INS Vikrant: News and Discussion

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 28 Jun 2015 10:50

What is angle of attack

PART 1: Big Surprises In LCA Navy NP1's Ski-Jump Fight

The test team's verdict: "This is certainly a welcome bonus for an aircraft that has been so often derided for lack of thrust, and this excess will be accounted for in future launches. Also the angle of attack after ramp exit reached 21.6 degrees which augers well for utilisation of even greater angles of attack for launch. It should certainly allay fears over the use of such high angles of attack and remove much of the pessimism that has surrounded the utility of the programme."

It seems the AoA of 21.6 degrees referred to is actually pitch angle. So the AoA is actually 21.6 degree-14.3 degree= 7.3 degree.

Thus there will be lift and drag associated as the estimated exit velocity is 49.5m/sec if thrust is taken as 84 KN and for MTOW of 13.3T for a 200m run for a 14.3 degree ski jump.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jun 2015 13:30

shiv wrote:
Shreeman wrote:Here is a practical little experiment for all you budding jet pilots. You know those flappy things that have one or more settings? That you cant retract until you reach a certain height? Go ahead and retract them any way, right after wheels are off the ground. Also, dont extend them when coming back down. Best demonstration of lift. No one responsible for any pranging that may occur. Also, if you dont reply with a report from hospital bed then we will understand you tried and succeeded!

Heck Shreeman you are tempting me. Guess what? I had made a video 3-4 years ago as part of my "aerodynamics research" . I will upload soon.

Not my fault..
The effect of flaps on take off performance
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npoQBBriglg

vina · Post by **vina** » 28 Jun 2015 20:26

It seems the AoA of 21.6 degrees referred to is actually pitch angle. So the AoA is actually 21.6 degree-14.3 degree= 7.3 degree.

No. If you look at the comments section, there is a "Balaji" (will that be Cmde Balaji) who came out and said that it was indeed the AoA and not the theta . If the theta (also known as climb angle/pitch angle ) was 10 deg per the article, and the alpha was 21.6, what was the direction of the relative wind (which is what AoA is measured against)/flight path vector ?

Was the wind coming from above the longitudinal axis of the plane or below ?

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 28 Jun 2015 21:13

Thanks vina.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 29 Jun 2015 02:00

The tarmak carries no force field. Once launched, and separated, the situation applies to any flying craft with the same parameters, speed, attitude, etc. You can slow down and climb down any time to practice. As in low passes or touch and gos.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 29 Jun 2015 03:49

Vina,

great series of posts.

though the 'technical' part was beyond me, your layman explanation - in your inimitable style - is simply lovable.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Jul 2015 07:19

Oh my, pushed all the way to the end of the third page?

Aircraft carrier technology: Indo-US working group likely to meet soon

In a major push to bilateral defence cooperation, an Indo-US working group on aircraft carrier technology is likely to meet next month, diplomatic sources told The Indian Express. India and US had decided to form a working group “to explore aircraft carrier technology sharing and design” during President Obama’s visit to Delhi this year. This was again reinforced during the visit of US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter to India earlier this month.

Indian Navy currently operates two aircraft carriers — INS Viraat and INS Vikramaditya. While INS Viraat was imported from UK in 1987 and is on extended operational life because of delayed induction of INS Vikramaditya, the latter, originally Admiral Gorshkov, arrived from Russia in 2013. India is indigenously constructing its third aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant, at Cochin Shipyard which is expected to enter service in 2018.

It is believed that Indian Navy has already completed the technology assessment, feasibility studies and analysis of alternatives for joint development of an aircraft carrier {?????}, tentatively christened INS Vishal. It is currently believed to be working on engineering design of the warship. The Defence Acquisition Council had approved Rs 30 crore as seed money for this project in April.

Former US State Department official and senior associate at Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Ashley Tellis had penned a monograph in April arguing for joint development of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. “Working in concert to develop this vessel would not only bolster India’s Naval combat capabilities but would also cement the evolving strategic bond between the US and India…,” Tellis wrote.

Sources said the two projects, agreements for joint development of Mobile Electric Hybrid Power Sources and the Next Generation Protective Ensembles, have been notified to the US Congress.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... hDAug.dpuf

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 08 Jul 2015 03:50

MoD, Navy to convert ageing aircraft carrier into a floating museum

A year before its decommissioning by mid-2016, the Defence Ministry has asked the Navy to decide on the post-retirement plan for the ageing aircraft carrier INS Viraat.

