Should India Be Building Another Carrier?

[arp2041]

Observers are questioning the wisdom of India’s decision to begin design work on its second homemade aircraft carrier, even as its first indigenous carrier faces more than two years of delays due to technical snags and its quest to refit a Russian-built carrier has been beset by years of delays and billions in cost overruns.

Sources said the second indigenous carrier, to be named the Vishal, will have a displacement of 65,000 tons, 25,000 tons heavier than the first indigenous carrier, called Vikrant.

Vishal will feature steam catapults, operate larger fighter aircraft, and carry an airborne early-warning (AEW) system and aerial refuelers.

An Indian Navy official said Vishal will also fly naval versions of the Light Combat Aircraft, which is in development.

The decision to go ahead with such a complex and costly project has evoked mixed reactions among analysts here.

While an Indian Navy official said India needs at least three aircraft carriers, Zachariah Mathews, a retired Navy commodore and defense analyst here, questioned the need to spend money on a second carrier at this stage.

“The Indian Navy needs to meet other priorities, including adding more warships and assets now. The carrier is not a top priority,” he said.

Vishal is expected to cost about $1.5 billion, according to Defence Ministry sources, compared with $750 million for the first indigenous carrier.

The Vishal project is still in the design stage, which is being undertaken by the Navy’s Naval Design Bureau.

The Navy has decided not to seek outside help as it did with Vikrant, when it hired Italy-based Fincantieri’s Naval Vessel Business Unit to help prepare the concept, design and implementation plans. The Navy might, however, seek help from the Russian Design Bureau at a later date in order to integrate the Russian aircraft onto Vishal.

While Vishal’s design is not finalized, sources said the carrier was originally planned to be 44,000 tons in 2010 before that was changed to 65,000.

India already has one aircraft carrier — the 53-year-old Viraat, purchased from the British Navy as the former Hermes in 1987 — in its inventory.

The 25-year-old Vikramaditya, purchased from Russia, is expected to join the inventory next year. Its delivery had been delayed by more than five years and was approved only after India agreed in 2010 to pay $2 billion more than the figure established in the 2005 contract.

Vikrant and Vikramaditya will fly the MiG-29K aircraft, but will not fly any AEW aircraft as conceived for Vishal. The Indian Navy source said the MiG-29K will likely not fly from Vishal; officials believe they will need more advanced aircraft to fly from the ship, such as the Russian-made Su-33 and MiG-35.

Meanwhile, Vikrant, which is already delayed by two years, faces yet another two-year delay. Carrier builder Cochin Shipyard is facing difficulties with the main reduction gear box supplied by Gujarat-based Elecon Engineering, which in turn has joined with Renk AG of Germany to build the two main reduction gears for the carrier.

Sources said that apart from delays in the delivery of the gear boxes, the boxes themselves — each weighing around 90 tons — have never been handled by Indian shipyards.

Other delay-causing issues include an accident with a diesel generator and an issue with its alignment. Vikrant is now expected to be inducted by 2017, two years later than planned. The scheduled keel laying was pushed back from 2009 to last year.


Should India Be Building Another Carrier? | Defense News | defensenews.com

 

[Abingdonboy]

In short-YES!!

 

[arp2041]

^^^ In short "why"

 

[karan21]

yessss, india will be building manu acs in this century and our navy has a lot of money right now.

every year the cost of the ac will multiply, so why not buy all the equipment of start cons right now. remember it takes 5-10 yrs to build each of them, we should have 2 atlest uc all the time..

 

[Skull and Bones]

Britain is making two Elizabeth class ACs, and given the economic shyte they're in, i bet they'll sell one of them.

 

[KRAIT]

Britain is making two Elizabeth class ACs, and given the economic shyte they're in, i bet they'll sell one of them.

Its sell to India was discussed earlier but later it was scrapped. We won't be buying one of them.

 

[arp2041]

I was a staunch supporter of bigger & better AC for IN, but this article clearly raises some questions:

1. Is Indian Navy "carrier obsessed", even if it is than it has a refurbished INS Vikramaditya for now.

2. If the IN wants to give air support to it's surface fleet than it can always buy at least 100 fighter jets which can be based on shore (east, west, Lakshwadeep, A&N) & since they have long ranges & facility for in flight refueling, they can always support the fleet no matter how far they are.

3. The cost of building INS Vishal will be "vishal" (huge), it will take around 10-12 years to join the service + it will charge around $ 2 billion to the exchequer, now if we compare with Kolkata class destroyer ($ 500 million a piece) we can get 4 of them in the price of 1 AC & we will get all the 4 ships in the same time as that taken by 1 AC.

