ManuJ wrote:Rakesh, thanks for humoring me and clarifying your stance. Good to know that your objections are essentially about EMALS and CATOBAR rather than about the carriers themselves or IN's overall plan. IN has been working on this plan for decades, with MoD and GoI support obviously, so for MoD or CDS to suddenly raise objections about the 3rd carrier is irresponsible. Of course, they have every right to ask questions about the price tag of the carrier w.r.t. the 2nd carrier.
Right now, the reason to that opposition mainly boils down to the following;
1) There is a money shortage issue. To assume that money should be there versus money actually being there are two different things. That is like me walking into a Ferrari showroom, under the assumption that money should be present in my bank account to afford that Ferrari. But the reality is, my bank account shows that I can only afford a Vespa. But - as you pointed out - this is temporary. The economy will improve, but that will take time. The economy is not going to dramatically change overnight.
2) So when the economy improves (which is a certainty), funds will get sanctioned. But will that happen next year? This is the navy's response to that...
The navy runs into a budget boulder
https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/up-f ... 2020-12-11
21 Dec 2020
If the service is unable to obtain an AoN for the IAC-2, their proposal will most likely lie dormant and be resurrected by the service when budgetary times are more favourable.
The problem for the Navy is when exactly are those budgetary times going to become favourable, because that has a direct correlation to the arrival of the vessel. The upcoming budget year (01 April 2021 - 31 March 2022) seems unlikely, but what about the following year? In 2022, the economy will be on the rebound, barring some catastrophe like COVID which wrecked the global economy.
So in 2022, the IAC-2 proposal will go for funds sanction to the CDS. For the sake of the Navy, I hope that the CDS in 2022 will be someone from the Navy onlee. If it is from the Air Force, the Indian Navy will continue to keep that project dormant. No IAF officer, holding the office of CDS, will approve an aircraft carrier program. But for argument sake, let us assume that the IAF-origin CDS officer approves the project (change of heart) and the AoN is given. Please note that the IAC-2 proposal will be one among the many proposals and wish lists that the services have in 2022. But for argument's sake, let's say it passes the AoN stage in 2022.
So now it has to go for CCS approval. Forgive me, if I have missed any step in between the two (AoN and CCS). By some miraculous event, the CCS also approves it in 2022. So now an agreement is signed and the steel cutting begins. By 2023, the keel is laid. From this point on - as per the navy's own admission - it will take 15 years for the vessel to arrive. So now we are looking at 2038 for this boat to enter service. And this is assuming at every stage of the process, it flows smoothly with zero hiccups.
But you are well aware, that is not how it is going to happen. Administrative, procedural and bureaucratic delays are guaranteed. Ship building delays are guaranteed. I can buy a lottery ticket on these guarantees and I am 100% confident that I will win.
So what is the Navy's counter till 2038, because nothing right now in the Navy's inventory will be able to defeat the invincibility of the CATOBAR. I am making that assessment based on some of the posts (definitely not yours), I am reading in this thread. Supposedly, the PLAN could have anywhere from 8 to 10 carrier battle groups in another 10 years. What will happen to the Indian Navy, if some PLAN Admiral decides to send in 1, 2, 3 or perhaps 4 carrier battle groups into the Indian Ocean, in lets say 2035. IAC-2 will still be another three years away from the horizon. Will the Indian Navy get decimated? Based on some of the posts I am reading in this thread, the Indian Navy is staring at a 100% defeat.
Will our one CATOBAR carrier be enough to take on the might of four PLAN carrier battle groups? Will 57 F-18SHs or Rafale Ms be enough to decimate four PLAN carrier battle groups? Apparently, the answer to that is a definite yes. And if it is F-18SH, instead of Rafale M, any aircraft lost in battle will be made up via borrowing from the USN. This is like that yarn that the NaPakis would spin in the late 90s about their F-7P aircraft, that I used to read on their fanboy forums. Supposedly, China had ready made F-7P aircraft waiting on tarmac in PAF colours. Whenever one F-7P crashed in Pakistan, another one would directly be flown to that air base, so the PAF always had a 100% fleet strength. But I digress and I apologise.
So what is the Navy's counter till 2038?
ManuJ wrote:IN's original plan wasn't far from these specs, before US came in like a Santa Clause offering bells and whistles. To be fair to IN, it must have been very hard for it to resist the offers because they represented a quantum jump in capabilities with a chance to skip a generation or two and to get their hands on technologies and capabilities not available to China.
Bingo! Correct. The Malabar exercises showed the awesome capability that a CATOBAR offers. It is no doubt effective. But that effectiveness comes with a cost and a pretty hefty one.
These capabilities were offered to the India via the JWGACTC (Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Technology Co-operation). A number of meetings have been held. The last I believe was in 2017 --->
https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/content/4 ... ised-india
ManuJ wrote:It's important to recognize that at the time of the offer, India's economy was going great guns and GoI was supportive of IN acquiring these technologies since it itself initiated and conducted the negotiations with USA.
Back in 2017 or 2018, when there was no COVID to ruin the global economy, this proposal for an Indian super carrier was shot down by the MoD on the account of it being too expensive. And the economy was doing quite well back then.
With the CDS setup now and the temporary economic situation, its odds of success are quite bleak.
ManuJ wrote:With the change in economic outlook, the drop in defense outlay, and the change in MoD/GoI support, I believe IN has gone back to its original plan of a smaller carrier without EMALS. I think they're still trying to get a CATOBAR because that allows them to launch heavier aircrafts like AWACS and fully loaded fighters, and France has demonstrated its feasibility on a smaller carrier.
As per this article, EMALS is still on the table and so is the tonnage. The navy has dropped the nuclear reactor requirement.
The navy runs into a budget boulder
https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/up-f ... 2020-12-11
21 Dec 2020
The carrier will be conventionally powered, displace over 65,000 tonnes and be equipped with the US-built Electro Magnetic Launch System (EMALS), cleared for sale to India, which means it can launch heavier multirole aircraft like the F/A-18 or the Rafale and exercise ‘sea control’ over vast swathes of ocean with its 55 aircraft and helicopters.
ManuJ wrote:I am hopeful that in the end, better sense will prevail overall. IN will get to continue with its long term plan of a carrier-led navy with 3 carriers, and IN on its part will come up with realistic specs for the carrier that show incremental improvement in capabilities and one that can be built relatively quickly.
It would have been better that they cut the steel for two Vikrant Class vessels, instead of one. Or started the steel cutting on the second one, after the keel laying of the first one in 2009. The IN would not be in this situation right now.