General News, Questions And Discussions - Indian Navy

Are these manufactured or assembled here?..and if manufactured then how much of it is indigenous?
 
bille ka vut said:
Are these manufactured or assembled here?..and if manufactured then how much of it is indigenous?
Click to expand...
Manufactured entirely in India from raw material stage in that Haridwar plant. Ammo is made by OFB.

Here is an overview of BEMLs capabilities :
Screenshot (31).png

Barrel forging :
Screenshot (32).png

Machining the forged metal :
Screenshot (33).png

More machining :
Screenshot (34).png

Boring the barrel :
Screenshot (35).png

Fabricating the fixtures, stealth mount et al :
Screenshot (36).png

Final assembly and testing :
Screenshot (37).png
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious, bille ka vut, RISING SUN and 1 other person
Gautam said:
Manufactured entirely in India from raw material stage in that Haridwar plant. Ammo is made by OFB.

Here is an overview of BEMLs capabilities :
View attachment 16982

Barrel forging :
View attachment 16983

Machining the forged metal :
View attachment 16984

More machining :
View attachment 16985

Boring the barrel :
View attachment 16986

Fabricating the fixtures, stealth mount et al :
View attachment 16987

Final assembly and testing :
View attachment 16981
Click to expand...
The photos ( at least the first one) is of BHEL.
 
Gautam said:
Manufactured entirely in India from raw material stage in that Haridwar plant. Ammo is made by OFB.

Here is an overview of BEMLs capabilities :
View attachment 16982

Barrel forging :
View attachment 16983

Machining the forged metal :
View attachment 16984

More machining :
View attachment 16985

Boring the barrel :
View attachment 16986

Fabricating the fixtures, stealth mount et al :
View attachment 16987

Final assembly and testing :
View attachment 16981
Click to expand...
Thanks great to see that these have been completely indigenised.any idea if we are planning to do the same with 5inch guns in the future?..afaik the bae deal didint include any license production
 
_Anonymous_ said:
The photos ( at least the first one) is of BHEL.
Click to expand...
All of them are from BHEL. I mixed up the names, sorry.
bille ka vut said:
Thanks great to see that these have been completely indigenised.any idea if we are planning to do the same with 5inch guns in the future?..afaik the bae deal didint include any license production
Click to expand...
BAE 127mm will not be made in India, as a part of the current deal. BHEL wanted to make the Otobreda 127 mm naval main gun in India after the gun won the IN's bid for the same. However the company OTO Melara was blacklisted as a part of the Agusta Westland scam investigation, OTO and Westland had the same parent company.

Thus the Navy had to scrap the old tender and buy the BAE 127mm gun. Now, Mahindra Defence has a JV with BAE and is already manufacturing BAE M777 guns in India. May be if Navy increases the order amount of the 127mm in the future we can have local assembly or even production in country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker, JustCurious, bille ka vut and 1 other person
Indian Navy to buy more U.S made weapons; big boost for Indian Navy
After the first batch of Rafale jets landed in India, a big boost for the Indian Navy as well. The Indian Navy is all set to buy sophisticated U.S made weapons.

The Defence acquisition council is expected to clear a decision to acquire 10 unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs during the upcoming meeting on August 11, 2020. A big boost for the Navy capability as well is expected soon.
The final decision however will be taken by August 11th, when a big meeting is likely to happen.

With the recent escalation in tensions between India and its neighbors, the move seems to be a great one to purchase strong weaponry.
www.timesnownews.com

Indian Navy to buy more U.S made weapons; big boost for Indian Navy

After the first batch of Rafale jets landed in India, a big boost for the Indian Navy as well. The Indian Navy is all set to buy sophisticated U.S made weapons.The Defence acquisition council is expected to clear a decision to acquire 10 unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs during the upcoming...
www.timesnownews.com www.timesnownews.com
 
And here's the most inane question directed at SME's:

Why do we even bother with stealth ships if PLAN Military Satellite constellation can anyway track & easily triangulate them in open seas ?
IN authorities do acknowledge this limitation on its IOR operations, that we can't move around without getting detected. This is yesterday's news.