Learning from the INS Vikrant experience that triggered a campaign involving political heavyweights like Nitin Gadkari, Indian Navy has now floated the idea of converting INS Viraat into a floating museum. An early response has come from Andhra Pradesh, which is ready to spend close to Rs 20 crore on the project.

The warhorse will fade into the sunset after the international fleet review in Visakhapatnam in February 2016 followed by visits to the naval bases on the east and west coast. The ship will celebrate its last anniversary on May 11 before it calls it a day.

This leaves the Navy with a year to determine the future of INS Viraat that was commissioned on May 12, 1987. Before serving the Indian Navy, it was in the Royal Navy where the ship was commissioned in 1959 as HMS Hermes. With 56 years of service, it is the world's oldest operational aircraft carrier.

“A proposal from the Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation has been received. We are seriously considering the museum plan and will take a decision before the decommissioning,” said a Navy officer.

The Navy has burnt its fingers with India's first aircraft carrier INS Vikrant because the decision to sell off the scrap triggered a political row and a Save Vikrant campaign after it was auctioned to IB Commercial for Rs 60 crore.

INS Vikrant that saw action in 1971 war, was decommissioned in January 1997. A year later, Maharashtra government proposed to convert the warship into a museum and defence ministry approved free transfer of the ship to the state in 1999.

However in 2012, Maharashtra indicated its inability to stay committed to the project because of the cost involved, leaving few options for the defence ministry and Navy, notwithstanding the military heritage of the ship.

“That's why we want a decision before INS Viraat is decommissioned,” said the official.
APTDC plans to dock the warship in Kakinada port to attract tourists. Andhra Pradesh government in the past had converted a decommissioned Kalvari class submarine into a museum, which is now anchored in Visakhapatnam. The Navy had also transferred another decommissioned Vela class submarine to Tamil Nadu to use the vessel as a museum.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Jul 2015 10:24

I would advise asking the various maritime state govts. to make offers.I would prefer Kerala or Goa because they are heavy tourist /MICE destinations.Even Madras is an option,Bombay great-the state has oodles of money but what did it do with the Vikrant? Shame upon all responsible for her fate. Who is going to go to Kakinada by the way,what's there? The carrier should be anchored in a major port where there is heavy tourist traffic and corporate entities.

I've seen several maritime museums/museums abroad,Greenwhich (Lon),Drassanes (Barcelona),Arsenal (Venice),etc.The Royal Yacht Britannia anchored in Leith Edinburgh is a superb job done where the ship hosts corporate conferences,parties,etc. Though on a smaller scale to the Viraat,it is a good model to follow.The Viraat will have to serve two major purposes. It will have to have to host a maritime museum that depicts India's great historic seafaring heritage down millennia ,the glorious history of the IN,its own glorious heritage (Falklands War) and to keep it cash happy,also serve as a venue for corporate events.It must be run as professionally as any such museum abroad with a special team,preferably using some retd. naval personnel who can explain the various aspects of naval warfare to visitors. Audio kits are an absolute need when walking through the displays.

The Britannia is also attached and entered through a lovely mall in Leith,filled with cafes,shops,etc.and has an excellent museum shop. The ship carries a Rolls aboard which was used by HM the Queen on her state visits. The carrier will have to display the various aircraft types used by the IN and during its history.Whatever remnants of the Vikrant are left,should also be part of the displays.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 17 Jul 2015 06:21

x-posting from the Naval News thread

Interesting news article with details, hence posting in full. My apologies if already posted:

India specifies 65,000-tonne aircraft carrier, with catapult

For the first time, the size and specifications of the Indian Navy's future aircraft carrier have been officially acknowledged. The navy has written to at least four major global shipbuilders, asking for proposals to help in designing a 65,000 tonne carrier that would be about 300 metres long.

The letter of request, issued by the Indian Navy on Wednesday, specifies the carrier should be capable of speeds greater than 30 knots (56 km per hour). However, it is silent on whether it prefers nuclear propulsion, or conventional diesel or gas turbines.

