It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian carrier turning into India's white elephant.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
www.google.com...


NEW DELHI — When Russia gave India a retired Soviet aircraft carrier five years ago, New Delhi was delighted -- little realising the vessel would turn into a costly white elephant.

Russia, India's longtime weapons supplier, said in 2004 it would give the country the 44,570-tonne "Admiral Gorshkov" as a gift, provided Delhi paid a Russian shipyard 974 million dollars to refurbish the carrier.

Since then, the price has skyrocketed for fixing up the 27-year-old ship, which was decommissioned after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In 2007, Russia demanded 850 million dollars more, citing cost escalations. Then, six months ago, Russia startled India with another demand -- this time for 2.9 billion dollars.

It also pushed back the ship's delivery by four years to 2012 -- a year after India must mothball its last remaining aircraft carrier, the British-origin INS Viraat.


You think its India's fault for asking for adding new modifications which led to increasing costs? Its kind of like spending more money for options on a particular car you want to buy and want to add more things on it.




posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Heck for another 1.6 Billion more, they could have gotten a New Nimitz Class Carrier. Over 2 Billion for a 12 jet carrier? What a ripoff.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by pavil]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


What a ripoff. Russia should stick to its agreement. If India demands newer technology to be installed then India should pony up the bill. If I was India, I would take my money and move on. Perhaps negotiate with Britain or France to sell them a new carrier -- If Britain and France are willing. Then again, India can use their future $9 billion purchases as a bargaining chip for Gorshkov. Either way, India got ripped off with this deal.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by guppy
 


Its too bad we couldn't sell India the Kitty Hawk. Possibly because of the technology and design on the carrier that has prevented many nations from creating a supercarrier in the first place.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by guppy
 


Its too bad we couldn't sell India the Kitty Hawk. Possibly because of the technology and design on the carrier that has prevented many nations from creating a supercarrier in the first place.


We wouldn't have been doing them any favors...the Kitty Hawk was known by some of her crew as the...well...crappy Kitty (I can't use the original language on this board) for a reason. The ship had serious mechanical problems.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   
there is another take on this:


www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-3283



July 31/09: India’s Business Standard conducts an interview with Russia’s outgoing ambassador to India, Vyacheslav Trubnikov. Excerpts:

”[VT] Not changing [the Gorshkov order], but the Indian Navy was eager to get the best, the most modern equipment [to insert into the hull].

[IBS] So the Navy’s appetite kept increasing, they wanted more and more..
[VT] Yes.

[BS] Reports are that it will cost around $2.2 billion?
[VT] It would be irresponsible of me to comment. Price negotiations are now entering the final stage. What is important for India is also the time of delivery. But the point is that if India wants additional equipment, the carrier will cost even more. So if both sides stop and decide, okay no request from India and no increase in price from our side, then we can finalise price and delivery.”



it would seems when you change the spec its going to cost more to change it......



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Just like the US Navy,
Want one thing then make changes and when the cost goes up complain about cost overuns.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 07:54 AM
link   
What I don't get, is that I would have thought India is at the point now where they can build their own ships. I guess not?



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Heck for another 1.6 Billion more, they could have gotten a New Nimitz Class Carrier. Over 2 Billion for a 12 jet carrier? What a ripoff.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by pavil]


974 million + 850 million + 2.9 billion = $4,724,000,000

So pushing $5 billion... India has been sucked


I have some used boxer shorts, they can have them as a gift - provided they pay me £75 to wash them, £123 to post them.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by guppy
 


Its too bad we couldn't sell India the Kitty Hawk. Possibly because of the technology and design on the carrier that has prevented many nations from creating a supercarrier in the first place.


We wouldn't have been doing them any favors...the Kitty Hawk was known by some of her crew as the...well...crappy Kitty (I can't use the original language on this board) for a reason. The ship had serious mechanical problems.


Brother Stormhammer is quite correct here.

The Kitty Hawk is a piece of junk..Just plain olde worn out. Same with the USS Kennedy. Just plain olde worn out. Same with the USS Enterprise...Just plain olde worn out.

Anyone in the buisness knows that once a carrier or such ships..escorts ..get over ..say ...five years olde...they begin spending more time in the yards and less time out at sea. The costs begin going up for maintenance. Same thing for Aircraft as they age. They spend more time in the hangers and less in the air.

Any nation intending to put together a significant international fleet...must be building first class ships all the time to replace aging ones on the other end of the age spectrum.

Carriers are no different. You have to juggle mission requirements against aging fleets, shipyard time, dock time for upgrades and modifications et al. It is a very tricky balance to schedule/handle and especially against an aging fleet.

One of the problems with asking Russia for advanced equipment for carriers...is that they dont have alot of it. If this were so..they would have super carriers as do we.
Alot of this advanced costs...is in what I am sure is R&D for this equipment. Would you want to go to the Russians for some of this "advanced" stuff???

Think about it..serously.

Oh..and Mattification...if India could built their own carrier...would they be going to the Russians for this??
What I know of well built carriers is that the structural requirements are far greater than a commercial ship like a tanker or freighter. So too are the electrical requirements and standards.
Something to think about!!

Orangetom

[edit on 22-8-2009 by orangetom1999]



posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Hah, we should have sold them the U.S.S. Shreveport. That way, their AAVs can swim around in circles while they wait for the welldeck doors to unjam.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join