To avoid the associated splurge that may or may not deliver targeted value, why not rather invest on Arsenal Ships loaded with:

  • higher tonnage (than the norm with IN), with longer sea-faring capabilities
  • longer range, higher resolution, bigger coverage, jam-proof MF-STAR,
  • armed to the teeth with massive no. of large VLS that can accommodate the best we will have
  • much higher AAD capabilities,
  • much enhanced Sub-Hunting capability with Anti-Sub rockets & more
  • more than 5 torpdeo tubes &
  • more than 2 aviation assets for SAR, CASEVAC, then few for AEW&C & few for anti-sub roles,
  • a platform that also acts as hub of drone-swarms for MALE/HALE-type,
  • fewer guns & lot more real-estate for all of the above.
Later, maybe start replacing the above to make way for logistical-setup (power-gens) required for rail-gun, MW, Laser etc.
Age of missiiles is anyway here to stay for another 15-20 years, so rail-gun mounting can wait.

Basically a new design (re-imagination) the combines the best of AAD, Anti-Undersea, Anti-Surface, Land-Attack, with some aviation components - that doesn't needs a flotilla of supporting crafts, FSS, frigates, destroyers. A massively hulked-up destroyer, on the conceptual lines of ColdWar era BattleCruisers (fewer guns, though & more missiles).

Sea-control, Sea-Denial, Air-Defence, Land-Attack, all-in-one - not an under-powered, sitting duck requiring multiple crutches & still ever-so vulnerable, scared, with short legs - like our Aircraft-Carriers are - a sinkhole of precious taxpayers' toil.

And still 1/3rd the tonnage of our so-called carriers. Thus simpler, efficient logistical support, faster replenishment & easier operations towards maximum effect. Way more bang for the buck.

  1. What are the constraints in conceiving such a design ?
  2. Why so stuck - in conventional designs bought from Finmeccanica, Navantia, & the likes ?
  3. Any such existing project underway with any of the global Naval Design bureaus ?
@vstol Jockey @randomradio @Milspec @Ashwin @Gautam et al

Highly obliged
 
Last edited:
JustCurious said:
And here's the most inane question directed at SME's:

Why do we even bother with stealth ships if PLAN Military Satellite constellation can anyway track & easily triangulate them in open seas ?
IN authorities do acknowledge this limitation on its IOR operations, that we can't move around without getting detected. This is yesterday's news.

To avoid the associated splurge that may or may not deliver targeted value, why not rather invest on Arsenal Ships loaded with:

  • higher tonnage (than the norm with IN), with longer sea-faring capabilities
  • longer range, higher resolution, bigger coverage, jam-proof MF-STAR,
  • armed to the teeth with massive no. of large VLS that can accommodate the best we will have
  • much higher AAD capabilities,
  • much enhanced Sub-Hunting capability with Anti-Sub rockets & more
  • more than 5 torpdeo tubes &
  • more than 2 aviation assets for SAR, CASEVAC, then few for AEW&C & few for anti-sub roles,
  • a platform that also acts as hub of drone-swarms for MALE/HALE-type,
  • fewer guns & lot more real-estate for all of the above.
Later, maybe start replacing the above to make way for logistical-setup (power-gens) required for rail-gun, MW, Laser etc.
Age of missiiles is anyway here to stay for another 15-20 years, so rail-gun mounting can wait.

Basically a new design (re-imagination) the combines the best of AAD, Anti-Undersea, Anti-Surface, Land-Attack, with some aviation components - that doesn't needs a flotilla of supporting crafts, FSS, frigates, destroyers. A massively hulked-up destroyer, on the conceptual lines of ColdWar era BattleCruisers (fewer guns, though & more missiles).

Sea-control, Sea-Denial, Air-Defence, Land-Attack, all-in-one - not an under-powered, sitting duck requiring multiple crutches & still ever-so vulnerable, scared, with short legs - like our Aircraft-Carriers are - a sinkhole of precious taxpayers' toil.

And still 1/3rd the tonnage of our so-called carriers. Thus simpler, efficient logistical support, faster replenishment & easier operations towards maximum effect. Way more bang for the buck.

  1. What are the constraints in conceiving such a design ?
  2. Why so stuck - in conventional designs bought from Finmeccanica, Navantia, & the likes ?
  3. Any such existing project underway with any of the global Naval Design bureaus ?
@vstol Jockey @randomradio @Milspec @Ashwin @Gautam et al

Highly obliged
Click to expand...

What you are asking for has already been done by the Soviet Union. Check out the Kirov class.

At the lower end compared to Kirov, the Russians have the Slava class. And they were planning to build a replacement called the Lider class, but that's gone nowhere. So yes, there is such an existing project under the Lider class, but it was suspended this year.

