INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 21 Dec 2013 11:37

^^^^^^^^^^

I know, I can be a real buzzkill on these threads :wink:

But speaking of...ah... elevators in general, not only does the Ford have three aircraft elevators to the Nimitz four, the weapons elevators use electromagnetic fields, making the latter more maintenance friendly and power efficient.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 21 Dec 2013 11:39

Ganesh_S wrote:Sounds Akin to saying buy American live Happy (but then it has to be the tax payer who provides for the deficit). Relatively speaking, cost overrun is the name of the game. Not speaking about F35 here.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-1 ... on-measure
The bill would increase the cost ceiling for the aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford, being built by Newport News, Virginia-based Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc., to $12.9 billion, making it the most expensive U.S. warship.


I'm afraid that's again a misconception. The figure quoted for the Ford includes the cost of development (about $4 billion). Since its the first of an entire class of ships, that's a one time investment.

The recurring cost of a Ford-class carrier is actually around $8.5 billion. Which is about the same as what a new-build Nimitz class carrier would cost today. The Ford class will however have a significantly lower life-cycle cost.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Dec 2013 11:49

PL. read the details in the link posted on the UK's QE carrier.Every issue has been detailed as to why the decision was made.In the case of two islands,as well as why only two lifts were chosen and their location.There is a mine of info on the issues.

I endorse the idea of more "carriers"/flat tops for India,if one has followed my posts,but with a significant difference,in that apart from the 3 carriers,our amphibs must be multi-role,JC style,plus all larger surface ships of 10/12,000t should also have through decks with batteries of missiles in silos as with the Kuznetsov class,allowing the use of STOVL/heavy helo ops.The amphibs and small flat tops will be more affordable and can be built in larger numbers.One can;t forget the need for a strong sub fleet.The Chinese will have 60-80,the Saudis planning 24 and the Pakis at least a dozen.The share of defence is now supposedly at an all time low with the UPA,just 1.75% of the GDP when it should be at least 2.5-3%.Indian industry will benefit from increased def. expenditure esp. on indigenous efforts.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Klaus » 21 Dec 2013 11:50

Is there a possibility that India might be able to pick up one of the to be mothballed, under construction QE class A/C in the future? Could buy for a percentage of the current price too.

If the UK does not find buyers (its economy is not getting better anyway), then it might find itself in a desperate situation 10 years down the line, a situation India might be able to capitalize upon, if it plays its cards well. That's a potential 4th carrier down the road, with NLCA's for the air arm. Same or slightly higher tonnage than the Vishal. Would complement it well.

member_20560
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_20560 » 21 Dec 2013 11:51

This is my first post. Been on this site for a while though.
I just have a small doubt. Why is Vik travelling under the Bhutan flag? I got this info from the marine tracker website.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /410000033


IMO: -
MMSI: 410000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: Bhutan (BT)
Type: Military Ops

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 21 Dec 2013 11:57

reuben wrote:This is my first post. Been on this site for a while though.
I just have a small doubt. Why is Vik travelling under the Bhutan flag? I got this info from the marine tracker website.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /410000033


IMO: -
MMSI: 410000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: Bhutan (BT)
Type: Military Ops


Must be a misunderstanding.

However,

Vessel track for WARSHIP R33

provides, every 4 minutes:
* Speed
* Long
* Lat
* Course


Why did the Chinese send a naval sat into space for? I mean we need to fear that DF-21D, for sure I would think.

?????

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby krishnan » 21 Dec 2013 12:00

seems so , none other website shows that

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 21 Dec 2013 12:04

For kicks check this page out, that is the Vicky they claim:

http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/hom ... :00/zoom:9

She changes directions with a few minutes and check out her speed, changes every 4 minutes - from 9 to a whooping 22. Someone is having fun out there.

(Place your cursor over any of the arrows to provide details.)

And the companion map:

http://www.flightradar24.com/20.17,72.12/2
Last edited by NRao on 21 Dec 2013 12:32, edited 1 time in total.

