Indian Naval Aviation : Updates and Discussions

[randomradio]

What could be the aviation strength, 60+ or 40+ or 40- configurations?

45 fighters for each carrier that's 45k DWT, so you have 30 jets available. About 60 for a 60k DWT, with 40 jets available. The remaining components would be helicopters, AWACS, transports, whatever.

The rule of thumb is one aircraft for every 1000 tons of weight. So on a 60k DWT carrier, you can have 40 jets and 20 medium/heavy helicopters, AWACS etc. You can carry even more if necessary, considering many aircraft can be rotated between the air and ship. I suppose 20-30% more aircraft can be in the air. Of course, you will need emergency landing strips around.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

45 fighters for each carrier that's 45k DWT, so you have 30 jets available. About 60 for a 60k DWT, with 40 jets available. The remaining components would be helicopters, AWACS, transports, whatever.

The rule of thumb is one aircraft for every 1000 tons of weight. So on a 60k DWT carrier, you can have 40 jets and 20 medium/heavy helicopters, AWACS etc. You can carry even more if necessary, considering many aircraft can be rotated between the air and ship. I suppose 20-30% more aircraft can be in the air. Of course, you will need emergency landing strips around.

In case of R33 or IAC1 , the helicopter operations can be transferred to its accompanying destroyers and frigates to allow for more aircrafts.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Make in India.

Remember the taxes! A 100 mil dollar aircraft built in France will cost 130+ mil to assemble in India. So with 10 bil if we are looking to buy 100 aircrafts, we will end up with just around 70!

I am against any such program now. Directly import, save cost and in return ask for consultation, setting up of R&D enviornment, help in testing/certification , setting up of MLU capabilities in India.

 

[randomradio]

In case of R33 or IAC1 , the helicopter operations can be transferred to its accompanying destroyers and frigates to allow for more aircrafts.

CBG ships don't operate right next to each other. The nearest escort could be as much as 50-100 Km from the carrier. So helicopters fulfil a critical need on carriers.

 

[randomradio]

Remember the taxes! A 100 mil dollar aircraft built in France will cost 130+ mil to assemble in India. So with 10 bil if we are looking to buy 100 aircrafts, we will end up with just around 70!

I am against any such program now. Directly import, save cost and in return ask for consultation, setting up of R&D enviornment, help in testing/certification , setting up of MLU capabilities in India.

Can't develop independent capabilities without being able to produce the jet.

As for money, what's more important about indigenisation is we don't have to give up forex. So even if it's more expensive, paying in rupees is better for us.

 

[Innominate]

CBG ships don't operate right next to each other. The nearest escort could be as much as 50-100 Km from the carrier. So helicopters fulfil a critical need on carriers.

Are you talking about IN Carrier strike group? Cause that seems extreme.

A US Carrier always has an escort pulling plane guard duty 1 nautical mile dead astern of the carrier ready to pick up pilot from a ditched plane. The rest of its escorts are always line of sight of carrier just like they were off the coast of my home town of San Diego when a Tico picked up bogies and guided two F-18Es to intercept these bogies which turned out to be flying tic-tacs... or something. However when a Carrier strike group sails near hostile waters the escorts stick near the carrier.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

CBG ships don't operate right next to each other. The nearest escort could be as much as 50-100 Km from the carrier. So helicopters fulfil a critical need on carriers.

SAR choppers are necessary. But AEW assets can still operate from other ships. With the data link available, that distance will not be a problem.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

able to produce the jet.

We have licence produced more than enough. If it hasn't helped till now, maybe it's time to accept the flaws.

No nation having any kind of decent aviation research effort has done this. No one.

Nations have done it , realised their mistakes and changed the course. We need to do the same.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Further licence production does not impart any meaningful technology. The most intensive ToT ever was the Su30MKI project. But then what?

Licence production gives us the technological skills/means to build only that aircraft.

The amount of data we have on AL31 engines, the technology of the radar .... But alas the agreement does not allow us to use it anywhere else.

China got hold of drawings of maintenance from Ukraine for different parts of Flankers and within a couple of years ditched J11A( Su27 built in China with Russian kits) to move on to J11B (Russian Engine , Chinese Flanker)

That's absorbing and using technology.

We want those types of results with our method. Not possible.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1478956838183849984

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

China got hold of drawings of maintenance from Ukraine for different parts of Flankers and within a couple of years ditched J11A( Su27 built in China with Russian kits) to move on to J11B (Russian Engine , Chinese Flanker)

That's absorbing and using technology.

