- Joined
- Jan 26, 2021
- Messages
- 7,365
- Likes
- 27,771
Issue with angle of image and then making 3 d image from many 2d imagesThe ship is tilting to the waterline.
Issue with angle of image and then making 3 d image from many 2d imagesThe ship is tilting to the waterline.
So the ship in the first pic is not actually sinking? Now I take a look at it again and I can see what you are saying. It sure fooled me.Issue with angle of image and then making 3 d image from many 2d images
Yeah but look at their mission profile. They will operate with the F35B equipped Izumo class, acting as picket ships while the Kongo/Atago class do the heavy lifting.Mogami excel in their stealth characteristics but lack in air defence capabilities, they only have 16 Mk41 VLS cells which carry Type 03 Naval SAM
Yes this is the right perspective. Future is network centric warfare. That's why assets such as p8i are very important.When addressing how Nilgiri or any IN ship will do against type 55, once can't treat it as some MMA match where it's 1v1 in the ring. The IN as a whole will need to be looked at comprehensively, against what the PLAN can bring to the IOR, keeping the geography and chokepoints of the Indian Ocean in mind.
Many members have already explained how these ships are network centric, where all the ships can share sensor data and target tracking data in real time with each other. For example, if 3 nilgiri class ships are there in a wide area, they essentially act as one ship with 3 sensors at different locations, with a total of 24 Brahmos and 96 Barak 8.
Second factor is the location of the fight. It will most probably be near the Malacca strait if there's a war, so it's well within air cover and surveillance cover from the A&N islands. The Air power India can bring to this chokepoint is tremendous, and neither the PLAN nor PLAAF have an answer for that. The numerical advantage of the PLAN also diminishes due to this factor, since if they try to rush their ships into the IOR through Malacca, it will be easy pickings for our aircraft and submarines.
Let us assume that some PLAN ships make it through Malacca and come deeper into the IOR. All the relevant trade routes in IOR are close to our coast and are again within striking range of our aircraft. So the PLAN is stuck at the outer edges of the IOR outside our aircrafts reach, from where they can accomplish nothing against India, and will be running low on fuel and food anyway.
India needs to step up it's air and missile presence in A&N, and build large numbers of frigates and destroyers that are networked together and spread out, instead of fewer cruiser sized destroyers like type 55. SSNs would also be a huge benefit of course.
They might have provided space for additional VLS in the future which for now is FFBNW.Mogami excel in their stealth characteristics but lack in air defence capabilities, they only have 16 Mk41 VLS cells which carry Type 03 Naval SAM
Yeah, but I still wouldn't rate them as more powerful than Nilgiri class. Mogami's primary radar is X-band, not S-band. And it carries a VL-SRSAM class SAM system and much less poweful (compared to BrahMos) SSM. Also, its got only one heptr hangar. So not as powerful as Nilgiri class. Although some of its design features like integrated mast, etc are pretty nice.I'd add the new Japanese frigates as top tier ships as well. The Mogamis are defining state of the art right now.
This I do agree with. Overall, JMSDF is looking pretty strong. Its larger and stronger than Indian Navy currently. And will continue to be so until around mid-2030s.Yeah but look at their mission profile. They will operate with the F35B equipped Izumo class, acting as picket ships while the Kongo/Atago class do the heavy lifting.
Horses for courses.
True. But still, the French are also working on long range scramjet powered cruise missiles that can fit into their FDI class' VLS. Also, frigates like Constellation class of USN will still be more powerful than Nilgiri class.French FDI are lighter Frigates, not where comparable to Nilgiri. They have lower range/endurance, 1 Helicopter deck, Light Torpedos.....and while the Greek variants have similar Air defence like Nilgiri, they fall aawfully behind due to our BrahMos advantage.
PS- Im pretty sure Nilgiri and all future warships will be equipped with the 700 kms+ BrahMos-ER.
Nilgiri will be the best frigate in the world .
WTF? 20,000 ton? They don't need such large ships! What a waste! What are they putting onboard these? Any links?Japanese are now planning two 20000 ton missile defence ship to take on chinese.
Goes to show they are getting serious about China.
WTF? 20,000 ton? They don't need such large ships! What a waste! What are they putting onboard these? Any links?
Looks like they are that large to be able to support long deployments. Despite being a 20,000 ton ship, its crew is less than a Nilgiri class. And they are building them that large to be able to have multiple VLS so as to act as replacement for all of their Aegis Destroyers and become the sole provider of BMD to entire Japan. So it makes sense for them to have many VLS.Japan to Build Two 20,000-ton Missile Defense Warships, Indian Carrier Commissions - USNI News
Japan’s Ministry of Defence is proposing to build a pair of ballistic missile defense ships – the among largest warships in the Japanese inventory since World War II – government officials said last week. The Ministry of Defense listed design expenses and engines for the two Aegis BMD ships...news.usni.org
Despite the massive stature, reports suggest a planned crew complement of around 110 sailors and officers, with private cabins for all onboard. In accordance with recent JMSDF designs for high-automation, a response to the shrinking number of personnel in the Force
The massive scale of the vessels will lend it stability under heavy sea states, increasing interception readiness, and increase endurance at sea, similarly increasing combat readiness.
