Indian Naval Aviation

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.
Post Reply
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by V_Raman »

The GE fighter engine dependency is entirely self-inflicted. we had a contest between EJ VS GE and chose GE.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by brar_w »

V_Raman wrote:The GE fighter engine dependency is entirely self-inflicted. we had a contest between EJ VS GE and chose GE.
So the MOD and the technical SMEs looked across a spectrum of technical, geopolitical and financial parameters and chose the GE-404/414 family, yet again? Perhaps they were not qualified, or incompetent at making that calculus and drawing that balance between easy of integration, technical merits, and other G2G considerations. But, absent some hard evidence pointing to such, I guess it's a a bit of a leap of faith to draw that inference.
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by V_Raman »

From what i understood we did not choose EJ over some cost and tooling advantages in GE bid
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by brar_w »

V_Raman wrote:From what i understood we did not choose EJ over some cost and tooling advantages in GE bid
Could you guide me towards an in depth run down of what the analysis entailed and what definitive factors led to choosing the GE, not once, not twice, but, it would seem, thrice with the early AMCA decision?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by brar_w »

Unfortunately, that media article has next to nothing in terms of technical evaluation besides the generic reporting that both were considered viable while one was determined to be cheaper (which would be the case b/w two competitors barring a catastrophic technical disqualification which would be rare in an engine war ). I am quite sure that if one had access to the underlying technical evaluation one would have seen the SMEs consider the fact that one of the competitors had absolute zero track record of integrating the family outside of the parent platform, while the other is probably one of the most widely used engine in its class as far as diversity of platform integration was concerned. Tough to put a $$ amount on risk but it isn't too far fetched to consider that it could have played a part especially when the product with the lowest risk was also judged to be the cheapest of the two. Number of platforms the 404/414 is integrated with is large. Number of platforms the EJ is integrated with is just 1.
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by V_Raman »

Why did we open up a bidding process then? We thought EJ can be integrated/used successfully too - it was not rejected for technical reasons evidently. We should just accept that we are ok dealing with USA regardless of sanctions risk etc. We are way beyond that.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by brar_w »

V_Raman wrote:Why did we open up a bidding process then? We thought EJ can be integrated/used successfully too - it was not rejected for technical reasons evidently. We should just accept that we are ok dealing with USA regardless of sanctions risk etc. We are way beyond that.
You are correct assuming that the process is a simple binary one i.e. are X and Y both viable. However, much like the cost, the technical evaluation and integration risk is often on a scale and not binary and there are nuances involved. Where are you taking more risk? with an engine and supplier that has had more than a half a dozen successful integrations (including on an MOD owned design?) or one with none outside of the parent platform? But that is besides the point. Even if one assumes equal risk, then the EJ team should have been able to match the cost no? Since they didn't they were set aside. So where does, in such a simplistic / binary selection process, does the geopolitical angle factor in? Fact is that there exists no (in the public domain) in depth analysis or evaluation of the two proposals as integration on the LCA and MCA were concerned. All we have to by is a news report with little to no actual technical information. That and the fact that the EJ has since continued to loose out on other programs where non-parent integration was required.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 18720?s=20 ----> IN 328, the first of the four follow-on Boeing P-8I Neptune MPA of the Indian Navy doing some flight tests in Boeing Field, Seattle, USA. These 4 MPAs will be operated by INAS315 "Winged Stallion" stationed in INS Hansa in Dabolim, Goa. Hence the "DAB" marking on the tail.

Image

Image

Image

Image
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by V_Raman »

massa efficiency in weapons production/support is something out of this world - unbelievable !!
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3989
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by vera_k »

Boeing is hurting for work atm in the civilian market. There may be good deals available on all types of military planes.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Philip »

We should've used both engines on two diff. prototypes for evaluation.If I recollect,the EJ also came with a TVC option. This way,US sanctions as we suffered after P-2 would've had insurance.
Dennis
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 58
Joined: 28 May 2009 19:43

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Dennis »

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 18720?s=20 ----> IN 328, the first of the four follow-on Boeing P-8I Neptune MPA of the Indian Navy doing some flight tests in Boeing Field, Seattle, USA. These 4 MPAs will be operated by INAS315 "Winged Stallion" stationed in INS Hansa in Dabolim, Goa. Hence the "DAB" marking on the tail.
Does this mean the Il-38s that INAS 315 operates now are being retired? Or will these P-8Is form a separate flight within the squadron?
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Kakarat »

