As to the creation of an Indian CVBG. Yes, they can put a task group to sea now
which would probably be superior or at least equal to everyone in the SE Asian
theatre in blue water, barring the Japanese of course, the Gorshkov with its
Fulcrums and Ka-31's will bring them into rough parity with the Italians in
terms of capability. Why not higher? I hear the screams from several
contributors, well simply as the Indian CVBG has deficiencies in certain key
areas. The most serious being:
1, Lack of an area air defence missile system. The longest range systems being the russian SA-N-7 Buk weapons with a mechanical launcher and 30km range. Insufficient to provide an outer layer missile engagement zone and with no air battlespace management system.
2, Limitations on C3 data availabilty due to the shortcomings of the Ka-31 AEW system. Those being the limited range of the E801 radar and target tracking facilities and its severly restricted range and endurance figures.
All in all though they will be superior, in naval matters, to any likely aggressor in theatre including, for a good while at least, the Chinese PLAN.
Steve
1, Lack of an area air defence missile system. The longest range systems being the russian SA-N-7 Buk weapons with a mechanical launcher and 30km range. Insufficient to provide an outer layer missile engagement zone and with no air battlespace management system.
2, Limitations on C3 data availabilty due to the shortcomings of the Ka-31 AEW system. Those being the limited range of the E801 radar and target tracking facilities and its severly restricted range and endurance figures.
All in all though they will be superior, in naval matters, to any likely aggressor in theatre including, for a good while at least, the Chinese PLAN.
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anything under 35-40.000 tonns is a toy in my eyes, as it lacks the space, lacks
the deck, lacks the speed, lacks the endurance, lacks the weapons (both own and
those carried by its aircraft) and lacks the survivability in any kind of
high-threat deployment.
Gorshkov is - IMHO - no exception from this rule. The ship is still too small: too small to take Su-27s, too small to embark capable AEW platforms, and too small to take a number of MiG-29s which would actually be needed. 20-25 MiG-29s sounds not bad (especially not when capabilities of other carriers of the similar size are considered), but it's also not enough to go anywhere to fight seriously. Loose one MiG to a mishap, one or two are shot down, and you have already lost 10% of the force.
The re-built Gorshkov will certainly look sexy, but it will also increase the maintenance burden because of "new" MiG-29Ks and because of its terrible machinery, which is a chaos.
Gorshkov is - IMHO - no exception from this rule. The ship is still too small: too small to take Su-27s, too small to embark capable AEW platforms, and too small to take a number of MiG-29s which would actually be needed. 20-25 MiG-29s sounds not bad (especially not when capabilities of other carriers of the similar size are considered), but it's also not enough to go anywhere to fight seriously. Loose one MiG to a mishap, one or two are shot down, and you have already lost 10% of the force.
The re-built Gorshkov will certainly look sexy, but it will also increase the maintenance burden because of "new" MiG-29Ks and because of its terrible machinery, which is a chaos.
All the other ships of this clas were
known for tremendous machinery problems. Kiev, Minks and Novorossiisk were
idling around their anchors most of their careers, and Gorshkov was no exception
of the rule.
One can only hope, that Indians will check the machinery
throughoutly before commissioning the hull.
The decision for the Indians to go for pure carriers, instead of building something the kind of a mix between Britsh Ocean and US Wasp class ships surprised me considerably. I know about problems with British around Indian Sea Harriers and Sea Kings, but despite this, I expected from Indians to continue in this line and also save money by combining and concentrating capabilities on a smaller number of hulls.
But, no: they're going for "pure" carriers. Ok, small, but still "pure".
Thus, I cannot but to congratulate the INI for its courage: at the time only three other navies in the world did anything similar (I'm excluding the Russians, they seem not to be able to support Kusnetcov any more), and aircraft types like VSTOL JSF are in develpement, they are going back to operations of CTOL aircraft from their carriers. One needs guts for that, especially considering the size of the Gorshkov - and eventual "Air Defence Ship", and their lack of experience in this kind of operations (it's something like 20 years since Vikrant has got the sky jump and Sea Harriers).
