India's largest naval destroyer INS VISAKHAPATNAM

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by SREEKAR, Apr 16, 2015.

  1. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,395
    Likes Received:
    21,269
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    No, it's for 20 (or 25 if luck is better) destroyers.
    .....................
     
  2. tsunami

    tsunami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2015
    Messages:
    987
    Likes Received:
    2,001
    Can you post details of Project 18??
     
  3. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,395
    Likes Received:
    21,269
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    this is what an integrated mast looks like -

    [​IMG]

    It won't have a rotating array.

    Some info from what a conversation with Prasun K. Sengupta yielded -

    > It's hull could be similar to P-15A/B designs, but with much-refined flush deck and stealth features.
    > It will have a fully Integrated Mast (all radars, sensors, comm links etc. housed within one big mast)
    > Will be able to carry upto 32 Nirbhay-type LACMs in dedicated cells.
    > Atleast 16 AShMs and upto 64 SAMs would be there (total around 112 VLS cells for missiles).
    > Likely to use BrahMos-II and Barak-8ER
    > Electric propulsion concepts could be put to use, similar to what's on Type-26 Global combat ship.

    Still too early to speculate any further.
    Though specs from some other source (can't authenciate):
    Displacement: 9,000 tonnes
    First launch: 2028
    Among the all, getting a railgun for such operation is most optimistic. We are still in early stages of it. Though, India can have something substantial in lasers.
     
  4. Indibomber

    Indibomber Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2015
    Messages:
    583
    Likes Received:
    1,013
    https://topwar.ru/138074-rossiya-pomogla-indii-postroit-esminec.html

    Military ReviewArmamentNavy
    Russia helped India build a destroyer
    March 19, 2018
    [​IMG]

    INS Visakhapatnam

    Visacaptam ... Viscatham ... In general, it does not matter. Destroyer with the onboard number D66, the head ship of the type 15-Bravo of the naval forces of India. The year of the launch is 2013, the launch on 2015, the commissioning is expected in 2018.

    INS Visakhapatnam was designed by the Office of Naval Research of India with the participation of specialists from the Northern Design Bureau (St. Petersburg).


    Power plant - gas turbine, combined, type COGAG - two independent turbines for each propeller shaft. The ability to disable one of the turbines on the economic path improves fuel efficiency (since at full load the efficiency of the gas turbine is higher than in the 50% power mode). Two M36E units (4 gas turbines, two reducers) manufactured by Zorya-Mashproekt (Ukraine) are used as the main engines.

    The shafts of the propeller shafts are made at the Baltic plant (St. Petersburg).

    As part of auxiliary power equipment, diesel engines manufactured by Bergen-KVM (Norway) are used; four "Wärtsilä" generator sets WCM-1000 (Finland) driven by Cummins diesel engines KTA50G3 (USA).

    The hull of the ship is made at the shipyard "Mazagon Dock Limited" (Mumbai).

    The most notable innovation of the type 15B destroyer is its network centric BIUS, which allows for high situational awareness for each combat post. In addition to the basic functions of the combat control system (analysis of incoming information, classification and assignment of priorities, selection and preparation of weapons), the new version provides automatic distribution of energy between the ship's systems.

    The Israeli IAI "Elta", with the limited participation of Indian specialists (Bharat Electronics) and the well-known European company "Thales Groups", was engaged in the creation of the radar complex and detection facilities for the Indian destroyer.

    [​IMG]

    The destroyer of the previous type 15-Alfa (Calcutta), apparently identical to the destroyers 15-Bravo


    The Israelis offered a multifunctional radar EL / M-2248 MF-STAR for the review of airspace and control of missile weapons. According to the developer, the use of active phased antennas improves the effectiveness of the MF-STAR radar when detecting low-noticeable targets in a complicated interference situation. To counter the radio interception systems, LPI (low probability of signal interception) technology is used, in which the learning frequency is tuned 1000 times per second. In addition to the basic functions, the radar can be used to adjust the artillery fire by bursts from falling projectiles.

    The manufacturer pays attention to the small mass of the radar - consisting of four AFAR antenna posts together with the below deck equipment weighs only about 7 tons.

    The only controversial aspect of the Israeli radar is its operating range (decimeter waves, S-band). This allowed to increase the detection range and eliminate the influence of weather conditions, in comparison with similar systems operating in the centimeter wave band (APAR, SAMPSON, OPS-50). But, proceeding from the world practice, such a decision should negatively affect the accuracy of accompanying high-speed small-sized targets.Perhaps, the specialists of "Elta" managed to partially solve the problem by means of software algorithms for signal processing.

