Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC 2): News & Discussion

[Rakesh]

It will be a duplicate of INS Vikrant with lessons learned.
IN Needs it fast.
It won't be a showboat with EMALS etc.
Its needed to defend the seas and not power projection.
Stop thinking colonial bull shit.

The navy has had to eat humble pie, primarily due to zero buy in from the other stakeholders.

See the post previous to this one ---> viewtopic.php?p=2608670#p2608670

Also this post ---> viewtopic.php?p=2599923#p2599923

[ramana]

Nobody is eating humble pie. Least of all IN. They are realistic.
All the catalog shoppers are retired.

BTW IN still looking at who all were involved in the INS Vikrant lift decision.

They were bad people.

[Pratyush]

Nobody is eating humble pie. Least of all IN. They are realistic.
All the catalog shoppers are retired.

BTW IN still looking at who all were involved in the INS Vikrant lift decision.

They were bad people.

Do we know for certain that the lift was not a copy of the Vikramaditya lift?

[Rakesh]

The Russians provided design input for IAC-1 (INS Vikrant) and the lift design primarily catered around the MiG-29K/KUB. It was unfortunate that the naval Fulcrum turned out to be a damp squib. It is a miracle that the Rafale M barely fits. No issue with Naval Tejas Mk1 and even the upcoming TEDBF, which will have folding wings.

IAC-2 is supposed to have larger lifts, but will wait to see what the final specs are. No DAC clearance was received on Nov 30, as expected. Larger lifts would make logical sense. The Navy also wants to station unmanned drones on IAC-2.

The long term plan is for IAC-3 to be the super carrier i.e. CATOBAR and displacement will be minimum of 65K tons. But plans - especially military projects - rarely follow the original idea. Agendas, Politics, Budgets, Change in Govts following elections all play a role.

[titash]

The Russians provided design input for IAC-1 (INS Vikrant) and the lift design primarily catered around the MiG-29K/KUB. It was unfortunate that the naval Fulcrum turned out to be a damp squib. It is a miracle that the Rafale M barely fits. No issue with Naval Tejas Mk1 and even the upcoming TEDBF, which will have folding wings.

IAC-2 is supposed to have larger lifts, but will wait to see what the final specs are. No DAC clearance was received on Nov 30, as expected. Larger lifts would make logical sense. The Navy also wants to station unmanned drones on IAC-2.

The long term plan is for IAC-3 to be the super carrier i.e. CATOBAR and displacement will be minimum of 65K tons. But plans - especially military projects - rarely follow the original idea. Agendas, Politics, Budgets, Change in Govts following elections all play a role.

Folks,

When the VikAd purchase was being negotiated, there was no other option on the table-wa. Sales folks for Rafale and F-18 came in much later.

Likewise, when the IAC-1 was being designed, the only bird available - irrespective of performance & availability - was the MiG-29K (and possibly the Su-33, which really was too large for 45T carriers).

The LCA -Navy was talked about but the bird had yet to be flown...let alone flown off a carrier.

The lifts are a downstream consequence of the above constraints. Why would a naval designer ever opt for a larger lift? Why blame them 10 year later when things have changed politically and commercially.

Building on what Admiral-ji says, down the line the IAC-2 will be a 45T carrier with wider lifts to accommodate UAVs/UCAVs. The IAC-3 will be the first in a long line of 65-85T CATOBAR supercarriers that will field manned/unmanned fighters, AWACS, tankers, UCAVs, etc.

Motivated / Awakened Population --> Economic Growth --> Strong Navies --> Supercarriers.

[AkshaySG]

Folks,

When the VikAd purchase was being negotiated, there was no other option on the table-wa. Sales folks for Rafale and F-18 came in much later.

Likewise, when the IAC-1 was being designed, the only bird available - irrespective of performance & availability - was the MiG-29K (and possibly the Su-33, which really was too large for 45T carriers).

The LCA -Navy was talked about but the bird had yet to be flown...let alone flown off a carrier.

