INS Vikrant Aircraft Carrier (IAC)

[abingdonboy]

You are aware of the delays in delivery of MF-STAR but you still continue to raise the same question **EVERY TIME** a pic is posted. Why?
Can you please stop whinging every time a pic of IAC-1 is posted?

As for the "jingoistic backwards mentality", what's the problem here? You are an old member, I believe you do know that a ship isn't to be "operational" (for deployment) just after commissioning, it takes around an year or more for it to be "deployment ready" what's the problem if MF-STAR faces aren't installed on the mast on commissioning? Not like it's the first time IN is commissioning a ship which isn't in its' final form (missing some sensors/eq). You like it? (Crying)

"No fighter trails"

What??

I’m aware? I’m only aware because I can see it with my own eyes, the IN (nor CSL) hasn’t made any formal statements on the lack of the ship’s primary sensor suite. Are you able to give any insights? It’s been almost 2 decades and the supplier hasn’t been able to deliver? Usually these things are indicative of far more serious issues, if they are contracted there’s no reason for an OEM not to have supplied by now.

Going with the fanfare of commissioning an aircraft carrier next month without the ability to even embark fighters is shameful for a supposed blue water navy but if you want to pretend all is well then don’t let me stop you.

 

[flanker99]

I’m aware? I’m only aware because I can see it with my own eyes, the IN (nor CSL) hasn’t made any formal statements on the lack of the ship’s primary sensor suite. Are you able to give any insights? It’s been almost 2 decades and the supplier hasn’t been able to deliver? Usually these things are indicative of far more serious issues, if they are contracted there’s no reason for an OEM not to have supplied by now.

Going with the fanfare of commissioning an aircraft carrier next month without the ability to even embark fighters is shameful for a supposed blue water navy but if you want to pretend all is well then don’t let me stop you.

How did u came to the conclusion it cannot embark fighters?

 

[johnj]

I expect her to receive it soon murmogao has received her mfstar

Becz murmogao need mfstar to achieve minimum capability, and iac don't, iac having helios, jets to do the job. Once ok with iac main functions and operations, IN adds mfstar.

 

[abingdonboy]

How did u came to the conclusion it cannot embark fighters?

Did I miss the fighter trails?

 

[johnj]

MF-STAR is a search and track radar. It could be installed even after commissioning. Its not a new RADAR for us and its cuing onboard is not a big issue. Important then the STAR radar is its subcomponent. As far as we have seen, those are already in place.

As far as fighters are concerned, we need a total of 52 Mig-29K among both the ACs. Right now we have 42 in active service. As of now, these are enough to operate from both the ACs. Anyway after commissioning it doesn't mean it would start patrolling Gulf of Eden or South China sea from second day itself.

plus, MF-STAR is the fcr of barak 8[search, track, identify, lock, guidance etc]

 

[flanker99]

Did I miss the fighter trails?

It had fighters in it when it left for trials..nothing to suggest flight trials were not conducted.

 

[abingdonboy]

It had fighters in it when it left for trials..nothing to suggest flight trials were not conducted.

No one is claiming such trails happened, in fact experts have confirmed they craned on test airframes (mock-ups and the real thing) onto her deck to work on deck handling

if fighter trails had happened we’d know about it and you know that.

 

[Hindu Nationalist]

Experts have confirmed they craned on test airframes (mock-ups and the real thing) onto her deck to work on deck handling

Which Experts? Praveen Sawhney type?

Ypu seriously believe that this aircraft worth millions of dollars was lifted by a crane and put on the deck?

if fighter trails had happened we’d know about it and you know that.

Yes, IN did 4 extensive sea trials of an aircraft carrier without testing whether an aircraft can land and take-off from the carrier. Totally believable.

this line looks directly copied from some Chinese or Pakistani troll

 

[abingdonboy]

Which Experts? Praveen Sawhney type?

Ypu seriously believe that this aircraft worth millions of dollars was lifted by a crane and put on the deck?

