Indian Navy Kitty Hawk Deal

[Izzy1]

Lolnfloorl: nfloorl: nfloorl: I hope mods will take care of your post and i need not post some interesting bits of news..

This forum is getting interesting to say the least! Did some one mention that this is a defence forum.

Sorry Swerve..we will take the economics via pm, may be I will learn thing or two from you and I do have some things to share with you.

Oh here we go, the usual retort...

You brought up Third World - I gave a adult retort and my opinion. I'm sorry you didn't like it. For someone with 650+ I'm sure you have seen worse.

 

[funtz]

Rubbish.
Your the only Third World country then I know that operated Charlie-Class SSNs, now has nukes - has more Su-30s than Russia. You wanted the position of power - welcome.

Third World... Don't blame us for your legacy cast system and lousy distribution of wealth. You can't even blame the British for that. Just like the rest of us, your rich are getting richer and poor getting poorer.

You countered Pakistan years ago - I prey their forgiveness outrunns your intolerence.

:unknown and this thread still exits... wonder why.

some of the people i know have seen the height of "their forgiveness".

The neighborhoods a mess, border disputes everywhere, internal disputes everywhere, kind of like the world, racism-castism-poverty-hunger and what not.

No ones blaming anyone, the brits left after some years of the "raj", 60 years and counting, things are improving thats the way of the world, things improve over a long period of time. A five year plan to build roads before you build the school doesn't work, its hard work all right complicated by the sheer diversity of the land and the people.
Any help is more than welcomed, its requested.

We will get there, many civilizations of men has lived on this earth, each thinking of the world with this narrow view.

can it be any more off topic, well no, and the thread still goes on and on.

And oh ya the lavish spending on military, ha ha, the Mig-21, Mig-27s, Shaktiman trucks, artillery guns, small arms, a million men army stretched thin along the vast borders and internal problems... list goes on and on, real grand military spending.

 

[Jon K]

In fact, the only navies really reducing their size right now are in Europe, and not even all of Europe, with the UK leading the way.

Some smaller navies are in fact expanding their capabilities dramatically. Norway and Denmark are constructing Mk 41 VLS equipped frigates, Romania has acquired ex-RN Type 22 suitable for distant deployments, Belgium is doing the same with acquisition of ex-RNlNships, Poland is constructing new small frigates etc... New European ships, in general, are much more capable than the vessels they're replacing, thus one should not just take a look at the numbers.

What the world wonders is how is Denmark, for example, is capable of constructing very capable multirole vessels (Absalon and frigates) with minuscule amount of money compared to USN LCS...

 

[kams]

Oh here we go, the usual retort...

You brought up Third World - I gave a adult retort and my opinion. I'm sorry you didn't like it. For someone with 650+ I'm sure you have seen worse.

I did not bring up thrild world

Deleted the rest, Off-topic. I might have mis-understood what Izzy was saying.

 

[Sea Toby]

Some smaller navies are in fact expanding their capabilities dramatically. Norway and Denmark are constructing Mk 41 VLS equipped frigates, Romania has acquired ex-RN Type 22 suitable for distant deployments, Belgium is doing the same with acquisition of ex-RNlNships, Poland is constructing new small frigates etc... New European ships, in general, are much more capable than the vessels they're replacing, thus one should not just take a look at the numbers.

What the world wonders is how is Denmark, for example, is capable of constructing very capable multirole vessels (Absalon and frigates) with minuscule amount of money compared to USN LCS...

Frankly, the US navy has never considered frigates front line warships. Frigates were considered more useful as ocean escorts than warships. With the Cold War over, its looking at other roles to fill, trying to combine inshore operations along with the ocean escort duties in hopes to increase the number of ships. At the same time the USCG is building cutters which resemble ocean escorts, one wanders whether the navy and coast guard will build the same ships.

 

[contedicavour]

Quite spectacular how a thread can end up nowhere in a few days

Wasn't this supposed to be on the Kitty Hawk rumours ?

cheers

PS : measuring the navies by number of ships that can be deployed doesn't make much sense. Yes PLAN can deploy 50+ Janghu, Luda, Jagnweis but the only threatening PLAN ships are the Russian-built Sovremmenny and the latest Luhu and Luhai DDGs.
PS2 : some European navies mentioned as currently being strengthened actually aren't that much. Romania has 2 almost unarmed ex RN Type 22s without Exocet or Seawolf... Denmark is acquiring wonderful new surface ships but had to give up their SSK force. Etc

 

[Generalissimo]

This thread is gone anyway, and I need to get my post count up so I can PM and stuff...so here goes.

Yes PLAN can deploy 50+ Janghu, Luda, Jagnweis but the only threatening PLAN ships are the Russian-built Sovremmenny and the latest Luhu and Luhai DDGs.

