INS Vikrant: News and Discussion

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Jul 2015 06:26

Boost to Indo-US ties! India to apply US technology to manufacture aircraft carrier

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Jul 2015 06:27

9 Indian shipyards shortlisted for next aircraft carrier

Nine shipyards including four owned by private players have been shortlisted by the government to compete for building the next generation indigenous aircraft carrier for the Indian Navy which could be nuclear powered.

The naval headquarters has written a letter seeking expression of intent for participation in the project, the most expensive single platform under 'Make In India' initiative, to the shortlisted shipyards. They have been given a deadline of July 21 to respond, defence sources said.

The four private shipyards are L&T, Pipavav, ABG and Bharti. The public sector shipyards are Mazagon Docks Limited, Garden Reach Shipbuilder and Engineers, Hindustan Shipyards Limited, Cochin Shipyard Limited and Goa Shipyard Limited.

The government has set up a high-level study group, headed by Assistant Controller of Carrier Project Rear Admiral Surendra Ahuja to identify the suitable Indian shipyard and to arrive at a build strategy.

The proposed 65,000 tonne aircraft carrier will be India's biggest and longest. It will also carry on board over 50 aircraft.

The first indigenous aircraft carrier - 40,000 tonne INS Vikrant - being build by the Cochin Shipyard has the capacity to carry 30 aircraft. The 45,000 tonne INS Vikramaditya, bought from the Russians, has capacity of 34 aircraft.

According to the letter sent out to the shipyards, the warship could be either be nuclear-powered or conventional one using diesel and gas turbines.

It would have a catapult to launch fixed wing aircraft.
India has always used "ski-jump" at the end of the flight deck to fly the planes off the carrier.

This is one area where the US will come into play. India and US have set up a working group to collaborate on aircraft carrier technology after the visit of US President Barack Obama.

American Navy's latest carrier, the 100,000-tonne USS Gerald R Ford, which will be commissioned next year, is the world's only carrier featuring electromagnetic aircraft launch system" (EMALS).

This means that the aircraft will gain its take-off velocity through an electromagnetic rail gun instead of the conventional steam-driven catapults.

The letter by the Navy says that modern technology can be considered for catapult launch

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Jul 2015 11:32

US carrier tech is far more valuable that the now discredited (by the IA) deal for Raven hand-launched UAVs. It has the most carrier warfare experience of any navy on the planet.However,the US carrier classes are huge,100,000t+ and simply unaffordable to the IN at the moment.By 2020,when construction is supposed to begin,the situ may be different.The IN will have to carefully see what items are on the menu and choose wisely what will suit it. The US will no doubt try to sell us the JSF et al, which is going to cost us around $12-15B according to some estimates for a 65K T CV. The Vik-A was bought around $2.3B as final cost,aircraft extra.The Vikrant around $4-5B.The MIG-29s cost us around $32M-40M /aircraft initially.Around $2B for 45 29Ks total package.A larger fixed-wing AEW aircraft is essential,accompanied with UAVs.a decade is a long time in aircraft/UAV/UCAV development and by 2030,the USN will be well into its revolutionary UCLASS operations.

The future larger carrier if 65K t-100K t,could operate naval aircraft from new Flanker variants, Cat-launched western naval fighters like the Rafale,JSF or even naval FGFAs/AMCAs.The arrival is going to be only in 2030.So there's a huge amt. of time in which to decide what type and what launch system. The Russian CV design where there was both cats and a ski-jump for STOBAR is an interesting concept.The future NCV could use both EMALS and a ski-jump.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 20 Jul 2015 12:56

Philip wrote:US carrier tech is far more valuable that the now discredited (by the IA) deal for Raven hand-launched UAVs. It has the most carrier warfare experience of any navy on the planet.However,the US carrier classes are huge,100,000t+ and simply unaffordable to the IN at the moment.By 2020,when construction is supposed to begin,the situ may be different.

US assistance with the carrier project is not predicated on our buying a Nimitz-class carrier.

The Vik-A was bought around $2.3B as final cost,aircraft extra.The Vikrant around $4-5B.

Wrong. $2.3bn wasn't the final cost. The integration of the radar, SAMs and CIWS is till pending.

The Vikrant cost: Phase I: Rs 3,500 crore. Phase II & III: Rs 19,000. That's about $3.5 billion for a far superior ship, with the bulk of that capital invested in the Indian economy.

The MIG-29s cost us around $32M-40M /aircraft initially.Around $2B for 45 29Ks total package.

$2bn for 45 MiG-29K equates to a cost of $45 million each. The $32 mil tag still remains entirely fictional. For a cost effective supplement to the F-35 or whatever, the Tejas still remains a better bet.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Jul 2015 13:54

MiG-29K

First Deal: 12 MiG-29K and 4 MiG-29KUB contract signed in 20th January 2004 is worth Rs 3,405.61 crores as per CAG.[1][11] For an exchange rate of 45.43 at that time, the amount translates to $749.7 million.[10] Hence the average cost of a single MiG-29K is $46.9 million. The contracts for the jets also stipulate pilot training and aircraft maintenance, including the delivery of flight simulators and interactive ground and sea-based training systems. So the unit cost of the MiG-29K variant is still unknown.[2]

Second Deal: 29 MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB contract signed in March 2010 worth $1.5 billion.[2] So the average cost of the jet is $52 million. Another news release says the jets cost $1.2 billion. [3] That translates to an average cost of $42 million per plane. Most probably the deal also covers a whole host of other goodies, but the full details of the deal is still not yet available in the public domain. So the unit cost of the jet is still unknown. The Russian deal still not yet signed is said to be estimated at $1 billion for 24 jets.[9]

http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/fighter ... iG-29.html

Wik:

In January 2010, India and Russia signed a US$1.2 billion deal under which the Indian Navy would acquire 29 additional MiG-29Ks