    The presence of a Thales LW-08 two-coordinate radar with a horn radiator and a parabolic reflector on the destroyer of the 21st century can cause surprise. In my opinion, the only reason for the appearance of LW-08 is its manufacturer - the company Bharat Electronics, which produces under license samples of European systems of the past generation.

    Perfectly perfect for its time (1980s), the system is used as a backup radar in tandem with the multifunctional Israeli MF-STAR. The specified operating range D is an out-of-date designation for the decimeter range with wavelengths of 15-30 cm.

    The key component of the destroyer's antiaircraft weaponry was the Israeli medium-long-range Barak-8 (Lightning-8) medium-range missile system capable of hitting air targets at ranges up to 70 km (some sources indicate a value of 100 km), in the altitude range from 0 to 16 000 m. Among the advantages - an active GOS, operating in the radio wave and thermal spectra (auxiliary IR-mode guidance for targets with small EPR).

    [​IMG]

    The launch of an anti-aircraft missile with a destroyer of the type "Calcutta"


    The complex is notable for its compactness (the starting mass of the missile is 275 kg), the storage and launching of the missile ammunition is made from the UVP. Among other advantages: a combat unit (60 kg), quite powerful for such a light-weight missile. Presence of a controlled thrust vector. The missile is equipped with a two-stroke engine, which makes it possible to realize the most profitable trajectories during flight to targets at different distances; and also to develop a high speed when approaching the target.

    The most significant drawback of Bark missiles remains the low flight speed (2M) - five times slower than the domestic missile systems Fort. Partly, this problem is compensated by the possibility of re-engaging the solid propellant at the final section of the trajectory.

    Another unpleasant feature is the launch from a specialized UVP, which forces two types of launchers, without the possibility of unification and its use for other types of munitions (Mk.41, European Sylver). However, if there is enough space on the ship, this problem recedes into the background.

    A total of 32 launching cells for anti-aircraft missiles are provided on board the Indian destroyer.

    The total cost of four sets of shipborne antiaircraft missile systems for constructing destroyers of type 15B was, according to official data, 630 million dollars (2017), a very moderate amount against the background of global trends.

    If we do not take into account the personal interests of the responsible persons, the choice of Barak-8 as the main air defense means of the Indian fleet is dictated by the compactness and relatively low cost of the complex (at the cost of deteriorating the power capabilities of the missile defense system and limiting the range of interception). Barak-8 is a reasonable compromise, allowing to get capabilities close to the best systems of shipborne air defense / long-range missile defense, at much lower costs.

    The destroyer's attack weapons include two modules (16 OHR) for launching two types of cruise missiles: long-range missiles Nirbhay ("Fearless", the Indian analogue of "Caliber") for striking ground targets at a range of 1000+ km, and "three-mahog" supersonic RCPs type PJ-10 BrahMos (Bakhmaputra-Moscow, a joint development based on the P-800 Onyx).

    [​IMG]


    Taking into account the high characteristics of the BKR Brahmos (speed at low altitude 2.5 M +) and the number of missiles, the Indian destroyer in the anti-ship configuration (all 16 mines occupied by the RCC) outperforms all existing types of ships in shock. even rocket cruisers of the Soviet model.

    Of course, this estimate does not correspond to the actual combat situation. All these are technical notes handed over for a sober assessment of the threats emanating from the Indian "missile carrier".

    The destroyer is equipped with a set of classic antisubmarine weapons of various generations, the real effectiveness of which is difficult to assess. The presence on board of two anti-submarine / multipurpose helicopters (such as Sea King or HAL Dhruv) extends the boundaries of the zone of the PLO. On the other hand, the absence of missile torpedoes and the questionable characteristics of the ASG do not give confidence in the fight against modern submarines.

    The destroyer is equipped with the sonar of the Indian company Bharat Electronics. Obviously, we are not talking about an undercover SSA, because in the images presented at the time of launching, there is no characteristic "drop" (a massive radar cowl in the bow of the destroyer). The presence of a towed low-frequency antenna is also not reported.

