Pakistan's naval buildup is quite concerning.

[Srinivas_K]

Bhai we r over estimating paxtan.
Turkey won't be getting anything from US or RUS.

If any it has to China.
It is Chinese who's keeping DPRK floating.
prostitute pak is more easy than dealing with DPRK. Chinese helped pak on improving shaeen mizzile and sneaking dual use autoclave and radioactive material in Sri lanka.

plz read these articles

https://www.theklaxon.com.au/home/china-running-pakistan-nuke-proliferation-via-embassy?rq=China

https://www.theklaxon.com.au/home/china-running-pakistan-nukes-part-two?rq=China

Pakistan has coast guard, not navy.
This is just attention seeking nothing else.

 

[Gandaberunda]

If any hostilities broke out at LoC first thing Pak navy does is hide their subs at Balochistan coast. They still fear repeat of operation trident

 

[Suryavanshi]

I already cleared gate . Second time, got good enough marks this time to get good company.

Tab ESE Nikal Kar Sarkar Ka paisa looto

 

[Abhay Rajput 02]

Tab ESE Nikal Kar Sarkar Ka paisa looto

I am happy with gate .

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

The question is are these acquisitions a threat or not for a blue water navy like ours. We operate A&N commands, Lakshadweep semi-command and also perhaps an outpost at Agalagea. All are strategic posts that a country like Pakshitstan is never going to command.
Also we have to see when some formidable assets like the second SSBN, second aircraft carrier, longer range SLBMs, better C4I capabilities are kicking in. We are certainly behind in the submarine game - SSKs or SSNs. Also, P8i, predator, MH 60R platforms integration and other possible network centric warfare capabilities programs - where are they all at?
Japanese Navy is very formidable with their AEGIS destroyers and "helicopter" carriers (which can be converted into aircraft carriers in quick time). And Japan and Korea both have excellent ship building capabilities and are developed nations. They can quickly advance to blue water navies.
It is pretty frustrating that we dont have a very strategic naval program with the Japanese and Koreans and just are relying on the Americans. Let's see where this strategy is headed. Clearly interoperability is the major guide for all our future naval assets and it is more and more clear that IN will have American technology as the platform of choice. While this creates a dependency it also means the Pakis and Chinis cannot challenge IN in IO.

It's an insult an country of 1.4 B has to depend on others standards to begin with. Most importantly on alliances. We should be ones leading any alliance in the Indian Ocean. Of course our economy in the last few years hasn't been great whatever reasons it may be impeding our military.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Well Indian navy is also having solid buildup and everything is going according to plans. Not sure how long porkis will import ships funded by Chinese lol do they even have fuel to manage such fleet.

It's not comical. All are new frigates going to join them in the next decade. India has to contend with Pakistan and China. Against Pakistan we need to have complete domination on our naval domain. They are planning for war in a few years and ensuring we don't block their sea lanes.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

It's not comical. All are new frigates going to join them in the next decade. India has to contend with Pakistan and China. Against Pakistan we need to have complete domination on our naval domain. They are planning for war in a few years and ensuring we don't block their sea lanes.

Around 4 p 8i should be enough along with other assets for pak , their harpoons must come to use against them
Pakistan also operates harpoons , some say they are nuclear capable ones

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

upcoming

I don't think their version of 54 is 32 VLS. It's 8 VLS anti air, and 8 anti ship. It's the lowest end of 54 they are buying.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Type	Class
Light Frigate	Zulfiqar Class	4
Corvette	Milgem Ada	4	93	372	Under Const.
Heavy Frigate	Type 54 A/P	4	165	660	Under Const.
Heavy Frigate	OHP	1	176	176	Active
Heavy Frigate	Tariq	2	215	430	Active
OPV	Yarmook	2	132	264	Active
Heavy Frigate	Jinnah	?	?	?	Planned
Diesel Electric Submarine	Agosta 70	2	41	82	Active
AIP DE Submarine	Agosta 90B	3	41	123	Active
AIP DE Submarine	Hangor	8	36	288	Under Const.
X Craft	Cosmos	3	6	18	Active
Fast Attack Craft (M)	Azmat	4	15	60	Active
Fast Attack Craft (M)	Jalalat	2	15	30	Active
Fast Attack Craft (M)	Jurrat	2	15	30	Active
Patrol Craft	MRTP 33	2	20	40	Active
Patrol Craft	Larkana	1	35	35	Active
Fleet Replenishment Tanker	Moawin*	1	228	228	Active
Fleet Replenishment Tanker	Fuqing	1	130	130	Active
Coastal Tanker	Gawadar	2	95	190	Active
Small Tanker	Madadgar	2	50	100	Active
MCMV	Munsif	3+3	55	320	3 Active
Hydrographic Survey Vessel	Behr Paima	1	92	92	Active
Hydrographic Survey Vessel	Behr Masah	1	104	104	Active
Tall Ship	Rah Naward	1	52	52	Active
				3,364	Active

This is the list doing the rounds in one forum with the complement of officers required.