*This is the second batch ordered.The first order placed in 2004 was quoted earlier as being $32M (http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29K).The figs. for the second order in 2010 works out to approx. $40M/aircraft,not $45M. The av. price in 2009 was $29M for a non-naval variant.The total deal included flight training,simulators,and other essential eqpt. Even if you handsomely increase the cost for inflation to approx. $50M today,36 MIG-29Ks today will cost less than $2B (1.8B) compared with the Rafale deal,anywhere from $5B to $7B! If its $7B one would get approx. 4 MIG-29s for the price of just one Rafale.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 20 Jul 2015 14:10

Philip wrote:*This is the second batch ordered.The first order placed in 2004 was quoted earlier as being $32M (http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29K), the figs. for the second order in 2010 works out to approx. $40M/aircraft,not $45M. The total deal included flight training,simulators,and other essential eqpt. Even if you handsomely increase the cost for inflation to approx. $50M today,36 MIG-29Ks today will cost less than $2B (1.8B) compared with the Rafale deal,anywhere from $5B to $7B! If its $7B one would get approx. 4 MIG-29s for the price of just one Rafale.

The contract for the follow-on MiG-29Ks was signed in Jan 2015. Five and a half years of inflation would like push the cost by more than just 25%. And that's assuming we don't request major new upgrades like AESA or TVC.

The Rafale is a bad deal, no two ways about it. But you could get near comparable performance with the cheaper F414 powered N-Tejas. And for a higher-end solution, I'd most certainly bet on 1 F-35 prevailing against 3 MiG-29s.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 20 Jul 2015 15:20

Vikrant mark II or Vishal, the issue isnt about "reinvesting back" in the Indian economy. As things stand, that will be minimal in eitehr case. Shipyard work is the lowest value added in the entire value chain of warship building. Bulk of the cost of a warship is on radars, electronics, aircraft, propulsion. From a purely commercial perspective (not from a strategic one) it makes sense for the NAval Design Bureau to contract the shipbuilding on its designs to a Korean or Chinese yard. They will build it quicker, cheaper than MDL or GSL. The newer, pvt sector Indian yards (Pipavav etc) should be better, we dont know yet though.

For the aircraft carrier, we should therefore look at the technologies we want, rather than domestic economic windfalls. EMALs is one of them, nuclear propulsion is another. Thanks to the nuclear deal, there is no shortage of nuclear fuel for India anymore. A proper carrier borne aircraft (Mig 29K is a compromise aircraft, not operated by any other fleet - risk running into maintenance problems in the next few years).

The big variable actually is the cost. We cannot most likely have a nuclear powered, EMALS carrier AND a fleet of 126 Rafales AND a 90k strong Mountain Strike Corps. Choices will need to be made, preferably by the Services organically. Lack of a CDS structure hampers this sort of decision-making, and we end up making sub optimal decisions all round. The worst of all worlds is to have a Mig29 based STOBAR carrier (Vikrant Mark II), a fleet of 50 Rafales and an MSC comprising 10k troops. Alternatively, we will have all three over the next 25 years rather than the next 10. The last two seem the most probable, currently!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jul 2015 17:19

nevertheless we must create and maintain the skills needed to build big warships. no naval power and independent non-poodle can hope to survive by outsourcing its principal projects to the lowest bidder. sadly, we are not australia or canada with the population of NCR, nato-backing, no enemies remotely near and untold mineral resources.

we should have control over the radars , EW, SAMs in the next 10 yrs for all but the highest end applications.

we have not invested at all in OEM naval gun designs but its one item thats COTS.

the worrying part is the whole power train of engine and gearbox remains fully imported and only assembled and serviced here by the likes of HAL, kirloskar and elocon. since we are really not part of the "west" can be guarantee the trajectory of india-west relations over the 50 yrs lifetime of these ships?

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 20 Jul 2015 17:23

If we cried about our Space program we would have never progressed despite set backs. Similarly we need to maintain this pace with both planes and ships.The spinoffs and benefits are plenty. As far as considering the pace of IAC one do not forget a large part of the deal was to get the required steel which we ultimately had to develop ourselves. We are now able to produce this so major stumbling blocks is removed.Once critical technology is learnt it cannot go to waste.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Jul 2015 17:40

Vikrant-2 will cost $4-5B says CSL ,can be delivered within 5 years (2020). Good point about the overall needs and costs.However,a report today said that the IA was really up the creek without a rifle for the whole IA! INSAS was a dud,the firang assault rifles tested "didn't meet IA requirements" and were "too expensive",and there's nothing on the desi horizon either.Add to this the outdated army uniforms/protection (20KG bullet proof jackets).

Now this beggars some v.serious Qs.What then are firang troops using as assault rifles? Are they fighting aliens? Terrorists love the Kalashnikov,which when captured by our troops is reportedly what our boys grab first! There was a report on BRF saying that we then imported a large qty of Kalsahnikovs,so it's anyone's guess. as to where we stand on the issue.The Q being asked is what the heck did the IA do for aeons and why,when we can produce rockets and missiles,warships and tanks,aircraft and helos,unable to develop a simple straightforward assault rifle-the fundamental weapon for the three services?

Decades ago,during the height of the Cold War,India could acquire only second rate western eqpt. and even the best that the Soviets could offer were a level below western tech.In '65 we outfought Pak which tried to wrest J&K from us,our Gnats bested their much-vaunted Sabres,and their Pattons bit the dust.Pak's diabolic plan was blunted and we were at the gates of Lahore when the umpires called "stumps". We fought again with T-55,VIjayanta and PT-72 tanks,MIG-21s ,Gnats and SU-7s in the '71 war,and bested the Pakis with their superior Mirages,Pattons,Starfighters et al.Innovation was the watchword with coastal defence Osas towed to Karachi to devastate the Paki navy,AN-12s became bombers,and brilliant strategy and tactics saw the IA race through wet and riverine E.Pak as if it were a 100m sprint on an Olympic track.It was "match over" in 10 days.The world was astonished and burst into applause.Adm. Gorshkov told the IN that "your boys have taught us new tricks".The US-Nixon and Kissinger were left frothing at the mouth. The NCV Enterprise scared no one."Indira was India","Durga's gift to Bharat",said ABV.Indira and "Sam the Man" changed the course of history and the face of the sub-continent forever.Partition was avenged.