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 21 Dec 2013 12:20

Klaus wrote:Is there a possibility that India might be able to pick up one of the to be mothballed, under construction QE class A/C in the future? Could buy for a percentage of the current price too.


This as well as the question I used to puzzle over 7-8 years back as to why the IN did not go in for even the older UK carriers and the corresponding Harrier fleet are really moot now.

If we are to spitball and fulminate would it not be better to put ourselves in the IN's shoes for once, and see what they are trying to do:

1. A commendable strategic fixation on a desi class of aircraft carriers - with lots of foreign input for sure.
2. A realization that small aircraft carriers and STOVL was not going to be of much help against China.

Going by the principle of Occam's Razor there is actually a very simple reason for this change IMO, from being influenced by RN carrier and naval aviation doctrine somewhere in the late 90s we went over to the USN side -- which is similar in essence but differs on one major aspect - scale/tempo/combat power - call it what you will.

Conflating this with the clusterf#$% on the Vikramditya deal is where we tend to screw up the quality of discussion IMO.

Viv S wrote:
I'm afraid that's again a misconception. The figure quoted for the Ford includes the cost of development (about $4 billion). Since its the first of an entire class of ships, that's a one time investment.

The recurring cost of a Ford-class carrier is actually around $8.5 billion. Which is about the same as what a new-build Nimitz class carrier would cost today. The Ford class will however have a significantly lower life-cycle cost.


The guy said cost overruns are part of the game. Are you saying that is a Misconception? Because the shipbuilder is not contesting the $2.3 billion overrun reported by the GAO.

Only three ships have been budgeted so far. The USN will keep asking for more stuff to be put in. That $8.5 billion/$13 billion/X figure is not going to remain what it is. Watch this space.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 21 Dec 2013 12:51

Philip wrote:Nevertheless,there is no point in flogging the acquisition of the Gorshkov.In its chronological history ,it was the best option.It ws imperative for the IN not to lose its carrier skills and maintain its naval fleet air arm essential to control the IOR.What else could we have done?


That way the Russians could have charged $5 billion and gotten away with it. Since we had 'no options'. That being the case, perhaps we really should be grateful that they took us 'only' for $2.3 billion.

There was no Harrier-2 ever developed for the RN and Harrier production had ceased.


The Harrier II entered production in 1981. New build Harriers were delivered till 1997 and rebuilt aircraft were delivered till 2003. Considering that the MiG-29K remained mothballed for decades till resurrected by an Indian order, the idea of Harrier production ending permanently in the 90s itself, doesn't hold water.


The Russians gave away for a song their Yak-141 tech to the US who used in developing the JSF.


They got a comfortable $400 million from the contract. And the impact of the Yak-141 on the F-35B is often overstated. They employed different propulsion mechanisms (lift fan vs lift jet) for VTOL operation and the swivel nozzle was developed by Rolls Royce based on internal research.


One interesting[/b] fact thrown up is that E-2C/D Hawkeye AEW aircraft can use STOBAR/ski jumps and was offered by Northrop-Grumman to the RN.[/b]


Actually its just a proposal not a fact yet. Flying a turboprop transport off a ski-jump is easier said than done.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 21 Dec 2013 13:05

RajitO wrote:The guy said cost overruns are part of the game. Are you saying that is a Misconception? Because the shipbuilder is not contesting the $2.3 billion overrun reported by the GAO.


I was referring to the article he quoted. The $12-13 billion figure gets regularly presented for the Ford class is erroneous. The figure for the Nimitz class ($7-8 billion) for example is always the production cost (doesn't factor in decades of investment in the type's development).

The actual cost i.e. the recurring cost, of the Ford class is around $8.5 billion.

Only three ships have been budgeted so far. The USN will keep asking for more stuff to be put in. That $8.5 billion/$13 billion/X figure is not going to remain what it is. Watch this space.


The ship's been launched, there's very limited scope for upgrading the existing equipment. There'll be plenty of add-on kit including DEW in the coming years (applies to other ships as well) but the basic design and fit is already frozen.

