INS Vishal (IAC- II) Aircraft Carrier - Flattop or Ski Jump

[WolfPack86]

It is better Indian Navy dropped out plan of Nuclear propulsion for INS Vishal. Instead we should go for coventional powered carrier. May be in 2040 India can build 100,000 tonne nuclear powered carrier. But now it is impossible to build. Indian Navy is the most sensible than Indian Army and Indian Air Force.

 

[Spectribution]

I like this approach. Navy makes bigger INS Vikrant (65000 tonnes) while it develops bigger nuclear reactor 550MW parallely by SSBN project know how. We don't have to wait on our asses for a new A/C post INS Vikrant commissioning.

 

[G10]

Emals without nuclear is not a good idea.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

DRDO is actively pursuing our indegeneous EMALS technology in collaboration with private enginnering colleges. Basic structure of Indian EMALS:

This is a technology which can be built entirely in India without any foreign help. We have big power companies and a huge number of electrical and electronics enginners.

Source : https://www.ijareeie.com/upload/2017/september/26_Double.pdf
http://www.ijltemas.in/DigitalLibrary/Vol.6Issue8/07-10.pdf

 

[Kalki_2018]

When did the nuke sub reactor become 190 MW?? The Arihant claim was 83 MW and I have seen some numbers like 150 MW for the Aridaman and larger boats.

 

[Kshithij]

Why not use multiple reactor then ? Enterprise run on 4 reactors , Nimitz on 2 probably ...3 ,190mw will do our job

Why won't you(NAVY) do that when you are going to the sole customer of this reactor?

Where is the logic behind reducing the capability of the Carrier by almost half just because you don't want to pay for the thing which is supposed to be developed for you only?

Do we tax-payers need to find new meaning for the word 'illogical'?



If so, then why Drop N-LCA MK-2 (citing lack of adequate thurst for carrier launch) which can not only notch up numbers(an asset) aboard carrier but also provide a stepping stone to designers and producers presently engaged with designing and later developing N-AMCA?

Buying F/A-18s and latter F-35Cs plus E-2Ds is ok(despite the fact that it is illogical in long-term) for trading EMLS and some geopolitical gains. But killing a greater section of indigenous defence industry just to buy it will never be logically ok........... It will most certainly negate many of said gains.

EMLS is just one piece of technology which can be developed outside of USA just like Chinese are doing. But it seems like it is one hell of tech. greater in complexity than sending a probe to Mars that we are ready to kill everything else for it.

India has no need to travel round the globe with ACC for combat missions so that is why we don't have that much requirements of high endurance and nuclear power for ACC.
Also, India need only two operational Aircraft Carriers with additional one for maintenance replacement.

By the way, INS Vikramaditya has endurance of nearly 2 months with nearly 25000kms while cruising which will further improved in INS Vikrant.

Nimitz class is 100000 tons and needs 550MW thermal power. Of this, electricity is 200MW while shaft power is 200MW and 150MW is wastage. For Indian usage of 65000 tons, the power requirement may be 65% of Nimitz which comes to 360MW. If we get 2 reactors, 2 each of 180MW will be needed.

After extensive research, I have concluded that the power of Arihant reactor is 90MW thermal power. So, we need to double the reactor output to 180MW for INS Vishal. Considering that INS Vishal is not a compact submarine, it is perfectly possible to double the reactor output at the expense of space which is in plenty relatively. Also, since EMALS has been sanctioned, I don't think anything other than nuclear power is even feasible. EMALS uses huge power that can only be supplied by nuclear reactors.

Next and most important thing about the Carrier is that the fuel cost for 65000 ton weight will be extremely prohibitive. Arabs are not any friendly either. Why would India want to rely on such expensive proposition is something I can't fathom.

How do you know that India doesn't need to go beyond IOR? Do you have some special magical ability to know everything? Also, how do you know that India doesn't need more than 2 AC? Why not have 5-6 to have the great military might as and when needed to combat every single filth that comes infront?

 

[aditya10r]

Nimitz class is 100000 tons and needs 550MW thermal power. Of this, electricity is 200MW while shaft power is 200MW and 150MW is wastage. For Indian usage of 65000 tons, the power requirement may be 65% of Nimitz which comes to 360MW. If we get 2 reactors, 2 each of 180MW will be needed.

