The Cochin Shipyard is now capable and confident of building a platform that’s similar or comparable to the maiden indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC-1) with the best functional technologies of the day in a matter of about seven to eight years from the word go, according to Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) of the shipyard, Madhu S. Nair.
The construction of IAC-1, for which work order was awarded in 2004, gave the yard a steep learning curve, and it also led to the creation of synergies among various stakeholders — from the Navy to public and private industry majors and about 550 medium and small-scale industries (MSMEs).
Mr. Nair said that IAC-1, which will join the Navy as Vikrant on September 2, paved the way for the development of capacities and capabilities within Indian industry.
The development of warship-grade steel within the country was one such. Steel was cut for IAC-1 in 2005 but actual fabrication started in end-2007 and its keel was formally laid in 2009.
Basic design
While the Directorate of Naval Design, since renamed Warship Design Bureau, conceived its basic design, the shipyard carried out the full functional design and engineering of the carrier.
”When we started off, there were large grey and unknown areas. We knew the broad contours of the vessel, but its design was never frozen as we wanted to harness the latest technologies as far as the functional needs were concerned. And, we [the major stakeholders such as the Navy and the Shipyard] took into consideration the evolving geopolitical scene and what could be developed within the country,” Mr. Nair said.
Building the carrier in 13 years was the original plan but there were significant delays in the delivery of Russian equipment, the aviation facility complex. And, then the pandemic struck. “Carriers aren’t built every day and there’s an erosion of knowledge base even in Russia. I would say we have it [knowledge] better in India now, between the Navy and us,” he said.
Cost escalation
Mr. Nair said ‘uncharitable remarks’ about the cost of the carrier escalating from ₹3,000 crore to ₹20,000 crore were uncalled for. “What was planned at ₹3,000 crore wasn’t an aircraft carrier. It was something else, called by some other name [air defence ship]. He said the idea of executing the project in three phases was a novelty intended to harness the best and most suited technologies and systems.
“Among the Indian PSUs, we held the project with unaltered focus and held the central fulcrum. But along with us were SAIL, MIDHANI, BEL, BHEL and HAL and major private sector players such as Tata Aerospace and Defence, L&T, Kirloskar Pneumatic, Johnson Controls and the like.... The entire cabling of the ship, running to about 2,300 km, is Indian. The indigenisation content of the ship is about 76%,” he said.
Mr. Nair said he was extremely happy about the carrier’s performance in the trials in which its gas turbines were tested for 1,500 hours, the air conditioning for 18,000 hours and the diesel alternators for 12,000 hours.
Major challenge
One of the major challenges faced by the shipyard was the gaps in planning and integration.
For instance, the HVAC (heat, ventilation and air conditioning) specifications on the vessel got revised countless times, as “when we started off, we weren’t even aware of the output heat loads”. Ditto with other major systems. And, it wasn’t owing to lack of knowledge, but the design was allowed to evolve in order to harness the best of technologies and systems. The evolution demanded various stakeholders to work in tandem, which naturally “posed challenges in terms of engineering, planning and procurement”, Mr. Nair said.
Besides the size and dimension of the platform, that its “move and fight components are both highly network-centric“ posed further challenges, he said.
The CSL intends to commission its under-construction larger drydock by the end of next year, hoping to capitalise on the skills and capacities acquired in the construction of IAC-1 to bag the contract for the follow-on carrier if the government chooses to have one.
