Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

INS Vikrant 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.
Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3485
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 04 Apr 2017 03:53

Rakesh wrote:USS America: The Navy's Newest Flattop Can't Decide What The Hell It Is
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/uss-am ... 1645391823

The picture below is from the above article. IMHO....I love the US Navy's ESGs (Expeditionary Strike Group). It defintely does not do power projection, but boy can it ruin your parade. See the picture below...an ESG has everything from flat tops (F-35Bs), to cruise missile destroyers to cruise missile frigates to Landing Platform Docks to P-3 (now P-8) MMA platforms to SSNs. A well rounded composition that can deliver a significant punch.

Let's do something similar - not exactly - like this first and then jump to bigger things.

Image

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3485
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 04 Apr 2017 04:08

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_battle_group

The Indian Navy's carrier battle group centered on Viraat consists of two destroyers, usually of the Delhi Class (previously Rajputs were used), two or more frigates, usually of the Brahmaputra, Godavari or Nilgiri classes, and one support ship.

The navy's new carrier battle group centered on Vikramaditya consists of the modern Kolkata class destroyers, Shivalik and Talwar-class frigates, Kamorta-class anti-submarine warfare corvettes and new tankers. INS Chakra II is expected to fill the sub-surface component.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5574
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 04 Apr 2017 11:52

My question is ulta: can an aircraft carrier effectively work as an helicopter carrier. If not, why?

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2045
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby kit » 04 Apr 2017 12:09

Indranil wrote:My question is ulta: can an aircraft carrier effectively work as an helicopter carrier. If not, why?


An aircraft carrier does carry helos but by virtue of being one it has a large quantity of equipment required to maintain and to prosecute fighter plane operations. If you want to use it purely for helo operations it would be sub optimal.
That said India needs both provided we have access to Vstol or stol fighters a flat top can take care of near abroad operation and the aircraft carrier can go for expeditionary operation's. India is perhaps the only country that can replace a flattop for an aircraft carrier for near abroad operations as effectively due to its unique position in the Indian ocean and it's island bases.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3198
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 04 Apr 2017 13:41

^ the requirements on a fighter carrier should be much higher than a plain helicopter carrier.

Fighters will be heavier and bigger to begin with, hence the lifts have to be powerful. With choppers you can afford a smaller fleet as well thanks to longer sortie times.

Vikramaditya is a good case study, as it was practically a helicopter cruiser. Converting it for fighters required a lot more changes

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2099
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 04 Apr 2017 14:04

Indranil wrote:My question is ulta: can an aircraft carrier effectively work as an helicopter carrier. If not, why?

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-ti ... 1647968681

Image

In 1994 the USS Eisenhower and the USS America were deployed to Haiti with their decks full of Army choppers. The US was threatening an invasion if the Junta did not return power to elected officials, and the 10th Mountain Division and a unique combination of special forces were sent over via the two super-carriers to make sure it happened.


Image

Image

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16987
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 04 Apr 2017 14:38

The Viraat/Hermes served as an amphib carrier before she was sold to us. Given the budgetary shortcomings and the IN's meagre share of the cake,I suggest the foll:
We have on order/planned,4 amphibs of approx 35K t each.We also have plans for a large CV of more than 65K t with EMALS and all the bells and whistles,probably N-powered for the extra power requirements that EMALS imposes. MP was not in favour oi this as a priority as it would beggar the IN.
Therefore,to keep our goal of possessing 3 carriers so that one was always available on each seaboard at any time, I suggest that we build only 2 of the amphibs ( which come with a ski-jump like the Spanish/OZ amphibs),but with one subtle modification in that the deck plan has an angled deck as well so that STOBAR ops are possible. We then build post 2020 another sister ship of the Vikrant ,slightly larger and if we want a western naval fighter then the Rafale-M is the best option,a proven 4++ fighter not an ersatz $++ fighter like the F-18 A-Z.Commonality with the IAF would help bring down costs.More Rafales for both services would see much savings 59 Rafale-Ms and another 24 for the IAF would give us a grand total of 120+ and with the setting up of a local service entity as the Russians are doing for their aircraft/helos,we would have a sanctions-free naval fighter for the next decade!
Remember that buying F-18s would leave us v.vulnerable to sanctions from the US should we N-test again,something that may have to be done to deter the increasingly aggressive Chinese.In Afghanistan,we're being left out of the picture completely by Russia,China and Pak! The US is in retreat,the future life of the Afghan regime in serious doubt,esp. if the so-called "Good Taliban" are supported in full by this new Afghan triumvirate.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 04 Apr 2017 16:08