The navy's letter states the carrier will embark 30-35 fixed wing combat aircraft, and about 20 rotary wing aircraft (helicopters). It would have a catapult to launch fixed wing aircraft, which would make the carrier a "catapult launched but arrested landing", or CATOBAR vessel. For India's naval aviators, this would involve a major change from a long tradition of getting airborne from a "ski-jump" at the end of the flight deck.

While not mandating an "electromagnetic aircraft launch system" (EMALS), the navy has specifically mentioned it as an option. The United States Navy's latest carrier, the 100,000-tonne USS Gerald R Ford, which will be commissioned next year, is the world's only current carrier featuring EMALS. This uses an electromagnetic rail gun to accelerate aircraft to take-off velocity, instead of the conventional steam-driven catapults that have been used for 60 years.

The navy's letter has gone out to US company, Lockheed Martin; UK company, BAE Systems, French shipbuilder, DCNS, and Rosoboronexport, the Russian export umbrella agency.

The letter pertains to the vessel that is commonly referred to as the "indigenous aircraft carrier number 2", or IAC-2. Currently, Cochin Shipyard Ltd (CSL) is building IAC-1, a 40,000-tonne carrier named INS Vikrant, which is scheduled to be commissioned in 2018.

INS Viraat will supplement INS Vikramaditya, the 45,000-tonne carrier bought from Russia, which was formerly named the Gorshkov. Another, older carrier, INS Viraat, is expected to be retired by the end of this decade.

For years, the biggest guessing game around the Indian Navy's future force has been: Will IAC-2 be a massive, EMALS-equipped, nuclear-powered super carrier, developed in partnership with America? So far, admirals have been close-mouthed, saying the process of formulating specifications is underway.

Now, the guessing game is already shifting to: Which shipbuilder does the navy's specification favour? The US remains the leading horse, not just because it is the world's most experienced and technologically advanced carrier operator with more aircraft carriers in service than the rest of the world combined.

There is also a US-India "working group", constituted during President Barack Obama's visit to India in January, specifically to promote cooperation in aircraft carrier technology. New Delhi and Washington are known to have discussed EMALS under the rubric of the Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI).

Yet, there could be others in the race. Vendors point out that the specifications framed bear similarities to the French aircraft carrier, Charles de Gaulle (in terms of speed and size, though not in displacement), and the British Queen Elizabeth II (in terms of displacement and size, though not in speed).

Surprisingly, the navy's letter allows the foreign vendors just one week to respond, demanding a reply by July 22. The reply is required to contain costing elements along with the proposal.

"This involves evaluating a consultative, hand-holding process that will last at least a decade. There is no way anyone can produce a detailed cost proposal in such a short time," complains a senior executive with one of the foreign vendors.

Experts have begun evaluating the implications of the navy's specifications. It is pointed out that asking for 25-30 fighters and 20 helicopters on a 65,000 tonne, 300-metre-long carrier would limit the size of the aircraft on the ship. If heavy fighters are to be a part of the ship's complement, it would need to be bigger; if the MiG-29K is retained, it would need a foldable nose to occupy less hangar space.

It is also pointed out that specifying a speed in excess of 30 knots eliminates certain forms of propulsion, notably an all-electric drive, which is environment friendly and economical.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 07:31

looks like its just a formality with the 1 week timeline. the other three will not bother to send in a reply.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 17 Jul 2015 07:44

Looks like the US has hooked up our Navy with all the gizmos promised.

Vishal will turn out to be an experiment for this military relationship. Maybe since at least one more carrier will be operationally available by the end of this decade we can afford this luxury.

Isn't QE-2 operating AWACS too from their ski-ramp ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 07:49

No, the QE-2 has no E2.
bartania has been offered the osprey as a awacs soln or the tried and tested folding radar drum on Merlin helicopter.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 07:50

behold the mighty Merlin crowsnest AEW, the aperture of the E2 radar will be atleast 4 times of that dustbin.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 07:57

we will go with E2 if we get catapult for sure. anything like merlin/v22 is always a compromise in terms of payload, range....the v22 also lacks a pressurized rear cabin(can be fixed) and it flies around 25,000ft max...far lower than 35,000ft the E2 can orbit at.

its a no contest if we get cats....4 E2 will be ordered for sure. perhaps 2-3 onboard and 1 on shore for training.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 17 Jul 2015 08:05

What I do not understand is if they see no value in a 40k tonne Vikrant-2, why are they stuck at 65k class for the next upgrade. With catobar (any kind) they should be able to operate more aircrafts, so why not increase the carrying capacity further. If uncle is going to be charitable with help, why not ask for more.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 08:10

perhaps there are length limitations in the kochi drydock and karwar jetty that is not easily fixable. and 65k is on the verge of being a supercarrier, the cancelled french PA2 DCN design with cats would certainly be the template we would look at seriously.