Only three ships have been budgeted so far, but unless the US is leaving the carrier building business, future ships are still going to be variants of the Ford and current development will feed into those orders as well.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3422
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 21 Dec 2013 18:55

Meanwhile ... Off the coast of England:

Image

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 21 Dec 2013 21:20

Is that a bartania type23?

Anurag
BRFite
Posts: 398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Anurag » 21 Dec 2013 21:28

Snooping....

Shalav
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Shalav » 21 Dec 2013 21:30

Escort. Viky's in UK territorial waters.

titash
BRFite
Posts: 376
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby titash » 21 Dec 2013 21:53

Viv S wrote:
Philip wrote:Nevertheless,there is no point in flogging the acquisition of the Gorshkov.In its chronological history ,it was the best option.It ws imperative for the IN not to lose its carrier skills and maintain its naval fleet air arm essential to control the IOR.What else could we have done?


That way the Russians could have charged $5 billion and gotten away with it. Since we had 'no options'. That being the case, perhaps we really should be grateful that they took us 'only' for $2.3 billion.


There is always a walk-away point for any transaction. Clearly $2.3 billion wasn't it. Maybe $5 billion would have been...who knows?

Clearly the IN/GOI agreed that whatever the russians were charging, it wasn't worth delaying the VikAd acquisition, the IAC design itself, and possibly other deals for the Arihant/Chakra/Su-30MKI etc.

The only lesson from this story is to develop our own military-industrial complex so we can cater to all our needs in house. And perhaps we're half way there...in 10 years time, the carrier itself and all her escorts will be homebuilt


Viv S wrote:
Philip wrote:There was no Harrier-2 ever developed for the RN and Harrier production had ceased.


The Harrier II entered production in 1981. New build Harriers were delivered till 1997 and rebuilt aircraft were delivered till 2003. Considering that the MiG-29K remained mothballed for decades till resurrected by an Indian order, the idea of Harrier production ending permanently in the 90s itself, doesn't hold water.


The Sea Harrier FA2 primarily featured a new blue vixen radar and AMRAAM BVR missiles. American equipment was a no-no until quite recently. In fact, 4-5 years back we tried to procure the FA2 to supplement our dwindling Sea Harrier fleet but the deal ran into trouble because the aircraft were going to be stripped down and supplied without blue vixen. In any case, the basic airframe was the same and was still susceptible to high accident rates

The point to note here is a BVR capable MiG-29k was an option back in 1997 but a BVR capable FA2 wasn't. In any case, the white tigers were roughly handled by IAF Mig-29's during DACT and were suitably impressed.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Peregrine » 21 Dec 2013 23:22

reuben wrote:This is my first post. Been on this site for a while though.
I just have a small doubt. Why is Vik travelling under the Bhutan flag? I got this info from the marine tracker website.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /410000033

IMO: -
MMSI: 410000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: Bhutan (BT)
Type: Military Ops


reuben Ji :

IMO: -
MMSI: 419000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: India (IN)
Type: Military Ops
Gross Tonnage: -
DeadWeight: -
Length x Breadth: 10m x 4m
Year Built: -
Status: Active

It is surprising that the Vikramaditya is not showing the Indian Naval Flag like the HMS Monmouth a "Duke"-class Type 23 frigate

Meantime the Vikramaditya's Position indicates that the ship will use the Suez Route in which case her arrival in India should be in Twenty Days plus whatever she spends in Various "Exercises.

VIKRAMADITYA WARSHIP R33 - Position Recorded on : 2013-12-20 18:32:00 (UTC)

Lat/Lon: 36.11061 / -3.534442 - Speed/Course: 13.4 kn / 86°

Cheers Image
Last edited by Peregrine on 22 Dec 2013 00:48, edited 1 time in total.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3422
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 21 Dec 2013 23:34

INS Delhi joins as escort ...

Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Peregrine » 22 Dec 2013 00:55

reuben wrote:This is my first post. Been on this site for a while though.
I just have a small doubt. Why is Vik travelling under the Bhutan flag? I got this info from the marine tracker website.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /410000033

IMO: -
MMSI: 410000033
Call Sign: AVWO (Call Sign is Indian)
Flag: Bhutan (BT)
Type: Military Ops


reuben Ji :

VIKRAMADITYA
IMO: -
MMSI: 419000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: India (IN)
Type: Military Ops
Gross Tonnage: -
DeadWeight: -
Length x Breadth:
Year Built: -
Status: Active

It is surprising that the Vikramaditya is not showing the Indian Naval Flag like the HMS Monmouth a "Duke"-class Type 23 frigate

Meantime the Vikramaditya's Position indicates that the ship will use the Suez Route in which case her arrival in India should be in Twenty Days plus whatever she spends in Various "Exercises.

VIKRAMADITYA WARSHIP R33

Position Recorded on : 2013-12-20 18:32:00 (UTC)

Lat/Lon: 36.11061 / -3.534442 - Speed/Course: 13.4 kn / 86°

Cheers Image

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 22 Dec 2013 04:15

Talking of ......................... (X-posting)

Nikhil T wrote:Chinese media reports of plans to build a 110,000 ton 'super aircraft carrier' to rival US naval power

CHINA has declared it is building a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier of a size to rival the biggest in United States naval service in the first move of a major new arms race.


The design is reportedly based on drawings from the former Soviet Union of a nuclear-powered, 80,000 ton vessel capable of carrying 60 aircraft.



This should make the Indian Naval strategists think a lot more.

Earlier I did not think India could do with two 44K ton ships, now I am rather confident that these ships will not be able to play a viable role.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 22 Dec 2013 07:23

NR,tx for the news about the Chinese carrier.There's a v. good Reuter's report (China;s military secret to success-European engineering) on the sophistication of the PLAN's sub fleet,which is now greatly enhanced using European tech,German engines-the quietest and the best and French sonars,plus Russian weaponry.Read the UK's historic carrier experience in the link I've given,larger carriers upto 65,000t,as we are gradually moving into the slot that the RN once played globally.The RN's strength still lies with their SSBN Trident equipped fleet.While the Chinese might have super-duper carrier ambitions,they should also realise that there own carriers are vulnerable to BMs.The other interesting development is that of carrier based UCAVs which reduce the size of carriers required as before.Similarly,US,UK studies have shown that STOVL aircraft have a better sortie rate,occupy less space,etc.,that conventional aircraft aboard cat equipped carriers .The USN will certainly use both F-35Bs along with the Cs. It is interesting f=to find that western naval strategists are recommending downsizing carriers,while the Chinese want to build the biggest! They haven't learnt from the smog in Beijing caused by their auto pollution.

Back to the Vikram,VAYU has a Dec. issue featuring the carrier in detail.A titbit,the Norwegians,who do the dirty work for the US,sent an ELINT spyplane,an Orion along with a highly sophisticated intel vessel to monitor the carrier.Sonobuoys were dropped,overflights,etc.We had to get the Russians to brush them off.Protests have been made.Par for the course,remember the OZ Oriion which overflew the Delhi? The carrier will get extensive surveillance in the Meditt. and when it transits the Canal and the Red Sea exit into the Arabian Sea.One can't wait however to see both the Vikram and the Viraat sailing together.The last time we saw two IN carriers was decades ago when the Vikrant escorted the Hermes/Viraat.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4473
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby sanjaykumar » 22 Dec 2013 08:37

http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/410000033


Flag:Bhutan. Bhutan has an aircraft carrier to police Himalayan glaciers?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 22 Dec 2013 10:06

probably bhutan flag avoids some legal / taxation / paperwork issues in suez transit as the ship's ownership etc is kind of 50:50 now...

Cheen would surely have obtained the Ulyanovsk design from Nikolayev and jointly working to amend it to todays needs and fix any drawbacks based on whatever they could spy up on american carriers of similar size.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 22 Dec 2013 10:20

Yes,that's what reports have said that they have bought the Ulyanov design from Ukraine and plan to use N-propulsion for it.The news that BDesh is to get 2 Ming class subs and train their submariners on an island base indicates that he PLAN plans another "pearl" in the Bay of Bengal.Coupled with the Lankan govt., wanting to take back the lease to the IOC of 90+ WW2 oil tanks at Trinco (and supposedly give the Chinese a foothold in Trinco) .Trinco has the world's most spectacular natural harbour that is so large that it can accommodate most of the world's naval fleets at the same time and have room to spare.It is so deep that whales have found a safe haven there.Ideal for deep draught carrier ops!