As for us, we don't have the pockets necessary for such a ship. The US hasn't pursued such ships either. Rather, the US use a few Ohio class in SSGN form as arsenal ships, each equipped with 150 Tomahawks.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Lolwa and JustCurious
JustCurious said:
And here's the most inane question directed at SME's:

Why do we even bother with stealth ships if PLAN Military Satellite constellation can anyway track & easily triangulate them in open seas ?
IN authorities do acknowledge this limitation on its IOR operations, that we can't move around without getting detected. This is yesterday's news.

To avoid the associated splurge that may or may not deliver targeted value, why not rather invest on Arsenal Ships loaded with:

  • higher tonnage (than the norm with IN), with longer sea-faring capabilities
  • longer range, higher resolution, bigger coverage, jam-proof MF-STAR,
  • armed to the teeth with massive no. of large VLS that can accommodate the best we will have
  • much higher AAD capabilities,
  • much enhanced Sub-Hunting capability with Anti-Sub rockets & more
  • more than 5 torpdeo tubes &
  • more than 2 aviation assets for SAR, CASEVAC, then few for AEW&C & few for anti-sub roles,
  • a platform that also acts as hub of drone-swarms for MALE/HALE-type,
  • fewer guns & lot more real-estate for all of the above.
Later, maybe start replacing the above to make way for logistical-setup (power-gens) required for rail-gun, MW, Laser etc.
Age of missiiles is anyway here to stay for another 15-20 years, so rail-gun mounting can wait.

Basically a new design (re-imagination) the combines the best of AAD, Anti-Undersea, Anti-Surface, Land-Attack, with some aviation components - that doesn't needs a flotilla of supporting crafts, FSS, frigates, destroyers. A massively hulked-up destroyer, on the conceptual lines of ColdWar era BattleCruisers (fewer guns, though & more missiles).

Sea-control, Sea-Denial, Air-Defence, Land-Attack, all-in-one - not an under-powered, sitting duck requiring multiple crutches & still ever-so vulnerable, scared, with short legs - like our Aircraft-Carriers are - a sinkhole of precious taxpayers' toil.

And still 1/3rd the tonnage of our so-called carriers. Thus simpler, efficient logistical support, faster replenishment & easier operations towards maximum effect. Way more bang for the buck.

  1. What are the constraints in conceiving such a design ?
  2. Why so stuck - in conventional designs bought from Finmeccanica, Navantia, & the likes ?
  3. Any such existing project underway with any of the global Naval Design bureaus ?
@vstol Jockey @randomradio @Milspec @Ashwin @Gautam et al

Highly obliged
Click to expand...
Stealth doesn't necessarily mean to remain hidden, it just means to make target acquisition by the foe more difficult and thereby increase the survivability of the vessel.

On the second point, numbers are really important in the age of supersonic CMs.
1 P28 ship doing ASW duties , 1 frigate doing solo long range deployments and 1 destroyer providing AD to a CBG is anyday more cost effective and more survivable than a single 15000 ton vessel doing everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious
JustCurious said:
Why do we even bother with stealth ships if PLAN Military Satellite constellation can anyway track & easily triangulate them in open seas ?
Click to expand...
Since when is that easy ?! Satellite based triangulation is easy for large sized slow moving ships like carriers not for faster moving destroyers. Even with carriers it is very difficult to attain targeting grade info from satellites.
JustCurious said:
IN authorities do acknowledge this limitation on its IOR operations, that we can't move around without getting detected. This is yesterday's news.
Click to expand...
If sneaky-ness is needed it is better to use smaller (say less than 3000 ton ships) & faster ships(>30 knots). But sneaking away from satellites requires you to do things that will make you rather loud and visible on sonar. Depending on the mission the choices are made.
JustCurious said:
To avoid the associated splurge that may or may not deliver targeted value, why not rather invest on Arsenal Ships loaded with:

  • higher tonnage (than the norm with IN), with longer sea-faring capabilities
  • longer range, higher resolution, bigger coverage, jam-proof MF-STAR,
  • armed to the teeth with massive no. of large VLS that can accommodate the best we will have
  • much higher AAD capabilities,
  • much enhanced Sub-Hunting capability with Anti-Sub rockets & more
  • more than 5 torpdeo tubes &
  • more than 2 aviation assets for SAR, CASEVAC, then few for AEW&C & few for anti-sub roles,
  • a platform that also acts as hub of drone-swarms for MALE/HALE-type,
  • fewer guns & lot more real-estate for all of the above.
Click to expand...

