INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3940
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby arshyam » 14 Apr 2020 12:58

Rakesh wrote:Some interior and exterior pics of INS Vikramaditya

https://twitter.com/ThingNavy/status/12 ... 44706?s=20 --->

Very nice. Apparently, per the twitter thread, these are sailor accommodations. Much better than what I expected, given the Russian origin ship design, which traditionally doesn't provide good quarters for ORs (hot bunking, no separate mess, etc. as shown in our submarine documentaries)

I expect the Vikrant to be even better.
Last edited by Rakesh on 22 Nov 2020 04:42, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please do not re-quote pictures in reply. Post Edited.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21060
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 14 Apr 2020 14:34

The accommodation is far superior to that of the venerable Viraat!
Ru vessels today especialy their large N-subs have excellent crew quarters and facilities. Greater automation is one reason,plus the long UW patrols demand extra facilities. I think many US vessels have their unique feature,the ice-cream soda fountain!

Prithwiraj
BRFite
Posts: 251
Joined: 21 Dec 2016 18:48

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Prithwiraj » 14 Apr 2020 17:29

The upper bunk berth reminds me of railway’s AC coaches. Most striking commonality is that netted magazine or book holder on the wall and reading light

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21060
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 05 May 2020 19:00

The light should be placed higher as it could hurt heads jumping to order when the alarm is given. It would be great if each berth has a built in video screen too,headphone jacks too for silent watching,part of a centralised system like Emirate's ICE on flights.
So much can be uploaded,watched.Technical manuals on various aspects of SOPs for the ship,apart from entertainment. CCTV coverage too which would be useful in rough weather,damage control,etc.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9814
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 18 Nov 2020 20:37

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/132 ... 38049?s=20 ---> Great shot of INS Vikramaditya at Malabar 2020.

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9814
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 22 Nov 2020 00:27

Twitter thread on INS Vikramaditya...click on link below and enjoy.

https://twitter.com/elmihiro/status/132 ... 54048?s=20 ---> Looking at these images of INS Vikramaditya sailing alongside the USS Nimitz, a few things stand out:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9814
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 22 Nov 2020 00:30

https://twitter.com/MI6GB/status/132948 ... 75137?s=20 ---> Where are the Barak-1 and Barak-8 VLS modules?

https://twitter.com/KunalVar/status/132 ... 96416?s=20 ---> Space for 48 but only 24 are installed as of now...that too Barak 1.

https://twitter.com/MI6GB/status/132948 ... 36519?s=20 ---> Barak 1 is on it's way out now.

https://twitter.com/KunalVar/status/132 ... 14402?s=20 ---> Refit was suppose to happen in 2017 for Barak 8. Now expected next year.

Image

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9814
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 22 Nov 2020 01:57

What a beautiful shot of INS Vikramaditya!

https://twitter.com/ThingNavy/status/13 ... 18340?s=20 --->

Image

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4623
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 22 Nov 2020 02:33

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1329011536929538049?s=20 ---> Great shot of INS Vikramaditya at Malabar 2020.

Wow. She looks like a rugged warhorse. So unlike the Chinese soopah carriers, all shiny and nice. I remember so many dissing the vikad for being unseemly with the long angled deck and ramp. Folks even questioned her sea worthiness. But she has stayed the course. May she always have the wind in her sails and Varunas blessing
Last edited by Rakesh on 22 Nov 2020 04:42, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please do not re-quote pictures in reply. Post Edited.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4623
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 22 Nov 2020 02:35

Rakesh wrote:Twitter thread on INS Vikramaditya...click on link below and enjoy.

https://twitter.com/elmihiro/status/132 ... 54048?s=20 ---> Looking at these images of INS Vikramaditya sailing alongside the USS Nimitz, a few things stand out:

These were all known issues but the Navy in it's wisdom went for it. I think their decision has proved itself, difficult though the teething issues were.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby John » 22 Nov 2020 03:50

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/MI6GB/status/132948 ... 75137?s=20 ---> Where are the Barak-1 and Barak-8 VLS modules?