4. Again a carrier demands a carrier battle group (7 additional ships) which are required to escort the carrier every time it travels to the sea, this means 8 precious ships of IN (it has total 160 ships) are at one place at a time ( a serious drain on resources when the IOR countries are looking towards IN to guard them against any threat), on the other hand there is no need for escorts if we build frigates or destroyers in it's place.

+ though a bigger AC looks very impressive in a navy but we have to ask if it is worth the money.

+ I am for 1 AC (INS Vikramaditya) & in place of making INS Vishal, we can go for more frigates/destroyer.

+ (Since we can afford) One option (if IN desperately need another carrier) can be that - we should try to buy the British AC or for that matter some other AC, this will help as such that we don't have to make the AC (which can result in delays) & can free the Indian shipyards (which are full as of now) to work on some other important warships for IN ( I think in a navy nos. are more important than a bigger or better carrier until of course it is not US navy ).

 

[Asskicker]

Its sell to India was discussed earlier but later it was scrapped. We won't be buying one of them.

When and why it was scrapped...?

 

[Abingdonboy]

Britain is making two Elizabeth class ACs, and given the economic shyte they're in, i bet they'll sell one of them.

I had discussed this deal with a friend of mine who works for a certain major UK defence company and is a senior manager in the said company and he is part of the Asian (mostly India). He told me there had only ever been intial repercussions wrt the QE class ACCs but despite all his team's efforts the IN brass really weren't that interested and were more interested in assistance in India's own domestic ACC construction than an off the shelf purchase of an ACC. He told me that in many instances the IN brass had been quite frank with him and his sales teams in and said why would India want to buy a ship that was already over budget and had never met a single construction deadline and why should India want to support foreign workers and foreign laborers over Indian and if India was to make the QE class ACC at home it would've cost them a fraction of the price. Having said that my friend tells me that the offer is still on the table and there is no hurry for India to make a decision as they are well aware that of the 2 ACCs one will be moth-balled almost instantly on commissioning and the other will be without an air-group for the first 5+ years of its life and will remain in-dock most likely for much of the early years due to costing. He also told me that India is always surprising him and that it appears to him negitaors play a tactful game of deliberate misinformation and talking down interest in many cases. We'll have to wait and see but I wouldn't hold my breath and I think India should go for an indigenous solution wherever possible. India can absorb delays on this front, war is hardly imminent.

 

[arp2041]

India can absorb delays on this front, war is hardly imminent.

@abing, mate, i din't expect these words atleast from u

On the contrary we should build our forces as though war is right around the corner.

IMHO, time is a luxury which India hardly enjoys, it is surrounded by threats all around & Chinese Navy is adding ships at the rate which has no precedent, If IN really wants to add another carrier to it's fleet than it should go for the QE as desperate time calls for desperate measures. I am saying that this can ease the pressure from the shipyards & they can work on more frigates/destroyers in parallel. The pros of this deal can be:

1. It will be the carrier of huge size & will able to support many aircrafts, just what the IN wants.

2. IN will get the carrier around the same time as IAC-1 i.e. 2017-18, that means we will be fielding 3 carriers around 2018 or so (IN's dream of all time).

+ let this be the last AC we buy off the shelf b'coz after that atleast for 30-40 years IN will always field 3 AC's even if it does not make more.

+ We have seen with the INS Vik & INS Vikrant deal that delays are bound to happen, i see no difference with INS Vishal, this deal will at least ensure that we get a hugely capable AC on time.

 

[INDIAISM]

I think it depends on future doctrine of Indian Navy.....i mean If we want to be a rigional power..then even Two CBG will more then enough for us as we have A&N island in Bay of Bengal and
Lakswadeep in Arabian sea..
where we can station Two squadron of Su30 Mki each......and then you have Mauritius who is ready to give two of its island to us where we can make another air base or Naval Base.......

And if we want to be a global power then even 5 CBG won't be enough.....

 

[Abingdonboy]

@abing, mate, i din't expect these words atleast from u

On the contrary we should build our forces as though war is right around the corner.

IMHO, time is a luxury which India hardly enjoys, it is surrounded by threats all around & Chinese Navy is adding ships at the rate which has no precedent, If IN really wants to add another carrier to it's fleet than it should go for the QE as desperate time calls for desperate measures. I am saying that this can ease the pressure from the shipyards & they can work on more frigates/destroyers in parallel. The pros of this deal can be:

1. It will be the carrier of huge size & will able to support many aircrafts, just what the IN wants.

2. IN will get the carrier around the same time as IAC-1 i.e. 2017-18, that means we will be fielding 3 carriers around 2018 or so (IN's dream of all time).

