PA indiens

En tout cas je trouve qu'il a beaucoup de ressemblance avec le kuznetsov. Peut etre que cela va intéresser la Chine d'upgrader les sien ( le Kiev, le Minsk et le Novorossiysk) en plus du Variag.

Rooivalk a écrit:

En tout cas je trouve qu'il a beaucoup de ressemblance avec le kuznetsov. Peut etre que cela va intéresser la Chine d'upgrader les sien ( le Kiev, le Minsk et le Novorossiysk) en plus du Variag.

Logique, le Kuznestov est une version derivée des Kiev avec la quasi absence de missiles à l'avant (sauf les SS-N-19 en plein milieu de pont d'envol

trouvé sur le web, via Warship 1 qui a réouvert semble-t'il....





travaux de mise en place des plates formes d'encorbellement tribord

Eh ben, ils ont encore du boulot en perspective

Bof au final c faire du neuf avec du vieux ...il est pas pret de prendre la mer ce bateau, et au moment ou il le fera elle aura quelle age la coque?

3 PA pour l'Inde:

India to have ‘3-carrier Navy’

DH News Service New Delhi:
As the construction of the first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC) is on a smooth course, naval engineers have readied plans to construct two additional home-made aircraft carriers to make the Indian navy a ‘three-carrier navy’.
At the Cochin Shipyard Ltd, heavy machineries are being put in place to undertake the navy’s most ambitious project – manufacturing the 37,500 tonnes IAC to carry fighter planes and helicopters – from the scratch in another six years at a cost of Rs 3261crore.
The two existing aircraft carriers – INS Virat and INS Vikrant are from the UK. A third Russian carrier INS Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov) is likely to be commissioned by 2008.
While INS Vikrant joined the services in the early 1960s and has been made a museum after more than two decades in service. INS Virat was commissioned in 1987.
“The manufacturing facilities now being put in place would not only be for making only one aircraft carrier. The navy has a long term plan of making two more. INS Virat can serve for another 6 to 7 years during which the final decision on constructing additional carriers can be made,” said a Navy officer.
Steel cutting have taken place in the IAC project, formerly known as air defence ship. According to the designs made at the Directorate of Naval Design (DND), the 840 ft ship will have 30 fighter planes and helicopters, out of which 17 can be accommodated in the hanger.
For the fighter fleets, the options are MiG-29K, naval version of the light combat aircraft, Sea Harrier, advanced light helicopter and Russian Kamov-31 helicopters. While there will be foreign consultations in a few areas, the naval engineers claimed the design to be completely indigenous. Only three other nations have built such a large carrier in the past.
“Besides the ambitious project, the navy is constructing three new destroyers, each weighing 6640 tonnes at the Mazgaon docks in Mumbai,” said Commodore K N Vaidyanathan, principle director of naval design at the DND. The organisation will complete its 50th anniversary on November 17.
The decision to make these three new destroyers has been taken following the success of the three Delhi-class destroyers, which are INS Delhi, INS Mysore and INS Mumbai.

moi, j'en compte 4 (nations) qui ont construit des grands PA depuis la seconde guerre mondiale (US, UK, CCCP, France)
Pour insister, encore une fois (et pas la dernière) sur la nécessité du PA2 pour la MN. Avec une telle ambition, la Marine indienne et la PLAN risquent bien d'être les "Blue Navy" les plus puissantes de la planète, avec l'USN, dans les prochaines décennies, surtout si les gouvernements Européens baissent les bras en ayant comme argument que ces PA ne servent à rien.... d'autres pays n'ont visiblement pas du tout la même approche de la politique internationale et du rôle de leur marine.
X

clausewitz a écrit:

Rooivalk a écrit:

En tout cas je trouve qu'il a beaucoup de ressemblance avec le kuznetsov. Peut etre que cela va intéresser la Chine d'upgrader les sien ( le Kiev, le Minsk et le Novorossiysk) en plus du Variag.

Logique, le Kuznestov est une version derivée des Kiev avec la quasi absence de missiles à l'avant (sauf les SS-N-19 en plein milieu de pont d'envol

mouais, sacre derive, de 40000 tonne pour un Kiev, il passe a 67000 pour un Kuznetsov

un peu comme si le Kitty Hawk aurait ete derive du Foch

India’s Quest for an Indigenous Aircraft Carrier

Admiral (Retd) Arun Prakash

Hey you found that forum Chack?

happy to see a indian guys on board, welcome here

and thanks for your website about the Indian aircraft carrier

Franz is right, how did you found this forum ?

