INS Vikramaditya:Sea Trails pictures

[imperialmen]

Looks darn small... how many planes can it carry?

And out of curiosity.... kitna deti hai?

 

[janon]

Looks darn small... how many planes can it carry?

Thirty.


.....

 

[kam83]

Only Male can feel this like I did. Hence Rumor debunked.

@KRAIT has a fetish for our Aircraft carrier Aka Vikramaditya

 

[sancho]

Say what you will about the US but if India had contracted them to do such work it would have been done on time and on budget.

F35, Comanche, V22, San Antonio Class, or their new carriers..., the list of their delayed and overpriced projects is more than long as well. It actually just shows that these kind of problems are available everywhere, the main bad thing in this case are the promises that were made and couldn't be kept by Russian shipyards and the constant costincreasings we see in nearly any deal with Russia.
But I agree, the carrier is too later and too costly to be a good addition.

 

[arp2041]

F35, Comanche, V22, San Antonio Class, or their new carriers..., the list of their delayed and overpriced projects is more than long as well. It actually just shows that these kind of problems are available everywhere, the main bad thing in this case are the promises that were made and couldn't be kept by Russian shipyards and the constant costincreasings we see in nearly any deal with Russia.
But I agree, the carrier is too later and too costly to be a good addition.

IMHO, IN acted very un-professionally in the project from the very beginning:

First, Why they selected to convert a cruiser into an AC is out of my mind (maybe just b'coz of the cost issue since they were getting it for free).

Second, The IN officials din't inspect the ship on spot & instead they were just analyzing the pictures, promises, word of mouth & assurances given by the Russians.

Third, This project would had always taken the time that it has taken since converting a cruiser to an AC had never taken place in history, instead building a ship from scratch was much better an option, even than IN went for it.

Fourth, If the scale of renovation were not analysed properly by the Russians, so were the IN officials responsible for it, entire wiring were changed, many weapon systems were removed, deck was extended etc. This obviously needed TIME.

Fifth, If these challenges for the Russians were not enough the IN insisted on using many new systems in the Viky renovation which were not the Russian expertise on the first place, eg. Russians used asbestos in there ships while IN insisted on Fireproof bricks (though i m not saying they were wrong, but it just caused more delays).

Having said that, this SHIP will make IN the Power to Reckon with in the entire IOR, since only US ACs are better than it in the IOR, 20+ mig29k & 10 odd helos on a ship can be termed as a Mini Air Force & will be a treat to watch.

 

[mirage2K]

beauty

 

[JohnyD]

Mate- look at the article, says the ship will now only be devlivered in Dec 2013 yet another year late from its revised delevery schedule that already puts this entire project 4-5 years behind.


Say what you will about the US but if India had contracted them to do such work it would have been done on time and on budget.


Russia time and again let's India down on budget and timely delivery.

yes dude but there are few things that only Russia can offer to India...US wont offer us Nuke Subs or an AC...will it?

 

[Yeti]

Is it just me or did I just get a hard on seeing these pics


Inside she is state of the art too

The 'Lesorub-E' CMS is installed on the Indian 'Vikramaditya' carrier

 

[janon]

F35, Comanche, V22, San Antonio Class, or their new carriers..., the list of their delayed and overpriced projects is more than long as well. It actually just shows that these kind of problems are available everywhere...

That's not a fair comparison. Those are new products being designed by them, that are being plagued by unforeseen delays. On the other hand, gorshkov/Vicky is a product they already had, that they promised us to refurbish for free by 2008. We ended up paying close to 3 billion dollars, and haven't gotten it yet.

When we bought C-130s or P-8Is from the US, they delivered them ahead of time and under budget. If we had asked them for a new design, that may have been a different issue.

 

[arp2041]

That's not a fair comparison. Those are new products being designed by them, that are being plagued by unforeseen delays. On the other hand, gorshkov/Vicky is a product they already had, that they promised us to refurbish for free by 2008. We ended up paying close to 3 billion dollars, and haven't gotten it yet.

When we bought C-130s or P-8Is from the US, they delivered them ahead of time and under budget. If we had asked them for a new design, that may have been a different issue.

Sorry but your posts have some flaws, Viky renovation was something that was never done in the history of naval shipbuilding i.e. converting a Cruiser to a Carrier, building altogether a new ship was much easier thats why the delays.

Cost of Viky is $2.3 billion + $600 million extra for first batch of 16 mig29k = $2.9 billion.

+ we got C-130j or P-8Is on time b'coz the US was running there production line which had already produced 100s of ac so producing few more was never an issue.

IMHO, for the Viky Fiasco, both IN & the Russians are responsible, as they say it's take two to tango.