The lifts are a downstream consequence of the above constraints. Why would a naval designer ever opt for a larger lift? Why blame them 10 year later when things have changed politically and commercially.

Building on what Admiral-ji says, down the line the IAC-2 will be a 45T carrier with wider lifts to accommodate UAVs/UCAVs. The IAC-3 will be the first in a long line of 65-85T CATOBAR supercarriers that will field manned/unmanned fighters, AWACS, tankers, UCAVs, etc.

Motivated / Awakened Population --> Economic Growth --> Strong Navies --> Supercarriers.

I agree to an extent however when designing the an AC you are looking at a platform which will serve for 3 decades if not more and there has to be more foresight involved especially from a country which had 50+ years of Carrier Ops experience by then

Vikramaditya's delays did cost us greatly in this case because by the time we got a chance to really try out the Viky+Mig 29 combo and understand the deficiencies it was too late to make changes for Vikrant

[AkshaySG]

And i honestly feel we are displaying the same lack of foresight by not going for 2 follow on carriers. For budgetary purposes even if IAC 2 gets approved in 2024 and IAC 3 in 2028 or something we should try to keep the design similar or as close to similar as possible in order to get them out quicker.

If India wants 3 concurrent carriers this is the only option. Otherwise we will find ourselves retiring Vikramaditya as soon as IAC 3 is ready.

Shifting to a supercarrier will require a whole new growth curve and take a much longer design and build time which will probably push us into 2040s

[sajaym]

I don't think we should start work on the IAC3 right now.

As soon as IAC2 is ready, VikAd should be removed from active duty and handed over to DRDO/DAE for nuclear propulsion testing.

And only once those tests are completed successfully, should we start work on IAC3, which should basically be a IAC2 twin with nuclear propulsion.

[titash]

I don't think we should start work on the IAC3 right now.

As soon as IAC2 is ready, VikAd should be removed from active duty and handed over to DRDO/DAE for nuclear propulsion testing.

And only once those tests are completed successfully, should we start work on IAC3, which should basically be a IAC2 twin with nuclear propulsion.

They can hand it over to DRDO/DAE today itself with no loss of operational capability...as it is, the VikAd doesn't sail much and the MiG-29Ks don't fly much - except for photo ops on Navy Day

I would be really interested to see the difference in availability between VikAd & Vikrant, given the differences in propulsion and the local supply chain. Most likely, if the availability is high, all the Rafale-Ms are going on board the Vikrant onlee. That will make for a reliable CBG that will be available for the most part.

If Vikrant + Rafale-M is an operational success:
1) Expect the IAC-2 to get a follow on Rafale-M order to form 2 operational CBGs
2) VikAd will retire to Alang
3) The IAF may not want the MiG-29s in 2035, and they will most likely be sent to A&N for maritime strikes at Malacca Straits

[SRajesh]

^^^sau partishath

[Rakesh]

They can hand it over to DRDO/DAE today itself with no loss of operational capability...as it is, the VikAd doesn't sail much and the MiG-29Ks don't fly much - except for photo ops on Navy Day

I would be really interested to see the difference in availability between VikAd & Vikrant, given the differences in propulsion and the local supply chain. Most likely, if the availability is high, all the Rafale-Ms are going on board the Vikrant onlee. That will make for a reliable CBG that will be available for the most part.

If Vikrant + Rafale-M is an operational success:
1) Expect the IAC-2 to get a follow on Rafale-M order to form 2 operational CBGs
2) VikAd will retire to Alang
3) The IAF may not want the MiG-29s in 2035, and they will most likely be sent to A&N for maritime strikes at Malacca Straits

Bolded Part in Blue - If the rumour mill is to be believed, the Navy wants to do a follow-on Rafale M order for IAC-2, as the 26 airframes being negotiated now is just enough for IAC-1 (INS Vikrant). However, more clarity on this will come only after the 2024 General Elections.

