INS Vikrant Aircraft Carrier (IAC)

[unlimittautar]

Why India choose Russian aircraft carrier ? In same India can buy a new aircraft from UK/Franch?

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Why India choose Russian aircraft carrier ? In same India can buy a new aircraft from UK/Franch?

India choose a Russian carrier because it is cheap. Tell me who will give India a carrier plus 16 Mig-29K and 4 Mig-29KUB for 2.9 billion US $s.
Buying a just carrier from UK or France will cost India approx. 4 billion US $s(The cost of planes is excluded).

 

[Adux]

India choose a Russian carrier because it is cheap. Tell me who will give India a carrier plus 16 Mig-29K and 4 Mig-29KUB for 2.9 billion US $s.
Buying a just carrier from UK or France will cost India approx. 4 billion US $s(The cost of planes is excluded).

Firstly it is important before you spout out , that you have atleast a bit of idea.
1.2.9 billion doesnt include the Aircrafts.
2. A Nimitz class cost god damn 5 billion, Buy a Cavor which is exculding aircrafts cost 2 bilion.
3.Italians are already our Design consultants for IAC, therefore there are people who gives us aircraft carriers, do you know from where viraat and vikrant came from? Indian shipyards?

coming to the rustbucket and dollar sinkhole
Do you know the capability difference because of a newer platform, sortie generation(have you looked at the Island structure of Gorshkov), Do you know how many aircrafts it can carry, Do you know the problems caused by that ruskbucket because of its steam engines. Do you know where the lifts are located, do you know how that will effect Sortie generation and safety?

For the time taken, money spend, and what it cost now? It will cost us nearly 1.5 times of the Cavor with of Half of the capability and Service time.

 

[unlimittautar]

Indigenous air craft carrier(Vikrant class) displacement is 40,000 tonnes,India plan to build 2 more aircraft carrier.I want to know that at same displacement is otherwise it will increase?Now France has started his the Future Air Craft Carrier at displacement of 75000 tonnes.China also buy the air carrier from Ukraine & Uk buld the Elizabe class just as a super aircraft Carrier?Can India build the super air craft carrier ?

 

[EnlightenedMonk]

Indigenous air craft carrier(Vikrant class) displacement is 40,000 tonnes,India plan to build 2 more aircraft carrier.I want to know that at same displacement is otherwise it will increase?Now France has started his the Future Air Craft Carrier at displacement of 75000 tonnes.China also buy the air carrier from Ukraine & Uk buld the Elizabe class just as a super aircraft Carrier?Can India build the super air craft carrier ?

Look, as of now I don't think we need a supercarrier since we don't have global dominance ambitions per se and a supercarrier will also bring along with it some unique challenges for us to face and surmount... These will include the effective strategies related to the escort vessels such as destroyers, frigates and submarines...

If you notice the countries with the big supercarrier ambitions, they all have known sea-faring experience for centuries and have larger ship-building industries than we do...

It is not important just to build a super carrier if you don't have the escort vessels to go with it and don't have a effective strategy for warfare with larger battle groups...

So, the answer to your question of whether we can build a supercarrier now is most certainly NOT unless we have a major upgrade of ship building infrastructure and ship building throughput... But, with the upgradation of some shipbuilding facilities like GRSE in Calcutta, Mazgaon in Mumbai etc I'm sure that within the next 10 - 15 years we can also harbour ambitions of building a supercarrier.

 

[hit&run]

Indigenous air craft carrier(Vikrant class) displacement is 40,000 tonnes,India plan to build 2 more aircraft carrier.I want to know that at same displacement is otherwise it will increase?Now France has started his the Future Air Craft Carrier at displacement of 75000 tonnes.China also buy the air carrier from Ukraine & Uk buld the Elizabe class just as a super aircraft Carrier?Can India build the super air craft carrier ?

india's approach to 40,000 tonnes of displacement is very balanced.China and pakistan has considerably bigger submarine fleet then indian submarine fleet counted all togather (think of worst case secnario that both have attacked). Bigger the size more voulnerable to attack.U.S. Aircraft Carriers Vulnerable to Attack?: The Ticking Time Bomb very intreasting article.
If the Indian Navy can stick to the current plan of having three aircraft carriers by 2020 (i should say must have) even with same or less displacement then we will possess a formidable advantage over the enemy in force projection. But rapid expansion of the enemy submarine force and the modernisation of the missiles they carry will be of serious concern to the Indian Navy.

The Indian Navy’s power projection is second only to the JMSDF, and with the possession of an aircraft carrier. I have no doubt the IN is well on its way to becoming Asia’s best navy but that’s only if the government can get its act together asap. There needs to be a sense of urgency, the same kind the PLA displays.