Philip wrote:The Viraat/Hermes served as an amphib carrier before she was sold to us. Given the budgetary shortcomings and the IN's meagre share of the cake,I suggest the foll:
We have on order/planned,4 amphibs of approx 35K t each.We also have plans for a large CV of more than 65K t with EMALS and all the bells and whistles,probably N-powered for the extra power requirements that EMALS imposes. MP was not in favour oi this as a priority as it would beggar the IN.
Therefore,to keep our goal of possessing 3 carriers so that one was always available on each seaboard at any time, I suggest that we build only 2 of the amphibs ( which come with a ski-jump like the Spanish/OZ amphibs),but with one subtle modification in that the deck plan has an angled deck as well so that STOBAR ops are possible. We then build post 2020 another sister ship of the Vikrant ,slightly larger and if we want a western naval fighter then the Rafale-M is the best option,a proven 4++ fighter not an ersatz $++ fighter like the F-18 A-Z.Commonality with the IAF would help bring down costs.More Rafales for both services would see much savings 59 Rafale-Ms and another 24 for the IAF would give us a grand total of 120+ and with the setting up of a local service entity as the Russians are doing for their aircraft/helos,we would have a sanctions-free naval fighter for the next decade!
Remember that buying F-18s would leave us v.vulnerable to sanctions from the US should we N-test again,something that may have to be done to deter the increasingly aggressive Chinese.In Afghanistan,we're being left out of the picture completely by Russia,China and Pak! The US is in retreat,the future life of the Afghan regime in serious doubt,esp. if the so-called "Good Taliban" are supported in full by this new Afghan triumvirate.


Phillip, we have no orders for "35K ton" ships. The Vikrant itself is 37K tons empty onlee.

The MRSV project is pretty far along since I last read about it. Its budget is set at $2.4B for four 20K plus tons systems. This is the same price (!!!) as the Vik'A, our "gift" from Russia. Core requirements for these are the landing dock and troops carrying facility. Different role than our carriers and, unlike the future carrier, this project budget is already approved by the MoD.

Now even if we halve the MRSV project, we save a measly $1 billion. In 2014, Modi released $3.1B to finish Vikrant (on top of $600M already spent.) So the Vikrant alone is at nearly $4B with no guarantees that there won't be any more increases along the way.

Leave that LPD project alone and hope we get all four in good order. Cutting into it will not make up for the carrier costs that is making the Ministry of Defense hesitant.

One extra Vikrant makes sense to capitalize off the experience from building the first. But two or more? No, as you can see, the Vikrant isn't all that cheap either. And it is STOBAR which will always mean a less than optimal solution.

If we want to preserve our status as a carrier power (and we were once the only carrier capable nation in Asia) we should bite the bullet and build the Vishal CATOBAR. The alternatives, other than giving up future carriers completely, is not that much cheaper.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16987
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 04 Apr 2017 18:52

Tx. Chola.If the amphibs are in the pipeline/approved,costs,etc. wise to leave it alone. I would build a second Vikrant,with some "extras".B-8LR SAMs,etc.I am sure that Rafale-Ms can successfully operate in a STOBAR mode,look at the Russians experience in Syria with the Kuz. They were able to carry out a large number of sorties using much larger Flankers and a few Fulcrums.We do not have any expeditionary warfare ambitions like the US/NATO or Russia. Sanitising the IOR is our primary objective and keeping cavy outside the IOR for pro-active ops to scotch enemy ingress into the IOR (mostly through subs ) annexed to the task. With nations like the Saudis,etc. scooping up islands in the Maldives the amphibs will be very useful for preventing any firang power from setting up mil bases inimical to India in our backyard. WE must make it clear to all concerned that we will not allow/accept any extraneous foreign mil power to enter and squat in the IOR.Unfortunately,Pak has sold its ars* to the Chinese and handed over Gwadar on a platter to it. DG historically is Brit BIOT entity,stolen from Mauritius after WW2. Nothing can be done about DG and the USN there.But the new presence of any Chinese ,Saudi, or any other nation's troops/forces in SL,the Maldives,must be met with force. We need to act like Putin did with the Crimea. A new Modi doctrine must be laid down by India,with the island nations well advised not to allow the Chinese,Saudis,etc. to squat on their land or face Indian punitive action.

