P-18/Next Generation Destroyer class (NGD)

[Neeraj Mathur]

HOW WILL P18 LOOK LIKE

ZUMWALT CLASS??

Nope
No design out yet, every one is guessing at this point.

 

[Gessler]

Do we even need cruisers? It makes 0 sense to me to operate cruisers.

We don't need 'destroyers' or 'cruisers'.

What we need is the ability to scan & prosecute X number of targets out to Y range in Z domain (surface, subsurface or air) while being able to travel V distance at W knots without refueling.

Whether we end up getting a ship that fits the traditional definition of a destroyer or cruiser depends on what capabilities we expect from it, and how big the ship needs to be in order to effectively deliver those capabilities.

That said, the traditional definitions of DDG or CG no longer carry any weight. The US Navy for example designates its ~16,000T Zumwalts as Destroyers but the ~9,800T Ticonderogas are classified as Cruisers. Even PLAN calls its ~14,000T Type-055 as Destroyer. I think Navies have stopped calling any new ships as Cruisers period.

HOW WILL P18 LOOK LIKE

ZUMWALT CLASS??

No one yet knows P18/NGD design as a matter of fact. But if you ask me what I think it'll look like, given our design capabilities & budgets & timelines, I'd say it'll be an enlarged P-15A/B hull with superstructure containing an integrated mast.

 

[Lonewolf]

We don't need 'destroyers' or 'cruisers'.

What we need is the ability to scan & prosecute X number of targets out to Y range in Z domain (surface, subsurface or air) while being able to travel V distance at W knots without refueling.

Whether we end up getting a ship that fits the traditional definition of a destroyer or cruiser depends on what capabilities we expect from it, and how big the ship needs to be in order to effectively deliver those capabilities.

That said, the traditional definitions of DDG or CG no longer carry any weight. The US Navy for example designates its ~16,000T Zumwalts as Destroyers but the ~9,800T Ticonderogas are classified as Cruisers. Even PLAN calls its ~14,000T Type-055 as Destroyer. I think Navies have stopped calling any new ships as Cruisers period.



No one yet knows P18/NGD design as a matter of fact. But if you ask me what I think it'll look like, given our design capabilities & budgets & timelines, I'd say it'll be an enlarged P-15A/B hull with superstructure containing an integrated mast.

Correct ,design should be really futuristic , if possible should be iep based or codag at least , no involvement of Ukraine or russia engine ,too much delay , gun Should be indigenized , uvls should be there ,and if space if enough under deck reloading mechanism should be present , all radar ,eo pod , satcom , should be on single superstructure , uav launching mechanism , a full spectrum of indigenous missile , barak 8 should be planned to be replaced by or common operational cannister for akash ng er version , most of equipment should be indigenous including radar etc , should have enough range and construction should be modular

 

[Gessler]

Correct ,design should be really futuristic , if possible should be iep based or codag at least , no involvement of Ukraine or russia engine ,too much delay , gun Should be indigenized , uvls should be there ,and if space if enough under deck reloading mechanism should be present , all radar ,eo pod , satcom , should be on single superstructure , uav launching mechanism , a full spectrum of indigenous missile , barak 8 should be planned to be replaced by or common operational cannister for akash ng er version , most of equipment should be indigenous including radar etc , should have enough range and construction should be modular

P-18/Next Generation Destroyer class (NGD)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/for-navy-6-nuclear-powered-submarines-take-priority-over-3rd-aircraft-carrier-101616564522467-amp.html It is in this context that the Navy is also seriously thinking of reviving its heavy-destroyer project to counter the 12,000-tonne cruisers being...

defenceforumindia.com

P-18/Next Generation Destroyer class (NGD)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/for-navy-6-nuclear-powered-submarines-take-priority-over-3rd-aircraft-carrier-101616564522467-amp.html It is in this context that the Navy is also seriously thinking of reviving its heavy-destroyer project to counter the 12,000-tonne cruisers being...

defenceforumindia.com

 

[Lonewolf]

P-18/Next Generation Destroyer class (NGD)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/for-navy-6-nuclear-powered-submarines-take-priority-over-3rd-aircraft-carrier-101616564522467-amp.html It is in this context that the Navy is also seriously thinking of reviving its heavy-destroyer project to counter the 12,000-tonne cruisers being...

defenceforumindia.com

P-18/Next Generation Destroyer class (NGD)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/for-navy-6-nuclear-powered-submarines-take-priority-over-3rd-aircraft-carrier-101616564522467-amp.html It is in this context that the Navy is also seriously thinking of reviving its heavy-destroyer project to counter the 12,000-tonne cruisers being...

defenceforumindia.com

Gas turbine are difficult tech but can't we make indigenous Diesel engine too

 

[Starlight]

Free mein bhi denge toh nahi leni chahiye.

Maintenance nightmare, outdated electronics, rust bucket, death trap.

Are itni abadi hain, crew toh bhar bhar ke mileage. But only upgading the docks and money can save our dream of ten carriers in the fleet.

 

[Gessler]

Are itni abadi hain, crew toh bhar bhar ke mileage. But only upgading the docks and money can save our dream of ten carriers in the fleet.

