'INS Vikramaditya will be a game-changer'

[sancho]

Responses in red. And to add, it is not about "surface/sub fleet" being more than enough. It is about doing certain missions effectively.

Which you can't do without surface vessels on the ground! Fighters can monitor a wider area and faster, but you still need INs vessels to stop ships or raid them, otherise IAF would take over maritme patrol too. And you must be kidding about the sailors and cost effectivity! The carrier alone requires more than 1600 sailors, add the CBG and further support vessels and then compare how many Frigats we could field instead with the same number of sailors and still at lower costs.

Protecting a certain area of ocean at all times is a lot easier with one CBG, than with 20 ships positioned properly and so on. It gives the navy a lot more options, and a lot more reach, and a lot more flexibility to execute missions.

That depends on the area, the Indian ocean far away from our coastlines, yes, but not the Arabian Sea or Bay of Bengal with a lot of ports for vessels, let alone shore based aircraft support! Guess why MKIs are covering A&N from Indian mainland?

There is a reason why any navy as big as ours operates aircraft carriers

Again an totally general statement, which has nothing to do with IN or the Indian threat perception. Carriers of NATO countries are used to project power all over the world, be it in wars, or humanitarian missions. Something that we don't do, since the main aim of Indian forces is protection of India and our areas of interest (Indian coastal areas)! You have to look at the Indian scenaro and not look at other countries to justify a carrier for IN, but the fact is, we don't need one to keep our neighboring countries in check. INS Viraat is useless for years and IN keeps wasting money on upgrading it for no reason, it is far to less to attack Pakistan and would be an easy target for PLAN either. But just like Thailand (not Taiwan), we can say we operate a carrier right?

To come back to the Pakistan scenario, what is more effective and capable? Around 20 x Mig 29Ks (including some in tanker role), supported by pointless Ka 31, or 1 x Squad Mig 29UPGs + 1 x Squad of Jags + at least 1 x squad of MKIs (we even have 2 in Pune), supported by DRDO AWACS and tankers to cover the Arabian Sea, or to keep check on Pakistans coastlines?

You would need Viki and IAC1 combined to offer roughly the same numbers of fighters only, not to mention that the shorebased assets are much better supported by more capable AWACS and tanker aircrafts.
Infact, what if IN simply would use 20 x Mig 29Ks from their air base at Goa? Wouldn't they be able to cover the Arabian Sea as well? Couldn't they offer fast reaction in case of such a scenario you painted?

 

[SQ8]

. INS Viraat is useless for years and IN keeps wasting money on upgrading it for no reason, it is far to less to attack Pakistan and would be an easy target for PLAN either. But just like Thailand (not Taiwan), we can say we operate a carrier right?

It is quite odd indeed that the Viraat is kept in operation if it is not cost-effective to do so. As such, there is no immediate threat.. There are already enough capable assets to provide multi pronged attack capability to the west and adequate air cover for the rest of the fleet.

 

[Dash]

It is quite odd indeed that the Viraat is kept in operation if it is not cost-effective to do so. As such, there is no immediate threat.. There are already enough capable assets to provide multi pronged attack capability to the west and adequate air cover for the rest of the fleet.

tell that to the fan boys! 

Which you can't do without surface vessels on the ground! Fighters can monitor a wider area and faster, but you still need INs vessels to stop ships or raid them, otherise IAF would take over maritme patrol too. And you must be kidding about the sailors and cost effectivity! The carrier alone requires more than 1600 sailors, add the CBG and further support vessels and then compare how many Frigats we could field instead with the same number of sailors and still at lower costs.



That depends on the area, the Indian ocean far away from our coastlines, yes, but not the Arabian Sea or Bay of Bengal with a lot of ports for vessels, let alone shore based aircraft support! Guess why MKIs are covering A&N from Indian mainland?