You can't give the Navy the smallest share of the budget and expect them to come up with super-mega-hyper weapons. In either case :

  • Navy's next gen destroyer probably will be around 10, 000 tons in displacement. Just guesswork on my part.
  • There is a larger naval AESA multi function radar in testing. DRDO should be able to conclude tests in the next few years.
  • Before getting a lot of VLS, we need to adopt a common VLS. Let, the naval Nirbhay missile come up. We should get to see some standardization of the Nirbhay with the current Brahmos VLS. The Kolkata, Vishapatnam and Nilgiri class ships have plenty of free deck space for additional VLS. But without standardization it is difficult to get more VLS, as every new missile will need a new launcher.
  • With the conclusion of the ASAT test, we should be in the second phase of the BMD program. This is where more advanced missiles like AD-1 & AD-2 come up. No further details are known yet. Some critical components for such advanced AD missiles like : two way comms link, conformal antennas and TSA based X-band and Ku-band AESA seekers have already been developed. Let's see how things play out. You can find details about the seekers, conformal antenna and naval radar at the AESA radar thread.
  • Supersonic Missile Assisted Release of Torpedo(SMART) program is ongoing. Me and @hellbent had quite a long rant on this over at the Indian Missiles and Munitions thread sometime back. We also a new lightweight torpedo coming up named ALWT. Check the torpedo thread.
  • Navy's helo acquisition is a mess to put it mildly. Way too much has been said about it and nothing much has been done. I don't want to start with this now.
  • About drone swarms, we do have a similar project running for the IAF. Check the Indian UAV thread. Don't know if the system will be compatible with ships though.
  • There is work going on rail guns, modern EW, EMP weapons, lasers & other DEW going on too. But progress has been slow.
  • What do you have against guns ? We need more modern CIWS though. AK-630 is good but we need better in the future.

JustCurious said:
  1. What are the constraints in conceiving such a design ?
  2. Why so stuck - in conventional designs bought from Finmeccanica, Navantia, & the likes ?
  3. Any such existing project underway with any of the global Naval Design bureaus ?
Click to expand...

1. For now the biggest one is money, or the lack of it. Most of the tech you listed is already there in India. Some are in more advanced state of development than others.

2. Most our designs are done in country. Foreign firms are contracted when no local expertise is around. Somehow it always seems to end badly. Recall IN's minesweeper bid.

3. Nothing in public. But going by the evolution of destroyers so far, the next one will probably be 10K tons.
Rajput: ~5000 tons
Delhi: ~6200 tons
Kolkata: ~7400 tons
Vishakapatnam: ~7400 tons

Essentially the Vizag class is an improved variant of the Kolkata. The Nilgiri class frigate (fully loaded) has nearly the same displacement as the Vizag (un-loaded). The NG-DDG, whatever it is named, will have to be bigger. With naval LR-LACMs and more options of AD missiles coming in. I am guessing the displacement has to be around 10K tons.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Chain Smoker and JustCurious
Neighbourhood first: Indian Navy extends technical support to Sri Lankan Air Force
economictimes.indiatimes.com

Neighbourhood first: Indian Navy extends technical support to Sri Lankan Air Force

Assistance was made possible due to similar inventory and experience, ET has learnt. "This is a nice example of cordial and fraternal Services level cooperation between India and SL and also of inherent interoperability of similar equipment and platforms," a source said
economictimes.indiatimes.com economictimes.indiatimes.com
 
randomradio said:
What you are asking for has already been done by the Soviet Union. Check out the Kirov class.

At the lower end compared to Kirov, the Russians have the Slava class. And they were planning to build a replacement called the Lider class, but that's gone nowhere. So yes, there is such an existing project under the Lider class, but it was suspended this year.

As for us, we don't have the pockets necessary for such a ship. The US hasn't pursued such ships either. Rather, the US use a few Ohio class in SSGN form as arsenal ships, each equipped with 150 Tomahawks.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your inputs. When we can spare a bit & stretch ourselves for 4 Billion USD short for acquiring Gorky with AAD (rechristened now, still very short legs & payload) & still capable of paying for 2 more IAC's (total expense unknown), with IAC-2 air-arm complement totally up in the air (unknown), could such SSGN in case of construction within India set us back by many more billion dollars ?