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 22 Dec 2013 10:53

Philip wrote:Coupled with the Lankan govt., wanting to take back the lease to the IOC of 90+ WW2 oil tanks at Trinco (and supposedly give the Chinese a foothold in Trinco) .Trinco has the world's most spectacular natural harbour that is so large that it can accommodate most of the world's naval fleets at the same time and have room to spare.It is so deep that whales have found a safe haven there.Ideal for deep draught carrier ops!


Presenting: China Bay at Trincomalee

Image

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 22 Dec 2013 15:10

titash wrote:There is always a walk-away point for any transaction. Clearly $2.3 billion wasn't it. Maybe $5 billion would have been...who knows?


The walkaway point might have been $1.3 billion. But the Russians took their own sweet time, waiting until the Indians were committed to the acquisition before handing over a bill for $2.9 billion, with negotiating buffer of $500 mil built in.


The only lesson from this story is to develop our own military-industrial complex so we can cater to all our needs in house. And perhaps we're half way there...in 10 years time, the carrier itself and all her escorts will be home-built


We'll be shrugging off a heavy price when it comes to the MTA and FGFA programs, if that's the only lesson we learn.


The Sea Harrier FA2 primarily featured a new blue vixen radar and AMRAAM BVR missiles. American equipment was a no-no until quite recently. In fact, 4-5 years back we tried to procure the FA2 to supplement our dwindling Sea Harrier fleet but the deal ran into trouble because the aircraft were going to be stripped down and supplied without blue vixen. In any case, the basic airframe was the same and was still susceptible to high accident rates


That was the RN's Sea Harrier fit. Nothing prevented India from contracting aircraft equipped with the EL/M-2032 and Derby, or RDY-2 and MICA.


The point to note here is a BVR capable MiG-29k was an option back in 1997 but a BVR capable FA2 wasn't. In any case, the white tigers were roughly handled by IAF Mig-29's during DACT and were suitably impressed.


There's no doubt that the MiG-29K is a far better aircraft platform.

member_20560
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_20560 » 22 Dec 2013 15:38

Peregrine wrote:
reuben wrote:This is my first post. Been on this site for a while though.
I just have a small doubt. Why is Vik travelling under the Bhutan flag? I got this info from the marine tracker website.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /410000033

IMO: -
MMSI: 410000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: Bhutan (BT)
Type: Military Ops


reuben Ji :

IMO: -
MMSI: 419000033
Call Sign: AVWO
Flag: India (IN)
Type: Military Ops
Gross Tonnage: -
DeadWeight: -
Length x Breadth: 10m x 4m
Year Built: -
Status: Active

Thank you for updating Peregrine sir. Like NRao sir said, must have been a mistake and they must have updated the info.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Peregrine » 22 Dec 2013 15:58

Singha wrote:probably bhutan flag avoids some legal / taxation / paperwork issues in suez transit as the ship's ownership etc is kind of 50:50 now...

Cheen would surely have obtained the Ulyanovsk design from Nikolayev and jointly working to amend it to todays needs and fix any drawbacks based on whatever they could spy up on american carriers of similar size.


Singha Ji :

Marine Traffic website has Two Vikramadityas i.e. One under Bhutan Flag and the other under Indian Flag :

Indian Flag : http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /419000033

Bhutan Flag : http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/det ... /410000033

Cheers Image

Ganesh_S
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 09 Mar 2010 06:40
Location: united kingdom

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Ganesh_S » 22 Dec 2013 16:39

I'm afraid that's again a misconception. The figure quoted for the Ford includes the cost of development (about $4 billion). Since its the first of an entire class of ships, that's a one time investment.