Again an totally general statement, which has nothing to do with IN or the Indian threat perception. Carriers of NATO countries are used to project power all over the world, be it in wars, or humanitarian missions. Something that we don't do, since the main aim of Indian forces is protection of India and our areas of interest (Indian coastal areas)! You have to look at the Indian scenaro and not look at other countries to justify a carrier for IN, but the fact is, we don't need one to keep our neighboring countries in check. INS Viraat is useless for years and IN keeps wasting money on upgrading it for no reason, it is far to less to attack Pakistan and would be an easy target for PLAN either. But just like Thailand (not Taiwan), we can say we operate a carrier right?

To come back to the Pakistan scenario, what is more effective and capable? Around 20 x Mig 29Ks (including some in tanker role), supported by pointless Ka 31, or 1 x Squad Mig 29UPGs + 1 x Squad of Jags + at least 1 x squad of MKIs (we even have 2 in Pune), supported by DRDO AWACS and tankers to cover the Arabian Sea, or to keep check on Pakistans coastlines?

You would need Viki and IAC1 combined to offer roughly the same numbers of fighters only, not to mention that the shorebased assets are much better supported by more capable AWACS and tanker aircrafts.
Infact, what if IN simply would use 20 x Mig 29Ks from their air base at Goa? Wouldn't they be able to cover the Arabian Sea as well? Couldn't they offer fast reaction in case of such a scenario you painted?

The idea of A/C is not against Pakistan as earlier assumed. Like I said earlier unless we have a full blown CBG, we cant boost that pride of ours...

 

[Capt.Popeye]

It is quite odd indeed that the Viraat is kept in operation if it is not cost-effective to do so. As such, there is no immediate threat.. There are already enough capable assets to provide multi pronged attack capability to the west and adequate air cover for the rest of the fleet.

@Oscar;
INS Viraat though long in the tooth is still a Naval Asset in some senses of the expression. So some of the obtuse talk is without substance. As for cost-effectiveness; it is still not impossible to maintain either in technical or financial terms. At this stage of her life, she is far easier to maintain on both counts than the old INS Vikrant was at a similar stage of hers.

Viraat's Hull is still intact with corrosion and material diminution well within acceptable limits. The Propulsion Plant is still working though the Boilers (like boilers of similar age) have been re-tubed while the turbines still work within acceptable parameters. Unlike the old Vikrant whose CAT had become BER; the Viraat is not encumbered by either a CAT or ARS. So as a platform to launch aircraft from either fixed-wing or rotary-wing; she is still functional.

All her Sensors and COMMs eqpt have been replaced over the years at successive re-fits and upgraded. What else would she need basically to function then? Unless her Screws and Rudder fall off---------but even that is replaceable at some cost and some difficulty. If her Main Steam V/V or the Hi-Lift Relief V/Vs become non functional, even they can be replaced just as her H.P. and L.P turbines can be re-bladed and re-balanced; of course at some cost and some difficulty as above.

The Viraat has great value to this day as a Training Platform. Where else will the Sea Harrier Aviators get their DLQs done day or night? Where else will the Flight Deck Crews practise Aircraft Handling on Deck, a finely co-ordinated ballet that it is.
And if one were to assume that all the Sea Harriers vaporise instantly; she can still launch and recover Helos. Apart from the Jalashwa; which other ship can practise upto Battalion Strength Embarkation/Disembarkation into Helos?

Apart from that Monsieur Oscar; how else will the FRS tankers practise RAS and the Destroyers, Frigates and Corvettes practise Screens and other intricate Fleet Manuevers in company of a Capital Ship?
When she leaves or enters Harbor, there is drill involved right from the casting off procedures and Tug movements at some berths to the Clearing Sweeps carried out of her. Which Ship will replicate that instead of her?

There is some funny cribbing and carping murmurs that have been emanating out of less than professionally informed souls. That can be discounted.