Dennis wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 18720?s=20 ----> IN 328, the first of the four follow-on Boeing P-8I Neptune MPA of the Indian Navy doing some flight tests in Boeing Field, Seattle, USA. These 4 MPAs will be operated by INAS315 "Winged Stallion" stationed in INS Hansa in Dabolim, Goa. Hence the "DAB" marking on the tail.
Does this mean the Il-38s that INAS 315 operates now are being retired? Or will these P-8Is form a separate flight within the squadron?
INAS 312 Albatross logo is clearly visible next to the doors, so could be a Sub-squadron/detachment of Albatross from Dabolim

Image
Dennis
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 58
Joined: 28 May 2009 19:43

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Dennis »

Kakarat wrote:
Dennis wrote:
Does this mean the Il-38s that INAS 315 operates now are being retired? Or will these P-8Is form a separate flight within the squadron?
INAS 312 Albatross logo is clearly visible next to the doors, so could be a Sub-squadron/detachment of Albatross from Dabolim
You are right. This article from 2018 mentions 312 will have a full strength of 12 P-8Is.
It will be one gigantic squadron though.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

V_Raman wrote:massa efficiency in weapons production/support is something out of this world - unbelievable !!
Amen to that. No one does it like massa does it.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

:lol:

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/130 ... 40801?s=20 --->

Hi @TimesOfIndia, that's Sub Lt Shivangi Singh of the Indian Navy in that photo, not Flt Lt Shivangi Singh of the Indian Air Force.

Subramanian Swamy
https://twitter.com/Swamy39/status/1309 ... 09606?s=20 --->

Even an idiot would have known that the uniform in white worn is for the Navy not IAF.

Image
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5414
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Manish_P »

Maybe the TOIlet journo got a premonition about the Rafale joining the IN :D
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Manish_P wrote:Maybe the TOIlet journo got a premonition about the Rafale joining the IN :D
:lol:
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Seeing how this will likely spin-off into TEDBF discussion, I moved my post to the TEDBF thread ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7791&p=2464292#p2464292
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

First batch of 3 women pilots to fly Dornier operationalised at SNC Kochi
https://www.onmanorama.com/lifestyle/wo ... kochi.html

From left to right - Lieutenant Shivangi, Lieutenant Shubhangi Swaroop, and Lieutenant Divya Sharma

Image
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

US offers F-18 fighters to India for Naval requirement
https://www.aninews.in/news/national/ge ... 028120316/
28 October 2020

HVT Sir's tweets in response to the above article....

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13214 ... 55488?s=20 ---> Lovely aircraft. TEDBF will be better. AFAIK, India's choice is indigenous. Twin-Engine Deck-Based Fighter.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13214 ... 19104?s=20 ---> Adequate advance planning has been done by the services. Requisite time is available to incorporate futuristic combat capabilities in TEDBF. At this moment, direct import options don't seem to be on the cards.
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Sumeet »

F/A-18 Block 3 is an extremely advanced aircraft in 4.5 gen category. We may be able to beat it's aerodynamic performance and perhaps frontal RCS in a newly designed TEDBF but getting on par with Block 3 avionics will be a tough challenge.

Pursuit of indigenous platform is certainly the way to go ahead.
souravB
BRFite
Posts: 630
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by souravB »

Sumeet wrote:We may be able to beat it's aerodynamic performance and perhaps frontal RCS in a newly designed TEDBF but getting on par with Block 3 avionics will be a tough challenge.
Saar, would like to know what would said avionics have that would be hard to follow for a 25T aircraft?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/noncommunistmao/sta ... 72866?s=20 ---> Sorry about the radio silence these last few days! Been working hard on large commissioned murals and prints for various Indian squadrons! So till then!... enjoy some awesome phone wallpapers and lock screens I made.

Image

Image

https://twitter.com/noncommunistmao/sta ... 61216?s=20 ---> You asked!... and I answered... dark mode.

Image

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by brar_w »

Sumeet wrote:F/A-18 Block 3 is an extremely advanced aircraft in 4.5 gen category. We may be able to beat it's aerodynamic performance and perhaps frontal RCS in a newly designed TEDBF but getting on par with Block 3 avionics will be a tough challenge.