The potential strength of PN in the next decade

 

[Rakesh4600]

Type	Class
Light Frigate	Zulfiqar Class	4
Corvette	Milgem Ada	4	93	372	Under Const.
Heavy Frigate	Type 54 A/P	4	165	660	Under Const.
Heavy Frigate	OHP	1	176	176	Active
Heavy Frigate	Tariq	2	215	430	Active
OPV	Yarmook	2	132	264	Active
Heavy Frigate	Jinnah	?	?	?	Planned
Diesel Electric Submarine	Agosta 70	2	41	82	Active
AIP DE Submarine	Agosta 90B	3	41	123	Active
AIP DE Submarine	Hangor	8	36	288	Under Const.
X Craft	Cosmos	3	6	18	Active
Fast Attack Craft (M)	Azmat	4	15	60	Active
Fast Attack Craft (M)	Jalalat	2	15	30	Active
Fast Attack Craft (M)	Jurrat	2	15	30	Active
Patrol Craft	MRTP 33	2	20	40	Active
Patrol Craft	Larkana	1	35	35	Active
Fleet Replenishment Tanker	Moawin*	1	228	228	Active
Fleet Replenishment Tanker	Fuqing	1	130	130	Active
Coastal Tanker	Gawadar	2	95	190	Active
Small Tanker	Madadgar	2	50	100	Active
MCMV	Munsif	3+3	55	320	3 Active
Hydrographic Survey Vessel	Behr Paima	1	92	92	Active
Hydrographic Survey Vessel	Behr Masah	1	104	104	Active
Tall Ship	Rah Naward	1	52	52	Active
				3,364	Active

This is the list doing the rounds in one forum with the complement of officers required.

The potential strength of PN in the next decade

What is this for??

 

[Anandhu Krishna]

In all seriousness, they are adding a lot of capability. 8 subs.

 

[Gessler]

@lixun

Tagging you here as this seems to be more appropriate section for this discussion.

So I've just noticed that the 054A (and by extension 054AP) has CODAD propulsion with 4 x Pielstick diesels only. At their most optimum rev range they'd put out 22.8 MW combined (5.7 MW each @ 1084 rpm).

The Shivalik (a ship with no AESA radars) has CODOG layout with 2 x LM2500+ gas turbines & 2 x Pielstick diesels (same model as 054). For regular cruise speeds the 11.4 MW of the 2 diesels is sufficient but while in combat or high-speed dashes the GTs come online putting out a whopping 60.4 MW (30.2 MW each).

Agreed the Shivalik is about 50% bigger than 054A/AP but in terms of power its putting out above 200% more at its peak. This ought to put the 054A/AP at a serious power disadvantage with implications for both propulsion & sensors. I wonder how much juice an APAR radar would suck up at its peak transmission power (optimized for maximum range) and how that would effect this propulsion layout.

Even the similarly sized Talwar-class FFG (~4000 tons) puts out a peak of nearly 48 MW with COGAG (2 x DS71 & 2 x DT59). Again that's more than twice the power for a ship of same size.

+++

The 054A was originally designed to accompany and/or screen Chinese Task Forces (where the brunt of the long-range scanning & fighting would be handled by CODAG/CODOG-powered DDGs), and the role of FFGs is limited mostly to close-in defence that doesn't involve much movement. But as a standalone combatant, like I said it could find itself at a serious power disadvantage against any existing (let alone future) Indian surface combatant.

 

[RoaringTigerHiddenDragon]

@lixun

Tagging you here as this seems to be more appropriate section for this discussion.

So I've just noticed that the 054A (and by extension 054AP) has CODAD propulsion with 4 x Pielstick diesels only. At their most optimum rev range they'd put out 22.8 MW combined (5.7 MW each @ 1084 rpm).

The Shivalik (a ship with no AESA radars) has CODOG layout with 2 x LM2500+ gas turbines & 2 x Pielstick diesels (same model as 054). For regular cruise speeds the 11.4 MW of the 2 diesels is sufficient but while in combat or high-speed dashes the GTs come online putting out a whopping 60.4 MW (30.2 MW each).

Agreed the Shivalik is about 50% bigger than 054A/AP but in terms of power its putting out above 200% more at its peak. This ought to put the 054A/AP at a serious power disadvantage with implications for both propulsion & sensors. I wonder how much juice an APAR radar would suck up at its peak transmission power (optimized for maximum range) and how that would effect this propulsion layout.

Even the similarly sized Talwar-class FFG (~4000 tons) puts out a peak of nearly 48 MW with COGAG (2 x DS71 & 2 x DT59). Again that's more than twice the power for a ship of same size.

