Project P15B Visakhapatnam class destroyer

[Saumyasupraik]

Now comping to Type 52D
32 HHQ9 is similar in weight compared to 32 Barak 8 ...Equal

HHQ-9B weight is around 1.3 tonnes each.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

Okay, I barely even comment here but this "doesn carry enough weapon" rubbish. Like have those guys even compared it with other "8000 tons" class Warships? No! They compare it with 10,000 tons class warships like Atago, Sejong the Great, Arleigh Burke , etc.

Among "8000 tons" class , other warships comparable in terms of weight are Horizon Class, Type52D and Type 45.

P-15A/B aren't armed enough to do the job against a near-peer adversary.

P-15A/B lacks a long-range SAM (like PG-LRSAM) and an SR-SAM (like VL-SRSAM).

Hardly anyone questions the number of BrahMos in P-15A/B.

My argument is, P-15A/B are ill-equipped for AAW.

If you want to compare P-15A/B with another 8k Tonne class ship, go ahead. Compare it with Burke Flight I (barely over 8k, nowhere near 10k) shorter but slightly wider than Kolkata. Nobody cares about Royal Navy's ill-equipped Daring, or Horizon, which doesn't have to face off an adversary like PLAN (VMF is already outclassed).
Comparison with ships that aren't meant to perform the same role is useless, Daring is for AAW, similarly RAN' Hobart doesn't have the same ASuW capability as P-15A/B, but it does have better AAW capability, it is well equipped to perform its role. Hobart has limited ASuW capability, just like P-15A/B have limited AAW capability.

P-15A/B will remain handicapped in the AAW domain until they are equipped with LR-SAM & SRSAM.

BTW, that weight comparison was unnecessary and stupid when comparing capability, BrahMos is better, should have stopped at that. Nobody cares if you store a 3T BrahMos in UVLM or a >1T Nirbhay, the VLU will occupy the same space.

 

[rohit b3]

OK.
Share your source, and then I'll share mine.

For Kolkata i would have shown you my "INS Kolkata visitors pass" when it had docked in Mumbai sometime in 2016, but i dont have it anymore.

For Shivalik - https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...-over-Rs-50000-crore/articleshow/14783631.cms

There was also another article which said INS Shivalik had travelled to China covering more than 9000 kms without refuel. But that was many years back and i cant seem to find that article anymore, so if anyone can find it , feel free to post.

 

[rohit b3]

HHQ-9B weight is around 1.3 tonnes each.

There is no HHQ9B. There is HQ9B which is an improved land variant with 300 kms range.

 

[rohit b3]

P-15A/B aren't armed enough to do the job against a near-peer adversary.

P-15A/B lacks a long-range SAM (like PG-LRSAM) and an SR-SAM (like VL-SRSAM).

Hardly anyone questions the number of BrahMos in P-15A/B.

My argument is, P-15A/B are ill-equipped for AAW.

If you want to compare P-15A/B with another 8k Tonne class ship, go ahead. Compare it with Burke Flight I (barely over 8k, nowhere near 10k) shorter but slightly wider than Kolkata. Nobody cares about Royal Navy's ill-equipped Daring, or Horizon, which doesn't have to face off an adversary like PLAN (VMF is already outclassed).
Comparison with ships that aren't meant to perform the same role is useless, Daring is for AAW, similarly RAN' Hobart doesn't have the same ASuW capability as P-15A/B, but it does have better AAW capability, it is well equipped to perform its role. Hobart has limited ASuW capability, just like P-15A/B have limited AAW capability.

P-15A/B will remain handicapped in the AAW domain until they are equipped with LR-SAM & SRSAM.

BTW, that weight comparison was unnecessary and stupid when comparing capability, BrahMos is better, should have stopped at that. Nobody cares if you store a 3T BrahMos in UVLM or a >1T Nirbhay, the VLU will occupy the same space.

No Destroyer is perfect. Yes, it has less SAMs, and i would love it if they add 16 x VLSRM to the configuration. However calling it "ill equipped" based on less SAMs isnt right. It packs more punch in terms of weight compared to other Destroyers in its class.
Even during designing, couldn the IN add 16 additional Barak 1 and say...ditched the RBU6000? Offcourse they could have, but chose not to.

And anyway, if you wanna compare with Areligh Burke Flight I, which is 8900 tons, Arleigh Burke has invested and filled the warship with SAMs. It has negligible Ashm land warfare with just 8 x Harpoons for a 8900 tons warships. It has Light 324mm Torpedo tubes, and NO HELI HANGER. Yes it has a Flight Deck for one Helicopter, but it cannot hold Helicopters for prolonged period on high seas. A 8900 ton warship without a Helicopter Hanger , meanwhile 7500 Kolkata/Vish has a Hanger for 2 Helicopters.

 

[shiphone]

There is no HHQ9B. There is HQ9B which is an improved land variant with 300 kms range.

lol....that is exactly the 'HHQ-9B' which means "Naval" HQ-9B

---------------------
BTW...:

1.there are two varrients of 052Ds , the displacements varies : normal displacement: 6300 and 6800 tons... the full displacement should be less then 7000 and around 7400 tons.

