With 144 Missile Cells, India's Upcoming P-18 Stealth Destroyer Emerges as a Powerful Counter to Growing Indo-Pacific Naval Threats

The Indian Navy has unveiled the design for a formidable new warship, the Project-18 Next-Generation Destroyer (NGD), a stealth vessel poised to become one of the most heavily armed ships in the world.

The revelation was made as the Navy's Warship Design Bureau (WDB) celebrated the delivery of its 100th indigenously designed ship, marking a significant milestone in India's journey toward self-reliance in naval manufacturing.

Revealed during a seminar in New Delhi titled “Nation Building Through Shipbuilding,” the Project-18 destroyer represents a major leap in India's maritime capabilities. This new class of warship is designed to succeed the current Visakhapatnam-class destroyers.

With a planned displacement of 13,000 tons, the P-18 will be substantially larger and more powerful than its predecessors, placing it in the category of a cruiser by international standards.

The warship's design incorporates a sophisticated suite of sensors and radar systems. It features four large Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) panels integrated into its superstructure, believed to be the indigenous Long-Range Multi-Function Radar (LRMFR).

Developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), this system provides 360-degree surveillance and can track a vast number of aerial and surface targets at distances exceeding 500 kilometres. This advanced electronic architecture ensures the destroyer can effectively operate and defend itself against modern threats in a complex combat environment.

The most striking feature of the Project-18 is its unprecedented firepower. The vessel is designed to carry a total of 144 Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells, which house a variety of missiles for different missions. This arsenal is planned to include:

• Long-Range Surface-to-Air Missiles (LRSAM): 32 VLS cells will be dedicated to long-range air defence missiles, likely the developmental PGLRSAM with a range of 250 km, providing a protective shield against enemy aircraft and ballistic missiles.
• Cruise Missiles: 48 universal VLS cells are intended for a mix of BrahMos Extended-Range supersonic cruise missiles and the Indigenous Technology Cruise Missile (ITCM), enabling powerful strikes against ships and land targets.
• Short-Range Air Defence: 64 smaller VLS cells will be equipped with the Very Short-Range Surface-to-Air Missile (VL-SRSAM) system for last-ditch defence against sea-skimming missiles and other aerial threats.

This missile capacity significantly surpasses that of many contemporary warships, including China's advanced Type 055 Renhai-class cruiser (112 VLS cells) and the United States Navy's workhorse Arleigh Burke-class destroyer (96 VLS cells).

Additionally, the design includes eight slant launchers, which could potentially carry future hypersonic weapons like the BrahMos-2, further enhancing its offensive power.

Reflecting the government's 'Atmanirbhar Bharat' initiative, the Project-18 destroyer aims for an indigenous content of approximately 75%.

It will incorporate advanced stealth features to minimise its radar signature and an efficient Integrated Electric Propulsion (IEP) system.

The ship will also be equipped to handle two multi-role helicopters and features systems for launching autonomous underwater vehicles and drones, making it a versatile platform for anti-submarine warfare, mine countermeasures, and surveillance.

The development of the Project-18 destroyer signals India's firm intent to safeguard its interests in the Indo-Pacific and maintain a robust defence posture.

As stated in the ancient Indian naval ethos, "Jalmev Yasya, Balmev Tasya" (He who controls the seas, holds the power), this next-generation warship is a testament to India's growing industrial capability and its ambition to be a dominant maritime force in the region.

 

Analysis  The Myth of Affordable Chinese Weapons Shatters Amid Repeated Combat Failures in Recent Conflicts

155 Weapons, 1,652 Ammunition Recovered From 5 Manipur Districts: Police

[R. Singh]

This warship must carry one MH-60- ASW and one NMRH Helicopter and DEW and Akash-Navy air defence !

 

[aksinghal]

Day dreaming, nothing has delivered successfully till date. Everything is on paper. World is moving fast...

