Comparing PLAN to Indian Navy

[contedicavour]

WP2000, you are putting a lot of rumoured stuff in there. As I said, PLAN is expanding very fast. You really can't know for sure what they are building until you see one of those pictures coming out. So, as of now, we've seen one picture of type 071 LPD, but that's it.

As for power projection, I think you would need a carrier/LHD, good ASW capability on escorting ships, good AAW capability (have a mixture of area defence and close in defence), attacking subs (SSN), good amphibious capability. And frankly, aside from the USN and possibly RN and FN, nobody else have that.

For the PLAN, the situation is pretty simple :
> 4 Sovremennys with SA-N-7 and SS-N-22 (supersonic Sunburn, range 110km or up to 180+ if it's the long range variant)
- Russians reportedly have offered to upgrade 956E to EM standard. currently, the EMs use 9M317 SAM and 3M80MBE as SSM as opposed to 9M38 and 3M80ME on E
> 2 Type052C with the HQ9 SAMs and YJ-63/C-803. By the way, I agree with a comment made above, its range is 90km, not more, according to Jane's 2006/07.
- not such thing as C-803 and YJ-63 is not AshM. it uses the domestic equivalent of YJ-62. The range of HQ-9 is 150-200 km, Janes is not perfect. For example, it totally miscounted the number of ka-28s in China.
> 2 Type051C with Russia's Grumble SAM
- rif-M, not the original rif
> 2 Type051B with SA-N-7
- you mean 052B? They use 9M317 again not 9M38
> all the others carry the Chinese copy of Crotale as SAM (Luhu, Luhai classes, some obsolete Ludas) or no SAM at all.

9M317 is only marginally better than 9M38 (35km vs 25km, but still restricted by the obsolescent launchers and the 4 illuminators) unless they are launched from a 16+ cell VLS, as on the Kolkatas of the Indian Navy under construction.
Could you explain what you meant on C803/YJ-63 ? It's the main SSM on the latest DDGs so I'm interested.
What is the difference of the Rif-M vs the original Rif ?
Last point, how do we know the sources Jane's uses are less accurate than the one mentioned elsewhere (I'm referring to the range of HQ9) ?

cheers

 

[wp2000]

For the moment only the Indian Navy has power projection capabilities, because of its carrier and large number of modern escorts.
China could get the Varyag operational (somehow, money not being a limitation for them), but India will have in 2009 the ex Gorshkov and in 2012 the enlarged Cavour carrier. So India is likely to maintain a lead on power projection capabilities vs China.

cheers

I partially agree.

Firstly, as I said above, India and China face different levels of threat. India's current projection power won't last long in East Asian waters. That's why although South Korea, China and Japan happen to be world's Top 3 ship builders, they are all cautious on this. They are all progressing in this area but they know half ass blue water navy still can't project meanful power in East Asia.

In fact, only USN can project real power. Even the UK or France CG groups will have to think very carefully before doing non-friendly visit to East Asia. There are several real strong brown water navies.

Secondly, to be frank, India's CG group does not have enough escort ships. Besides the 3 Delhi destroyers and the 3 Kirivak FFGs, you still a enough large supply ships, a large medical ship, large Amphibitious ships, at least one occean tug boat, at least one (better have 2) SSN. Without all these, you really can't have a meaningful projection power.

And those items are what china has been working on in the last 10 years. The only thing missing in the puzzule is obvious to me.

BTW, PLAN's first 071 LPD's pictures can be found on several other forums. If you really can't find them, let me know.

 

[contedicavour]

I partially agree.

Firstly, as I said above, India and China face different levels of threat. India's current projection power won't last long in East Asian waters. That's why although South Korea, China and Japan happen to be world's Top 3 ship builders, they are all cautious on this. They are all progressing in this area but they know half ass blue water navy still can't project meanful power in East Asia.

In fact, only USN can project real power. Even the UK or France CG groups will have to think very carefully before doing non-friendly visit to East Asia. There are several real strong brown water navies.