The recurring cost of a Ford-class carrier is actually around $8.5 billion. Which is about the same as what a new-build Nimitz class carrier would cost today. The Ford class will however have a significantly lower life-cycle cost


Might not be a misconception. The plan seems to have been to spend $43 billion in building three ships. Considering $4 billion as development costs you still end up paying $39 billion for 3 ships which makes it approximately $13 billion a ship.

The Navy plans to spend $43 billion to build three Ford-class ships. However, the GAO said the program might need to be slowed down so the swarm of bugs and unproven technology issues, which have bogged down the construction schedule, can be ironed out.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/09/ ... 378404901/

Delays and cost overruns for the USS Gerald R. Ford also threaten construction of the USS John F. Kennedy, the second of the Ford-class ships. GAO scoffed at the Pentagon's cost estimate for the CVN 79 as “optimistic.”

http://www.defenseone.com/management/20 ... ers/70038/


Design and construction collectively contributes to 54% of the procurement cost growth against what was envisaged in 2008.
http://gao.gov/assets/660/657412.pdf

Ganesh_S
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 09 Mar 2010 06:40
Location: united kingdom

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Ganesh_S » 22 Dec 2013 16:46

the Navy has consistently increased its procurement budget for the ship to account for cost growth as construction has progressed. Budgeted costs have grown to $12.8 billion, compared to the Navy’s initial $10.5 billion procurement budget request. This total represents an increase of $2.3 billion, or 22.3 percent, and includesalmost $1.4 billion in future years funding (fiscal years 2014 and 2015) to cover the anticipated cost growth. It also exceeds the $10.5 billion legislative cost cap on the program, which the Navy is currently seeking to amend as part of its fiscal year 2014 budget submission

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 23 Dec 2013 05:34

Just an aside.The Harriers can reportedly operate from the Vikram,no problemo,but support facilities for them aboard will be limited,as the carrier has been geared up to mainly support the MIG-29Ks and other Russian origin helos,KA-31s and 28s.There should also be support for Sea Kings and their successor multi-role helos too.The carrier will require the best heavy ASW/multi-role helos in the inventory and planned.

VAYU on the NLCA's woes.Summation:
The IN would be best served with a NLCA based upon the LCA MK-2 variant,not the underpowered NLCA-1 given its limited operational effectiveness.The NP-1 can only carry light SR AAMs,stay aloft for a short time and has limited endurance.The solution is "more power and less weight",but given the small size of the LCA a task too difficult? Since 8 aircraft are on order and the MK-2 development likely to take more time,the suggestion is to use the first batch to validate the aircraft and test it at the SBTF facility at Goa,then aboard IAC-1 and afterwards used as a "shore based conversion aircraft for an eventual MK-2 fleet".
It is therefore most unlikely that we will see the Vikram operating NLCAs for quite some time.

Tx Pratik.China Bay is just a small part of the huge Trinco region.A quote from Wik:

The recorded history of Trincomalee spans more than two and a half thousand years beginning with civilian settlement associated with the Koneswaram temple in the pre-modern era. One of the oldest cities in Asia, it has served as a major maritime seaport in the international trading history of the island with South East Asia. In the ancient world, it was successively the capital of eastern kingdoms of the Vanni country, developing under the Pallava Dynasty, Chola Dynasty, Pandyan Dynasty, the Vannimai chieftancies and the Jaffna kingdom through the Koneswaram shrine's revenue. Trincomalee's urbanization continued when made into a fortified port town following the Portuguese conquest of the Jaffna kingdom, changing hands between the Danish in 1620, the Dutch, the French following a battle of the American Revolutionary War and the British in 1795, being absorbed into the British Ceylon state in 1815. The city's architecture shows some of the best examples of interaction between native and European styles. Attacked by the Japanese as part of the Indian Ocean raid during World War II in 1942, the city and district were affected after Sri Lanka gained independence in 1948, when the political relationship between Tamil and Sinhalese people deteriorated, erupting into civil war. It is home to major naval and air force bases at the Trincomalee Garrison. The city also has the largest Dutch fort on the island.