Francois,

I found this forum while googling for INS Shardul...

Bill,

Thank you for the welcome. Thnt article is from the former Admiral. Adm Arun Prakash has also flown Rafale.

Hi Brutus,

It is a long time we know each other...
But others may not. So please a small word (even in English) to introduce you to the community (sounds like a sect LOL):
https://forummarine.forumactif.com/viewforum.forum?f=8

Francois a écrit:

Hi Brutus,

It is a long time we know each other...
But others may not. So please a small word (even in English) to introduce you to the community (sounds like a sect LOL):
https://forummarine.forumactif.com/viewforum.forum?f=8

I will...

I will introduce myself in French https://forummarine.forumactif.com/viewtopic.forum?p=23109#23109

Why don't you come over to FI Forum like old times?

I have question. Any one knows if the Fincantieri has already started the work on Indian Air Defence Ship?

INS Viraat can sail for seven more years

INS VIRAAT, JANUARY 5: ...... INS Viraat, its sole aircraft carrier, there was new hope that this ageing vessel—incidentally the oldest warship in commission in the world—will probably steam on for another seven years, a resounding record in global maritime military history.

“We are confident that she is in good condition for another seven years of service,” Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta told The Indian Express just after the Defence Minister addressed the Western Fleet, following a demonstration of the Barak anti-missile system in the Arabian Sea and a steam past of the Western warship fleet.

With this new lease of operational life, the Navy may just about realise its long-standing dream of operating three aircraft carriers, albeit for a short period. Next year, it will add the carrier INS Vikramaaditya (the rechristened Admiral Gorshkov) to its fleet, and the indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC) in 2011-2012. With three carriers, the Navy will be able to project power off both seaboards, a massive force multiplier.

“From 2008 onward, we will have at least two aircraft carriers. In ideal

conditions, we will have two carriers operational and one in refit,” Admiral Mehta said.

Construction work on the 23,900-ton carrier, the largest in the Navy’s fleet, began during the pre-Independence period in Britain, and was commissioned into the Navy in 1987. At that point it was already three decades old. The Indian Navy astounded its British counterpart by operating the ship far beyond the eight-nine years that was originally part of the plan, making it nearly half a century old now.

“The ship is in excellent condition. It is up to the Naval Headquarters to decide how long we use her, but I can say she is in top form. Even the British officers who have served on her previously have visited and said she is in better condition now than she was 40 years ago,” Capt Girish Luthra, Viraat’s skipper said.

At any rate, after a major refit in 1999, which included making living conditions better for its complement of 150 officers and 1,500 sailors, and armed with the Barak anti-missile system in 1997 among a lot of other modern equipment and structural welded steel, the carrier is still extremely seaworthy—a point proved by its voyage deep into South East Asia last June.

chacko a écrit:

Why don't you come over to FI Forum like old times?

Well, put simply, your server went off due to pirating, then at the same time I got a bit tired of all the fuss online.
Especially always explaining the same things to kids that won't listen.

Well, nothing against your site especially though.
Too bad you lost all though.

Actually, It was good to loose the forum. I was getting tired as I couldnt re organise it. Even the ournal. Actually I could have restored the forum, but decided against it. I took the risk of remaking Frontier India and I seem to be succeding.

Any way, How many years do French aircraft carriers operate?

le sao paulo (ex foch) est toujours en service au bresil et je suppose qu'on reparlera du CDG dans 50 ans

chacko a écrit:

Actually, It was good to loose the forum. I was getting tired as I couldnt re organise it. Even the ournal. Actually I could have restored the forum, but decided against it. I took the risk of remaking Frontier India and I seem to be succeding.

Any way, How many years do French aircraft carriers operate?

The french aircrft carrier operate about 35 years, more or less, then the Foch was sales to Brazil and still operate today
The Clemenceau, hes sister ship was decomissioned when the Charles de Gaulles nuclear powered carrier is comissioned.

and then the Clemenceau, got a long History because like every ship of this age he's full of asbestose, but he was the only one to be nicely cleaned, and because that he got every troubles than every others ship avoid !

for go back on your question, the average operating times in the french navy is about 35 years

Why is that they operate only 35 years? Aircraft Carriers are capable of operating up to 50 years, right? Is it because the cost of operations is higher? That brings to another question IS Nuclear powered aircraft carriers have annnual cost of 160 mil USD. What are the figures for others?