A decade+ later, Rajiv did something equally bold,squashing a coup in the Malldives in the space of a night. His boldness in sending the IPKF to Sri Lanka was however a costly one,for the IA.A few thousands of casualties,because of bad intel and ill-advice from his MEA mandarins. But eventually he tamed the Tiger and elections were held in the NEast,with a puppet CM installed who would do India's bidding. The sacrifice in blood was betrayed by VPSingh,and Rajiv was betrayed by the very people whose interests he fought for.

At Kargil,it was all "blood and guts" again,immense sacrifice,immense achievement. Innovation in air strikes at Himalayan heights.No army had fought such a war before.It was like Hannibal crossing the Alps. The glorious history of the Indian armed forces since Independence was "achieving more with less".We showed how to win against a formidably equipped foe fighting with humble eqpt., while the world's strongest superpower lost fighting with the best eqpt. facing a nation of pesants who had incredible ingenuity.

Today,the lesson still holds good.Inferior equipped Taliban,Iraqi insurgents,Al Q and ISIS have tamed the hides and backsides of NATO and the West. Iran has learnt the lessons of asymmetric warfare with their home built mini-subs,masses of coastal anti-ship missiles and swarms of small craft aimed at strangulating the Gulf should they be attacked. The Hiz and Hamas are still thorns in Israel's flesh.ISIS are marauding Iraq and have just destroyed an Egyptian naval vessel with an ATGM.

Therefore,with less cash in the pocket, a global eco downturn,"we cannot spend like billionaires when we are merely millionaires". We have to cut our "naval blazer" according to our cloth. Cost-effective decisions need to be made,not just now but for the future too.Numbers will matter more and more as the Sino-Pak JV swings into perfidious action.It will be war on two,perhaps even three fronts. The "quality of quantity" factor will come into effect.Commonality of warships,subs ,weaponry and eqpt. across the spectrum will bring about a higher operating % of assets,making training,manning,MRO easier. Thus as far as the IN's needs are in Q,a second Vikrant class CV for around $4-5B would be more advisable and achievable,before we spend like superpowers on a $15B NCV. $10B alone will give us another CV,plus half-a-dozen subs/ N-subs too. I would wager $15B spent upon our expanded sub fleet (with a Vikrant class CV as a bonus) doing the business against the Sino-Pakis rather than a sole NCV,which can only operate on one seaboard at any given time.

PS:The IN has already embarked upon this course of action in the ATV programme,where a first batch of Arihant class SSBNs are being built before starting work on a larger SSBN with ICBMs aboard. It could follow the same course of action with its CVs.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Jul 2015 12:51

Philip wrote:Vikrant-2 will cost $4-5B says CSL ,can be delivered within 5 years (2020).

When did CSL make such a statement? Post references.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 21 Jul 2015 13:20

The issue isnt just a simple one of Vishal v/s Vikrant Mark II. From a strategic standpoint, having a naval fleet (actually a military force) centred around large, sophisticated carriers require doctrinal decision-making. It is not just expensive to build large carriers, it is also very expensive to maintain and operate the carrier based fleet. A carrier embarking 50 fighter aircraft will require a fleet of 75-80 aircraft of the type (for training, attrition, maintenance and upgrades). Which means 75 less fighters for the Air Force, if that the spending pie remains the same.

As of now, I am not sure that MoD or the services have done that level of optimisation. Every service is trying out it own trial balloons. IN is doing the same with the fresh RFI.

I also think that willy nilly, the grand narrative of India is changing towards a more maritime-oriented approach from a continental one. "Act East", Trilateral exercises, most importantly growing importance of trade on our GDP, are all part of that. Which means that India will need to invest more on maritime resources.

This would almost necessarily mean large scale optimisation of resources. If the IN is going to induct another 100 fighter aircraft in the next 15 years, where is the space for a Rafale fleet in the IAF? If the IN needs to raise and equip a brigade or division strength IA force for marine expedition, shouldnt there be a cut of a couple of line infantry divisions in IA?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jul 2015 13:42

The CSL is learnt to have assured the Navy in end-2014 that in case a follow-on order for a carrier is placed, it would be able to deliver the vessel in just four years from the time of delivery of INS Vikrant, scheduled to take place in 2018. The Navy has not responded to the proposal yet. “A follow-on carrier would be advantageous for the Navy, as there would be no time lost on detailed design, development of specialised material, technology, honing of skills of the workforce and so on. Since the Navy desires to operate two carrier task forces at any given time, it would be a good option to exercise,” said a CSL official.

“The carrier INS Viraat is retiring [next year] and the refurbished 45,000-tonne INS Vikramaditya [undergoing a short refit now] will be joined by the 40,000-tonne INS Vikrant a few years from now. Should there be a second Vikrant-class carrier with the same specifications and equipment, it could be operationalised in early or mid-2020s. It makes perfect sense as two carriers would always be operational even as the third remained under refit,” he added.

Cost: http://www.hindustantimes.com/newdelhi/ ... n-aircraft...

India will on Monday launch its first indigenously built aircraft carrier INS Vikrant, two years behind schedule and at an estimated cost of up to $5 billion.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 034399.cms

NEW DELHI: After Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself witnessed the raw combat power exuded by an aircraft carrier sailing on the high seas last month, his government is now all set to approve the much-delayed infusion of funds to finish the ongoing construction of INS Vikrant at Cochin Shipyard.

Defence ministry sources say the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is slated to meet this week, probably on Wednesday itself, to approve the allocation of around Rs 19,000 crore for the Phase-II and III building of the 40,000-tonne indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC).