    [​IMG]

    The notorious INS Visakhapatnam, caught on the cameras during the launch of the INS Khanderi submarine


    For the destruction of submarines in the near zone are provided self-guided torpedoes of caliber 533 mm and two out-of-date RBU-6000. The presence of the latter is only a given to the traditions. Bombs (even jet) are completely ineffective in modern conditions. The only more or less realistic purpose is the destruction with their help of the detected torpedoes. This task also contains a lot of unknowns; To counter the torpedo threat, it is more useful to use various tow traps.

    By the way, about the traps. The destroyer is equipped with a complex of production of passive jamming "Kavach" of its own Indian development. Kavach rockets can create veils from radio-reflecting particles at ranges up to 7 nautical miles.

    Artillery. The destroyer is equipped with a 127-mm universal installation - a modern development of OTO Melara, also installed on European destroyers and frigates. The length of the barrel is 64 calibers. The range of fire can reach 30 km. Fully automatic system with a firing rate of 30+ rds / min.

    The reason why the system data is still used in the fleet remains unclear. Too little power in 5 "shells to defeat any possible targets. On the other hand, 17 tons is a small price for the opportunity to make a warning shot under the nose of the intruder vessel. Or finish off the "podranok", making 150 cannons of mercy from the cannon.

    For defense in the near zone, two batteries are provided - each consisting of two six-barrel AK-630s and a fire control radar. It is noteworthy that, unlike the US Navy, Indians do not save on such things. Or not yet fully realized the horror of the situation. Shoot down missiles near the ship - you can, but it's too late. In real combat, the benefit of any quick-firing cannon ("Phalanx", "Goalkeeper", etc.) remains questionable - fragments of downed missiles, one way or another, reach and damage ships.

    conclusions

    Structurally, INS Visakhapatnam and three of its colleagues continue the ideas laid down in the destroyers of the previous type of Calcutta (accepted into the fleet in 2014-2016), differing from them with enhanced armament and more modern stuffing.

    The technical level of destroyers of the Indian Navy has not yet reached the favorites - first-class destroyers of the United Kingdom, the United States and Japan. And the presence of a dozen foreign contractors does not contribute to an increase in combat capability in the event of a deterioration in the international situation. And it only points to the weakness of the Indian military-industrial complex.

    At the same time, the Indians managed to build one of the most interesting destroyers in its class (7000 tons), different from the American concept of the "Burke" adopted for the standard. Weaknesses of the project are leveled by its impressive anti-ship weapon. Unlike most fleets, the Indians build ships not to release a couple of missiles over ruins in the desert.

    In the creation of the destroyer of the type 15-Bravo, Russian specialists also took part, who gained experience in the design of modern combat ships. Experience is what we get when we do not get what we want. To our Navy, such ships would also come in handy.
     
    sayareakd, Spectre, Kranthi and 3 others like this.
  5. porky_kicker

    porky_kicker Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2016
    Messages:
    2,749
    Likes Received:
    13,384
    I love vodka and garlic pickles :shock::):shock:

    AFAIK the Russian only provided consultancy wrt the mast design and it's related cooling systems.

    Can't figure out whether the author of the above was actually shitting or praising p15b.

    Maybe both, that too without having access to relevant facts regarding the ship and it's systems.

    They forget one man's food is another man's poison.

    do svidaniya :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2018
  6. Indibomber

    Indibomber Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2015
    Messages:
    583
    Likes Received:
    1,013
    Actually he is talking about his observation pointing both good and bad aspects. Considering the costs it is a decent system but not state of art or top of the line..This destroyer can fry porky surface ships but sub surface war machines will be difficult to manage.. and we stand no chance against modern destroyers.

    So I posted it for experts to discuss on systems and we gain some knowledge on it. This ship is supposed to be weapon loaded in comming months.
     
  7. porky_kicker

    porky_kicker Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2016
    Messages:
    2,749
    Likes Received:
    13,384
    I am against all sorts of comparisons because of the simple reason that unless you are the end user of the concerned systems you are trying to compare, you don't have the necessary data to do justice to either of the system's.

    Also there is no ship which can act as the jack of all trades like surface warfare, subsurface warfare anti air warfare with equal ease.

    Compromise has to be made , p15 a and b are primarily surface warfare ships with the most potent anti ship and anti surface loadout. No other ship can come close to it in this domain.

    And one can shit on others as much as they want because it's their mouth or ass. One should not be bothered to respond to each and every articles which degrades the capabilities of others.
     
    aditya10r and Pinky Chaudhary like this.
  8. cyclops

    cyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2016
    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    3,620
    What we need are VLS akin to the american Mk41s.
    Something that has 90+ cells and can fire many types of missiles(mostly).