2. 052D's endurance is 4000 NM (over 7200km) @16 knots...(PS. the '11,000 kms+ at 16-18 knots' endurance for a COGAG vessel is really incredible...lol...actually we should have seen the right parameter on some brochure )

3. 052D doesn't have the ASW filled in the VLS, only the AAW (over 200km) and AShW(over 600km), normally 8 YJ-18 and 56 HHQ-9 in 64 cells. at this stage ,054A FFG carries the ASW in its 32 cell VLS.

4. 052D has 2*3 tube 324mm torpedo tubes....

-------------------
052DE - the export varient was marketed recently...

 

[Saumyasupraik]

There is no HHQ9B. There is HQ9B which is an improved land variant with 300 kms range.

Ok.

 

[jai jaganath]

Okay, I barely even comment here but this "doesn carry enough weapon" rubbish. Like have those guys even compared it with other "8000 tons" class Warships? No! They compare it with 10,000 tons class warships like Atago, Sejong the Great, Arleigh Burke , etc.

Among "8000 tons" class , other warships comparable in terms of weight are Horizon Class, Type52D and Type 45.

Horizon carries 48 Aster SAMs, 8 Exocet AshM , 324 mm Light torpedos and 1 Helicopter

Type 45 carries 48 Aster SAMs, 8 Harpoon AshM, No Torpedo tubes and 1 Helicopter

Type 52D carries 32 HQ9 SAMs, 24 HQ10 , 16 YJ18 AshM, 16 CY-5 ASW missiles , no Torpedo tubes and 1 Helicopter (Configuration can be changed but this an optimal configuration for this debate).

In comparison

Kolkata/Vish carries 32 Barak 8 SAMs, 16 x BrahMos AshM, 533MM HEAVY Torpedo tubes , RBU6000 and 2 Helicopters.

As clearly seen Type 45 and Horizon fall way back. For instance, the AshM load of Horizon is 6.2 tons while AshM load of Kolkata is 48 tons.....close to 8 times more. And better range, speed and capability comes along with that. Each Varunastra ASW torpedo weights 5 times that of MU90 torpedo on Horizon. And not just weight, Varunastra gives twice the range and a far larger warhead making it crucial in ASW warfare.
Kolkata's 2 Helicopter capability means an additional weight of over 10-15 tons due to an additional airframe, its weapons as well as spares. RBU6000 with 72 rockets are an additional 10 tons.

Now comping to Type 52D
16 x YJ18 is 24 tons. Kolkata is 48 tons BrahMos - 2x more
16 x CY5 is 10 tons. Kolkata even if it carries 10 Varunastra is 15 tons. 1.5x more.
32 HHQ9 is similar in weight compared to 32 Barak 8 ...Equal
24 HQ10 is just 0.4 tons of missiles....closest comparison is the 72 x RBU6000 rockets which is 8 tons of rockets. (not comparing the launchers in either cases here)
1 Helicopter vs 2 Helicopers...again an additional weight of 10 tons approx.

And even after all that, Type 52D's range at cruise speed is 8300 kms and Kolkata's is 11,000 kms as per open sources.

Prove me wrong!

It does carry torpedo tubes
And regarding asw missiles I don't remember

 

[jai jaganath]

3300nm (6100km) at 18 knots.

Even 52D has similar range
I might be wrong

 

[jai jaganath]

lol....that is exactly the 'HHQ-9B' which means "Naval" HQ-9B

---------------------
BTW...:

1.there are two varrients of 052Ds , the displacements varies : normal displacement: 6300 and 6800 tons... the full displacement should be less then 7000 and around 7400 tons.

2. 052D's endurance is 4000 NM (over 7200km) @16 knots...(PS. the '11,000 kms+ at 16-18 knots' endurance for a COGAG vessel is really incredible...lol...actually we should have seen the right parameter on some brochure )

3. 052D doesn't have the ASW filled in the VLS, only the AAW (over 200km) and AShW(over 600km), normally 8 YJ-18 and 56 HHQ-9 in 64 cells. at this stage ,054A FFG carries the ASW in its 32 cell VLS.

4. 052D has 2*3 tube 324mm torpedo tubes....

-------------------
052DE - the export varient was marketed recently...

Can u pls list the armaments of 52C and 52D
It's very confusing
Thanks

 

[Adm Kenobi]

No Destroyer is perfect. Yes, it has less SAMs, and i would love it if they add 16 x VLSRM to the configuration. However calling it "ill equipped" based on less SAMs isnt right.

It is what it is. It hasn't reached its full potential & lacks some key systems.

It packs more punch in terms of weight compared to other Destroyers in its class.

Only in anti-shipping, need not remind of Gorshkov.

Even during designing, couldn the IN add 16 additional Barak 1 and say...ditched the RBU6000?

Delhi and Shivalik are armed with 32 SRSAM, they need not ditch the ASW rocket launcher to pack SRSAM, there's enough space on the foredeck & mid-deck.