@ 283m it was weighing in full load I suppose @ 75000t.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ai ... arrier_PA2

our puppy at 300m could be same weight empty and pack in few more

Khan has no idea how to do small, Khan loves making big and does it well - burgers, pickup trucks, bombers, guns...carriers....big is their thing.

so its best to upsize by 10,000t considering the incremental cost will be minimal over the huge tab.

we need a 60 unit airwing. with 50 fighters.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 17 Jul 2015 08:40

Would liked to have heard some noises about another 30k vikrant class but the IN continues with piecemeal orders...

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 17 Jul 2015 08:45

^Though I would have loved to see another Vikrant class carrier, it is understandable when you look at how long we are to use these things. In 50 years, a non-CARTOBAR carrier will be at a severe operational handicap (I will more than happy to be proven otherwise) for a nation that will be a true world power with a global (military) presence. If you look at it that way, the 65k ton carrier can be seen as an evolutionary step towards the aim of an eventual super carrier in the decades to come.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 09:01

i think they want to finalize and start work on the 65t as soon as possible instead of devoting scarce resources and one kochi drydock to the vikrant2.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 17 Jul 2015 09:02

I'm not so sure, the Queen Elizabeth 2 for example is a stovl design and the number of unmanned surveillance assets plus jsf types that are likely to crop up would preclude smaller design from becoming obsolete

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2015 09:04

I smell a MLU in the design phase. I bet IN is looking for a blessing, to go bigger, from the political establishment.

But a nice way to get a multi vendor RFI out and skirt the rules.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 Jul 2015 09:06

The new 65k ton ship would probably come in time to replace the Gorky. That's why they are starting now. It's going to take a couple of decades especially if they want to build it in India. IN might have its doubts on how long the Gorky will last and in the meantime, 2 carriers is enough. They aren't in a hurry. So they can dream of nuclear power and EMALs.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 17 Jul 2015 09:12

Or better start building a INS Vikrant follow up ship which will be in Service by 2023024 while INS Vishal will take atleat until 2030.

We will need 3 carriers with 1 being in refit.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 09:51

LM does not seem involved in the carrier build program. it builds the LCS and this doing some hobart class AAW ddg for australia
http://cdnph.upi.com/sv/b/i/UPI-4511432 ... troyer.jpg

EMALS - general atomics
JSF - LM
E2 - northrop grumann

amit · Post by **amit** » 17 Jul 2015 11:36

It's interesting that the US vendor approached is Lockheed Martin and not Northrop Grumman. The latter runs the only shipyard in the US with expertise to build super carriers, Newport News Shipbuilding.

As far as I can recall there was a merger attempt in the late nineties between Lockheed and Northrop but that fell through.

Apart from littoral combat ships Lockheed has no shipbuilding experience.

This and the one week timeline makes me think that the this RFI is just a red herring to show that the Navy has done a due diligence. The agreement has been drawn up, IMO, in the Indo-US joint group.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Jul 2015 11:42

They are better off building 2 more Vikrant Class by 2030 before jumping to build something bigger , we have yet to commission the first Vikrant class in the navy and we are jumping into building something much bigger not really the best approach

amit · Post by **amit** » 17 Jul 2015 11:53

Austin wrote:They are better off building 2 more Vikrant Class by 2030 before jumping to build something bigger , we have yet to commission the first Vikrant class in the navy and we are jumping into building something much bigger not really the best approach

Austin,

I have a different take on this which I explained earlier on this thread. An aircraft carrier has a lifespan of 50 years, heck our current Virrat is almost 60 years! The target is to get this boat out in the 2030s time frame, let's say 2030. Which means we need a boat which will be relevant in terms of our capability requirement around 2060-70 decades at least.