Source: https://www.overtdefense.com/2022/0...et-expansion-includes-two-20000-ton-cruisers/
Is it only bmd or anti missile shipJapan to Build Two 20,000-ton Missile Defense Warships, Indian Carrier Commissions - USNI News
Japan’s Ministry of Defence is proposing to build a pair of ballistic missile defense ships – the among largest warships in the Japanese inventory since World War II – government officials said last week. The Ministry of Defense listed design expenses and engines for the two Aegis BMD ships...news.usni.org
Just a BMD ship. That will free their current BMD capable Aegis destroyers for offensive tasks, instead of providing round the clock protection to Japan like they are doing right now. That task would then be taken up by these dedicated BMD ships.Is it only bmd or anti missile ship
Or it is a destroyer with attack capabilities
I couldn't understand
BMD bruh, BMD.WTF? 20,000 ton? They don't need such large ships! What a waste! What are they putting onboard these? Any links?
Well you will see 24-32 VL-SRSAM VLS cells being retrofitted to these ships in the near future.We need more SAM
Their old rich population doesn't want missile interception over its cities and hence push for sea based BMD.Looks like they are that large to be able to support long deployments. Despite being a 20,000 ton ship, its crew is less than a Nilgiri class. And they are building them that large to be able to have multiple VLS so as to act as replacement for all of their Aegis Destroyers and become the sole provider of BMD to entire Japan. So it makes sense for them to have many VLS.
I still think Japan should have gone in for a land-based BMD instead. I don't get the "falling missile debris argument." Wonder how much these ships are going to cost. Probably a lot more than a land based system for sure.
EDIT: Part of the reason why its so large:-
Its actually the limitation of AEGIS ashore, due to terrain masking of radars.Their old rich population doesn't want missile interception over its cities and hence push for sea based BMD.
But terrain masking shouldn't be a problem for BMD right? Given trajectory of Ballistic Missiles. Also, AEGIS ashore will basically have radars similar to the DRDO HPR that Air Force in installing across India, right? So they could still work despite the terrain masking.Its actually the limitation of AEGIS ashore, due to terrain masking of radars.
Thus, they shifted AEGIS ashore to two dedicated ships, freeing up the AEGIS destroyers for fleet duties.
If youre going to invest billions of dollars into creating a BMD net, and your VA is a thin series of islands that are mountainous, with radar on one side not being able to get a good track on targets on the other, would you invest in land based BMD?But terrain masking shouldn't be a problem for BMD right? Given trajectory of Ballistic Missiles. Also, AEGIS ashore will basically have radars similar to the DRDO HPR that Air Force in installing across India, right? So they could still work despite the terrain masking.
Plus our own BMD radars are atop hills, so it makes sense to put it on land.
Kind of would, but then don't our BMD system against China face a similar problem of Himalayas? Still, even MRBMs would have apogee of around 300 km, so mountains shouldn't delay tracking unless you are trying to get a Mid-phase kill.If youre going to invest billions of dollars into creating a BMD net, and your VA is a thin series of islands that are mountainous, with radar on one side not being able to get a good track on targets on the other, would you invest in land based BMD?
Let me rephrase it, for pure BMD, yes AEGIS ashore makes sense - but wouldnt mounting the system, with its powerful integrated array, and large numbers of SM series missiles make more sense at sea. Mobile, able to deal with all aerial threats, create a ADIZ virtually anywhere and at will.
Its actually the limitation of AEGIS ashore, due to terrain masking of radars.
Thus, they shifted AEGIS ashore to two dedicated ships, freeing up the AEGIS destroyers for fleet duties.
But wait, I just remembered, Japanese are also planning to use these ships for HGV defence, so yeah, that way you are right. It is much better than Aegis ashore, not only due to radar horizon not being masked by terrain, but also due to its mobility lending it survivability. Especially for HGV defence.If youre going to invest billions of dollars into creating a BMD net, and your VA is a thin series of islands that are mountainous, with radar on one side not being able to get a good track on targets on the other, would you invest in land based BMD?
Let me rephrase it, for pure BMD, yes AEGIS ashore makes sense - but wouldnt mounting the system, with its powerful integrated array, and large numbers of SM series missiles make more sense at sea. Mobile, able to deal with all aerial threats, create a ADIZ virtually anywhere and at will.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Indian navy railgun development | Indian Navy | 75 | ||
Very concerned with development of Indian navy: Pakistan naval chief | Indian Navy | 10 | ||
W | Adani PLR system deliver 500 Masada made in India pistol to Indian navy | Indian Navy | 0 | |
W | Rafale and F 18 super hornet shortlisted by Indian navy | Indian Navy | 21 |