    A universal/modular missile canister launching system which can fire BrahMos, Barak-1, Barak-8, Nirbhay and other upcoming missiles that is the way to go.

    VLS_MK41_Canister_Types.gif

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2018
  9. tarunraju

    tarunraju Sanathan Pepe Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,597
    Likes Received:
    14,082
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    Article is basically a butthurt ruski trying to glory-steal P-15 designers while being extremely salty.

    It's like an American saying "America helped Russia build a modern passenger airliner" while referring to Irkut MC-21, when in reality all that the Americans (Rockwell-Collins and Pratt&Whitney) did was designed its flight-deck and supplied an engine option foreign customers (if any) would actually choose (PW1400G), over the relatively unknown Aviadvigatels.
     
  10. rohit b3

    rohit b3 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    476
    Any update on the first ship? Should have been in Sea trials by now.
     
  11. Adioz

    Adioz शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,414
    Likes Received:
    2,633
    Location:
    Bottom of the Andaman sea planting mines for PLAN
    The SRGM is not installed yet. Good to hear that they finally made the decision to get it from BAE.

     
  12. rohit b3

    rohit b3 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    476
    So let me get it straight. China started the construction of a 60,000 Tons Carrier in 2013 and got it working for sea trials in 2018.
    India started the construction of a 8000 tons Destroyer in 2013, hoping to commission it in 2018 and in 2018 they "Clear the deal" for a CIWS?
    Is it just me, or does anyone else feel like they purposely delay these projects to escalate the cost and put some of em in their own pockets?
     
  13. undeadmyrmidon

    undeadmyrmidon Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2017
    Messages:
    551
    Likes Received:
    863
    Firstly the P15B was designed for a 127 mm gun. Intially Otomelara 127/64 mm was chosen but deal got into limbo because of blacklisting in 2016. Only other manufacturer of 127 mm gun is BaE with their 127/62 mm gun.

    BaE wasn't selling India gun until Trump came and used GPL treatment. Now we have deal signed, CCS will sign and ship will be inducted in 2019.

    P 17A class also uses 127mm gun. The P15, P17 series is a new template on which new destroyers and frigates will be made. Even our NGMV is a light Frigate design sold as a Corvettes with 76 mm gun.

    We are in terms of shipbuilding where China was in 2007/2008. So strap on your helmet and hunker down.
     
  14. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    17,689
    Likes Received:
    17,879
    We learn it hard way, be it India, Russia, US or UK.
    China is new kid on the block, he has not much experience of navy, they are not checking systems up to its total points. Its easy to have all the fancy stuff in single boat and think that when you needed all will work perfectly.
    It does not happen in that way. All 4 in first line learned it hard way (as told by experienced ex-naval person from our group).
     
  15. darshan978

    darshan978 Darth Vader

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2017
    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    620
    YOU JUST SEE COMMENT SECTION THERE LOTS OF BUTTHURT RUSKIES LOL SO FUNNY
     
  16. abingdonboy

    abingdonboy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,698
    Likes Received:
    7,690
    P-17 yes but there is nothing new about the P-15 hull, in fact the P-15B (even if more are ordered) will be the last to use the P-15's hull design, the P-16/18 NG-DDGs will have a brand new and all Indian hull design (like P-17 did) that will likely exceed 10,000 tons.
     
    aditya10r likes this.
  17. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    17,689
    Likes Received:
    17,879
    I am waiting for big ass vertical launch universal tubes, ship with about 100 tubes.

    Plus having exclusive BMD ship.
     
    Pinky Chaudhary likes this.
  18. rohit b3

    rohit b3 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    476
    I sincerely hope you are right about the 2019 commissioning. However, back in the early 21st century, China was commissioning those Type052C Destroyers within 3 years of starting construction.
     
  19. rohit b3

    rohit b3 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    476
    You cant be saying like that. I remember how the Kolkata was rusting in the shipyard waters after launch between 2006-2013. 7 years! So they are not really "testing it" . They are just finding ways to not complete the ship.
    I dont think money is a problem for us, like its for the Russians(they cannot complete their ships cause of shortage of funds).

    The only reason im pointing this out this is people should be aware. If they are doing this to make money, they shouldn get away with it.
     
  20. Flame Thrower

    Flame Thrower Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2016
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    2,671

Share This Page