Current estimates are that it will take around Rs 20,000 crore to construct the IAC, which is christened INS Vikrant after India's first carrier that was acquired from the UK in 1961 and later decommissioned in 1997.

This was the report about the extra allocation of funds by PM Modi for completion of the Vikrant,phases 2 & 3..At $5B,it is around twice the cost of the slightly larger Vik-A,acquired for $2.3B!

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 21 Jul 2015 14:15

^^^

now he comparing the price difference between a second hand "missile -helo carrier" with a brand new aircraft carrier !!!

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Jul 2015 14:36

Shaun wrote:^^^

now he comparing the price difference between a second hand "missile -helo carrier" with a brand new aircraft carrier !!!

..The Chinese got the Varyag for a mere $20 Million

Therefore, 1 Vikrant = 250 65,000 ton Varyag's

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jul 2015 15:37

Read the voluminous reports on the Vik-A's conversion and modernisation .As the IN itself said,we've got virtually a brand new carrier that will serve us for at least 3 decades.The Chinese got an empty rusting hulk,rejected by the IN earlier.They took aeons to virtually rebuild it and have never said what it has cost them. At least we know what we paid for. Just look at the IN's own video clips of the CV and you can see the value of what we paid for.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 21 Jul 2015 15:55

^^^Vik-A will serve for 3 decades, maybe. But in what form is an open question. IN has made Viraat soldier on for 50 years and some more. But question is what/how much is the operational effectiveness of the carrier.

Whether Vik-A will be able to be consistently deployed with its full complement of aircraft is something we shall know only many years later. The Vik-A has also made IN settle on Mig29K as its carrier borne fighter, a sub-optimal choice, being an aircraft that no other fleet uses/will use.

To be fair, when the deal was signed, there werent too many other games in town. Once it was signed and we spent 600-700 million dollars, it became a question of too much sunk cost. Having said that, it is not a "brand new" AC. Its uptime and serviceability will be known in the years to come.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 21 Jul 2015 16:32

^It will be as much "brand new" as the INS Jalashwa (Formerly USS Trenton) is. Probably, even less so, considering the ocean of difference in the way a well-maintained US piece of hardware is at the end of its service with them and the way russians treat their crappy stuff, i.e. just like crap.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 21 Jul 2015 16:46

The Amount paid for Vik-A is hiding the payouts for N-Sub where we got Roosi help. It wasn't free and had to be hidden somehwere , what better than this.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Jul 2015 17:43

Philip wrote:
Defence ministry sources say the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is slated to meet this week, probably on Wednesday itself, to approve the allocation of around Rs 19,000 crore for the Phase-II and III building of the 40,000-tonne indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC).

Current estimates are that it will take around Rs 20,000 crore to construct the IAC, which is christened INS Vikrant after India's first carrier that was acquired from the UK in 1961 and later decommissioned in 1997.
This was the report about the extra allocation of funds by PM Modi for completion of the Vikrant,phases 2 & 3..At $5B,it is around twice the cost of the slightly larger Vik-A,acquired for $2.3B!

I'll ask again... when did Cochin Shipyards Limited present this $5 billion bill for the Vikrant to the MoD? Please post references.

FYI Rs 19,000 = $3 billion

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Jul 2015 18:05

A FYI post:

Large Russian Aircraft Carrier Design Unveiled

The carrier measures 95,000 to 100,000 metric tons by displacement, with a length of 330 meters (1,082 feet) and a width of 40 meters (131 feet). It has a “twin island” layout similar to that found on the new British Queen Elizabeth-class carriers. In addition to the big ski jump in the bow, characteristic of previous Russian carriers, the Shtorm comes with a second, smaller, one at the end of the angled deck. According to Krylov’s leaflet, the carrier is outfitted with two catapults. The scale model showed four. Other visible characteristics include four arrestor wires, four aircraft elevators, two cranes and several multi-tube rocket launchers.

The carrier would have a crew of 4,000 to 5,000, and an air wing of 80 to 90 aircraft. The scale model included combat aircraft on the flight deck that were reminiscent of a navalized version of the Sukhoi T-50 PAKFA fifth generation fighter with folding wings and empennage; AWACS aircraft that resembled a single-tailed American E-2C Hawkeye; and Kamov Ka-27 series helicopters

Local media outlets estimated the construction cost of such a ship at 160 billion Roubles (nearly $3 billion), not including the air wing. The high cost of aircraft carriers has previously discouraged the Russian navy, whose only operational carrier—the Admiral Kuznetsov—was commissioned in 1990. The Shtorm is roughly 1.5 times larger the Kuznetsov, and twice the size of the INS Vikramaditya that Russia delivered to India in November 2013

IF (Big if) that is indeed the cost of this carrier, then India should trade the Vicky in and her "Read the voluminous reports on the Vik-A's conversion and modernisation" (

)+ around $0.5 billion and perhaps get this new carrier.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Jul 2015 20:04

And even if we spent 5 billion dollars for Vikrant, it is cheap. It is the first ship in its class. We trained thousands of people, set up infrastructure. And have you seen the ship. It is beautiful, and I am not saying this because I am Indian.

Phillip sir, Vik A is so spanking new that one of its boiler gave up in the first voyage. It is so new, that it had NO protection till very recently (it still does not have any long range S2A protection). I like Vik A. It is not a bad deal at all. 2.5 Billion is a reasonable price. We have a decent AC where our pilots and sailors can train and even go to war. But let us not put forward crappy arguments just for the sake of proving our POV.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 21 Jul 2015 21:01

The biggest issue with Vik-A is that it leaves IN with a legacy carrier aircraft, with limited upgrade scope. IAC II, whatever the final config, will have a different aircraft. Which means that IN will operate there different fighter types, including the LCA, for the next 30 years. I don't think any navy after WWII has managed that.