 

[Adux]

India is building a smaller Aircraft carrier at 40,000 tons is because that is the largest we can build because of our docks!Not because of anything else, We are going for a 65000-70000 ton class from INS Vishaal onwards. India according to our immediate doctrine of being supreme in the Indian Ocean must have 5 Aircraft Carriers with also Airforce bases at A&N and Lakshadweep. Furthermore, We need on an urgent basis 10 SSN's/SSGN's, 2 for each Carrier Battlegroup, as well as 5-6 SSBN's. Those SSK's are only good for littoral warfare as well as for an advesery like Pakistan,not for The big boys, we need big toys in big numbers. We need strategic airlift capacity up from the current Brigade level, We need nearly 200 Fighter jets for the Navy. This isnt my dream, but the Navy's plan by 2030, but I Think it should be done by 2018

 

[Antimony]

india's approach to 40,000 tonnes of displacement is very balanced.China and pakistan has considerably bigger submarine fleet then indian submarine fleet counted all togather (think of worst case secnario that both have attacked). Bigger the size more voulnerable to attack.U.S. Aircraft Carriers Vulnerable to Attack?: The Ticking Time Bomb very intreasting article.
If the Indian Navy can stick to the current plan of having three aircraft carriers by 2020 (i should say must have) even with same or less displacement then we will possess a formidable advantage over the enemy in force projection. But rapid expansion of the enemy submarine force and the modernisation of the missiles they carry will be of serious concern to the Indian Navy.

Not sure who Mr. David Crane is, but his assumptions seem a bit ameteurish. A CVN does not float all by itself. It is a part of a Carrier Battle Group (or a Carrier Strike Group as per the new terminolgy). First of all one has to find the Carrier and track it so that ordnance may be deployed. Then there are several layers of defenses (including submarimes and anti submarine frigates) that need to be breached. This will give an idea of what I am talking about

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/docs/591.pdf

This link shows how a battle group works
HowStuffWorks "How Carrier Battle Groups Work"

 

[hit&run]

Not sure who Mr. David Crane is, but his assumptions seem a bit ameteurish. A CVN does not float all by itself. It is a part of a Carrier Battle Group (or a Carrier Strike Group as per the new terminolgy). First of all one has to find the Carrier and track it so that ordnance may be deployed. Then there are several layers of defenses (including submarimes and anti submarine frigates) that need to be breached. This will give an idea of what I am talking about

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/docs/591.pdf

This link shows how a battle group works
HowStuffWorks "How Carrier Battle Groups Work"

First of all we are talking about Indian indigenous ACC which may not be able to do what US ACSG can do.

Secondly this article is raising few concerns about vulnerability of ACC and is linked here with an intention to provide information to Indian enthusiasts; to be more informed about this topic.

Thirdly this article is mostly telling about different(ISOLATED) (whold be) threats to an ACC. May GOD save America and its ACC, when all different ISOLATED threats will be placed together by an aggressor the situation would be different.

Fourth and fortunately till this time no country on this planet possess capacity to even establish a continuous target track of ACC.

Fifth and final is that its just a matter of 5-6 years when advances in radar, acoustic, Electra-optical, electronic-intelligence and long rage super sonic cruise missiles will be common to many countries including Russia and china.

Space-based(high resolution-high altitude) or airborne radar with the capacity to track moving ground targets(such as the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System, or JSTARS) look feasible in near future.
Most Importantly as i said before, this is regarding Indian indigenous ACC not US. what US will be doing to counter these threats( i know they can do) is none of my business.

we are getting this home made product within next few years(5-6). At that time equations will be different to US as well, so Indian aspirations are more sensitive and concern prone for the same.
thanks.

No Beard is dense for Gillette Mach 3.0 and Gillette fusion Mach 5.0 '' O Best a man can get''. Go Brahmos Go....... :blum3:

 

[Antimony]

H&R,

The article you quoted talked about the vulnerabilities of the US carriers, and I think the one I quoted disproves that.

Furthermore the author's basic premise of targetting lone ACCs is wrong. Even the Indian Navy utilises INS Viraat in a Battle Group. As per wiki:

The centrepiece of the Indian carrier battle group is currently the INS Viraat. The Indian Navy's CBG usually consists of two destroyers (usually of the P-15 Delhi Class, previously Kashins were used) and two or more frigates, (usually a combination of P-16 Brahmaputra and Krivak III or Talwar class) and one support ship.

I appreciate the intention to educate Indian enthusiasts, but any discussion of any military technology is probably incomplete without understanding the underlying doctrine of use. The info about CVBs was in that context.

