INS Vikrant Aircraft Carrier (IAC)

[Bleh]

Bleh, if we had Kuznetsov instead of Vikramaditya, than how many Mig-29K it would have carried?
And I also wonder that Soviets had tested both Su-33 and Mig-29K on Kuznetsov back in late 80's, but choose Su-33?

1. Kuznetsov carries 6 Migs & 18 Su-33. Compated to 30-36 on Vikky.. 40 maybe. 50, for a 60ton Vikrant.
2. Sukhoi lobbying mostly.

IMO we could possibly merge MMRCA.2 & MRCBF to get 72-98 Indianised Mig-35s for cheap, to augment our 62 present & 21 coming Mig-29s.
And if we get a ToT for 95kN 3D TVC engine, that'll give us significant edge with dupermaneuverable fighters over sea & land.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

1. Kuznetsov carries 6 Migs & 18 Su-33. Compated to 30-36 on Vikky.. 40 maybe. 50, for a 60ton Vikrant.
2. Sukhoi lobbying mostly.

IMO we could possibly merge MMRCA.2 & MRCBF to get 72-98 Indianised Mig-35s for cheap, to augment our 62 present & 21 coming Mig-29s.
And if we get a ToT for 95kN 3D TVC engine, that'll give us significant edge with dupermaneuverable fighters over sea & land.

Rishi , why did navy reject naval lca ?

 

[Bleh]

Rishi , why did navy reject naval lca ?

Can only takeoff with air-to-air load. Max 6 missiles & only 1 droptank. Navy felt that in the limited number of aircraft on the carriers, they want a jet with highest T/W ratio.
Chances of getting a small NLCA order of 8 is low.

This is why I am telling that there is no hope of a CATOBAR.. Teddy is being developed completely with skyjump ops in mind... A slightly enlarged sistership of Vikrant would be nice.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Can only takeoff with air-to-air load. Max 6 missiles & only 1 droptank. Navy felt that in the limited number of aircraft on the carriers, they want a jet with highest T/W ratio.
Chances of getting a small NLCA order of 8 is low.

This is why I am telling that there is no hope of a CATOBAR.. Teddy is being developed completely with skyjump ops in mind... A slightly enlarged sistership of Vikrant would be nice.
View attachment 104265

View attachment 104264

Vikku was made for mig 29k itself.
It seems.

 

[Akula]

Can only takeoff with air-to-air load. Max 6 missiles & only 1 droptank. Navy felt that in the limited number of aircraft on the carriers, they want a jet with highest T/W ratio.
Chances of getting a small NLCA order of 8 is low.

This is why I am telling that there is no hope of a CATOBAR.. Teddy is being developed completely with skyjump ops in mind... A slightly enlarged sistership of Vikrant would be nice.
View attachment 104271

Looks like INS Vikrant will not have 76mm naval gun, on the left side of Ski jump.

 

[Nationalist Manasvi Papa]

Nope it's based on our own findings on Mig-29 & Su-33...

With this max skyjump payload Su-33/Joke-15 won't be providing any significant air-cover.
On the other hand, these are the Vikramaditya trials when 5.4t payload was hauled (15% penalty). https://thebharatmilitaryreview.blogspot.com/2013/10/mig-29k-naval-fighter-jet-taking-off.html?m=1
View attachment 104228View attachment 104231View attachment 104232View attachment 104233

Oh, little Vikky also has greater range (but that I didn't mention as there would be fleet support tanker vessels).


Cope chink cope Cope chink cope Cope chink cope

Refuelling Fulcrum looks saxy

 

[Starlight]

 

[lixun]

To be fair to the chinks they achieved more than Russia.. they made the mistake of copying world's worst carrierbourne fighter jet in the world, that Russia will now retire in favour of Mig-35K.
But Chink manages to flyoff & arrest Joke-15 with YJ-91 & 2 Pl-8 (unknown fuel percentage tho).
View attachment 104240View attachment 104239

But that's it, the difference is notable... View attachment 104241View attachment 104248

With three takeoff points, two short J15s cannot take off with full load, and one long J15 can take off with full load. Heavy fighters can carry more ammunition than medium fighters. This is common sense.

 

[lixun]

To be fair to the chinks they achieved more than Russia.. they made the mistake of copying world's worst carrierbourne fighter jet in the world, that Russia will now retire in favour of Mig-35K.
But Chink manages to flyoff & arrest Joke-15 with YJ-91 & 2 Pl-8 (unknown fuel percentage tho).
View attachment 104240View attachment 104239

But that's it, the difference is notable... View attachment 104241View attachment 104248

In fact, it’s very simple. India paid for the improvement of MiG-29 and Su33, the aircraft of the 1990s, of course, did not have the value of continuing to serve, and the arrangement of takeoff and landing points for the Indian aircraft carrier was problematic. Both takeoff and landing points were deep enough to land. Zone, the advantage is that it can take off with full load, but the disadvantage is that it cannot take off and land at the same time, and the efficiency will be reduced.

 

[Bleh]

With three takeoff points, two short J15s cannot take off with full load, and one long J15 can take off with full load. Heavy fighters can carry more ammunition than medium fighters. This is common sense.

