Indonesia Indonesian Navy, Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Laut (TNI-AL)

[Gary]

italian improved FREMM variant in DIMDEX 2016 .
View attachment 15937

I'd say we remove the twin fast forty and replaced it with another quadruple missile launcher. 8 AShM is just too light of an armament to ship this size.

 

[Van Kravchenko]

I'd say we remove the twin fast forty and replaced it with another quadruple missile launcher. 8 AShM is just too light of an armament to ship this size.

Not gonna happend, even if the missile launcher system is sligtly small, the capability of electronics system is the most valuable asset in a multipurpouse war ship.

Here is standard configuration of Bergamini, even though its look weak at small number of missile; but she stil has room for more armament

 

[Chestnut]

I'd say we remove the twin fast forty and replaced it with another quadruple missile launcher. 8 AShM is just too light of an armament to ship this size.

Ships these size generally carry only 8 AShM's.

 

[Gary]

Ships these size generally carry only 8 AShM's.

I mean if we're not going to buy enough hulls, we should maximize the amount of payload per ships. Might want to remember that we are neighbor with the world largest navy.

Formidable class for example has provision for up to 24x AShM, even though it rarely if ever sail in such configuration.

 

[lemons]

 

[Madokafc]

View attachment 16068

The government had put the budget already, so it is understandable. But for notice, this should go for MEF phase 2 project

 

[Van Kravchenko]

I mean if we're not going to buy enough hulls, we should maximize the amount of payload per ships. Might want to remember that we are neighbor with the world largest navy.

Formidable class for example has provision for up to 24x AShM, even though it rarely if ever sail in such configuration.

If yo look closerly to every warship that we curremtly have, almost all of'em has provisional space for more AShM.

AShM, such as exocet, harphoon, NSM, Kh 35, C 705 didnt meant to sink a vessel, yes it has devastating power but the main role of thoose missile usually to cripple and disable a vessel.

The electronics suite, currently more important than the AShM itself, war vessel isnt only mean to sunk a aship, but its today role is more leaning to deffend against every aspect of threat

 

[Anmdt]

I mean if we're not going to buy enough hulls, we should maximize the amount of payload per ships. Might want to remember that we are neighbor with the world largest navy.

Formidable class for example has provision for up to 24x AShM, even though it rarely if ever sail in such configuration.

Don't forget about Vulcano like guided artillery shells, which is way harder to intercept than an AShM.
Soon there will be IIR guided shells or maybe home-onto radar kinds that will be useful up to medium ranges.

Vulcano Precision-Guided Munitions

The Vulcano family of precision-guided, gun-launched munitions offers U.S. and allied military forces a range of low-risk, cost effective capabilities for advanced, large caliber weapon systems.

www.baesystems.com

Meanwhile it is known hypersonic-guided-ramjet powered artillery shells are under development by different countries too (mainly for land systems with caliber of 155mm) and could be practical and cheaper to use than AShMs in the naval platforms too.

 

[trishna_amrta]

If yo look closerly to every warship that we curremtly have, almost all of'em has provisional space for more AShM.

AShM, such as exocet, harphoon, NSM, Kh 35, C 705 didnt meant to sink a vessel, yes it has devastating power but the main role of thoose missile usually to cripple and disable a vessel.

The electronics suite, currently more important than the AShM itself, war vessel isnt only mean to sunk a aship, but its today role is more leaning to deffend against every aspect of threat

Having the provision for additional payload is nice, however I don't see any practical point of having more than 4 AShM per hull. Furthermore, mission-kill can be achieved using SAM such as RIM-66, RM-67, RIM-174, CAMM which have secondary anti-surface capability.

 

[Madokafc]

If yo look closerly to every warship that we curremtly have, almost all of'em has provisional space for more AShM.

AShM, such as exocet, harphoon, NSM, Kh 35, C 705 didnt meant to sink a vessel, yes it has devastating power but the main role of thoose missile usually to cripple and disable a vessel.

The electronics suite, currently more important than the AShM itself, war vessel isnt only mean to sunk a aship, but its today role is more leaning to deffend against every aspect of threat

AShM still important though, but not everything

Having the provision for additional payload is nice, however I don't see any practical point of having more than 4 AShM per hull. Furthermore, mission-kill can be achieved using SAM such as RIM-66, RM-67, RIM-174, CAMM which have secondary anti-surface capability.

SAM like those optimized for mobility kill, as most of them programmed to do top attack mode, instead of sea skimming mode.

The real killer for any Naval warships even till Falkland war is your old but reliable torpedo and somehow dumb bomb like Mk82 from fighter bomber is being quite lethal (and now all the more with the availability of Guidance kit)

 

[FPXAllen]

...I don't see any practical point of having more than 4 AShM per hull...

It's a long stretch, but how about missile saturation attack? With the advent of CIWS, launching a missile (or just a few missiles) to a target equipped with it is almost guaranteed to fail. If there are two ships, where each equipped with - say 8 AShMs - attacking one such target, while there's still no guarantee that one missile will reach it but at the very least, the chance are still bigger.