You are right in saying that the IN's capability is different (by far) from the US Navy's. However your point was that a larger carrier is more vulnerable, which I think I disproved. The point is moot, since you and I both know that we are not getting a Nimitz class anytime soon

Fifth and final is that its just a matter of 5-6 years when advances in radar, acoustic, Electra-optical, electronic-intelligence and long rage super sonic cruise missiles will be common to many countries including Russia and china.

I know that this is not related to the IN, but as a side note it is interesting to know that the current venerable Nimitz class is being upgraded/ replaced by the new Gerald Ford Class, which has stealth capabilities. The point is that while the aggressors move ahead in technology, the defenders will not be sitting idle

 

[hit&run]

H&R
The article you quoted talked about the vulnerabilities of the US carriers, and I think the one I quoted disproves that.

I don’t know whether what you are trying to prove will help this discussion. Anyhow good on you.
Furthermore the author's basic premise of targeting lone ACCs is wrong.
I would rather quote it as an another perception of an author which is good to know for wanna be.
I appreciate the intention to educate Indian enthusiasts, but any discussion of any military technology is probably incomplete without understanding the underlying doctrine of use. The info about CVBs was in that context.
I will eye on that doctrine changing instantly, to trigger nuclear war as the only salvation to save US ACC bucket full of all US eggs once advances by the aggressor will become realistic.
Furthermore I will add any Navy’s wisdom of war, that Principles/doctrine on any subject have exceptions. (Being a week enemy I rely on that.) The exceptions to the principles of war tend to be crucial. In war every problem, and every principle, is a duality. Like a coin, it has two faces. This is the inevitable consequence of the fact that war is a two part affair, so imposing the need that while hitting, one must guard. If you are rigid on your argument then i think we should invite more thoughts to this topic.
How things work on US ACC in particular is beyond this thread to discuss. Interestingly the underlying doctrine of use almost remains the same for all USS ACC irrespective of their size so your point doesn’t prove anything for proportion to vulnerability and size. NSWC carderock, at the David Taylor Model Basin, has done excellent vulnerability analyses for many years. Its quantitative work is classified, but its general conclusion is that US warship of ~ 10,000 tons and up could be made much less vulnerable to firepower kills from cruise missiles than they are now. One may argue that it is more design concentric but vulnerability is there which disapprove your rigid comment on invulnerability.
Another assessment ‘’cruise missile warfare’’ Naval institute 1985 – Conclude Vulnerability is proportional to the cube root of displacement. This will give you a breather isn’t it. Since displacement is roughly proportional to three dimensions of length, beam and draft, the cube root reduces to one dimension:viannen_10:.
But another cane of worms is If a 60000 ton ship carries twenty times the payload of a 3000 ton ship but can only take 3-4 times as many missiles or torpedo hits as a small one before it is out of action, then that is a substantial disadvantage offsetting its greater payload. So bigger the size more is vulnerability as it will carry more fuel, ordnance, air crafts, or Men than several smaller ships and is a hazard of putting many eggs in one basket.
For on being topic and Indian concern I would like to study more on Indian navy’s decision which as I assume is very balanced with current displacement. We have no desire to operate for ‘Da Mission world dominance’ like US. The Indian ocean/BOB & Arabian Sea is our area of interest i bet. Even having capacities of blue water navy we are more concerned for security of inner waters. For India littoral waters will be arena of modern fleet actions.
It’s worth worrying for better analytical criteria for ship procurement than combat potential to maximize net delivered combat power over the combat life of the ship. This takes into account the possibility that the ship will be incapacitated in the midst of fulfilling its mission.
For operational planning the best criterion for evaluation is to maximize the net delivered combat power over the effective life of the task force. As a tactical factor large ships with big payloads should be protected by small screening ships, the loss of which can be accepted. Susceptibility to hits can and be attenuated by defensive fire power and soft-kill, but these may not be enough in littoral waters, where sudden attacks at relatively close range will be more frequent. In India we are going to deal with that as our neighbour is our enemy ‘a typical Navy Foe is its neighbour' and US is immune to this.
US navy’s current inventory is mainly in large war ships and ACC that are potent offensively but depend almost entirely for survivability on reducing susceptibility by a layered defence (as you too has mentioned) of combat air patrols, SAMs, and hard kill & soft kill point defences. Even more they depend for survival on out scouting the enemy and attacking him not only effectively, but decisively FIRST i repeat FIRST.
These tactics are suitable for a fleet in the open ocean and will lose their efficacy in littoral waters. For India littoral waters will be arena of modern fleet actions and it is the area of interest too.

