Indian Navy News & Discussions

[Basel]

Problem solved then, Awacs+PAF will counter All of Indian navy, and IAF. so there may be no need for any further acquisitions for PN.

PAF have dedicated AWACS for PN, and PN have new system available now which they never had C-602s, now coastal batteries can hit long distance and PN is now NCW capable to so they will not as easy to fight as Indians think.

PN main weapons to deny blockade will be P-3, Subs, coastal batteries, ships (defensive posturing), missile crafts, if IN come close to our border then PN will be in much better position to respond and inflict damage on IN.

 

[Screambowl]

Answer will be a Raad Air to Surface missile having range of around 500 KM.

Danish

and do you think that a better navy than your'S won't have any counter measures? Typical nonsense

 

[Basel]

During cold war US navy had doctrine to take control of seas by having CBGs as they could afford it, on the other hand USSR took path of sea denial making more subs, dedicated air assets with Super Sonic AShM etc. So at the end it depends what doctrine you follow as per your needs and available resources.

 

[Screambowl]

4000+ posts and you write this absolutely bogus shitty sentence? Ever heard of INS guidance? Or perhaps GPS? And exactly whose AWACS is going <100km to a naval vessel armed with LR SAMs?

As for OP, you really ought to know better than this. Reported for useless war-mongering and instigating nonsensical arguments.

so the Pakistani military doctrine is to hit a destroyer or missile frigate with an IRBM warhead. Hatts off. This will lead to no-clear war.

INS is not accurate for moving targets.

GPS, okay, even if you use Babur or Ra'ad, do you think ships are not fitted with counter measures?

It's a fact that you will not launch it from land and you will not launch it either from sea either to kill other ship, because PN is aware of the facts that before Ra'ad will hit the IN vessel, brahmos would have already taken down the launcher ship.
India can launch a missile from submarine too, this mistake of launching a babur or Ra'ad from a ship to kill IN ship, PN will not do.

The only possibility is the air.

 

[MilSpec]

PAF have dedicated AWACS for PN, and PN have new system available now which they never have, now coastal batteries can hit long distance and PN is now NCW capable to so they will not as easy to fight as Indians think.

PN main weapons to deny blockade will be P-3, Subs, coastal batteries, ships (defensive posturing), missile crafts, if IN come close to our border then PN will be in much better position to respond and inflict damage on IN.

In theory then, all offensive risks posed by IN can be mitigated purely by Coastal batteries and Maritime Recon, and Anti Sh Missiles, and Anti Air Defence.

Just wondering what happens when you have an active ping on a marine target and have a firing solution. What will the vessel do. Will it have net centric ability to track the source and share the ping with other surface assets? if it does, guess what happens next?
When Maritime surveillance with active MAD is sweeping Sea floor even with the PAF CAP, even if blow per blow attrition on both sides? How long before you run out of anti Sub assets?
When you have huge disparity in strike fleet, how many will you leverage for sea denial and how may for air space denial.


The intention of the post is not gloat of IN resources, but t point out how PN and Often PAF has been actively starved for resources in you defense allocation. For active sea denial PN needs better budget, especially when the highest disparity lies within the naval forces between the two adversaries.

 

[Screambowl]

PN vs IN is not just one ship vs one ship, it will systems+tactics+doctrine vs systems+tactics+doctrine.



With radar range of 450 km AWACS will not need to come close to IN fleet.

same can be said for IN, we have got the AC , we can create no fly zone for 700kms. radius

 

[Basel]

In theory then, all offensive risks posed by IN can be mitigated purely by Coastal batteries and Maritime Recon, and Anti Sh Missiles, and Anti Air Defence.
Just wondering what happens when you have an active ping on a marine target and have a firing solution. What will the vessel do. Will it have net centric ability to track the source and share the ping with other surface assets? if it does, guess what happens next?
When Maritime surveillance with active MAD is sweeping Sea floor even with the PAF CAP, even if blow per blow attrition on both sides? How long before you run out of anti Sub assets?
When you have huge disparity in strike fleet, how many will you leverage for sea denial and how may for air space denial.
The intention of the post is not gloat of IN resources, but t point out how PN and Often PAF has been actively starved for resources in you defense allocation. For active sea denial PN needs better budget, especially when the highest disparity lies within the naval forces between the two adversaries.