I think they will be fitted with SRSAM not Barak-8, as I don’t see Vikramaditya having room for MF-STAR.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9280
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 22 Nov 2020 04:05

You also don't really need anything beyond short-range defense to come from the carrier itself given how much EMCON you would need to practice when conducting operations in higher threat areas. The escort should be capable of defeating the salvos with area defense interceptors.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4068
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby kit » 22 Nov 2020 05:21

Rakesh wrote:Twitter thread on INS Vikramaditya...click on link below and enjoy.

https://twitter.com/elmihiro/status/132 ... 54048?s=20 ---> Looking at these images of INS Vikramaditya sailing alongside the USS Nimitz, a few things stand out:

Vikky was a soviet cruiser carrier in the first place with a full complement of cruise missiles and sams
Dare say an apple modified to look like an orange

Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9280
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 22 Nov 2020 06:12

Cain Marko wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Twitter thread on INS Vikramaditya...click on link below and enjoy.

https://twitter.com/elmihiro/status/132 ... 54048?s=20 ---> Looking at these images of INS Vikramaditya sailing alongside the USS Nimitz, a few things stand out:

These were all known issues but the Navy in it's wisdom went for it. I think their decision has proved itself, difficult though the teething issues were.


Were there any alternatives when it came to preserving long term carrier capability?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21060
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 22 Nov 2020 10:36

None at the time.Ex- western CVs were too old,small,could operate only Harriers or Seahawk,Super- Etendard type fighters which were also legacy birds. The Illustrious class RN CVs were too small and limited to operating only Sea Harrier birds .There was no plan to build a supersonic successor to the SH too,a big mistake by Britain.Had they done so,with the USMC also operating Harriers ,a huge market was available as we're seeing with the F-35B.

The unfinished Varyag was also available.Was dropped because of its condition and size said an admiral to moi.No Indian base could berth it.It would have to return to Russia every time for major repairs,etc. In retrospect after the PLAN rebuilt it,it could've been picked up as less modifications would've been reqd., the req. infra for repairs and maintenance could've been set up in the years pending acquisition, it was larger,could accommodate more aircraft and helos,but would've cost a lot more to operate.At that time 25 years ago,the IN was waging a war with the IAF for resources which wanted to scupper its carrier plans. The thinking was that modifying the Gorshkov was easier,less expensive, and would attract less flak from the IAF. Had the GOI of the time had even greater vision, both Kiev class CVs available at the time, or the Varyag and Ulyanovsk ,the 3rd. of the Kuznetsov class CVs,planned as an 85K t nuclear powered CV, could've been acquired. Two sister ships would've brought down overall unit costs,but those days the IN was the " cinderella" of the services and the stealthy plans of the PLAN weren't known at all.

The Gorky/ VikA has in retrospect been a v.good acquisition despite its excruciatingly long birth pangs. Looking at how long we're taking over our own Vikrant-2, over a decade to deliver, of slightly smaller size, we're lucky to have had the VikA. A pity a sister ship to the Vikrant-2 hasn't taken place.A stretched sister ship with larger lifts should've been ordered 5 years ago.The IN has only itself to blame for no 3rd.CV with its wet dreams of a 3rd. type,a 65K t EMALS catobar CV whose cost would've bankrupted the IN's budget. A sister ship would've easily passed the MOD/ CCS, the first having been ok'd, just as we're seeing with repeat orders for frontline weaponry for the IAF and IA. With the LHPD number reduced to just 2,the IN has another window of opportunity for a sister ship to the Vikrant-2 ,sacrificing an LHPD or modifying their designs into 2 multi-purpose light CVs.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3059
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Vips » 22 Nov 2020 20:41

kit wrote:Vikky was a soviet cruiser carrier in the first place with a full complement of cruise missiles and sams
Dare say an apple modified to look like an orange.

We paid the price of the most expensive Alphonso mango for buying an apple modified to look like an orange.
Last edited by Rakesh on 22 Nov 2020 22:21, edited 1 time in total.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3482
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 22 Nov 2020 20:43

Vikramaditya's biggest contribution to the Navy is in its very being. For public in India and adversary countries, its design limitations are not apparent. The ship has thus an ability to project power in peacetime - it's only an all out and intense war where low sortie rate will be 'exposed'. What are the chances of that ever happening?