View attachment 163635

Yes, IN did 4 extensive sea trials of an aircraft carrier without testing whether an aircraft can land and take-off from the carrier. Totally believable.

this line looks directly copied from some Chinese or Pakistani troll

Sorry they conducted super secret stealth trails


Sounds ridiculous to have not done air trails of fighters by now but that’s where they are. Don’t need to go into wild conspiracy theories to justify it.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

I’m aware? I’m only aware because I can see it with my own eyes, the IN (nor CSL) hasn’t made any formal statements on the lack of the ship’s primary sensor suite. Are you able to give any insights? It’s been almost 2 decades and the supplier hasn’t been able to deliver? Usually these things are indicative of far more serious issues, if they are contracted there’s no reason for an OEM not to have supplied by now.

Going with the fanfare of commissioning an aircraft carrier next month without the ability to even embark fighters is shameful for a supposed blue water navy but if you want to pretend all is well then don’t let me stop you.

Order for each and every subsystem isn't placed just after steal cutting or even keel laying. Orders are placed while the boat is under construction and reaches the state of fitment, the date of order for MF-STAR faces for IAC-1 isn't known to the public, but we draw a comparison to the state of Mormugao which lacked its' primary radar until recently (in a video released by MDL). And delay by OEM isn't really a new thing, we have seen the delays in order placement *&* the delivery by OEM in case of D66.

And a boat being commissioned ≠ being fully operational. IAC-1 won't be deployed or fully "operational" without the stated subsystems, your statement would make sense if IAC-1 went on a deployment without its' primary assets, which is not the case (at least not yet).

"Without the ability to even embark fighters"
demonstration of ability* is the right phrase to be used here. Having the ability and demonstrating it are two different things, and IAC-1 has to demonstrate that capability before being fully operational anyways. (Which it would be in around FY24). USS R. Ford demonstrated it after commissioning btw.

I didn't say "everything is all merry and well", just stated the issues with your statement.

 

[shiphone]

page 182 of this thread

View attachment 153278

An Indian Navy MiG-29K "Sea Baaz" being loaded on the IAC-1. This specific semi-knocked-down airframe will be employed to study the deck and hangar movements onboard the indigenous aircraft carrier.
DATE UNKNOWN
Indian Navy will soon begin touch-and-go, landing and ski-jump trials with fixed-wing aircraft soon. The commisioning ceremony of the ship is scheduled to be held in August 2022.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

page 182 of this thread

@Hindu Nationalist

 

[abingdonboy]

Order for each and every subsystem isn't placed just after steal cutting or even keel laying. Orders are placed while the boat is under construction and reaches the state of fitment, the date of order for MF-STAR faces for IAC-1 isn't known to the public, but we draw a comparison to the state of Mormugao which lacked its' primary radar until recently (in a video released by MDL). And delay by OEM isn't really a new thing, we have seen the delays in order placement *&* the delivery by OEM in case of D66.

And a boat being commissioned ≠ being fully operational. IAC-1 won't be deployed or fully "operational" without the stated subsystems, your statement would make sense if IAC-1 went on a deployment without its' primary assets, which is not the case (at least not yet).

"Without the ability to even embark fighters"
demonstration of ability* is the right phrase to be used here. Having the ability and demonstrating it are two different things, and IAC-1 has to demonstrate that capability before being fully operational anyways. (Which it would be in around FY24). USS R. Ford demonstrated it after commissioning btw.

I didn't say "everything is all merry and well", just stated the issues with your statement.

Your assertions don’t hold water considering the VSR (RAN-40L) was ordered and delivered almost a decade ago and sat at CSL unboxed for plenty of time. And considering IAC-1 has been heavily delayed any delays in deliveries should’ve been well offset and not been a factor.

the knots some are having to tie themselves into to justify the unjustifiable is bizarre. Something more is going on here and it’s not good.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

Which Experts? Praveen Sawhney type?