Bolded Part in Green - The plan is to decommission Vikramaditya sometime in the 2030s. The Navy would like to time the decommissioning of Vikramaditya with the induction of IAC-2.

Bolded Part in Red - See This Post ---> viewtopic.php?p=2609119#p2609119

Rafale M will be an operational success, as anything would be better than the MiG-29K/KUB. It is a very low bar! What I am looking forward to is seeing the Rafale M travelling on the lifts of INS Vikrant

[Rakesh]

As soon as IAC2 is ready, VikAd should be removed from active duty and handed over to DRDO/DAE for nuclear propulsion testing.

A nuclear powered vessel is designed and then built around the nuclear reactor. But I don't know of any instance of a vessel being retrofitted to carry a nuclear reactor. The sheer magnitude of work that is involved, would be better spent in building a vessel from scratch i.e. metal cutting.

The Navy will retire Vikramaditya, at the first available opportunity.

[Rakesh]

India needs four, not three aircraft carriers
https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/de ... rs-2797384
05 December 2023

================================================

The drum beat will only get louder on the above, in the months and years ahead. But after reading the above article, how much this plan will work remains to be seen.

[Rakesh]

Is India Ready For A Maritime Renaissance? INS Vikrant’s Success And The Imperative For IAC-2
https://asia.businessupturn.com/is-indi ... ac-2/4332/
04 Dec 2023

The geostrategic challenges demand a proactive approach, urging the nation to invest in naval capabilities and embrace the maritime domain wholeheartedly. As the Indo-Pacific undergoes a ‘strategic churn,’ India’s choices today will determine its standing in the maritime-centric world of tomorrow.

[Rakesh]

Supercarrier is still very much on the cards, but no sanction of funds for now.

https://x.com/SPsNavalForces/status/173 ... 00021?s=20 ---> Admiral R Hari Kumar, Chief of Naval Staff, told @SPsNavalForces that IAC-2 (65,000 tonnes platform), remains the way Navy envisaged the requirement, originally. The repeat order of IAC-1 is a sort of interim arrangement, once approved by Government.

[hgupta]

We should not retire Vikraditya. We should turn Vikraditya into a carrier training facility. That allows IN to put less stress on her engines, thus being able to be operational for much longer than before without requiring recurring manpower extensive maintenance. That way it can continue to serve in some useful fashion and not break IN's budget.

[Rakesh]

The boilers on the Vikramaditya is one of the issues. Not sure if that was fixed to the Indian Navy’s satisfaction. The Russians really hamstrung us on that ship. If the Navy can successfully transform her into a training vessel, then more power to them. Hopefully the savings will outweigh the costs incurred.

[Pratyush]

The boilers on the Vikramaditya is one of the issues. Not sure if that was fixed to the Indian Navy’s satisfaction. The Russians really hamstrung us on that ship. If the Navy can successfully transform her into a training vessel, then more power to them. Hopefully the savings will outweigh the costs incurred.

The Royal Navy during the 20s and the 30s, replaced the boilers of a lot of their ships during the mid life refits.

So did the USN during the refits of their ships.

The fact that boilers are a problem is not a satisfactory response especially when it comes to INS Vikramaditya. The Vikramaditya would be undergoing at least 1 midlife refit. The boiler could have been swapped out during such a refit.

Unless the inability to build boilers in India is the real issue.

Secondly, the Indian Navy is changing the engine of the 3 Brahmaputra class ships from steam propulsion to diesel propulsion.

https://www.indiandefensenews.in/2023/1 ... ships.html

published on 7th, October 2023.

Why is a similar effort impossible for the Vikramaditya? Especially when the blue prints of that ship are available with us.

[SRajesh]

Rakesh
A question then:
A four CBG, I presume the deployment would be East/West and IOR with one reserve/refit/repair etc.
Given IAC 1 and 2 with conventionally powered what would limit their deployment IOR given the distances for friendly watering holes. The future IAC 3/4 should they then be 65,000 and N-powered with bells and whistles including all the associated CBG vessels
I presume by the time they come TEDBA would be ready??
Or is there a rethinking on the reach of subs/carrier-killer missile

[Pratyush]

An aircraft carrier is a global asset. It will be deployed where our interests require it to be deployed.