IAC II, in my view should be one of two approaches:
1. Make it a technology acquisition vehicle. Get our hands on the best in AC - nuke propulsion, EMAL, maybe a 5th gen aircraft.

This will be a strategic game changer in the Indian Ocean.

Or

2. Make it completely Indian. Propulsion maybe a few bridges too far. But radars, electronics, missiles and aircraft - standardise on Indian equipment. Make it a template for a fully Indian vehicle, somewhat like the P28 vessels.

This will also mean substNtial investment in the economy as a result.

I suspect we will end up with a mix of both. As a result, we won't have much domestic investment while getting maybe one or two really cutting edge stuff.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Jul 2015 22:01

And if the design is going to take 5-7 years. Please don't squander away Cochin's expertise. Order another IAC-I ASAP.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Jul 2015 22:10

The Vik-A is going to be a maintenance and logistical nightmare. The Russians didn't even do proper training which means we will discover a lot of post induction bugs. Hopefully IN will reuse the name on a properly designed local carrier one day.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/ins- ... 25188.html

Bahut pareshan kiya': Why India is so relieved that Vikramaditya is here

It seems Russian are feeling we robbed them, while simply forgetting that India has paid through nose and took all the risk. No matter, what we or Russian say at public ceremony but there was a lot of rift and turf war between people of two countries.

"Bahut pareshan kiya," fumes a sailor on the crew of INS Vikramaditya, the massive new addition to the Indian Navy's fleet. The Russians troubled us a lot, he says, succinctly describing the Indian Navy's experience over the last 10 years in this freezing town on the White Sea coast. The 45,000 ton aircraft carrier was ceremonially transferred to the Indian Navy on November 16, nearly five years later than promised and over $1.5 billion over contracted cost. While November 16 marks an undoubtedly important day for Indo-Russian relations, the over 1,600 Indians officers and sailors departing these shores later this month won't be sorry to do so. At every level, big and small, from the level of the entire navy, down to the youngest sailor, there's relief that it's finally over.

"Eta secret". Russian for "Sorry, that's secret". That, according to Indian personnel who've spent years in Severodvinsk learning how to sail their enormous new ship, has been the most common response from Russian personnel to any query or request for help. Over 188 days, during two rounds of sea trials between 2012 and 2013, Indian personnel are said to have been deeply irritated with the manner in which the Russian trial team on board ran the show, speaking largely in their own language, and ticking off mandatory test points on the ship, while bewildered Indian Navy personnel repeatedly requested them to slow down and take everyone on board, so to speak. The Indian side has had far less experience on the ship than it would have liked: of the 19,500 miles covered by the ship during trials, barely 1,700 miles were under the command of Commodore Suraj Berry, who is now officially commanding officer of the vessel.

Hundreds of Indian officers and sailors have been rotated through Severodvinsk over the last decade in embedded observation teams or specialised training units. The length of their commitment has meant that most brought along their families on two year stints to the town, a tough call, given that it is truly a tiny town whose economy is entirely centred around the shipyard that converted the Admiral Gorshkov into the Vikramaditya. Unlike Moscow and St. Petersburgh, Severodvinsk doesn't have any English schools to speak of, forcing many families to leave their children behind in India with relatives, or make the younger ones attend good Russian medium schools in this town. No Indian military project has seen such a large-scale excursion of personnel to another country for such an extended period.

But for a small town, Severodvinsk has an unusually vibrant night life, with several popular clubs and restaurants. Two of them -- 'Rome' and 'Wasabi' -- have been popular with young Indian officers when they've got time off attending to ship duties. The local 'black' brew has apparently been the most intriguing on the Indian drinking palate.

"Brave as the Sun," reads a poster placed near the vessel at her commissioning ceremony. When the Vikramaditya transits through the Mediterranean Sea into relatively warmer climes next month, her crew will welcome the sun, for whom the ship gets its name, like they've perhaps never done before. Many among Vikramaditya's crew belong to the Garhwal hills and Himachal Pradesh, but they've never experienced the unrelenting, almost hostile cold of Severodvinsk, helped heartily by freezing cold winds from the north that bring snow and sleet in abundance. In the words of crewman Umrao Ghatori, "Such weather is simply not worth it. It is sometimes difficult to work. And when you're creating a warship, there's no 'downtime' as such."

Even Defence Minister AK Antony quipped on Saturday on the Vikramaditya's flight deck, "Everything is wonderful except the weather."

Over the last one year that the Vikramaditya has had its full complement of sailors and officers, the ship's galley has had to work with whatever produce is in season, since shipping in such large quantities of vegetables or fruit was unviable. The ship's cooks therefore learned to cook with several local vegetables as well. Given how the relative drudgery of open ocean makes meal time perhaps the most anticipated time of day on any warship, Vikramaditya's crew are near unanimously looking forward to food favourites. Lt Cdr Manoj Parashar, a mechanical engineer on the ship says his favourite vegetable, ladies' finger, is shipped in during a brief period from Sweden, and is hugely expensive. "I can't wait to be in a place where bhindi isn't such a big deal," he says.

Above all, Project 11430 has been a mutual embarrassment to India and Russia, that both sides will be relieved to see completed with the ship's delivery. Between 2007-2010, the programme very nearly destroyed relations when the Russians reported that the scope of work on the erstwhile Admiral Gorshkov had been severely underestimated. The project made both countries look deeply inept and inefficient, but the only one with anything to lose was India. The deal was one of the last big ticket items pushed through by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, after which it coursed from one disaster to the next, until Russia dropped a bomb in 2007 about how they got it so badly wrong. In many ways, those involved with bringing the deal in, will be relieved that the Vikramaditya is leaving Russian shores for what is hopefully the last time. They include the former Prime Minister, his defence minister George Fernandes, and former navy chiefs Admiral Sushil Kumar and Admiral Madhvendra Singh.

Incumbent Navy chief Admiral DK Joshi was polite when he said the ship was the result of "exceptional perseverance."