As I've alway maintained military capability cannot divorced from economic capability. It's difficult to predict but indications as of today is that by 2060 or so India is quite likely to be the top economy in the world in terms of GDP, or at least 2nd biggest. At that time there will be a scramble for resources around the world between China and India. So we would need something that packs a punch. Vikrant class, I'm afraid does not do it. We will need aircraft like the E2, JSF, AMCA and FGFA naval variants on the Vishal.

Also going by our experience with Vikrant, if we want the boat by 2030 or so we need to start planning today. In the interim if the Navy can find the money for another Vikrant, I think they will go for it. This would be sufficient for Pakistan.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 13:03

a couple of LHD hulls purposed as ASW carriers would be great as well to lead task forces. each could be around 20,000t size and mount some 4 utility helis and 10 ASW helis....these could sanitize large areas and work together with P8 and smaller ships

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jul 2015 13:12

To paraphrase a famous quote,"a bird in the hand is worth a larger one in the bush"!

The IN's plan for a N-powered larger CV expects that entity to arrive around 15 years from now,with a 10yr. construction period going by our first effort. I sound a word of caution.The development of anti-CV BMs like the Chinese ones,in the future will have far better detection and targeting capabilities,from aircraft,sats,UAVs,in addition to usual surface and sub-surface assets. the Russians are to build a new class of "carrier-killer" subs to replace the Oscar class,armed with 20 anti-CV supersonic missiles with v.large warheads. from exg. info,current anti-CV missiles will be launched in massive salvoes with some in stealth mode,receiving updated targeting info from sister missiles flying at higher alts. The missiles also take turns at targeting,complicating the ships defences/sensors. They are all timed to arrive at the same time from all points of the compass in the hope that at least one or two hit with devastating effect,sinking,or at least disabling the carrier. One would expect the Chinese to adopt similar tactics for their subs.I posted recently,the PLAN's strategy and tactics using the Song and Yuan class SSKs in the Taiwan Straits,aimed at defeating the USN's attempts to defend Taiwan from annexation.
We can be very sure that the IN's CVs will receive similar attention,esp. from the PRC's BMs.

Therefore,the IN needs not just CV capability but also numbers of flat tops.It is why I've for decades now advocated building several flat tops.both CVs and amphibs,which can accommodate strike aircraft/STOVL aircraft ,using ski-jumps/STOBAR as well as STOVL, if such aircraft are available.This waty,we will have adequate platforms even if a couple of flat tops are hit/damaged in any conflict. the Q is how much of the IN's share of the budget can it afford to devote to CVs? Looking at the new Talwar deal and quotes I've posted,the IN has a v.balanced all-round acquisition plan .If we add to the IN's "flat-tops",the unsinkable carriers,INS India,INS A&N,INS Lakshadweep,,which for IOR purposes will be key naval bases from where LRMP and strike aircraft operate ,the several flat tops can be used expeditiously within and without the IOR region as the situ demands.

Building another Vikrant class CV easily affordable and which will be completed in 5-7 years,will fill the void until the larger Vishal in whatever avatar it arrives in,is commissioned around 2030.The second Vikrant class CV will also enhance our amphib warfare support capability and we could perhaps build/acquire fewer amphibs as a result.Two Vikrants and the Gorky will serve our needs very well until 2030.A decade in naval development is also along time and might bring with it unexpected revolutions in naval warfare.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 13:14

+72 sire. large LHD type of hulls with good sea legs are a must to saturate an area with ASW coverage, sanitize sea lanes and provide much more ASW helis into the fight than the paltry 1 or 2 a couple of DDGs can keep in the air for 24x7 before they go down for upkeep.

we probably need that more given TSPN will not risk any surface engagement but try to strike via submarines. once a torpedo is in the water, none can say whether it came off a chinese or chilean sub so plausible deniability is there even if a chinese yuan class or two join the fight.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jul 2015 14:15

To paraphrase a famous quote,"a bird in the hand is worth a larger one in the bush"!

So the letter to the DM about the C-17 vs the IL has been dropped

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 17 Jul 2015 14:53

I'm not sure what this fascination with having this latest, gold-plated stuff is. Heck, our first indigenous aircraft carrier is not out in the water yet but we're looking to cap the Vikrant-class at one ship.

