India mulls options for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier

Anshu Attri

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
1,218
Likes
679
Country flag
Eye on future, India mulls options for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier

Eye on future, India mulls options for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier - The Times of India

NEW DELHI: Nothing projects raw power like an aircraft carrier prowling on the high seas, capable of unleashing strike fighters against an adversary in a jiffy. A nuclear-powered carrier can make the punch even deadlier with much longer operational endurance.

With its first indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC) set to be "launched" at Cochin Shipyard on August 12, and sea trials of the first nuclear submarine INS Arihant to begin shortly after, India is now examining the possibility of having a nuclear-powered 65,000-tonne carrier in the future.

Navy vice-chief Vice Admiral RK Dhowan on Thursday said a "detailed study" was underway on the "size, type of aircraft and their launch and recovery systems, propulsion" and the like for the IAC-II project. "Yes, we are also considering nuclear propulsion. All options are being studied. No final decision has been taken," he said.

There are huge cost issues with nuclear-powered carriers, which can easily take upwards of $10 billion to build. The Royal British Navy is reverting to carriers propelled by gas turbines/diesel-electric systems from nuclear ones.

However, the US has 11 Nimitz-class "super-carriers" — each an over 94,000-tonne behemoth powered by two nuclear reactors and capable of carrying 80-90 fighters - to project power around the globe. China, too, is now looking at nuclear-powered carriers after inducting its first conventional carrier — the 65,000-tonne Liaoning — last September.

So, while Navy may want a nuclear-powered carrier, it will ultimately have to be a considered political decision. The force, however, is firm about its long-term plan to operate three carrier-battle groups (CBGs). "One carrier for each (western and eastern) seaboard and one in maintenance," said Vice Admiral Dhowan.

But, even two CBGs will be possible only by 2019. The 40,000-tonne IAC, to be christened INS Vikrant, will be ready for induction only by December 2018, as was first reported by TOI.

"Design and construction of a carrier has many challenges. Around 75% of the IAC structure has now been erected. India joins only four countries — the US, Russia, the UK and France - capable of building a carrier over 40,000-tonne," he said.

The 44,570-tonne INS Vikramaditya - or the Admiral Gorshkov carrier now undergoing sea trials after a $2.33-billion refit in Russia - in turn will be ready by end-2013 instead of the original August 2008 deadline.

Vice Admiral Dhowan admitted India's solitary carrier, the 28,000-tonne INS Viraat, will soldier on till 2018 due to these long delays. The 54-year-old INS Viraat is left with just 11 Sea Harrier jump-jets to operate from its deck. The 45 MiG-29K naval fighters, being procured from Russia for over $2 billion, can operate only from Vikramaditya and IAC.

The 260-metre-long IAC, whose construction finally began in November 2006, will be able to carry 12 MiG-29Ks, eight Tejas Light Combat Aircraft and 10 early-warning and anti-submarine helicopters on its 2.5-acre flight deck and hangars. It will have a crew of 160 officers and 1,400 sailors. Powered by four American LM2500 gas turbines, the IAC will have an endurance of around 7,500 nautical miles at a speed of 18 knots.
 
Last edited:

Payeng

Daku Mongol Singh
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
2,522
Likes
777
There are huge cost issues with nuclear-powered carriers, which can easily take upwards of $10 billion to build.
At that price we can have more then a couple of conventionally powered aircraft carriers :notsure:
 

lookieloo

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
468
Likes
264
Nuclear Powered Aircraft Carriers are not a good idea, ask France. They are too complex too build, too expensive, and we don't need worldwide power projection.
Pretty sure the French are happy with their ship, although they haven't yet decided what to do next. Besides speed and endurance, nuclear power has other special advantages in carriers, as it allows the dedication of more internal space to aviation needs as opposed to ship needs: no fuel bunkerage (except for the planes), more room for munitions, and no space-hogging intakes or uptakes for propulsion-exhaust (which also fouls equipment topside).

Disadvantages: Costs more to buy/operate... can't be mothballed in times of financial hardship (use it or lose it).
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Pretty sure the French are happy with their ship, although they haven't yet decided what to do next. Besides speed and endurance, nuclear power has other special advantages in carriers, as it allows the dedication of more internal space to aviation needs as opposed to ship needs: no fuel bunkerage (except for the planes), more room for munitions, and no space-hogging intakes or uptakes for propulsion-exhaust (which also fouls equipment topside).

Disadvantages: Costs more to buy/operate... can't be mothballed in times of financial hardship (use it or lose it).
Charles De Gaulle has spent an extra-ordinarily long time in repair and "maintenance" Iirc France's next Aircraft Carrier will be conventional
 

lookieloo

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
468
Likes
264
Charles De Gaulle has spent an extra-ordinarily long time in repair and "maintenance" Iirc France's next Aircraft Carrier will be conventional
All carriers spend long periods in maintenance; it's just more noticeable when only one is available. As for the next French carrier, that is on ice for the foreseeable future and nothing has been decided.
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Last edited by a moderator:

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Would it be possible for IN to acquire a retiring USN carrier, if economically feasible?
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Would it be possible for IN to acquire a retiring USN carrier, if economically feasible?
Depends, on the offer and the kind of kit USN is willing to part with. And whether it will fit in with the rest of the fleet.
 

lookieloo

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
468
Likes
264
Would it be possible for IN to acquire a retiring USN carrier, if economically feasible?
We've got plenty of hulks laying around on museum-hold or waiting for the breaker; but only the USS Kitty Hawk is maintained in any sort of readiness, and that ends in 2014. A retiring nuke wouldn't be safe or practical given that each serves about 50 years. Should sequestration bite too much, it might be possible to sell off one of the newer ships; but as Singh mentioned, that largely depends on what tech we're willing to part with, and I rather doubt that Nimitz-class reactors are on that list.
 

Decklander

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2012
Messages
2,654
Likes
4,111
Arihant has an 84Mw reactor. IAC-2 will need close to 300Mw. We have another upgraded Arihant reactor under development which is approx 150Mw. This reactor will go into the follow on nuke attack subs and two of them will go into IAC-2. This is the plan as of now. May change later based on how far we have travelled down the line with this new reator. Unofficial sources say that this reactor is already operational and undergoing evaluation.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top