PS:Last news about the amphibs is that they're about 35-40K t,large multi-purpose ships.If equipped with a ski=-jump they could theoretically operate 29Ks,NLCAs (if they arrive),Sea Grips,JSF,and Rafale-Ms whose MTO weight is just 24.5t.Now these ships are even larger than the Viraat and therefore if the flight deck is astutely designed,could operate such above aircraft should the need arise.

Posted at: Jan 12, 2015,
India to ramp up amphibious capabilities with four warships

The ‘modern Trojan Horse’
The four warships will be the biggest-ever made in the country other than the under-construction 40,000 tonne sea-borne aircraft carrier the INS Vikrant
Called the Landing Platform Docks in naval parlance, each ship will approximately cost Rs 6,000 crore and are expected to deliver over the next 10 years
A modern-day sea-based version of the Roman epic “Trojan horse”, each ship carries, in its huge lower deck, hundreds of Indian Army troops with tanks, vehicles and cargo
Ajay Banerjee
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, January 11
India is on its way to indigenously build four warships, which will be the biggest-ever made in the country other than the under-construction 40,000 tonne sea-borne aircraft carrier the INS Vikrant.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) had re-issued a request for proposal (RFP) to Indian private sector shipyards in September to build four amphibious assault ships, also called the Landing Platform Docks (LPD) in naval parlance. Each of these will approximately cost Rs 6,000 crore and are expected to deliver over the next 10 years.
Each of these ships will be anything between 35,000 and 40,000 tonnes. The Indian shipyards have been asked to locate their own foreign collaborator. “The bids have come in,” a source in the Navy said. The RFP was sent to ABG, Larsen & Toubro (L&T), and Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering.
The successful private shipyard and its foreign collaborator will be given order for two such ships and the two others will be made by the MoD-owned Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Visakhapatnam, at the same price being paid to the private builder.
This signals an important change in the long-term strategic plan as this will be huge jump over the existing capability of launching offensive sea-borne. The LPDs are essentially the first step towards increasing capability to launch “out-of-country operations”.
The LPDs are essentially a modern-day sea-based version of the Roman epic “Trojan horse”. Each carries, in its huge lower deck, hundreds of Indian Army troops with tanks, vehicles and cargo. Such a ship can deliver men and equipment near a sea beach and does not need a berthing dock, hence providing the option for landing thousands of troops near a spot chosen to attack.
The size of the LPDs indicates the Indian Navy’s growing amphibious warfare capacity. As of now, the biggest such variety of vessel is INS Jalashwa, a 16,900 tonne ship. Another five warships classified as Landing ship tank large (LST-L) are some 5,600 tonnes each, another four ships are just 1,100 tonnes and lastly the smallest are 650 tonnes and six of these are in service.
Forces that move across sea are referred to as “amphibious task force”. At present, India has the capability to move a Brigade, some 5,000 men, using the lone LPD, INS Jalashwa, along with a fleet of five smaller 5,600-tonne (LST-Ls) each of which can carry 10 tanks, 11 combat trucks and 500 troops.
Each of the new LPDs will have three times the capacity and have multi-role helicopters, including heavy lift helicopters to provide even greater flexibility.
Foreign shipbuilders offering such ships include DCNS of France, Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Fincantieri of Italy, South Korea’s Hanjin Heavy Industries & Constructions Co and Navantia of Spain.
India has sought a vessel of 213 metre, endurance at sea for 45 days, the vessel must be able to house combat vehicles (including main battle tanks, infantry combat vehicles and heavy trucks on one or more vehicle deck), and the vessel should be able to undertake all-weather operations involving heavy lift helicopters of up to 35 tons

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 29035.html

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 04 Apr 2017 21:10

Philip wrote:
Posted at: Jan 12, 2015,
India to ramp up amphibious capabilities with four warships

