Russia wants $2 billion extra for Gorshkov carrier

[JCady]

It's my understanding that legal title was already formally transferred to India at the beginning of the deal. The Russians are simply using the fact that they still have physical custody of the ship to hold it ransom for more money.

[K. A. Pital]

Should the Indian government be entitled to any further compensation (beyond refund of the payments to date) to make up for the lost time and additional expense to which they'll be committed, by derailment of the agreement?

Quite possibly so; I believe that the contract drafted included compensations for failure and how to calculate them - I doubt anyone would venture into such a large contract before hammering out little details like "what happens if we don't get the carrier and spend a lot of time waiting for it"..

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Should the Indian government be entitled to any further compensation (beyond refund of the payments to date) to make up for the lost time and additional expense to which they'll be committed, by derailment of the agreement?

Quite possibly so; I believe that the contract drafted included compensations for failure and how to calculate them - I doubt anyone would venture into such a large contract before hammering out little details like "what happens if we don't get the carrier and spend a lot of time waiting for it"..

The Indian Civil service isn't well known for efficiency and being meticulous, except for guarding their turf.

[Kitsune]

More problems with the India Navy:

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/index ... 0&Itemid=1

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

More problems with the India Navy:

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/index ... 0&Itemid=1

I remember Stuart mentioning that one Indian Navy ship had a case of cholera some years back.

[Ender]

I get the distinct impression that everyone here pitching the decomed conventionals lacks a suficient appreciation for exactly how decrepit and run down those things are.

[Sidewinder]

I get the distinct impression that everyone here pitching the decomed conventionals lacks a suficient appreciation for exactly how decrepit and run down those things are.

How decrepit and run down are the USS John F. Kennedy and Kitty Hawk compared to the alternatives, i.e., the Admiral Gorshkov and the INS Viraat (which the Indians plan to retire in 2012)?

[Lonestar]

Not worth it. Remember, the conventionals were built to go at a certain speed, required a lot of parts for catapults,and even if India was willing to come up with the thousands of sailors needed to man it, it probably wouldn't be able to come up with the cash to refurb a 50 year old hull that is significantly larger than anything else out there(outside of the uSN)

[Sea Skimmer]

You’d be looking at increasing the Indian navy by about 10% to man a Kitty Hawk, and they’ve already got a personal shortage. Not going to happen. A Kiev needs less then 1/3rd as many men, and in the configuration India is getting the ship, with a few more aircraft but many fewer weapons systems, that number is probably even lower.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I don't see why they need such a large, conventional angled-deck carrier. What was wrong with getting a smaller ASW design, or chipping in with the CVF project? If they want something so badly, throwing good money after bad on literally ancient designs that surprise people in their ability to still float.

[Lonestar]

They wanted to keep a conventional carrier on the cheap, with a cheap airwing. Obviously, that didn't work out due to the ludicrous low-balling the Russians did.

[Admiral Valdemar]

"Cheap" and "conventional carrier" don't mix too well. If you're going to commit, it'd be nice to do the homework and realise that a newer, smaller design would be far more effective than a hulking big relic.

Oh well. Live and learn. The navy will soon figure the Russians for conmen if they haven't already. In Russia, carrier buys YOU!

[Lonestar]

Ah, allow me to clarify:

India wanted a carrier with high performance aircraft("Better than a Sea Harrier") that was relatively cheap. Now, they could have gone with a smaller carrier, but that would have stuck them with either the Harrier family or a F-35B(which is shaping up to be very expensive).

[Admiral Valdemar]

In that case, their options are limited (I doubt even the F-35B will even see the light of day the way things are going). But do they really need such an option anyway? It's not like they have a massive blue water force they need CVNs in, like the USN. Sounds like they saw a deal, went with it, then got raped hard on the overhead.

[Lonestar]

I think the Indian Navy is dead set on maintaining a Two carrier force, they are also building(presumably, I've read that construction started in '05 but the Keel isn't to be laid down until sometime in December) a domestic CTOL carrier as well.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I think the Indian Navy is dead set on maintaining a Two carrier force, they are also building(presumably, I've read that construction started in '05 but the Keel isn't to be laid down until sometime in December) a domestic CTOL carrier as well.

I think it will take them forever to get it commissioned. And even after completion, a whole spate of defects start to surface. It's going to be a fun time finding all the defects.

[Sidewinder]

I doubt even the F-35B will even see the light of day the way things are going

If the STOVL version of the F-35 is canceled, the USN will have to stop putting fixed-wing aircraft on their amphibious assault ships, or to modify them with ski jumps or catapults, angled flight decks, arrestor wires and barriers. Both options will likely cost more than continuing development of the F-35; remember, the USMC uses Harriers for close air support, and if their assault ships can't carry them, the USN will have to attach a carrier, loaded with fixed-wing aircraft, to the amphibious task force.

[Sarevok]

If the STOVL version of the F-35 is canceled, the USN will have to stop putting fixed-wing aircraft on their amphibious assault ships, or to modify them with ski jumps or catapults, angled flight decks, arrestor wires and barriers. Both options will likely cost more than continuing development of the F-35; remember, the USMC uses Harriers for close air support, and if their assault ships can't carry them, the USN will have to attach a carrier, loaded with fixed-wing aircraft, to the amphibious task force.