Second, why the fascination for skipping entire generations of technology and depending upon a foreign power (esp like US) for the primary war fighting ship of the future IN? We built even the ski jump at INS Hansa with Russian help, shouldn't we invest in building an indigenous steam catapult technology so we can churn out CATOBAR carriers that satisfy OUR strategic goals - instead of procuring a technology that was created to satisfy someone else's strategic goals?

amit wrote: I have a different take on this which I explained earlier on this thread. An aircraft carrier has a lifespan of 50 years, heck our current Virrat is almost 60 years! The target is to get this boat out in the 2030s time frame, let's say 2030. Which means we need a boat which will be relevant in terms of our capability requirement around 2060-70 decades at least.

As I've alway maintained military capability cannot divorced from economic capability. It's difficult to predict but indications as of today is that by 2060 or so India is quite likely to be the top economy in the world in terms of GDP, or at least 2nd biggest.

Agree that military capability should be tied to economic capability. However, using GDP as a measure for economic capability is deeply flawed. If increasing GDP is desirable, we should infact let our population grow explosively - each new person will only add to the GDP! No one can deny that India will continue to be a developing economy with plenty of economic challenges for the next 50 years. What we need is an economical, yet powerful military with weapons that give us the biggest bang for the buck. We need to do a careful cost and risk (sanctions etc) analysis of each foreign procured weapon. Can't US shut down our Vishal by denying/delaying spares for the EMALS firing system?

At that time there will be a scramble for resources around the world between China and India. So we would need something that packs a punch. Vikrant class, I'm afraid does not do it. We will need aircraft like the E2, JSF, AMCA and FGFA naval variants on the Vishal.

Also going by our experience with Vikrant, if we want the boat by 2030 or so we need to start planning today. In the interim if the Navy can find the money for another Vikrant, I think they will go for it. This would be sufficient for Pakistan.

If we need foreign EMALS, plus aircraft like ones you mentioned for the prime war fighting ship of the IN, aren't we deviating from our strategic goal of becoming a builders Navy in 'move' and 'fight' components of shipbuilding? Why not churn out much cheaper, indigenous Vikrant-class 40k tonne ships with LCA-navy Mk2 that will have commonality in spares and provide economies of scale in all costs while fulfilling our strategic goals?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2015 15:45

problem is
- wrt TSP we dont need carriers as all of TSP is within reach from land bases
- wrt Cheen which presents a formidable PLANAF+PLAAF+PLAN threat , 65kt is where a carrier design with 50 airwing becomes viable as a standalone strike and fleet defence asset. a smaller airwing cannot cope with saturation attacks multiple times a day.
- wrt to submarine threat we need ASW carriers not the vikrant type ships

hence like Agni2 vikrant is a passing phase before the heavy meat of A5 and K4.

amit · Post by **amit** » 17 Jul 2015 16:31

Nikhil T wrote:Agree that military capability should be tied to economic capability. However, using GDP as a measure for economic capability is deeply flawed. If increasing GDP is desirable, we should infact let our population grow explosively - each new person will only add to the GDP! No one can deny that India will continue to be a developing economy with plenty of economic challenges for the next 50 years. What we need is an economical, yet powerful military with weapons that give us the biggest bang for the buck. We need to do a careful cost and risk (sanctions etc) analysis of each foreign procured weapon. Can't US shut down our Vishal by denying/delaying spares for the EMALS firing system?

And

If we need foreign EMALS, plus aircraft like ones you mentioned for the prime war fighting ship of the IN, aren't we deviating from our strategic goal of becoming a builders Navy in 'move' and 'fight' components of shipbuilding? Why not churn out much cheaper, indigenous Vikrant-class 40k tonne ships with LCA-navy Mk2 that will have commonality in spares and provide economies of scale in all costs while fulfilling our strategic goals?

Nikhil,

Since this is not an economy related thread I'll just let your comments on the GDP growth pass by just saying I'm not too sure that you understand what I was implying. We can discuss this in the Indian econ thread if you so wish.

However, I find it interesting that you call Vikrant "indigenous". Why? We had design help from outside, many of the equipment that's being fitted into the ship is from foreign vendors and since its an ab initio development it's way behind schedule. But the interesting thing is that now the shipyard says that it can build a second one with in 4 years - OK that may be optimistic but you get the drift they now have the capability to build the second one much faster.