I don't know the annual cost of the Charles de Gaulle, anywa, I believe the biggest part came from the aircraft on board

what the life expectation of a ship ? it depend who you ask and where ?
35 years looks pretty good in France, lots of people complained after the state of the Clemenceau said is too old. and the continuation of the Foch was only after a heavy repairs on every stages, including the boiler, the motor, the catapults, the bed, the bath room....

with the Indian carrier, I believe by using the Harrier you have less trouble, is no catapult on board and do you no need high speed for launch the Harrier

we have a story with the Clemenceau that the 2 catapults for some reason doesn't work, the whole air group stay on the deck, useless, and well, the only choice was take the whole task force back the harbour, dowload all the aircraft with a crane, take them back the airport by road across Toulon City and repairs the bloody carrier

now, suppose this problem happen during Agapanthe operation out of the coast of pakistan.... it will looks great !

Bill a écrit:

what the life expectation of a ship ? it depend who you ask and where ?
35 years looks pretty good in France, lots of people complained after the state of the Clemenceau said is too old. and the continuation of the Foch was only after a heavy repairs on every stages, including the boiler, the motor, the catapults, the bed, the bath room....

with the Indian carrier, I believe by using the Harrier you have less trouble, is no catapult on board and do you no need high speed for launch the Harrier

we have a story with the Clemenceau that the 2 catapults for some reason doesn't work, the whole air group stay on the deck, useless, and well, the only choice was take the whole task force back the harbour, dowload all the aircraft with a crane, take them back the airport by road across Toulon City and repairs the bloody carrier

I suppose the boilers are main problems in most aircraft carriers

1) INS Vikrant had boiler problem when it was deployed to liberate Bangladesh in 1971. It was operating in half speed. It had a defective boiler.
2) A boiler room flood put Viraat out of action in 1993.
3) Gorshkov had a fire because of a small boiler tube burst.

The current boilers for to be named INS Vikramaditya is not very adequate. Don't you think so?

well, I was 6 month a go visit the Kiev, wich is actually a museum in China, and is the similar model of the Gorshkov, your future Vikramaditya, but I didn't see the engine or the boiler room, is out of access of the public.

anyway, I will say is a russian stuff, simple, robust, lots of thick steel wich is always better for the lifetime, I see the sonar and radar desk and the phone system .... looks back in 1930-1940.
evens on the french navy logistic ship Rhone made in 1962 and where I was on board in 94-96 the phone and radar system looks modern compar at the Kiev. but we cannot compare a logistic/supply ship and a aircraft carrier

the worries for the Gorshkov is after the explosion in the boiler or engine room, no reparations was made, and the ship stay out of use without maintenance many years. every places, especialy these with a difficult access have rost , every pipes, for the boiler, the motor, the fire extinguisher or the toilets
If the shipyard in Russia didn't done well the reparation and maybe change the whole propulsion system, you will get troubles.

because you will use Mig 29, and without catapult, them need speed for be launch or take back on the deck, that will be not with the half speed

in 1991, on the first gulf war, the Clemenceau have boiler problem and can only reach half speed, he go to war with a full shit load of helicopter and kaki army truck .... and without any airplane

Bill here is descision to deploy INS Vikrant in 1971 operations with faulty boilers. This is an extract from "Transition to Triumph" book by Adm Hiranandani 9for Indian Navy). Happy reading Co-incidently even I was reading it.

Citation :