+++

The 054A was originally designed to accompany and/or screen Chinese Task Forces (where the brunt of the long-range scanning & fighting would be handled by CODAG/CODOG-powered DDGs), and the role of FFGs is limited mostly to close-in defence that doesn't involve much movement. But as a standalone combatant, like I said it could find itself at a serious power disadvantage against any existing (let alone future) Indian surface combatant.

Chinese do not possess good gas turbine technology. Their ACs run on steam turbine not gas turbines. Looks like they are unable to develop good GT technology, an area where we lead them. BHEL has good GTs not as good as the top guys like GE though. More importantly it is interesting that the CCP has not been able to master gas turbine technology.

 

[Gessler]

Chinese do not possess good gas turbine technology. Their ACs run on steam turbine not gas turbines. Looks like they are unable to develop good GT technology, an area where we lead them. BHEL has good GTs not as good as the top guys like GE though. More importantly it is interesting that the CCP has not been able to master gas turbine technology.

The BHEL GTs (Frame-series) are just license-produced GE designs as far as I know.

 

[lixun]

@lixun

Tagging you here as this seems to be more appropriate section for this discussion.

So I've just noticed that the 054A (and by extension 054AP) has CODAD propulsion with 4 x Pielstick diesels only. At their most optimum rev range they'd put out 22.8 MW combined (5.7 MW each @ 1084 rpm).

The Shivalik (a ship with no AESA radars) has CODOG layout with 2 x LM2500+ gas turbines & 2 x Pielstick diesels (same model as 054). For regular cruise speeds the 11.4 MW of the 2 diesels is sufficient but while in combat or high-speed dashes the GTs come online putting out a whopping 60.4 MW (30.2 MW each).

Agreed the Shivalik is about 50% bigger than 054A/AP but in terms of power its putting out above 200% more at its peak. This ought to put the 054A/AP at a serious power disadvantage with implications for both propulsion & sensors. I wonder how much juice an APAR radar would suck up at its peak transmission power (optimized for maximum range) and how that would effect this propulsion layout.

Even the similarly sized Talwar-class FFG (~4000 tons) puts out a peak of nearly 48 MW with COGAG (2 x DS71 & 2 x DT59). Again that's more than twice the power for a ship of same size.

+++

The 054A was originally designed to accompany and/or screen Chinese Task Forces (where the brunt of the long-range scanning & fighting would be handled by CODAG/CODOG-powered DDGs), and the role of FFGs is limited mostly to close-in defence that doesn't involve much movement. But as a standalone combatant, like I said it could find itself at a serious power disadvantage against any existing (let alone future) Indian surface combatant.

First of all, these two are not one tonnage, one is 3600t and the other is 6200t. The tonnage of the Indian frigate is the same as that of the 052D. It is meaningless to compare the power. Generally speaking, the CODOG layout is generally to start the diesel engine at low speed, start the gas turbine at high speed, and shut down the diesel engine.
Moreover, the Indian frigate is powered by four sets of WCM 1000/5 generator sets made by Wartsila, Denmark. Each set consists of a Cummins KTA-50G3 diesel engine and a Kirloskar alternator, with a total power of 4MW, all installed in IACL soundproof box, not 200% higher than 054A

 

[Haldilal]

In all seriousness, they are adding a lot of capability. 8 subs.

Ya'll Nibbiars we would also be outnumbered them with the subs in the 1970s we outnumbered them by 2 : 1 ratios and in the 1990s we outnumbered them by 3.4 to 1 ratio. And if our submarine procurement policies is back in track we can outnumbered them by even a greater ratio. Its not like all the eight submarine are going to be inducetd now by the time all the submarine gets inducted the first submarine of the current class inducted in the early 90's would be retired. At most they can have 10 submarine but I have doubt that the timeline can be kept due to the financial issues as already the Project is running almost more than a decade late. Started at the same time a our Project 75 class but we are almost build all the submarine in this class but they have not a single one.

 

[Gessler]

First of all, these two are not one tonnage, one is 3600t and the other is 6200t. The tonnage of the Indian frigate is the same as that of the 052D. It is meaningless to compare the power. Generally speaking, the CODOG layout is generally to start the diesel engine at low speed, start the gas turbine at high speed, and shut down the diesel engine.

Yeah already addressed these points in my post. And the comparisons also take that into account. When I said ~60 MW for Shivalik at peak that is only taking the 2 x GTs into account as DGs would be off at that stage.

Also made the comparison with Talwar-class which is of similar displacement as 054A.

Moreover, the Indian frigate is powered by four sets of WCM 1000/5 generator sets made by Wartsila, Denmark. Each set consists of a Cummins KTA-50G3 diesel engine and a Kirloskar alternator, with a total power of 4MW, all installed in IACL soundproof box, not 200% higher than 054A

No I meant the total power output of the propulsion i.e. motive power. Not the electrical gensets only (though for radar uses that's more apt).

