Indian Navy Developments & Discussions

[Tshering22]

Should be looking at navies by tonnege.View attachment 236451

The Royal Navy and JMSDF are some forces! Damn... Imagine being a tiny island with a falling economy and yet maintaining such firepower in the seas. I understand they were good at the seas before but if they are so good today, we have a lot to catch up in terms of tonnage.

 

[binayak95]

The Royal Navy and JMSDF are some forces! Damn... Imagine being a tiny island with a falling economy and yet maintaining such firepower in the seas. I understand they were good at the seas before but if they are so good today, we have a lot to catch up in terms of tonnage.

Royal Navy is a paper tiger.
They dont have the crews to man the ships that they have, and of the ships they have, too many have engine/transmission issues keeping them in harbour.

 

[mamamia12]

Royal Navy is a paper tiger.
They dont have the crews to man the ships that they have, and of the ships they have, too many have engine/transmission issues keeping them in harbour.

I really don't understand their Type-45 ship design. SAMPSON radar high on mast enables more horizon distance against sea skimming missiles okay then why did they chicken out on 2 panels only . If they want that high altitude placement, you can have it with 4-face AESA panel like MF-STAR without degrading it. I think they splurged too much on IEP which ballooned the costs and cut out on crucial things. Looks like Rolls Royce took them to a ride.

 

[binayak95]

I really don't understand their Type-45 ship design. SAMPSON radar high on mast enables more horizon distance against sea skimming missiles okay then why did they chicken out on 2 panels only . If they want that high altitude placement, you can have it with 4-face AESA panel like MF-STAR without degrading it. I think they splurged too much on IEP which ballooned the costs and cut out on crucial things. Looks like Rolls Royce took them to a ride.

and the said IEP has transmission that breaks down more often than not. of the 6 T45 DDGs, only 2 are operational at any given time.

Compare that to their own Type 23 FFGs. Excellent ships that they are now retiring AFTER extensive upgradation because they cant crew them.

Add to that two brand new carriers yet not even one squadron of F35Bs to share between them. Instead they are loaning the decks to host USMC F35 squadrons, effectively becoming a LHA.

What sheer nonsense.

 

[shade]

I really don't understand their Type-45 ship design. SAMPSON radar high on mast enables more horizon distance against sea skimming missiles okay then why did they chicken out on 2 panels only . If they want that high altitude placement, you can have it with 4-face AESA panel like MF-STAR without degrading it. I think they splurged too much on IEP which ballooned the costs and cut out on crucial things. Looks like Rolls Royce took them to a ride.

Isse yaad aaya, and this probably has been answered before, but why does our navy build like just 3-4 ships of a class and then make a new class of ships?
Like these RN walas have 6x type 45 destroyers and 8x frigates of the same class?
Chinkies and USN also do this, but in larger numbers like 10x ships of one class

Is it a case of ships being built too slowly, so by the time the final class of one ship is out it is outdated so they build/design a new ship class?

 

[Love Charger]

The Royal Navy and JMSDF are some forces! Damn... Imagine being a tiny island with a falling economy and yet maintaining such firepower in the seas. I understand they were good at the seas before but if they are so good today, we have a lot to catch up in terms of tonnage.

Royal Navy is lulz , literally the tonnage you said bout is only because of Elizabeth carrier and nothing else.

 

[DumbPilot]

Royal Navy is lulz , literally the tonnage you said bout is only because of Elizabeth carrier and nothing else.

A shadow of the once great Navy

 

[Love Charger]

A shadow of the once great Navy

Indeed.

 

[Suryavanshi]

A shadow of the once great Navy

They don't need much navy to be exact.
They are no longer an empire.
It is only natural.

 

[mamamia12]

The Indian Navy's own Warship design bureau is still conservative in Ship process and lacking potential.
1. Even in the latest design Nilgiri Class correct me if am wrong the Engines exhaust plumes are stacked and maybe they are in single same engine room?. Even if its not if they resorted to horizontal segregated separate engine room, its still doesn't have survivability of a longitudinally segregated seperate engine rooms.
2. The issue with VLS, if they think they don't have money to splurge on Missiles or so, they can just put some VLS canisters themselves or even leave empty place to be fitted later.
3. So much useless deck space in Nilgiri Class here and there, with no space for a Modular Mission Bay like Type 26 Frigate where they can spam shitload of UxVs.

 

[binayak95]

Isse yaad aaya, and this probably has been answered before, but why does our navy build like just 3-4 ships of a class and then make a new class of ships?
Like these RN walas have 6x type 45 destroyers and 8x frigates of the same class?
Chinkies and USN also do this, but in larger numbers like 10x ships of one class

Is it a case of ships being built too slowly, so by the time the final class of one ship is out it is outdated so they build/design a new ship class?

the p15A/B are effectively one class. 7 ships. if you include the P15s (same hull and power plant) then thats 10 ships. The P17s and 17As are in similar situation, and thats 10 ships between them. The P25 and P25A are even more similar and thats 8 ships.

