More Information of India's ADS Carriers?

By 2020 can we expect a similar ship from South Korea. Especially, if China goes ahead with a Carrier of its own……………..:rolleyes:

The build quality of the Delhis are excellent. What reports are you talking about?

http://www.acig.org/exclusives/viraat/viraat_3.htm

BTW The ADS is called Project 71.

A friend of mine had the opportunity to tour the ship when she was in the UK for the Trafalgar 200 fleet review, and the finish quality of the ship was not very high. I believe it was largely with regard to such things as the weld quality – not a unique problem, and indeed one experienced by many yards. I have a lot of respect for the Indian shipyards, but the account of the quality control was pretty worrying. The location, quality, and extent of welds was the issue if memory serves. :confused:

hasn’t alredy been done with smaller ships weren’t the ANZACs bulit in germany and fitted out in AUS? and wasn’t there a smilar arangement in NZ for the MRV

Negative, all 10 Anzacs were built at the Tenix yard in Melbourne.

The MRV was built in the Netherlands and final fit out was done at Tenix.

Unicorn

The build quality of the Delhis are excellent. What reports are you talking about?

http://www.acig.org/exclusives/viraat/viraat_3.htm

BTW The ADS is called Project 71.

Nick: I am basing my comments about build quality mostly on reports on the Delhi class destroyers, which were built fairly recently. It is entirely possible that the quality has improved since then, but I haven’t seen anything on any warships built since then. I hope I am wrong!

Scooter: I agree that the CdG is smaller than I would choose, but it is big enough to be a potent carrier – the CVF will be much better, but the CdG is still worthwhile. France basically built the CdG to be a bit bigger than the carriers she replaced, but didn’t aim for a small supercarrier, whereas the UK basically aimed for a cheaper supercarrier. Twenty-four Rafales is enough for a lot of purposes, but obviously thirty-six or more is even better!

Just a small thing – the CdG is only 238m at the waterline (261m flight deck), so the 252m could either mean it’s a little bigger, or a little smaller. The displacement is in the same ballpark as the CdG as well, if not a little bigger. It is probably most accurate to say that it is in the same size class as the CdG, and nothing more (especially until we see detailed info on the ADS).

Remember, the French have decided the Charles de Gaulle is to small and elected to go with a larger version of the CVF…………Which, is not to far from the American JFK or Kitty Hawk Class of Super Carriers. 😀

I wonder if South Korea is not seriouly considering building a Aircraft Carrier? As they don’t have the political constraints that say Japan would! Further, they have the capabilities to construct with little help from the outside world………..

I agree, as I mentioned, it was really only in reference to the lower costs. The reality is that they would not have the capacity, and there are serious concerns about their yards’ quality control, which has led to some pretty worrying build quality on some of their ships.

In reality, it might not be too insane to actually have someone else build the basic hulls, but ‘green’, i.e. not really fitted out, just wired for it. The UK yards (and French ones in the case of PA2) then put on the flight deck and island, and fit the whole ship out. It would be politically untenable, however, but it would probably save a fair amount of money. I am even tempted to think it would be better to simply have France actually build the basic hulls, then have them all fitted out in the UK.

The ADS does, however, seem to be a lot of ship, for not too much money, especially if given cats, and ideally Rafales (naval Typhoons or Rhinos being too much to hope for). Two dozen Rafales, a few Hawkeyes, and it will make the Vikramaditya look like a poor imposter! :diablo:

hasn’t alredy been done with smaller ships weren’t the ANZACs bulit in germany and fitted out in AUS? and wasn’t there a smilar arangement in NZ for the MRV

I agree, as I mentioned, it was really only in reference to the lower costs. The reality is that they would not have the capacity, and there are serious concerns about their yards’ quality control, which has led to some pretty worrying build quality on some of their ships.

Check out the newer ships and build quality is not an issue. Also check out the refurbed Carrier for quality of construction.

What is an issue is that they have their order books full up as is, with existing orders. And that efficiency is not too high either in terms of manpower to ships and time taken. Though the wage differential (conversion) makes them very attractive anyways.

To cut a long story short, in the short term, Poland & Japan (as Swerve mentioned) and Korea are better bets. In a decades time, India might be competitive in warship building, since several private yards are getting into the business. More capacity, more competition (hence greater efficiency from the state yards itself) and more funding, for state yards (economic growth affecting defence expenditure).

We wouldn’t even dream of getting India to build carriers. IIRC, India currently has only one shipyard capable of building a ship that size, & has never built such a ship before. Remember, they’ve hired Fincantieri for design assistance, which shows a realistic appreciation of the gaps in their own expertise. Building the first IAC will give them valuable experience & fill a lot of those holes, but until that’s done, they can’t even think about taking on any similar work. And even then, will there be the shipyard capacity? I reckon it’ll be busy with IAC 2 & probably Indias first indigenous LPDs, so Musashis estimate is probably right.

No, if we lacked the capacity to build the ships ourselves (& that’d be shipyards, not expertise), we’d contract it out to somewhere like Poland (relatively close, which has advantages), or even Japan – which might like the practice.