Antony even found reason to say, "Now that the ship is ours, I can confide in you. The whole programme very nearly failed."

"The Indians changed a lot of specifications, and asked for many things that had not been contracted initially," says Igor Leonov, chief commissioning officer for the Vikramaditya project, and a man who will be one among 183 persons travelling with the ship to India next month to 'guarantee' her for the first year.

With only her hull harking back to the erstwhile Soviet warship she once was, and virtually everything else either brand new or fully refurbished, including thousands of kilometres of cabling, the Russians repeatedly suggest that Vikramaditya is effectively a new warship, not a repaired one. This, the Indian Navy agrees with. With an operational life of approximately 40 years, the Vikramaditya is unlikely to need any major work for at least a decade if not more. As she sails home, escorted by four Indian warships, including the Indian Navy's sole aircraft carrier INS Viraat from the Persian Gulf, the Indian crew knows that their new home was perhaps worth waiting for, and that they've effectively got a new warship for a second-hand price. The 183 Russians on board the ship for the journey home never fail to remind them of this.

Among that Russian contingent escaping their country's winter to sail to India will be nine interpreters who will be based in Karwar for a period of at least three months to ensure, in the words of one of them Sasha, that there are no "communication gaps".

Both sides know they've had too many of those.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 22 Jul 2015 00:17

NRao

IF (Big if) that is indeed the cost of this carrier, then India should trade the Vicky in and her "Read the voluminous reports on the Vik-A's conversion and modernisation" ( )+ around $0.5 billion and perhaps get this new carrier.

No IFs. 3 upgraded Talwars for RuNavy cost 40 billion RuR. 3 upgraded Talwars for Indian Navy cost 160 billion RuR = 3 billion USD. The price of the CV for India will be 12 billion USD. Full stop.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jul 2015 02:25

SNaik wrote: No IFs. 3 upgraded Talwars for RuNavy cost 40 billion RuR. 3 upgraded Talwars for Indian Navy cost 160 billion RuR = 3 billion USD. The price of the CV for India will be 12 billion USD. Full stop.

Do not know if I can fully agree. A few days back I had asked about three (of six) ships lying at the Yantar site taht I had heard were to be offloaded to India. Here is some more info now:

The ghost of Gorshkov

But the proposed third tranche has a less than wholesome odour, and not just because they are at least twice the cost. In December, Russian President Vladimir Putin urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to take three Talwar-class frigates off Russia's hands for three entirely self-serving reasons. First, Yantar shipyard has six frigates languishing in various stages of build, but the Russian Navy wants just three. Yantar began building six because Moscow was certain it could persuade perpetual-buyer India of the need for another three frigates. Second, the frigates that languish in Yantar have no power plants (engines). Ukraine has refused to supply Russia the Zoryagas turbines that power earlier Talwar-class frigates, and which were contracted for this batch too. Ukraine's refusal comes after Moscow's military adventure in Ukraine and its annexation of the Crimea. Squeezing another power plant into the Talwar-class hulls would involve major re-engineering. India, on the other hand, with strong defence ties with Ukraine, could obtain Zorya turbines without much problem. Thirdly, even though Moscow's proposal has been cloaked in the rhetoric of "Make in India", the Talwar-class features mainly Russian systems, sensors and weapons, which cannot be changed without adversely impacting on delivery time lines

A few observations:

* The cost escalation is - again - in due to some Russian planning - or lack of it (and do not tell me that the Russians were not aware of the amount of cabling that had to be replaced on the Gorshkov - they damn well were aware, they had to be. Else what kind of naval designers are they?)
* "Gorshkov Ghost" is absolutely right. Disgusting if true
* There is something to be said about the decision on the part of the GoI (as is with the Rafale) that I do not like this one
* Seems to me that this is again a political decision and not a naval one

I do not think I will be too far out if I state that the Russians are looking after just too much of their own self interest. They need to cut a lot more slack.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 22 Jul 2015 10:51

^^^Someone has not done the maths. Or the induction schedule runs into decades rather than years. IN has large committed capex spends on account of existing inductions - IAC-I, P8I, Choppers, new Mig29Ks, Scorpenes. Has someone told IN that there will be money for so many gold plated frigates (7 P17A, 3 Talwars) AND a super carrier with EMAL? One (or many) of these projects will be shelved or massively delayed on funding.

From a strategic perspective, our most likely requirements (IMO) are

1. Be able to field 1 carrier battle group for a short intense conflict. This requires a credible carrier along with gold plated escorts (FFGs, DDGs, SSNs).
2. Have a large footprint to "plant our flag" from the Hormuz to Malacca - for securing sea lanes of trade, rescue missions, escort of maritime assets. This requires large numbers of platforms - they dont need to be gold plated with MFSTAR, Barak8, Brahmos et al. Just largish platforms with endurance and sea keeping abilities.
3. A fleet of SSBNs for nuclear deterrence.

Somehow the current induction planning seems to be a bit of "Rafale"-itis. IN is planning for large numbers of high end platforms, and no one's told IAF (or IA) that they need to go slow. As an example, today IN has a fleet of 28 fighter (8-9 Harriers and ~20 Mig29K), IAF has ~450-500 fighters. In 15 years, IN is planning to have upwards of 120 fighters (40-50 Mig29s, similar number for the IAC II and a certain number of LCAs), while IAF is looking for ~700-800 fighters (~40 squadrons). No one's told the IAF to keep naval induction in mind while doing their planning!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jul 2015 11:17

Viv,the $4-5B that I mentioned is the approx. cost for Vikrant-2 ,based upon IAC-1's costs,which CSL says that they can build in 4 years,posted. You wanted details of that which I've provided.The other costs for Phase 2 and 3 for IAC-1 are in the public domain/posted.I don't know what the angst is about.