Secondly, to be frank, India's CG group does not have enough escort ships. Besides the 3 Delhi destroyers and the 3 Kirivak FFGs, you still a enough large supply ships, a large medical ship, large Amphibitious ships, at least one occean tug boat, at least one (better have 2) SSN. Without all these, you really can't have a meaningful projection power.

And those items are what china has been working on in the last 10 years. The only thing missing in the puzzule is obvious to me.

BTW, PLAN's first 071 LPD's pictures can be found on several other forums. If you really can't find them, let me know.

I would add that China (as Japan and Korea) need to protect the sea lanes bringing them raw materials (oil to start with) and allowing them to export their wares. India sits in the middle of most of those sea lanes, which gives it quite an advantage.
Also, India imports and exports a lot less than China (or Japan or Korea) and wouldn't suffer from a closure of East Asian sea routes.
To summarize, PLAN Navy could have to intervene one day in the Indian Ocean, most likely the Indian Navy would never have to intervene in the Pacific Ocean in front of China.
So China needs to improve its blue water navy capabilities a lot more than India should improve its already significant capabilities.
China should vastly improve its ASW (Type 093 will help, but all its surface vessels have very poor ASW) and achieve operational status on a couple of Varyag-type carriers with at least 25-30 SU30s on each carrier. This will take at least 10-15 years...
India would just need to complete its already planned acquisition programme of Gorshkov and enlarged Cavour, the MIG29Ks, the Kolkata DDGs and the P17S FFGs and the Scorpene SSK-AIP. May be add more MIGs and really build some SSNs. But that's it.

cheers

 

[qwerty223]

hI, may I ask a newbie questions?
no mather how true is that 170 is equavalent to the Agies class, do you guys agree that it is symbol of potential regarding PLAN is getting ready for thier carrier combat group in the future?

 

[kams]

I would add that China (as Japan and Korea) need to protect the sea lanes bringing them raw materials (oil to start with) and allowing them to export their wares. India sits in the middle of most of those sea lanes, which gives it quite an advantage.
Also, India imports and exports a lot less than China (or Japan or Korea) and wouldn't suffer from a closure of East Asian sea routes.
To summarize, PLAN Navy could have to intervene one day in the Indian Ocean, most likely the Indian Navy would never have to intervene in the Pacific Ocean in front of China.
So China needs to improve its blue water navy capabilities a lot more than India should improve its already significant capabilities.
China should vastly improve its ASW (Type 093 will help, but all its surface vessels have very poor ASW) and achieve operational status on a couple of Varyag-type carriers with at least 25-30 SU30s on each carrier. This will take at least 10-15 years...
India would just need to complete its already planned acquisition programme of Gorshkov and enlarged Cavour, the MIG29Ks, the Kolkata DDGs and the P17S FFGs and the Scorpene SSK-AIP. May be add more MIGs and really build some SSNs. But that's it.

cheers

You are right in saying that India need not project power in to Chinese waters to hurt China. All they have to do is to control IOR. Addition of newer Carriers ( and Mig 29K),Destroyers, Frigates, and submarines will boost India's capability. Only area Indian Navy needs improvement is Air Defence Ship (Aegis type) and more potent MMA. Indian Navy is looking for next generation MMA , Boeing P-8 MMA is in contention..lets wait and watch.

India and Japan are forging new defence co-operation as highlighted by latest white paper by Japanese Defence Department.

 

[contedicavour]

You are right in saying that India need not project power in to Chinese waters to hurt China. All they have to do is to control IOR. Addition of newer Carriers ( and Mig 29K),Destroyers, Frigates, and submarines will boost India's capability. Only area Indian Navy needs improvement is Air Defence Ship (Aegis type) and more potent MMA. Indian Navy is looking for next generation MMA , Boeing P-8 MMA is in contention..lets wait and watch.

India and Japan are forging new defence co-operation as highlighted by latest white paper by Japanese Defence Department.