I agree, as I mentioned, it was really only in reference to the lower costs. The reality is that they would not have the capacity, and there are serious concerns about their yards’ quality control, which has led to some pretty worrying build quality on some of their ships.

In reality, it might not be too insane to actually have someone else build the basic hulls, but ‘green’, i.e. not really fitted out, just wired for it. The UK yards (and French ones in the case of PA2) then put on the flight deck and island, and fit the whole ship out. It would be politically untenable, however, but it would probably save a fair amount of money. I am even tempted to think it would be better to simply have France actually build the basic hulls, then have them all fitted out in the UK.

The ADS does, however, seem to be a lot of ship, for not too much money, especially if given cats, and ideally Rafales (naval Typhoons or Rhinos being too much to hope for). Two dozen Rafales, a few Hawkeyes, and it will make the Vikramaditya look like a poor imposter! :diablo:

I…
Part of me would love to see the UK get India to build a few of them (in place of the CVF) to a cat-equipped version, but in larger numbers, maybe even four! …

We wouldn’t even dream of getting India to build carriers. IIRC, India currently has only one shipyard capable of building a ship that size, & has never built such a ship before. Remember, they’ve hired Fincantieri for design assistance, which shows a realistic appreciation of the gaps in their own expertise. Building the first IAC will give them valuable experience & fill a lot of those holes, but until that’s done, they can’t even think about taking on any similar work. And even then, will there be the shipyard capacity? I reckon it’ll be busy with IAC 2 & probably Indias first indigenous LPDs, so Musashis estimate is probably right.

No, if we lacked the capacity to build the ships ourselves (& that’d be shipyards, not expertise), we’d contract it out to somewhere like Poland (relatively close, which has advantages), or even Japan – which might like the practice.

You do realise that with India’s own orders, the Royal Navy wouldn’t see them any earlier than the late 2020s.

Sadly, I agree, but it was a nice thought! It was largely the potential to get the carriers for less than half the price of the two CVFs!

Gollevainen: I agree, it’s actually a real shame the Indians chose to go with the Russian STOBAR technique, when they actually had cat equipped carriers previously! Even the Russians originally saw STOBAR as a purely interim step, with the aim of switching to cats once their newer carriers came online. It is odd that the Indians seem to be sticking with it – I strongly suspect the (new) Mig-29K could have been modified to use catapults, since it was a fairly major redesign anyway!

Just a small thing – the CdG is only 238m at the waterline (261m flight deck), so the 252m could either mean it’s a little bigger, or a little smaller. The displacement is in the same ballpark as the CdG as well, if not a little bigger. It is probably most accurate to say that it is in the same size class as the CdG, and nothing more (especially until we see detailed info on the ADS).

Thats why a catabult would be essential to Indians to accure. The combat value of the ADS would rise sicnifically. But with its current STABAR arragment, it migth be physically par with De Gaulle, but not operationally.

Part of me would love to see the UK get India to build a few of them (in place of the CVF) to a cat-equipped version, but in larger numbers, maybe even four!

You do realise that with India’s own orders, the Royal Navy wouldn’t see them any earlier than the late 2020s.

Well with limited size and the STOBAR arragment which requires alot of deckspace, there is nothing more you can do.

What comes its dimensions, 252 meter lenght is given and so is the 37,500 ton displacement so its not larger than the De Gaulle…

Just a small thing – the CdG is only 238m at the waterline (261m flight deck), so the 252m could either mean it’s a little bigger, or a little smaller. The displacement is in the same ballpark as the CdG as well, if not a little bigger. It is probably most accurate to say that it is in the same size class as the CdG, and nothing more (especially until we see detailed info on the ADS).

It would be very interesting to see India abandon the STOBAR arrangement, in favour of cats, especially if they could be persuaded to buy Rafales! :diablo:

Part of me would love to see the UK get India to build a few of them (in place of the CVF) to a cat-equipped version, but in larger numbers, maybe even four! They should be capable of carrying two dozen fighters, a few Hawkeyes, and a few helos, or act as commando carriers with two dozen transport and attack helos. The cynic in me, however, recognises that the build quality is, unfortunately, lacking, given the build quality on the IN’s Delhi class destroyers.

It is a pity that most of the info on them is out of date, so I suspect that any figures quoted should be treated with a degree of scepticism. 🙁

Well with limited size and the STOBAR arragment which requires alot of deckspace, there is nothing more you can do.

What comes its dimensions, 252 meter lenght is given and so is the 37,500 ton displacement so its not larger than the De Gaulle…

It looks big. 🙂

Are there any technical data?

It seems to be bigger than french carrier CdG :confused:

Indian navy is growing faster and will soon rules the asian seas (….and more) showing that the XXI century will be ruled by new powers alongside USA and some of the XIX-XX centuries powers will step back in the world power rank.

I wasn’t aware that they had finalised a design- I know they’ve cut the first steel though and that Italy’s Fincanterri was supposed to be helping them with the design which started looking like a Frankenstein version of the Cavor, Kuznetsov and the Mistral LHD (island structure).