IMHO, the basic problem of the INI is that of a "limited" navy ("limited" in order not to say "small" and in the sence of its capability of power projections - after all, that's one of the most important reasons for existence of navies since 200 years), which has at the same time to play certain roles which are placing it on a verge of strategic importance (as India is well underway to develop into a strategic power).
The problems with the lack of an area defence missile system can be solved: after all, the SA-N-6 is in Soviet service already since almost 30 years, and there are more modern versions of it. If the Indians would not copy that, they can still go for the Aster.
But, the problem with the limited AEW system - regardless of its actuall usefullnes - cannot be solved without building larger ships, capable of accomodating more capable AEW platforms. The same is the case with the general C3 capabilities: no space for C3, no C3. And, there is no space on small ships.
In summary, the capabilities of what the INI is going to become after purchasing Gorshkov will certainly be the best in that part of the World. Yet, IMHO, such capabilities are rather what the INI is needing "now", this very moment. They are, actually, far under what the INI will need in 10-15 years, when that navy will not only control the Gulf of Bengal or the Arabic Sea, but also have to do power projections along African coasts and into the eastern Indian Ocean.
For such tasks, gents, larger, more powerfull and flexible ships are necessary.
Regards,
Tom
reach out and touch
The decision for the Indians to go for pure carriers, instead of building something the kind of a mix between Britsh Ocean and US Wasp class ships surprised me considerably. I know about problems with British around Indian Sea Harriers and Sea Kings, but despite this, I expected from Indians to continue in this line and also save money by combining and concentrating capabilities on a smaller number of hulls.
But, no: they're going for "pure" carriers. Ok, small, but still "pure".
Thus, I cannot but to congratulate the INI for its courage: at the time only three other navies in the world did anything similar (I'm excluding the Russians, they seem not to be able to support Kusnetcov any more), and aircraft types like VSTOL JSF are in develpement, they are going back to operations of CTOL aircraft from their carriers. One needs guts for that, especially considering the size of the Gorshkov - and eventual "Air Defence Ship", and their lack of experience in this kind of operations (it's something like 20 years since Vikrant has got the sky jump and Sea Harriers).
IMHO, the basic problem of the INI is that of a "limited" navy ("limited" in order not to say "small" and in the sence of its capability of power projections - after all, that's one of the most important reasons for existence of navies since 200 years), which has at the same time to play certain roles which are placing it on a verge of strategic importance (as India is well underway to develop into a strategic power).
The problems with the lack of an area defence missile system can be solved: after all, the SA-N-6 is in Soviet service already since almost 30 years, and there are more modern versions of it. If the Indians would not copy that, they can still go for the Aster.
But, the problem with the limited AEW system - regardless of its actuall usefullnes - cannot be solved without building larger ships, capable of accomodating more capable AEW platforms. The same is the case with the general C3 capabilities: no space for C3, no C3. And, there is no space on small ships.
In summary, the capabilities of what the INI is going to become after purchasing Gorshkov will certainly be the best in that part of the World. Yet, IMHO, such capabilities are rather what the INI is needing "now", this very moment. They are, actually, far under what the INI will need in 10-15 years, when that navy will not only control the Gulf of Bengal or the Arabic Sea, but also have to do power projections along African coasts and into the eastern Indian Ocean.
For such tasks, gents, larger, more powerfull and flexible ships are necessary.
Regards,
Tom
reach out and touch
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before the start, all the aircraft have to be moved behind the island (actually,
considering the size of the island compared to the size of the hull, "continent"
would be a proper description). Consequently, if somebody's in the air, he'll
have no possibility to land.
There are only two lifts, one of which is in the
area of the landing deck (inclined at only 4°), and the other besides the
island. Both lifts are taking valuable deck and hangar space.
Because of this,
when aircraft land, there is also no possibility for taking them down into the
hangar immediately: they all have to be parked ahead of the island, and are thus
blocked for extended periods of time. And if, then the rythm between two
aircraft in the landing pattern will have to be approx 1.5-2 minutes, needed for
the aircraft to land, then be made free of arrestor wires, turned around, its
wings folded and then the whole plane to be secured on the lift; the lift being
put down to the hangar deck, the plane moved into hangar and the lift being
brought back to the deck level. That's almost three times that of the USN
standard.
