Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AB has a 20M beam compared to a 17.4M on kolkatta class. I am assuming based on the length and the beam, draft is smaller on the kokatta too, AB's 90 cell comes from a Mk41 mod2 - with 29 cell VLS forward and 61 on the Aft spar of the ship. What I wonder is if there is an internal magazine to resupply the UVLM.But only 16 brahmos can be fitted on these uvlm,also any destroyer/frigate required carry minimum antiship missiles and can't replace all these 16 brahmos with nirbhay.
One thing I am not understanding is that despite being comparable tonnage with US Burk class Kolkata carries only 32+16 vertical launched systems where as Burk can carry 96.
What I wonder is if there is an internal magazine to resupply the UVLM.
No, there isn't: that would negate the entire advantage of having VLS relative to magazine fed single or twin rail launcher(s)What I wonder is if there is an internal magazine to resupply the UVLM.
instead of going for Shtil we have to find smaller solution ....shtil is quite big and heavy both kamorta and saryu class don't have space for 32 and 16 shtil sam .....some thing like CAMM will be good which is compact and low weightkamorts hull platform being used as 8x2 Brahmos UVLM with small 32 cell Shtil module and retaining the 533mm torp tube would compliment the Missile boat Idea pretty well. Could even match Talwar class Destros. Or even an saryu class OPV with 8 cell UVLM and a 16 cell Shtil.
6m without booster with booster its 7.5 m so yeah it can be in used in UVLMNirbhay is 6m in length,
instead for going for more B8 ....it will more useful to go for more 16/24/32 CAMM/Maitri and 16/24/32 Very long range theatre area defence SAM like what drdo trying to Long-range SAMs, cruise missiles for all platforms: Avinash Chander - The HinduIt will be even better when hypersonic Brahmos 2 and/or NG-Brahmos(mini) replaces Brahmos1. And the surface fleet gets long range land assault capability with Nirbhay blocks. And possible long range, 200-300 km SAM, that DRDO is developing under their "missile autonomy mission".
It's only just began really.
For sure, for it's tonnage, they carry fewer sams and assault missiles compared to it's contemporaries. They also left a lot of space between LRSAM and the Brahmos missiles. Surely they'll add more, at least I think.
They could've put another 16 Baraks there.(?)
Even in the upcoming Vizag class, this isnt changed for some reason.
It's disappointing, but I dont know their planning behind it.
M-109 is not turkish but american SPH.....where as K9 is a south korean..both are different
Turkish Artillery Gun same as K-9 as for features of M-109 A told in article they are wrong
I was bored at work and loking at INS kochi specs, looking into the Frigates and destroyers of IN, I was in awe of the offensive firepower these puppy's have, shivalik and Talwar class are almost destroyers, got me thinking about the kamorts hull platform being used as 8x2 Brahmos UVLM with small 32 cell Shtil module and retaining the 533mm torp tube would compliment the Missile boat Idea pretty well. Could even match Talwar class Destros. Or even an saryu class OPV with 8 cell UVLM and a 16 cell Shtil.
It will be even better when hypersonic Brahmos 2 and/or NG-Brahmos(mini) replaces Brahmos1. And the surface fleet gets long range land assault capability with Nirbhay blocks. And possible long range, 200-300 km SAM, that DRDO is developing under their "missile autonomy mission".
It's only just began really.
For sure, for it's tonnage, they carry fewer sams and assault missiles compared to it's contemporaries. They also left a lot of space between LRSAM and the Brahmos missiles. Surely they'll add more, at least I think.
They could've put another 16 Baraks there.(?)
Even in the upcoming Vizag class, this isnt changed for some reason.
It's disappointing, but I dont know their planning behind it.
instead for going for more B8 ....it will more useful to go for more 16/24/32 CAMM/Maitri and 16/24/32 Very long range theatre area defence SAM like what drdo trying to Long-range SAMs, cruise missiles for all platforms: Avinash Chander - The Hindu
Mr. Avinash said DRDO would like to compete with the best in the world and develop long-range SAMs of 300 km range and air-to-air missiles with more than 100 km range.
So according to you we should always play defensive role instead of offensive-defensive .......instead of taking out the aircraft or making damage to enemy we should just shoot the coming AShm and run out of B8.....and then enemy come up with more AShm and shoot the sitting duck called INS kolkata..nice logic broSince India does not face any ballistic missile threat,emanating from the sea,therefore there remains no need to equip the IN surface ships with such heavy and big theater missile defence interceptors,which would be more or less useless against inbound sea skimming anti ship cruise missiles,which IN ships are expected to face in immediate future.Barak 2,with its 90 km range and its superb horizontal acceleration of 64 g (later,the ER with 140-160km range) and its light weight will be the ideal defence against a multitude of threats including manned fighters,cruise missiles and also tactical ballistic missiles
And as for the QRSAM is concerned,I think the best course of option would be to turn the existing Astra MkI into a QRSAM,by adding a booster and retractable fins,which will potentially give it the capability to engage targets out to a distance of at least 35-40 km,and therefore can act as both an MRSAM and QRSAM at the same time.
this is i agree with you instead of going different and duplication of work go with one for tri-services......This will be a much better option than to go for a new development like the Maitri QRSAM,will reduce the logistical trails as same missile components can be used with fighters,making the whole system cheaper to operate and at the same time,will have longer target engagement range than Maitri.And if the DRDO and Navy can show some far-sight of developing a Mk41 type VLS system,then a single cell will be able to carry four such missiles,I think it's high time IN sits with DRDO and pulls their socks up to sort out this mess of useless duplication of technologies,which serves no purpose other than delaying system inductions and complicating a problem,for which much simpler and more effective solutions are already in place!!