Pursuit of indigenous platform is certainly the way to go ahead.
Nothing is insurmountable. The Block III is flying right now (for the most part) and is going to be produced and/or upgraded in relatively high quantity. The TEDBF has loads of challenges in front of it. For one, it is to design, develop, test, validate and field a naval strike fighter. This will keep the design team busy anywhere from a decade to a decade and a half. Not an easy task. With the naval fighter acquisition, the IN has to now make a call whether it wants to hedge for that or not. Whatever it decides it will have to balance the cost of either decision with the risk and of course look at alternative investment paths. It is not an easy decision so I don't think the acquisition of either the F-18 or the Rafale is a given at this point. I think it will be a couple of years before we know either way.
Jay
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 18:24
Location: Gods Country
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Jay »

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/noncommunistmao/sta ... 72866?s=20 ---> Sorry about the radio silence these last few days! Been working hard on large commissioned murals and prints for various Indian squadrons! So till then!... enjoy some awesome phone wallpapers and lock screens I made.
Gorgeous!
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 01794?s=20 ---> A P-8 Poseidon with the Raytheon AN/APY-10 radar mounted on the nose. The AN/APY-10 is a maritime, littoral & overland surveillance radar that features color weather, synthetic aperture radar (SAR), inverse synthetic aperture radar (ISAR), periscope detection & navigation modes.

https://twitter.com/tuskini/status/1322 ... 64229?s=20 ---> The Indian P-8(I) is equipped with APY-10(I)Radar. There is difference between the 2 radars. The Indian radar is less accurate compared to American Radar: https://fcc.report/ELS/Raytheon-Company ... 013/136754

Image
Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 263
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Chinmay »

Rakesh wrote:
https://twitter.com/tuskini/status/1322 ... 64229?s=20 ---> The Indian P-8(I) is equipped with APY-10(I)Radar. There is difference between the 2 radars. The Indian radar is less accurate compared to American Radar: https://fcc.report/ELS/Raytheon-Company ... 013/136754
So now that we've signed all the alphabet treaties, can the radar be upgraded to its full capability? Is it a hardware or software change?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Not sure if we will still get the US-spec radar, despite the treaty signing. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the alphabet treaties were for secure communication equipment and other similar kit. But I do not believe US spec radar or sensors come under that.
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by andy B »

Rakesh wrote:Not sure if we will still get the US-spec radar, despite the treaty signing. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the alphabet treaties were for secure communication equipment and other similar kit. But I do not believe US spec radar or sensors come under that.
Usually the hind end modes will only be for Khan platforms. I believe all export oriented hardware is generally degraded relative to what Khan's own operators get. BrarW had also said something on this point a while ago....maybe he can corroborate?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by brar_w »

andy B wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Not sure if we will still get the US-spec radar, despite the treaty signing. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the alphabet treaties were for secure communication equipment and other similar kit. But I do not believe US spec radar or sensors come under that.
Usually the hind end modes will only be for Khan platforms. I believe all export oriented hardware is generally degraded relative to what Khan's own operators get. BrarW had also said something on this point a while ago....maybe he can corroborate?
The program partners share a different baseline to FMS customers. This is true of most US systems but not all. The IN P-8 requirements created a separate baseline on top of the FMS cleared systems because of unique IN requirements from existing sensors, additional sensors, and software. The IA/IAF/IN owns and operates Russian kit in vast quantities so that would automatically trigger objections from the US services that may have a vested interest in protecting certain capabilities of the systems they may have to take to war against Russian systems (ASW capability will be right up their in terms of important strategic capability). This then gets reflected in what is offered via FMS and ultimately what is accepted or rejected by a prospective FMS customer once they evaluate what is on offer. Some rules/processes are stricter than others. For example, if it pertains to a Low Observable / Counter-Low Observable (LO/CLO) technologies such as RAM/RAS, IR supression measures, acoustic protection, LPI-modes/capabilities in sensors and passive targeting then even the "marketing" of this capability (by the business development teams of individual OEMs) is prohibited and requires a LO/CLO executive committee approval prior to sharing details. So even a simple response to an RFI can trigger a lengthy process of seeking an approval to talk about these capabilities (on systems that may be otherwise export cleared) in detail.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Philip »