Hmm I like the idea
A sort of Asian federation of democracies
By the way, for approx 400 million USD per ship (and progressively less if order were for more ships) we could equip a derivative of the Kolkata DDGs with EMPAR and 48 VLS Aster15/30 (system + missiles). May be not an aegis SPY1D but enough to start shooting down 48 enemy planes/standoff missiles from 120km away at Mach 4.0.... and enough to track 300+ targets at 200+km range (500 if you take AMS S-1850 long range radar).

cheers

 

[kams]

French have offered Herakles for P-17 and P-15A. Not sure whether the offer was taken up though.

 

[contedicavour]

French have offered Herakles for P-17 and P-15A. Not sure whether the offer was taken up though.

Why not ... but Herakles (on the Delta FFGs of Singapore) can only support Aster 15s (mach 3.5 / range 30km), not suitable for the Aster 30s which would really provide area air defence.

cheers

 

[aaaditya]

here is a news article with the indian vice admiral claiming that china is readying the varyag for use as an aircraft carrier.

here check out this link:

http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?gid=73&id=407492

India ahead of China in naval aviation: Vice Admiral

KOCHI,AUG 17 (PTI) The Indian Navy, which was far ahead of China in the field of Naval Aviation, should not allow the gap to be bridged, Flag Officer Commanding in Chief Southern Naval Command, Vice Admiral Jagjit Singh Bedi, said today.

Inaugurating a symposium 'Changing Face of Aviation', organised in connection with the golden jubilee celebrations of the School of Naval Airmen (SFNA) here, Bedi said a high powered Chinese delegation, which had been on a world trip to study carrier borne flying, had recently visited India.

The Chinese are "feverishly" working on an aircraft carrier and 'Varyah', the old Russian carrier bought by the Chinese, was getting readied.

"Having the hardware is one thing, but exploiting the same is a totally different ball game," he said.

In the field of Naval aviation, the Indian Navy has a headstart of four-and-a-half decades on the Chinese navy and this gap must not allowed to be bridged, he said.

The Navy was on the threshold of inducting MIG 29K, LCA, new LRMP aircraft, among others, which will pose a challenge, he said but expressed confidence that SFNA would update its methodology to man and operate these aircraft safely.

SFNA would be shifting to its new complex with state-of-the-art training facilities in 2008.

Various papers were also presented at the symposium.

The Post Master General released the first day cover on the celebrations.

 

[aaaditya]

hey guys here is an interesting article on the indian navy's mig29k,seems that they will have a number of indian systems.

here check out this link:

http://www.idrw.org/index.php?categoryid=1&p2_articleid=307

This is the first time MiG’s marketing director Mikhail Globenko at the international economic forum told that mig-29k multi-role ship-borne jet fighters which is brought by Indian navy to be operated on ex soviet aircraft carrier admiral Gorshkov (INS Vikaramaditya) The aircraft will be equipped with a number of systems developed and produced by the Indian side. He did not mention what kind of Indian system will make into mig-29k ,The size of the contract was not disclosed, but an average price for a MiG-29K jet fighter is said to be around $32 million. Speaking of upcoming cooperation with India, Globenko also mentioned a program for the modernization of the MiG-29 fleet owned by the Indian Air Force. These aircraft were delivered to India in the 1980s and now form the foundation of India’s military aviation — the country’s Air Force has 65 MiG-29 jet fighters. The representative of MiG Corporation also announced that Russia will take part in the tender to sell and establish licensed production of jet fighters for the Indian Air Force. “India plans to announce a tender in the near future,” Globenko said that the sum of this contract may amount to as much as $9 billion, because it includes not only deliveries of ready-made fighters, but also the organization of licensed production of the aircraft and its components. Globenko said that according to his information, the tender will have four main participants — the United States, Sweden, France and Russia, which plans to offer the Indian Air Force the MiG-35 fighter. Globenko stressed that MiG Corporation is striving to make a transition from direct deliveries of its production to joint ambitious hi-tech programs.