 

[Dranzer Knight]

From the recent reports this destroyer will have a different Radar not the Israeli MF Star and will also have the new 300 KW laser weapon being developed by DRDO and the most interesting part from the design we can tell it will have 4 engines which most probably will be the MT30 marine engine.I have to say if what they have projected in this destroyer is true then it will surpass almost all the destroyers all around the world in terms of weapons and technologies Jai Hind🇮🇳🇮🇳

 

[Takumi]

From the recent reports this destroyer will have a different Radar not the Israeli MF Star and will also have the new 300 KW laser weapon being developed by DRDO and the most interesting part from the design we can tell it will have 4 engines which most probably will be the MT30 marine engine.I have to say if what they have projected in this destroyer is true then it will surpass almost all the destroyers all around the world in terms of weapons and technologies Jai Hind🇮🇳🇮🇳

It might be the unicorn mast

 

[Anonymus]

At least the Indian Naval Design Bureau is much better than ADA. Happy for the Navy; with the lowest budget among the three branches of Indian defence forces, the Navy's modernisation plan is at a much better pace than the Army's and especially the Air Force's.

 

[Sanjib Pathak]

Impressive! From now on, this should be standard issue destroyer for the IN.

 

[Aayush Pratap]

Why do we always design flat super structures? Why can't we design angled ones?

 

[Alok Gupta]

This ship is going to be a beast in the IOR. With so many defensive and offensive missiles (still a speculation at best) this ship can pin the enemy's naval assets to their coast and win wars for India. Jai Hind

 

[Anant]

Fantastic news! That said, if we go with using the VSHORADS in a manner similar to the American RAM system (where you have a number of VSHORADS on a single box launcher of sorts) for use as a point defence system, it would be fantastic too.

 

[Anant]

Why do we always design flat super structures? Why can't we design angled ones?

Given the usual trend of how these renders look vs how the actual ship turns out, one can be sure that this will be a design step, and not the finalised design. The Navy won't simply ignore the benefits of an angled superstructure. Let's wait for the official finalised design.

 

[Anant]

Impressive! From now on, this should be standard issue destroyer for the IN.

No, it shouldn't. The P-18s will be extremely expensive ships, and as such, we will quite possibly not build more than the current plan of 8-10 ships. The standard issue destroyer, so to speak, has to be a smaller and cheaper ship. Perhaps something around the size of a Visakhapatnam-class destroyer, but armed considerably more heavily.

 

[Anonymus]

Why do we always design flat super structures? Why can't we design angled ones?

Are you suggesting a Zumwalt-class destroyer-like design? If yes, then even the US Navy, with a 292 billion dollar defence budget, wasn't able to afford such a destroyer. How could the Indian Navy afford such a warship?

 

[Anant]

Correction: VL-SRSAM stands for "Vertically-Launched Short-Range Surface-to-Air Missile", not "Very Short-Range Surface-to-Air Missile". Also, the VL-SRSAM is more of a medium-ranged SAM with its 80 km range. A true short-ranged SAM would be something like a navalised QRSAM.

 

[Anant]

Are you suggesting a Zumwalt-class destroyer-like design? If yes, then even the US Navy, with a 292 billion dollar defence budget, wasn't able to afford such a destroyer. How could the Indian Navy afford such a warship?

The cost of the Zumwalts has practically nothing to do with their superstructure design. The reason for that is primarily the fact that the US wanted the ship to do literally everything under the Sun, the fact that they decided to pack it full of experimental systems (some of which have proven to be utterly useless), the fact that the production run was cut down drastically from 32 to 3 (which, in turn, sent per-unit costs skyrocketing), and the American MIC being the gluttonous beast it is.

 

[Aayush Pratap]

Given the usual trend of how these renders look vs how the actual ship turns out, one can be sure that this will be a design step, and not the finalised design. The Navy won't simply ignore the benefits of an angled superstructure. Let's wait for the official finalised design.

Here's to hoping, my friend. It's a fact, though, that almost none of our ships have angled superstructures, which is a basic design requirement when aiming to achieve stealth.

 

[Beast Incarnate]

Great! 48 anti-ship missiles, next-level destruction. Deploy a combination of hypersonic, supersonic, and subsonic missiles, also anti-drone D4 systems or laser weapons.

 

[Jabberwock]

48 Brahmos missiles. This is huge firepower that can destroy cities.

 

[Anonymus]

The cost of the Zumwalts has practically nothing to do with their superstructure design. The reason for that is primarily the fact that the US wanted the ship to do literally everything under the Sun, the fact that they decided to pack it full of experimental systems (some of which have proven to be utterly useless), the fact that the production run was cut down drastically from 32 to 3 (which, in turn, sent per-unit costs skyrocketing), and the American MIC being the gluttonous beast it is.