The ‘modern Trojan Horse’
The four warships will be the biggest-ever made in the country other than the under-construction 40,000 tonne sea-borne aircraft carrier the INS Vikrant
Called the Landing Platform Docks in naval parlance, each ship will approximately cost Rs 6,000 crore and are expected to deliver over the next 10 years
A modern-day sea-based version of the Roman epic “Trojan horse”, each ship carries, in its huge lower deck, hundreds of Indian Army troops with tanks, vehicles and cargo
Ajay Banerjee
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, January 11
India is on its way to indigenously build four warships, which will be the biggest-ever made in the country other than the under-construction 40,000 tonne sea-borne aircraft carrier the INS Vikrant.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) had re-issued a request for proposal (RFP) to Indian private sector shipyards in September to build four amphibious assault ships, also called the Landing Platform Docks (LPD) in naval parlance. Each of these will approximately cost Rs 6,000 crore and are expected to deliver over the next 10 years.
Each of these ships will be anything between 35,000 and 40,000 tonnes. The Indian shipyards have been asked to locate their own foreign collaborator.



Wow! I didn't know that the LPD order was re-issued for 35-40k tons. Thanks Philip.

An amphib system of that size is equivalent to the USS Wasp! Those things cost around $2B Unkil dollars.

So, according to the article, 6000 crores = 60 billion R's / 68 (exchange rate) = $882M USD per ship.

More than what I read originally but still pretty affordable for vessels of that size!

I hope we pull this off. Yes, the Navantia tie up can get us a bigger San Juan class and that one has a ski-jump.

This can create some overlap with the formal carriers and is really Singha's vision of a LHD type fleet!

Vessels this size are far bigger than the traditional LPDs like Mistral or Albion which are between 15-25K tons. This is LHD size like the Wasp or the HMS Ocean!

I hope this is true and not just DDM goofiness. How did we miss this?

This would be as big or even bigger story than the Vikrant! Four Ocean/Wasp-size/type ships in the pipeline!

JTull
BRFite
Posts: 1991
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby JTull » 04 Apr 2017 23:00

Another source, published 1 year later.

http://www.financialexpress.com/industry/abg-shipyard-may-lose-in-race-for-rs-20000-cr-warships-for-indian-navy/214000/

Each of these ships will be between 35,000 and 40,000 tonne.


It will be completely different ship at 3 times the displacement of INS Jalashwa. We can now see why Vishal is planned to be 65K tonnes.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Apr 2017 00:17

JTull wrote:
It will be completely different ship at 3 times the displacement of INS Jalashwa. We can now see why Vishal is planned to be 65K tonnes.


Vishal was planned long time back, when INS Jalashwa was the USS Trenton (the Vishal is still a Vikrant Class.). These four boats are relatively new - certainly after the experience gained from the purchase of the INS Jalashwa.

Question:

What would the IN use these huge landing ships for? And, potentially where - geographically?

Also, do we know if India is thinking of raising a Marine unit/s?

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 05 Apr 2017 00:40

NRao wrote:
JTull wrote:
It will be completely different ship at 3 times the displacement of INS Jalashwa. We can now see why Vishal is planned to be 65K tonnes.


Vishal was planned long time back, when INS Jalashwa was the USS Trenton (the Vishal is still a Vikrant Class.). These four boats are relatively new - certainly after the experience gained from the purchase of the INS Jalashwa.

Question:

What would the IN use these huge landing ships for? And, potentially where - geographically?

Also, do we know if India is thinking of raising a Marine unit/s?


At that size, they can't be run-of-the-mill LPD like the Trenton/Jalashwa. In Western navies -- US, Japan, UK, vessels of that size are LHD. Heliborne assault ships. These are just one step below formal carriers. You are not going to build a regular troop carrier of that size. At least I hope not.

I'm really surprised by this. Very pleasantly surprised if this is true (I haven't follow after reading that they were looking to partner for LDP)! Though that second article saying it is a 20000 crore tender worries me. That comes out to $700M per ship. I don't think it is possible to build a 40K-ton LHD at that price. A 7500-ton P15B costs $1B alone. Could be just a mistatement or misunderstanding by the reporter.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Apr 2017 04:53

chola wrote:
NRao wrote:
Vishal was planned long time back, when INS Jalashwa was the USS Trenton (the Vishal is still a Vikrant Class.). These four boats are relatively new - certainly after the experience gained from the purchase of the INS Jalashwa.

Question:

What would the IN use these huge landing ships for? And, potentially where - geographically?

Also, do we know if India is thinking of raising a Marine unit/s?


At that size, they can't be run-of-the-mill LPD like the Trenton/Jalashwa. In Western navies -- US, Japan, UK, vessels of that size are LHD. Heliborne assault ships. These are just one step below formal carriers. You are not going to build a regular troop carrier of that size. At least I hope not.
.......


