Comparing PLAN to Indian Navy

[aaaditya]

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

there was an earlier upgrade programme for the seaharriers(to the british fa-2 standards)which was cancelled due to high cost in favour of the less comprehensive israeli upgrade involving the elta-elm-2032 radar ,python-5 short ranged air to air missile and the derby beyond visual air to air missile.

 

[contedicavour]

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.

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.


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

Beyond ranges, which can be increased by adding boosters, how do we know if the YJ-83 or YJ-62 is supersonic (at least in terminal phases) ? What sources do you trust most for this information, since you doubt what Jane's says ?

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

there was an earlier upgrade programme for the seaharriers(to the british fa-2 standards)which was cancelled due to high cost in favour of the less comprehensive israeli upgrade involving the elta-elm-2032 radar ,python-5 short ranged air to air missile and the derby beyond visual air to air missile.

Ah-ha, ok. What range/performance does the Derby BVR radar have, for instance vs Amraam AIM120B ?

thks

 

[powerslavenegi]

Performance is relative

Ah-ha, ok. What range/performance does the Derby BVR radar have, for instance vs Amraam AIM120B ?thks

Well buying a weapon system is not simple for it is more of a political decision rather a strategic alone.Buying Aim120 would mean a "Warranty void if sticker removed" clause and also US known for exporting scaled down weapon systems + other fuss about it's use case scenario.Derby if not the best would come second to only Aim120(US version) and hence would be the best in the subcontinent and as for Python-5 this is what I got my hands on .
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/air_missiles/python/Python5.html

 

[contedicavour]

Well buying a weapon system is not simple for it is more of a political decision rather a strategic alone.Buying Aim120 would mean a "Warranty void if sticker removed" clause and also US known for exporting scaled down weapon systems + other fuss about it's use case scenario.Derby if not the best would come second to only Aim120(US version) and hence would be the best in the subcontinent and as for Python-5 this is what I got my hands on .
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/air_missiles/python/Python5.html

Thks for the link ! By exploring it I found several articles on Derby as well. It says maximum engagement envelope 50km. A bit short vs Amraam AIM120B on our Harrier AV8B Plus, still not bad at all, especially vs no BVR at all, or versus a traditional semi-active radar BVR.

cheers

 

[powerslavenegi]

Range and speed are not enough

When we talk about AAM,specially in case of BVr engagements I believe ECCM capabilities,an excellent seeker that can resolve an A/C infrared sig from that of a flare etc are the factors that would decide who actually gets to kill.In these regards I think Israeli AA weapons are battle proven and of-course I think Indian Navy might have chosen the best from what was available.What is interesting is IN didnt opt for R-77 which has a longer engagement range.I think Derby scored in terms of accuracy,more robust ECCM ,superior seeker tech and LOAL which R-77 lacks(or what I suspect R-77 being incompatible with the harrier).

 

[contedicavour]

When we talk about AAM,specially in case of BVr engagements I believe ECCM capabilities,an excellent seeker that can resolve an A/C infrared sig from that of a flare etc are the factors that would decide who actually gets to kill.In these regards I think Israeli AA weapons are battle proven and of-course I think Indian Navy might have chosen the best from what was available.What is interesting is IN didnt opt for R-77 which has a longer engagement range.I think Derby scored in terms of accuracy,more robust ECCM ,superior seeker tech and LOAL which R-77 lacks(or what I suspect R-77 being incompatible with the harrier).

Well if the Harriers had to operate AA-10 or AA-12 missiles they'd need Russian radars, some sort of improved Zhuk. May be it's too big to fit on a Harrier, which remains a relatively compact plane.
It'll be interesting to see in exercises how modernized Harriers with Derby will perform against SU30s with AA10 or 12.

cheers

 

[aaaditya]

Well if the Harriers had to operate AA-10 or AA-12 missiles they'd need Russian radars, some sort of improved Zhuk. May be it's too big to fit on a Harrier, which remains a relatively compact plane.
It'll be interesting to see in exercises how modernized Harriers with Derby will perform against SU30s with AA10 or 12.

cheers

not necessarily.

the mirage2000's of the indian air force and the jaguars are compatible with the russian air to air missiles ,but they are not equippe with the russian radars.

the basic function of all radars is the same ,that is to detect a target,however to guide a missile onto the target the radar and missile must be compatible,for this the software of the missile and the radar have to be made compatible,just like to operate a mouse with your computer ,you need to download the software of the mouse first into your computer.

 

[tphuang]

I think the reason Derby was chosen was due to its size and weight. If you check it up, Derby is actually the weight as Python series. I'm not the sure the Sea Harriers that IN has can even handle AMRAAM or the heavier AA-10/12. And when you talk about a 50 km range for Derby, the NEZ for Derby is probably only 20 km.

