JonSThe A-190E differs a LOT of the A-190 in appearance! Anyone have an idea why? Did they just fool the Indians with this “stealth” gun?
the new mount was probably not arround when talwar was designed, orginal mount for a-190e is supposed to have rcs reduction as well according to the manufacturer.
JonSAny pictures of it?
JonSback after a long vacation, delhi class design went thru a lot of design changes because of the end cold war and the long construction time.
As far as i know Mumbai doesnt have barak, the plan is to fit 3 P-16As with barak in upcoming months FYI no word on Mumbai getting it.
JonSAhh but missile load does not maketh a ship Terran.
If this ship had all the cells of a Tico it would still not be the equal of either PAAMS ships or the APAR ships. Why?.
Fire channels!.
F100 whilst an admirable multirole design (albeit one thats a tad short of legs) has a HUGE achilles heel in that it has only two fire control directors. So, facing a saturation threat, its in a dicey predicament. It may be wonderful to have 40 odd ESSM in the silo’s but if it cant guide them they stay onboard. Missiles, its an accepted fact, are far more useful when you can get them into air.
Type 45 WILL be the best AAW ship period until the US gets a SPY-3 hull wet.
T-45 is capable AAW vessel i wont go as far saying its the best, but it has its holes.
T-45 is still limited to 48 missiles and CIWS is rather limited since its limited to phalanx as it stands. Especially do note that Aster min range is quite high (3 km?) so it does need a complimentary shorad system to deal with saturation ashm attacks, F-100 has ESSM which has pretty good min range. I believe the french have devoloped a system using sardal sam for that purpose (forgot the name will look it up later).
JonSJonS may not be DDM , though name of the sub is wrong. Rubin makes both Amur and Kilo and is offering a 8 cell brahmos plug on Amur 1650.
too many holes in it to be correct, installing vls in already built submarine would invove the sub being cut in half then installing the cells and then the sub being wielded back together. We would have probably know about it by know if it was being done,it remind me of the rumours back in 2000 of kilo being fitted with 8 vls cells.
JonSfourth INS Sindhghosh is currently undergoing deep refit including the installation of vertical tubes for launching Club-S cruise missiles. Although the agency did not give the cost of the Indian contract and other details, except that it was concluded through Rosoboronexport State Corporation, it is not ruled out that four upgraded submarines with vertical tubes could be adopted for deployment of state-of-the-art Brahmos cruise missiles.
DDM :rolleyes:
JonSThey have just received the IL-38SD , it would atleast take a year and few exercise to get a good idea of the new equipment.
I believe the Israel upgrade was not a comprehensive one as the IL-38 had gone through , Think its was radar and some electronic stuff.
No point in supporting the Junta Regiem of Burma.
I believe one of the reasons the israeli upgrade was put off due to agreement signed with russia that required russian approval (licensing fees) for upgrade of any russian platform by a foreign vendor.
JonSThats intresting, i have only seen it from JDW. Pakistan did float a tender for more foreign built submarines due to problem manufacturing agosta 90b, i thought chinese subs were also being considered?
JonSInteresting that model of Sukhoi with 3 brahmos missiles.And on the picture at defexpo its just 1!
To convert brahmos into 1000 km cruise missile will be done in secret at least at start in order not to disturb pakistan [or china] too much and i dont think they would say that in open-for now.Its not a big problem for russians they have done it before just add a big solid booster at the bottom and tripple the range. :diablo:
dont really need larger solid booster probably incoporate some weight reduction (which is already being done for air launched variant) by incoporating greater amount of composites and which should offset the increase in the fuel load. And as i mentioned a more range enhancing flight path.
Anyway
Israel, India to Cooperate on $350M Long-Range Barak SAM Project
The Barak-I and Barak-II will replace ageing Russian OSA-M and Volna RA-31 missiles still in operation on most Indian warships.
Looks like Barak-II will also replace exsisting SAM systems, look like it also is easy to strap on modular system like the orginal variant.
JonSthey were keeping it secretive for obvious reasons but there was leak and JDW reported.
JonSJonS you may be right , But lets see when she is finally out , I dont have too much trust on the Yard model , what will it take to even get those Aster 15 on P-17 , Empar & VLS module.