If we modify the 3/4 amphib vessels,current config. canned, into light carriers of 35-40K, with a Vikrant-2 type flight deck,with larger lifts, we could
operate upgraded exg.29Ks,plus any new type like JSFs in STOBAR mode,preferable to 4th.-gen aircraft. It will give us a min. of 5 flat tops and 100+ carrier borne fighters if the 3 light CVs are tasked for SC. The first CV-L should be built asap,say by late 2021,to arrive in 2025.All 3 by 2030. Post 2030 with the expected surge in UCAVs including carrier based birds, the config. of the next larger CV could be determined with whatever aircraft types are reqd.
I really have my doubts about the TEDBF and its timelines.A naval AMCA would be more relevant post 2030. We have a decade in which to make it happen.
AkshaySG
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 30 Jul 2020 08:51

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by AkshaySG »

Philip wrote:If we modify the 3/4 amphib vessels,current config. canned, into light carriers of 35-40K, with a Vikrant-2 type flight deck,with larger lifts, we could
operate upgraded exg.29Ks,plus any new type like JSFs in STOBAR mode,preferable to 4th.-gen aircraft. It will give us a min. of 5 flat tops and 100+ carrier borne fighters if the 3 light CVs are tasked for SC. The first CV-L should be built asap,say by late 2021,to arrive in 2025.All 3 by 2030. Post 2030 with the expected surge in UCAVs including carrier based birds, the config. of the next larger CV could be determined with whatever aircraft types are reqd.
I really have my doubts about the TEDBF and its timelines.A naval AMCA would be more relevant post 2030. We have a decade in which to make it happen.

If it was so easy (or cheap) to convert a amphib vessel into a 35-40k carrier then every medium sized navy would have tons of them, It's too expensive, too time consuming and frankly not worth it with so many glaring holes in other areas. We are still having to use 50 year old helos and Jets , The submarine program is going nowhere, We're struggling to get more squadrons of Rafales and are going through the worst economic recession in decades and you think we can have 5 "light carriers" and the F-35's for them in a decade?

Would be a million times cheaper to station two squadrons on the top and bottom islands of A&N chain and cover the whole region with a unsinkable AC
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Aditya_V »

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 01794?s=20 ---> A P-8 Poseidon with the Raytheon AN/APY-10 radar mounted on the nose. The AN/APY-10 is a maritime, littoral & overland surveillance radar that features color weather, synthetic aperture radar (SAR), inverse synthetic aperture radar (ISAR), periscope detection & navigation modes.

https://twitter.com/tuskini/status/1322 ... 64229?s=20 ---> The Indian P-8(I) is equipped with APY-10(I)Radar. There is difference between the 2 radars. The Indian radar is less accurate compared to American Radar: https://fcc.report/ELS/Raytheon-Company ... 013/136754
Another difference is P-8(I) has A2A mode which the US with its vast AWACS fleet does not require.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by tsarkar »

V_Raman wrote:From what i understood we did not choose EJ over some cost and tooling advantages in GE bid
Both Eurofighter and Eurojet are children of an orgy of multiple parents with troubled roadmaps.
UK & Italy have moved to F-35A/B
Spain is confused
Germany is left holding the baby. During the Indian competition only the Germans were making efforts.

Other example is NH-90 with Airbus and Leonardo pulling in different directions.

Joint development is like friends with benefits. Everyone wants fun minus the responsibility. Which is why we left the Su-57/PAKFA/FGFA.

Eurojet doesnt have a good future with only Germany still interested on it.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by chola »

AkshaySG wrote:
Philip wrote:If we modify the 3/4 amphib vessels,current config. canned, into light carriers of 35-40K, with a Vikrant-2 type flight deck,with larger lifts, we could
operate upgraded exg.29Ks,plus any new type like JSFs in STOBAR mode,preferable to 4th.-gen aircraft. It will give us a min. of 5 flat tops and 100+ carrier borne fighters if the 3 light CVs are tasked for SC. The first CV-L should be built asap,say by late 2021,to arrive in 2025.All 3 by 2030. Post 2030 with the expected surge in UCAVs including carrier based birds, the config. of the next larger CV could be determined with whatever aircraft types are reqd.
I really have my doubts about the TEDBF and its timelines.A naval AMCA would be more relevant post 2030. We have a decade in which to make it happen.

