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 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.
SanjayC
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby SanjayC » 18 Jun 2014 10:47

anyusharma wrote:IMO, the Dhruv being used in an ASW role is purely a stopgap measure. The ALH has performed magnificently in land based operations, but it just doesn't have the design features to optimise it for maritime operations. There was a talk given at one of the Aero India's which emphasised just how difficult it was to design the helicopter with all three services wanting in on a piece of the action and each of them having distinct, sometimes conflicting performance requirements.

Bottomline is, a purebred medium maritime helicopter is needed as of yesterday. The navy has been giving the procurement very high priority from what I've been told.


The Dhruv design should be used as the base to build an entirely new helicopter for the navy. Will have good export potential.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7345
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby krishnan » 18 Jun 2014 14:03

why stopgap , if it can perform decently it can be upgraded, if its design was not good enough for that role then it wont be able to perform even the stop gap role

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby merlin » 18 Jun 2014 15:43

titash wrote:merlin/krishnan,

I think this has to do with the LFDS sensor recently (hopefully successfully) trialed on the Dhruv combined with the fact that our fleet of medium helos has dwindled due to attrition and serviceability issues. Hopefully the folding blades issue is not a problem with the larger carriers and LHD flat tops

The sheer number of Dhruvs in service will ensure serviceability over the next 2 decades.


Are you referring to the Mihir sonar here?

titash
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby titash » 18 Jun 2014 17:50

Nope LFDS. This appears to be a lower frequency derivative of Mihir...

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18849
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 18 Jun 2014 19:18

It was a major boo-boo by the IN not to have installed a Russian CIWS, VLS Shtil or at least the 30mm ADGs + Barak at the time of commissioning. Bark being modular can easily be removed and retrofitted onto another warship later,once a true LR SAM is installed. After commissioning it is always going to be a major hassle modifying a major warship like a carrier,removing aircraft,weaponry,etc.,while the mods are being done.Installing new radar/FCS another requirement.The sooner the IN makes up its mind the better.Any SAM/anti-missile system better than none.

The various video clips of the VIK-A show that it is a truly magnificent warship,a superb job of modification,that will hopefully serve the IN for at least 3-4 decades.At today's costs,it would be twice the amount that we've paid for. Once the Vikrant-2 is completed,it would be an interesting exercise to compare costs.Unless we build in significant numbers at home,the cost-effectiveness of building locally will be lost,as from the Delhi and Shivalik experience,there have been huge cost escalations.The Talwars now look like a bargain.

The decision on the amphib design must also be decided fast.That number can be built at home in a pvt. yard if MDL is incapable of delivering the food already on its plate.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5173
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2014 21:32

Philip wrote:The various video clips of the VIK-A show that it is a truly magnificent warship,a superb job of modification,that will hopefully serve the IN for at least 3-4 decades. At today's costs,it would be twice the amount that we've paid for.


For the same cost, we could've ordered a new ship. Case in point:

- 1 x America-class LHA. 45,000 ton. $2.7 billion (2004 dollars). Time taken - 7 years/unit.
- 2 x Cavour class. 54,000 ton. $4 billion (2001). Time taken - 7 years/unit. [cumulative displacement]
- 3 x Dokdo class. 56,000 ton. $2 billion (2002). Time taken - 5 years/unit. [cumulative displacement]

(Brand new ships including weapons, radars and battle management systems.)

Once the Vikrant-2 is completed,it would be an interesting exercise to compare costs.Unless we build in significant numbers at home,the cost-effectiveness of building locally will be lost,as from the Delhi and Shivalik experience,there have been huge cost escalations.The Talwars now look like a bargain.


Talwar class. 4000 ton. Unit cost -

i) $300 million (1997) link
ii) $530 million (2006) link
iii) $1 billion (2013) link


Shivalik class. 6000 ton. Unit cost -

$440 million (2002) link

Project 17A

$1.1 billion (2013) approx.


Could have ordered six to eight Shivaliks (instead of just three). Instead chose to fund the 'modernization' of the Yantar shipyard and subsidize frigate production for the Russian Navy.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1647
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby John » 18 Jun 2014 22:01

Chance of Foreign SY building a carrier for IN is unlikely apart from France no other nation would do it for political reasons.

