WanshanSee this picture. Maybe some part of the rack is there, but the launchers are not. You can barely see the top of the port side launchers.
So? That means she’s fitted with 2 racks for a total of 8 Uran. At present, from the image, she carries 2.
Ever seen NATO ships (frigates e.g. ) on port visits? Usually, they don’t carry a full load of Harpoons but rather e.g. 2×1 instead of the full 2×4 load out. That doesn’t mean their load couldn’t/wouldn’t be 2×4.
Wanshanactually if VLS Shtil offered good performance then IN probably wouldn’t have asked Israel/DRDO to develop 70km Barak-2. I believe when Barak-2 is ready for induction, IN might replace Shtil with it provided radars and entire system can fit into the ship easily.
For CIWS, P-15, P-16A and other older warships were refitted Barak-1 replacing Russian SAMs and Guns. while Talwar still has Kashtan-M System. But P-17 might have Barak-1/AK-630. that does say that if warship is built in russia, israeli origin weapons or systems are not entertained.
Viraat was fitted with 16 Barak VLS, we would expect similar fit for Gorshy but it repordtedly has Kashtan-M. Again Carrier built locally by India is expected to have Barak.
P15s got Barak in addition to (not in place of) Russian missiles (Shtil), at the cost of a couple of AK630. Same on some of the Rajput (Kashin) class at the cost of a couple of older AK230. P16A was supposed to get Trishul SAM (indigenous but clearly modelled after Russian OSA-M) but due to its terminal delays got Barak instead (they never got Trishil). Only then did some older P16 get Barak in place of their original Russian OSA-M SAMS. Which makes sense logistically. While Barak was ordered for close in protection, orders for the longer ranged Shtil continued (P17, mod-Talwars). Which signals satisfaction with Shtil. Barak-NG/2 is clearly intended a third missile layer.
Original model and drawings of P17 showed her with Kashtan. These at present are not showing on the ship and the presence of Elta radar directors suggests Barak-1 will be used instead.
As for Gorshkov, it was never clear what she would be receiving as armament. My understanding is IN wanted Barak-1 and Russia wanted to sell Kashtan. Presently nothing it fitted. She might yet end up with both …
WanshanGovt approves Navy plans for four new warships
New Delhi, Mar 16 (PTI) The government has approved building of four new destroyer warships to bolster the Navy’s strength. The follow-on orders for the new destroyers would be placed with Mumbai-based Mazagon Docks Limited (MDL) soon, top Navy sources said here today.
“The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) has last month given in-principle approval to the Navy’s proposal for construction of four new Kolkata Class destroyers,” sources said.
Codenamed “Project 15B”, the new warships would be built after the MDL completed construction of the first three destroyers of the Kolkata Class under “Project 15A”.
To be built with advanced stealth features, the four new warships will have land attack capabilities and would be fully indigenous.
“In all, the Navy has would have seven Kolkata Class destroyers,” sources noted.
Currently, the Navy has three Delhi Class destroyers in its service and the Kolkata Class destroyers are expected to join the Navy one each every year beginning with 2010.
The MDL had begun construction of the Kolkata class ships beginning September 2003.
Meanwhile, in another post in the IN thread, it was claimed that Magazon lacks pier and dock space already, having trouble dealing with the 3 P17s and 3 P15As it is currently building…. now there are going to be 4 more P15s in B version? And then add P17As etc > makes no sense.
WanshanOut of nowhere I wonder how much that would cost in comparison with providing Perrys with usable Standards?
As it stands the Perrys are able to deploy Helos and get between torpedoes and big surface units but little else.
Al
Much less, I assume, because there would be no need to make changes (upgrades) of the firecontrol system as RAM is fire and forget. > no need to reinstall the STIR, no need to modify the WM25 etc to get a suficient number of guidance channels.
If those helicopters are properly armed (Penguin missile e.g.), they have fair anti shipping capability as well.
WanshanBecause on pictures i have only seen them on one side, above picture does not show launchers. Do you see them?
I see 1 rack for 4 Uran amidship on the starboard side. Assuming another rack on the other side, that’s a pretty normal AShM fit. Also considering that the ship can launch additional AShM from its fixed torpedo tubes.
The above graphic I posted shows 4 racks for 4 Uran each amidships.
WanshanExcuse my ignorance. Is Mk48 the single-pack VLS for ESSM only?
As others have said OHPs have been fitted with Mk41 (presumably quad-packed with ESSM?) AS WELL AS Mk13; so presumably they could lose Mk13 and have a larger Mk41.
Looking at the size of the Mk41 on Adelaide and her sisters and the size of the Mk13 and footprint I’d have though that at least 4x 8 cell VLS could be mounted in a raised silo on the foredeck
Al
I’ve assumed you’ld want a launcher with sufficient length for Standard SM2 i.e. a longer MK41 version than is used in the Aussie conversion, which therefor cannot be mounted too close to the bow.