 

[kams]

Secondly, to be frank, India's CG group does not have enough escort ships. Besides the 3 Delhi destroyers and the 3 Kirivak FFGs, you still a enough large supply ships, a large medical ship, large Amphibitious ships, at least one occean tug boat, at least one (better have 2) SSN. Without all these, you really can't have a meaningful projection power.

WP2000, when I summarised IN's ships, I included only modern Destroyers, Frigates and Corvettes. I left out large chunk of older ships such as Type 16 frigates (3 in service, not so old but not in class of Type 17), Leander class frigates, Type 25 Kukri class (4 in service)corvettes, Veer class corvettes (12 in service, although last 2 of them are new a pack and punch 16 Uran, 76 mm Gun, 2 AK-630) and all fast patrol crafts, Tankers, LST, etc. Let me capture what you say essential for CBG.

Supply ships -
Jyoti - 35,900 T , cargo - 25,000 T
Aditya - 24,000 T
Deepak and Shakti - 15,000 T

Medical Ship - 1 in service

Amphib - Magar class - 2 in service, third launched in 2004
5500 T, capacity 15 Tank, 8 APC, 500 troop

Landing ship Tank (large ) - 3 under construction - 5600 T , capability similar to Magar class.

USS Trenton - To be procured from USA.

Occean Tug - 2 in service - INS Gaj, INS Matanga

SSN - ATV under construction. Akula - wait for 2 months

I am not saying that IN can wage war in South China Sea. She need not, thats the point.

 

[tphuang]

here is a news article with the indian vice admiral claiming that china is readying the varyag for use as an aircraft carrier.

here check out this link:

http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?gid=73&id=407492

India ahead of China in naval aviation: Vice Admiral

KOCHI,AUG 17 (PTI) The Indian Navy, which was far ahead of China in the field of Naval Aviation, should not allow the gap to be bridged, Flag Officer Commanding in Chief Southern Naval Command, Vice Admiral Jagjit Singh Bedi, said today.

Inaugurating a symposium 'Changing Face of Aviation', organised in connection with the golden jubilee celebrations of the School of Naval Airmen (SFNA) here, Bedi said a high powered Chinese delegation, which had been on a world trip to study carrier borne flying, had recently visited India.

The Chinese are "feverishly" working on an aircraft carrier and 'Varyah', the old Russian carrier bought by the Chinese, was getting readied.

"Having the hardware is one thing, but exploiting the same is a totally different ball game," he said.

In the field of Naval aviation, the Indian Navy has a headstart of four-and-a-half decades on the Chinese navy and this gap must not allowed to be bridged, he said.

The Navy was on the threshold of inducting MIG 29K, LCA, new LRMP aircraft, among others, which will pose a challenge, he said but expressed confidence that SFNA would update its methodology to man and operate these aircraft safely.

SFNA would be shifting to its new complex with state-of-the-art training facilities in 2008.

Various papers were also presented at the symposium.

The Post Master General released the first day cover on the celebrations.

if he is talking about naval arms as in the non-existent Chinese aircraft carrier naval fighters vs the extremely archaic Sea Harriers, then he is. Again, let's compare current capability, not what they will have in 10 years.

9M317 is only marginally better than 9M38 (35km vs 25km, but still restricted by the obsolescent launchers and the 4 illuminators) unless they are launched from a 16+ cell VLS, as on the Kolkatas of the Indian Navy under construction.
Could you explain what you meant on C803/YJ-63 ? It's the main SSM on the latest DDGs so I'm interested.
What is the difference of the Rif-M vs the original Rif ?
Last point, how do we know the sources Jane's uses are less accurate than the one mentioned elsewhere (I'm referring to the range of HQ9) ?

there are other differences, the 9M317 do not need to be illuminated the entire way. The 9M38 do have to be. Even if you only have 4 illuminators for 9M317, it will still end up with more firepower than 6 illuminators with 9M38.

