As to the conspiracy theories of Russia trying to jemmy the Gorshkov back out of India’s waiting hands forget it. Answer one question – what use is a carrier, to Russia or China, that cannot operate the Su-30?.

The MiG-29 production line has been reopened, and there is no reason that the Russians couldn’t make their own MiG-29K purchase, is there? By all accounts, the airframes produced are new, and there doesn’t seem to be any trouble so far with the Indian aircraft order?

I don’t know if the political will is there to both assume the costs of the ex-Gorshkov rebuild and to purchase a MiG-29K squadron or two, but it isn’t beyond the realm of possibility?

1) Which frigate class is capable of accomodating two Sea Kings?.

An older, and quite modestly sized example, would be the Canadian Iroquois/Tribal class. All considered, the flight deck is remarkably small, a testament to the efficacy of Beartrap haul down gear.

2) You need at least three airframes to keep one on station. One on station, one at readiness/transit to station and one down for repair/maintenance. 3 airframes, using NH90 as example, gives about 7hrs cycle time for each airframe deployed to be regenerated. That optempo can be sustained until the ship runs out of avcat, spares and air ordnance.

Two airframes achieving the same thing would need to have 6hr plus endurances on station, would still be dependent on returning to the ship for ordnance replenishment and would offer no cover for any mechanical fault cropping up on the airborne chopper.

Better to have the extra helicopter on your ship than need an extra ship with a helicopter to do the same job!.

Now why do you need to maintain a helo on station, outside of a Cold War era ASW scenario? That doesn’t seem likely enough to justify a specialist DDH, and if there is that level of concern, why not go to a true through deck type like the 16DDH, which at least offers a degree of flexibility?

In this day and age, you don’t need that operational tempo, and it is even questionable that you need a manned platform for anything other than SAR?

Just how many Firescout UAVs could you fit in the same hanger space as a Sea King/EH101?

Personally, I don’t see the need for 3 large manned helicopters. How about 1 EH101 and 2 or 3 UAVs?

Considering the delay’s keep pushing back the delivery date for the ex-Gorshkov to something like 2013-2014. Should India just move on………..Really, to me India would be better off just completing the first IAC as soon as possible. To be followed by the third after that. In the short term considering the IAC is a complete design. Just contract out the second of the class to a foreign ship yard. Thereby, getting at least two new Carriers in a reasonable period.

Not a bad concept. Immediately fund a second IAC to be built at a foreign shipyard, and then make the 3rd a competitive bid between Indian and foreign builders.

You really do have to wonder if Fincantieri could complete a new carrier in the time that it takes the Russians to get the ex-Gorshkov sorted.

If the pric etag of the ex-Gorshkov is already up to $2.0 billion, just how much more would it take a build an optimal new-built carrier?

Considering its just steel…………what would be the advantage vs a straight flight deck as used on the 16DDH????

It comes down to a matter of scale. A hanger in the superstructure makes sense for a smaller hull, while a through deck makes sense for a larger ship. In other words, a through deck made absolutely no sense for a 6,300 to 6,800 ton ship, but was the preferred choice when its replacement was nearly 3 times the displacement.

Now, I suppose that you could build a sub-7,000 ton flat-top, much like the Harrier Carrier proposal, but that flight deck would be a very wet place due to the low freeboard. There’s a reason why most surface combatants have an aft helicopter deck.

I think it was not posted here

http://www.meretmarine.com/article.cfm?id=108719

The side profile image is entirely new. This contract has rumored for a couple of years and some would say it is even a sneak peak at what the RN will eventually chose for MARS.

It might be best to remove the entire superstructure and start from scratch. I don’t think anyone would build a warship this way today. Start with a proper hangar aft and a modern weapon and sensor fit. I’d think that it would be worth the trouble and expense, especially after the disastrous ex-Gorshkov rebuild.

Planeman6000, great graphics.

Kenya is claiming that the vessels are for their military only before we get too carried away with the Ukraine bashing……the truth has yet to be found.

It is a bit surprising that Kenya would be making a major arms purchase so soon after the recent ethnic violence and the formation of a divided coalition government.

On the other hand, the there would be tremendous difficulties in transporting T-72 tanks overland to Southern Sudan, where much of the terrain is unsuitable for MBTs, especially in the rainy season.