What I was referring to a somewhat more balanced ship (than Ohio class) between Anti-Ship, Anti-Surface, Anti-Sub, Anti-Air.
A mini-Ohio class, if you will - with all-round capabilities, which is very well-defended against under-sea & cruise Missile threat.


150 Cruise Missiles seems an overkill. We follow 16-24 SSM layout in our India, to bumping it up 48-50 CM's appear enough on a single such ship. Remaining real-estate & investment directed towards tackling SSN-SSGN threat, along with AAD & ACM capabilities.

A flotilla of 2-3 such ships can upset any equations in the theater. Aren't some of the latest PLAN destroyers going this way already ?

Something which doesn't requires a full fleet to support it in any kind of threat-but can rather provide cover to all kinds of fleet in India, independently. It will be everything that our IAC's can never be, due to their Mig29K, without splurging on prohibitively expensive French or American jets, while we can manufacture all Cruise Missiles ourselves.

After all, what is an Deck-based Jet, but a platform to deliver ammunition, & acting as sea-deterrent --- at an immense risk to itself, each Rs. 1600 crore platform (IAC2) , after ignoring all components & expenses that go into pilot training & aircraft maintenance) .

Why can't this kind of Arsenal ship do the same job without emptying IN coffers - like what IAC-2 is projected to do.

Such ships can be designed form scratch indigeniously, all its arsenal will be developed in India.
  • Zero dependency on foreigners for its Air-Arm, unlike the all IAC's that catch IN-planners fancy
  • saving previous foreign-exchange
  • getting completed on time
  • avoiding associated cost-escalation, thus saving even more foreign exchange

How can it be any less effective & costlier than like Vicky & IAC-1 which are practically sitting ducks when alone, sad they wouldn't even dare to venture out alone :D. On the contrary, a well thought-out design should be lot less costlier than these fancy platforms, which are nowadays being aptly shown the door at the very outset.
Ankit Kumar said:
Stealth doesn't necessarily mean to remain hidden, it just means to make target acquisition by the foe more difficult and thereby increase the survivability of the vessel.

On the second point, numbers are really important in the age of supersonic CMs.
1 P28 ship doing ASW duties , 1 frigate doing solo long range deployments and 1 destroyer providing AD to a CBG is anyday more cost effective and more survivable than a single 15000 ton vessel doing everything.
Click to expand...

Thank you Ankit for the inputs. What I am conjuring up has to be more balanced. & Way more defensible than anything Asian Navies will have in near future.
 
Gautam said:
Since when is that easy ?! Satellite based triangulation is easy for large sized slow moving ships like carriers not for faster moving destroyers. Even with carriers it is very difficult to attain targeting grade info from satellites.

If sneaky-ness is needed it is better to use smaller (say less than 3000 ton ships) & faster ships(>30 knots). But sneaking away from satellites requires you to do things that will make you rather loud and visible on sonar. Depending on the mission the choices are made.


You can't give the Navy the smallest share of the budget and expect them to come up with super-mega-hyper weapons. In either case :

  • Navy's next gen destroyer probably will be around 10, 000 tons in displacement. Just guesswork on my part.
  • There is a larger naval AESA multi function radar in testing. DRDO should be able to conclude tests in the next few years.
  • Before getting a lot of VLS, we need to adopt a common VLS. Let, the naval Nirbhay missile come up. We should get to see some standardization of the Nirbhay with the current Brahmos VLS. The Kolkata, Vishapatnam and Nilgiri class ships have plenty of free deck space for additional VLS. But without standardization it is difficult to get more VLS, as every new missile will need a new launcher.
  • With the conclusion of the ASAT test, we should be in the second phase of the BMD program. This is where more advanced missiles like AD-1 & AD-2 come up. No further details are known yet. Some critical components for such advanced AD missiles like : two way comms link, conformal antennas and TSA based X-band and Ku-band AESA seekers have already been developed. Let's see how things play out. You can find details about the seekers, conformal antenna and naval radar at the AESA radar thread.
  • Supersonic Missile Assisted Release of Torpedo(SMART) program is ongoing. Me and @hellbent had quite a long rant on this over at the Indian Missiles and Munitions thread sometime back. We also a new lightweight torpedo coming up named ALWT. Check the torpedo thread.
  • Navy's helo acquisition is a mess to put it mildly. Way too much has been said about it and nothing much has been done. I don't want to start with this now.
  • About drone swarms, we do have a similar project running for the IAF. Check the Indian UAV thread. Don't know if the system will be compatible with ships though.
  • There is work going on rail guns, modern EW, EMP weapons, lasers & other DEW going on too. But progress has been slow.
  • What do you have against guns ? We need more modern CIWS though. AK-630 is good but we need better in the future.