 

[janon]

Sorry but your posts have some flaws, Viky renovation was something that was never done in the history of naval shipbuilding i.e. converting a Cruiser to a Carrier, building altogether a new ship was much easier thats why the delays.

Cost of Viky is $2.3 billion + $600 million extra for first batch of 16 mig29k = $2.9 billion.

+ we got C-130j or P-8Is on time b'coz the US was running there production line which had already produced 100s of ac so producing few more was never an issue.

IMHO, for the Viky Fiasco, both IN & the Russians are responsible, as they say it's take two to tango.

The reason we went for that conversion from cruiser to carrier was because it was offered at a certain cost (zero) and within a certain time (by 2008). We did not go for it because of it being a historic first, or any such extraneous reasons. If we had been told that we would end up paying 2.3 billion dollars and having to wait nearly 10 years for it, we would have said "thanks, but no thanks" and gone for a new carrier. Newly built european carriers of comparable size would have come at comparable cost and less time.

I know why we got C-130s on time and within budget, my point was that that would be a fairer comparison than comparing gorshkov delays to the F-35, which is a completely new product they are designing.

Of course, the IN was also to blame for taking the Russians' word at face value. My post wasn't about assigning blame, but merely to bring to attention the fact that delays in something like Gorshkov and the design of a new product like the F-35 is unfair.

 

[Yeti]

Was done is done guys no use crying over spilled milk we will get her soon in our hands and she will grace her presence for a good 30 years in our waters and beyond also

 

[sancho]

That's not a fair comparison. Those are new products being designed by them, that are being plagued by unforeseen delays. On the other hand, gorshkov/Vicky is a product they already had, that they promised us to refurbish for free by 2008. We ended up paying close to 3 billion dollars, and haven't gotten it yet.

When we bought C-130s or P-8Is from the US, they delivered them ahead of time and under budget. If we had asked them for a new design, that may have been a different issue.

That's the same case with Gorshkov as well, the refurbishment run into problems they didn't expected or underestimated, because re-designing the ship was more complicated than it initially looked.
And this is not comparable to C130s or P8s, you could then take Su 30s from Irkut, or Talwar class frigats as examples as well, which came in time either.
The point is always the same, doing something for the first time is always more difficult than producing something that you have for years, but as I said, they shouldn't have given such promises and we shouldn't have simply believed them.

 

[arp2041]

The reason we went for that conversion from cruiser to carrier was because it was offered at a certain cost (zero) and within a certain time (by 2008). We did not go for it because of it being a historic first, or any such extraneous reasons. If we had been told that we would end up paying 2.3 billion dollars and having to wait nearly 10 years for it, we would have said "thanks, but no thanks" and gone for a new carrier. Newly built european carriers of comparable size would have come at comparable cost and less time.

I know why we went for that ship, but it was wrong on the part of the IN officials to ASSUME that we are getting the ship FREE OF COST & it will get completed in just four years from the time of contract signing. I would say a big BLUNDER on the part of IN.

First, the ship though given Free of Charge, Russians asked for refurbishment costs, they selected Sevmash as the shipyard to construct it, now Sevmash had no experience of building any AC before, so they utilized Indian Funds to build a long lasting infrastructure for such huge projects.

Second, This Assumption that we will get the ship in 4 years from the date of signing was really like living in a dreamland, how can a ship be fully converted from a cruiser to a AC (the job which has never been done before) in just 4 years when constructing a new ship was much easier a job.

+ You are completely wrong in this part:

If we had been told that we would end up paying 2.3 billion dollars and having to wait nearly 10 years for it,

These were b'coz of the unforseen delays which not even the Russians imagined, IN should have seen this coming before signing the contract & should had been a little pro-active, but entire project was really handled un-professionally by IN, for this disaster we can't blame Russians, they were just making there points clear, they weren't forcing the Indians to sign the contract.

 

[faithfulguy]

The reason we went for that conversion from cruiser to carrier was because it was offered at a certain cost (zero) and within a certain time (by 2008). We did not go for it because of it being a historic first, or any such extraneous reasons. If we had been told that we would end up paying 2.3 billion dollars and having to wait nearly 10 years for it, we would have said "thanks, but no thanks" and gone for a new carrier. Newly built european carriers of comparable size would have come at comparable cost and less time.

I know why we got C-130s on time and within budget, my point was that that would be a fairer comparison than comparing gorshkov delays to the F-35, which is a completely new product they are designing.

Of course, the IN was also to blame for taking the Russians' word at face value. My post wasn't about assigning blame, but merely to bring to attention the fact that delays in something like Gorshkov and the design of a new product like the F-35 is unfair.

Well, we don't know if India is getting this carrier or not? What would India do if Russia demand India to pay for the repairs.