Beyond ranges, which can be increased by adding boosters, how do we know if the YJ-83 or YJ-62 is supersonic (at least in terminal phases) ? What sources do you trust most for this information, since you doubt what Jane's says ?

cheers

JDW is great at gathering things that are released (ie: for export), but domestic system specs are harder to find.

The YJ-83 being supersonic in terminal stage, I found originally on sinodefence, but that's really not convincing. I probably should ask him for his source on that. I read about it being supersonic on Chinese forums from several respected members.

 

[kams]

I think the reason Derby was chosen was due to its size and weight. If you check it up, Derby is actually the weight as Python series. I'm not the sure the Sea Harriers that IN has can even handle AMRAAM or the heavier AA-10/12. And when you talk about a 50 km range for Derby, the NEZ for Derby is probably only 20 km.

Sigh..

Weight of Derby - 118 kg

Weight of Python 5 - 103.6 kg so wieght of both are different.

Weight of AA-12 - 175 kg.

Maximum External Stores load of Indian harriers - 3600 kg in STOL mode.


Indian Harrier can carry 2 Sea Eagle AShm in anti-ship mode, we can safetly assume that they are capable of carrying at least 2 AA=12. .

The original upgradation cost was high, IN was planning to induct Mig-39K and it did not make economic sense to spend a lot when one is planning to replace the air craft any way, so it was cancelled. Later when Israeli offer was made, it was found to be not only cost effective, but as both Derby and Python were already inducted in to IAF, their feedback was vital in clinching the deal.

 

[tphuang]

Sigh..

Weight of Derby - 118 kg

Weight of Python 5 - 103.6 kg so wieght of both are different.

Weight of AA-12 - 175 kg.

Maximum External Stores load of Indian harriers - 3600 kg in STOL mode.


Indian Harrier can carry 2 Sea Eagle AShm in anti-ship mode, we can safetly assume that they are capable of carrying at least 2 AA=12. .

The original upgradation cost was high, IN was planning to induct Mig-39K and it did not make economic sense to spend a lot when one is planning to replace the air craft any way, so it was cancelled. Later when Israeli offer was made, it was found to be not only cost effective, but as both Derby and Python were already inducted in to IAF, their feedback was vital in clinching the deal.

118 vs 104 kg. You are getting a little picky here. The great thing about Derby is that it uses many of the same technology as the python series and most importantly, it can be launched from the same rail launchers as python 4. So, you hard points that normally can only support SRAAM would be able to support Derby.

It's not about the maximum payload but rather if the hard points can support them.

 

[kams]

It's not about the maximum payload but rather if the hard points can support them.

The two outer wing pylons can carry 450 kg each and two inner wing pylons normally take drop tanks of 900 kg. (all data from Bharat-Rakshak).

118 vs 104 kg. You are getting a little picky here

In real life I am a Pharma R&D Scientist...so the 15% difference weight is considered as significant in our field. Just having fun..relax

 

[chinawhite]

List of PLAN ships to compare



Destroyers

16 - Type 051 Luda class
C-803 Antiship missile, HQ-7 SAM in 8 cell confirguration

2 - Type 052 Luhu class
16 C-803 Antiship missiles, HQ-7 SAM in 8 cell confirguration

1 - Type 051B Luhai class
16 C-803 Antiship missiles, HQ-7 SAM in 8 cell confirguration

2 - Type 052B Guangzhou class
16 C-803 Antiship missiles, 48 SA-N-12 SAM

2 - Type 052C Lanzhou class
8 YJ-62 Antiship missiles, 48 HHQ-9 SAM

2 - Type 051C Luzhou class
16 C-803 Antiship missiles, 48 RIF-M missiles

2 - Project 956 Sovremenny class
8 Moskit Antiship missiles, SA-N-7 SAM

1 - Project 956EM Sovremenny class
8 Moskit Antiship missiles, Kashtan Air defence system

Total number of destroyers = 28
Total number of Anti-ship missiles = 168 (Excluding 14 Luda class ships)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Frigates

12 - Type 053H Jianghu I class
5 - Type 053H1 Jianghu II class
1 - Type 053HT-H Jianghu IV class
6 - Type 053H1G Jianghu V class

3 - Type 053H2 Jianghu III class
8 C-801 Anti-ship missiles

4 - Type 053H2G Jiangwei I class
6 C-801 Antiship missiles, 6 Cell HQ-61B SAM

10 - Type 053H3 Jiangwei II class
8 C-803 Antiship missiles, HQ-7 SAM in 8 cell confirguration

2 - Type 054 Ma'anshan class
8 C-803 Antiship missiles, HQ-7 SAM in 8 cell confirguration

2 - Type 054A (under construction)
8 C-803 Antiship missiles, HQ-7 SAM in a VLS configuration (unconfirmed)

