Cruisers for the IN- A discussion

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Also, we will not be able to deploy the long-range P-700 Granit (over 300 km range, which cannot be transferred due to MTCR), which would make it somewhat weak against similar surface combatants. Do not forget that PLAN has Sunburns on its Sovremenny class destroyers which has same ranhe as Brahmos.
Also since, Missiles and sub-systems are costly (example, lets take Nirbhay ship-launched version), it would be wise to have two destroyers instead of one cruiser. If one is damaged (and has to retire from combat) or sunk, the other would still remain operational.

India cannot afford CG (X) type ships. Moreover, CG (X) class being nuclear powered (most likely), US will not be selling it.
The sunburn has a range of 120km compared the the 300 km for the BRAHMOS
Project 956/EM Sovremenny Class Missile Destroyer - SinoDefence.com

I did not mean buy CG(X) . I believe that should be the template for future indian designed cruisers(i have been talking about indian designed cruisers from the beginning of this thread), as far as the cost aspect is concerned; i agree cruisers are costlier ships but they pack double the punch as i have outlined in one of my posts earlier on this thread. The PLAN is expanding we cannot hope to match the chinese in nos but we can match them in capability; we should be planning on enlarging our forthcoming destroyers like the kolkata to cruiser levels. As i have outlined with the Arleigh burke and ticonderoga weight comparison earlier; modern frontline destroyers with comparable hitting power weigh as much as cruisers.No navy operates destroyers as single units; they are operated mainly as Carrier escorts something an air defence cruiser can do much better than an air defence destroyer.
 

K Factor

A Concerned Indian
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,316
Likes
147
The sunburn has a range of 120km compared the the 300 km for the BRAHMOS
Project 956/EM Sovremenny Class Missile Destroyer - SinoDefence.com
Okay, but they have C-805: ~500km range and C-803: ~350km range. Lets not get into nitpicking here, and discuss the point.

I did not mean buy CG(X) . I believe that should be the template for future indian designed cruisers(i have been talking about indian designed cruisers from the beginning of this thread), as far as the cost aspect is concerned; i agree cruisers are costlier ships but they pack double the punch as i have outlined in one of my posts earlier on this thread. The PLAN is expanding we cannot hope to match the chinese in nos but we can match them in capability; we should be planning on enlarging our forthcoming destroyers like the kolkata to cruiser levels. As i have outlined with the Arleigh burke and ticonderoga weight comparison earlier; modern frontline destroyers with comparable hitting power weigh as much as cruisers.No navy operates destroyers as single units; they are operated mainly as Carrier escorts something an air defence cruiser can do much better than an air defence destroyer.
Tell me one thing, why aren't two destroyers better than one cruiser?

Also, the Kolkata class design is finished and construction has started. To make modifications at this stage would be to re-start the entire program from scratch, which is not possible.

Yes, but I agree with you on two points without getting into designations (Cruiser or Destroyer):
1. Future IN surface combatants should be larger, more displacement, more weapons load (Air, Surface, Anti-Ship).
2. Ideal weight category would be 15,000 tons.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Okay, but they have C-805: ~500km range and C-803: ~350km range. Lets not get into nitpicking here, and discuss the point.


Tell me one thing, why aren't two destroyers better than one cruiser?

Also, the Kolkata class design is finished and construction has started. To make modifications at this stage would be to re-start the entire program from scratch, which is not possible.

Yes, but I agree with you on two points without getting into designations (Cruiser or Destroyer):
1. Future IN surface combatants should be larger, more displacement, more weapons load (Air, Surface, Anti-Ship).
2. Ideal weight category would be 15,000 tons
.
Exactly what i wanted to say cruiser is just a word !we should have larger surface combatants(you can even call them corvettes if you want to)

One more thing, Just as a concept with the advent of railguns do you guys think there is any room for the return of the all big gun battleship!I'm talking nuclear powered 45,000 tonne monsters with 9-12 rail guns capable of firing hypersonic shells to 500km ranges.:twizt:
 

AJSINGH

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,237
Likes
77
it is a good thread to start with . well cruisers for IN
i would like to say something here ( my uncle is in IN ,at commander position )
he says that apart from equipment ,tactics play a major role
for example USS COLE was damaged by rather a small motar boat and it was out of action for few months

i am not saying that we should not think of cruiser but atleast not now , if need arises cruisers should be bought ,( i like Kirov class) and personally speaking aircraft carrier is more of scyological fear than a cruiser
 