Viv S wrote:iii) $1 billion (2013) link

Has this even been confirmed, i know there is negotiations onoging but i think the site jumped the gun and confused it with P-17A.

Also Shivalik cost is roughly 650 million each. It cost nearly as much as P-15A thanks in part to some of western equipment, delays etc. With kinks ironed out, If we order 2nd batch with Barak-8 and Brahmos it should cost around the same.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5173
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2014 22:56

John wrote:Chance of Foreign SY building a carrier for IN is unlikely apart from France no other nation would do it for political reasons.


Japan couldn't have because of doctrinal issues and at the time the US would likely have faced political constraints. But I don't anyone else could have refused a contract worth $3-4 billion. France and Italy were already cooperating with the Russians and lobbying for a repeal of the embargo on China. If France was open for business, so was the UK. And over the last decade South Korea has been trying to boost to defence exports to India.

Viv S wrote:iii) $1 billion (2013) link

Has this even been confirmed, i know there is negotiations onoging but i think the site jumped the gun and confused it with P-17A.


Not that I can find, but its a fair estimate nonetheless. A two-fold cost increase over 7 years corresponds to an hike of about 10% per annum (inflation in Russia has averaged 10-15% a year over the last decade).

Also Shivalik cost is roughly 650 million each. It cost nearly as much as P-15A thanks in part to some of western equipment, delays etc. With kinks ironed out, If we order 2nd batch with Barak-8 and Brahmos it should cost around the same.


Around Rs 8,000 crore for 3 ships. Even assuming an older exchange rate, at $650 million, its still far more cost-effective than the Talwar class considering the difference in displacement and capability. Would have been even more so had we ordered it in bulk instead of ordering the second set of Talwars.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jun 2014 10:39

Indian Navy's Official INS Vikramaditya Video


svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 21 Jun 2014 11:47

joygoswami wrote:INDIAN NAVY VIDEO 8)

[youtube]t9WxdLyL-_A#t=122[/youtube]

Some Screens.


Need the Submarine in the shot
http://i59.tinypic.com/jrafk2.png

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 22 Jun 2014 22:24

Some good pics of Vikram interior by Kunal in the link

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... ead/page10

I wonder why officers and sailors dont have a common dining area ?

John
BRFite
Posts: 1647
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby John » 22 Jun 2014 22:32

Viv S wrote:Not that I can find, but its a fair estimate nonetheless. A two-fold cost increase over 7 years corresponds to an hike of about 10% per annum (inflation in Russia has averaged 10-15% a year over the last decade).

I find that hard to believe talwar was signed in 97 for 1 billion and 2nd batch was signed in 06 for 1.5 billion and some of cost increase was attributed to Brahmos. If price escalation is similar, if another deal is signed now it should cost no more 2 billion.

Also Russians were offering more advanced Project Gorshkov class FFG for around 700+ million each for P-17A tender but i believe that has been rejected.

Japan couldn't have because of doctrinal issues and at the time the US would likely have faced political constraints. But I don't anyone else could have refused a contract worth $3-4 billion. France and Italy were already cooperating with the Russians and lobbying for a repeal of the embargo on China. If France was open for business, so was the UK. And over the last decade South Korea has been trying to boost to defence exports to India.

No country would go thru the hassle of all political ramifications for just 3 to 4 billion contract it is easy to look back and say what if they built it. If we had that option IN would have pursued it, there was no other option than Vikramaditya and Invincible class. It a shame we let the latter get away.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5173
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 22 Jun 2014 23:21

John wrote:I find that hard to believe talwar was signed in 97 for 1 billion and 2nd batch was signed in 06 for 1.5 billion and some of cost increase was attributed to Brahmos. If price escalation is similar, if another deal is signed now it should cost no more 2 billion.


If the price escalation is similar (i.e. 50% over 9 years) it'll cost about $2.2 billion today. Given its technology and displacement, the Shivalik still offers far better value today.

Also Russians were offering more advanced Project Gorshkov class FFG for around 700+ million each for P-17A tender but i believe that has been rejected.


The P-17A does not involve direct imports. You can't gauge the price of the Gorshkov through a tech transfer offer (which I assume is the case here).

No country would go thru the hassle of all political ramifications for just 3 to 4 billion contract it is easy to look back and say what if they built it.


Political ramifications haven't impeded military exports to Middle Eastern sheikdoms in the least. A stable democracy with healthy relations with most of the countries in question is a different case.