Agreed, shaft horsepower (shp) was probably a better measure for that than KW - but it still adds up to the same numbers.

054A delivers 30,400 hp (4 x 7,600hp diesels) compared to Shivalik's 2 x LM2500+ each making 40,500 shaft horsepower adding up to 90,000 hp at the shaft. That's still 200% more motive power for a ship that's only 50% bigger in terms of tonnage.

For a better comparison, let's compare with Talwar which is approx 4000t at full load, not much different from 054A.

Talwar in COGAG (all 4 gas turbines operating simultaneously) puts out about 64,000 hp - twice as much (100% more) as the 054A even though it's the same size/tonnage.

There's no getting around it - the 054A (and 054AP) is an extremely underpowered vessel for its size & class.

 

[lixun]

Yeah already addressed these points in my post. And the comparisons also take that into account. When I said ~60 MW for Shivalik at peak that is only taking the 2 x GTs into account as DGs would be off at that stage.

Also made the comparison with Talwar-class which is of similar displacement as 054A.



No I meant the total power output of the propulsion i.e. motive power. Not the electrical gensets only (though for radar uses that's more apt).

Agreed, shaft horsepower (shp) was probably a better measure for that than KW - but it still adds up to the same numbers.

054A delivers 30,400 hp (4 x 7,600hp diesels) compared to Shivalik's 2 x LM2500+ each making 40,500 shaft horsepower adding up to 90,000 hp at the shaft. That's still 200% more motive power for a ship that's only 50% bigger in terms of tonnage.

For a better comparison, let's compare with Talwar which is approx 4000t at full load, not much different from 054A.

Talwar in COGAG (all 4 gas turbines operating simultaneously) puts out about 64,000 hp - twice as much (100% more) as the 054A even though it's the same size/tonnage.

There's no getting around it - the 054A (and 054AP) is an extremely underpowered vessel for its size & class.

According to my data, Talwar’s power is 55,283 horsepower,, The Indian Navy should also consider the problem of tropical power attenuation, and the 054A uses not a 16PA6V280 diesel engine,it use a 16PAB-STC diesel engine with a single engine power of 6480KW and a total power of 35000 horsepower. This is what I just asked a well-known military enthusiast
However, the speed issue must consider not only the power, but also the hull design. Chinese designers have made two improvements. One is to use an optimized deep-V ship type, and the other is to use a stern wave plate.

Deep V ship tank test

Indeed, considering the cost and combat missions, the power of the 054A frigate is slightly insufficient, but in the 21st century, speed is not the primary issue for a navy ship to consider. The 054A performs anti-submarine and auxiliary air defense tasks within the first island chain, four iesel engine is enough power

 

[lixun]

In fact, the 054A is a frigate that I like very much. It is very good for air defense, anti-submarine, and anti-ship, and the price is cheap.

 

[Gessler]

According to my data, Talwar’s power is 55,283 horsepower,, The Indian Navy should also consider the problem of tropical power attenuation, and the 054A uses not a 16PA6V280 diesel engine,it use a 16PAB-STC diesel engine with a single engine power of 6480KW and a total power of 35000 horsepower. This is what I just asked a well-known military enthusiast

Well, they were also approx figures anyway, and in any event are effected to a great deal by external factors like water temp, salinity, windspeed etc.

The point is more broad - a huge comparative power deficiency for a ship of overall same size.

Why is it so? I'd say it's all about doctrine. The way the PLAN wants to use its FFGs (screening task forces, point air defence & ASW), they don't require a lot of motive power. The ones the DO require all that power would be the CODAG/CODOG-equipped DDGs like 052C/D which would be the main surface/anti-air combatants in any task force and therefore the main sea-control assets.

But the problem only becomes pronounced when these FFGs are being used as flagships/main surface combatants by likes of Pak Navy, and going up against vessels that would be enjoying a significant power advantage in surface combat.

This is not what the 054A class was designed for.

However, the speed issue must consider not only the power, but also the hull design. Chinese designers have made two improvements. One is to use an optimized deep-V ship type, and the other is to use a stern wave plate.
View attachment 105760
Deep V ship tank test

View attachment 105762
View attachment 105763
Indeed, considering the cost and combat missions, the power of the 054A frigate is slightly insufficient, but in the 21st century, speed is not the primary issue for a navy ship to consider. The 054A performs anti-submarine and auxiliary air defense tasks within the first island chain, four iesel engine is enough power

It's not just about speed - but about how quickly you can attain that speed, how long can maintain that speed etc etc That's where the power advantage comes in.

The hull refinements can help to make the ship more fuel-efficient, but effect is very marginal in the broader picture. The disparity here is brought on by doctrinal differences - not necessarily design ones.