 

[Parry Brima]

It's a long stretch, but how about missile saturation attack? With the advent of CIWS, launching a missile (or just a few missiles) to a target equipped with it is almost guaranteed to fail. If there are two ships, where each equipped with - say 8 AShMs - attacking one such target, while there's still no guarantee that one missile will reach it but at the very least, the chance are still bigger.

We have (not so) secret weapon aboard our warship

 

[trishna_amrta]

It's a long stretch, but how about missile saturation attack? With the advent of CIWS, launching a missile (or just a few missiles) to a target equipped with it is almost guaranteed to fail. If there are two ships, where each equipped with - say 8 AShMs - attacking one such target, while there's still no guarantee that one missile will reach it but at the very least, the chance are still bigger.

Such attack mode require fully functional Network Centric capability to track the target from stand-off distance (beyond the horizon). Furthermore, with more than 4 AShM in a single hull is basically putting too many eggs in the same basket

 

[Madokafc]

Ship launched AShM doesn't matter very much, big Boys player usually relying their Bomber or Fighter Bomber equipped with air launched AShM to saturate enemies fleets, meanwhile most of their Naval surface warships assets dedicated toward Anti Submarine warfare and AAW roles.

 

[Anmdt]

Such attack mode require fully functional Network Centric capability to track the target from stand-off distance (beyond the horizon). Furthermore, with more than 4 AShM in a single hull is basically putting too many eggs in the same basket

Actually a legit point, even Large USS Cruisers (Yes i know they have dual purpose AA-point defense missiles or cruise missiles to serve to an alternative plan or submarines which is more focused to hunt surface assets or conduct land attack operations) have 8 AShM, these are like just "de-jure" systems on the ships which has became more strategic than practical. This applies to VLS as well. Some navies has realized filling a ship with VLS and keeping a stock and managing it for each cell has not been practical and possible thus they started to reduce VLS numbers to more sensible amounts (down to 16-32 from 48- 64).

Also, if you can fit 4 (Since most launchers come in quad), you can definitely fit 8. So it all starts from purposing a spot. Additionally we should recall that we are placing nearly 100+ people, which includes at least 20 highly skilled, experienced ranked officers in a single ship. Compared to this, cost of 4 AShM is nothing.

I rather consider this as provisional land attack cruise missile spot for poor navies (rich ones: US-Russia-Some EU members) who can not afford a 8+ meters VLS and a tomahawk missile.
Also further to add, a shifted 4 + 4 configuration provides 8 + 8 facing configuration, these spots are usually the places which you can not enforce a VLS or place a sensor mast so these are just filled up instead of being left empty.

We have (not so) secret weapon aboard our warship

Entirely useless as is. The missiles should be guided (at least GPS) the system should be updated to include roll and trim status of the ship and at launch missiles should be updated according to the environmental conditions, so that the missile can adjust itself after the launch and put itself into a course.
Or at first place it should be placed on a stabilized platform if it is not possible for them to update course of the missile ie. if it is not guided.
Nothing more than just displaying. Years ago we have discussed with some members about possibility of using a propelled artillery at sea while being carried by a LCT, the dispersion found out to be large (by %10 of the range) at sea state 2.

SAM like those optimized for mobility kill, as most of them programmed to do top attack mode, instead of sea skimming mode.

And they lack a radar altimeter usually. But land attack cruise missiles might be equipped wit altimeters.

 

[wekiweko]

SSM is still very much relevant today. The US Navy is one such navy who have been neglecting their SSM and come to a hard realization that their surface warships lack SSM for today's near peer conflict and thus scrambling to develop or acquire new SSM to equip their surface warship. Even the long forgotten anti ship capability of Tomahawk is getting their attention to

 

[R4duga]

take a guess ?

https://www.facebook.com/lembagakeris/posts/3475486569226328

are changbogo still in our grocery list ?

 

[Madokafc]

Heavy Frigates, OPV, Submarine, patrol aircraft, multi purpose Frigates, MLRS and Coastal Defense Missiles system for the Navy not to mention Heavy Fighter, Multirole Fighter, MRTT, Hercules, Skyshield, MERAD for the Air Force and hundreds of APC, IFV and other for the Army it seems our situation is not that good indeed.... As it is quite worrying when our ministry of finance just give a literally blank check for our MoD...

 

[trishna_amrta]

take a guess ?

https://www.facebook.com/lembagakeris/posts/3475486569226328

are changbogo still in our grocery list ?

IF... IF... it still does, then there is no point to paying anything further for anything related to KF-X. The Chang Bogo should be enough to ease the butt hurt.

The way I see it, it's far better option to bulk buying from (Scorpene, Rafale, etc) and get some lucrative off set deals out of them in return.

 

[trishna_amrta]

I rather consider this as provisional land attack cruise missile spot for poor navies (rich ones: US-Russia-Some EU members) who can not afford a 8+ meters VLS and a tomahawk missile.
Also further to add, a shifted 4 + 4 configuration provides 8 + 8 facing configuration, these spots are usually the places which you can not enforce a VLS or place a sensor mast so these are just filled up instead of being left empty.

IMO using those space for strike missiles is far better option