You can be sure to have sufficient below deck depth at the spot of the Mk13. Using only the space left vacant by the removed launcher, and minimizing the amount of surgery needed, you can fit at least 2 and possibly 3 Mk41 units. This could hold 64 ESSM or possibly 32 ESSM+16 SM2 and would leave some deckspace for a fit of 2×2 or 2×4 Harpoon above deck (removal of Mk13 eliminates OHP Harpoon capability).
A 2×2 fit or 2×2+1 Mk41 8-cell units would require substantially greater modification, including possibly a deck house, and is of questionable use without substantial modification and improvement in the firecontrol system (increased number of guidance channels needed). For a 4 or 5 unit VLU farm, you’ld probably need to put the Mk41 units lengthwise rather than crosswise (2+2) or combined (4 lengthwise +1 across).
Mk48 comes in 4 different configurations (Mod 0: on deck as in Canadian Halifax class, Mod 1: bulkhead as on Dutch Doorman class, Mod 2: in-deck as on South Korean KD1 Okpo, and Mod 3: compact module as used on Danisch Stanflex ships. Presently Mk48 single packs Sea Sparrow. With a mk20 canister, the Mk48 can double pack ESSM (DP-48). http://www.raytheon.com/businesses/stellent/groups/public/documents/legacy_site/cms01_048612.pdf
Quickest way to mod a OHP left without Mk13 would be to add a 21-cell RAM launcher were the Mk13 used to be, add 2×2 Harpoon forward of the bridge, replace the Phalanx with another 21-cell RAM launcher and bolt on 4 remote control 25mm cannons around the ship.
WanshanThe IN considered PAAMS for the P-17s.
It looks like P-17 delays harming other projects as well ….bad sign for indian defence shipbuilding… i think the Navy should go for Private + PSU JV…
Sorry, Mumbai has no berth for Kolkata
SUJAN DUTTAhttp://www.telegraphindia.com/1090317/jsp/nation/story_10681349.jsp
New Delhi, March 16: The navy is all at sea because there is no room in Mumbai for Kolkata.
The INS Kolkata, the navy’s “stealth” guided-missile destroyer named after the Bengal capital, is floating — unable to sail — in the waters off the west coast metropolis.
Not a berth is available in the Mazagaon Docks where the INS Kolkata is to be moored so that it can be fitted with four gas turbines to propel it; given a landing deck and a hangar for two helicopters; armed with missiles and torpedoes to make it the most powerful warship of its class.
On schedule, the 6,700-tonne INS Kolkata would by now have been in a “hot start” mode with four Ukrainian M-36 Gas Turbine propulsion systems and ready for sea trials. Classified as Project 15Alpha, the INS Kolkata, the first of three in its class, would have “an updated weapons package and new-look exteriors and improved stealth (making it difficult to detect) and will be delivered beginning with the end of this decade”, says official literature distributed by the directorate of naval design.
But senior naval sources say a conservative delivery schedule envisages that the INS Kolkata will be ready only in 2013, at least three years after its deadline.
The INS Kolkata is not the only warship to be delayed. A parliamentary committee study has found that nearly all the stealth projects of the navy totalling worth more than Rs 19,000 crore are late. More than 30 ships and submarines are being built for the Indian Navy at home and overseas.
The INS Kolkata was “launched” three years ago. Its keel was laid in September 2003 when it was announced that it would be commissioned in 2010.
But now there is not a single shipyard in the country large enough to accommodate the INS Kolkata. Calcutta’s own Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers is too small to accommodate a destroyer. Even then, it has its berths full with orders for offshore and fast patrol boats and frigates.
In Mazagaon Docks (MDL), a senior naval officer told The Telegraph: “They do not have the manpower, design, capability, availability of berths, and the wherewithal to meet monthly targets — simply put, there does not seem to be the will.”
He said MDL makes a 12 per cent profit in any case and cost overruns add to its revenues and all projects, including the strategic, licensed-from-the-French Scorpene submarine venture, are running behind schedule.
Worse, the INS Shivalik stealth frigate project has been hit by an insidious bombshell after the new Obama administration instructed GE to stop work on a pair of gas turbine engines on the ship under US laws.
The Indian Navy is now trying to work around the laws by drawing in consultants from Italy and Germany by using the defence public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. The INS Shivalik is likely to be delayed by at least nine months.
The INS Kolkata is an advancement over the INS Delhi, the destroyer currently in service that also has the INS Mumbai and the INS Mysore in its class. The enhanced weapons package on the INS Kolkata will include twin-tube torpedo-launchers, anti-submarine rocket launchers, and 28 Long Range Surface to Air Missiles (LR-SAMs), possibly the Barak-NG (next generation).
The Barak-NG has run into a controversy itself with the CPM demanding that India should pull out of the joint venture project. A venture between India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation and the Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) for which the cabinet committee on security has committed at least Rs 10,000 crore, the Barak-NG or Barak-II ship missile defence system is yet to be tried and tested.