Don't you think the Navy is following the same path with Vishal? That will be the first of its class and there is a requirement for a lot of external help. But do you seriously think that after the Navy gets Vishal it will not require follow on boats? Remember by current projections there is a requirement for 5 aircraft carriers.

EMALS or plain steam catapults, will need an initial help from foreign vendors for Vishal but for follow on ships that capability would be indigenous, there's nothing rocket science about catapults. I don't know if you remember, the original Vikrant used to launch aircraft with the use of catapults. The attack on Chittagong Harbour, which brought the surrender in Bangladesh was done by airplanes that were launched by catapults!

The problem as I see it is that we look at current geopolitical reality and then think the same reality will be in existence for the rest of this century with India having the same friends and foes. I think by 2030, India will be sufficiently technologically advanced to be able to absorb whatever high fangled tech there is in EMALS. And denying technology or imposing sanctions on a US$5-US$7 trillion economy is a darn sight harder than denying technology to a US$300-US$400 billion economy that we were when we last came under sanctions.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2015 16:39

'm not sure what this fascination with having this latest, gold-plated stuff is. Heck, our first indigenous aircraft carrier is not out in the water yet but we're looking to cap the Vikrant-class at one ship.

ThThe plan was always 40K followed by a 65K, both belonging to the Vikrant Class.

They had not decided on the power unit nor the mechanism for take offs.

EMALS and help to "design" is a fairly recent offer from the USN. But a cat in the original thinking was still reliant on a "foreign" player.

Finally ships of these sizes have a huge political input.more later.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jul 2015 17:04

15 years is a long,long,time to wait until we get our 3rd CV.The Viraat is to be pensioned off after the naval review.To keep one carrier on each seaboard combat ready,we need at least one more which may be in the dockyard for repairs,refit,etc.When the Kargil War exploded upon us the Viraat was unavailable.

If we order another Vikrant CV today,by 2012/13 we would have another CV operational,almost identical to the Vikrant (as there may be a few minor modifications),with crews who can easily be switched from one CV to the other. The chief problem with building next a 65K t CV is that there are several areas of uncertainty.One launch system.Cats,EMALs or STOBAR.I've already shown how the RN rejected cats becos of the huge costs involved.Carrier launch,then requires "steaming into the wind". Secondly,power plant,cats requiring extra power than a STOBAR carrier. N-power is being mooted and preferred option,but where is the N-plant design going to come from (not the US)? We've barely perfected an N-plant for the ATV-1.Then the aircraft,larger types but which ones? Anything other than the MIG-29K is going to cost-even a new Flanker carrier variant double the cost of a 29K.A naval FGFA,JSF ,whatever will cost much more.A Rafale costs twice the cost of an MKI and 4 times the cost of a 29K!So work out the extra costs of a 65K CV.Conservative estimates say anywhere from $12B to $15B if she is to arrive by 2030 as planned. Another Vikrant would cost less than half that price. To me,it is putting just too many eggs in one basket.Don't also forget the extra operating costs of the larger CV. Some even say why stop at just 65K? If the CV is to be N-powerd,then 100K is even better as the US is doing!

The PLAN apart from the Liaoning are reportedly building 3 more CVs,supposed to be based upon her design,even N-powered. China will take some time to master carrier aviation,at least a decade and currently has no ideal aircraft for its carrier ops. Russia isn't obliging them with SU-33 details. But when 2030 arrives,we could have the larger CV launched or been commissioned at that time,if we start construction around 2020 after the second Vikrant is launched,giving us 10 years to build the CV. The timing would be perfect for CSL too. What this also gives us is time to wait and watch the development of carrier UCAV ops which would've matured by then.We could then decide upon the size of the embarked air wing and mix of manned and unmanned aircraft/helos. I anticipate a greater role for UAVs in the AEW role with long endurance UAVs/UCAVs in the next decade.More warshsips will be using UAVs for early warning and will be able to carry more numbers of them.Interesting times ahead.

PS:Brar,we already have "two birds in the hand",C-17s and IL-76s and need "only one in the bush"!
Letter being drafted.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Jul 2015 17:10

our rattehalli rmp facilities should yield enough enriched U for A/Cs as well.

if it can drive atv, it can drive ads as well. perfection should be measured from continued process metrics.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Jul 2015 06:07

Jul 17, 2015 :: India to build next aircraft carrier with US technology

India and the US have worked out the terms of reference for building the next Indian aircraft carrier with US technology.

