Indian Navy Discussions and Updates

[kay_man]

The third carrier being planned will have at-least 50% more displacement than the carrier under construction in Kochi, also the design could be a conventionally powered CATOBAR than the STOBAR design for the current under construction vessel. The IN has been generating info through RFIs issued for carrier based aircraft as well as launch systems. Interest has also been shared for carrier based AWACS platforms. The new design will be larger, will be able to have a higher no of fighters / fighter mix deployed and may also be able to deploy fixed wing AWACS platforms. So there are significant capability differences being planned. If it works out then there were even discussions about a 3rd Carrier which would be similar in design to the second one, this however is not confirmed as it way ahead in the future.

The first vikrant class carrier will be a STOBAR carrier with a displacement of 40,000 tonnes. It is designated as CV-01.
Work has also begun on the second carrier which is a CATOBAR carrier with a displacement of 65,000 tonnes. It is designated as CV-02. The keel has not yet been laid down.
Although a third carrier is planned, order has not been by the Navy so far. This may be because, by the time both the indigenous carriers will enter service, the INS Vikramaditya will also be in active service and the Navy will have its 3 carriers as planned.
However if order for the third carrier is placed it will definitely be a CATOBAR carrier of 65,000 tonne class.

 

[dragonfire]

Work has also begun on the second carrier which is a CATOBAR carrier with a displacement of 65,000 tonnes. It is designated as CV-02. The keel has not yet been laid down.

When you state work has begun on the second indigenous carrier, what exactly does it mean. As of now has the design been finalised. The keel laying will not be possible till the time the first carrier moves out of the dry dock at Cochin Shipyard. Has any modular construction started off-site, can it start before a structural plan is finalised.

 

[kay_man]

When you state work has begun on the second indigenous carrier, what exactly does it mean. As of now has the design been finalised. The keel laying will not be possible till the time the first carrier moves out of the dry dock at Cochin Shipyard. Has any modular construction started off-site, can it start before a structural plan is finalised.

The design work is underway. As far as i know the design has not been finalized and so no actual construction has begun on CV-02.
However the Navy has confirmed the order, so we can be sure that project will go ahead.

 

[dragonfire]

The design work is underway. As far as i know the design has not been finalized and so no actual construction has begun on CV-02.
However the Navy has confirmed the order, so we can be sure that project will go ahead.

That the navy is keen on a second and then perhaps a third domestically developed carrier has been known for atleast 2 years now. The design part as far as i know is pending due the decision on the option of going with either the CATOBAR model or the STOBAR model. For CATOBAR the EMALS system was being considered, the F-35C had recieved interest from India etc. If the GOI decides to go-ahead and acquire these capabilities and is able to generate the same from the suppliers then a CATOBAR design would be required, OTOH if the STOBAR model is considered with the Mig-29Ks and the LCA Tejas Naval variant then the design would be similar but larger than the IAC 1, for which i am sure that the design is already ready. Whatever the IN, MoD and GOI decides it should start fast so that atleast the modular construction can be utilised and the off-site construction of the modules for the IAC 2 can be started.

 

[kay_man]

That the navy is keen on a second and then perhaps a third domestically developed carrier has been known for atleast 2 years now. The design part as far as i know is pending due the decision on the option of going with either the CATOBAR model or the STOBAR model. For CATOBAR the EMALS system was being considered, the F-35C had recieved interest from India etc. If the GOI decides to go-ahead and acquire these capabilities and is able to generate the same from the suppliers then a CATOBAR design would be required, OTOH if the STOBAR model is considered with the Mig-29Ks and the LCA Tejas Naval variant then the design would be similar but larger than the IAC 1, for which i am sure that the design is already ready. Whatever the IN, MoD and GOI decides it should start fast so that atleast the modular construction can be utilised and the off-site construction of the modules for the IAC 2 can be started.

