Britain may sell its Aircraft Carrier to India

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Indias own carrier program is for three in the vikrant class. After that India will think of super carriers. Indias last carrier will come in by the 2020-22 timeline after it's approved. Even the second ship will get approval only by next year and come along by 2016. Viraat will be gone by then. Well we still don't know the final outcome on the gorshky. One thing is for sure, it will help india either bargain for that carrier or dump it altogether if it comes to that and get our money back. But if we see the final cost of the gorshky at about 3.4 billion that the Russians are demanding, it's better to pay 4-5 for the QE. Even if we get both the carriers it enhances indias power projection in an earlier timeframe. The support ships will come as india is planning about 200 odd boats in the next 10 years. Nuke subs will also come along during that time.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Putting "Russians in hot steam?" xaxa :sarcastic: Russia is already pooring at top steam to finish Gorshkov. It is India's indecision which has led to this crises in the first place. If they hadnt' waited ten years to make a decision, INS Vikramaditya would have been in service years ago.
indias indecision has no bearing on the price as the Russians inked the price when the decision was firmed up in 2004. So it was the Russian mistake, not indias. Enough said on that already in other thread though.
 

VayuSena1

Professional
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
200
Likes
16
So India is going to pay $5-6 billion dollars (don't forget inflation) for a carrier that isn't (realistically) coming out until 2020? They are going to spend that much on one without catapults? They are going to buy foreign carriers when they will have mastered their own?

Conclusion --- I think not!
It has only expressed interest on purchasing the carrier. There are a lot of steps before the interest is confirmed with the interest of purchasing as you are well-aware of military procurements.

However, I am surprised about Navy's decision. Firstly, because there are already 3 aircraft carriers that are confirmed for the Naval Air Arm; Vikramaditya, Vikrant II and the nuclear-powered carrier that shall commence in 2017. As far as I am aware, the Navy has nowhere confirmed the fourth and fifth carriers as many people are assuming.

We haven't reached that level of technical perfection or even economic clout to maintain and operate 4-5 carriers. Besides, Vikramaditya shall be the last foreign carrier in the Indian armed forces whereas the future shall see domestically-made aircraft carriers, starting Vikrant II.

The second question that has been whizzing in my and my colleagues' heads is that what aircraft do the NAA plan to use for this carrier even if the government confirms the expression of interest for this carrier. F-35 is first of all not open to India for sure, considering that the F-16 bait is only to promote the sale of the Falcon's last model.

The MiGs cannot be either used in this situation since they would need extensive modification, meaning additional cost. Naval Tejas has some chances of operating from this carrier but then again this would take time to further modify the next versions of Mark IIs that are already seeing drastic modifications from the ones that we plan to induct.
 

Quickgun Murugan

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
778
Likes
22
My only concern is economic repercussions of having and maintaining 3+ Aircraft carriers. We have sufficient evidence to prove that Britain, France or Russia could not operate multiple aircraft carriers at the end of the day because of economic reasons and India is definitely not immune to recession.

Indian Navy, no matter what, does not have to prove itself to be a blue water navy since our threat perceptions are only limited to Pakistan and china. I hope they do not consume too much stuff to digest.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Vayusena. India sure has a req for at least 4 carriers as we await the gorshkov and the three planned indigenous ones.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
My only concern is economic repercussions of having and maintaining 3+ Aircraft carriers. We have sufficient evidence to prove that Britain, France or Russia could not operate multiple aircraft carriers at the end of the day because of economic reasons and India is definitely not immune to recession.

Indian Navy, no matter what, does not have to prove itself to be a blue water navy since our threat perceptions are only limited to Pakistan and china. I hope they do not consume too much stuff to digest.
Britain and France don't have an 8-10% growth rate for one. They have a problem. India doesn't. There is only one way India is heading and that's up. India doesn't have to worry about just pak and china, but any unknown threat in the entire IOR. Remember there will be ships in for repairs. So we have to keep cover for that as well.
 

thakur_ritesh

Ambassador
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
4,435
Likes
1,733
can someone throw in the annual figures for maintaining a us cvbg and what are the figures for india’s cvbg?

as far as india is concerned, if we have an average growth rate of around 8% with 3% inflation rate and a constant exchange rate, then the indian economy by 2016 should be worth 2.6t usd and by 2020 it should be hovering around 4t usd.

now keeping in view our defence budget as a % of gdp keeps around 2.5% the expected defence budgets for 2016 will be 65b usd, and for 2020 will be 100b usd.

mind you if there is an appreciation in rupee, it is going to benefit india.
 

Emperor

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
99
Likes
1
rithesh,

Viraat CBG used to cost IN an average of $100 million every year when put on high seas for a long period of time.And a bigger one say Gorshy/IAC will cost $150 million/annum.

While super carriers of CVF might bill the IN a max of 200 million/annum(my wild guesstimate).
These includes the expenses of all the combatants in a CBG not only the AC.For other countries their expenses are far higher than the Indians.

the same invincible class CBG used to cost the brits 130+ million pounds.
To some extent it does needs a consideration of the compliment ships included in the CBG.
The maintenance costs were never an issue.
 