We want those types of results with our method. Not possible.

Your statement doesnt tell the whole story

India Russia Relations have always been a lot different than China Russia

In the 90s , when Russia was facing a lots of economic problems , at that time , China and Russia buried their rivalries and came closer
Both Economically , Poliitically and also in terms of Technological support because both had a Long term Enemy-- the USA

Where as we were dependent on US and Western Investments and vulnerable to sanctions

That is why successive PMs did not dare to do Nuclear tests

We were also very much dependent on Subsidised SU 30s and T 90s so there is no way we could get away with Boldly COPYING Russian technology

Also remember Russian support for Missile programme, Space programme and Above all the Nuclear Submarine project

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Your statement doesnt tell the whole story

India Russia Relations have always been a lot different than China Russia

In the 90s , when Russia was facing a lots of economic problems , at that time , China and Russia buried their rivalries and came closer
Both Economically , Poliitically and also in terms of Technological support because both had a Long term Enemy-- the USA

Where as we were dependent on US and Western Investments and vulnerable to sanctions

That is why successive PMs did not dare to do Nuclear tests

We were very much dependent on Subsidised SU 30s and T 90s so there is no way we could get away with Boldly COPYING Russian technology

Also remember Russian support for Missile programme, Space programme and Above all the Nuclear Submarine project

I am not saying what happened was wrong or something.

What I intend to say is that we received a very comprehensive package in that deal. And even after that we are still looking for another local assembly program. We need to understand that this is not working for us and need to change methods.

 

[Hydra]

I am not saying what happened was wrong or something.

What I intend to say is that we received a very comprehensive package in that deal. And even after that we are still looking for another local assembly program. We need to understand that this is not working for us and need to change methods.

Not only in aircraft sector, we got ToT in submarine deals, Howitzer deals etc. What happened in all these deals? We failed absorb the technology in any meaningful way.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Not only in aircraft sector, we got ToT in submarine deals, Howitzer deals etc. What happened in all these deals? We failed absorb the technology in any meaningful way.

We need to understand that no nation will give up a contemporary technology to us at any amount of dollars.

Local manufacturing is way to train a pool of manpower and create basic infrastructure.

What should have happened is that testing/certification infrastructure and consultation agreements should have been signed for in house R&D projects.

In this way after a foreign item is imported, by the time we will need it's replacement a local substitute would have been developed and ready for production.

But we keep coming back at squre one again and again expecting different results.

Vampire then Gnat then Mig21 then Mig27 then Jaguar then Su30MKI

If it has not happened till now, assembly of 90 or so Rafales will not change it.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

I am not saying what happened was wrong or something.

What I intend to say is that we received a very comprehensive package in that deal. And even after that we are still looking for another local assembly program. We need to understand that this is not working for us and need to change methods.

Because our circumstances were totally different

Circumstances dictate policies

Circumstances means Financial conditions , Technological capabilities and Above all International Relations

EVERYTHING is connected in Geopolitics

From 1998 to 2005 , our realtions with US were cold

Only Russia was a reliable friend

There was No way we could make them Angry by ripping of their Technologies like China did

You need Top level Political support for that

The political Leadership of that time ie Vajpayee was busy in other things like

1 Containing Pakistan
2 Getting in the Good books of Western Nations post 1998 tests

Just one more thing

When Russia went back on Gorshkov deal because of Financial disputes , Some "Analysts " were claiming that India Russia relations will now turn worse

But since we had no other choice
We went back to Russia

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Because our circumstances were totally different

Circumstances dictate policies

Circumstances means Financial conditions , Technological capabilities and Above all International Relations

EVERYTHING is connected in Geopolitics

From 1998 to 2005 , our realtions with US were cold

Only Russia was a reliable friend

There was No way we could make them Angry by ripping of their Technologies like China did

You need Top level Political support for that

The political Leadership of that time ie Vajpayee was busy in other things like

1 Containing Pakistan
2 Getting in the Good books of Western Nations post 1998 tests

Just one more thing

When Russia went back on Gorshkov deal because of Financial disputes , Some "Analysts " were claiming that India Russia relations will now turn worse

But since we had no other choice
We went back to Russia

Getting a local solution is not ripping off the technology. That's one way to do it for sure but certainly not a way for us.

We need to understand that any nation will at best help us in creation of testing/certification facilities , train the manpower required to do that.

Maybe provide consulting in initial stages of the project. But that's it.

The money and the R&D. That's our part to do. No one else will give us at any cost , untill it's one generation old.