The only issue being debated here is that until 2030,when the large CV Vishal class arrives,whose design has yet to be finalised,which will take a few years and whose construction will begin perhaps in 2020,we will have just 2 CVs after the Viraat is pensioned off. CSL has offered a second Vikrant at a reasonable cost to be built in 4 years time.Even if it takes 5 years,by 2020 we will have 3 CVs in service which will last us for 3 decades at least. This will allow one always combat ready on each seaboard with one in the dockyard.Remember that during Kargil the Viraat was unavailable.The PLAN are building 3 new carriers reportedly clones of the Liao Ning. In any future spat with Pak or China,the JV aspect will definitely come into play.From Gwadar to the Malacca Straits maritime ops will be taking place.PLAN subs will be very active in support of Pak,directly or indirectly,giving it intel on IN naval activities,shadowing our CBG task forces,etc. It may also send in a CV just as the US did in '71 with the Enterprise to divert our attention during a spat with Pak. We will have to counter such a move. The IN will be severely constrained if it has only 1 CV operational in a crisis during the next 15 years.

Incidentally,a MIG-29K can operate from any flat top of approx. 28,000t. If our planned amphibs are of size of the Spanish Juan Carlos,35,000+t,they theoretically will be able to operate both NLCAs and MIG-29Ks which will both be in service 2020+. The alternative to a second Vikrant class CV is to build the amphibs asap,of min. size of the Juan Carlos, with the capability of operating existing/planned IN carrier aircraft when needed.

PS:The Vik-A lacked SAMs because Barak-8 wasn't ready,delays in the JV dev. between Israel and the DRDO. That is why it was delivered without any anti-missile capability.B-1 is an interim solution.At some future time one is sure that B-8 will be installed. Once B-8 is given the green light after trials on the Kol DDG,we should see a faster induction of it aboard several ships in the pipeline and also the new Vikrant.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 22 Jul 2015 11:25

somnath wrote:No one's told the IAF to keep naval induction in mind while doing their planning!

Why should they? Keeping in mind the other's services' is the job of the MOD and the Govt. The services will ask for what they want and they will get what they can have.

IN seems to be going the quality vs the chinese quantity. But, unlike the other two import services, they are exponentially more realistic and indigenous-friendly. Where they can go for cheap options, they have gone for the likes of P28, with hardly any multi-role options. In fact, that was the complaint of some other posters, to which I more or less agree. Since we cannot match the chinese in numbers, we must do our best to have better quality combatants.

amit · Post by **amit** » 22 Jul 2015 13:10

NRao wrote:A FYI post:

Large Russian Aircraft Carrier Design Unveiled

The carrier measures 95,000 to 100,000 metric tons by displacement, with a length of 330 meters (1,082 feet) and a width of 40 meters (131 feet). It has a “twin island” layout similar to that found on the new British Queen Elizabeth-class carriers. In addition to the big ski jump in the bow, characteristic of previous Russian carriers, the Shtorm comes with a second, smaller, one at the end of the angled deck. According to Krylov’s leaflet, the carrier is outfitted with two catapults. The scale model showed four. Other visible characteristics include four arrestor wires, four aircraft elevators, two cranes and several multi-tube rocket launchers.

There is something wrong with the dimensions quoted here. How can a 95,000 ton, 330 meters long aircraft carrier be just 40 meters wide? Unless this 40 meters refers to the waterline beam, and the overall width is much more, like say 70-75 meters, this aircraft carrier will resemble a large helo carrying cruiser than a Nimitz or Queen Elizabeth type carrier.

No way can they have catapult and angled deck on a 40 meter width. For reference Vikrant is 60 meters wide, the QE is 70 meters and a Nimitz class is around 80 meters.

This is so Russian, they release specs and they don't tally up!

Added later: Same dimensions appear in a number of different news outlets and so this was what was given out by the Krylov State Research Center which is designing the ship.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Jul 2015 13:26

could be hull width not deck width. even then it looks very less unless its waterline hull like you said.
the type45/ddg51 daring class is 20mts wide!

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 22 Jul 2015 13:26

Arun Menon wrote:
somnath wrote:No one's told the IAF to keep naval induction in mind while doing their planning!
Why should they? Keeping in mind the other's services' is the job of the MOD and the Govt. The services will ask for what they want and they will get what they can have.

IN seems to be going the quality vs the chinese quantity. But, unlike the other two import services, they are exponentially more realistic and indigenous-friendly. Where they can go for cheap options, they have gone for the likes of P28, with hardly any multi-role options. In fact, that was the complaint of some other posters, to which I more or less agree. Since we cannot match the chinese in numbers, we must do our best to have better quality combatants.

In my opinion, the problem here is with this obsession with stealth. I can understand the P28s to have sonar stealth but not 'surface stealth'. We could have had some urans on them and compromised with stealth. Same things with 17A, why wait for a state of the art 'aegis like' system when we could have churned out more P 17's with Barak 8. The more sophisticated we make our ships, the more expensive they become, the more the delays with production and the more we have to loose when they take damage in war. I would much rather have robust and reliable weapons in numbers than more expensive ones. Attrition is a big leveler in war. And why on earth do we need more carriers when there is a crying need for nuke attack subs, mine sweepers and helos.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 22 Jul 2015 13:28

Wars are won by innovative tactics, strategic clarity, political will, training and espirit de corps. Unees, bees ka farak in sophistcation is irrelavent.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 22 Jul 2015 13:36

^^^Most importantly,wars (rather strategic objectives) are won by defining one's objectives well, and preparing to achieve them. The first is the most important piece - the Pakis have traditionally been quite bad at that.

Inter services tugs of war over resources are legendary everywhere, but in India its of epic dimensions. Someone political needs to bell the cat, and not leave the decision-making at the respetive services HQs.

amit · Post by **amit** » 22 Jul 2015 13:44

Singha wrote:could be hull width not deck width. even then it looks very less unless its waterline hull like you said.
the type45/ddg51 daring class is 20mts wide!

It has to be waterline beam in order to make sense.