You're forgetting the Type 22s. There's dozens of them (25+ I believe. The fact that I'm an SDF member and don't know is really quite shameful), all capable somewhat stealthy fast attack craft armed with YJ-82s and suitable for operating in the littoral, around Taiwan, in the South China Sea, maybe even around Japan if accompanied by underway replenishment ships.

 

[contedicavour]

This thread is gone anyway, and I need to get my post count up so I can PM and stuff...so here goes.



You're forgetting the Type 22s. There's dozens of them (25+ I believe. The fact that I'm an SDF member and don't know is really quite shameful), all capable somewhat stealthy fast attack craft armed with YJ-82s and suitable for operating in the littoral, around Taiwan, in the South China Sea, maybe even around Japan if accompanied by underway replenishment ships.

Yes but those FACs are extremely vulnerable to air attacks unless they are under constant air cover from PLAN Sukhois...

cheers

 

[Generalissimo]

Yes but those FACs are extremely vulnerable to air attacks unless they are under constant air cover from PLAN Sukhois...

cheers

True, but you still should include them in the list of modern ships the PLAN can deploy.

Whatever happened to Taiwan's FAC program?v

 

[contedicavour]

True, but you still should include them in the list of modern ships the PLAN can deploy.

Whatever happened to Taiwan's FAC program?v

I was actually focusing on oceangoing ships but if you insist I can also add land based SSMs and the ASMs under the wings of PLAN fighterbombers

Last time I heard Taiwan was working on a class of 50 small FAC(M)s with a couple of Hsiung Feng II missiles in the back as a replacement for Hai Ou FACs.

cheers

 

[Salty Dog]

Frankly, the US navy has never considered frigates front line warships. Frigates were considered more useful as ocean escorts than warships. With the Cold War over, its looking at other roles to fill, trying to combine inshore operations along with the ocean escort duties in hopes to increase the number of ships. At the same time the USCG is building cutters which resemble ocean escorts, one wanders whether the navy and coast guard will build the same ships.

Too bad the USN didn't plan a follow-up to the OHP class. The LCS maybe? The OHP is ugly, but she could enter in numerous ports, didn't need tugs, didn't burn a lot of fuel, and still packed a punch with her combat systems. The Aegis DDG/CG are far more capable, however, they are limited to which ports they can visit due to their draft requirement. That crosses off a number of ports, or going pierside for a visit.

 

[contedicavour]

Too bad the USN didn't plan a follow-up to the OHP class. The LCS maybe? The OHP is ugly, but she could enter in numerous ports, didn't need tugs, didn't burn a lot of fuel, and still packed a punch with her combat systems. The Aegis DDG/CG are far more capable, however, they are limited to which ports they can visit due to their draft requirement. That crosses off a number of ports, or going pierside for a visit.

That's exactly what the LCS are for, littoral operations... though at this rate they will end up costing as much as a DDG

cheers

 

[Salty Dog]

That's exactly what the LCS are for, littoral operations... though at this rate they will end up costing as much as a DDG

cheers

Two different LCS designs and the USCG Deepwater program cutters to boot. You would thing the US would agree on a nice standard frigate/corvette design that would suit the USN and USCG. Kind of like the JSF for the flyboys. I'd give it to the Italians to design a sleek sporty warship.

Cheers mate

 

[contedicavour]

Two different LCS designs and the USCG Deepwater program cutters to boot. You would thing the US would agree on a nice standard frigate/corvette design that would suit the USN and USCG. Kind of like the JSF for the flyboys. I'd give it to the Italians to design a sleek sporty warship.

Cheers mate

Good idea to standardize LCS and Deepwater into one hull... especially with all this emphasis on modular design with several different weapons suites than can be installed based on the mission. With a nice huge flight deck at the back for heavy helos.
IIRC Fincantieri is involved in one of the 2 LCS teams, based on experience gained from building high speed passenger ships. Just add "by Giugiaro" or "by Pininfarina" and it would be perfect

cheers !

 

[Salty Dog]

Good idea to standardize LCS and Deepwater into one hull... especially with all this emphasis on modular design with several different weapons suites than can be installed based on the mission. With a nice huge flight deck at the back for heavy helos.
IIRC Fincantieri is involved in one of the 2 LCS teams, based on experience gained from building high speed passenger ships. Just add "by Giugiaro" or "by Pininfarina" and it would be perfect

cheers !

Really off topic, I could not resist - Giugiaro is one of my favorite designers, he studied sharks and other fast marine life and applied that knowledge to his car designs.

Seriously, I would like to see the USA design a kick-ass frigate/corvette for the USN/USCG. If the price was kept down, it could even be exported. Northrup Grumman, General Dynamics, and Lockheed Martin are "missing the boat"

 

[swerve]

Good idea to standardize LCS and Deepwater into one hull... ...

cheers !