IAC-I Vikrant only re-uses and refines the STOBAR concept available in Vikramaditya. So in a sense the latter's contribution is beyond just one ship.

Navy's stance on keeping a 3 carrier fleet makes absolute sense. However, it would be prudent for it to climb down from insisting on a 65k ton, CATOBAR uber-carrier. A second Vikrant class carrier will be cheaper, quicker and allows you to avoid purchasing a brand new aviation component. A much more palatable proposition given budget issues.

Yes, STOBAR and MiG-29K have limitations. But having a carrier is better than not having one at all.

IN has reduced the requirement for 4 LPD/LHD to just 2. Why not be realistic on the carrier as well?

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3547
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby fanne » 22 Nov 2020 23:39

If we go for the next carrier, shouldn't we go for a bigger one? A larger carrier with a complement of 60 planes vs 30 planes is not 2 times better, but perhaps 4-5 times better than the smaller carrier. Of course that greater return comes with its own set of issues (budget, design etc.)

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4068
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby kit » 23 Nov 2020 01:06

fanne wrote:If we go for the next carrier, shouldn't we go for a bigger one? A larger carrier with a complement of 60 planes vs 30 planes is not 2 times better, but perhaps 4-5 times better than the smaller carrier. Of course that greater return comes with its own set of issues (budget, design etc.)



There seems to be a case for smaller carriers as inherently they are more survivable .Brar could possibly elaborate this new thought in USN circles. But the larger carriers need to go big think 100k class, smaller ones are good for shorter and quicker expeditionary roles , think a heli carrier size. But carriers are a must for the IN to carry the fight away from its shores outflanking enemy forces. Mid size carriers (65k) might not be an ideal any more.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby John » 23 Nov 2020 01:48

kit wrote:
fanne wrote:If we go for the next carrier, shouldn't we go for a bigger one? A larger carrier with a complement of 60 planes vs 30 planes is not 2 times better, but perhaps 4-5 times better than the smaller carrier. Of course that greater return comes with its own set of issues (budget, design etc.)



There seems to be a case for smaller carriers as inherently they are more survivable .Brar could possibly elaborate this new thought in USN circles. But the larger carriers need to go big think 100k class, smaller ones are good for shorter and quicker expeditionary roles , think a heli carrier size. But carriers are a must for the IN to carry the fight away from its shores outflanking enemy forces. Mid size carriers (65k) might not be an ideal any more.

Smaller carriers aren’t inherently more survivable they are just as venerable to AshM as large carriers. You can make a case a larger carrier could afford to add more additional steel plating around vital areas and more space for better damage control greatly increasing its survivability and would have more runways allowing it to operate even it is hit (only for CATOBAR).

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9280
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 23 Nov 2020 02:20

Yeah size rarely has direct impact on survivability. The ability to take a hit and survive comes from design and structural choices made across the entire size spectrum though even a small or mid sized carrier will have most of the real-estate required to field the sort of structural and electronic systems needed. Perfect recent example of that is Fincantieri adding reinforcement in its FREMM frigate (a proven operational design) design to meet USN survivability and shock trials requirement that were different and beyond what the French or Italian navies had.

Being able to be more "survivable" though is best addressed by being more difficult to target either by creating stand-off range between the shooters and yourself, or by a wide array of offensive capability that can rapidly kick down the ability of your opponent to effectively target you. Usually it is a combination of factors. Here, the ability to launch and recover heavier platforms that can see , fly , and shoot farther allows one to stand off and gain the sort of SA required to tackle this threat. The second part is deception. There are measures you can take in the EW domain, in the counter-space domain and via other systems (wake manipulation) that can make one more survivable but there too size may not be the sole factor. The USN has added multiple layers of survivability to its carrier strike group by creating an integrated fire control network (NIFC-CA) with the E-2D playing quarterback, the F-35C playing the penetrating targeting node, and the F-18E/F and Growler acting as medium ranged enablers and the SM-6 as the long range shooter. A smaller LHA will never be able to gain that survivability and hence would always have to stand back until the threat is diminished by other means. That's just a limitation of it not being able to launch the sort of AEW and OTH targeting enablers that can allow it to fully leverage the capability fo the escort vessels.