SATISH

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
2,038
Likes
303
Country flag
I rather prefer a heavy destroyer compared to a cruiser. Unless the Cruiser is equipped with some sort of star trek weapon that annihilates the enemy totally.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
I rather prefer a heavy destroyer compared to a cruiser. Unless the Cruiser is equipped with some sort of star trek weapon that annihilates the enemy totally.
as i said earlier call it a cruiser, a heavy destroyer, a frigate or a corvette even! the moot point is that the IN needs larger more heavily armed surface combatants.
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
Armament: [Kirov Class]
20 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) AShM
14 SS-N-14 Silex ASW cruise missiles
12x8 (96) S-300PMU Favorit SA-N-6 Grumble surface-to-air missiles
96 S-400 (SA-NX-20 Gargoyle) long-range SAM
192 9K311 Tor (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) point defense SAM
44 OSA-MA (SA-N-4 Gecko) PD SAM
2x RBU-1000 305 mm ASW rocket launchers
2x RBU-12000 (Udav-1) 254 mm ASW rocket launchers
1 twin AK-130 130 mm/L70 dual purpose gun
10 533 mm ASW/ASuW torpedo tubes, Type 53 torpedo or SS-N-15 ASW missile
8x AK-630 hex gatling 30 mm/L60 PD guns
6x CADS-N-1 Kashtan missile/gun system


Just try 2 imagine what devastating effect this could have on the enemy force........ In case of India Brahmos-1 or 2 might replace P-700
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
P-700 Granit

The P-700 Granit (Russian: П-700 "Гранит"; English: granite) is a Soviet and Russian naval anti-ship missile. Its GRAU designation is 3M45, its NATO reporting name SS-N-19 Shipwreck. It comes in ASCM and SLCM variants.

The P-700 was designed in the 1970s to replace the P-70 Ametist and P-120 Malakhit, both effective missiles but with too short a range in the face of improving weapons of US Navy carrier battle groups. The missile was partially derived from the P-500 Bazalt.

Built by Chelomei/NPO Mashinostroenia, the bulging 10m missile has swept-back wings and tail, weighs around 7,000 kilograms and can be fitted with either a 750 kg HE warhead, a FAE warhead, or a 500 kt nuclear warhead. It is launched by circular (one-dimensional) solid-fuel booster before moving into sustained flight with a turbojet KR-93 engine, the missile has a distinctive annular air intake in the nose to power the engine. Maximum speed is believed to be around Mach 2.5, experimental version fitted with a ramjet 4D 04 engine can accelerate up to a top speed of Mach 4. Range is estimated at 550 to 625 km.The guidance system is mixed-mode, with inertial, active terminal guidance with radar and also anti-radar homing. Mid-course correction is probable.

The missile, when fired in a swarm (group of 4-8) has a unique guidance mode. One of the weapons climbs to a higher altitude and designates targets while the others attack. The missile responsible for target designation climbs in short pop-ups, so as to be harder to intercept. The missiles are linked by data connections, forming a network. Missiles are able to differentiate targets, detect groups and prioritize targets automatically using information gathered during flight and types of ships and battle formations pre-programmed in an onboard computer. They will attack targets in order of priority, highest to lowest: after destroying the first target, remaining missiles will attack the next prioritized target.. See also P-500 Bazalt for more details.

Specifications

Name: P-700 (SS-N-19)
Type: Long-range anti-ship cruise missile
Developed: Russia
Weight: 7000 kg
Length: 10 m
Diameter: 0.85 m
Warhead: 750 kg HE (unknown composition, probably RDX or similar) or 500 kt fission-fusion thermonuclear
Guidance: Inertial, active radar with home-on-jam, and Legenda satellite targeting system (believed to be nonfunctional after the fall of the USSR)
G limit: 16
Maximum Mach number: 4.5
Range: 550 - 625 km
Platforms: Kirov CGN, Kuznetsov CVG, Oscar SSGN
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
SS-N-14 Silex ASW

Metel Anti-Ship Complex (Russian: противолодочный комплекс «Метель» 'Snowstorm'; NATO reporting name SS-N-14 Silex) is a Russian family of anti-submarine missiles and warheads. There are different anti-submarine variants ('Metel') for cruisers and frigates, and a later version with a shaped charge ('Rastrub') that can be used against shipping as well as submarines.