[SRajesh]

Pratyushji
With due respect apart from Unkil no one has that capacity or capability for such power projection
In India’s case it’s more how we control ‘Ou Pond’ so to speak

[Pratyush]

Pratyushji
With due respect apart from Unkil no one has that capacity or capability for such power projection
In India’s case it’s more how we control ‘Ou Pond’ so to speak

India by 2045 to 50 will require such capacity.

[drnayar]

An aircraft carrier is a global asset. It will be deployed where our interests require it to be deployed.

and i say it is.. especially with low intensity conflicts and the need for air cover, I can very well imagine a scenario when some of our diaspora are threatened by conflict and we need a element of hard military power in the vicinity. There is none better than an aircraft carrier battle group.

[titash]

...
Secondly, the Indian Navy is changing the engine of the 3 Brahmaputra class ships from Steam propulsion to diesel propulsion.

https://www.indiandefensenews.in/2023/1 ... ships.html

published on 7th, October 2023.

Why is a similar effort impossible for the Vikramaditya. Especially when the blue prints of that ship are available with us.

Diesels are not suitable for high speed warships if I understand correctly. A carrier needs to turn into the wind and/or generate wind by steaming at 30 knots

It's either {Nuclear --> Steam Turbines} OR {Oil --> Steam Turbines} OR {Oil --> Gas Turbines}. Also CATOBAR ships till the Gerald Ford also require steam to operate the catapults.

[drnayar]

...
Secondly, the Indian Navy is changing the engine of the 3 Brahmaputra class ships from Steam propulsion to diesel propulsion.

https://www.indiandefensenews.in/2023/1 ... ships.html

published on 7th, October 2023.

Why is a similar effort impossible for the Vikramaditya. Especially when the blue prints of that ship are available with us.

Diesels are not suitable for high speed warships if I understand correctly. A carrier needs to turn into the wind and/or generate wind by steaming at 30 knots

It's either {Nuclear --> Steam Turbines} OR {Oil --> Steam Turbines} OR {Oil --> Gas Turbines}. Also CATOBAR ships till the Gerald Ford also require steam to operate the catapults.

https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-s ... ssels.aspx

Why are other Navies around the world choosing the hybrid propulsion plant solution for their future frigate programmes? First, it’s the low-risk, immediate availability of a proven reliable (class standard) 36-40 MW gas turbine as the prime mover in a relatively simple, yet flexible COmbined Diesel eLectric Or Gas (CODLOG) arrangement optimised to a warship hull design and operational profile.

[Rakesh]

....

It is up to the Navy to decide what they want to do with INS Vikramaditya. The plan is retire the ship sometime in the next decade. If they want to extend the life of the ship, by another decade or two, then more power to them. It will boil down to how much money will have to be invested to make her a viable platform to continue serving. But if more utility will be derived from a brand new vessel, then the Navy will retire her.

[Rakesh]

With due respect apart from Unkil no one has that capacity or capability for such power projection
In India’s case it’s more how we control ‘Ou Pond’ so to speak

Power projection has multiple meanings. Lets define the "kind" of power projection the Indian Navy has been doing and will be doing.

* Global Expeditionary Power Projection. So sending an aircraft carrier outside of the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and into a whole other theatre. Perfect example of that would be the deployment of the USS Gerald R Ford in the Mediterranean Sea to project US military might to deter Iran and other rogue nations to enter the Israel-Hamas conflict. The issue lies in not whether the Indian Navy is capable of doing it, but will our political masters allow such a move? How many such deployments has any Indian Govt - since 1959 (commissioning of our first aircraft carrier) - permitted the Indian Navy to do? Where will the Indian Govt allow such a deployment? South China Sea? Or even in the Mediterranean Sea to partner with the US Navy that is deployed there right now? Has any Indian Govt expressed such a Global Expeditionary desire? The PLAN - on the other hand - has a working plan to display a full-blown Global Expeditionary Power Projection capability.