That is my point - these are no ordinary ships. So, where in the IOR does India plan to use them? And, under what circumstances? 4 of them.

One may call them LPD, but at that size they are "assault" boats. Each of them will, or should, have the means to transport about 2000 "assault" troops to shore in short time. And, once there, have air cover.

So, what exactly does the Indian political wing have in mind to fund such boats?

Not knowledgeable on teh topic, but, I very much doubt that these are a step below a carrier. I think, they have two diff roles, with very little overlap - even IF these 4 were to host the F-35B (for discussion sake).

I think they are meant to project beyond the IOR.

ranjan.rao
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby ranjan.rao » 05 Apr 2017 05:03

Nrao, this is very interesting. I was thinking of this as a way to mount an attack on Gwadar or Karachi, in case sh** got really real or may be to supply troops to Afghanistan through chabahar (knowing it is a very stupid idea). Your idea is very very radical

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Apr 2017 05:20

One for the ages.

I would think it has expired by now or at least been invalidated. BUT, India-Iran had an agreement - made in the late 90s - which allowed IA to start a front from Iran in the event of a war with Pakistan. I have a friend, an ex IA officer, who used to say that the IA can land with tooth picks and start a front from there.

OT for this thread.


This whole LPD discussion should have been moved to teh In thread. Sorry!!

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10470
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Gagan » 05 Apr 2017 05:34

Most of the flat-top LHDs are 20-22,000 tons and carry 900 troops.
Are we sure the IN wants 35-40,000 ton ships? Those will be the size of the Vikramaditya, much larger than the Virat

Seems to me that this is a DDM typo

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2680
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 05 Apr 2017 07:00

Iirc the viraat was retired not because of the ship but due to the lack of an air wing. Always makes me wonder if the navy could have tasked it as a heli carrier. As a fantasy perhaps even have a complement of jsfs.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Apr 2017 08:09

Those were haseen sapne days of mistral and juan carlos. Reality is harsh. We dont need such huge LPD ships let alone 4. Its the apache longbow "face" thing. God alone knows what egypt will do with her 2 ex russi mistrals? Invade israel? Casino ?

We need a mix of small Lpd like rotterdam class ie magar class mki and medium size fast Lph asw sea control ships like hyuga or a 30% downsized vikrant with 15-20 helicopters. These fit our needs much better

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Apr 2017 08:13

Needless to say unkil would prefer we waste our time and money on a huge oneoff vishal.

The asw ships can track anybodys subs not just plan...a big booboo for nato subs sent to prowl here

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16987
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 05 Apr 2017 11:30

Why I advocated building just 2 such amphibs and another sister ship of the Vikrant.That will give us 5 flat tops which can operate fighter aircraft,heavy attack and ASW helos and AEW birds too. Vishal's cost is just too much when the sub fleet is in dire straits. The approx 80 PLAN subs ,plus Pak armed with 8-12 Agostas and Yuans,will make life for the IN UW a hard task to counter. We nee a min. of 36+ subs.Ideally,3/4 SSGNs (Akulas,etc.),6 SSNs (desi/JV design)+ 6 SSBNs.Another 20-24 conventional subs,at least half with AIP (a mix of Scorpenes,German and Russian boats-Kilos progressively replaced with Kalina?)

On another note,the retiring Bears,superb platforms with almost endless range and endurance,could've been turned into AEW aircraft,while still retaining their LR strike capability/internal bomb bay.It was mentioned that they performed superbly at the last naval exercise.Every platform is of value,a resource.Look at the cost of the extra 2 Phalcons and the thought of buying ultra-expensive A-330s for our desi AEW radar. We could instead use these Bears!

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1846
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Bala Vignesh » 05 Apr 2017 11:46

Philip wrote:On another note,the retiring Bears,superb platforms with almost endless range and endurance,could've been turned into AEW aircraft,while still retaining their LR strike capability/internal bomb bay.It was mentioned that they performed superbly at the last naval exercise.Every platform is of value,a resource.Look at the cost of the extra 2 Phalcons and the thought of buying ultra-expensive A-330s for our desi AEW radar. We could instead use these Bears!