Ypu seriously believe that this aircraft worth millions of dollars was lifted by a crane and put on the deck?

View attachment 163635

Yes, IN did 4 extensive sea trials of an aircraft carrier without testing whether an aircraft can land and take-off from the carrier. Totally believable.

this line looks directly copied from some Chinese or Pakistani troll

Yes, crane is one of the means you can put an aircraft on the flight deck, and it's nothing new.
Both the frame are said to be mockups, the MiG-29K mockup onboard IAC-1 on the 4th sea trials wasn't for demonstrating landing or take-off. It will happen after it's handed over to IN (was supposed to happen last May but seems to be delayed).

 

[MonaLazy]

What would those tyre marks on the take off ramp seem to suggest?

 

[abingdonboy]

View attachment 163647


What would those tyre marks on the take off ramp seem to suggest?

There definitely are no tyre marks in that picture and you had better hope there aren’t. You will not find tyre marks at the departure end of a runway unless something has gone very wrong

 

[Adm Kenobi]

Your assertions don’t hold water considering the VSR (RAN-40L) was ordered and delivered almost a decade ago and sat at CSL unboxed for plenty of time. And considering IAC-1 has been heavily delayed any delays in deliveries should’ve been well offset and not been a factor.

the knots some are having to tie themselves into to justify the unjustifiable is bizarre. Something more is going on here and it’s not good.

"Because X was ordered at A time means Y would have been ordered at the same time (A)" it doesn't hold true here. As for the delays, delays also happen because of late deliveries of subsystems that are to be fitted. An example for IAC-1 itself, the Diesel Alternators (DAs) were to be delivered by April 2011 but were only delivered by December 2012 (delay of 20 months from the revised timeline) and it was actually to be delivered in 2010, but changes in design prevented that. And as mentioned in the post you quoted, all subsystems aren't ordered at once.
Another example, GRSE has only been able to spend around ₹4000cr on the 3 P17As it is building, most of the expenses occur in the fitment period and weapons/sensors/supporting systerms etcetera are ordered in that period. IAI has a backlog of deliveries of radar set for 2 P15Bs and initial P17As too, don't be surprised if fitment of those are prioritised over the radar on IAC-1 at commissioning.

"Something more is going on here and it’s not good."

Ooo, then why don't you share more about the "something more" and your conclusion of "it's not good".

And I believe you received your answer for the fighter "trails" part.

Note: the ~₹4000cr figure is from GRSE and is a quarter year old. (Q4 FY22)

 

[MonaLazy]

There definitely are no tyre marks in that picture and you had better hope there aren’t. You will not find tyre marks at the departure end of a runway unless something has gone very wrong

Are you saying the plane is airborne before it gets on to the take off ramp?


Why did we go through the hassle of establishing the entire SBTF then?

Watch and be better informed

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

Also, skid marks going right up to the end of take off ramp not to be missed in the second link.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

Are you saying the plane is airborne before it gets on to the take off ramp?


Why did we go through the hassle of establishing the entire SBTF then?

Watch and be better informed

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

Also, skid marks going right up to the end of take off ramp not to be missed in the second link.

The marks on the picture you shared aren't due to some attempted take off, similar marks wouldn't be present behind the safety line (coloured in red).

Those marks and the marks left by aircrafts while taking off are visibly different. Marks left by aircrafts while taking off are the ones in video you shared and another picture below which follow the take off alignment line (coloured in yellow)

The marks on IAC-1' ramp are similar to these ones on Vikky, which are *not* due to attempted take offs,

do notice that these matks don't align with the yellow lines that the aircraft is to follow while taking off.

 

[MonaLazy]

All hail Uncle Sam?

F-18 Super Hornet managed to exceed Indian Navy's requirements for MRCBF program.

Spoiler: tweet

MRFA to Rafale and MRCBF to F-18? Bye bye commonality and common sense?