Kolkata-class and Visakhapatnam-class Destroyers: News & Discussions

[Parthu]

Small ships are pretty nifty. The Russians have as many as 8 Kalibrs on their 1000T corvettes. And those Kalibrs are known to go up to 2500Km.

My thinking was that LACMs are best used for saturating strikes on inland targets - which are likely to be less effective when the attacking salvo is only 8 (or even 16) LACMs. The Americans used 59 Tomahawks from 2 destroyers to take out a single airfield.

For best effect, they are best launched from ships/submarines that are more capable of carrying a sufficient (or nearer to sufficient) quantity of LACMs. Like at least 32 per ship.

When a large batch of LACMs are dispatched to destroy an inland target, inevitably some of them can & will be shot down by a variety of defenses, and some might just fail out of technical problems or difficulty acquiring targets or properly navigating - happens to the best of them. Having a small initial batch takes a bigger toll out of any attrition, further reducing the effect on the target. And requiring the Navy to usher in a far larger number of vessels to attack the same target with the same effect.

 

[randomradio]

My thinking was that LACMs are best used for saturating strikes on inland targets - which are likely to be less effective when the attacking salvo is only 8 (or even 16) LACMs. The Americans used 59 Tomahawks from 2 destroyers to take out a single airfield.

For best effect, they are best launched from ships/submarines that are more capable of carrying a sufficient (or nearer to sufficient) quantity of LACMs. Like at least 32 per ship.

When a large batch of LACMs are dispatched to destroy an inland target, inevitably some of them can & will be shot down by a variety of defenses, and some might just fail out of technical problems or difficulty acquiring targets or properly navigating - happens to the best of them. Having a small initial batch takes a bigger toll out of any attrition, further reducing the effect on the target. And requiring the Navy to usher in a far larger number of vessels to attack the same target with the same effect.

It depends. A P-15B costs $1B and can carry at least 8 Nirbhays. But a corvette with the weight of a Kora class will be able to carry 16 and cost less than $50M. So for $1B, you can have 20 Koras with 16 Nirbhays each for a total of 320 missiles.

A Kamorta class sized ship can be easily re-engineered to carry 24 missiles, for less than $100M. For $1B, you can have 10 ships carrying 240 missiles.

Both configs give you more firepower than 2 Kolkatas at far lower costs. And both ship classes have massive ranges on their own.

Bring three of those Nirbhay-Kamorta classes along and you will see a nice barrage of 72 missiles.

Always remember that the Americans always use expensive options. They need to travel a lot before they get somewhere. We do not have that problem. Park these ships in either the Arabian Sea or the BoB and fire away from relative safety.

 

[Indian Jatt]

And why not 64 Brahmos ? Stop dreaming.

^$ will be too much....#@ is good incase we need saturation attack....

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

It's not unwise - that's the way both USN and PLAN work. That's a very smart way to accommodate ship's missile systems. The reason why IN can't do the same is not because we wouldn't want to but because we can't!

For India this can't work because our SAM cells are designed for accommodation of Israeli-origin missiles and our strike-length UVLM cells are designed to accommodate Russian-origin anti-ship/land-attack missiles.

Russians & Israelis have no obligation to design their missiles in such a way that they fit into the VLS cells designed by the other party. But US and China use locally-designed missile systems, hence they are able to make missiles that fit into a larger infrastructural domain that underlines commonality and near-infinite flexibility & adaptability.

I don't understand why can't Indian ships erect 48 launchers for Barak-8, 16 for brahmos and 32 for Nirbhaya cruise missile. If there is enough space let, pack it to the brim. Why would someone want to have empty space on a ship?

How universal VLS like Mk.41 works is that a cell capable of storing 1 big missile can accommodate 2 or upto 4 smaller missiles. This is quad-packing. If dealing with a small SRSAM like Sea Sparrow ESSM, you can put 4 missiles in a single VLS cell.

And again, the reason why we have separate cells is not because we wanted it that way, but because we couldn't have it any other way.

We wanted it or not, what is the problem with having different launchers? If the launchers and the missiles are predetermined and not loaded on the spot, I don't see any problem in having different launchers. Since the roles are distinct - Barak-8 is a SAM and Brahmos/Nirbhay are cruise missiles (both made by India), there is no reason I see to be unhappy about.

No, the point of your destroyer is determined by your naval doctrine. If your destroyer's focus is AAW (protecting Carrier Battle Group from enemy air & missile attacks) you may not be bothered even if your destroyer has very limited (or none at all) long range anti-ship capability.

The Royal Navy's Type-45 DDG is an example. I think most of them don't even carry a single ASCM and even when they do, they are designed to accommodate only 8 Harpoons.



Nonsense. For a ship without universal VLS, 16 is very very good number.

Daring-class (UK)
Horizon-class (France)
Orizzonte-class (Italy)
Baden Wurttemburg-class (Germany)
Type-052C (China)
Alvaro De Bazan-class (Spain)
Fridtjof Nansen-class (Norway)

^^ All those have only 8 ASCMs. In surface warfare, the Kolk beats them all hands down, just with what it has now. Remember China only afforded the ability to have larger number of ASCMs only once they installed UVLS on their Type-052D. Before that, 8 ASCMs was standard fit for any PLAN main surface combatant including DDGs and FFGs.

In comparison IN had 16 ASCM package on DDGs designed in 90s like Delhi-class. Heck, we put 16 ASCMs on a farking Corvette (Kora-class)!

The idea is to pack as much punch as possible by completely filling all the space in a ship with weapons. I agree that depending on the role - like AAW or surface role, the missile packed will be different. But no matter what, the number of missile packed must always be maximum. My intention is to get as much firepower as possible rather than the 'minimum" needs. The war works on the principle of doing as much as one can an not as less as one can.