Quickgun Murugan

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
778
Likes
22
Britain and France don't have an 8-10% growth rate for one. They have a problem. India doesn't. There is only one way India is heading and that's up. India doesn't have to worry about just pak and china, but any unknown threat in the entire IOR. Remember there will be ships in for repairs. So we have to keep cover for that as well.
I am not sure, but India too does not have 8-10% growth rate as of now, but is aiming to achieve it in a decades time. Whatever goes up will come down eventually, so was the case for Britain and France. I am not pessimistic about our economy, but I am concerned that too many A/C's might become a burden for our Navy and economy wherein the money could have been spent on better defence deals like more P-8I's and Nuke submarines.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Emporer, I think those figures might not be accurate. I read somewhere that it costs the US about 120-150 million to operate its nuke super carrier. Indian op cost will be far lesser than that.
 

icecoolben

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
Ice, why go for something that britain is looking to phase out when they are offering something that's going to serve them in the future?
Leasing the invincible is useless. We already have the refitted virat with harriers. We need to look forward and not back. With the mrca deal which will either be the super hornet or the mig 35, both carrier capable, the mig 35, being an upgrade of the 29 series that india has already ordered, the QE class will suit just fine with these ACs.
mig-35 has not been navalised and if done would be configured for stobar. Hence could not be used as a carrier aircraft on elizabeth. Super hornet is configured for catobar operation and cannot be used on both elizabeth and vikrant classes. Queen elizabeth can and will only use stovl model f-35 b as its fighter complement.

And u got thanked for the post
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Read up on the QE, it can be adapted to a catobar and stobar op.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Infact it's going to have a ski ramp initially andvthen get converted to catobar should they chose to fly the 35C. I have my facts and so did the one who thanked me for the post.
 

icecoolben

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
The hybrid carrier was proposed so that hawkeye e-2d could be used abroad for awacs role. These designs were the prime causes that shot up carrier cost. The british would never consider stobar, simple reason it combines the worst elements of both stovl and catobar, though they have thoughts that eurofigter would be configured into a navalised stobar aircraft. once british joined jsf and x-35 became the first aircraft to perform a short take off, super-sonic fligt and vertical landing, they never looked back. They are thinking of eliminating catobar in the current design by using a converted v-22 osprey to function awacs role. Pls be comprehensive.
 

K Factor

A Concerned Indian
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,316
Likes
147
Point is - India doesn't need it.

IN has planned to have 4 A/Cs in service by 2020-25. Hopefully, Gorshkov will be operational by 2013 and ADS/Vikrant by 2015.

One must realise that a sudden jump in the number of carriers is not desired. The IN is gradually building it muscle. We are planning to induct carriers one at a time, and if we suddenly go for the QE, we are looking at a lot of logistics problems (Such as manpower, aircraft and the battle group flotilla itself).

It would be wise to take things slowly. Form the CBG for the Gorshov, then the Vikarnt and then ADS-II and ADS-III.

Also, keep in mind that nothing is fool-proof. We are assuming a lot of things here. India's economy might be growing but still, we are nowhere near a position to maintain 5 CBGs.

The even more important question is, do we need 5 CBGs? According to me, we need more SSNs and SSBNs. The IN doesn't have a gold-mine. Carriers will eat up valuable resources. As India's deterrance is not that good right now, I would think that getting at least 4-6 SSBNs should be India's first priority and not 5 carriers.

4 carriers are more than enough, with 2 on stations, one in refit and one on standby.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Kommie, the induction of carriers and boomers are going to happen simultaneously. Its not that one is being neglected. IN plans are huge as far as acquisition is concerned.
Besides nothing is coming tomorrow. Its all 7-8 yrs from now. Capabilities are being built and planned with all that in mind.
 

icecoolben

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
Infact it's going to have a ski ramp initially andvthen get converted to catobar should they chose to fly the 35C. I have my facts and so did the one who thanked me for the post.
sorry, if i had u hurt emotionally. Its just my sense of humour. For efficient catobar operations u need an angled deck. but as we can see from the design its quite clearly not. So even in the future they would have to settle for stovl besides f-35 is destined to be a top-notch fighter till 2040 thats nearly half the life time. So there's no real predications here.
 

K Factor

A Concerned Indian
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,316
Likes
147
Kommie, the induction of carriers and boomers are going to happen simultaneously. Its not that one is being neglected. IN plans are huge as far as acquisition is concerned.
Besides nothing is coming tomorrow. Its all 7-8 yrs from now. Capabilities are being built and planned with all that in mind.
Yusuf sahab,I don;t think IN/MoD had the QE in mind even 6 months before today. :wink:

Modifying existing plans for accomodating a $10 bn + CBG is nearly impossible even with India's stable growing economy.

($ 10 bn figure break-up. $ 3.5-4.5 bn - The A/C itself, $ 1.5-2.25 bn for aircraft - at least 40, $ 1.5 bn - 2 multi-role destroyers for CBG, $ 2 bn - 2 ASuW and one AD frigates, $ 1.5 bn - at least one SSN)


Also, you must not forget the most important aspect. Need for trained personnel to man the carriers and CBGs, and trained naval aviators for the aircraft based on the carrier. You cannot purchase that with money.

I remember one of OoE's famous quotes in this regard - "Amateurs think hardware, professionals think logistics". :)>
 

icecoolben

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
Yusuf, short time ad hoc planning gives us leverage to choose on long term options. One hurried jump into goskov deal has hurt indo-russian relations badly. So, it would be wise on both the governments and armed forces to estimate the capability of the builders and the of absorption and growth potential of the users are well understood while deals are concluded.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top