how old are the newest 300 F15Es ? if < 10 yrs old, they can
comfortably perform for another 20 yrs atleast.

hindustantimes.com

Kuwaitis pull out of tough Indian Navy course
Vishal Thapar and M.A.S. Chinna
New Delhi, January 4

In an unprecedented incident, 10 Kuwaiti Naval officers recently deserted a training course run by the Indian Navy after complaining of ‘maltreatment’ by the hosts.

The 10 Kuwaiti officers of the rank of lieutenant were undergoing a Bridge Watchkeeping Certificate Course conducted by the Indian Navy’s Southern Command at Kochi and Vishakhapatnam. They had completed four-and-a-half months of the six-month course when they pulled out in August. This was the first time Kuwaiti officers were attending this course.

The Indian Navy has denied the Kuwaitis were maltreated but indicated that they were soft, expected “five-star treatment” and were unable to take the rigour of training.

The course is rudimentary but rigorous. “It’s an important benchmark. An officer can be useful on a ship only if he is a qualified watchkeeper,” a senior Navy officer said.

The Kuwaiti embassy in New Delhi appeared to concur with its officers that the Indian Navy’s training regimen was too rough.

It cited the “inability” of its officers to put up with the training regimen in high seas during the monsoon as the reason for the “withdrawal”. Significantly, each of the 10 Kuwaiti lieutenants had a record of five to ten years of service.

Indian training standards are tough. Apocryphal legend has it that even the US SEALS — the universally-known crack marine commandos — were staggered at the Indian training rigour (for their counterparts) and had described it as “inhuman”.

The Indian Navy insists the trainees have to be “put through the paces” and that there can be no compromise on the regimen. “This is only a reflection of the high standard of training imparted by the Indian Navy,” a senior officer said. “The Kuwait Navy needs to be concerned that its officers were unable to cope up,” he pointed out.

On its part, the Indian Navy was observing a certain leniency with the Kuwaitis, as it does with many foreign trainees.

“Foreign personnel from certain Gulf countries under training with the Indian Navy have been provided additional residential facilities of soft furnishing and air conditioning on payment by their governments,” a Navy spokesman said.

In the case of the Kuwaitis, they were allowed to stay in hotels on off-duty days while their ships were in harbour. The 10 officers were assigned to three Indian naval ships based at Kochi and Vishakhapatnam.

The Navy has strongly dismissed the “maltreatment” charge. “We have been training foreigners from 28 countries since 1965. Currently, about 350 foreign personnel are being trained by the Indian Navy annually. No complaint of maltreatment has been received,” a spokesman said.

india desired to improve relations with US in early 1990s and
took up US offer of engine and help with the FBW in which ADA
had zero experience. US made available the F16XL testbed and
some indian engineers kept coming and going from lockheed to
learn how to code the FBW. it was partly a political decision. india
already had good relations with france. and in that timeframe IAF
was having a rough time with the Mig29 engines following breakup of fUSSR and dislocations in the parts chain plus poor
initial quality of the RD33 (these were finally overcome in late 90s and Mig29s returned to normal flying hrs). so nobody was keen
on a russian engine, US was also far ahead in FBW.

didnt Rafale prototype first fly with GE404 engine in 1988 and
then M88-1 came along ?

I doubt M88-1 was on the table for india in early 1990s and it
was a new engine compared to GE404 whose base design was
older from early 1980s and more proven.

is AVIC-1 and AVIC-2 part of Shenyang ? who is making the SU30s?

>They could have saved all that money by signing a defence pact
> with the US.

the Qataris proved more shrewed. they have a fine AF composed
of KC-135, E3, F15E, F16s all based in Thumrait

1980 Hong Kong ship owner C.Y.Tung’s ‘Seawise Giant’ with 564,839 DWT is the largest tanker and the largest man-made structure in the world. After just two voyages goes into layup and serves as storage vessel later on. Sold to Norway and re-named ‘Jahre Viking’. Specs: Length 1,504’, beam 226’, draft 98’, 260,851 GRT, 13 knots.

==> 1504 ft x 226 ft

Nimitz class
==> 1092 ft x 250 ft
==> 100,000t full load.

What is the empty weight of a ULCC tanker (minus the fuel)

I’d hazard a guess the empty weight of a CVN nimitz is around
90000t. (100ac @ 20t is still only 2000t, fuel ??)

I dont think building large tankers is any assurance of capability
to build large carriers , but it is one of the factors only – you have exp with large building yards and processes, plus manpower trained.

if PRC has any ambitions of being the leading east asian or even
a global power, building large carriers cannot be walked away from. So they had better start early …. the internal design of
merchant ships is relatively simple, the tanks just scaling up of
a single cell design looks like. A CVN has 100times more machinery and internal complexity spanning 7-8 deck levels ,
classified damage control measures and so on.

CVNs just cant be churned out the way hyundai makes merchant ships. as you can see from the dimensions even a ship 2x a 300,000t ULCC doesnt ‘dwarf’ the Nimitz just matches it in width and slightly longer in length. the Nimitz rides far more out of the water than a low-slung ULCC and towers over anything else nearby.

DWT is weight of cargo a ship carries 300,000DWT means it
carries that much oil. used for oil and bulk carriers.

displacement tonnage (like 100,000 for nimitz) is used for
navy ships.

USS constellation = 81,000t full load displacement
Jahre viking is only 36,000t empty it looks like from
page 7 of below.
http://www.australianheritagefleet.com.au/JCFullBy/crewnews3.pdf

just as I suspected these ULCCs use far less steel and machinery
than a CVN and are far easier to manufacture.

not for nothing a single CVN cost $5 bil to make.