Also, 3 to 4 billion dollars doesn't often invite a 'just' prefix. Its a big enough figure to throw a spanner into the QE program and nix the PA2 follow-on for the French CdG.

If we had that option IN would have pursued it, there was no other option than Vikramaditya and Invincible class. It a shame we let the latter get away.


The cost escalation was tabled only in 2007, which meant any option would have meant a further delay in a new carrier. And of course delays in the Vikad delivery were released only bit by bit, with the ship finally delivered ten years after the contract for refurbishment was signed.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1647
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby John » 23 Jun 2014 01:50

If the price escalation is similar (i.e. 50% over 9 years) it'll cost about $2.2 billion today. Given its technology and displacement, the Shivalik still offers far better value today.

Not arguing whether Talwar or P-17 i was for building more of the latter discussed in last page of this thread. but just pointing new Talwar will not cost any where close to 1 billion.

The cost escalation was tabled only in 2007, which meant any option would have meant a further delay in a new carrier. And of course delays in the Vikad delivery were released only bit by bit, with the ship finally delivered ten years after the contract for refurbishment was signed.

That why we should have kept Invincible on the table which would have given us leverage with Russians, simply having it as the only option meant Russia could demand whatever it wants.

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_26622 » 24 Jun 2014 11:32

I have been fascinated by the big drum on top of Vikramaditya's superstructure. What kind of electronic equipment is in it.

Old pics of Admiral Gorkshov show the same drum on top...see similar one on top of Varyag (now PLA Liaoning carrier)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61946
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 24 Jun 2014 11:36

I believe it was the location of some failed phased array radar & its back end the old soviets tried out.
not sure it has any role now or why its left in place.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jun 2014 11:41

The big drum up there is not a radar but some ATC like equipment to control the Air Traffic , Landing , Take off etc although inside it could be a radar but more for ATC like duty

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jun 2014 12:59

Image

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1154
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Khalsa » 24 Jun 2014 14:33

Though I knew they had achieved it way back.
But brings the proverbial tear to my eyes to see an Indian Pilot landing an Indian Mig-29K on Indian IAC near/ close to the Indian Ocean off India.

That video was great .... thank you

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61946
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 24 Jun 2014 18:07

http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/artic ... le_044.pdf

good read on shipborne PA radars. I didnt know empar was lowbrow passive while sampson and apar were active.
has details on the failed soviet sky watch also on kiev class.

titash
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby titash » 24 Jun 2014 20:54

excellent article GD!

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby member_26622 » 24 Jun 2014 21:30

Thanks for the article.

Just saw some videos on Ford class and like the super small superstructure. We likely cannot trim down Vikramaditya's superstructure without affecting ship CG, dynamics and stability -otherwise can park 4~5 more Mig-29 in that space.

Hoping after we get IAC, we retrofit and maintain commonality in sensor suite across our carrier fleet!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18849
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 28 Jun 2014 21:00

The Vik-A at the time of acquisition was the only serious option available to the IN.The other carriers were RN Harrier carriers with elderly aircraft available,not having enough oomph and effectiveness in the decades of service to come.At the most the smaller Invincible carriers,smaller than the Viraat ,would've been a step down in true capability.DID has a lengthy feature on the history of the Gorshkov/Vik-A ,too long to post here,but it shows how both sides made mistakes in estimating the enormity of the task of virtually rebuilding the carrier into a true flat top.There are some limitations within the modifications when compared with a carrier designed as such from the keel upwards.The flight deck is narrower than other carrier designs,but once its integral air defence missiles and guns are installed,the Vik-A will be a very powerful asset,enhanced once BMos is carried by the MIG-29Ks.

The Vikrant-2 will raise the bar somewhat,but what is really needed are larger carriers of at least 65,000t,which can carry more aircraft,helos and UAVs,adding to the strike and anti-sub capability required.There was a news item about the extension of the Campbell Bay naval runway to 9000ft. allowing for larger aircraft to operate from as well as upgrading two other bases.The IN's Fleet Air Arm should also include some land based assets,allowing for the IAF to second some tasks to the OIN,while extending its capability of primarily defending our sub-continental airspace while allowing the IN to take over some extra maritime responsibilities safeguarding our maritime interests and offshore island territories.