Then why are new US warships not commissioning on superstructure designs? They even restarted the production of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and retired none, but are not inducting Zumwalt destroyers. Your comment itself is saying that the warship is not capable enough to perform all tasks with almost 16k ton category destroyers with only 80 VLS. Project 18 will have more VLS than this; even Burke-class destroyers come with 96 VLS.

 

[futurenz]

With likely similar 500m minimum range as Astra, you can't claim VL-SRSAM is a point defence missile but point defence is too important to leave to laser alone without a kinetic CIWS. Also you cant compare 64 VL-SRSAM launch cells with Mk-41 cells that quad-pack the equivalent ESSM, so you would have to compare with 64 quad-packed ESSM in 16 of the Mk-41 cells.

Also, if the 32 long range SAMs are the maximum possible because of "dedicated" VLS, then its a bit inflexible compared to most air warfare destroyers. I hope the information gaps in this article arent hiding actual gaps in the ship's weapon sytems, because we really need to be effective.

 

[Anant]

Here's to hoping, my friend. It's a fact, though, that almost none of our ships have angled superstructures, which is a basic design requirement when aiming to achieve stealth.

Agreed. To be honest, one can forgive the non-inclusion of an angled superstructure on the first generation of stealth warships, these being the Kolkata-class destroyers, and the Talwar-class (Batches 1 and 2) and Shivalik-class frigates. It's difficult to justify why this change wasn't made on the Visakhapatnam-class destroyers as well as the Nilgiri-class and Talwar-class (Batches 3 and 4) frigates.

Still, I am hopeful that we will see these elements in the P-18 destroyers, P-17B frigates, NGC corvettes, etc.

 

[Enforcer]

Why have different-sized VLS cells? The whole world is trying to use single-type VLS cells with smaller missiles being quad-packed into one.

 

[Anonymus]

Agreed. To be honest, one can forgive the non-inclusion of an angled superstructure on the first generation of stealth warships, these being the Kolkata-class destroyers, and the Talwar-class (Batches 1 and 2) and Shivalik-class frigates. It's difficult to justify why this change wasn't made on the Visakhapatnam-class destroyers as well as the Nilgiri-class and Talwar-class (Batches 3 and 4) frigates.

Still, I am hopeful that we will see these elements in the P-18 destroyers, P-17B frigates, NGC corvettes, etc.

It's difficult to justify why this change wasn't made on the Visakhapatnam-class destroyers as well as the Nilgiri-class and Talwar-class (Batches 3 and 4) frigates.

To costly to design an induct such warship and those ships already comes in stealth warships that's true those structure will improve stealth but it comes with cost and compromises on deck space which will lead to space for future upgrades and I think navy knows much better about there requirement then the people who come on this platform.

 

[Anant]

Then why are new US warships not commissioning on superstructure designs? They even restarted the production of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and retired none, but are not inducting Zumwalt destroyers. Your comment itself is saying that the warship is not capable enough to perform all tasks with almost 16k ton category destroyers with only 80 VLS. Project 18 will have more VLS than this; even Burke-class destroyers come with 96 VLS.

Okay, two points:

1. I never raised any doubts on the capabilities of the P-18s. Any ship that is essentially a cruiser and has over 100 VLS cells is exceptionally capable, and only a fool would say otherwise. What I did say, however, is that ab angled superstructure does lend itself well to reducing the radar cross-section of the ship. In any case, I am fairly confident that these renders are a preliminary design, and are almost certainly not the finalised design, which will only happen after the design parameters are finalised and the appropriate RfPs are issued.

2. As for the Arleigh Burke-class continuing production, the USN needed more ships to keep fleet strength up, the Zumwalts were too expensive, and the DDG(X) design was still too far into the future. Thus, a modernised Arleigh Burke design was how it went. Now, in theory, the Americans could have modified the design to incorporate an angled superstructure, but it would have necessitated major redesign work.

 

[Anant]

It's difficult to justify why this change wasn't made on the Visakhapatnam-class destroyers as well as the Nilgiri-class and Talwar-class (Batches 3 and 4) frigates.

To costly to design an induct such warship and those ships already comes in stealth warships that's true those structure will improve stealth but it comes with cost and compromises on deck space which will lead to space for future upgrades and I think navy knows much better about there requirement then the people who come on this platform.

The Nilgiri-class were a major redesign from the Shivalik-class. As such, had the decision been made to incorporate an angled superstructure, it could have been done at little additional cost.

Now, the fact that the Batch 3 Talwars don't have such a feature is a Russian failing.