Is it going to be a big loss ? Harriers are old and slow. Many countries have modern missiles and aircraft these days. So in order to use harriers in the first place you will need a real carrier to secure the skies and wipe out SAM launchers. Same will apply to a lesser degree to F-35s I suppose. It might be new but what will a tiny number of F-35s burdened with STOVL do against agile jets and modern SAMs ? They could still need help from real carrier planes against any moderately powerful country.

[Sea Skimmer]

I don't see why they need such a large, conventional angled-deck carrier. What was wrong with getting a smaller ASW design, or chipping in with the CVF project? If they want something so badly, throwing good money after bad on literally ancient designs that surprise people in their ability to still float.

I’ve pointed it out before, they only wanted this ship as an interim vessel for fill a gap until the second domestic carrier can be completed. The first domestic carrier is already building. No new western construction could possibly be ready soon enough to be worth buying, a third CVF for example physically could not be finished before 2017… same completion date they have planned for the second domestic ship.

The domestic ships are only projected to be about 1 billion apiece, about the same as Gorshkov was contracted for. In comparison to get that CVF by 2017 would be over 3.5 billion. Any western ship small enough to cost only 1 billion would be so small it could not operate conventional fixed wing aircraft… meaning it does not meet even the most basic Indian requirement. The proper thing in hindsight India should have done is just accepted a one carrier fleet for a while instead of trying to skimp on an interim ship, or else they should have started at least trying to build a domestic ship sooner. It was never in the budget to do more then this.

[Kitsune]

The Indians planned to originally order the steel to build the carrier from Russia from what I understand. There were so many problems that they ended up developing their own facilities.
That already caused delays. I cannot see them really pushing the time table for a second carrier.

[Starglider]

Same will apply to a lesser degree to F-35s I suppose. It might be new but what will a tiny number of F-35s burdened with STOVL do against agile jets and modern SAMs ?

This is a bit of a nitpick but I don't think STOVL is a major 'burden' for the B model. The empty weight is about a tonne (10%) more and the payload is reduced from about six tonnes to about five tonnes. I doubt that's significant for combat purposes. The biggest loss is range, down to about 75% of the A model due to lower internal fuel capacity, but for the CAS mission profile that probably isn't a problem either.

They could still need help from real carrier planes against any moderately powerful country.

After F-35 introduction the only other carrier fighter in the US inventory will be the F-18E Super Hornet, which has similar range and speed to the F-35C and I'm pretty sure is less capable in air-to-air combat (due to inferior stealth and avionics). But yes, serious opponents will require a lot more aircraft than you can fit on a marine landing ship - no one ever debated that.

[Sidewinder]

Is it going to be a big loss ? Harriers are old and slow. Many countries have modern missiles and aircraft these days. So in order to use harriers in the first place you will need a real carrier to secure the skies and wipe out SAM launchers. Same will apply to a lesser degree to F-35s I suppose.

(Shrugs.) I think it's due to some idiotic military officer or DoD official wanting to cut the costs of building a blue water navy capable of conducting amphibious operations, i.e., the idiots saying, "We don't need to buy another carrier to provide close air support for the marines! Look, we can put VTOL fighters onboard the amphibious assault ship, and have them support the landing!" Hell, if I had a dollar for every book and article urging the USAF to buy "less vulnerable" VTOLs instead of aircraft needing long runways and which become grounded when the enemy puts bomb craters on those runways, and the USN to buy numerous little VTOL carriers instead of a few big CTOL carriers, I'd double the size of my savings account.

[Kitsune]

During Carters administration, the idea of a smaller carrier. went almost to the point of being actually planned.

One item weird is that the Gerald Ford is listed at 5.1 Billion Dollars and the HMS Queen Elizabeth is listed as 3.8 Billion Pounds (5.8 Billion Dollars)

Conventional Carrier without all of the new technology is actually more expensive.
Granted that may partially be economies but even at normal economies, the numbers are extremely comparable.

[Kitsune]

I was mistaken, the 3.8 billion pounds is for both carriers

[Sea Skimmer]

During Carters administration, the idea of a smaller carrier. went almost to the point of being actually planned.

Almost every US administration since and including Eisenhower has considered them. Carter went further then others, but not even by that much. Every single time the math has been overwhelmingly against it, but hey, now LAH-6 now essentially amounts to a smaller carrier.

One item weird is that the Gerald Ford is listed at 5.1 Billion Dollars and the HMS Queen Elizabeth is listed as 3.8 Billion Pounds (5.8 Billion Dollars)

Who’s saying Ford costs 5.1 billion? A Nimitz hasn't been so wonderfully cheap since the mid 1990s. Its about 7.9 billion for CVN-78, CVN-79 should be similar in price, besides the total of 5.6 billion in R&D work for all the CVN-21 improvements that are going into the two hulls.

However each ship, particularly CVN-79 which introduces the full revised hull and new reactors, will also save as much as five billion dollars in reduced operating costs over a 50 year lifecycle. For a big carrier your looking at 200 million dollars a year or more to operate the ship, and that’s not counting SLEP. This means operating costs actually exceed construction costs… which is no real surprise. For combat aircraft as much as 2/3rds of costs are in operations. CVF is much cheaper to buy, but its operating costs are not going to be significantly less then a much larger Ford because of how much fuel the thing will guzzle down. The RN full well knows this, but they simply cannot get the money for a bigger and better ship upfront nor for the aircraft to make use of the bigger deck. Anyway, 3.8 billion pounds is the very optimistic cost projection .