1. For now the biggest one is money, or the lack of it. Most of the tech you listed is already there in India. Some are in more advanced state of development than others.

2. Most our designs are done in country. Foreign firms are contracted when no local expertise is around. Somehow it always seems to end badly. Recall IN's minesweeper bid.

3. Nothing in public. But going by the evolution of destroyers so far, the next one will probably be 10K tons.
Rajput: ~5000 tons
Delhi: ~6200 tons
Kolkata: ~7400 tons
Vishakapatnam: ~7400 tons

Essentially the Vizag class is an improved variant of the Kolkata. The Nilgiri class frigate (fully loaded) has nearly the same displacement as the Vizag (un-loaded). The NG-DDG, whatever it is named, will have to be bigger. With naval LR-LACMs and more options of AD missiles coming in. I am guessing the displacement has to be around 10K tons.
Click to expand...

Ohk. Apparently, NG-DDG would be somewhat closer to my concoction.

This was immensely informative. SFO rocks. Admins and SME's abound, all rockstars.

DFI, which is run & moderated by a bunch closet-Commies (posing as Centrist, RW - but never neutral) & also diehard-Commies doesn't compares. Though I have really missed Brig. Ray Sir over there & maintained distance from that forum for several years.

Please feel free to omit previous line, but I had to convey this.

Thank you for the time you took out to reply, though I must say it must come effortlessly to someone of your caliber.
 
JustCurious said:
Thank you for your inputs. When we can spare a bit & stretch ourselves for 4 Billion USD short for acquiring Gorky with AAD (rechristened now, still very short legs & payload) & still capable of paying for 2 more IAC's (total expense unknown), with IAC-2 air-arm complement totally up in the air (unknown), could such SSGN in case of construction within India set us back by many more billion dollars ?

What I was referring to a somewhat more balanced ship (than Ohio class) between Anti-Ship, Anti-Surface, Anti-Sub, Anti-Air.
A mini-Ohio class, if you will - with all-round capabilities, which is very well-defended against under-sea & cruise Missile threat.


150 Cruise Missiles seems an overkill. We follow 16-24 SSM layout in our India, to bumping it up 48-50 CM's appear enough on a single such ship. Remaining real-estate & investment directed towards tackling SSN-SSGN threat, along with AAD & ACM capabilities.

A flotilla of 2-3 such ships can upset any equations in the theater. Aren't some of the latest PLAN destroyers going this way already ?

Something which doesn't requires a full fleet to support it in any kind of threat-but can rather provide cover to all kinds of fleet in India, independently. It will be everything that our IAC's can never be, due to their Mig29K, without splurging on prohibitively expensive French or American jets, while we can manufacture all Cruise Missiles ourselves.

After all, what is an Deck-based Jet, but a platform to deliver ammunition, & acting as sea-deterrent --- at an immense risk to itself, each Rs. 1600 crore platform (IAC2) , after ignoring all components & expenses that go into pilot training & aircraft maintenance) .

Why can't this kind of Arsenal ship do the same job without emptying IN coffers - like what IAC-2 is projected to do.

Such ships can be designed form scratch indigeniously, all its arsenal will be developed in India.
  • Zero dependency on foreigners for its Air-Arm, unlike the all IAC's that catch IN-planners fancy
  • saving previous foreign-exchange
  • getting completed on time
  • avoiding associated cost-escalation, thus saving even more foreign exchange

How can it be any less effective & costlier than like Vicky & IAC-1 which are practically sitting ducks when alone, sad they wouldn't even dare to venture out alone :D. On the contrary, a well thought-out design should be lot less costlier than these fancy platforms, which are nowadays being aptly shown the door at the very outset.
Click to expand...

Yep, all of this is going to be part of the Next Generation Destroyer program for a new class of destroyers that will succeed P-15B. It will carry more advanced weapons, larger inventory of missiles, bigger radars (perhaps indigenous) and so on.

Bu whether the IN will simply go for a P-15C or a new class right away is as of yet unknown. The DWT is also unknown, although to get everything you want, we will need a 10,000 to 13,000T ship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom