heavily armed. A single one of these can overwhelm a formidable air defence shield. They can also provide a very good air defence cover single-handedly. They can also engage multiple well defended surface targets simultaneously.

The Atago-class, Arleigh Burke class or even the Type 52 D can be called a Cruiser Masquerading as a Destroyer. Ours certainly are not in that category.

If we ever get a ship that is:-

1. Very heavily armed.
2. Is capable of embarking the entire command staff of a fleet.
3. Has powerful longer-range weapons and multilayer defenses.
4. Has stronger onboard sensors.
5. Has BMD or ASAT capability.

then I might call it a Cruiser.

I may be wrong but I feel that the Indian Navy underarms its ships to bring down peace-time OPEX. I believe that there is some space left on-board most IN ships for addition of more VLS.

 

[Adioz]

You are talking about specs of a heavy cruisers or heavy battle cruiser which are primarily meant for combat ..

A cruiser is defined by its size and long range ability, With fighting capability which can be useful for protecting itself and the fleet ..

If so, then how do we define Destroyers? What about Frigates and Corvettes?

In the absence of universal clearly defined set of rules for classification, the only way to label a warship is by either accepting the name tags provided by the navy itself or by comparing all the capabilities of the warship in question to the ones in the enemy/competitor's warship fleet.

I cannot very well accept the tags that our Navy gives to its ships. My limitation in this area stems from my lack of knowledge about naval tactics in general and Indian Naval tactics and strategies in particular.

The only way I know is to compare all the capabilities of our ships against the ones they are supposed to go up against. So we will look up to PLAN, who will be looking up to JMSDF and USN. So I thought its better to compare with USN itself, and I chose the Tico and Burke classes as benchmarks.

But if I do disregard my lack of deep knowledge on Naval tactics and look at our ships in a purely reigonal context, then yeah, the Kolkata and Visakhapatnam classes are definitely Cruisers.

 

[Spectre]

In my opinion , multiple number of small , fast , networked , maneuvrable ships having a shallow draft , and decent range would be better . These ships will take advantage of their small size and inherent stealth nature to shoot and scoot . Since they r networked (as with all ships in the Navy ) , targets can be shared , missles launched by one ship can be guided by another . The Chinese cariers air wing ( if it is present at all ) will have to disperse in order to find there small surface combatants . Smaller ships can use smaller makeshift ports ( due to small draft ) , rearm refuel , replenish supplies and rejoin the fight . Hug the terrain of islands and use ground clutter to remain undetected . Basically they can use guerrilla tactics at sea.and punish the enemy .

Our islands can be defended using this strategy

And yes , btw won't a cruiser be too costly and too maintenance intensive . Also , saturated missile strikes r difficult to defend against let alone a Chinese anti ship ballistic missile (if it is really effective )


I have limited knowledge about the armed forces . I may be wrong . Please do feel free to correct me if u feel my view is incorrect

 

[ModrndyBttlsp]

Currently only four nations in the world operate warships classified as cruisers(United states, Russia, France & Peru)and only two are building new ones(Russia- one Slava Class,United States CG-X program)though many people believe the era of cruisers coming to an end due to the fact that modern destroyers like the INS Delhi are almost as heavily armed as cruisers i believe otherwise. a cruiser adds prestige to a naval fleet like no destroyer can it has more of a psychological fear effect on an enemy ship than a destroyer(example the arrival of the Pyotr velikly in venezuela created ripples in the USN like no Russian destroyer could ). i believe that the IN should enlarge the current Kolkata class design into a Nuclear powered cruiser of around 14,000 tonnes(Comparable to the Virginia Class), armed with around 20-30 Brahmos 2 and around 40 Nirbhay class CM's each.These vessels could become the Base for the heavy hitting power the IN needs to become a true Blue water navy . i would like you guys to express your views in this matter.

Project Zetaj :

Cruisers :
INS Narshingha, L=236m (total), missiles : 410
INS Arjun class, L=220m (total), missiles : 320
INS Brahmadev, L=? (planned), missiles : ?

Battleship :
INS Karna class, L=272m (waterline), missiles : 736(no Brahmos)

 

[Anikastha]

Project Zetaj :

Cruisers :
INS Narshingha, L=236m (total), missiles : 410
INS Arjun class, L=220m (total), missiles : 320
INS Brahmadev, L=? (planned), missiles : ?

Battleship :
INS Karna class, L=272m (waterline), missiles : 736(no Brahmos)

Battleship? Seriously dude. In this modern warfare you need something deadlier , highly maneuverable and it paints less on enemy radar.
Battleships are huge and outdated.
And about cruisers give me some time. I will investigate through it and present the Cruisers .

 

[Darth Malgus]

Battleship? Seriously dude. In this modern warfare you need something deadlier , highly maneuverable and it paints less on enemy radar.
Battleships are huge and outdated.
And about cruisers give me some time. I will investigate through it and present the Cruisers .

Instead i would prefer around 2 dozen submarines. Maybe start the construction of Scorpene submarines in mass.

 

[Anikastha]

Instead i would prefer around 2 dozen submarines. Maybe start the construction of Scorpene submarines in mass.

Yep for size of our coastline present number of dolphins aren't enough.

 

[kit2018]

Battleship? Seriously dude. In this modern warfare you need something deadlier , highly maneuverable and it paints less on enemy radar.
Battleships are huge and outdated.
And about cruisers give me some time. I will investigate through it and present the Cruisers .

The US actually brought back their mighty battle cruisers from storage .. the same ones in the movie "Battle ship" .. their newest Zumwalt is near battleship dimensions packed into a radar image of a fishing boat .. a large floating 10000+ class ship is something Indian Navy is probably going to acquire judging the way its latest warships are gaining tonnage

 

[Anikastha]

The US actually brought back their mighty battle cruisers from storage .. the same ones in the movie "Battle ship" .. their newest Zumwalt is near battleship dimensions packed into a radar image of a fishing boat .. a large floating 10000+ class ship is something Indian Navy is probably going to acquire judging the way its latest warships are gaining tonnage

Zumwalt is a destroyer. Its not even close to cruisers.