 

[sancho]

It is quite odd indeed that the Viraat is kept in operation if it is not cost-effective to do so. As such, there is no immediate threat.. There are already enough capable assets to provide multi pronged attack capability to the west and adequate air cover for the rest of the fleet.

It still has the capability to be used as an helicopter carrier and would remain to be useful in support of amphibious operations (at least in disater relief or humanitarian missions), or sub hunting. The fact however is, that it is way to old and too bothered with technical issues, which is obvious by the fact how often it was not in service in the last years and in the docks for repairs or upgrades. To claim it is a useful "aircraft" carrier is even totally pointless, since the fighters available face similar technical problems and the numbers IN has left to operate are basic, but far away to be useful in any conflict.
When you see how cheap and fast the French has build the Mistral class for the Russians, IN should start calculating what might be more logical, keep Viraat with adittional costs but barely any operational use, or divert the money into some LHDs next to Viki and IAC1.

 

[sancho]

The idea of A/C is not against Pakistan as earlier assumed. Like I said earlier unless we have a full blown CBG, we cant boost that pride of ours...

But that's what many assume and the pride factor has more to do than operational requirements. The importance of Viki and IAC 1 is mainly based on their air wing and that's what makes the to a game changer or not. Mig 29K, even worse N-LCA and Ka31 are no game changers, neither wrt Pakistan, nor to China.

 

[Dash]

But that's what many assume and the pride factor has more to do than operational requirements. The importance of Viki and IAC 1 is mainly based on their air wing and that's what makes the to a game changer or not. Mig 29K, even worse N-LCA and Ka31 are no game changers, neither wrt Pakistan, nor to China.

I highly doubt Vicky will be used against Pakistan but Mig 29 could be a potent challenger on high seas to Chinese flankers. I can take this as a baby step to a higher level though.

 

[sancho]

but Mig 29 could be a potent challenger on high seas to Chinese flankers.

Don't think so, it can carry more load to longer distances, doesn't need external fuel tanks and the efficiency of the canard design wrt to maneuverability is well known in India too. To make it worse, they can carry even more fighters than we can, so we would need Viki and IAC 1 combined again, to take on their 1 carrier and the battle group. Remember IN initially wanted navalised MKIs too, which simply wasn't suitable to Viki and most likely to Russian interest and that's what is the real problem, the capability of the air wing, not the carrier itself!
Think about a Viki with the following airwing:

Rafale M F3+ (AESA radar, FSO-IT, SPECTRA with GaN AESA jammers, MICA and soon METEOR, AASM, Exocet and most importantly Scalp)

EV22 AEW (more capable radar system, higher ceilling, more range and endurance, refuelable in air by fighters)

MV22 (long range transport, MEDIVAC and SAR, possibly even in the tanker role)

S70 or Dhruv for ASW

Naval Dhruv (utility roles)


That would be a game changer!

An aircraft carrier is dependent on how capable the air wing is, to project it's power. Without capable fighters, you can't take on enemy fighters, or attack enemy coast lines. Without a capable AEW plattform, you can't detect threats at long range. Without a capable naval helicopters, you can't defend yourself against enemy subs...
...and that's where Mig 29Ks partially, but N-LCA and Ka 31 fully are bad choices for a carrier!

 

[MKI 30]

An aircraft carrier is dependent on how capable the air wing is, to project it's power. Without capable fighters, you can't take on enemy fighters, or attack enemy coast lines. Without a capable AEW plattform, you can't detect threats at long range. Without a capable naval helicopters, you can't defend yourself against enemy subs...
...and that's where Mig 29Ks partially, but N-LCA and Ka 31 fully are bad choices for a carrier!

Considering the capability of the Chinese air wing does the Navy have any plan regarding N-MMRCA? I believe the Vikrant would also carry Mig-29K along with N-LCA? Is this the best we could manage? It all depends what the Navy can get and for it to get any better we need Rafale.

One Q : Would the Navy conduct a separate evaluation process for N-MMRCA?