The Trincomalee Bay Harbour, bridged by the Mahavilli Ganga River to the south is referred to as "Gokarna" in Sanskrit, meaning "Cow's Ear", akin to several areas of Siva worship across the Indian subcontinent. Its sacred status to the Hindus has led to the city being declared "Dakshina-Then Kailasam" or "Mount Kailash of the South" and the "Rome of the Pagans of the Orient." The harbour is renowned for its large size and security; unlike any other in the Indian Ocean, it is accessible in all weathers to all craft. It has been described as the "finest harbour in the world" and by the British, "the most valuable colonial possession on the globe, as giving to our Indian Empire a security which it had not enjoyed from elsewhere."


Under NO circumstances should the GOI ever allow the GOSL to offer Trinco to any nation operating the WW2 oil tank farm or naval facilities other than India.It is past time to play hard ball with the Rajapakse regime on this score.Getting their facilities back is just the pretext to offering them to China.The reverberations will be colossal.For the GOI,total dereliction of duty in foreign affairs in the island.

LakshO
BRFite
Posts: 210
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby LakshO » 23 Dec 2013 05:51

Nice pic of INS Vikramaditya :twisted: Regardless of the delays & wranglings over price, I am glad that the boat is finally headed home 8)

:?: That pic has a helicopter hovering. Is that one of ours or one of them Biturds' :?: Is this standard procedure?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 23 Dec 2013 06:15


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 23 Dec 2013 06:32

True,but we have to first bite the bullet.With such deplorable decision making (barring US deals,news that the cabinet rushed through on Dec. 20th with indecent haste the nod for more C-130Js despite the on-going diplomatic spat with the US,pat and Christmas present for O'Bomber & Co. ),where the forces languish for want of vital eqpt.,ammo,etc.,while the def. budget/GDP % plummets to its lowest level for aeons,even a heavily tilted deal for Japanese amphib aircraft is taking its "tea time".The sooner this despicable regime is thrown out the better.

member_25400
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_25400 » 23 Dec 2013 07:05

I was referring to the article he quoted. The $12-13 billion figure gets regularly presented for the Ford class is erroneous. The figure for the Nimitz class ($7-8 billion) for example is always the production cost (doesn't factor in decades of investment in the type's development).


Viv, Ganesh

$13 billion is the construction cost for Gerald R Ford. It does NOT include $4.7 billion worth of R&D costs (applicable for the entire class and other spin-offs). The 13 billion itself includes a cost overrun. Any delay (due to budget difficulties/sequestration, or due to technical challenges with maturation of EMALS/othyer technologies) will cause further increases.

The recurring cost for a Ford class carrier is NO LONGER $8.x billion. The (old) [url]article href =http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/costing-the-cvn21-a-did-primer-01624/[/url]which claimed this assumed that construction costs remain the same as originally scheduled (which is not true any more), The figure for the Nimitz class also is an underestimate of late Nimitz rebuild, as it omits cost of lots of work which was then done in-house, and of other changes.

Also, note that just adjusting for cost of inflation (Ford was supposed to be based on 2008 base $) also makes a significant difference. I'm suspect the $13 billion is the actual construction cost and not base FY2008 value.

The US Navy has traded off (increased) initial upfront cost against increased power projection (effectiveness and cost effectiveness), availability (reduced maintenance), and operation (automation/manpower).
--
Other than bringing this kind of thinking into IAC2/IAC2+ costing, I'm not sure if there are any specific costing lessons to be learnt for India here.

member_25400
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_25400 » 23 Dec 2013 07:07

I was referring to the article he quoted. The $12-13 billion figure gets regularly presented for the Ford class is erroneous. The figure for the Nimitz class ($7-8 billion) for example is always the production cost (doesn't factor in decades of investment in the type's development).


Viv, Ganesh

$13 billion is the construction cost for Gerald R Ford. It does NOT include $4.7 billion worth of R&D costs (applicable for the entire class and other spin-offs). The 13 billion itself includes a cost overrun. Any delay (due to budget difficulties/sequestration, or due to technical challenges with maturation of EMALS/othyer technologies) will cause further increases.