Nope... Su-33 & J-15 have far too low T/W ratio for takeoff length to make much difference. I have extensively looked into it, but not a single exception I've found.

You can tell yourself whatever helps you cope but you cannot provide a single photographic evidence of such "taking off with full load from the long position".

 

[lixun]

Nope... Su-33 & J-15 have far too low T/W ratio for takeoff length to make much difference. I have extensively looked into it, but not a single exception I've found.

You can tell yourself whatever helps you cope but you cannot provide a single photographic evidence of such "taking off with full load from the long position".

First of all, the bomb load is more related to the structural strength

Let’s talk about J15 and su33 with an empty weight of 18400kg. The weight is reduced by about 600kg through radar and composite materials.
AL31FP maximum thrust 125.57 kN
MiG 29, 11000KG, first of all carrier-based aircraft must strengthen the structure, the weight will increase, but the composite material will reduce the weight, we are optimistic, it is 11000KG
RD33 maximum thrust 8300
In fact, the difference between the two planes is not much

 

[Nationalist Manasvi Papa]

 

[shiphone]

Nope... Su-33 & J-15 have far too low T/W ratio for takeoff length to make much difference. I have extensively looked into it, but not a single exception I've found.

You can tell yourself whatever helps you cope but you cannot provide a single photographic evidence of such "taking off with full load from the long position".

the answer was in 2013 and the right thread of this forum...

some multi-weapon configurations(national TV news sreen shots)

1. Ground Attact : 6×500kg bombs + 2× PL8 WVM = round 3.5 tons

2. Anti Ship : 2 × YJ83K AShM(around 600Kgs each) +2 x PL8 WVM

3. Air Defence: 2× PL12 BVM + 2× PL8 WVM

 

[lixun]

Nope... Su-33 & J-15 have far too low T/W ratio for takeoff length to make much difference. I have extensively looked into it, but not a single exception I've found.

You can tell yourself whatever helps you cope but you cannot provide a single photographic evidence of such "taking off with full load from the long position".

I looked for information,

The take-off trajectory of a ski jump has an "up-throwing section". When the aircraft leaves the ship, there is an upward velocity component. At this time, the aircraft's lift is not enough to offset the acceleration of gravity, so the aircraft's ascent speed gradually becomes zero and gradually changes. Is negative.
But before falling back to deck height, there is at least 4 seconds of extra space time. With the maximum afterburner, it is enough to accelerate to the normal take-off speed, so the aircraft can fly.

Obviously, the stronger the acceleration capability of the aircraft (the greater the T/W), the safer the skid-jump takeoff, because the greater the speed off the ship, the more speed vectors will be thrown up, and the more time left for the same time. The greater the acceleration within

In general, when the wind speed on the deck is 25 knots, the su33 can take off at two shorter take-off points at 28.2t, which means that at this time, the su33 can obtain the same take-off weight at the short take-off point at the long take-off point. weight

When the deck wind speed is 0, su33 can take off at 27.0t at two short take-off points,

The normal take-off weight of the su33 is 26.6 tons. It is not full of fuel or full of bombs. Its combat radius is about 700 kilometers. It can take off normally at a short take-off point with zero wind speed.
su33 can take off at 32.8t at the long take-off point with 0 wind speed on the deck

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

1. Kuznetsov carries 6 Migs & 18 Su-33. Compated to 30-36 on Vikky.. 40 maybe. 50, for a 60ton Vikrant.
2. Sukhoi lobbying mostly.

IMO we could possibly merge MMRCA.2 & MRCBF to get 72-98 Indianised Mig-35s for cheap, to augment our 62 present & 21 coming Mig-29s.
And if we get a ToT for 95kN 3D TVC engine, that'll give us significant edge with dupermaneuverable fighters over sea & land.

Vikky can't carry 30 Migs. The max it can carry is 24 plus 10-12 helis as it was a cruiser before.

Vikrant can carry more like 30-32 fighters. As it was designed as a carrier from scratch.

 

[abingdonboy]

Problem being Vikrant won't have the full complement of Mig29 fighters. It has to share it with Viky. With current numbers decreased to 42, we can't even get it from Russia since they don't operate that. We should have brought Mig29k design and IP.

Very unlikely they’ll sail both carriers out together during peacetime so it’s not a question of sharing fighters

 

[FalconSlayers]

Hope its CATOBAR like 40000 ton Charles de Gaulle

65k tonne catobar will be a nightmare for adversaries. Navy should save some cash for it.

 

[Nationalist Manasvi Papa]

the answer was in 2013 and the right thread of this forum...

So 2 AAM and 2 dumb bombs is full load?

 

[Bleh]

So 2 AAM and 2 dumb bombs is full load?

No, those are YJ-91s I think.. The case I mentioned here; https://defenceforumindia.com/threads/indigenous-vikrant-class-aircraft-carrier-iac.77/post-2010719

Not given that Joke-15 can't operate with more than 4 AAMs, taking off with that AShM probably leave no fuel.

the answer was in 2013 and the right thread of this forum...

"FULLY LOADED"... go chowmein, eat bat-penis or something!
Whatever will help you cope

We have your aircraft carrier to make us laugh, you don't need to make an effort.

 

[Haldilal]

"FULLY LOADED"

Ya'll Nibbiars Na Tsar Bomba.