The missile carries an underslung anti-submarine torpedo which it drops immediately above the suspected position of a submarine. The torpedo then proceeds to search and then home in on the submarine. The missile has been in operational service since 1968, but is no longer in production; it was superseded by the RPK-2 Viyuga (SS-N-15 'Starfish').

n the early 1960s the Soviet Union introduced the RBU-6000 and RBU-1000 anti-submarine rocket launchers, which worked on a similar principle to the Royal Navy's Hedgehog system of the Second World War, propelling small depth charges up to 5,800 metres (6,300 yd) from a ship. However this meant that a ship would still be in range of the submarine's torpedoes and missiles, and depth charges were less accurate than homing torpedoes. In 1963 the US Navy introduced ASROC, a missile that flew to the estimated position of the target submarine, and then dropped a torpedo into the water to destroy it. The SS-N-14 was the Soviet response.

In 1993, an upgraded version, designated YP-85, with a range of 250 km (130 nmi), was proposed for export.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Armament: [Kirov Class]
20 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) AShM
14 SS-N-14 Silex ASW cruise missiles
12x8 (96) S-300PMU Favorit SA-N-6 Grumble surface-to-air missiles
96 S-400 (SA-NX-20 Gargoyle) long-range SAM
192 9K311 Tor (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) point defense SAM
44 OSA-MA (SA-N-4 Gecko) PD SAM
2x RBU-1000 305 mm ASW rocket launchers
2x RBU-12000 (Udav-1) 254 mm ASW rocket launchers
1 twin AK-130 130 mm/L70 dual purpose gun
10 533 mm ASW/ASuW torpedo tubes, Type 53 torpedo or SS-N-15 ASW missile
8x AK-630 hex gatling 30 mm/L60 PD guns
6x CADS-N-1 Kashtan missile/gun system


Just try 2 imagine what devastating effect this could have on the enemy force........ In case of India Brahmos-1 or 2 might replace P-700
I would like the Nirbhay to replace the P-700 here
anyways look at the anti-aircraft missile component on the ship
96+44+192=332,
she could take out half the entire PAF by herself.:goodstuff:

But i would prefer something like the Ticonderoga Mark 41 for anti-surface assault reason
armament:
cruiser mark 41
2 × 61 cell Mk 41 vertical launch systems
122 × RIM-156 SM-2ER Bock IV, RIM-162 ESSM, BGM-109 Tomahawk, or RUM-139 VL-Asroc
8 × RGM-84 Harpoon missiles
2 × Mark 45 5 in / 54 cal lightweight gun
2 × 25 mm
2–4 × .50 cal (12.7 mm) gun
2 × Phalanx CIWS
2 × Mk 32 12.75 in (324 mm) triple torpedo tubes
 

StealthSniper

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
1,111
Likes
61
Again, I would rather have 2 destroyers then 1 Kirov Battlecruiser. At the end of the day yes the Kirov is huge and has a lot of weapons on board but their is only one and if that gets destroyed what do you have. If it were me I would do what India is doing now and make small ships first before making ships that are nuclear propelled and over 25,000 tons.


I do agree with what Kommu said about us having larger ships in the future. I do wish that later on maybe 10 years from now we start making ships in the 9,500 to 11,000 ton range and have alot more weapons aboard these ships. I think India is planning to do this but they are still trying to get the indigenization side of thing sorted out first.
 

K Factor

A Concerned Indian
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,316
Likes
147
I would like the Nirbhay to replace the P-700 here
anyways look at the anti-aircraft missile component on the ship
96+44+192=332,
she could take out half the entire PAF by herself.:goodstuff:

But i would prefer something like the Ticonderoga Mark 41 for anti-surface assault reason
armament:
I don't believe Kirovs have both S-300PMU and S-400. Its most likely either of the two.
 

blade

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
154
Likes
16
i have a sincere request to every one out here to be fact oriented while making their points.
" Do not forget that PLAN has Sunburns on its Sovremenny class destroyers which has same ranhe as Brahmos. ------ kommunist " such ill informations can the ruin the status of this forum. Brahmos certainly has considerably greater range when compared to sunburn. Now about cruiser i must say its all about the doctrine and threat perception. Just because an atom bomb is the most devastating weapon can we choose it to get rid of a mosquito perched on our head?
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
I would like the Nirbhay to replace the P-700 here
anyways look at the anti-aircraft missile component on the ship
96+44+192=332,
she could take out half the entire PAF by herself.:goodstuff:

But i would prefer something like the Ticonderoga Mark 41 for anti-surface assault reason
armament:

P-700 Ascm Where as Nirbhay is lacm.....