Also, size is not the best indicator of the type of air-wing and its capability. The French field the Rafale and E-2C (and soon D) even with a sub 50K ton carrier. Its the design and launch and recovery mech that ultimately dictates performance. An AC is essentially a flying air-base so ultimately it is the qualitative and quantitative factor of the air-wing that makes it effective.

titash
BRFite
Posts: 398
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby titash » 24 Nov 2020 21:07

Vips wrote:
kit wrote:Vikky was a soviet cruiser carrier in the first place with a full complement of cruise missiles and sams
Dare say an apple modified to look like an orange.

We paid the price of the most expensive Alphonso mango for buying an apple modified to look like an orange.


No reason to ideologically bash Russian hardware & purchases (also no reason to stick with Russian hardware & purchases like Phillip-ji)

The rationale for the VikAd is simple:
1) We wanted a carrier & carrier borne aircraft
2) Based on our budget, only the (a) Invincible class, (b) the Kiev class, and (c) a custom indigenous design would fit
3) The Invincible class could only support the Sea Harrier, which was coming to the end of life within a decade, with no suitable replacement on the horizon
4) A custom indigenous carrier could be designed and built, but the aircraft that will fly off it did not exist
5) The ONLY option was the Kiev class
6) The Kiev class could support the VTOL Yak-36 (worse than the Harrier) but experiments with STOBAR concepts led to the Kuznetsov class capable of launching MiG-29s and Su-33s. But this would entail reconstruction and the installation of an aviation complex and the purchase of MiG-29s
7) The indigenous carrier Vikrant is designed based on the inputs from VikAd as well as the aviation complex, lifts, and MiG-29 aircraft. Without the VikAd, there would have been no Vikrant. Something that is lost on many folks...

When you have no other options, you take what you get. As simple as that. No need to blame the Russians or IN folks or bureaucrats.

Develop industrially, get the LCA navy Mk-2/TEDBF rolled out, and then we can do whatever we please. Until then we suck it up.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9814
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 24 Nov 2020 21:47

The cost of the carrier eventually ended up over US $2 billion, but FWIW....

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Vikramaditya

The Indian Navy Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta defended the price for the warship saying, "I can't comment on the CAG. But you all are defence analysts, can you get me an aircraft carrier for less than USD 2 billion? If you can, I am going to sign a cheque right now".

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 390
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Roop » 25 Nov 2020 06:07

titash wrote:
Vips wrote:No reason to ideologically bash Russian hardware & purchases (also no reason to stick with Russian hardware & purchases like Phillip-ji)
...

When you have no other options, you take what you get. As simple as that. No need to blame the Russians or IN folks or bureaucrats


An excellent summary, Titash. People here on BRF do a lot of bitching and moaning about Vikramaditya but forget (or maybe never knew, out of ignorance) the dire state of affairs faced by India when this decision was made (very late 1990s / early 2000s). We were still in the global (i.e. Western/Korean/Japanese) doghouse because of the nuclear tests. We were under US sanctions, so no US-chamcha country would sell us any dual-use items (not even a f**king Tektronix logic analyzer FFS), let alone weapons. Russia, and only Russia was willing to sell us this, and even for that they extracted their pound of flesh.

It is all very well now (now that India is in a completely different geopolitical situation) to say "Oh, we should have bought a Nimitz / Queen Mary / Charles de Gaulle) but that was simply not on offer at the time.We faced the choice of Vik or nothing. Under the circumstances, I am happy we chose Vik.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3547
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby fanne » 25 Nov 2020 07:04

And Vik does not fit few people's western sensibility, but that is their problem. It can still blockade all of sea routes of TSP and sink anything chinese can throw into the Indian ocean. There is no pint comparing what chinese will have after 5 years from today what we had 20 years ago. We will have our IAC-1 and TED-BF.
The Mig29k is better than yet to mature chinese copy of su-33. 5 years from now, I hope IN has plan B (unlike the IAF) and we shall still dominate the Indian Ocean.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21060
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 25 Nov 2020 08:14