The bears are old platforms and are not really ideal platfrom for mounting an early warning radar. My personal opinion was that the Bears could have been transferred to ARC/DRDO as a test bed platform for trying out newer technology or long snooping patrols off Gwadar.. Or handed over to ICG for some training and testing to see if they can also operate on a Medium range high endurance patrols off our Islands for anti-piracy and counter narcotics patrols..
Sorry about the OT..

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1846
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Bala Vignesh » 05 Apr 2017 11:51

Cain Marko wrote:Iirc the viraat was retired not because of the ship but due to the lack of an air wing. Always makes me wonder if the navy could have tasked it as a heli carrier. As a fantasy perhaps even have a complement of jsfs.

Wasn't it due to manpower shortage of trained manpower to deploy on another carrier along with a lack of financial wherewithal to support an ageing platform?? That said, I would have liked the Viraat being operated as a heli-carrier, without any major structural refit. She could have also been used as a training and certifying new deck crews who are to operate on board carriers.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 05 Apr 2017 11:53

Singha wrote:Those were haseen sapne days of mistral and juan carlos. Reality is harsh. We dont need such huge LPD ships let alone 4. Its the apache longbow "face" thing. God alone knows what egypt will do with her 2 ex russi mistrals? Invade israel? Casino ?

We need a mix of small Lpd like rotterdam class ie magar class mki and medium size fast Lph asw sea control ships like hyuga or a 30% downsized vikrant with 15-20 helicopters. These fit our needs much better


Yah, it doesn't make sense. Done some googling and research. There is no "LPD" in the world at that size -- the largest being the San Antonio Class at 24K tons.

As stated earlier, 35-40K ton would put it into the class of helicopter decks (LHDs) like Wasp. That would be one step below formal carriers and can perform other missions such as ASW with its complement of helos/vtol as well as the designed role of assault. In fact, the US is looking at pairing them with a large number of F-35s as a light carrier. Top speed is limited somewhat because of the landing dock, Wasp's 24 knots.

A LHD like a Wasp is a versatile design but really only affordable by the US. The Indian project is named MRSV (Multi-Role Support Vessel) by MoD so perhaps this is what they want but hard to see them going all out like this when the Vishal is giving them pause.

And then the budget associated with the project, 20000 crores, would be nowhere near the cost of four ships of something like the Wasp. Especially when we are partnering with a phoren firm.

Anyways, four warships as large as our carriers should have been a very big story. How did this get under our radar at BR? Should have had its own thread. It sounds too good to be true and probably is.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Apr 2017 17:38

http://www.thehindu.com/business/Indust ... 983848.ece

Sept, 2016.

It is a 20,000 ton boat, with 900 troops (per Wiki), for a $1 billion each.

And, it goes by umpteen names and acronyms. Typical.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5689
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 05 Apr 2017 18:33

chola wrote:
Singha wrote:Those were haseen sapne days of mistral and juan carlos. Reality is harsh. We dont need such huge LPD ships let alone 4. Its the apache longbow "face" thing. God alone knows what egypt will do with her 2 ex russi mistrals? Invade israel? Casino ?

We need a mix of small Lpd like rotterdam class ie magar class mki and medium size fast Lph asw sea control ships like hyuga or a 30% downsized vikrant with 15-20 helicopters. These fit our needs much better


Yah, it doesn't make sense. Done some googling and research. There is no "LPD" in the world at that size -- the largest being the San Antonio Class at 24K tons.

As stated earlier, 35-40K ton would put it into the class of helicopter decks (LHDs) like Wasp. That would be one step below formal carriers and can perform other missions such as ASW with its complement of helos/vtol as well as the designed role of assault. In fact, the US is looking at pairing them with a large number of F-35s as a light carrier. Top speed is limited somewhat because of the landing dock, Wasp's 24 knots.

A LHD like a Wasp is a versatile design but really only affordable by the US. The Indian project is named MRSV (Multi-Role Support Vessel) by MoD so perhaps this is what they want but hard to see them going all out like this when the Vishal is giving them pause.

And then the budget associated with the project, 20000 crores, would be nowhere near the cost of four ships of something like the Wasp. Especially when we are partnering with a phoren firm.

Anyways, four warships as large as our carriers should have been a very big story. How did this get under our radar at BR? Should have had its own thread. It sounds too good to be true and probably is.