MN Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 393
Joined: 27 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby MN Kumar » 01 Jul 2014 13:39

Lousy video for the majority part except at around the 33 Min mark the two Talwars show up. Shows the sea state at that time. Remember the discussion on the thread about the Mig29K's not flying due to bad weather.


Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5173
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 01 Jul 2014 14:09

Philip wrote:The Vik-A at the time of acquisition was the only serious option available to the IN.


That's only because at the time of acquisition the IN didn't know rather than the four years promised the Russians would take ten years to modify and refurbish the ship. Construction of most new carriers usually take less time.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1647
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby John » 02 Jul 2014 05:06

Invincible was available as an option, post harrier could even be converted to helo carrier for amphb/relief ops.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18849
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 02 Jul 2014 13:55

Invincible is even smaller than the Vikrant.The Sea H's lack of supersonic flight,limited range and payload needed to be rectified with a new fighter and larger carrier.The SH's were also no longer in production,we weren't given the RN SH's radar either,lacking any BVR capability.The R have only in recenbt times pensioned off early their GR harriers which they were using aboard their light carriers in the strike role in the Gulf wars and Afgn.The Varyag was looked at,but the adm. who looked her over with his team years ago told me that her hull was in poor condition.There were no new carrier designs available.All that was required was to have worked out a realistic price and timeframe to convert the cruiser-carrier into a typical flat top.Now that the Vik-A is in service and we can see what a formidable warship she is,"better late than never" should be our attitude.In any case,this will have to be the motto of the IN,as both surface ships,subs (Scorpenes,which by now all should've been in service,and cost over $80M now!) are all afflicted with the same disease,arriving late and at much greater cost.cavour,Juan Carlos carriers are also STOVL ships.Remember at that time back,we had no access to any western carrier high tech design barring second hand UK STOVL light carriers.It is only now that we are building our very first med. carrier which has had French and Italian input.

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub ... 30422.aspx

Submarines: India Finds Another Way To Delay
April 22, 2013: India's effort to build six submarines (French Scorpenes), under license, has been delayed once again. The problem is mainly poor management. An example of this occurred quite recently with the departure of ten Spanish technical advisors for the Scorpenes. Their contract expired at the end of March and, despite the expiration date being well known, Indian bureaucrats were unable to get a new contract in place on time. Similar avoidable delays have occurred several times already and the price has gone up with each delay. Last year it was announced that the first Scorpene sub would not be ready until 2015. The new delays push that to 2017.

Building the subs in India will leave India with thousands of workers and specialists experienced in building modern submarines. All that will be wasted because the defense procurement bureaucrats seem to have learned nothing. These officials already caused numerous delays and cost overruns during negotiations to build these diesel-electric submarines. The bureaucrats mismanaged this deal to the extent that it is now five years behind schedule. But it is even more behind schedule if you count the several years the Indian bureaucrats delayed it even getting started. The delays and mismanagement have so far increased the cost of the $4 billion project by 25 percent (to $834 million per sub).

The original plan was to have the first Indian built Scorpene delivered at the end of 2012. But now, because of problems getting the construction facilities and skilled workmen ready, the first Scorpene won't be delivered until 2017, with one each year after that until all six are delivered. That schedule is subject to change and probably will, for the worse.

After the bureaucrats and politicians dithered for nearly a decade, in 2005, India finally signed a deal to buy six French Scorpene class boats. The delays led to the French increasing prices on some key components and India has had some problems in getting production going on their end. The first Scorpene was to be built in France, with the other five built in India. While some problems were expected (India has been doing license manufacturing of complex weapons for decades), the defense ministry procurement bureaucrats never ceased to amaze when it came to delaying work or just getting in the way.

The Scorpenes are similar to the Agosta 90B subs (also French) that Pakistan recently bought. The first of the Agostas was built in France, but the other two were built in Pakistan. The Scorpenes purchase was seen as a response to the Pakistani Agostas. The Scorpene are a more recent design, the result of cooperation between French and Spanish sub builders. The Agosta is a 1,500 ton (surface displacement) diesel-electric sub with a 36 man crew and four 533mm (21 inch) torpedo tubes (with 20 torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles carried). The Scorpene is a little heavier (1,700 tons), has a smaller crew (32), and is a little faster. It has six 533mm torpedo tubes and carries 18 torpedoes and/or missiles. Both models can be equipped with an AIP (air independent propulsion) system. This enables the sub to stay under longer, thus making the sub harder to find. AIP allows the sub to travel under water for more than a week, at low speed (5-10 kilometers an hour). Two of the Indian Scorpenes are to have Indian made AIP installed.