P.S. We do a clandestine form of this power projection and whose scope will only increase in the future via the induction of SSNs. So not an overt, visible power projection...but rather one of intelligence gathering to analyze any visible/foreseeable threats. In the future, our SSNs will enter the South China Sea or whichever other seas or oceans the Indian Govt desires. One of our Kalvari Class submarines recently completed a port visit all the way to Australia.

OR

* Protect India's sphere of influence in the IOR. This is what the Indian Govt - since 1959 - has expressed and permitted the Indian Navy to do. This is power projection via controlling our pond, as you rightly pointed out. This capability has a reduced military presence, when compared to the above. However, it is a capability that the Indian Navy is a master at, as they have six plus decades of experience with it. The Indian Navy knows the IOR very well, as it is her pond. All of the Indian Navy's current surface/aerial platforms and even future such acquisitions cater to this scenario.

There are multiple reasons for this type of power projection;

1) Cost. This is a huge factor in our country. Such a capability takes a long lead time to induct. So when it comes to allocating funds for military platforms, the motivating factor for our politicians and bureaucrats is this ---> from the limited and finite money pot, which will provide the greatest return and at the quickest turnaround time? An aircraft carrier program will never win that contest.

2) Risk Aversiveness. As a people, we are very risk averse and it affects every decision we make. The GOI will not send a capital ship - like an aircraft carrier - into a theatre of conflict, outside of the IOR. After the loss of a single MiG-21 Bison at Balakot, there was rona-dhona everywhere. Imagine what will happen, if we lose an aircraft carrier. The Indian Navy does send surface vessels - like destroyers and frigates - to foreign countries, but can you recall any of our aircraft carriers doing a port visit to lets say the US (Atlantic or Pacific), Australia (Southern Indian Ocean) or UK/France (Atlantic Ocean)?

3) Messaging. Tying in to the above, such visits by Indian Navy surface vessels are labelled as Friendship Visits. The Govt takes very careful steps - followed by the Navy - to ensure that message is sent across. Therefore "Friendship of the Seas" is the theme. But when you see the USS Gerald R Ford, is that the message one gets? That is 100,000 tons of US diplomacy at its best - the bald eagle that holds the olive branch and the arrows.

The day one of our aircraft carriers does an international port visit, that is when India will have *ARRIVED*, geopolitically speaking. But for this to happen, there has to be a paradigm shift in the way the Govt and the Bureaucracy views India and her role in global affairs. That is a tall order and till that occurs, this discussion will remain academic.

Rakesh
A question then:
A four CBG, I presume the deployment would be East/West and IOR with one reserve/refit/repair etc.
Given IAC 1 and 2 with conventionally powered what would limit their deployment IOR given the distances for friendly watering holes. The future IAC 3/4 should they then be 65,000 and N-powered with bells and whistles including all the associated CBG vessels
I presume by the time they come TEDBA would be ready??
Or is there a rethinking on the reach of subs/carrier-killer missile

The ideal plan should be the following;

Vikrant Class - STOBAR
INS Vikrant (IAC-1) + INS Viraat (IAC-2)

Vishal Class - CATOBAR
INS Vishal (IAC-3) + INS Vikramaditya (IAC-4)

But this is my plan and it has no bearing on what the Indian Navy and future Indian Govts will ultimately do. Budgets, Elections, Politics, Agendas will all play into how many aircraft carriers (and their respective tonnages) the Indian Navy will have at any given point in time.

[Rakesh]

India's Second Indigenous Aircraft Carrier: Why Is It Important?
https://japan-forward.com/indias-second ... important/
08 Dec 2023

The new aircraft carrier will replace an aging Russian model and assist India's Navy in conducting an increasing array of naval exercises with friendly nations.

[uddu]

The day one of our aircraft carriers does an international port visit, that is when India will have *ARRIVED*, geopolitically speaking.