C-803 does not exist. YJ-63 is a LACM I think. The standard SSM used on PLAN DDG is YJ-83. I would rank SSM as the following:
power:
YJ-62 (domestic version)
Club-S
Moskit improved
YJ-83
KH-59
KH-31
technology:
YJ-62
Club-S
YJ-83
Moskit

rif-M is based on more advanced version of S-300. It has further range and better kill probability. you are looking at around 150 KM I think.
we know land based version of HQ-9 can go further than 90 km.

Akula - wait for 2 months

I'd be very surprised if Akula actually comes.

Again, please compare current capability, not speculate what you will have in 5 years.

 

[aaaditya]

by the way guys,the nuclear reactor for the atv class of nuclear attack submarine has been declared operational,this 100mw reactor had been running successfully since the 2004 end,the hull fabrication work is also progressing satisfactoriely.

 

[chinawhite]

There has been much rumours of the ATV for such a long time yet I have seen absolutly nothing to suggest this program has progressed to the prototype stage.

Does anyone have any information about the ATV?

 

[wp2000]

WP2000, when I summarised IN's ships, I included only modern Destroyers, Frigates and Corvettes. I left out large chunk of older ships such as Type 16 frigates (3 in service, not so old but not in class of Type 17), Leander class frigates, Type 25 Kukri class (4 in service)corvettes, Veer class corvettes (12 in service, although last 2 of them are new a pack and punch 16 Uran, 76 mm Gun, 2 AK-630) and all fast patrol crafts, Tankers, LST, etc. Let me capture what you say essential for CBG.

Supply ships -
Jyoti - 35,900 T , cargo - 25,000 T
Aditya - 24,000 T
Deepak and Shakti - 15,000 T

Medical Ship - 1 in service

Amphib - Magar class - 2 in service, third launched in 2004
5500 T, capacity 15 Tank, 8 APC, 500 troop

Landing ship Tank (large ) - 3 under construction - 5600 T , capability similar to Magar class.

USS Trenton - To be procured from USA.

Occean Tug - 2 in service - INS Gaj, INS Matanga

SSN - ATV under construction. Akula - wait for 2 months

I am not saying that IN can wage war in South China Sea. She need not, thats the point.

Yes. I've thought about it and I agree with you. I've made a wrong observation which I was trying to avoid: again forgot the different requirement and threat.

In fact, I admit that not every country has to compete with USN and Japan Navy together. India has the geographical and strategic advantage. No doubt about that.

 

[kams]

if he is talking about naval arms as in the non-existent Chinese aircraft carrier naval fighters vs the extremely archaic Sea Harriers, then he is. Again, let's compare current capability, not what they will have in 10 years.

I would not right off Harriers yet. They are undergoing major upgradation involving New Radar (Elta EL/M-2032 multimode fire control radar) and new Air to Air missiles (Derby). I agree that you can't compare tham to frontline fighters.

I'd be very surprised if Akula actually comes.

Again, please compare current capability, not speculate what you will have in 5 years.

Ok, lets forget about ATV and Akula (what I have heard is that Akula deal will be formally announced once the nuclear deal is cleared. This is from a guy in MoD - informal talk only I don't have any links, proof.)

I did include P-15A, P-17 and P-28 because unlike China, we do know these are in advanced stages of construction and their capability are reported in many public forums.

In addition we may consider significance of Andamon Nicobar Command.

 

[contedicavour]

I would not right off Harriers yet. They are undergoing major upgradation involving New Radar (Elta EL/M-2032 multimode fire control radar) and new Air to Air missiles (Derby). I agree that you can't compare tham to frontline fighters.



Ok, lets forget about ATV and Akula (what I have heard is that Akula deal will be formally announced once the nuclear deal is cleared. This is from a guy in MoD - informal talk only I don't have any links, proof.)

I did include P-15A, P-17 and P-28 because unlike China, we do know these are in advanced stages of construction and their capability are reported in many public forums.

In addition we may consider significance of Andamon Nicobar Command.