If it was so easy (or cheap) to convert a amphib vessel into a 35-40k carrier then every medium sized navy would have tons of them, It's too expensive, too time consuming and frankly not worth it with so many glaring holes in other areas. We are still having to use 50 year old helos and Jets , The submarine program is going nowhere, We're struggling to get more squadrons of Rafales and are going through the worst economic recession in decades and you think we can have 5 "light carriers" and the F-35's for them in a decade?

Would be a million times cheaper to station two squadrons on the top and bottom islands of A&N chain and cover the whole region with a unsinkable AC
The amphib to light carrier idea is unrealistic nonsense. You put an angled-deck and recovery system on a LHD and you have a carrier with carrier prices. The US and Japanese "light" carriers are straight-deck helo-carriers that carry VTOL F-35B onlee.

As for the IN's amphib program, it is completely dead in the water. Never mind the fantasy of converting them into light carriers. There are even less hope for them than the IAC2 which is already in dire straits with no funding approved.

We've been looking at the MRSV for over a decade that got a few proposals from phoren firms and then everything was scrapped in 2019.

Meanwhile, Cheen will get its third LHD in the water after the 1st was launched last year. They also put 8 Type 71 LPDs into the water during the same period we began and ended this fruitless amphib/multirole support vessel project between 2006 and 2019.
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1769
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Khalsa »

Dennis wrote:
Kakarat wrote:
INAS 312 Albatross logo is clearly visible next to the doors, so could be a Sub-squadron/detachment of Albatross from Dabolim
You are right. This article from 2018 mentions 312 will have a full strength of 12 P-8Is.
It will be one gigantic squadron though.
Wiki mentions that another 6 are cleared for procurement.
If true we could be looking at two squadrons of the following Strengths

12 & 6
OR
8 & 10
AkshaySG
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 30 Jul 2020 08:51

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by AkshaySG »

chola wrote:
AkshaySG wrote:

If it was so easy (or cheap) to convert a amphib vessel into a 35-40k carrier then every medium sized navy would have tons of them, It's too expensive, too time consuming and frankly not worth it with so many glaring holes in other areas. We are still having to use 50 year old helos and Jets , The submarine program is going nowhere, We're struggling to get more squadrons of Rafales and are going through the worst economic recession in decades and you think we can have 5 "light carriers" and the F-35's for them in a decade?

Would be a million times cheaper to station two squadrons on the top and bottom islands of A&N chain and cover the whole region with a unsinkable AC
The amphib to light carrier idea is unrealistic nonsense. You put an angled-deck and recovery system on a LHD and you have a carrier with carrier prices. The US and Japanese "light" carriers are straight-deck helo-carriers that carry VTOL F-35B onlee.

As for the IN's amphib program, it is completely dead in the water. Never mind the fantasy of converting them into light carriers. There are even less hope for them than the IAC2 which is already in dire straits with no funding approved.

We've been looking at the MRSV for over a decade that got a few proposals from phoren firms and then everything was scrapped in 2019.

Meanwhile, Cheen will get its third LHD in the water after the 1st was launched last year. They also put 8 Type 71 LPDs into the water during the same period we began and ended this fruitless amphib/multirole support vessel project between 2006 and 2019.

I agree.

And we also need to keep in mind our location and requirements as compared to China's when talking about things like this, If China wants to battle India, Japan or US as well as project itself as a Naval superpower then it needs a 7-8 carrier+LHD capability while for India and its requirement of dominating the IOR we don't need more than 2-3 (one each for West, East).

Frankly we should be utilizing A&N chain a lot more when it comes to Naval Aviation, A couple of squadrons stationed there is enough cover Malacca Strait, BOB/Myanmar or even Indochina areas.... And land takeoffs don't have the weight/size/durability concerns that a carrier takeoff does

And as far as offensive "power projection" goes then China would be more scared of another 6 Scorpene/Arihants capable of getting to South China Sea than IAC-2
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Aditya G »

Today INS Airavat docked at Sudan carrying relief materials.

LPDs and LHDs are attractive capabilities no doubt, but if we are looking for an ability to execute an amphib operations then LSTs should cut the mustard. Well, they will have to as no LHDs are coming in the foreseeable future.

Thankfully we have just completed the LCU Mk.4 program so there are some new ships in that space.

We should bought the Egyptian mistrals when we had the chance <rant>
Post Reply