2016, INS Vikramaditya did visit Colombo.
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/sri-lan ... ya-1269296

[Pratyush]

....

It is up to the Navy to decide what they want to do with INS Vikramaditya.

Snip....

Point taken.

[Rakesh]

The day one of our aircraft carriers does an international port visit, that is when India will have *ARRIVED*, geopolitically speaking.

2016, INS Vikramaditya did visit Colombo.
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/sri-lan ... ya-1269296

Thank you. I did not know that.

But I apologise for not being more clear. Sri Lanka is in our pond. I am hoping for our carrier to visit a port based somewhere in the Atlantic or Pacific.

[Prem Kumar]

Supercarrier is still very much on the cards, but no sanction of funds for now.

https://x.com/SPsNavalForces/status/173 ... 00021?s=20 ---> Admiral R Hari Kumar, Chief of Naval Staff, told @SPsNavalForces that IAC-2 (65,000 tonnes platform), remains the way Navy envisaged the requirement, originally. The repeat order of IAC-1 is a sort of interim arrangement, once approved by Government.

Given that we will be a 2 carrier force for some time, if we want to become a 3 carrier force by the 2nd half of 2030s, work on IAC-3 design should begin now, alongwith IAC-2 construction (whenever the approval for the latter comes). The IN should not scratch its testimonials & wake up when IAC-1/2 are reaching end of life.

The design can undergo changes with the changing times/technologies, but there is enough information to begin the process and freeze a reasonably good design. Perfect is the enemy of the good - the IN coming to its senses and agreeing to a 45K tonne IAC-2 is proof of that

Moreover, a CBG plan must be socialized and presented to the MoD for approval. This includes another key asset, i.e. SSNs, which are equally critical for both Carrier protection and power projection. Not to mention carrier-borne AWACS. By mid-2030, our economy will be so massive that we will be able to afford even a 4 carrier fleet. But we should plan with future money in mind and not just current budget

Lastly, design is less expensive. There is no reason why the Naval Design Bureau cannot complete the design for IAC-3 with IN's funds, so that when the plan is presented to the MoD, its a fully fleshed out one. And we can shave off a few years compared to the linear process today. They can take a leaf out of HAL's approach vis-a-vis the LUH

[drnayar]

I would say by 2030 India will have a good capacity to build out two aircraft carriers of 65k simultaneously.Whether that will happen or not would be a political question and not economic

[ramana]

I would say by 2030 India will have a good capacity to build out two aircraft carriers of 65k simultaneously.Whether that will happen or not would be a political question and not economic

Where are the two docks to build simultaneously?

[ramana]

Nobody is eating humble pie. Least of all IN. They are realistic.
All the catalog shoppers are retired.

BTW IN still looking at who all were involved in the INS Vikrant lift decision.

They were bad people.

Do we know for certain that the lift was not a copy of the Vikramaditya lift?

Yes. The lift dimensions are different for both ships.

[SRajesh]

Ramanaji
Had we started IAC-2 2019/20
And forward planned for the design/power fitting etc 2022 IAC-3 could have started by 2025/26 given modular capability acquired already.
TEDBA would have come by 2032/35 if there's will but given baboons power of dithering and political will
Take for example Rafale-M when we knew 29's are not unto it and after buying Rafale would have made sense to go that way but we had chai/biskooot with unkil's tiyyaras

[Pratyush]

Where are the two docks to build simultaneously?

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 758364.ece

Cochin Shipyard readying to commission new dry dock, international ship repair facility: CMD

Published on August 11, 2022 08:20 pm

This new yard is 300 meters*60 meters and is scheduled for completion by 2024.

The existing CSL yard is already capable of 80000 ton ships.

[hgupta]

....

It is up to the Navy to decide what they want to do with INS Vikramaditya. The plan is retire the ship sometime in the next decade. If they want to extend the life of the ship, by another decade or two, then more power to them. It will boil down to how much money will have to be invested to make her a viable platform to continue serving. But if more utility will be derived from a brand new vessel, then the Navy will retire her.