Even now PN can defend its borders, but what IN is doing is something new to them and us, they want to put blockade from deep sea and to handle this PN needs more subs, long range MPAs with offensive capability, better coverage & support from PAF (for that PAF need J-11B class fighter).

same can be said for IN, we have got the AC , we can create no fly zone for 700kms. radius

Currently IN's CBGs don't have enough air power to create and sustain that in deep sea, only big power like US, France can do that.

 

[Screambowl]

Currently IN's CBGs don't have enough air power to create and sustain that in deep sea, only big power like US, France can do that.

Why should India go to deep sea somewhere near coast of somalia or south Indian ocean when Pakistan is not even 100nm ? During Kargil war, India had already created a blockade and shown an example.

 

[Basel]

Why should India go to deep sea when Pakistan is not even 100nm ? During Kargil war, India had already created a blockade and shown an example.

Because PN can inflict damage to IN if their fleet comes close to our borders as PN & PAF both have new toys available to strike IN from long distance and CM-400AKG is very fast too.

DF-21 type solution is also rumored to be on table.

 

[SQ8]

True.

Although, I was correct, the long term perspective plan for the IN (2 decades) resembles what I had opined as my FAD (fly and die) idea for the Arabian sea.

That having been said, I thought the Oliver's were being upgraded, what's with the anemic AAW capability?

The IN in my view was essentially an orphan arm till it got its act together( in a manner of speaking). Its currently on route to become possibly a more potent Navy than that of Russia(if it can sort out its Submarine issues). The Fly and Die concept relies on the Air denial capability of its surface and aerial assets. However, while the Mig-29s have the potential to provide a certain air superiority element, there is a need for longer ranged SAMs on board the capital ships.

At this point the Barak-8 provides a capability similar to the ASTER-15 but what is needed is the ability to engage targets out to a 100km radius(or more). In essence, an Indian Marine landing force should have protection from air attacks well into the shores.


The Olivers had their Launch systems removed due to the non-availability of SM-1 systems.

high-frequency monopulse seeker same as our P15 Kermit making them ideal choice for passive jamming.Then there is KH31 Ati radar for search ad destroy modes control and targeting stations. They will have to be pretty close to Shoreline.
Additionally ARGS-35E X band seeker on KH35 and the J-band active seeker on sea eagle both can pick up the targeting and control nodes for silkworms.

Yet, this requires that the precise position of these system be known. That too is a sorting job that may not prevent a launch of the missile. In addition, the Chinese were advertising a C-803 based shore system with the ability to receive off board targeting.. say from a sensor system such as the ZDK-03.
That offers a rather unique tactical capability in having SSM systems sitting essentially silent electronically before being given coordinates to launch.

Let me put this in no unclear terms, the PN has NO answer to the Kolkata as such with its current force. When I say that I mean that there is no system within the PN that can match the Kolkata machine for machine, nor is there a system that can provide a silver bullet. What may work is a synergy of tactics by which a ship such as the Kolkata may be taken down. That synergy however stands on thin ground as it requires that those assets, and specifically the surface assets survive to be a part of that effect.

When your surface assets are going to have holes bored in them by the Brahmos, then there is no point in trying to include them in the equation to deny India sea space.

 

[Screambowl]

Because PN can inflict damage to IN if their fleet comes close to our borders as PN & PAF both have new toys available to strike IN from long distance and CM-400AKG is very fast too.

DF-21 type solution is also rumored to be on table.

The point is IN will not come close. That's IN has opted for brahmos, so that enemy doesnt get any chance to retaliate the ping from the IN vessel who launched.

DF 21 will be presumed as nuclear strike on its launch.

 

[Dillinger]

The IN in my view was essentially an orphan arm till it got its act together( in a manner of speaking). Its currently on route to become possibly a more potent Navy than that of Russia(if it can sort out its Submarine issues). The Fly and Die concept relies on the Air denial capability of its surface and aerial assets. However, while the Mig-29s have the potential to provide a certain air superiority element, there is a need for longer ranged SAMs on board the capital ships.

At this point the Barak-8 provides a capability similar to the ASTER-15 but what is needed is the ability to engage targets out to a 100km radius(or more). In essence, an Indian Marine landing force should have protection from air attacks well into the shores.