I think the surge carrier concept would work better on the Americas Class than the Wasp even though it was the latter where they deployed the Harrier-Carrier concept. They are looking at an aviation component of 16-20 F-35Bs at surge and that comes with a decent amount of fuel, and weapons capacity particularly when you start demanding diverse payloads. Missiles, Bombs, LRUs, etc take up a lot of room if you want to maintain and sustain a given sortie rate.

Image

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2045
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby kit » 05 Apr 2017 19:02

.. i think these new boats would serve as expeditionary as well as command and control ships for near abroad ops and free up the carriers for longer range extended duration operations simultaneously ..

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 05 Apr 2017 19:12

brar_w wrote:
chola wrote:
Yah, it doesn't make sense. Done some googling and research. There is no "LPD" in the world at that size -- the largest being the San Antonio Class at 24K tons.

As stated earlier, 35-40K ton would put it into the class of helicopter decks (LHDs) like Wasp. That would be one step below formal carriers and can perform other missions such as ASW with its complement of helos/vtol as well as the designed role of assault. In fact, the US is looking at pairing them with a large number of F-35s as a light carrier. Top speed is limited somewhat because of the landing dock, Wasp's 24 knots.

A LHD like a Wasp is a versatile design but really only affordable by the US. The Indian project is named MRSV (Multi-Role Support Vessel) by MoD so perhaps this is what they want but hard to see them going all out like this when the Vishal is giving them pause.

And then the budget associated with the project, 20000 crores, would be nowhere near the cost of four ships of something like the Wasp. Especially when we are partnering with a phoren firm.

Anyways, four warships as large as our carriers should have been a very big story. How did this get under our radar at BR? Should have had its own thread. It sounds too good to be true and probably is.


I think the surge carrier concept would work better on the Americas Class than the Wasp even though it was the latter where they deployed the Harrier-Carrier concept. They are looking at an aviation component of 16-20 F-35Bs at surge and that comes with a decent amount of fuel, and weapons capacity particularly when you start demanding diverse payloads. Missiles, Bombs, LRUs, etc take up a lot of room if you want to maintain and sustain a given sortie rate.

Image



Ah yes, the follow-on to the Wasp, the America class. An even bigger monster of a ship at 44K tons than the Wasp! They are still wringing out the lead ship though. They have three Americas in total planned (the USN currently has 8 of the Wasp class.)

Anyways, I would love for the IN to be looking at ships of this size, flexibility and caliber. But as I said, it sounds too good to be true.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 05 Apr 2017 19:19

NRao wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/Reliance-LampT-in-last-leg-to-bag-2-billion-defence-deal/article14983848.ece

Sept, 2016.

It is a 20,000 ton boat, with 900 troops (per Wiki), for a $1 billion each.

And, it goes by umpteen names and acronyms. Typical.



So they are just 20K ton ships just like the original tender. My first post on this was correct.

Philip, you fed me misinformation and had me mentally masturbating like a fool on 40K tons LHDs for the IN. Dam you! :evil:

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5689
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 05 Apr 2017 19:26

chola wrote:
Ah yes, the follow-on to the Wasp, the America class. An even bigger monster of a ship at 44K tons than the Wasp! They are still wringing out the lead ship though. They have three Americas in total planned (the USN currently has 8 of the Wasp class.)


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4752&p=2138649#p2138649

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2680
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 06 Apr 2017 08:58

Bala Vignesh wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Iirc the viraat was retired not because of the ship but due to the lack of an air wing. Always makes me wonder if the navy could have tasked it as a heli carrier. As a fantasy perhaps even have a complement of jsfs.

Wasn't it due to manpower shortage of trained manpower to deploy on another carrier along with a lack of financial wherewithal to support an ageing platform?? That said, I would have liked the Viraat being operated as a heli-carrier, without any major structural refit. She could have also been used as a training and certifying new deck crews who are to operate on board carriers.

I was under the impression that the shars were really in bad shape and forced the navys hand.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ins-viraat-to-be-decommissioned-in-2016/article6884261

But it might have been an idea to keep the ship and do one last refit as a heli or jsf carrier. The crew training could have been kept up and easily transferred to the vikrant later along with the jsf or the helis as well. But of course this should have been planned and procured years ago. But we all know how fast procurement works... Guess the navy did its best under the circumstances

Maybe they should do a dekko at the hms ocean and get it for scraps. Put it under refit and in that time procure some helis, later task it with jsfs.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Apr 2017 09:17

unlike the "proper" way of having a welldeck for LCAC/LST fronted by a multi-storey park for vehicles and living areas of marines, the HMS ocean uses a chankian british way of saving on that interior space on the assumption that landing ops will be in calm sea state

the 4 landing crafts are hosted and lowered from davits on the side. they sail around to the back where a ramp allows vehicles to be driven up and down off the ship.

this frees up the volume occupied by the welldeck in LPD ships and makes the ship more compact and cheap

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ropped.jpg

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3198
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 06 Apr 2017 15:24

Looks like a British reinterpretation of the commando carrier. Viraat being a famous example.