IN Chief already visited Italy in Feb 2005 and had a close look at the EMPAR system ( which was under going testing there ) , MBDA has already a deal with BDL to Lic Manu system if selected.
Lets wait and watch.
Because most of the launch photos pretty much match yard model. Including the one photo of shivalik post launch also shows a mast design that is designed to accomadate fregat radar. Will be surpised if there any major changes to it (even vl-shtil and kashtan-m looks rather improbable). Anyway i was under the impression IN is more intrested in herakles.
JonSIt is a good point, but are you referring to the Talwar or to the Gorshkov?
talwar the orginal design was to have klinok and was based on the Novik Frigate.
JonSYes I am aware of the Barak 2 , Ever time there is some event there is some news about Barak 2 , And as you know Barak 2 will come when it comes , The Barak 2 is stated at a range of 80Km .
The IN chief had stated some time back that , they were looking at beyong 100 Km range SAM , What I understand and know is that the IN is evaluating 2 Long Range SAM system ( this I understand is beyond the Barak 2 system ) , Since operational needs are also paramount , If one looks around only 3 countries around the world has a Naval sam beyond 100 Km , and only two are willing to share such system.
The P-17 when it comes should give us the answer , The P-17 is simply getting unnecessarly delayed.
There will not be any weapon spec changes with P-17 only design changes according to press reports when 3rd in the class was launched, as for delay its mainly due to the flooding the project as a whole is on schedule 06-09.
Because Russians like to keep things inhouse. For that reason I don’t see how Barak is better than Klinok, given how the Russians have emphasized SAM development, and for that matter, Klinok is already integrated with Russian control systems.
klinok was already evaluated and turned down for talwar, barak is much more compact can be fitted on in place of ak-630 where as klinok launcher alone is so much larger than barak vls module definetly cant be retrofitted onto exsisting vessel. Not to mention FCR and command module for klinok is far bigger as well. Barak is better for anti missile far less reaction time and much lower minimum range.
JonShttp://www.stratmag.com/issue2Oct-15/page02.htm
The Gorshkov (original name Baku) has a chequered history. It was built in 1978 but its transfer to the Soviet Navy was delayed by lack of funds, fire and technical problems. When eventually transferred in 1987, it saw little service and has spent more time laid up than at sea. The Gorshkov is a heavy carrier displacing 44,570 tonnes, is 273 metres long, 49 metres wide and has a draft of 10.2 metres. It will have a crew numbering 1,950. The ship is powered by four turbines generating 189,000 hp.
Stratmag is indian publication fyi not that most accurate bunch, anyway thats true with most soviet vessels including kuznetsov and kirov so i dont understand your point.
Regardless it is still the same class and it is still quite small for a carrier.
?? its bigger than ADS and will be the biggest naval vessel in asia for quite some time.
That gives you better range but nothing to jump about.
The Klinoks might still be better for anti ASM interception but are you also fitting that?
that gives pretty nice AAW capability, as for klinok why would IN need it when there is barak. Besides kashtan-m will also fitted on it.
JonSYes, you are talking about the FOV. That’s the problem of the radar, not the missile. The missile does not need the radar to track as it can do so with its TVM systems. Actually we still know little of the complete radar systems of the 051C.
lmao the missile not reading the radar for tvm :p if tombstone cant see it the missile will lose its guidance, both the tracking data from the missile and radar is need in order to guide the missile please read up on tvm before you waste my time…
You should indeed get your facts straights that the Minsk, Kiev and the Gorshkov all belong to the same class.
wtf are you talking about gorshkov is modified version of kiev it is longer and heavier. As for kiev wasnt aware of that anyway think the 3rd version was scrapped prolly will research it later on.
Lol, the Gorshkov was mothballed since 1991. The Russians didn’t think it was worth keeping in service.
??? sigh thats what you get for getting ur data from fas.org you do realise it remained fully operational till 95 (even had boiler explosion in 95 iirc), it was manned time to time till 01 but wasnt fully operational due to that.
Excuse me. Layered AAW systems? You probably got a bunch of Klinoks or SA-N-9 on the ship, which is essentially point defense AAMs.
once again if you dont know what you are talking dont reply to it fyi it will have vl-shtil.
Sign In