The information that the second carrier would be 65,000 tonne class, i got from Wikipedia and few other sources. But if i were to apply my common sense i would say that the second carrier would also be of the 40,000 tonne STOBAR type.
If the design of the first carrier is accepted by the navy and if it is successful....then it would want to replicate the success.
Also, India would have asked for design consultancy from U.S, French or other country before going for a large and expensive 65,000 tonne carrier which i dont think it has.

 

[dragonfire]

The information that the second carrier would be 65,000 tonne class, i got from Wikipedia and few other sources.

Yes the second IAC being in a 65k ton class has been doing the rounds for a while now.

But if i were to apply my common sense i would say that the second carrier would also be of the 40,000 tonne STOBAR type.
If the design of the first carrier is accepted by the navy and if it is successful....then it would want to replicate the success.

From a Defense technology perspective India is looking at jumping a huge technology gap currently. It is aiming at jumping from a LCA Tejas to a Stealth AMCA, it is trying to move from UAVs to stealth UCAVs, the IN already deploys some of the world best design in its latest warships. India is hungry to be globally contemporary, it's looking at making up for lost time.

Also, India would have asked for design consultancy from U.S, French or other country before going for a large and expensive 65,000 tonne carrier which i dont think it has.

If India can design and construct a STOBAR 40K ton class carrier then it is safe to assume that it does have the right skill sets to design a 65k ton class STOBAR vessel. However when it comes to a CATOBAR model then it could be different story as it has not operated, designed or constructed such a vessel, also some of the technologies required are not currently internally available

 

[shag]

Yes the second IAC being in a 65k ton class has been doing the rounds for a while now.



From a Defense technology perspective India is looking at jumping a huge technology gap currently. It is aiming at jumping from a LCA Tejas to a Stealth AMCA, it is trying to move from UAVs to stealth UCAVs, the IN already deploys some of the world best design in its latest warships. India is hungry to be globally contemporary, it's looking at making up for lost time.



If India can design and construct a STOBAR 40K ton class carrier then it is safe to assume that it does have the right skill sets to design a 65k ton class STOBAR vessel. However when it comes to a CATOBAR model then it could be different story as it has not operated, designed or constructed such a vessel, also some of the technologies required are not currently internally available

Not that it completely negates your point but indian navy did operate ins vikrant with a steam catapult to launch the alizes before the harriers were inducted, ski jump was installed and catapult was removed. So it has indeed operated catapult launch systems historically though not modern ones. More informed people than me can post how much the tech has changed sice then.

 

[dragonfire]

Not that it completely negates your point but indian navy did operate ins vikrant with a steam catapult to launch the alizes before the harriers were inducted, ski jump was installed and catapult was removed. So it has indeed operated catapult launch systems historically though not modern ones. More informed people than me can post how much the tech has changed sice then.

You are correct the INS Vikrant was operated till about 1989 using Catapults, although the Sea Harriers were inducted in 1982-84 period, the Alize's were operated till the end of that decade. However it was not an Indian designed or constructed vessel, it was a British design. The point i was trying to make was that it would be easier for IN to develop a larger vessel of the same design / type than a totally new design

 

[shag]

You are correct the INS Vikrant was operated till about 1989 using Catapults, although the Sea Harriers were inducted in 1982-84 period, the Alize's were operated till the end of that decade. However it was not an Indian designed or constructed vessel, it was a British design. The point i was trying to make was that it would be easier for IN to develop a larger vessel of the same design / type than a totally new design

The point was regarding operating experience with catapults. Thats very important and not really easy to acquire. Perhaps more importantly indian navy pilots have also been traing at a US navy school on t-45 goshawks for arrested recovery etc. i am not sure if it includes catapult launch training but arrested recovery is the trickier thing to master than catapult launch as far as I understand.

 

[swerve]

Note that India would have had a carrier engaged in combat operations 4 years after commissioning if she'd not been in dry dock when war broke out. She was in combat 6 years later.

Some people are claiming that it would take India (or China) decades to learn how to operate catapults.

 

[shag]

Note that India would have had a carrier engaged in combat operations 4 years after commissioning if she'd not been in dry dock when war broke out. She was in combat 6 years later.