You are right in saying that the IN's capability is different (by far) from the US Navy's. However your point was that a larger carrier is more vulnerable, which I think I disproved. The point is moot, since you and I both know that we are not getting a Nimitz class anytime soon

See, I have no affinity with any article or to PROVE something. For on being topic and Indian concern I would like to study more on Indian navy’s decision which as I assume is very balanced with current displacement. Two ACC with modest displacement here we go ‘Balle Balle’. We have no desire to operatee almost everywher like US. The Indian ocean/BOB & Arabian Sea is our area of interest i bet. Even having capacities of blue water navy we are more concerned for security of inner waters.

regards. jai hind

 

[Antimony]

For India littoral waters will be arena of modern fleet actions and it is the area of interest too.

We have no desire to operatee almost everywher like US. The Indian ocean/BOB & Arabian Sea is our area of interest i bet. Even having capacities of blue water navy we are more concerned for security of inner waters.

Speak for yourself, I would like 10 CVBGs with Ford class carriers, all monitored by the Death Star II orbitting the moon

But coming back to reality, I do think that the IN would have to look beyond littoral operatins, if we really want to protect our maritime interests in the IO region. Yes, we cannot afford and do not need a Nimitz, because our foprce projections requirements are far modest compared to the US'.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Speak for yourself, I would like 10 CVBGs with Ford class carriers, all monitored by the Death Star II orbitting the moon

Buddy a man must always stand/work on ground if he tries to fly like birds he will fall back on ground and may even hurt himself.

But coming back to reality, I do think that the IN would have to look beyond littoral operatins, if we really want to protect our maritime interests in the IO region. Yes, we cannot afford and do not need a Nimitz, because our foprce projections requirements are far modest compared to the US'.

Now this is much matured.

 

[natarajan]

we need atleast one super carrier to tackle chinese as they will get 6+ ac and in future super carriers so it will be great if we get first

 

[Adux]

For all the pessismist,

It is a given fact, that India will have atleast 4 aircraft carriers; ie atleast 3 IAC's and 1 Gorshkov by 2025,

 

[natarajan]

we need atleast one super carrier to tackle chinese as they will get 6+ ac and in future super carriers so it will be great if we get first

wont use this term but came out as they have occupied kashmir and trying for arunachal pradesh

 

[Tamil]

Need a Change b4 2025

As per thought we need at least 5 AC. 2 on Arabian sea/2 on BOB/1 on Indian Ocean.

and Navy want a 250+ fighter jets by 2025 is important. what is our strength now is not worthy. we at least triple them by 2025. we need min 4 big docks to build more AC/destroyers/[SIZE=-1]cruiser/[/SIZE]frigate/supply ships/Submarines.

AC fighter jets MiG-29k/Tejas are now OK but in future we need a real tougher Fighter Jets.

Maritime flights to by 10 times higher than now. else we face a tofouch fight in future with our lovable nebiours

Think Positive Good will Happen to all.

 

[Adux]

Suresh Mehta has already told that Indian Navy will have 300 aircrafts

 

[youngindian]

Kakodkar: India can build N-carriers too

Aug. 2: India can build its own nuclear powered aircraft carrier and warships, said the country’s top nuclear scientist. "Yes, we have the capability and technical expertise to build nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and war ships of global standards. When the government asks us to build such ships, we will do it," Dr Anil Kakodkar, chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), said on Sunday.

He was addressing reporters at the Propulsion Reactor Project (PRP) site at Indira Gandhi Centre For Atomic Research (IGCAR), where INS Arihant, country’s first indigenous nuclear-powered submarine took shape.

Disclosing that India has mastered the technology to build "light water reactors", Dr Kakodkar said, "INS Arihant is powered by a Light Water Reactor built by the scientists of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (Barc). We have the capability to build big Light Water Reactors to meet the energy requirements of the country."

The AEC chairman said that the kind of reactor built for the nuclear submarine could be used to electrify villages and remote areas not covered by the national grid. "We are not ruling out the possibilities of using such reactors for rural electrification.

Though the cost of power production may be a bit expensive, we can always explore the possibilities for using this compact reactors for bringing light to the villages," he said.

Dr Kakodkar said the commissioning of the first reactor at Koodankulam had been delayed.

"It will be ready for fuelling early next year. The 500 MW fast breeder reactor will be ready for commission by 2011," he said.

Dr S. Banerjee, director, the BARC said that the Light Water Reactor was more flexible than other reactors.

"It can work 30 times faster than the conventional reactors," Dr Kakodkar said.

This will help the Navy personnel to manoeuvre the vessel to speeds of their requirement," Atomic Energy Commission chairman Kakodkar said.

The Asian Age - Enjoy the difference

 

[nitesh]

cat is out of the bag:

Indian Aircraft Carrier Back in Service in a Month - Defense News

The Navy's long-term plans include a blue water force with six aircraft carriers and improvements in littoral warfare capabilities.