IMO this goes show the larger problem the Russians have in this case and that's lack of experience in building large aircraft carriers.

Just how does this reflect on the designing agency? They release the dimensions to shock and awe everybody with the sheer size of the ship that would carry 100 aircraft, more than the Nimitz class which carries a maximum of 90 aircraft. And while doing so they forget to give the deck width and instead give the waterline width which sounds so dhoti shivering piddly and doesn't match the other TAFTA numbers like length and weight!

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 22 Jul 2015 13:59

^^^Its a trial balloon. Russia has no money to operate a CBG around a super carrier, not with oil @ 50 dollars.

More importantly, they have no strategic need to operate one. Even the Soviet Union, which tended to copy everything that the US did, didnt build a carrier fleet.

Its a waste of time.

amit · Post by **amit** » 22 Jul 2015 14:05

somnath wrote:^^^Its a trial balloon. Russia has no money to operate a CBG around a super carrier, not with oil @ 50 dollars.

More importantly, they have no strategic need to operate one. Even the Soviet Union, which tended to copy everything that the US did, didnt build a carrier fleet.

Its a waste of time.

You are most probably right. They don't have the money or expertise to build a ship that big and complex. But even a trial balloon could have been released in a more professional manner, IMO.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jul 2015 18:00

The IN needs a CV design based upon her own requirements.No need to blindly copy another design,but worth examining concepts and tech offered. It is good that the RFI has been sent to the principal CV operating nations. We can pick and choose what we want from the CV "buffet".

Russia is well capable of building for itself a CV of 100K.Look at its massive subs built earlier,don't underestimate its capability.It has also built the largest WIG aircraft,transports,helos,etc. Size is a big thing for Russia. It has not built a huge fleet of CVs because it has never had an expeditionary warfare ambition like the US and the need for CVs.The US wages war around the world using her CBGs principally.The last Russian who sent his fleet halfway round the world was Tzar Nicholas,and his fleet was sunk by the Japanese at Port Arthur! The Russians have primarily been a huge land based Eurasian power,with great emphasis upon its army.Understandable after Napoleon and the events of WW2.Wasn't it Marshal Malenkov (responsible for Russia's missile development) who said that "a carrier is the fifth hind leg of a dog"? It was Adm.Gorshkov who brought about the revolution in Russian thinking with his innovative ideas,fitting missiles onto even tiny Russian craft like the Osas with which we lambasted Pak in '71.

With the largest land territory of any nation on the globe,Russia/Soveits also used land based aircraft,tactical and long-ranged, to defend its shores,more convenient and practical. China copied it. Geography has also been not kind to it as it lacks warm water ports. During the Cold War,Communism was spread globally not so much through the barrel of the gun by the Soviets (barring the "police actions" in Hungary and Czechoslovakia),but through the "point" of the pen (pun intended). Incidentally it was the Brits (Anthony Eden) who coined the word "police action",with their Anglo-French invasion of the Suez Canal,which the Soviets emulated in E.Europe. It was through propaganda that the ideology of Communism was mainly spread worldwide,which was lapped up by the peoples of many new states which had been colonies under the imperial yoke. Revolutions in Latin America,Cuba especially, rocked the western capitalist world.

With the antipathy amongst the ruling politburo to carriers,Adm.Gorshkov cleverly built a massive fleet of missile-carrying subs and warships,like the Typhoons and Oscars and battlecruisers like the Kirov class,still in service ,which have had extensive mdoernisation recently. Saturation attacks against enemy fleets with supersonic (and in the future hypersonic) missiles is still the doctrine as we can see even with our BMos,variant of the Yakhont. Underwater,the Shkval rocket torpedoes are the equivalent.

Adm.Gorshkov slowly changed the thinking of the Russian military towards carrier operations. He first built helo carriers like the Moskva ,then Kiev class cruiser-carriers with a huge missile package plus VSTOL Yaks.Then came the true CVs like the Kuznetsov. Had the USSR not collapsed there would probably have been about 3-4 of the class built,at least the completion of the Varyag.

The survivability of the super-carrier has in recent times come into debate due to the Chinese development of the anti-carrier BM and the proliferation of numerous stealthy subs by enemy (Chinese) forces. Russian subs primarily carry their nation's strat. arsenal and defence of that is paramount,why it is building an equivalent or more number of attack boats.Geography has also give it some valuable "bastions" ,where its SSBNs can hide undetected,protected by both sub and surface assets. The Gulf of Cambay offers us our own little bastion.

The IN however requires carriers and multi-purpose flat tops with which to secure the IOR and support the smaller island and littoral nations who look to us for their security. We need to keep out extraneous enemy forces from disrupting our maritime trade and against attacks of the mainland using LR missiles and carrier aircraft. In addition to whatever CVs we acquire/build,as said many a time,"INS India" and the two other island territories on each seaboard are unsinkable and the exploitation of them with LRMP aircraft equipped with stand-off ASMs and strike aircraft is essential. We also need to plan for "looking east",sending our fleet into the Asia-Pacific waters,esp the Indo-China Sea. Using the excellent Vietnam War facilities at Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam,just as the US plan to return to using facilities at Subic Bay,will give us a forward posture vs the PLAN,just as they plan to do to us using Gwadar.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jul 2015 19:07

Notes:

* Wow. Very glad to see:

We also need to plan for "looking east",sending our fleet into the Asia-Pacific waters,esp the Indo-China Sea

{"Act East"}. Did not expect that. Next step: super carrier.

* No need for INS India. "East" is beyond "IOR"
* BTW, official USN verbiage: "Indo-Asia Pacific region". Erased "China" from every map out there.

Its a trial balloon. Russia has no money to operate a CBG around a super carrier, not with oil @ 50 dollars

* Q: Does Russia have a *need* for such a boat? Point being Mr. P is pig headed enough to make anything happen at any price

* There is another angle: Chinese support for Russia, with the goal of slowing down teh pivot east effort. For another time