Some people are claiming that it would take India (or China) decades to learn how to operate catapults.

Thats true, infact at one point pakistani media even claimed that the INS vikrant had been sunk in 65 war. She ultimately saw action in 1971 when her aircraft raided chittagong and cox bazar, and she lead the blockade of east pakistan(now bangladesh). btw all through this time she was still operating with catapult launched alizes. STOVL config with harriers came sometime in 80s iirc.

 

[dragonfire]

Note that India would have had a carrier engaged in combat operations 4 years after commissioning if she'd not been in dry dock when war broke out. She was in combat 6 years later.

Some people are claiming that it would take India (or China) decades to learn how to operate catapults.

Precisely why IN should stick to the STOBAR model. It would take some time for the operational paradigms to be worked out as the current carrier is a STOVL config operating Harriers. If you invest time and facilities to operationalise a new config then should maximise on the learnings to utilise the same for the future also. The IN Pilots who get trained to operate on the first IAC can be part of the next batch of pilots and their training for the second IAC, because the model would be the same and in all probability the aircrafts too (Mig-29Ks and LCA Tejas N).

Also in a war scenario if one of the carriers is in the dock and not operational then the air wing would more or less be constrained in their usage, whereas if there is the same model and aircraft, attrition can be managed very effectively and maybe additional aircraft can be deployed as well from the operational carrier

 

[swerve]

The carrier I referred to was cat & trap, not STOVL. There were no STOVL carriers in 1965.

Note that: India bought a British carrier in 1958. After a thorough refit, she was handed over in 1961. Before that, India had never operated a carrier. Four years later, she was fully operational, with catapult-launched aircraft, & would have seen action if she hadn't been in dock for maintenance. She did see action in 1971.

I've seen suggestions that starting from now (i.e. after 50 years of carrier operations) it would take the IN much longer to be able to operate a cat & trap carrier than it did in reality from buying its first ever carrier to using it successfully in a war.

 

[shag]

The carrier I referred to was cat & trap, not STOVL. There were no STOVL carriers in 1965.

Note that: India bought a British carrier in 1958. After a thorough refit, she was handed over in 1961. Before that, India had never operated a carrier. Four years later, she was fully operational, with catapult-launched aircraft, & would have seen action if she hadn't been in dock for maintenance. She did see action in 1971.

I've seen suggestions that starting from now (i.e. after 50 years of carrier operations) it would take the IN much longer to be able to operate a cat & trap carrier than it did in reality from buying its first ever carrier to using it successfully in a war.

Is that a question? Frankly my understanding on the subject is limited. I am not in a position to answer that, but its a good question and I myself have been puzzled by it. Maybe its because catapult technology/ops have become much more complex since the old carriers? it would be nice if someone can explain that in more detail.

 

[swerve]

I think it's just nonsense, personally.

Some of the comments I've seen suggest it'll take China (which is able to learn from 90 years of published accounts of carrier operations) longer to get proficient than it took Japan, the UK & USA to develop carrier aviation up to WW2, having to make it up as they went & learn from mistakes. I don't believe that.

 

[dragonfire]

The carrier I referred to was cat & trap, not STOVL. There were no STOVL carriers in 1965.

Swerve I stated that the current carrier is a STOVL carrier operating the harriers (INS Viraat)

Precisely why IN should stick to the STOBAR model. It would take some time for the operational paradigms to be worked out as the current carrier is a STOVL config operating Harriers.

--

I've seen suggestions that starting from now (i.e. after 50 years of carrier operations) it would take the IN much longer to be able to operate a cat & trap carrier than it did in reality from buying its first ever carrier to using it successfully in a war.

Well i doubt the kind of time frame being discussed here for either China or India for learning to operate catapult carriers. Even though India last operated the Alizes in 1989 on the INS Vikrant, the catpult was operated for more than a decade atleast, however from a modern / contemporary systems perspective it would take some time but not in decades. Besides in these days of interoperability with the USN, training programs can be imparted to the IN pilots and air wing/crew to operate a CATOBAR carrier. However i still suggest/hope for the second IAC to be STOBAR config.