All this ineffective urgency is in play because India's submarine fleet is dying of old age and new boats are not going to arrive in time. It's not like this was a surprise, but the Indian defense procurement bureaucracy has long been noted as slow, sloppy, and stubborn, especially in the face of demands that it speed up. The twisted tale of the tardy submarines is particularly painful.

The plan was to have a dozen new subs in service by the end of the decade. At present, there will be (with a bit of luck) three or four of them in service by then. The procurement bureaucracy is still seeking a supplier for the second batch of six diesel-electric subs. This second six probably won’t even begin arriving by the end of the decade. It's hard to say, although the defense procurement nabobs speak of "fast tracking" this project, but long-time observers are not expecting speed.

There's some urgency to all this because this year five of India's 16 diesel-electric subs (10 Kilo, two Foxtrot class Russian built boats, and four German Type 209s) were to be retired (some are already semi-retired because of age and infirmity). Because of the Scorpene delays, the Type 209s are being kept in service (but not allowed out to sea much) for several more years. That leaves India with 14 subs. But in the next year or so several of the older Kilos will reach retirement age. Thus, by the time the first Scorpene arrives in 2017, India will only have five or six working subs. India believes it needs at least 18 non-nuclear subs in service to deal with Pakistan and China.

The hulls of all six Scorpenes have been completed, but filling those subs up with all the necessary equipment is an even more difficult task. Moreover, India insists that some of that equipment be manufactured in India, and that introduces even more complications and delays. Indian firms have a spotty track record in this area.

India is also building and buying nuclear subs. India received a Russian Akula nuclear attack (SSN) sub last year. This one is on lease with the option to buy. Indian SSNs and SSBNs (missile carrying boats) are under development, as they have been for decades.

While India was largely concerned with the Pakistani navy when the Scorpene contract was negotiated and signed, China is now seen as the primary adversary. The Chinese subs are not as effective as the Pakistani boats, both because of less advanced technology and less well trained crews. India could use their Scorpenes to confront any Chinese attempt to expand their naval presence into the Indian Ocean. Thus the delays and cost overruns with the Scorpenes are causing quite a lot of commotion in India. But at the rate India is going, it will be over a decade of construction before all six of the Scorpenes are in service. At that point, India would have about a dozen subs (including nuclear powered models under construction). China will have over 60 boats, about 20 percent of them nuclear. China does have a lot for its warships to deal with off its coasts and in the Western Pacific but it does retain the capability of putting more subs off the Indian coast than can the Indian Navy.


Costs: One non-AIP Scorpene of 1500t now costs over $800M.The Akula lease:The Akula is 5 times larger than a Scorpene,carries 2.5 times its arsenal of more advanced weaponry,and has far greater speed and endurance with unlimited range and normal 90+ days of patrol,twice that of any conventional sub.Its 10 yr. lease also costs less!

As of 2008, Russia had an agreement pending with India worth US$2 billion for the lease of Nerpa and another Project 971 Shchuka-B class submarine.[12] Of this, K-152 Nerpa will be leased for 10 years to India at an estimated cost of US$670 million
The option to buy the sub at depreciated cost after 10 yrs. is also on.Just for the record,the second Akula lease is on the table,hopefully our new dispensation will firm it up,critically needed.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/manm ... 17212.html
Manmohan in Moscow: India may lease second nuclear submarine from Russia
PTI New Delhi, October 20, 2013


Cost given in this report approx., $1B. There were some other earlier reports that the second sub may have
extra capability than the first.VL silos,etc.,with some of the latest tech seen on the latest Russian SSGNs.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 09 Dec 2014 20:18

Russian specialists to service India’s Vikramaditya carrier on permanent basis
SEVERODVINSK, Arkhangelsk Region, December 9. /TASS/. A special group of Russian specialists will be responsible for the post-guarantee maintenance of India’s aircraft carrier The Vikramaditya in India on the permanent basis, the general director of the naval shipyard Sevmash, Mikhail Budnichenko, told TASS in an interview.