The recurring cost for a Ford class carrier is NO LONGER $8.x billion. The (old) [url]article (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/cos ... mer-01624/)[/url]which claimed this assumed that construction costs remain the same as originally scheduled (which is not true any more), The figure for the Nimitz class also is an underestimate of late Nimitz rebuild, as it omits cost of lots of work which was then done in-house, and of other changes.

Also, note that just adjusting for cost of inflation (Ford was supposed to be based on 2008 base $) also makes a significant difference. I'm suspect the $13 billion is the actual construction cost and not base FY2008 value.

The US Navy has traded off (increased) initial upfront cost against increased power projection (effectiveness and cost effectiveness), availability (reduced maintenance), and operation (automation/manpower).
--
Other than bringing this kind of thinking into IAC2/IAC2+ costing, I'm not sure if there are any specific costing lessons to be learnt for India here.

member_25400
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_25400 » 23 Dec 2013 08:16

Klaus: Is there a possibility that India might be able to pick up one of the to be mothballed, under construction QE class A/C in the future? Could buy for a percentage of the current price


A decision on the QE carrier is expected 2014 (and will likely depend upon budget vs force outook at that time). It will likely be too soon for India to know what it has with Vik_tya and Vikrant and too much for India's budget at that time. (far-sightedness /early prep has NEVER been one of the strong points of India's MOD/procurement plans).

Expect it to be retained by the UK or bid for by Brazil or other maritime country. (even france?)

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3971
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby kit » 23 Dec 2013 11:14

Guys ., whats the take on the large carrier / small carrier argument

smaller carrier .. less survivable..less costly to operate..can carry UAV/UCAV.. operational endurance ?

larger carrier .. more survivable..cost !! .. can carry everything..unlimited endurance esp if nuclear

2 or 3 smaller carriers or a single behemoth ?

mix of smaller and super carriers for a navy like India s seem to be the best option., since it derives operational flexibility and also ability for higher force projections

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 23 Dec 2013 12:37

The QE class did have French input,with the fond hope that the two would share the asset.Now the carrier's future will have to wait for another year before a final decision is taken.For sure it will be offered to India,but at a price.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5288
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 23 Dec 2013 14:50

Philip wrote:VAYU on the NLCA's woes.Summation:
The IN would be best served with a NLCA based upon the LCA MK-2 variant,not the underpowered NLCA-1 given its limited operational effectiveness.The NP-1 can only carry light SR AAMs,stay aloft for a short time and has limited endurance.The solution is "more power and less weight",but given the small size of the LCA a task too difficult? Since 8 aircraft are on order and the MK-2 development likely to take more time,the suggestion is to use the first batch to validate the aircraft and test it at the SBTF facility at Goa,then aboard IAC-1 and afterwards used as a "shore based conversion aircraft for an eventual MK-2 fleet".
It is therefore most unlikely that we will see the Vikram operating NLCAs for quite some time.


Ok, here is what I know about the LCA-Navy. It IS based on the LCA Mk2, not the Mk1. That was a confirmed fact from the Deputy Project Director of LCA Navy. So if you do find out this fact in another 6 months, please don't tell us that the IN or ADA has finally gone and done what Vayu suggested or what you have been advocating.

Second, the NP-1 is a test-bed and a trainer at that. It serves a purpose- to validate control laws that were specifically intended for a carrier variant. It is not the basis for the LCA-Navy.

NP-2 is a single seat fighter that is based on the Mk1 variant and will further help in finetuning control laws, testing the LEVCON and test the new landing gear. But apart from that, the true LCA-Navy will not be derived from the NP-1 or NP-2.

Also, please do let us know how much is the endurance and range of the MiG-29K/KUB (especially the latter since since it loses a fuel tank). the MiG-29K has OBOGS, but so will the LCA-Mk2, and both feature IFR, so what exactly is your point on the endurance and range?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: manish singh, Narad, Nishant Kumar Jha and 63 guests