So according to you we should always play defensive role instead of offensive-defensive .......instead of taking out the aircraft or making damage to enemy we should just shoot the coming AShm and run out of B8.....and then enemy come up with more AShm and shoot the sitting duck called INS kolkata..nice logic bro
That's because you do not have a clear idea about the topic at hand,no offense.What i don't understand is that why people are so fetish about shooting down AShm ?
Yes,that's pretty much all they can do for the time being,considering the gigantic leap that has been achieved in electronic warfare,with the tiny winy radars (seekers if you may) to overcome and get past the powerful Escort jammers the enemy strike fighters will come equipped with and also due to the lack of good lateral acceleration capabilities of the heavier long range SAMs of today.what the range of B8?............mere 90 km............. what it gonna do ?nothing ...............our enemy has SOW of more than 200km so what IN gonna do with 90 KM B8 ? shoot couple of AShm and run out of B8 then what?
Of course it would have been better,but sadly that isn't the case,not yet at least.The SM6 looks promising though,but its effectiveness against high end strike fighters still remains questionable at best.Or is it not better to have a 200 KM + and shoot down the hostile aircraft before it empty its belly.......more what if PN gets SU-35 or J-11 then what ?
Wow!!I did not know that there is a sea between India and China!!Or did we just shifted our entire country in the middle of the Pacific,so as to save ourselves from our annoying Western Border??who said that IN dont face any ballistic missile threat,emanating from the sea??..............doesent chinese is not have DF-21.......lets say it does work then what ?
And when did I say you said that??But in such a case,I would rather put more numbers of Barak 2 (later ER) along with VL Astras,quad packed into a Mk41 type VLS arrangement.I never said that in place of B8 ............VLRSAM be used but both should be just like AB uses ESSM and SM-6 together
Thanks Mr Obvious,as if we did not know that already.Presently there is no Maitri or VL astra
That's just one of your opinions,every one has got em.Do not try to pass it as a fact,boyo...............and Astra can not be used in its present design
ARE YOU SH!T KIDDING ME BOY??!!Ok,enough of your unsubstantiated claims,lets stop for a moment to compare the facts,shall we??its bulky and heavier
SAY WHAT??!!ARE YOU FUCKKING KIDDING ME??!!Take a look at this and inform yourself you delusional fool!!and does not have fins like in SYPDER to intercept AShm
No,the present design is already quite agile with a lateral acceleration of 40+ g,which again makes it one of the most maneuverable BVRAAM in its class.And besides,it has got twice the range of the ones you mentioned at a fraction of extra weight,barring the CAMM ER.But hey,as we can see from the above spec charts,it's clearly evident that CAMM ER is significantly bulkier and heavier than the Astra MkI is in its current form!!So what the hell was your point exactly??A design needed to develop but using astra core system like seeker dual pulse motor etc
this is what MICA VL looks like
this is what CAMM looks like
this is what SYPDER looks like
Oh I did see those specs,in fact I went farther than that and took the trouble to post them right here,so that others may see as well.Only thing I found out by looking at those spec charts is your epic comprehension failure and your lack of will to follow the mantra of practicing what one preaches.See theirs design and specs you will to know about why astra VL cannot be used
Good.this is i agree with you instead of going different and duplication of work go with one for tri-services......
The original P15A model (pre-Barak 8) only had 2x24 VL Shtil, essentially replacing the 2x Single rail launcher, each with magazine capacity of 24 missiles. It doesn't show VL Barak 1 but 2 pairs of AK630. (Note: newer Talwar's and Russian navy equivalents have also settles on a mix of VL Shtil and 2 single AK630). Models with Barak 8 have consistently had 2x16 of these missiles. And no closer in missile either, just pairs of AK630. So, while the design could probably accommodate retrofitment of a compact close in missile system, replacing 1 AK630 of each pair, I'm not quite sure this is the intention. Likewise, the design can probably host 2x16 additional Barak-8. However, I think the choice for going down to 2x16 from 2x24 is deliberate (perhaps a cost saving measure?) and refitting with additional VLUs is not a given. Remember, what we've seen so far for P17A impressions has exactly half the missiles fit of Brahmos and Barak 8 of the P15A, just like P17/Talwar has half that of the P15 (although Talwar batch 1 and P17s have inner layer SAMs).Kolkata class has enough space to accomodate twice the current load of barak-8s.At least 64 VLS cells can be put there.I think cells will be added during mid life refit.Nirbhay will also be added most likely.
The original P15A model (pre-Barak 8) only had 2x24 VL Shtil, essentially replacing the 2x Single rail launcher, each with magazine capacity of 24 missiles. It doesn't show VL Barak 1 but 2 pairs of AK630. (Note: newer Talwar's and Russian navy equivalents have also settles on a mix of VL Shtil and 2 single AK630). Models with Barak 8 have consistently had 2x16 of these missiles. And no closer in missile either, just pairs of AK630. So, while the design could probably accommodate retrofitment of a compact close in missile system, replacing 1 AK630 of each pair, I'm not quite sure this is the intention. Likewise, the design can probably host 2x16 additional Barak-8. However, I think the choice for going down to 2x16 from 2x24 is deliberate (perhaps a cost saving measure?) and refitting with additional VLUs is not a given. Remember, what we've seen so far for P17A impressions has exactly half the missiles fit of Brahmos and Barak 8 of the P15A, just like P17/Talwar has half that of the P15 (although Talwar batch 1 and P17s have inner layer SAMs).
May be to provide more spece for crew.Hmm..good point.But still,there are plenty of unused spaces on-board each and every new IN ships,wonder why.