I never advocate only Ru milware as if it were an ideological pursuit. "Horses for courses" is my philosophy coupled with cost-effectiveness. My option for a 3rd. CV as spelt out ad nauseum is a desi built ( stretched) sister ship of the Vikrant-2 with larger lifts,so she can operate 29Ks plus post 29K era larger aircraft decades from now, and/or leveraging the 35K+ t amphib. design with a Vikrant-2 style STOBAR flight deck,allowing it to operate as a light carrier apart from amphib. duties. The Japanese and So Ko light carriers to operate F-35Bs are 10-15K t smaller.
For the coming decade+, at least 15 years, the 29Ks offer further upgrade capabilities such as AESA radars, avionics, new EW systems, TVC engines, and a range of weaponry from Astra-ER to BMos- NG, Nirbhay, The VikA can soldier on easily to 2040+ and the Vikrant-2 to 2050+. The carriers too can fit newer SAM and anti-missile systems.
The Paket hard-kill anti- torpedo/sub system is available,may be fitted to the 4 Talwars being newly built in Ru and at GSL.

We keep forgetting our central landmass in the IOR and island territories ,from where LRMP and supersonic maritime strike bombers, with ranges in thousands of kms,equipped with the latest missiles,LRCMs like 2500km Kalibir being upgraded to 4K km in a few years time, can swifty sanitise large swathes of the IOR , in addition to our CV assets. As said before a couple of Backfires ,even Bears, can carry 24 BMos/ equiv. ASMs, which not a single 29K can do at the moment (and only the modified MKIs that too with only a single ASM ) ,waiting for BMos- NG to arrive!
That extra capability is an absolute must for the IN which can then conduct air strikes well into the ICS and beyond,especially in the airstrips in the ANC are upgraded to operate such aircraft. Look at how DG can operate the entire range of USAF stratehic bombers.

The RMA also taking place apace is the emergence of unmanned attack drones,UCAVs,both on land and at sea. Operating in tandem with manned aircraft.How this is going to influence future
carrier warfare, size and design of flat tops will be very interesting to see.

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 640
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby rajsunder » 26 Nov 2020 04:25

Philip wrote:I never advocate only Ru milware as if it were an ideological pursuit. "Horses for courses" is my philosophy coupled with cost-effectiveness. My option for a 3rd. CV as spelt out ad nauseum is a desi built ( stretched) sister ship of the Vikrant-2 with larger lifts,so she can operate 29Ks plus post 29K era larger aircraft decades from now, and/or leveraging the 35K+ t amphib. design with a Vikrant-2 style STOBAR flight deck,allowing it to operate as a light carrier apart from amphib. duties. ........................................


I second philip's idea. we should not stop the carrier assembly line, we should work on a 55k ton displacement ship by extending Vikrant's design and go on to complete the ship by 2034-2035 time and then we can go on to build a bigger carrier as a replacement for vikramaditya.

VenkataS
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 03:38

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby VenkataS » 26 Nov 2020 06:08

rajsunder wrote:
Philip wrote:I never advocate only Ru milware as if it were an ideological pursuit. "Horses for courses" is my philosophy coupled with cost-effectiveness. My option for a 3rd. CV as spelt out ad nauseum is a desi built ( stretched) sister ship of the Vikrant-2 with larger lifts,so she can operate 29Ks plus post 29K era larger aircraft decades from now, and/or leveraging the 35K+ t amphib. design with a Vikrant-2 style STOBAR flight deck,allowing it to operate as a light carrier apart from amphib. duties. ........................................


I second Philip's idea. we should not stop the carrier assembly line, we should work on a 55k ton displacement ship by extending Vikrant's design and go on to complete the ship by 2034-2035 time and then we can go on to build a bigger carrier as a replacement for vikramaditya.


It makes sense to go for a stretched Vikrant design (50K+ tons displacement) to accommodate larger aircraft and in greater numbers (50+) on the carrier with large deck elevators. It makes sense to build two of these with second one coming a few years after the first for larger economies of scale. Deck space should be increased by further shrinking the island if possible. It is also probable that the next generation IN Naval aircraft 2035+ will be VTOL capable.

These should be built in partnership with L&T. The aim should be that L&T should then be able to compete for these large defense ship contracts from the Navy on its own in the future. Indian private ship building is how we are going to be able to compete with the Chinese/Japanese/Koreans in terms of the speed of building and deploying large defense ships in the future.