P16, P16A is six ships. So i dont really get your question?

 

[Joydeepghosh1976]

Logic Says India Buy Admiral Kornilov FFG & Order 1 More Talwar FFG from GSL

Logic Says India Buy Admiral Kornilov FFG & Order 1 More Talwar FFG from GSL

Admiral Kornilov FFG Logic says India must buy Admiral Kornilov FFG, it is an Admiral Grigorovich-class FFG, also referred to as Krivak ...

rbt-defense.blogspot.com

 

[Azaad]

and the said IEP has transmission that breaks down more often than not. of the 6 T45 DDGs, only 2 are operational at any given time.

Compare that to their own Type 23 FFGs. Excellent ships that they are now retiring AFTER extensive upgradation because they cant crew them.

Add to that two brand new carriers yet not even one squadron of F35Bs to share between them. Instead they are loaning the decks to host USMC F35 squadrons, effectively becoming a LHA.

What sheer nonsense.

...Yet IN has opted for electric propulsion for its next gen capital ships with HAL tying up for RR local mfg & servicing .

 

[blackleaf]

Should be looking at navies by tonnege.View attachment 236451

I'm surprised the Russian navy is still do large given how degraded their shipbuilding capabilities are since the fall of the USSR.

 

[blackleaf]

I really don't understand their Type-45 ship design. SAMPSON radar high on mast enables more horizon distance against sea skimming missiles okay then why did they chicken out on 2 panels only . If they want that high altitude placement, you can have it with 4-face AESA panel like MF-STAR without degrading it. I think they splurged too much on IEP which ballooned the costs and cut out on crucial things. Looks like Rolls Royce took them to a ride.

The SAMPSON mask is higher so it gives a bit more warning time than even the MF-STAR. However it does seem very specialised to deal with supersonic sea skimming missiles.

The Burke on the other hand has much larger and heavier panels that are located much lower. The larger aperture and more power should give it a longer ranger against non sea skimming targets.

The MF-STAR is a compromise between the two approaches.

 

[binayak95]

...Yet IN has opted for electric propulsion for its next gen capital ships with HAL tying up for RR local mfg & servicing .

The RN's problem is transmission - thankfully we have ELECON solutions and heavy industry in India that can pretty much overcome any and all engineering problems.

 

[Tshering22]

Royal Navy is lulz , literally the tonnage you said bout is only because of Elizabeth carrier and nothing else.

A shadow of the once great Navy

That still leaves out Japan as a massive maritime force. This is when they technically don't even have a Navy (it is a "self-defence force"). The tonnage difference makers:

1. 2 Izumo class light aircraft carriers
2. 2 Hyuga class helicopter carriers
3. A massive 25-attack submarine fleet
4. 36 Destroyers (We have only 13 active)

These add some serious firepower for a country that no longer knows how to fight.

I don't like how the government is dragging its feet on the Mistral-class LPDs. We are really lagging behind in LPDs and submarines.

 

[Blademaster]

That still leaves out Japan as a massive maritime force. This is when they technically don't even have a Navy (it is a "self-defence force"). The tonnage difference makers:

1. 2 Izumo class light aircraft carriers
2. 2 Hyuga class helicopter carriers
3. A massive 25-attack submarine fleet
4. 36 Destroyers (We have only 13 active)

These add some serious firepower for a country that no longer knows how to fight.

I don't like how the government is dragging its feet on the Mistral-class LPDs. We are really lagging behind in LPDs and submarines.

Some of their destroyers are really frigates.

 

[shade]

the p15A/B are effectively one class. 7 ships. if you include the P15s (same hull and power plant) then thats 10 ships. The P17s and 17As are in similar situation, and thats 10 ships between them. The P25 and P25A are even more similar and thats 8 ships.

P16, P16A is six ships. So i dont really get your question?

Oh ok, so these new "classes" are basically just some improvements over the previous class.
I assumed that they make totally new designs from scratch, make 3-4 ships and then make another new class

 

[rohit b3]

The Royal Navy and JMSDF are some forces! Damn... Imagine being a tiny island with a falling economy and yet maintaining such firepower in the seas. I understand they were good at the seas before but if they are so good today, we have a lot to catch up in terms of tonnage.

The British Navy is a paper tiger.
2 Huge STOVL Aircraft carriers, but no fighter jets on them. Anyone who wants to point out the F-35B they see on youtube videos - They are borrowed from the Airforce Squadrons. The Navy has no fighter jets.
And a bunch of massive fleet tankers, so they can boast "global reach", even though they do not have the "fighting capability" due to the lack of actual warships.

Just so you know, in the Indian context, a 7500 tons Warship like INS Vishakapatnam costs 1.1 Bil$(2011 money), while a 40,000 Tons HSL Class Fleet tanker costs 500 mil$(2023 money).

The Brits have bloated their navy through such low cost ships which are of no practical use in direct war.

The Japanese Navy on the other hand is a force to recon with.