Furthermore, there is no cat; consequently, MiG-29s will have to launch at lower weights, and will never be able to use their full capabilities and range combined when starting from this ship. Finally, there is also no space for any better AEW platform but Ka-31 helicopters.
Yet, a carrier of this size depends heavily on its small air wing for air defences. If it cannot operate that wing efficiently and swiftly, it's of no - or not very much - use.
What are the results of this?
Very slow air ops, full of compromises and which have to be much better planned than the crews of USN carriers would ever have to do.
Smaller carriers also cannot support intensive operations for longer time without extensive supply support. Extensive supply support needs also much coverage. I.e.: an air wing of a smaller carrier will not only be stressed enough to battle an opponent active in the air and on the ground, but will also have to take care about the defences of its own supply lines.
Furthermore, there is no cat; consequently, MiG-29s will have to launch at lower weights, and will never be able to use their full capabilities and range combined when starting from this ship. Finally, there is also no space for any better AEW platform but Ka-31 helicopters.
Yet, a carrier of this size depends heavily on its small air wing for air defences. If it cannot operate that wing efficiently and swiftly, it's of no - or not very much - use.
What are the results of this?
Very slow air ops, full of compromises and which have to be much better planned than the crews of USN carriers would ever have to do.
Smaller carriers also cannot support intensive operations for longer time without extensive supply support. Extensive supply support needs also much coverage. I.e.: an air wing of a smaller carrier will not only be stressed enough to battle an opponent active in the air and on the ground, but will also have to take care about the defences of its own supply lines.
It is now neither British nor mine fault if the Argentinian generals in
1982 haven't understood these facts (that's why I always say, that generals
shouldn't talk or fight naval battles and admirals shouldn't talk or fight
ground battles) and tried to cut British supply lines. If they had started any
serious try to do so - instead of battling heavily armed British warships, the
RN would be completely incapable of supporting its operations in the South
Atlantic.
Reg. the size in general: from what I know (correct me if I'm wrong), the US have still not brought any decisions to cut the size of their carrier fleet. This decision has not been taken so far, nor is there any decision to build smaller carriers. There are only "studies", "suggestions" and "discussions" about this topic, while the building of the CVNX-78 has been postponed for the time being (albeit, not cancelled, as ordered items will be built), while the new US admin has - despite its promises - still not made up its mind on what is it going to do.
India needs actually more than one carrier: once on the sea, such ships, their equipment and crew have to be constantly ready. But, they cannot be ready "forever". Consequently, 1/3 of their life-time they will spend in the dock for maintenance, 1/3 on the training and 1/3 in operations. This gives us the number of carriers the INI actually needs at least in order to be sure to have one always ready for operations: three.
To make myself clear: I'm not "asking" for Indians to build Nimitz-class (that's now you going to the extreme, Garry). What I'm talking about is, that this design is a compromise between a hull already available and what the INI actually needs. IMHO, it is a cheap sollution, no discussion about this, but the INI would rather need a ship of a similar size, but also equipped with cats and capable of - at least parallel if not simultaneous - start and landing operations. This foremost for the reason, that they clearly cannot afford larger carriers with more aircraft.
The problem is, namely, that if you have less aircraft, you have to operate them more efficiently and at greater speed, or risk being overrun in any kind of serious confrontations.
In that sence, I agree with you that the solution with Gorshkov will offer the INI tremendous help in gaining experience of operations with such ships and modern, high-performance, combat aircraft. What I was pointing at - or rather warning about - is, that this is no sollution for the future (more than 10 years or so), while this will very likely become the only Indian carrier for the next 20 or so years, and with this, I'll try to answer your last question.