Total number of Frigates = 45 Ships
Total number of Anti-ship missiles = 160 (Excluding 24 Jianghu class ships)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conventional submarines

20 ~ Type 033 Romeo-class
17 - Type 035 Ming-class

12 - Type 039A/G Song-class
Capable of firing C-80X series of missiles while submerged

12 - Kilo-class
Klub-S missle system

1 - Yuan-class

Total number of conventional submarines = 62

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nuclear Submarines

5 - Han class SSN
Capable of firing C-80X series of missiles while submerged

1 - Xia class SSBN
16 JL-1 ballistic missiles

Total number of nuclear submarines = 6


I left out most rumours like the extra Yuan class submarines and did not include the SSN or SSBN

 

[contedicavour]

question on remaining life for IN Harriers

How long do you expect the IN to keep its Sea Harriers in service, after the SLEP underway with Israeli Derby ?
MIG29Ks are supposed to replace entirely Sea Harriers or not necessarily ?
I'm saying this because the modified Cavour ADS design is best at VSTOL aircraft (F35Bs ideally).

cheers

 

[kams]

How long do you expect the IN to keep its Sea Harriers in service, after the SLEP underway with Israeli Derby ?
MIG29Ks are supposed to replace entirely Sea Harriers or not necessarily ?
I'm saying this because the modified Cavour ADS design is best at VSTOL aircraft (F35Bs ideally).

cheers

I think Harriers will be in service as long as INS Virat is in service (2010). The ADS being built will have Mig-29K and/or Naval LCA. IN has the option to buy 30 Mig-29K in addition to 16 already ordered for Gorshkov.

 

[Gollevainen]

Isen't disinformation a bithc thing??ope

16 - Type 051 Luda class
C-803 Antiship missile, HQ-7 SAM in 8 cell confirguration

I'm sure you just forgotted to mention that of those 16 Ludas four have C803 been fitted, 109, 110, 165 and 166 and of those only two have HQ-7 s (109&110) so what it leaves those 12 other Ludas??? 12 post-WWII design hulls (badly costructed by the way) with late 50's design SSMs...

...what is said, and what is left unsaid...makes wonders to these "listings" doesen't it??

 

[contedicavour]

Isen't disinformation a bithc thing??ope



I'm sure you just forgotted to mention that of those 16 Ludas four have C803 been fitted, 109, 110, 165 and 166 and of those only two have HQ-7 s (109&110) so what it leaves those 12 other Ludas??? 12 post-WWII design hulls (badly costructed by the way) with late 50's design SSMs...

...what is said, and what is left unsaid...makes wonders to these "listings" doesen't it??

Most Janghius and Ludas are so completely obsolete... though at this rythm PLAN will have replaced all of them in less than 10 years... :frown

cheers

 

[kams]

Quote:
Originally Posted by contedicavour
How long do you expect the IN to keep its Sea Harriers in service, after the SLEP underway with Israeli Derby ?
MIG29Ks are supposed to replace entirely Sea Harriers or not necessarily ?
I'm saying this because the modified Cavour ADS design is best at VSTOL aircraft (F35Bs ideally).

cheers

I think Harriers will be in service as long as INS Virat is in service (2010). The ADS being built will have Mig-29K and/or Naval LCA. IN has the option to buy 30 Mig-29K in addition to 16 already ordered for Gorshkov.

Ok here is the confirmation from Horses mouth, err..rather from Admiral Arun Prakash. The enclosed article narrates the fascinating story behind Indian Navy's tryst with carriers and how ADS (now called IAC - Indegenous Aircraft Carrier) evolved from a 16,000 T Harrier carrier to 37,000 STOBAR and how Mig-29K and Naval LCA were chosen as fighters.

Indigenous aricraft carrier by Arun Prakash

 

[tphuang]

Isen't disinformation a bithc thing??ope



I'm sure you just forgotted to mention that of those 16 Ludas four have C803 been fitted, 109, 110, 165 and 166 and of those only two have HQ-7 s (109&110) so what it leaves those 12 other Ludas??? 12 post-WWII design hulls (badly costructed by the way) with late 50's design SSMs...

...what is said, and what is left unsaid...makes wonders to these "listings" doesen't it??

according to SARguy, 165 and 166 also got the HQ-7 upgrade. But yeah, most of the time when I'm discussing PLAN, I'm too ashamed to bring up the Ludas and Jianghus.

 

[kams]

according to SARguy, 165 and 166 also got the HQ-7 upgrade. But yeah, most of the time when I'm discussing PLAN, I'm too ashamed to bring up the Ludas and Jianghus.

For the same reason I left out Type 16 and Leander class frigates . When will people understand its not only numbers that matter, but strategy, doctrine and location also play a big role.