Why not convert her to a carrier training ship?

[titash]

Diesels are not suitable for high speed warships if I understand correctly. A carrier needs to turn into the wind and/or generate wind by steaming at 30 knots

It's either {Nuclear --> Steam Turbines} OR {Oil --> Steam Turbines} OR {Oil --> Gas Turbines}. Also CATOBAR ships till the Gerald Ford also require steam to operate the catapults.

https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-s ... ssels.aspx

Why are other Navies around the world choosing the hybrid propulsion plant solution for their future frigate programmes? First, it’s the low-risk, immediate availability of a proven reliable (class standard) 36-40 MW gas turbine as the prime mover in a relatively simple, yet flexible COmbined Diesel eLectric Or Gas (CODLOG) arrangement optimised to a warship hull design and operational profile.

In CODOG / CODLOG, the gas turbine is for high speed sprint, whereas the diesel / diesel-electric is for economical cruise. This is because the efficiency of a frigate's 1 or 2 installed gas turbines is highest close to the maximum RPM. If you aren't running the gas turbines to hit 30+ knots, you are wasting fuel. In that case, switch to diesel / diesel-electric while cruising

Whereas in a carrier, you need at least 4 (frigate-sized) gas turbines. So you can
1) spin up all 4 units at maximum RPM (i.e. highest efficiency) >>>>>> achieve 30+ knots and launch aircraft
OR
2) shut down 2 units completely + keep 2 units at maximum RPM (i.e. highest efficiency) >>>>>> cruise at 15+ knots

[Rakesh]

Why not convert her to a carrier training ship?

The Indian Navy will determine how much investment will have to be made to in order to get the vessel to serve in that role. However, a vessel of this magnitude is a sizeable chunk of expenditure to operate just as a training vessel. Even the country with the largest number of aircraft carriers in active service - the US - does not have a dedicated aircraft carrier to serve in the training role. Whichever of the 10 Nimitz Class vessels is available, that particular boat is used for aircraft carrier training.

If the Vikramaditya will continue to serve beyond the 2030s, then the Navy will have to make the investment to keep her sea worthy. At 45K plus tons, that will be a significant investment. That is a call that only the Indian Navy can make, as they would know what to look for.

When we are talking about a carrier training ship, look at the two types of naval personnel aboard the vessel;

1) The ship's crew to operate the vessel on the open seas.
2) Air crew to operate both the rotary and fixed wing aircraft aboard the vessel.

The first type of crew is fairly self explanatory. Both officers and sailors under this branch, undergo significant training both ashore and at sea in this role. When they finally embark on an operational deployment, they will come under a department head that is led by a senior and experienced officer. That officer is responsible for all the men/women under his department.

The second type of crew is more or less the same as the first. But when you mentioned aircraft carrier training, I am assuming you mean carrier training as in the role of aircrew training. If my assumption is wrong, do let me know.

Now both rotary and fixed wing aircraft - that serve aboard aircraft carriers - come under individual naval air squadrons. At their home port, these squadrons conduct intensive training respective to their platform that they operate. But when an aircraft carrier is deployed, her air component consists of the following naval air squadrons;

* Fighter Squadrons (fixed wing)
* Search & Rescue Squadrons (rotary wing)
* ASW Squadrons (rotary wing)
* AEW Squadrons (rotary wing)

These squadrons work as one cohesive unit aboard the vessel. So when the Navy deploys all these assets aboard an aircraft carrier, the cost incurred is then best utilized as a war fighting vessel, than just as a training vessel. And with the low number of aircraft carriers the Indian Navy has (2), it cannot spare such a vessel for just aircraft carrier training. Therefore, any training of aircrew is done during operational deployments.

Side note ---> It is on a deployment like this, that Commander Nishant Singh died. More info on this tragic incident: https://www.honourpoint.in/profile/comm ... -singh-nm/