The Vikramaditya (formerly The Admiral Gorshkov) was upgraded at the Sevmash shipyard. Since its handover to India in November 2013, it has spent more than 220 days on the high seas. The warranty period expired on November 16.

Budnichenko said a group of 23 specialists will be present in India on the permanent basis and address day-to-day issues, such as supplies of spare parts and equipment requiring maintenance or repairs. Also, it will be making arrangements for the annual overhaul together with a maintenance group from Russia.

All works are to be done under specifications and in amounts agreed with the Indian side.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 30 Dec 2014 22:44

X-Post from Naval thread. Chacko's interviews at the Vikramaditya from earlier this month.

chackojoseph wrote:WRT CIWS, I discussed with a naval official on Vik. He wanted to to know which cruise missile can be targeted on Vik. My reply on RA'AD failed to impress him. He said that to target Vik, the opponent will require a satellite or an air based asset. No air based asset is going to come anywhere near Vik as the surveillance is too good and MiG-29's will not allow them. Regarding satellite, only US has that capability and they are not the enemies. With a complement of a nuclear sub and couple of destroyers/frigates (and other support vessels), no ship or submarine is going to come close.

Then I asked him about submarine threat. He wanted to know which. I pointed out reports that Chinese subs have been tailing US carriers. He said that the carriers can be tailed in peace time. In wartime, they may attempt to come close. I asked him if they planned to install a sonar. He said that his ship does not do Submarines, it is an aircraft carrier.


At the time I had not understood these comments fully. However, reading on the Soviet anti-carrier strategy and brings these into perspective. First of all, links for reading up:

https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/b2e ... egacy.aspx

http://www.informationdissemination.net ... omber.html
http://www.informationdissemination.net ... rt-ii.html
http://www.informationdissemination.net ... t-iii.html
http://www.informationdissemination.net ... rt-iv.html

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-031.htm

Lets try to paint this in the Indo-Pak theatre:

  • The biggest challenge to attack and destroy an aircraft carrier is to locate and positive identify it in the open seas and not radiating. This was very difficult for the Soviets to achieve in the 1980s despite a large contingent of long range MR aircraft, space based assets and naval ships. I don't think PN or PAF would be in any better position to do that even today, though some of the individual platforms (P-3s) may be modern. Visual confirmation was the most trusted method for the Soviets and but would lead to certain annihilation of the recce force.
  • Typical layman perception of a carrier task force is of a lumbering large carrier protected by warships on all sides as if it is a defenseless tanker or cruise ship. In truth, the carrier is a fighting ship and provides a long range protective bubble around all the complete naval group. With a 500 Km bubble around the vessel, P-3s and Mirages will have a hard time penetrating it to come within weapon and sensor range, assuming they have a positive track on the carrier in the first place. Coming in lo-lo-lo is the best bet, but how many aircraft can Pakistan muster for such an attack? The MiG-29s are not Tomcats, but the Mirage is not a Blinder either. Attrition will be very high in such a mission.
  • In 1971, PN tasked its submarine force to target the Vikrant. The modern carrier cruising at 20+ knots is a difficult fish for a submerged SSK to catch. But then, I assume there must be submarine tactics to counter that.
  • Again, the carrier is not a dumb target. There are extensive tactics of deception which we got right even back in '71 created conditions for sinking the Ghazi.
  • In '71 the Vikrant was not running full speeds due to boiler issues and hence did not enter the fight immediately. At present, will the IN still deploy the carriers defensively in light of submarine threat?

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9732
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby arun » 18 Apr 2015 13:41

X Posted from the "Indian Naval Discussion" thread.

pankajs wrote:Manu Pubby @manupubby · 32m 32 minutes ago >>

* End of May - the navy hopes to undock the under construction Vikrant aircraft carrier at Kochi.
* Dec 2018 - Navy hopeful to meet this date to induct the INS Vikrant - India's first indigenous aircraft carrier under construction in Kochi.
* Big: Navy says on record it is actively considering the American EMALS aircraft launch system for its next aircraft carrier.

* INS Vikramaditya at refit in Karwar, to be fitted with the Barak air defence system from the Viraat that is now set to retire.
* Slight correction: Vikramaditya to get Barak air defence systems but not from Virat. Another ship that is being decommissioned.