But that would mean abandoning one of the main requirements of LCS, i.e. the extreme high speed. The USCG wants a robust, seaworthy ship that can do long patrols in all weather, not an oversized speedboat.

 

[contedicavour]

But that would mean abandoning one of the main requirements of LCS, i.e. the extreme high speed. The USCG wants a robust, seaworthy ship that can do long patrols in all weather, not an oversized speedboat.

True, but at this ... speed ... the USN will be lucky to get a dozen LCS in 10 years... and by then all OHPs will have been decommissioned.
They'd better settle for a 35kn ship and at least get enough of them on time...

cheers

 

[alexsa]

. The Aegis DDG/CG are far more capable, however, they are limited to which ports they can visit due to their draft requirement. That crosses off a number of ports, or going pierside for a visit.

Sorry this is total nonsense. The draft of the DDG51 is 6.5m (stated naviagation draft including UKC is 32 feet or something like that). The FFG7 draft with that whacking great single CPP is 6.3m so ther is very little difference there.

In addition these drafts are very shallow. A very small feeder vessel with an LOA of only 100m still draws 6.1 to 6.5m loaded the point being these vessel are used to service port that most cargo vessel cannot get into. Many main ports have dredged to around 10m to simply accompodat modern genral cargo container vessels wihtout event considering bulk carriers or tankers. Even modern offshore support vessels of 100m LOA (not known for relying on deep water harbours) draw more that 6m and a small 140m tanker has a draft of 8.5m. Most ports handle ships much bigger than this.

The problem is warships take up a lot of space on the wharf (noting they are invariabley segregated from the other users for security sake) for a lot of time and disrupt the normal operation of the port (A cargo ship is in and out as quickly as possible). In addition they require considerable logistic support compared to a cargo ship (on the basis of caring for the crew alone). This makes them less desirable for many ports which have busy commercial facilites taht are close to their full utilisation.

 

[Salty Dog]

Sorry this is total nonsense. The draft of the DDG51 is 6.5m (stated naviagation draft including UKC is 32 feet or something like that). The FFG7 draft with that whacking great single CPP is 6.3m so ther is very little difference there.

In addition these drafts are very shallow. A very small feeder vessel with an LOA of only 100m still draws 6.1 to 6.5m loaded the point being these vessel are used to service port that most cargo vessel cannot get into. Many main ports have dredged to around 10m to simply accompodat modern genral cargo container vessels wihtout event considering bulk carriers or tankers. Even modern offshore support vessels of 100m LOA (not known for relying on deep water harbours) draw more that 6m and a small 140m tanker has a draft of 8.5m. Most ports handle ships much bigger than this.

The problem is warships take up a lot of space on the wharf (noting they are invariabley segregated from the other users for security sake) for a lot of time and disrupt the normal operation of the port (A cargo ship is in and out as quickly as possible). In addition they require considerable logistic support compared to a cargo ship (on the basis of caring for the crew alone). This makes them less desirable for many ports which have busy commercial facilites taht are close to their full utilisation.

Thank you for the comments mate. CG-47 class navigational draft is 10m, whilst DDG-51 is 9.4m and FFG-7 6.7m. CO's add about a meter for good measure. I based my statement on the problems encountered berthing the CG-47, DD-963, and DDG-51 ships in some of the ports along the Atlantic coast of South America, notably Montevideo, Fortaleza, Salvador, Porto Belgrano, and Buenos Aires. They often had to sit out at anchor due to draft restrictions. Luckily they were able to berth in Rio de Janeiro. I suppose those ports need some dredging.

 

[Sea Toby]

The Navy started planning for the LCS many years ago, possibly a decade, and very early said the ships would run around $200 million each. Turns out many years later, they ran over $400 million each with the first ships. As a result the Congress and Navy cancelled the second ship of both classes. The Navy then attempted to order a second ship of each class at a much lower price. Both shipyards would have nothing to do with this.

Frankly, almost thirty years have passed since the OH Perry class. Ships of that size costs more. I doubt whether many of the frigates being built around the world are cheaper than $400 million each. New Zealand paid $470 million each in NZ dollars for their two Anzac frigates.

While the first Arleigh Burke destroyers may have cost around $1 billion twenty years ago, they run closer to $2 billion today. You would think the Navy and Congress would have concluded that replacing the frigates would cost twice as much too.

So in this next wave of ships, the Navy wants more than a ocean escort to replace the OH Perrys. They also want a ship which can do some inshore duties better in the littorals. Following Canada's example with their new corvettes, the Navy is attempting to use 20 ft, sea containers to provide these ships different mission capabilities. Should I say a multi-role ship. However, unlike Canada, instead of a very slow ship, the Navy wants a very fast one. But I agree, a ship with faster speed costs more.

The Danish have been very successful with their new multi-role vessels. Maybe we should use the Danish ship?