A couple of these carrier battle groups based along the east coast/Andaman Islands should be able to thwart any threat from the East.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9814
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 26 Nov 2020 06:31

This very line of thinking has been discussed before on BRF, including by yours truly. The opposition to that idea was that it is not technically possible, which is laughable. Our very Indian Naval Design Bureau has done this on capital ships of the Indian Navy. The only stipulation I would insist on is larger lifts to accommodate any naval fighter out there.

Defence Reporter Saurav Jha has even written an article on this very idea. The main opposition to this lies with the Indian Navy. See article below. The irony is the Navy's share of the defence budget keeps going down year after year and the number of high value projects keeps going up (six Project 75I SSK boats, six SSN boat program, 65,000 ton aircraft carrier, phoren carrier borne fighter aircraft, etc.)

And the Navy is looking for funding for all projects, but now is being forced to prioritize due to budgetary shortfalls. And this was all pre-COVID. Now in COVID times, no project will move. And by the way, as per the Navy's own admission...this super carrier will take 15 years to build in an Indian shipyard. Add five years to that, at minimum. Forget talking about keel laying, the project has not even received financial sanction. In which decade is the Navy expecting to commission this vessel?

Navy’s eagerness to buy $20 billion aircraft carrier cuts into funds for Army & Air Force
https://theprint.in/opinion/navys-eager ... ce/108323/
30 Aug 2018

Indeed, a case could be made for building a more modest INS Vishal, which would basically be an enlarged INS Vikrant and would host a group of indigenous LCA-Navy Mark 2 fighters that are currently under development. To be sure, this option might not easily find favour with the Navy, which obviously does not want the Vishal to be just a modest step-up from its current carriers.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21060
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 26 Nov 2020 09:31

X-posted from the drone/UCAV td.How attack drones launched from subs armed with torpedoes to attack surface ships,etc., are going to be fielded by the USN. The survivability of carriers in the age of hypersonic missiles and BMs is becoming an item of major debate. While not advocating doing away with CVs, the increasing importance of having a large capable sub fleet of both N-subs and AIP subs is crucial for the IN.As for carriers,larger numbers of smaller flat tops,even amphibs to support FW aircraft is essential to spread the risk,given that we have such a unique geographical footprint in the IOR,the great Indian landmass like a dagger in the centre of the IOR and flanked on either seaboard by island territories.If Lakshadweep receives the PRC Spratly islands treatment,increasing the landmass of the atolls by reclamation,etc.we could have the equiv. of the ANC in the Arabian Sea too.

Coming back to the issue of flat tops.Man,many moons ago,back in the last century,I postulated the idea ( I think first by anyone anywhere) that any capital ship of around 8,000+ t should have a flat top,missiles in VLS modules and a hangar deck to accommodate at that time Sea Harriers and heavy ASW helos like Sea Kings/Merlins,etc.
Imagine one of our Vizag class DDG hulls with a flat top and hangar deck.At least 12 to 16 F-35Bs and helos could be embarked on the vessel with missiles in VLS silos mostly on sponsons around the flight deck,also supported by the latest Palmash type BPDMS systems with SR SAMs of 20+km range.
Thailand's Chakri light CV of under 12K t,could carry a max. of about 20 Harriers and helos. Instead of building heavier and heavier capital ships,DDGs and CGs,smaller heavily armed corvettes like the RU classes of around 1,000t+ carrying Kalibir 2500km range LRCMs,Yakhont,etc.,are being built instead of the large and expensive Leader class of DDG.The IN could have a class of 6 to 8 min-CVs instead of DDGs when the Rajput class require replacement. 6 of these flyweight flat tops could collectively carry 100+ aircraft ,helos and attack drones! In addition,at least 50% of them would be available at all times for any crisis in the IOR. Imagine such vessels also armed with Hyper-BMos in flush deck silos and B-8 SAMs.IN,time to think outside the box!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... rd%20Brief

RMA in naval warfare.
The use of sub-launched attack drones ,tests just carried out by the USN is revolutionising sub and naval warfare.As the article says,
considering the threat from the PRC, the navy cannot afford continued reliance on the delusion that its aircraft carriers are indestructible.If America is to win a naval war,submarines will be critical.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher and 51 guests