After extensive research, I have concluded that the power of Arihant reactor is 90MW thermal power. So, we need to double the reactor output to 180MW for INS Vishal. Considering that INS Vishal is not a compact submarine, it is perfectly possible to double the reactor output at the expense of space which is in plenty relatively. Also, since EMALS has been sanctioned, I don't think anything other than nuclear power is even feasible. EMALS uses huge power that can only be supplied by nuclear reactors.

Next and most important thing about the Carrier is that the fuel cost for 65000 ton weight will be extremely prohibitive. Arabs are not any friendly either. Why would India want to rely on such expensive proposition is something I can't fathom.

How do you know that India doesn't need to go beyond IOR? Do you have some special magical ability to know everything? Also, how do you know that India doesn't need more than 2 AC? Why not have 5-6 to have the great military might as and when needed to combat every single filth that comes infront?

Nuclear propulsion is expensive and we cannot afford it now, may be iac-3 will be a nuke powered flat top.

Plus it's Navy's long term vision to operate 6 aircrafts carriers by mid century,some 25-30 years later.

 

[Kshithij]

Nuclear propulsion is expensive and we cannot afford it now, may be iac-3 will be a nuke powered flat top.

Plus it's Navy's long term vision to operate 6 aircrafts carriers by mid century,some 25-30 years later.

Actually, indigenous nuclear propulsion is cheapest. Forex loss is zero. We have sufficient Uranium of 2-2.5 lakh tons after the massive discovery of over 70000 tons in Tumallepalli. When you consider cost, always consider forex loss. Hiring more people using Indian rupee is actually an investment to improve GDP, not loss.

 

[FergisNahk]

How do you know that India doesn't need to go beyond IOR? Do you have some special magical ability to know everything? Also, how do you know that India doesn't need more than 2 AC? Why not have 5-6 to have the great military might as and when needed to combat every single filth that comes infront?

India doesn't have any priorities beyond IOR, despite being vocal on South China Sea as a whiff of spice to its act east policy. Current P1 is to cover all areas of IOR with 3 aircraft carriers.

At my best guess, i think the cost of a larger nuclear carrier would be put into expanding the base of nuclear/AIP Submarines.

 

[Kshithij]

India doesn't have any priorities beyond IOR, despite being vocal on South China Sea as a whiff of spice to its act east policy. Current P1 is to cover all areas of IOR with 3 aircraft carriers.

At my best guess, i think the cost of a larger nuclear carrier would be put into expanding the base of nuclear/AIP Submarines.

Carrier INS Vishal is also a technology demonstrator of indigenous nuclear carrier capability. It is important to have the technology for further scaling in case necessary in the future.

The cost is not an issue for defence. Defence is invaluable. The first and foremost priority is defence and only then everything else. It is perfectly fine to reduce unnecessary consumerism and selfish buying. The submarines have started being made indigenously which will cut down the cost significantly. In fact, it is even possible to use the government spending to make massive defence infrastructure to enhance GDP. Just like roads are being constructed, defence infrastructure can also be constructed rapidly as part of government expenditure to improve GDP. As of now, due to poor UPA governance, the roads and other basic infrastructure are in dire situation and have to be improved for better economic progress. But, once there are no roads to make or when most roads are already made, then the government expenditure will be directed towards defence. So, as long as the construction is indigenous, it can't be construed as wasteful. Defence is a form of government consumption and provides jobs, brings in technological base and infrastructure.

Construction of submarines and INS Vishal can go side by side by increasing the defence budget and focusing on it

 

[archie]

By the way, INS Vikramaditya has endurance of nearly 2 months with nearly 25000kms while cruising which will further improved in INS Vikrant.

Highly Doubt the Pure Endurance.. Nimitz or American carriers only carry Enough fuel for the aircraft for about 3 days operating all aircraft.. Since Soritie load is less on viki may be about a week's worth of Aircraft fuel .

Guess operations will dictate which would be which one lasts longer..

Aircraft Fuel or Ship Fuel or Food supplies ... Either way operations Would probably be sustained only with Strong Supply Chain...

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Fuel and other items can be replenished at sea, In war situation a carrier such as IAC-2 can stay for 2 months or more, Unless it require urgent repairs which cannot be done at sea ..

