Indian Navy LHD/LPD Amphibious Ships : Updates & Discussions

[Parthu]

Why do you think the swapping is a big ask. It's a proven system, and we already have all agreements in place with RR.

https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/press-releases/2021/20-10-2021-rr-keen-to-partner-the-indian-navys-electrification-journey-for-its-fleet-of-the-future.aspx

India-UK marine engine collaboration sets tone for Navy’s next-generation warships - The Tribune

Inside the Capital.

www.tribuneindia.com

It's nothing undoable, but I'm saying there's no existing solution that the deal is 'tailor-made' for.

The scale & scope of modification will vary based on the ship. Trieste for example is already made for MT30 so just changing the transmission would be more straightforward compared to JC-1 or Mistral which may have to undergo a greater degree of redesign internally (MT30 enclosure is going to be physically larger than LM2500, while Mistral will have to find a way to rearrange the layout from 3 x diesel engines to a single, or two, MT30s. There might be some CoG/CoM changes that have to be accounted for to recertify the hull.



I don't know if the new RFI changed the elevator needs compared to the old 2021 RFI but if they didn't, it would mean the elevators on these ships will have to be redesigned as well (old RFI needed minimum 24-ton capacity, Mistral's lifts can only do 13-ton). JC-1's lifts have got the capacity, but the dimensions are too small compared to RFI requirement, read this thread:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1432009733771120643

It's possible we might end up requiring strengthened, outboard elevators (like on US LHDs):

Again, it's nothing undoable. But will require a revisit to the drawing board for sure. So no ready-made solution, unlike Turkey or Australia buying the Juan Carlos as-is.

 

[aditya g]

It's nothing undoable, but I'm saying there's no existing solution that the deal is 'tailor-made' for.

The scale & scope of modification will vary based on the ship. Trieste for example is already made for MT30 so just changing the transmission would be more straightforward compared to JC-1 or Mistral which may have to undergo a greater degree of redesign internally (MT30 enclosure is going to be physically larger than LM2500, while Mistral will have to find a way to rearrange the layout from 3 x diesel engines to a single, or two, MT30s. There might be some CoG/CoM changes that have to be accounted for to recertify the hull.

View attachment 50697

I don't know if the new RFI changed the elevator needs compared to the old 2021 RFI but if they didn't, it would mean the elevators on these ships will have to be redesigned as well (old RFI needed minimum 24-ton capacity, Mistral's lifts can only do 13-ton). JC-1's lifts have got the capacity, but the dimensions are too small compared to RFI requirement, read this thread:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1432009733771120643

It's possible we might end up requiring strengthened, outboard elevators (like on US LHDs):

Again, it's nothing undoable. But will require a revisit to the drawing board for sure. So no ready-made solution, unlike Turkey or Australia buying the Juan Carlos as-is.

I feel IN is over engineering the LPD requirement. The probability of us landing troops in comtested shores is very remote. Even so you would simply send in large LSTs as they can reach pretty much entire IOR.

If there is cash go a second vikrant class design with good helo complement to allow commando style attacks on shore.

We should complement LSTs with commercial ferry style ships which can disembark men and material port side...

 

[Speedster1]

I feel IN is over engineering the LPD requirement. The probability of us landing troops in comtested shores is very remote. Even so you would simply send in large LSTs as they can reach pretty much entire IOR.

If there is cash go a second vikrant class design with good helo complement to allow commando style attacks on shore.

We should complement LSTs with commercial ferry style ships which can disembark men and material port side...

Interesringly, the Vikrant's design evolved from the Italian Cavour CV which has significant amphibious capabilities (upto 24 MBTs or AAV/light vehicles)

Imo, a modified version of the Vikrant with well deck and IEPS could fit this requirement . Though, I suspect the IN also wants an ASW command ship for which a through deck LPH might be a better fit than a traditional LPD.

 

[Ashwin]

It's nothing undoable, but I'm saying there's no existing solution that the deal is 'tailor-made' for.

The scale & scope of modification will vary based on the ship. Trieste for example is already made for MT30 so just changing the transmission would be more straightforward compared to JC-1 or Mistral which may have to undergo a greater degree of redesign internally (MT30 enclosure is going to be physically larger than LM2500, while Mistral will have to find a way to rearrange the layout from 3 x diesel engines to a single, or two, MT30s. There might be some CoG/CoM changes that have to be accounted for to recertify the hull.

View attachment 50697

I don't know if the new RFI changed the elevator needs compared to the old 2021 RFI but if they didn't, it would mean the elevators on these ships will have to be redesigned as well (old RFI needed minimum 24-ton capacity, Mistral's lifts can only do 13-ton). JC-1's lifts have got the capacity, but the dimensions are too small compared to RFI requirement, read this thread:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1432009733771120643

It's possible we might end up requiring strengthened, outboard elevators (like on US LHDs):

Again, it's nothing undoable. But will require a revisit to the drawing board for sure. So no ready-made solution, unlike Turkey or Australia buying the Juan Carlos as-is.

They have definitely tweaked the RFI numbers to match whats available in the market. It was 200 meter +/- 5% before now its 200-230 meter.

On the propulsion rearrangement, I think it's a non-issue. This is not a frigate or destroyer where space is extremely tight. It should be easy to change and rearrange the propulsion quite easily.

I feel IN is over engineering the LPD requirement. The probability of us landing troops in comtested shores is very remote. Even so you would simply send in large LSTs as they can reach pretty much entire IOR.

If there is cash go a second vikrant class design with good helo complement to allow commando style attacks on shore.

We should complement LSTs with commercial ferry style ships which can disembark men and material port side...

They have a long term vision on the propulsion. Their object is to guide towards that.

Future AC and Destroyers will definitely need IEP. So, they are staring with a larger platform.

 

[babablacksheep]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057022215535931455

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057020483871387937

 

[YoungWolf]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057022215535931455

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057020483871387937

Won't exactly call it a new contender. Ever since TPCR-25 laid out the approx displacement of the LHD IN is seeking, this big boy alongside the JC-1 could be considered the top contenders (JC-1 is 27,000 tonnes and Trieste is 33,000, with the IN looking for something roughly straddling the middle ground between these 2).