+ let this be the last AC we buy off the shelf b'coz after that atleast for 30-40 IN will always field 3 AC's even if it does not make more.

+ We have seen with the INS Vik & INS Vikrant deal that delays are bound to happen, i see no difference with INS Vishal, this deal will at least ensure that we get a hugely capable AC on time.

Mate, I understand where you're coming from but there is no need for your alarmist tone. Yes India should be adding military capabilities at great pace but on this front (ACC front) I think India should defiantly go for "Made in India" as ACCs are incredibly complex ships that can emply thousands of skilled laborers and technicians and for strategic weapons like an ACC you need domestic solutions same way as you wouldn't want the Arihant built in UK the only nation you can count on in times of crisis is your own. I would not be opposed to the IN procuring a QE class ACC over and above the IAC-1 and IAC-2 vut I would not want one being bought over an Indian built ACC because the skills and tricks gained from domestic construction of an ACC is invaluable and will keep the Indian marine building industry in good steed in the decades to come and this is invaluable. Mistakes have been made wrt IAC-1 but lessons have been learnt and I am hopeful IAC-2 will be more succesful in meeting targets. We MUST bear in mind IAC-1 is India's FIRST try and IAC-2 India's SECOND. The US and UK (mainly US of course) has decades of experience and has built dozens of ACCs between them and many of these Supercarriers and nuclear powered, India isn't necessarily going to find it easy going at first but time will help India immensely with experience. Same goes for other much lamented indigenous projects like LCA, Arjun, Kaveri etc- the good thing about building the first of anything is you'll never have to do so again! And I think many are being too harsh wrt the IAC-1 and delays.



The PLA(N) is not going to be able to threten the IN in the IOR anytime soon and year by year the IN is proving it is the dominant force in the region.

 

[INDIC]

3 Aircraft carriers, what is wrong in that.

 

[sancho]

I was a staunch supporter of bigger & better AC for IN, but this article clearly raises some questions

Sorry, but that's a crappy article, the only point that is useful is:

Zachariah Mathews, a retired Navy commodore and defense analyst here, questioned the need to spend money on a second carrier at this stage.

“The Indian Navy needs to meet other priorities, including adding more warships and assets now. The carrier is not a top priority,” he said.

Which is true, at the current stage and with 2 x carriers coming in for coastal and regional defence, additional Destroyers, Frigates and most importantly subs should have higher priority. However, IAC2 is meant for future threats and is needed according to the future doctrine! IN must be able to project the power and pose a credible threat to PLAN and areas in the east to deter China. That is only possible with SSBNs, SSNs and more capable carriers, so for the future a IAC 2 is more than important.
Another point is, that "designing" IAC2 now, has nothing to do with the "production" issues of IAC1! The earlier is necessary today, to propperly plan and construct IAC2 in future, that's why the design, JV partners, as well as fighters are evaluated now and not after the induction of IAC1. Not to forget that we learn much from the construction of IAC1 now, that will be helpful in the construction of IAC2, because except of the size of the carrier and the take off system for the fighters, everything will be similar to IAC1.

I think it depends on future doctrine of Indian Navy.....i mean If we want to be a rigional power..then even Two CBG will more then enough for us as we have A&N island in Bay of Bengal and
Lakswadeep in Arabian sea..
where we can station Two squadron of Su30 Mki each......and then you have Mauritius who is ready to give two of its island to us where we can make another air base or Naval Base.......

And if we want to be a global power then even 5 CBG won't be enough.....

IN is already the biggest regional power, with the USN as the biggest external power in the region. They also benefit from IAF and Indias strategic location, so we don't really need more carriers for this reason. Neither has India or IN an interest to be a global power, but they must be part of our deterence against the most important threats and that not only in our backyard, but also in theirs. Therefor, projecting the power to the east is an inevitable task for IN, at least towards the east!

 

[Veritas]

3 Aircraft carriers, what is wrong in that.

Defense budget is not free, Carriers are resource hogs. Indian economy cannot support the super-ambitious Navy because even today majority of Indians live in Poverty. Squalor. Hunger.

A third carrier is purely screwed up Priority. You want to go toe-to-toe with China big fella? How about growing the economy to that scale before jacking off your Muscle?