IN already has more than enough love of ASCMs. What we need now are more SAMs.



Across the Navy? Sure. We will have both BrahMos and at least 1 other type of smaller ASCM which might or might not be subsonic for the smaller ships.

But more than 1 type of ASCM on a single ship? That's probably not gonna happen - here or in any other country*

* Not including SAMs or otherwise re-purposed missiles used to attack ships.

The idea of having subsonic cruise missile is to have dual use of hitting land targets as well as ships. It is always important to strike the ports of enemies to prevent resupply and refuel. Hence longer range missiles are needed. It will be difficult to enter region closer to the port as the port is likely to be guarded by other ships, coast guard and helicopters.

SAM is also needed and can be enhanced to 48 from the current 32 by adding 2 sets of launchers with 8 missile each.

1200km LACMs on gun boats and corvettes?

I meant that LACM will be useful for hitting smaller ships without air defence like those of Pakistan. Almost none of the Pakistani ships have a decent SAM and can be struck down by slow moving LACM like Nirbhay.

Since you mentioned carrying LACM on corvettes and gun boats, it is actually possible to carry LACM on corvettes and missile boats. India used a few missile boast in 1971 war. The advantage is that missile boats are expendable and hence can be tasked with more dangerous operations.

 

[Austerlitz]

Our next destroyer at least should be something like this -

Sejong the Great-class destroyer - Wikipedia

Just 8500 tons st.displacement and 11000 full load.But look at the capability and punch it packs.

AEGIS radar.Both passive and towed array active sonar.2 helicopters.Even IRST system.Electronic countermeasures suite.
127 mm gun. Goalkeeper CIWS.Black shark heavy torpedo tubes.
21 cell RAM PDM.
16 anti ship missiles.
80 vls for SM-2
32 vls for land attack cruise missile
16 vls for ASROC

And all this for ~950 million dollars.
Ofcourse the subsonic ASCM is no comparison to brahmos,but as far as i see this is a PERFECT destroyer.

 

[Notsuperstitious]

Our next destroyer at least should be something like this -

Sejong the Great-class destroyer - Wikipedia

Just 8500 tons st.displacement and 11000 full load.But look at the capability and punch it packs.

AEGIS radar.Both passive and towed array active sonar.2 helicopters.Even IRST system.Electronic countermeasures suite.
127 mm gun. Goalkeeper CIWS.Black shark heavy torpedo tubes.
21 cell RAM PDM.
16 anti ship missiles.
80 vls for SM-2
32 vls for land attack cruise missile
16 vls for ASROC

And all this for ~950 million dollars.
Ofcourse the subsonic ASCM is no comparison to brahmos,but as far as i see this is a PERFECT destroyer.

The pricing you quoted is not very clear in terms of what is included. For example, just the 3 AEGIS with aux equipment will cost close to 2 billion dollars today.

 

[Ashwin]

 

[Ashwin]

INS Kolkata

 

[China_SCS_Info]

Hello guys, just signed up. Yesterday I posted a long thread about Kolkata class in Twitter. I did the best I could, but there are a lot of mistakes in the info out there. I hope you guys can check the thread and give me feedback. I already founds valuable information in this thread, which I'll use for an expanded, upgraded version of my Kolkata thread. Thanks a lot in advance.

This is the link to the twitter Kolkata thread: Kolkata-class and Visakhapatnam class Destroyers: News & Discussions

 

[Ashwin]

Hello guys, just signed up. Yesterday I posted a long thread about Kolkata class in Twitter. I did the best I could, but there are a lot of mistakes in the info out there. I hope you guys can check the thread and give me feedback. I already founds valuable information in this thread, which I'll use for an expanded, upgraded version of my Kolkata thread. Thanks a lot in advance.

This is the link to the twitter Kolkata thread: Kolkata-class and Visakhapatnam class Destroyers: News & Discussions

Welcome.

Wrong link?

 

[China_SCS_Info]

Oops yes, here is the twitter link:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1053680777404153856

 

[China_SCS_Info]

By the way, talking about my twitter thread, I already know about the mistake about what helos are carried, Sea King and Chetak, no HAL Dhruv. I mentioned Varaustra torpedoes, but I think it also uses Russian type 65 torpedoes, can anybody confirm?

 

[China_SCS_Info]

Welcome.

Wrong link?

Thank, I already posted the right link.

 

[Ashwin]

By the way, talking about my twitter thread, I already know about the mistake about what helos are carried, Sea King and Chetak, no HAL Dhruv. I mentioned Varaustra torpedoes, but I think it also uses Russian type 65 torpedoes, can anybody confirm?

Varunastra just entered production. Ultimately it will replace the Russian ones.

 

[China_SCS_Info]

Varunastra just entered production. Ultimately it will replace the Russian ones.

Thank you, but can you confirm that what Kolkata class is using now is the Russian type 65?

 

[Ashwin]

Thank you, but can you confirm that what Kolkata class is using now is the Russian type 65?

In all probability it's using Russian now because all the equipment for the ship were ordered pre-varunastra. Varunastra got formally induced and placed order only in 2016.

 

[Pundrick]

What is the progress on P-15B's 1st ship ? Any latest image, apart from pics during Scorpene launch, would be better ?

 

[Parthu]

INS Kolkata together with HMS Dragon:

@randomradio @Ashwin @Milspec @Hellfire @Amal @Nordic Wolf @BMD

 

[Ashwin]

 

[Parthu]

some more from Exercise Konkan 2018;