A navy could mount a reasonable amphibious operation with choppers and LCVPs from the davits.

Image

LSTs could transport the vehicles on the beach head.

Singha wrote:unlike the "proper" way of having a welldeck for LCAC/LST fronted by a multi-storey park for vehicles and living areas of marines, the HMS ocean uses a chankian british way of saving on that interior space on the assumption that landing ops will be in calm sea state

the 4 landing crafts are hosted and lowered from davits on the side. they sail around to the back where a ramp allows vehicles to be driven up and down off the ship.

this frees up the volume occupied by the welldeck in LPD ships and makes the ship more compact and cheap

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ropped.jpg

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16987
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 06 Apr 2017 16:18

I posted only what was published in the media! I've no idea how a 35/40K amphib suddenly dwindles into half its size.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby chola » 06 Apr 2017 19:53

Philip wrote:I posted only what was published in the media! I've no idea how a 35/40K amphib suddenly dwindles into half its size.


Philipji lol. I was kidding onlee.

This is classic DDM. It was 20K tons when I first read of the LPD project, then it became 35-40K ton when you read about it and now back to 20K tons when NRao read about it.

But for one night I went to bed salivating at the thought of four LHDs and swarms of F-35Bs.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5689
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 06 Apr 2017 19:55

Deleted

nachiket
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5803
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49
Location: Соединенные Штаты Америки

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 07 Apr 2017 06:00

Best not to dream about IN and F-35s at all. They have neither been offered for sale to us nor has the IN expressed an interest in acquiring them. The last bit of news was that they wanted a twin-engined bird instead of the LCA, which the F-35 isn't.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 07 Apr 2017 06:28

nachiket wrote:Best not to dream about IN and F-35s at all. They have neither been offered for sale to us nor has the IN expressed an interest in acquiring them. The last bit of news was that they wanted a twin-engined bird instead of the LCA, which the F-35 isn't.


You are both right and wrong.

Wrong because the IN has expressed 'interest' (depends how one defines that) and Lockheed has made presentations to the In - in 2010

"We have received the Request for Information (RFI) from the Navy seeking information about the F-35 aircraft, which are capable of taking off from aircraft carriers. We are going to offer our aircraft to them," Lockheed Martin vice president Orville Prins said.


But, you are right too, because neither the GOTUS or Indian MoD has expressed interest - outside of allowing Lockheed and the IN to talk about the 'F-35'.

But, that is old news, I agree it does not apply to the current situation.

Based on recent readings, on the Vishal, I expect the EMALS with the new arrestor mechanism, F-18, including the G, Hawkeye and perhaps the V-22. Nuclear?? Perhaps, that is where it seems to be trending.

Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby Eric Leiderman » 07 Apr 2017 09:41

The OEM for the e- mals say that multiple countries have shown interest, Including UK an Japan for her flat tops.

I am trying to find the max electrical power requirement for a single system. To figure out what Vishal might need for auxilary power. She will have two or possibly 3 systems.

Would any of the gurus have an answer to this query?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikrant News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 07 Apr 2017 17:43

Based on multiple internet sources, the Vishal will have 2 90 meter EMALS cats.



USS Ford has 4 cats. This from the web

The challenge is scaling a relatively new technology to handle the required weights and power. EMALS motor generator weighs over 80,000 pounds, and is 13.5 feet long, almost 11 feet wide and almost 7 feet tall. It’s designed to deliver up to 60 megajoules of electricity, and 60 megawatts at its peak. In the 3 seconds it takes to launch a Navy aircraft, that amount of power could handle 12,000 homes. This motor generator is part of a suite of equipment called the Energy Storage Subsystem, which includes the motor generator, the generator control tower and the stored energy exciter power supply. The new Gerald R. Ford Class carriers will require 12 of each.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bodhi, brar_w, Google Feedfetcher, Shakthi and 35 guests