Type 45 destroyers: UK’s £1bn warships face engine refit

Having to cut open the hulls of multiple new(ish) warships to add more generators because they keep going dark? Sounds like the sort of balls-up you’d expect from an Australian project. 😮

True. And I do believe they will order a second 40-45K carrier, though how much time they’ll take to reach that decision is an open question. Just as important is the matter of the air complement.

The N-Tejas is a cheap option that can be built in numbers, provide attrition replacements as well as carry out shore defence duties. So its an obvious choice. But they’ll still need something at the higher end and the MiG-29K simply won’t cut it. You probably won’t like this bit, but given the ski-jump requirement, at some point the IN will have to order the F-35B, if its to provide a battle group (comprising of upto $10 bn in naval assets), with effective air cover in an increasingly lethal threat environment.

MiG-29K is analagous to Super Hornet, Rafale, or J-15. With appropriate upgrades, I think it will be adequate to serve as the high-end complement to naval Tejas on the STOBAR carriers for probably the next 20 years, certainly in the air defense role, and by which time the first next-gen carrier will have arrived. The major deficiency of the STOBAR configuration lies in the lack of fixed wing AEW (something that F-35 would not address) and reduced payload capability which is more relevant for strike roles. The F-35B also has reduced payload and range relative to the A and C models, it would be interesting to see how the two aircraft compare in this respect.

At some point it may be sensible to purchase F-35B for [EDIT: the STOBAR carriers], perhaps as part of a package deal including airframes intended for the next-gen carriers also, but I do not see such an acquisition as being forced by the inadequacy of MiG-29K, at least not in the medium-term. Indeed, once the next-gen carriers have arrived the STOBAR carriers could find themselves operating in more of a support role, e.g. as an ASW platform in the manner of Japan’s Izumo DDHs, only with organic air cover and the ability to recover fixed-wing aircraft.

Thing is, once critical mass in terms of experience and capabilities is built up, the going gets much easier. The IAC program is coming along nicely (after a funding crunch 2011-2013). Similarly, the first P-15B ship will probably be commissioned within two years of the last P-15A ship. While the 65K IAC-2 is a far more complex program, given the expanded domestic technical base and, in particularly, technical assistance from the US, delivery by 2035 is very doable.

India should seek redundancy and compartmentalisation in order to minimise both program and strategic risk. This applies to the carrier, its technologies, and its air wing. For example, India should aim to operate AMCA from its next-gen carriers, but seek a foreign aircraft also so as to mitigate risk. F-35 is the obvious candidate, but Russia may have something suitable to offer in the timeframe also, while a European solution is likely to be too immature. The US is the obvious source for EMALS technology but this should be compartmentalised from the carrier project itself: the intent should be to fit the carrier with an Indian EMALS system (developed with US or other foreign assistance), but the option to fit a foreign-sourced system should be retained, again to mitigate risk. Another area for compartmentalisation would probably be the reactor, if a nuclear-powered vessel is pursued. There are four major players that India can call upon for assistance in a next-gen carrier project: the US, Russia, France, and the UK and India should not hesitate to employ all of them and indeed play them off against each other in pursuit of her strategic interests. Timelines should be conservative, and there should always be a Plan B.

Answer depends on broader aircraft carrier ambitions and timelines.

Personally I think India should build Vishal to same specs as Vikrant and operate the same air wing (with suitable upgrades), and then commit to a next-generation >65k ton carrier program with nuclear power, EMALS, VLO aircraft etc. designed to reach fruition in early 2030s. Airwing options for this carrier would be AMCA, F-35, and whatever the Russians and potentially French have to offer at the time, plus UCAVs of one sort or another. Probably three units would be built over the course of 10-12 years, with the last replacing Vikramaditya by mid 2040s.

Gee, it might have something to do with the fact that that all branches of the US military spent much of the Cold War strapping nuclear warheads to everything they could think of regardless of practicality, in service of building up a hideous arsenal sufficient to extinguish most life on Earth, coupled with the simple fact that since 1945 the United States has been the most warlike nation on the planet, coupled with a national culture that more or less worships the military and believes that violence is the solution to all problems, and regularly features persons and sentiments as linked below on national television and as candidates for high office.

It’s no coincidence that the same Presidential bright spark who claimed that Islam “is a religion of peace” also claimed that “[the USA] is a peaceful nation”. The latter statement is actually far more ridiculous, given that “Islam” is a slippery, amorphous concept that is difficult to get a hold of to make such claims about one way or the other, whilst the United States of America and the activities of its federal government are much more well-defined and susceptible to analysis.

The US Navy just issued an eerie report outlining Russia’s naval capabilities

Link doesn’t match story.

“Eerie” is a strange adjective to apply to a report too…

Don’t forget the 5-6 aircraft carriers by early 2030s!

Sounds to me like the IN/MoD folks feeding Saurav Jha are getting a little carried away with themselves (again). Undoubtedly force planning is a tricky business for a nation experiencing rapid growth, but I think a degree of conservatism is called for, particularly given India’s unenviable project management record.

That said, if a half-dozen aircraft carriers really are on the cards, we should see the evidence sooner rather than later in the form of IAC-2 being built to largely the same specifications as IAC-1.

We are a European country under serious threat.

The UK is not under “serious threat” from ISIS or anyone else for that matter. That someone could confuse a bunch of ragtag terrorists staging the occasional atrocity in fair England with a serious threat to the nation indicates just how skewed perceptions have become. The only serious threat to the nation or the welfare of its people comes from its response to terrorism.

And I was under the impression that the UK wanted out of Europe anyway. 😉