The Deployment of the VIKRANT

Since June 1970, the aircraft carrier VIKRANT had been lying immobilised in Bombay due to serious cracks and leaks that had developed in the water drum of A1 boiler. Subsequent radiographic examination revealed that the water drums of the remaining three boilers also had a large number of internal fatigue cracks and fissures at each of the circumferential rivetted joints that were beyond repair by welding. It was clear that long term repairs to VIKRANT's boilers were not feasible indigenously. Orders were placed in Britain for the supply of four new water drums. Naval Headquarters directed that the boilers were not to be used till further orders. A1 boiler was blanked off.
Eventually, on 26 Feb 71, the ship made a `cold move' from the Ballard Pier Extension to the anchorage. The objective was to flash up each boiler at reduced steam pressure and try out the main and flight deck machinery which had been lying idle for seven months. The boilers were first flashed up on 1 Mar 71 and `Basin Trials' upto 40 RPM (ahead and astern) were carried out, after securing the ship to E1 Buoy. Fast pullout catapult trials were also completed on the same day. The catapult steam supply modification in the forward machinery room was tried out and found to be fully satisfactory. As events were to prove later in the 1971 war, without this modification the Seahawks could not have been launched at 160 RPM. The ship proceeded to sea for Preliminary Sea Trials on 18 Mar 71 and returned on 20 Mar 71. She went to sea again on 26 Apr, returning the next day.
As a result of these sea trials, it was considered technically feasible to operate the boilers at 400 psi pressure thereby restricting the ships speed to 14 knots, maximum revolutions 120 ahead and 60 revolutions astern.
In May 1971, when Naval Headquarters started working on the concept of operations, the first problem that needed deciding was what to do with VIKRANT. Admiral Nanda recalls:
"When the circumstances became clear that we may have to go to war, there was a feeling that we should leave VIKRANT in Bombay harbour. I said "No, because during the 1965 war also, VIKRANT was sitting in Bombay harbour and did not go out to sea. If in the 1971 war the same thing happens, VIKRANT would be called a white elephant and Naval Aviation would be written off. VIKRANT has to be seen as being operational, even if we do not fly the aircraft.
"There has been this fear, and probably rightly so, that if the VIKRANT gets torpedoed or if VIKRANT sinks, the Navy and India will lose a lot of prestige. Therefore to send VIKRANT to sea was a difficult decision for anybody to take. One had to take cognisance of the facts. These were that VIKRANT's boiler had a crack and therefore the speed of the ship was restricted. That the ship may not be in a position to fly aircraft or operate the catapult. Then I asked the question "If we operate on three boilers, what will happen ?" The answer given was that "we may not be able to catapult the aircraft." So knowing the decision had been taken not to fly aircraft, I asked "Are we able to at least steam? Not at the speed required for catapulting aircraft, but at steaming speed ?" And I got the staff to agree that she could steam. So I said "Alright, let her steam". We sent the VIKRANT out from Bombay.
In his book, Vice Admiral Krishnan states: (Page 8 et seq)
"There were many in the service, some of them very senior officers, who considered VIKRANT a liability in any war with Pakistan. They argued that deployment of the VIKRANT involved certain inherent risks, especially from underwater threats, so considerable escort effort would be required. Many doubted her exact role in a war with Pakistan. Some even went to the extent of suggesting that the VIKRANT should take no part in the war but should be tucked away inside Cochin. I am not suggesting that the pessimists did not have sufficient grounds for their misgivings. There was an overwhelming body of professional opinion that considered that steaming the VIKRANT in her current state was not a risk worth taking.
"Secondly, in any war at sea, VIKRANT would obviously be the most worthwhile target for the enemy. The three Daphne class submarines, newly acquired by Pakistan from France and fully operational, posed a great potential threat to the carrier. The sophistication of their detection capability as well as the homing devices of their torpedoes were such that once the ship was picked up and the screen of escorts pierced, the VIKRANT would stand in mortal danger. Even as many as six escorts would not guarantee any complete immunity to the carrier.
"Morale and psychological factors weighed just as heavily in the minds of all of us. If VIKRANT were to be sunk, it would represent a victory of the first magnitude to the enemy, just as it would represent a national disaster to us. VIKRANT was the core round which our Fleet was built and her loss would be something too terrible to contemplate. Ever since we had acquired the carrier, she had come in for severe criticism and much controversy, invariably to her detriment. But we were not concerned at public criticism alone. Obviously as professional men in positions of responsibility, we would not send any ship into battle unless we were satisfied that it would be worth our while to do so."
A characteristic of Admiral Nanda's style of leadership was that whenever he was confronted with a vexed problem, he would go down to where the ships were, sit down with those he considered knowledgeable about the problem, listen carefully to all views, ask basic commonsense questions and gradually evolve workable solutions, making it clear that the responsibility for the final decision would be his. He would then go back to Naval Headquarters, discuss the suggested solutions with the Naval Staff and quantify the risks and the benefits on a commonsense basis. This helped to arrive at a consensus in the formulation of which each one felt that his concerns had been considered, that as much care as possible had to be taken to minimise the risks and that should things go wrong, then everyone knew that no single individual could be blamed. In May 1971, Admiral Nanda personally chaired numerous discussions on the VIKRANT problem.
After careful consideration at all levels, it was decided to auxiliary steam the remaining three boilers for 500 hours and thereafter take a further set of radiographs to study the behaviour of the cracks. This trial proved encouraging as there was no evidence of any deterioration. In June 1971, it was decided to carry out sea trials. To allay the watchkeepers' fears of the boilers bursting, heavy safety harnesses of steel were designed and strapped over the water drums of the remaining three boilers. As a further precautionary measure, observation windows were fitted to detect traces of steam leaks that could occur in the initial stages of rupturing. To balance the forcing rates of the forward boiler and minimise the pressure fluctuations when launching aircraft, a modification had been carried out on the main steam range that enabled the two boilers aft to be cross connected to the catapult steam accumulator. By end June, it was clear that the sea trials had been successful. As a measure of abundant precaution, Naval Headquarters restricted VIKRANT's speed to 14 knots.