We have a dream of 10 carriers in fleet ?? Ye kab se khwaish rahi hai humari ?

 

[FalconSlayers]

We have a dream of 10 carriers in fleet ?? Ye kab se khwaish rahi hai humari ?

I made a pun a few posts ago on this thread, that my wish is 10 aircraft carriers as it costs nothing to dream . He took it seriously.

We want 10 aircraft carriers also, as it costs nothing to dream .

 

[Starlight]

I made a pun a few posts ago on this thread, that my wish is 10 aircraft carriers as it costs nothing to dream . He took it seriously.

Easily doable counting the landing helicopter docks hopefully being ordered soon. Also we can now assume the EMALS system already tested by the naval personnel abroad, can safely be integrated on the LHDs, atleast one per ship,(we have plans for 4 or 5) I now assume should be great for the TEDBF fighter and maybe even nose gear retro fitted MIG-29 Ks. So I see we can reach atleast 7 carriers, where 4 are light carriers are for the Arabian sea and the bay of Bengal, and the rest of the carriers, Vikkys and a larger type called IAC-2 go for blue waters. Now, the point here is should we duplicate the Vikranth or trudge along, like we do for our larger design? Because the guys at CSL have already specified that if we want, they can make another of the same type in 4-5 years after 100% assembly of parts. So I know ideally we should buy two more Vikrant class carriers, wait for the sub guys to test the reactors on our brand new SSBNs and ask the fellows at BARC to retro fit a reactor on all Vikrant class carriers with three EMALs catapults each with the ski jump replaced by them. Then think about a 65000 ton class easily made sooner due to CSL making carriers of the same previous class in double time. Dhanyawaad!

 

[Edinburgh]

We don't need 'destroyers' or 'cruisers'.

What we need is the ability to scan & prosecute X number of targets out to Y range in Z domain (surface, subsurface or air) while being able to travel V distance at W knots without refueling.

Whether we end up getting a ship that fits the traditional definition of a destroyer or cruiser depends on what capabilities we expect from it, and how big the ship needs to be in order to effectively deliver those capabilities.

That said, the traditional definitions of DDG or CG no longer carry any weight. The US Navy for example designates its ~16,000T Zumwalts as Destroyers but the ~9,800T Ticonderogas are classified as Cruisers. Even PLAN calls its ~14,000T Type-055 as Destroyer. I think Navies have stopped calling any new ships as Cruisers period.



No one yet knows P18/NGD design as a matter of fact. But if you ask me what I think it'll look like, given our design capabilities & budgets & timelines, I'd say it'll be an enlarged P-15A/B hull with superstructure containing an integrated mast.

Japan calls the 20, 000-ton helicopter carrier frigate

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

Easily doable counting the landing helicopter docks hopefully being ordered soon. Also we can now assume the EMALS system already tested by the naval personnel abroad, can safely be integrated on the LHDs, atleast one per ship,(we have plans for 4 or 5) I now assume should be great for the TEDBF fighter and maybe even nose gear retro fitted MIG-29 Ks. So I see we can reach atleast 7 carriers, where 4 are light carriers are for the Arabian sea and the bay of Bengal, and the rest of the carriers, Vikkys and a larger type called IAC-2 go for blue waters. Now, the point here is should we duplicate the Vikranth or trudge along, like we do for our larger design? Because the guys at CSL have already specified that if we want, they can make another of the same type in 4-5 years after 100% assembly of parts. So I know ideally we should buy two more Vikrant class carriers, wait for the sub guys to test the reactors on our brand new SSBNs and ask the fellows at BARC to retro fit a reactor on all Vikrant class carriers with three EMALs catapults each with the ski jump replaced by them. Then think about a 65000 ton class easily made sooner due to CSL making carriers of the same previous class in double time. Dhanyawaad!

Not just the carrier construction. The problem is also of the accompanying aircraft to be ready in that 4-5 years time frame. TEDBF is at least a decade away in induction. Mig-29K is the aircraft Navy wants to get rid-off. Now that leaves us with F-18 and Rafael both are at present not compatible with IAC.

Thus even if GOI asks CSL to make another IAC on the same design by 2025 we won't have the aircrafts that it would house. Nor will the present capital aquistion budget of Navy will allow it.

 

[Starlight]

Not just the carrier construction. The problem is also of the accompanying aircraft to be ready in that 4-5 years time frame. TEDBF is at least a decade away in induction. Mig-29K is the aircraft Navy wants to get rid-off. Now that leaves us with F-18 and Rafael both are at present not compatible with IAC.

Thus even if GOI asks CSL to make another IAC on the same design by 2025 we won't have the aircrafts that it would house. Nor will the present capital aquistion budget of Navy will allow it.

Budgets can be hopefully reviewed and updated for defence. If we time this right we have a perfect fleet.