* Navy will submit it's report on selecting Indian shipyards for the P75 I by the end of this month. No decision yet: DG Naval Design.



PTI via Zee News says Barak missile system will be transferred from a Godavari class vessel to INS Vikramaditya. Same with the CIWS:

INS Vikramaditya to finally get air defence system

Last Updated: Thursday, April 16, 2015 - 15:43 .............................

The Navy plans to transfer an Israeli Barak missile system from a Godavari-class ship to the aircraft carrier that was bought from the Russians.

This will be a shot in the arm for the over Rs 15,000- crore aircraft carrier that has been without a defence system, since it joined the Indian Navy in November 16, 2013.

"We have a plan to install a system from one of our ships, which perhaps may be decommissioned at a subsequent stage. The system is operational and we have certain plans," Vice-Admiral AV Subhedar, Controller of Warship Production and Acquisition told reporters here. ....................

Sources said a CIWS, again from a Godavari-class ship, will also be installed on it during the ongoing refit. .................

Zee News

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 16 Jul 2015 15:49

After refit, Vikramaditya ready to join Navy

Aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya will sail out of the harbour in Karwar after its first short refit and join the Navy in a week, Vice-Admiral P. Murugesan, Vice-Chief of the Naval Staff, said here on Tuesday.

He was briefing presspersons on a seminar, “Innovation and indigenisation — sailing towards self-reliance” being organised by the Navy on Thursday and Friday.

Vikramaditya, acquired from Russia for $2.3 billion, was commissioned into the Navy in November 2013 without the crucial air-defence systems. They are now being installed during the “guaranteed refit”, in addition to scheduled maintenance, by the original equipment manufacturer.

The Israeli-supplied Barak-1 point defence missile system and the Russian-origin AK-630 close-in weapon system, borrowed from a to-be-decommissioned Godavari-class ship, were installed on the carrier.

The carrier was originally scheduled to receive a long-range surface-to-air missile system under joint development with Israel. But delay in its development resulted in the carrier being inducted without its own air-defence cover.

Vice-Admiral Murugesan said a high-powered committee constituted to evaluate domestic shipyards for the Navy’s next line of submarines under Project 75I had completed its compliance checks.

“The report has been submitted to the Defence Ministry,” he said.

Tenders will be issued to the shortlisted shipyards once it is approved. Under Project 75I, estimated at over Rs. 50,000 crore, six conventional submarines are to be built by domestic shipyards with foreign collaboration.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9529
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 16 Jul 2015 16:10

Good to know Vik has some anti missile defence now!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18849
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 17 Jul 2015 19:22

Good news,though it would've been better if B-8 was installed,maybe later on after it has been evaluated in the field. Just for the record,the second batch of Talwars were offered at the same price for the first 3 iif new orders were placed within a timeframe,but the MOD dillied and dallied and the opportunity was lost. Barring a second multi-role helo of Sea King size,the Talwars are 25% smaller than the Shivaliks but have approx. the same firepower/weapon systems.They should therefore also cost at least 25% less than the P-17s. According to reports posted in the IN td.,our cost overruns for the P-17s were the most,over250%.

The location of the Barak launchers and gatlings will be interesting to see.Any official pics available as yet?

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 17 Jul 2015 20:10

My guess on the ak-630/b1 mounts

- stern starboard sponson
- starboard deck astride island
- between island and mast

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18849
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Jul 2015 12:15

There was one report suggesting that though the In wanted B-8 to be installed,its delays made it necessary for B-1 fitted as the report says.However,B-8 may also be fitted as well later on. If so,it would give the carrier greater anti-missile capability.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20724
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jul 2015 12:18

B-8 is not ready and you cant fit something which is not operational yet , Adding B-8 would need some major changes to structure adding radars etc and would happen only during a medium refit 4-5 years down the line by that time B-8 would be well ready

Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Nick_S » 18 Nov 2015 18:40


Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Nick_S » 18 Nov 2015 18:50


Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3311
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 19 Nov 2015 00:33

nice pics. these must be older ones as there is no evidence of Barak-1 installation

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18849
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Vikramaditya: News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 19 Nov 2015 11:25

A quick Q.What would be the approx. combat radius of a MIG-29K operating from the Vik-A with a payload of approx. 4000kg?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jaeger, kvraghav, ravikr, srin, Will and 53 guests