Citation :

VIKRANT'S PASSAGE TO THE EAST COAST
On 23 July VIKRANT sailed in company with the Western Fleet to Cochin. Lieutenant Commander (later Vice Admiral) B Bhushan was the Senior Engineer of VIKRANT. He recalls:
"Even our eventual sailing for Cochin was not without some `hiccups'. Shortly after leaving harbour, we found that one of our boiler feed water tanks was contaminated and as a consequence, we were very short of usable feed water. A `council of war' was held. The Commander (E) asked me whether we should go on, or ask the Command to go back to harbour. I reported that our seawater distilling plants were finally producing clear water and unless something drastic happened, we should be able to build up our feed water reserves in due course. It was decided to go ahead and take a final decision after a few hours. The rest, of course, is history."
After an intensive shake down en route, VIKRANT carried out Seaking landing trials before entering Cochin on 26 July. She sailed on 28 Jul for radar and communication trials, on completion of which she departed for Madras, escorted by BRAHMAPUTRA and BEAS.
At the very outset, a short sea trial off Madras proved that a speed of 16 knots at maximum revolutions 140 could be maintained for short periods, without causing undue strain on the three boilers. This restored confidence in the ship's machinery, which was operating under limitations.
Admiral Nanda recalls:-
"Next the question arose, was VIKRANT capable of flying? So I spoke to Vice Admiral Krishnan and told him I am going to come and see VIKRANT and I would like him to accompany me on board. We had a long discussion on board between Captain Parkash the Commanding Officer of the VIKRANT (Capt S Prakash), FOCINCEAST (Admiral Krishnan) and myself."
Captain (later Vice Admiral) S Parkash recalls:-
"A very serious discussion took place regarding the role of VIKRANT if hostilities were to take place. I told CNS and the C in C that "My biggest concern is that we have an aircraft carrier and we cannot fly any aircraft. I have got the most dedicated aircrew on board. Can you imagine their morale if I were to just sit in Madras or show off some time at sea. How do we tackle this situation?" They said "Well, you are restricted in speed. Try and make the best of it". So I said "I have done that already. Whenever the fresh breeze in the afternoon starts giving me an extra 10 knots, I do carry out rollers with Alizes. To start with, what I want is permission for them to hook on and finally to embark the Alize Squadron, so that at least in a given period during a day, I can carry out flying which will make all the difference to the morale of the ship. Can I make a signal to Naval Headquarters asking approval to hook on an Alize"? I distinctly remember CNS' reply "Parkash, who in Naval Headquarters is going to give you permission to embark an Alize with your speed restriction? If you think you can hook an Alize on board, let me know, then I will give you permission to embark". The conversation stopped there. He flew back to Delhi.
"At this point of time, it was evident that some semblance of flying operations was possible only if two factors could be resolved:
(a) Steam the second forward boiler at full load to achieve a higher speed.
(b) Accept launch and recovery of aircraft under marginal speed conditions.
"Commander (E) (later Vice Admiral) BR Chowdhury, who had earlier done two stints on board the VIKRANT, was my Engineer Officer. With his past experience and professional competence, his contribution to decision-making at this crucial juncture was important. In his view:
(a) The behaviour of the machinery on passage from Bombay to Madras had given Engine Room personnel considerable confidence to steam the three boilers de-unitised. This alone was the deciding factor to use the remaining three boilers to full load capacity, so as to build up speed to operate aircraft under marginal conditions.
(b) The second and more important factor was whether flying operations should be risked under marginal conditions? This would call for extraordinary skills on the part of the pilots as a matter of routine.
"The embarked aircrew were well experienced and the willingness of the pilots, in this instance, was overwhelming and exemplary. Their professional excellence and resolution to go to war was indeed contagious and creditable. Thus the overall risks involved were calculated and a decision was taken eventually to hook an Alize aircraft on board. This was successful. In due course, NHQ signalled approval to embark more Alizes and later the Seahawk squadron".