Offcourse they could have, but chose not to.

Trishul failed, waiting for an indigenous SRSAM seemed like a better proposition at the time, it's sad that it was shelved before the commissioning of Kolkata.

And anyway, if you wanna compare with Areligh Burke Flight I, which is 8900 tons, Arleigh Burke has invested and filled the warship with SAMs. It has negligible Ashm land warfare with just 8 x Harpoons for a 8900 tons warships.

You're in for a shock, standard load for the Burke was 32 TLAM in 2018, aircraft are responsible for the anti-shipping role, and they can deliver >10× larger volume.

It has Light 324mm Torpedo tubes,

& ASROC, operating with an HWT on high seas isn't easy.

and NO HELI HANGER. Yes it has a Flight Deck for one Helicopter, but it cannot hold Helicopters for prolonged period on high seas. A 8900 ton warship without a Helicopter Hanger , meanwhile 7500 Kolkata/Vish has a Hanger for 2 Helicopters.

Flight 1 is 8230LT, flight IIA (9.1k) incorporated hangar, it's still shorter than P-15A/B.

Burke displaces more than P-15A/B because it is more kitted out, P-15A/B won't always remain at 7400 Tonne, they have a large hull with space to upgrade, and that thing is long & deep. It will displace much more than 7400 Tonnes when it is about to be retired.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

For Kolkata i would have shown you my "INS Kolkata visitors pass" when it had docked in Mumbai sometime in 2016, but i dont have it anymore.

For Shivalik - https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...-over-Rs-50000-crore/articleshow/14783631.cms

There was also another article which said INS Shivalik had travelled to China covering more than 9000 kms without refuel. But that was many years back and i cant seem to find that article anymore, so if anyone can find it , feel free to post.

Don't worry, I saved my source.
3300nm at 18 knots for P-15B
5000nm at 18 knots for P-17
5500nm at 16-18 knots for P-17A

Burke is 4400-4900nm at 20 knots

052D surpasses both.
For time period, P-15A/B & P-17/A can do 45 days.
Pic credit - Vayu

 

[shiphone]

Can u pls list the armaments of 52C and 52D
It's very confusing
Thanks

052C DDG (six in service)

.48 cell of HHQ-9/9B VLS (this revolver style VLS is for the cold launched HHQ-9 serial missile only)
.8 YJ-62 AShM
.100mm naval gun
.two 730 CIWS
.one Z-9C/F or Ka28 helicopter
.2*3 324mm Torpedo tube

052D/D(imporved) DDG

.64 cell universal VLS for AAW, AShW and Land attack missils ..
.HQ-10 SRSAM , 24 missiles ready for fire.
.130mm naval gun
.one 730 or 1130 CIWS
.one Z-9C/F or Z-20F helicopter
.2*3 324mm Torpedo tube

 

[rohit b3]

Ok.

View attachment 203098

fair enough , i stand corrected. must be a more recent development. does any source talk about its weight?

 

[Adm Kenobi]

052DE - the export varient was marketed recently...

That's some 100m OPV

 

[rohit b3]

It does carry torpedo tubes
And regarding asw missiles I don't remember

i know it did, but when im looking up latest articles about its armaments, i cannot find torpedo tubes anywhere.

 

[rohit b3]

lol....that is exactly the 'HHQ-9B' which means "Naval" HQ-9B

---------------------
BTW...:

1.there are two varrients of 052Ds , the displacements varies : normal displacement: 6300 and 6800 tons... the full displacement should be less then 7000 and around 7400 tons.

2. 052D's endurance is 4000 NM (over 7200km) @16 knots...(PS. the '11,000 kms+ at 16-18 knots' endurance for a COGAG vessel is really incredible...lol...actually we should have seen the right parameter on some brochure )

3. 052D doesn't have the ASW filled in the VLS, only the AAW (over 200km) and AShW(over 600km), normally 8 YJ-18 and 56 HHQ-9 in 64 cells. at this stage ,054A FFG carries the ASW in its 32 cell VLS.

4. 052D has 2*3 tube 324mm torpedo tubes....

-------------------
052DE - the export varient was marketed recently...

then i suppose a lot of open sources are giving conflicting reports.

 

[rohit b3]

Don't worry, I saved my source.
3300nm at 18 knots for P-15B
5000nm at 18 knots for P-17
5500nm at 16-18 knots for P-17A

Burke is 4400-4900nm at 20 knots

052D surpasses both.
For time period, P-15A/B & P-17/A can do 45 days.
Pic credit - Vayu View attachment 203099View attachment 203100

pretty sure the INS Kolkata sailor had said around 11,000 kms at economical speeds. Though i cant believe my eyes on those boards, but doesn it feel weird a Frigate has more range than a Destroyer? Something isnt right..

 

[Saumyasupraik]

That's some 100m OPV

I am guessing @shiphone wanted to post the Whale Shark 6000 specifications.

 

[shiphone]

That's some 100m OPV

sorry my bad...

052DE seems to be based on the improved 052D which is longer with more displacement.