 

[rama2011]

india< future carriers...

in the ligth of the government plans to field at least three aircraft carriers by 2020,there should be more rational approach towards the process of acquisition policy.as times always play a crucial factor,efforts towards speedy acquisition of equipments needed by navy should be considerd while speedy and massive expansion plans and execution of pla-navy should always form the framework for any modernisation policy of government.....

 

[shag]

I think it's just nonsense, personally.

I would tend to agree. I haven't seen those claims backed up by any hard facts.

I would guess ppl are talking about carrier ops w.r.t tactics rather than just figuring out how to use the catapult to launch the aircraft, i am sure thats not rocket science(Ok its not that simple but its not sooo complicated or top secret either)

Tactics do take time to evolve AFAIK and although India got her carrier operational in 60s her deployment tactics have continued to evolve over the years, and with the addition of a CATOBAR system it would again take the navy some time to figure out the tactics to fully utilize the additional capabilities that the system would bring. But that doesn't mean the carrier wont be operational till then.

Do note that since independence India has had the luxury of sending her Naval personnel to the most distinguished schools around the world for training and some of those schools were in countries like US, and U.K which boast a long history of carrier aviation and undoubtedly they have exchanged notes both ways. so in this case India has had a edge in that she has been able to gain from the experience of other nations.
Search for "india's 12 steps to a world class navy by thomas barnett" its a moderately interesting report by a a guy from the US naval institute for a look at how the officers coming from these different schools have had their own outlook on Indian Navy's evolving role and tactics.

Anyway don't wanna go OT. I think India has had enough experience operating carriers and shifting to CATOBAR now will have the no more effect than the QE class will have on royal navy if they turn out to be CATOBARs(Were the rumours on CATOBARs confirmed? I got bored and stopped following that). In any case it would literally be the same switch(STOVL to CATOBAR)

For PLAN maybe some one with a background there can fill in the blanks, but I assume they will take more time to evolve their tactics as they are starting from scratch, I am sure however that they are smart enough to figure out how to launch the fighter with a catapult. I also heard they have a deal with Brazil to get some training on the Sao Paulo. As to what nature of training it is, I have no idea but its probably out there in public domain somewhere.

 

[swerve]

... I think India has had enough experience operating carriers and shifting to CATOBAR now will have the no more effect than the QE class will have on royal navy if they turn out to be CATOBARs(Were the rumours on CATOBARs confirmed? I got bored and stopped following that). ...

Not rumours. Official statements by the Ministry of Defence, the minister, & everyone else involved. I personally phoned the MoD information bureau last year to check, when it still seemed a bit uncertain, & was given a very clear statement. The Royal Navy will not have any STOVL ships. Neither the RN nor RAF will have STOVL aircraft (& the Harriers have been retired already, rather suddenly). The carriers will be completed with cats & traps, & will operate F-35C.

 

[shag]

Not rumours. Official statements by the Ministry of Defence, the minister, & everyone else involved. I personally phoned the MoD information bureau last year to check, when it still seemed a bit uncertain, & was given a very clear statement. The Royal Navy will not have any STOVL ships. Neither the RN nor RAF will have STOVL aircraft (& the Harriers have been retired already, rather suddenly). The carriers will be completed with cats & traps, & will operate F-35C.

Thats actually interesting, Indian navy has been desperately trying to keep the INS Vikrant in action till the INS Vikramaditya(gorshkov) gets inducted so that there is no break in carrier operations experience. I understand there is a belief that if there is a break in carrier operations, it will be a task to pick it up again.
With the Harriers gone and illustrious converted to helicopter role, and QEs or F-35s still not here for quiet some time. whats the RNs contingency plan? how do they plan to keep the experience alive? I believe this is probably after a long time that RN will be without any carrier in its fleet.