 

[randomradio]

Are you talking about IN Carrier strike group? Cause that seems extreme.

A US Carrier always has an escort pulling plane guard duty 1 nautical mile dead astern of the carrier ready to pick up pilot from a ditched plane. The rest of its escorts are always line of sight of carrier just like they were off the coast of my home town of San Diego when a Tico picked up bogies and guided two F-18Es to intercept these bogies which turned out to be flying tic-tacs... or something. However when a Carrier strike group sails near hostile waters the escorts stick near the carrier.
View attachment 22498

CBGs are spread out over very large areas. But it's a mix of both.

If the missile threat is serious, you can always have a Ticonderoga or two about 10 miles away from the carrier.

SAR choppers are necessary. But AEW assets can still operate from other ships. With the data link available, that distance will not be a problem.

Not just SAR. Even the Nimitz class carry about 10 helicopters for anti-sub and anti-ship roles.

 

[randomradio]

We have licence produced more than enough. If it hasn't helped till now, maybe it's time to accept the flaws.

No nation having any kind of decent aviation research effort has done this. No one.

Nations have done it , realised their mistakes and changed the course. We need to do the same.

I am referring to the imported jet, not R&D of our own. We can't independently support the jet without being able to produce it. Just 'cause you imported the jet doesn't mean spares can be produced overnight at a cheap cost. So we will need to import a lot of the sustainment as well. No one in India will have the actual blueprint of the jet, so we won't be able to make any changes of our own, like we did with the MKI and Brahmos. In case we are sanctioned, then our jets completely fall under the mercy of the supplier. Otoh, based on at least what Dassault is providing, we will become completely independent from France. We will have full control over the airframe and engine, and we can replace the avionics with our own, like the Jaguar.

Lastly it's just a waste of money not to do it on our own. An entire industrial ecosystem can be created on the back of just 100 jets. It can bring us 10000 jobs for 30-40 years. It's gonna be pretty dumb on our part to miss out on that, quite literally.

 

[randomradio]

Further licence production does not impart any meaningful technology. The most intensive ToT ever was the Su30MKI project. But then what?

Licence production gives us the technological skills/means to build only that aircraft.

The amount of data we have on AL31 engines, the technology of the radar .... But alas the agreement does not allow us to use it anywhere else.

China got hold of drawings of maintenance from Ukraine for different parts of Flankers and within a couple of years ditched J11A( Su27 built in China with Russian kits) to move on to J11B (Russian Engine , Chinese Flanker)

That's absorbing and using technology.

We want those types of results with our method. Not possible.

You get thousands of trained manpower. The alternative is no aerospace ecosystem itself.

People always confuse the two. "Oh, we got AL-31FP ToT, so that means it can be used on Kaveri..." NO!!! They are completely independent of each other. There is quite literally no relation between the two. Manufacturing ToT doesn't help R&D directly anyway. But when our own R&D needs production, we need the trained manpower that has been building the AL-31FP all this time to also build the Kaveri. Without the trained manpower, even if we develop our own engine, we are unlikely to produce it because there's no one with such an experience. Then, we will need 10-15 years just to get manufacturing right, no different from how Tesla struggled with production for over a decade.

When we import and produce the jet, we get trained manpower but also possession of technology. The mere possession of technology gives us the ability to create new requirements. If we do not have someone as smart as Steve Jobs in the country, then we need access to a smartphone he's made to gain some experience on it before we can duplicate it. Imports gives us access to foreign "inventors", whereas in India, we are not yet inventing, we are only innovating. We are basically reinventing the wheel.

Someone or the other is always creating disruptive technology that no one knows about. Imagine if only the US used smartphones and no one else in the world even knew about it. Then how are you gonna make your own smartphone if you don't even know it exists? Our scientific pool has been pretty clueless for decades, they are still in the process of catching up. So, until that happens, we need to import jets to gain full access to new technologies, and also assistance, if not ToT, in developing such tech so we can do it on our own.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

People always confuse the two. "Oh, we got AL-31FP ToT, so that means it can be used on Kaveri..." NO!!! They are completely independent of each other. There is quite literally no relation between the two. Manufacturing ToT doesn't help R&D directly anyway. But when our own R&D needs production, we need the trained manpower that has been building the AL-31FP all this time to also build the Kaveri. Without the trained manpower, even if we develop our own engine, we are unlikely to produce it because there's no one with such an experience. Then, we will need 10-15 years just to get manufacturing right, no different from how Tesla struggled with production for over a decade.

Exactly what I am saying. Doing it again with Rafale will not change anything.