Ticonderoga is specially for land attack where as Kirov's role is to destroy the AC Group....
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
Ticonderoga is specially for land attack where as Kirov's role is to destroy the AC Group....
What makes you say that? Ticos can be anything, they are multimission carrying as many ASMs, LACMs, or SAMs as the mission requires. Kirovs land attack capabilities are next to nothing. What the Kirov does excel in is air defence. With 500 SAMs it is the most heavily armed ship in the world. The 16 P-700s do give it a powerful anti-ship strike, but the lack of multi-mission packs really limits it only to excel at the air defence role.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
What makes you say that? Ticos can be anything, they are multimission carrying as many ASMs, LACMs, or SAMs as the mission requires. Kirovs land attack capabilities are next to nothing. What the Kirov does excel in is air defence. With 500 SAMs it is the most heavily armed ship in the world. The 16 P-700s do give it a powerful anti-ship strike, but the lack of multi-mission packs really limits it only to excel at the air defence role.
I would partially agree with you , However the displacement of the Kirov makes it an unlkiely candidate for a future IN cruiser, Apart for the fact that it is already 30+years old.However i would not count out the combat potential of cruisers in the IN completetly, The IN is a western influenced force i.e we follow the same principle of sea control(pakistan curiously follows the soviet principle of sea denial, using submarines to disrupt and endanger OPFOR patrols) in a Sea control a setup a navy utilizes Carriers as the long arm of the law, I.e the carrier airgroup defends the fleet from air attacks , while the fleet
attacks targets on land and on the surface of the sea.
The soviet navy lacked large carriers hence the Kirov was born ;with it's immense anti-aircraft missile complement the Kirov was to do but one task in case of any USSR-USA conflict. it was to escort and defend a anti-ship force from american air attack till it got to the heart of an american battlegroup9The group would also have one or two SSGN's defending from sub attack), the kirov was to make sure that the carrier air-complement never made it near the ships that were to attack the carrier and her escorts. Once the soviet destroyers,subs & cruisers were close enough they would let loose with supersonic anti-ship missiles(some with tactical nuclear warheads) that would devastate the carrier battlegroup.
The Kirov was the reason the Tico was born, the previous virginia class cruiser were built as anti- aircraft cruisers and did not have a substantial anti-ship &anti-sub capability, the Ticonderoga was designed to correct that ;i.e it was designed to take out a Kirov or an oscar(using tomahawks,asroc's and harpoons) before it got to the carrier.
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
Two Kirov's class atomic cruisers will be resurrected

The Russian naval program goes ahead. After declared intention to buy in one of the European countries (France, Nederland or Spain) an amphibious assault ship, also known as a helicopter carrier, a Russian military top said that two additional now conserved nuclear-propelled cruiser Kirov's class can be resurrected and enter the Navy service. The deputy MoD Vladimir Popovkin said to 'Moscow Echo' radio-station yesterday that the program for this is already developed. The atomic cruisers 'Admiral Nakhimov' and 'Admiral Lazarev' will come back to service on Pacific and Northern fleets. For the force projection in the remote pelagic areas Russia needs at least two such cruisers on the North and one – on Pacific he said. The current activation of Russian military policy in Latin America has to be supported by additional transportation and strike capacity. Russia needs it urgently otherwise its old and new friends there never can be calm about US invasion.


Since most of Russian shipyards are occupied with domestic and foreign orders, seem that the Russia's tops are ready to use any opportunity for accelerating their Navy program including reviving old ships and new orders abroad. Up to 3 additional helicopter carriers can be built in Russia itself in addition to one bought off-the-shelf. If 'Nakhimov' and 'Lazarev' come back to service they would be modernized with much more advanced seekers, longer range missiles and networking capabilities then they had in Soviet era.

Defunct Humanity: Two Kirov's class atomic cruisers will be resurrected
 

DEBA_LAB

New Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
1
Likes
2
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.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top