Jane's states that the upgrade programme of the Sea Harriers has been cancelled. May be it would be a better idea to buy second hand Royal Navy Sea Harriers which have BVR capability. Only thing, India would have to make sure the US allow transfer of Amraam AIM120B

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

if he is talking about naval arms as in the non-existent Chinese aircraft carrier naval fighters vs the extremely archaic Sea Harriers, then he is. Again, let's compare current capability, not what they will have in 10 years.


there are other differences, the 9M317 do not need to be illuminated the entire way. The 9M38 do have to be. Even if you only have 4 illuminators for 9M317, it will still end up with more firepower than 6 illuminators with 9M38.

C-803 does not exist. YJ-63 is a LACM I think. The standard SSM used on PLAN DDG is YJ-83. I would rank SSM as the following:
power:
YJ-62 (domestic version)
Club-S
Moskit improved
YJ-83
KH-59
KH-31
technology:
YJ-62
Club-S
YJ-83
Moskit

rif-M is based on more advanced version of S-300. It has further range and better kill probability. you are looking at around 150 KM I think.
we know land based version of HQ-9 can go further than 90 km.


I'd be very surprised if Akula actually comes.

Again, please compare current capability, not speculate what you will have in 5 years.

I'll just copy paste Jane's 06/07.

C-803 = YJ-83 = CSS-N-8 Saccade, operational on 052, 051B, 052B, 051C. Range 150km at 0.9 Mach, warhead 165kg

YJ-62 intertial GPS guidance and terminal active radar homing to 280km at Mach 0.8, warhead 300kg. Operational only on 052C DDGs.

HHQ-9 100km at Mach 3

SA-N-20 Grumble Fort-M, range 150km

cheers

 

[kams]

Jane's states that the upgrade programme of the Sea Harriers has been cancelled. May be it would be a better idea to buy second hand Royal Navy Sea Harriers which have BVR capability. Only thing, India would have to make sure the US allow transfer of Amraam AIM120B

cheers

It's not been cancelled. Its going ahead as per statement from Defence Minister. The Cabinet Committee on Security cleared the upgradation in March 2005.

 

[tphuang]

I'll just copy paste Jane's 06/07.

C-803 = YJ-83 = CSS-N-8 Saccade, operational on 052, 051B, 052B, 051C. Range 150km at 0.9 Mach, warhead 165kg

C-803 does not exist. It's a common misconception that C-801=YJ-81, C-802=YJ-82 and C-803=YJ-83. What actually is going on is this. For the domestic program, you have the rocket engine powered program that started with YJ-8 and that had a export program with similar specs to it called C-801.

Then, they upgraded it and the upgrade version was YJ-8A I think. They also had air launched version (YJ-81) and sub launched version YJ-82.

Now, after that, they developd turbo-jet powered YJ-8 series SSM. The export version became well know as C-802 and the domestic program resulted in YJ-83. terms like YJ-85 have been speculated for the air launched version, but it seems like YJ-83 has become a uniform name. I'm still waiting for the sub launched version of YJ-83. Not sure if it is available or not. One big difference between C-802 and YJ-83 is that the latter seems to be supersonic in terminal stages whereas the former is entirely subsonic.

Much of what we know about YJ-83 comes from C-802. We know that an enhanced version of C-802 called C-802A came out recently with a range of 180 km at mach0.9 with improved seeker. And also that the Iranian version of C-802 (Noor) recently test fired with a range of 200 km. So, we can only assume that YJ-83 would be doing better than that. That is the sea launched version. We know that the air launched version was launched from a JH-7 and travelled 250 km. Right now, it's the standard missile on PLAN warships.

YJ-62 intertial GPS guidance and terminal active radar homing to 280km at Mach 0.8, warhead 300kg. Operational only on 052C DDGs.

again, that's export version. There is a domestic equivalence. You can bet it do better than 280 km at higher speed. I guess it's one of China's secret weapons.

HHQ-9 100km at Mach 3

SA-N-20 Grumble Fort-M, range 150km

cheers

yep, rif-M at 150 km sounds about right.