The Indian Navy has armed its vessels with the first generation of Barak missiles with which it claims it is satisfied.
In keeping with the new look that the city it is named after aspires for, the INS Kolkata has been given a sophisticated design that compares among the best of warships in its class.
Indian Naval Headquarters asked its designers to come up with a destroyer that can operate with fully integrated multi-function radar systems and, for the first time, 16 silos — eight on each side — capable of launching Brahmos supersonic cruise missiles.
Estimated to cost nearly Rs 8,500 crore, the INS Kolkata “will be capable of exerting sea-control in a multi-threat environment”, says Rear Admiral M.K. Budhwar, director-general of naval design.
Images below date from march last year: it shows Kolkata moored together with the first 2 P17. A second P15A is on a slipway, and a third P17 is in drydock. There appears 1 more slipway in use (third P15A?). There appears to be pierside space for 1 more surface ship. Cramped but entirely possible.
WanshanThe SLR Shtil-1 and the Fregat radars are the worst part of the ship!! Alas I expected something like Aster-30+Simpson!!!!
BTW all the P-17 have SLR Shtil-1 onboard. The follow-on Talwars getting VLS Shtil while P-15A will get Barak-NG MRSAM.
P17 was never intended to have Aster. Besides, it may be wiser to adopt Barak-NG on later ships rather than Aster (wouldn’t multiply the number of missile types too much)
Beyond the three currently building, nothing is firm as regards SAM: VL Shtil is a distinct possibility for a three ship follow-on P17A, particularly in view of its adoption for the follow-on Talwars, which will give the IN an opportunity assess the system before incorporating it into a domestic design. Also, given it will then have 9 ships with Shtil (3 P15, 3 Talwar, 3 mod-Talwar), it makes sense in terms of logistics and training as well.
WanshanAnyone know how many Mk.41 cells can be placed on the bow of a Perry Class frigate if you delete the Mk.13 launcher?
Anyone know how many Mk.48 cells can be placed on the bow of a Perry Class frigate if you delete the Mk.13 launcher?
On the same deck footprint of the Mk13 launcher likely 3x 8-cell module. Mk48 is lighter but has a larger footprint (see South Korean KD1 destroyers and some japanese destroyer classes like Murasame)
WanshanWhy only launchers on one side of YM then?
What gave you that idea?
WanshanNavantia Launches Second Patrol Boat for Venezuela
15:26 GMT, March 16, 2009 On 11th March Navantia launched, at the San Fernando-Puerto Real shipyard, the second of four offshore patrol boats (OPVs) that are being built for the Venezuelan Navy. The vessel was named “Yaviré” and was christened by Dña. Marieta Chapín de Yibirín.
Attending the ceremony were, among others, the Venezuelan Ambassador to Spain, Alfredo Toro, the Vice-chairman of SEPI, Federico Montero, the Chairman of Navantia, Juan Pedro Gómez-Jaén and the San Fernando-Puerto Real shipyard’s General Manager, Fernando Miguélez.
The patrol boat launched today has a length overall of 79.90 metres and the capacity to displace 1,500 tonnes and reach a maximum speed of 22 knots. These ships will be able to carry out a wide variety of missions such as coastal surveillance and protection, protection of maritime traffic, health assistance to other ships, external firefighting, the fight and control of marine pollution, transport of personnel and provisions, search and rescue operations, rapid intervention, frogmen support, surface defence and passive electronic warfare.
In addition to the CPVs, Venezuela also ordered four ocean-going Exclusive Economic Zone Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) with a length overall of 96.6 metres, displacement of 2,300 tonnes and a speed of 24 knots, which are being built in Puerto Real.
The contract for these eight patrol boats, whose construction will mean 5 million work hours (1,456,900 for Navantia and 3,580,700 for auxiliary industry), was signed on 28 November 2005.
Their deliveries are scheduled to take place between October 2009 and July 2011.
Artist impressions BVL and POVZEE
WanshanAnother photo from the same….
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/SbPG5PGOgGI/AAAAAAAAAkQ/YjVv2Jqz1W8/s1600-h/Shivalik+mast.JPG
El/M-2221 STGR for Barak-1
Grapun BAL
Fregat Top plate
Orekh
BEL navigation radar etc
Interesting, it would appear that they get Barak rather than Kashtan for close in protection. Shtil to provide a level of consort ship protection. Pity they stuck to the SLR but I suppose that’s a long lead item and once ordered you’re stuck with it. Oh well, perhaps 2x 12-cell VLU’s on the next batch …
WanshanI guess this one is the most recent
Seeing some of the extra bells and whistles put on the Yaroslav Mudry, can we expect Neustrashimy to be refitted with these in due course as well?
WanshanWanshanSorry, can’t read you, you’re on my ignore list.
Sign In