This has been pushed through after the visit of US defence secretary Ash Carter. As both countries prepare for a September round of strategic dialogue in Washington DC, India is preparing to send a team to speed up talks on the aircraft carrier and the Light Combat Aircraft jet engine, which is also slated to be built with US assistance.

The agenda has been set in the two summits held in September and January, but the key will be checking off the ambitious bucket list of projects.

This will be the first strategic dialogue to be held in the new 2+2 format, including the foreign and commerce ministers. From the US side, it will be John Kerry and Penny Pritzker, commerce secretary, rather than Michael Froman their chief trade negotiator, who is generally believed to take a dim view of India and its trade practices. The US and India are expected to take forward earlier agreements on smart cities, which is likely to get priority.

This year India-US relations will be tested on climate change as the Paris climate change summit, COP 21 looms. India will be under unprecedented pressure to declare ambitious emission targets. Climate change is a legacy issue for Barack Obama and he's expected to push hard.

China has been smarter - first, by clinching a climate deal with the US during Obama's visit, and second, by declaring their INDC (intended nationally determined contributions) just before a meeting with the French president, which made it seem like it was a special gesture by China. India tried to match it somewhat with an energy deal when Barack Obama visited India.

Even though India is far below China on per capita emissions, India will be cynosure of global, particularly US attention when it does finalize and announce its INDC. Officials expect this to be done in the coming weeks.

India is scheduled to enter the US' Global Entry program, which is a pre-approval of immigration procedures for travelers to the US. This was agreed during Modi's visit to the US last year. However, the Indian system is yet to collate criminal data records digitally and online, which is a pre-requisite for entering such a program.

With the Modi government prioritizing "ease of doing business" rules, sources say they are spending a lot of time with investors and private sector to get a better idea of how to simplify processes in India, which are one of the biggest impediments to domestic and foreign business. But the two countries continue to struggle to find common ground on IPR issues where India is expected to continue to take a diplomatic beating.

Welcoming "the significant and welcome announcement" of India-Pakistan talks, US ambassador to India, Richard Verma told students in Chennai today, "This is the new normal ... India as the global strategic, political and economic player. We welcome that role and will continue to be supportive of India's global aspirations. We will continue to support India's bid for UNSC membership in a reformed security council," he said. "The United States and India look forward to a day very soon when, for the first time, we establish secure phone lines between our respective National Security Advisers, as well as between the President and Prime Minister, further opening key channels of communication on sensitive issues," he said.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Jul 2015 06:19

Jul 17, 2015 :: India's Biggest Warship, INS Vishal, Likely to Be Nuclear-Powered

India's biggest ever warship, the INS Vishal, is likely to be propelled by nuclear energy.

The second of India's home-made aircraft carriers will be a whopper at 65,000 tonnes with enough room to accommodate 50 aircraft.

The Ministry of Defence has written to nine Indian shipyards, including some that are privately owned, in search of a partnership for the project.

The INS Vikramaditya, an old Russian carrier which weighs 45,000 tonnes, joined the Navy in 2013 and carries 34 aircraft on board. While the type of fighter jets which will be based on the new carrier is yet to be decided, senior officials indicated that the size of the warship indicates its fighters would be twin-engine.

"The cost of INS Vishal will depend on the kind of propulsion; nuclear propulsion will cost more than conventional means - diesel or gas," a senior naval officer told NDTV. A nuclear aircraft carrier costs upto three times more than a conventional one.

After years of neglect, India's navy is in the midst of accelerated modernisation under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The government has fast-tracked processes to ensure the domestically-built INS Vikrant will be ready for service in 2018.

The INS Vishal could be built with US technology - the proposal was discussed during President Obama's visit to Delhi in January.

India is eyeing the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) developed in the US, which means jets can launch off a flat deck at a faster rate and with less fatigue to aircraft.

India's existing carrier force uses ski-jump ramps to help planes take off and uses wires to slow them down when landing. For that reason, planes have to be lighter and fewer in number (the upper limit is 34 currently).

With an EMALS system on a flat deck, the INS Vishal could field 50 heavier fighter jets with longer range as well as airborne early warning aircraft.