The Olivers had their Launch systems removed due to the non-availability of SM-1 systems.



Yet, this requires that the precise position of these system be known. That too is a sorting job that may not prevent a launch of the missile. In addition, the Chinese were advertising a C-803 based shore system with the ability to receive off board targeting.. say from a sensor system such as the ZDK-03.
That offers a rather unique tactical capability in having SSM systems sitting essentially silent electronically before being given coordinates to launch.

The FAD is my designation, NOT EVEN THE IN CAN STEAL THAT FROM ME!

I disagree on the Aster-15 and Barak-8 comparison though.

First and foremost the range difference is more than double, secondly a certain quantum of speed was sacrificed for lateral acceleration (the Aster's 12Gs to the Barak's 80Gs, for immediate and near instantaneous orientation against maneuverable targets in conjunction with the 2 way data link/mf-star and active seeker, most high speed in-bounds even with dual pulse motors will be limited in their end phase maneuvering lest it be a liquid fueled in-bound). With the MF-STAR the Israelis are counting on it to take down even high speed ballistic in-bounds in a TBM role (although its the lack of a 3D L-band VSR on our ships which is the issue, not the performance of the SAM).

Where the Barak-8 has issue is in absolute slant range, which is prospectively meant to be covered by the ER variant (with an additional booster).

ANYWAY:-

The FAD is actually meant to be employed with a bigger carrier and fixed wing AEW assets organic to the CBG rather than shore based, we are talking ETOS of 5-6 hours and multiple birds per carrier for round the clock AEW and ISAR for the CBG and BARCAP. That will fall on the shoulders of the men who will man the prospective INS Vishaal.


Without said fixed wing AEW assets the current CBG with the Kamov Okoeye AEW is not capable of enforcing something akin to FAD and will actually have to maintain some distance from Pakistan's territorial waters.


The current MDL tender for a scale model of the 15B calls for 8*8 cell VLUs for SAMs along with 16 cells for AShMs or LAMs, no news on a high performance L-band 3D VSR although the "defence experts" are betting on the RAN-40L with TATA hooking up with THALES NEDERLANDS to offer the SMART-L from the Type-45. Lets see how that pans out (recent sat images posted on this site itself show that construction is getting along well, dunno if we will slip on the outfitting as we so often do).

Still, at the end of the day, no organic fixed wing AEW = NO FAD.

 

[Donatello]

Let me put this in no unclear terms, the PN has NO answer to the Kolkata as such with its current force. When I say that I mean that there is no system within the PN that can match the Kolkata machine for machine, nor is there a system that can provide a silver bullet. What may work is a synergy of tactics by which a ship such as the Kolkata may be taken down. That synergy however stands on thin ground as it requires that those assets, and specifically the surface assets survive to be a part of that effect.

When your surface assets are going to have holes bored in them by the Brahmos, then there is no point in trying to include them in the equation to deny India sea space.

Assuming Barak 8's engagement range is 100 km, that still puts the massive Kolkata within firing range of a Exocet/C802/CM400......no?

 

[ares]

Very easy solution, a preemptive missile strike at the docks. Same solution to their much touted Flankers. They will not have an airbase to go back to if they ever attack Pakistan. India always had superior weapons but a we are still a pain in their a$$.

Well Pakistan is not unfamiliar with pre-emptive strikes, infact once before did Pakistan organize a massive pre-emtive strike on 11 Indian bases..and they were so efficient in it, that they failed to hit even a single aircraft and the damage caused to the Indian bases was so extensive, that IAF took off from the very same bases that very night and bombed Pakistan.

Read all about it.

Operation Chengiz Khan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

P.S. If you think you are smart, your enemy is not dumb, they would have already prepared for such an eventuality.

 

[Chronos]

True.

Although, I was correct, the long term perspective plan for the IN (2 decades) resembles what I had opined as my FAD (fly and die) idea for the Arabian sea.

That having been said, I thought the Oliver's were being upgraded, what's with the anemic AAW capability?



Not operational. The ACTAS will go on board some ships, other issue the severe paucity of ASW helos and the MoD's lethargy in pushing through the ASW/NMRH.

I thought FAD was applicable to the Indian air force with their shoddy flying equipment.