 

[IndianHawk]

Easily doable counting the landing helicopter docks hopefully being ordered soon. Also we can now assume the EMALS system already tested by the naval personnel abroad, can safely be integrated on the LHDs, atleast one per ship,(we have plans for 4 or 5) I now assume should be great for the TEDBF fighter and maybe even nose gear retro fitted MIG-29 Ks. So I see we can reach atleast 7 carriers, where 4 are light carriers are for the Arabian sea and the bay of Bengal, and the rest of the carriers, Vikkys and a larger type called IAC-2 go for blue waters. Now, the point here is should we duplicate the Vikranth or trudge along, like we do for our larger design? Because the guys at CSL have already specified that if we want, they can make another of the same type in 4-5 years after 100% assembly of parts. So I know ideally we should buy two more Vikrant class carriers, wait for the sub guys to test the reactors on our brand new SSBNs and ask the fellows at BARC to retro fit a reactor on all Vikrant class carriers with three EMALs catapults each with the ski jump replaced by them. Then think about a 65000 ton class easily made sooner due to CSL making carriers of the same previous class in double time. Dhanyawaad!

Problem is that vikrant class can't fly heavier Aircrafts like e2d hawk eye so it is limited to helicopter based aew ka31 which reduces it's air bubble significantly. Also without catobar it can't launch aircrafts at maximum load thus limiting the Aircrafts manly to air to air and anti ship role and not suitable for land attack.

So navy will likely go for a much bigger carrier with Emals or atleast catobar.

Looking at uk carriers and French plan for next Carrier 75000 tons seems the most optimum choice.

 

[Starlight]

Problem is that vikrant class can't fly heavier Aircrafts like e2d hawk eye so it is limited to helicopter based aew ka31 which reduces it's air bubble significantly. Also without catobar it can't launch aircrafts at maximum load thus limiting the Aircrafts manly to air to air and anti ship role and not suitable for land attack.

So navy will likely go for a much bigger carrier with Emals or atleast catobar.

Looking at uk carriers and French plan for next Carrier 75000 tons seems the most optimum choice.

I said retrofitting the carriers by removing the ski-jump with three EMAL catapults and a reactor from BARC, even the LHDs the same way, one EMAL catapult and a reactor. This is doable by the way.

 

[Starlight]

Chinese examples are the attached files. Confirmed by the Chinese government for production or not, this is what we have to do to our carrier fleet and hopefully, the LHDs soon to recieve confirmation to be on order for production.

 

[Lonewolf]

Chinese examples are the attached files. Confirmed or not, this is what we have to do.

View attachment 92751

View attachment 92752

View attachment 92753

Isn't it wrong thread mate ,you are derailing it for quite long please shift to iac 1 discussion

 

[Rassil Krishnan]

Problem is that vikrant class can't fly heavier Aircrafts like e2d hawk eye so it is limited to helicopter based aew ka31 which reduces it's air bubble significantly. Also without catobar it can't launch aircrafts at maximum load thus limiting the Aircrafts manly to air to air and anti ship role and not suitable for land attack.

So navy will likely go for a much bigger carrier with Emals or atleast catobar.

Looking at uk carriers and French plan for next Carrier 75000 tons seems the most optimum choice.

emals is cancer.

guys here should review every latest stuff that is coming out of usa.a lot of it ends up having technical issues that need to be resolved.

remember we are at the frontlines,we need our doctrines and weapons to work.if we are incorporating foreign systems,let us only do so readily for platforms that we cant come up with an indigenous soln AND ALSO one which has been a workhorse with the us military for some time because the new stuff is all iffy.

 

[Starlight]

emals is cancer.

guys here should review every latest stuff that is coming out of usa.a lot of it ends up having technical issues that need to be resolved.

remember we are at the frontlines,we need our doctrines and weapons to work.if we are incorporating foreign systems,let us only do so readily for platforms that we cant come up with an indigenous soln AND ALSO one which has been a workhorse with the us military for some time because the new stuff is all iffy.

Ford class carriers are in service.

 

[Neeraj Mathur]

emals is cancer.

guys here should review every latest stuff that is coming out of usa.a lot of it ends up having technical issues that need to be resolved.

remember we are at the frontlines,we need our doctrines and weapons to work.if we are incorporating foreign systems,let us only do so readily for platforms that we cant come up with an indigenous soln AND ALSO one which has been a workhorse with the us military for some time because the new stuff is all iffy.

Any idea what will french use on their AC?

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Project 18 is a class of Next Generation Stealth Guided Missile Destroyers planned for the Indian Navy. This ship class will be in replacement of the rajput class.

Class overview
General characteristics
Name:	Project 18 class
Builders:	Mazgaon Dock Yard
Operators:	Indian Navy
Preceded by:	Visakhpatanam Class Destroyers
Cost:	50,000 crores.
Planned:	6
Type:	Stealth Guided Missile Destroyers.
Displacement:	13,000 Standard tonnes 13,000 long tons; 14,000 short tons.
Speed:	In excess of 30 knots 56 km/h.
Crew:	400 70 officers and 330 sailors.
Sensors and processing systems:	BEL HUMSA-NG bow sonar
Armament:
Aircraft carried:

Probably it will be equiped with Rolls Royce engine to be ptoduced in collaboration with India UK. Great engine. It will be a big plus if it is done.