India is a huge country, already an industrial might and has the second largest population on this planet, while already now being influental and very active in the UN. There are enough reasons to expect, that its forces will be involved in different contingencies in the future, be it due to its commitment in the UN or otherwise. One can expect, that India will increase its cooperation with Iran (which will need "excursions" and the coverage by INI ships right to the Hormuz), with South Africa (which takes us down to the Cape), and - very likely - Australia (which brings us to the other side of the Indian Ocean. Connections between such states - all of which are very much maritime oriented - also calls for the control of the sea lines, and taking care of them remaining open whatever it takes.
That is not so because any kind of "Indian expansionalism", but because in the future, the importance of "Superpowers" will decline, and that of "local powers" will increase, while the economy will become even more influental. Any state interested in selling its products to the others will need a powerfull navy to keep its maritive connections free of any kind of threats, be them pirates in the South China sea, or anything else, up to somebody else sending its carriers into the waters of the Indian Ocean (for the start).
With all that I said here, I think that everything about the need for global reach of carriers is being explained: either they are large and can go places and do things, or they are small, can't go anywhere, and can't do anything. Indian Ocean is - after all - "slightly" larger than the Med.
Regards,
Tom
reach out and touch
Reg. the size in general: from what I know (correct me if I'm wrong), the US have still not brought any decisions to cut the size of their carrier fleet. This decision has not been taken so far, nor is there any decision to build smaller carriers. There are only "studies", "suggestions" and "discussions" about this topic, while the building of the CVNX-78 has been postponed for the time being (albeit, not cancelled, as ordered items will be built), while the new US admin has - despite its promises - still not made up its mind on what is it going to do.
India needs actually more than one carrier: once on the sea, such ships, their equipment and crew have to be constantly ready. But, they cannot be ready "forever". Consequently, 1/3 of their life-time they will spend in the dock for maintenance, 1/3 on the training and 1/3 in operations. This gives us the number of carriers the INI actually needs at least in order to be sure to have one always ready for operations: three.
To make myself clear: I'm not "asking" for Indians to build Nimitz-class (that's now you going to the extreme, Garry). What I'm talking about is, that this design is a compromise between a hull already available and what the INI actually needs. IMHO, it is a cheap sollution, no discussion about this, but the INI would rather need a ship of a similar size, but also equipped with cats and capable of - at least parallel if not simultaneous - start and landing operations. This foremost for the reason, that they clearly cannot afford larger carriers with more aircraft.
The problem is, namely, that if you have less aircraft, you have to operate them more efficiently and at greater speed, or risk being overrun in any kind of serious confrontations.
In that sence, I agree with you that the solution with Gorshkov will offer the INI tremendous help in gaining experience of operations with such ships and modern, high-performance, combat aircraft. What I was pointing at - or rather warning about - is, that this is no sollution for the future (more than 10 years or so), while this will very likely become the only Indian carrier for the next 20 or so years, and with this, I'll try to answer your last question.
India is a huge country, already an industrial might and has the second largest population on this planet, while already now being influental and very active in the UN. There are enough reasons to expect, that its forces will be involved in different contingencies in the future, be it due to its commitment in the UN or otherwise. One can expect, that India will increase its cooperation with Iran (which will need "excursions" and the coverage by INI ships right to the Hormuz), with South Africa (which takes us down to the Cape), and - very likely - Australia (which brings us to the other side of the Indian Ocean. Connections between such states - all of which are very much maritime oriented - also calls for the control of the sea lines, and taking care of them remaining open whatever it takes.
That is not so because any kind of "Indian expansionalism", but because in the future, the importance of "Superpowers" will decline, and that of "local powers" will increase, while the economy will become even more influental. Any state interested in selling its products to the others will need a powerfull navy to keep its maritive connections free of any kind of threats, be them pirates in the South China sea, or anything else, up to somebody else sending its carriers into the waters of the Indian Ocean (for the start).
With all that I said here, I think that everything about the need for global reach of carriers is being explained: either they are large and can go places and do things, or they are small, can't go anywhere, and can't do anything. Indian Ocean is - after all - "slightly" larger than the Med.
Regards,
Tom
reach out and touch
No comments:
Post a Comment