 

[HariPrasad-1]

When did the nuke sub reactor become 190 MW?? The Arihant claim was 83 MW and I have seen some numbers like 150 MW for the Aridaman and larger boats.

Aridaman 125 MW.................

 

[Kshithij]

Aridaman 125 MW.................

So, scaling to 180-190 MW is easy? For 65000 tons, 2 180MW reactor is good enough.

 

[WolfPack86]

NAVY TO USE U.S. AIRCRAFT LAUNCH SYSTEM IN SHIP
It will have to choose between two mechanisms for the second indigenous aircraft carrier

The Navy is likely to go with an advanced catapult-based aircraft launch mechanism (CATOBAR) from the U.S. for its second indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC-II), which is on the drawing board. For some time, India has been exploring the possibility of installing the U.S. electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS).

“IAC-II will have a CATOBAR launch. However, the kind of propulsion is yet to be decided,” a senior officer said.The U.S. has offered India its latest EMALS technology, developed by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., which has just been installed on the Gerald Ford carrier.

While the older generation of CATOBAR was powered by a steam catapult, EMALS uses an electric motor-driven catapult instead, which allows the launch of much heavier aircraft and also reduces the stress on the aircraft.

However, the system is expensive, something that needs to be factored in.

“EMALS will allow us to operate heavy surveillance aircraft in addition to heavy fighters,” another officer observed.

50 Aircraft

The Navy envisages the IAC-II to be around 65,000 tonnes and capable of carrying over 50 aircraft. While the Navy is keen on nuclear propulsion, which would give it unlimited range and endurance, its development in time seems doubtful.

The two countries had set up a joint working group on Aircraft Carrier Technology Cooperation (JWGACTC) under the Defence Technology and Trade Initiative, which held several rounds of discussions.The group concluded its 4th meeting in New Delhi last Friday.

India’s first domestic carrier, Vikrant, weighing 40,000 tonnes, is in an advanced stage of construction in Kochi and is scheduled to be launched by 2018-end. It works on a Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery (STOBAR) mechanism similar to that in the present carrier INS Vikramaditya, with an angular ski-jump.
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2017/11/navy-to-use-us-aircraft-launch-system.html

 

[WolfPack86]

It is better to go for catapult rather than emals it will save money for the indian army procurement.

 

[Kshithij]

It is better to go for catapult rather than emals it will save money for the indian army procurement.

Catapult is steam based while EMALS is digital one. I don't think that it is that hard a technology. It is just that USA is the only country with large number of nuclear carriers that can afford to use them. Many other countries could also make such EMALS if they had many nuclear carriers. Nuclear power is mandatory as huge amounts of power is needed to run the motors which latch on to the planes and throws them off board with large speed.

USA never gives complicated technology to anyone. EMALS from USA is just a way of fastening Indian EMALS and may be reasonable to go for it by this logic

 

[Tactical Frog]

EMALS work ...

INS Vishal with EMALS will be the most powerful ship operating outside United States.
My dream is seeing Rafale M on the deck but also E-2 D Hawkeye , Sea Guardian drones and a futuristic AMCA.
Hurry up my friends ...

 

[Armand2REP]

Catapult is steam based while EMALS is digital one. I don't think that it is that hard a technology. It is just that USA is the only country with large number of nuclear carriers that can afford to use them. Many other countries could also make such EMALS if they had many nuclear carriers. Nuclear power is mandatory as huge amounts of power is needed to run the motors which latch on to the planes and throws them off board with large speed.

USA never gives complicated technology to anyone. EMALS from USA is just a way of fastening Indian EMALS and may be reasonable to go for it by this logic

The US spent big money to develop EMALS, the concept might not be complicated but to make a reliable system that will launch hundreds of thousands of aircraft over its life is not so easy.

 

[TPFscopes]

EMALS work ...

INS Vishal with EMALS will be the most powerful ship operating outside United States.
My dream is seeing Rafale M on the deck but also E-2 D Hawkeye , Sea Guardian drones and a futuristic AMCA.
Hurry up my friends ...

Rafales on IAC-2 (aka INS VISHAL) will be very unlikely if we managed to operate our AMCAs from it.
Along with this E-2D will become obsolete by that time.