INS Vikrant Aircraft Carrier (IAC)

[Johny_Baba]

What nonsense? Who is this 'test pilot' genius who said that N LCA can carry 4 derby and 2 R73? Even the IAF Tejas won't carry such a payload. Technically it could be possible. But the drag and combat radius will be limited exponentially such that any decent mission will not be possible.
Now the N-LCA have to take of from a ski-jump on its on engine power with all these payload? Not even in dreams. Even the MiG 29k will not take of with such a oayload. N-LCA test pilot Mao sir himself has cleared that N-LCA is heavy and not powerful enough to carry significant payload from a ski jump to conduct any significant combat missions.

He was part of the team that landed N LCA on flight deck of INS Vikramaditya. I can provide names but it would create unnecessary uproar when people aren't willing to listen to what actual people involved in these things say.

Also statements for public consumption vs banters that you have among trusted people.

 

[IndianHawk]

What nonsense? Who is this 'test pilot' genius who said that N LCA can carry 4 derby and 2 R73? Even the IAF Tejas won't carry such a payload. Technically it could be possible. But the drag and combat radius will be limited exponentially such that any decent mission will not be possible.
Now the N-LCA have to take of from a ski-jump on its on engine power with all these payload? Not even in dreams. Even the MiG 29k will not take of with such a oayload. N-LCA test pilot Mao sir himself has cleared that N-LCA is heavy and not powerful enough to carry significant payload from a ski jump to conduct any significant combat missions.

4 derby and 2 r73 are not heavy load at all. Heavy load is when drop tanks and anti-ship missiles are carried.
That's where naval lca is challanged.

 

[NutCracker]

4 derby and 2 r73 are not heavy load at all. Heavy load is when drop tanks and anti-ship missiles are carried.
That's where naval lca is challanged.

It should be able to refuel mid air by mig29k buddy refueling , question is What is the bring back payload capacity of NLCA.

 

[IndianHawk]

It should be able to refuel mid air by mig29k buddy refueling , question is What is the bring back payload capacity of NLCA.

Mid air refueling is good to have once in a while can't do that again and again. Besides mig29k doesn't have much fuel to spare . It's own fuel is barely adequate.

 

[Blademaster]

I know that Ashley Tellis is an US based defense analyst and that some of his writings are pro US and not really in the interests of India but take a look at this video and you will fully understand why IN did not go for another IAC-1 carrier. They simply want to wait for the IAC-2 to fully realize the potential of the aircraft carrier. They learned their lessons with Vicky and IAC-1 and quickly came to the conclusion that despite building all that knowledge base, building another IAC-1 simply makes no sense. If no IAC-2, then submarines.

Here's the video:

 

[abingdonboy]

I know that Ashley Tellis is an US based defense analyst and that some of his writings are pro US and not really in the interests of India but take a look at this video and you will fully understand why IN did not go for another IAC-1 carrier. They simply want to wait for the IAC-2 to fully realize the potential of the aircraft carrier. They learned their lessons with Vicky and IAC-1 and quickly came to the conclusion that despite building all that knowledge base, building another IAC-1 simply makes no sense. If no IAC-2, then submarines.

Here's the video:

IN haven’t even finalised the design of IAC-2. Don’t pretend they are taking this seriously. Just another case of pie in the sky thinking whilst the here and now suffers

 

[Johny_Baba]

ok some ideas that i've had regd solving issues on Mig-29K, N-LCA (if it gets inducted) powered by F-414 engine and so about taking off with good payload

<1> aerial refueling UAV from Ghaatak program ?
say, a folding wing aerial refueling version of DRDO's Ghaatak UAV that takes off from the deck first with fuel and later Mig-29K or N-LCA takes off with full combat load and does mid-air refueling from the UAV
our own version of Boeing MQ-25 Stingray

second one is just crazy but still,
<2>Rocket-Assited Take Off // RATO ?
i mean, RATO indeed used to be a thing in US Navy during era of propellar aircraft and so, and since we already have rocket engine for Lakshya PTV say can we make our own RATO detachable launcher that's dropped in sea once used etc...

 

[IndianHawk]

I know that Ashley Tellis is an US based defense analyst and that some of his writings are pro US and not really in the interests of India but take a look at this video and you will fully understand why IN did not go for another IAC-1 carrier. They simply want to wait for the IAC-2 to fully realize the potential of the aircraft carrier. They learned their lessons with Vicky and IAC-1 and quickly came to the conclusion that despite building all that knowledge base, building another IAC-1 simply makes no sense. If no IAC-2, then submarines.

Here's the video:

It's the gradual evolution in thinking.
Vikrant was supposed to be an air defence ship till 2003-4 then navy converted it to full carrier and increased displacement.

Similarly navy now wants to move further .

When we sanctioned vikrant construction back in 2006-7 our economy was mere 1 trillion. Now that vikrant is in water we have a 3.5 trillion economy.

We should look into future when it comes to aircraft carrier because they last 40-50 years.

We should sanction 65k ton catobar now. Construction would anyway start 3-4 years later buy the time budget will grow and by the time we will have this new carrier in water in 2035 we should be 12 trillion usd economy if not 15!!!

 

[Javelin_Sam]

ok some ideas that i've had regd solving issues on Mig-29K, N-LCA (if it gets inducted) powered by F-414 engine and so about taking off with good payload

<1> aerial refueling UAV from Ghaatak program ?
say, a folding wing aerial refueling version of DRDO's Ghaatak UAV that takes off from the deck first with fuel and later Mig-29K or N-LCA takes off with full combat load and does mid-air refueling from the UAV
our own version of Boeing MQ-25 Stingray

second one is just crazy but still,
<2>Rocket-Assited Take Off // RATO ?
i mean, RATO indeed used to be a thing in US Navy during era of propellar aircraft and so, and since we already have rocket engine for Lakshya PTV say can we make our own RATO detachable launcher that's dropped in sea once used etc...

F - 414 cannot go inside N-Tejas or Tejas Mk1, Mk1a of IAF. F-414 needs to suck in more air hence it needs redesigned intakes.
That's why Tejas Mk2 has new intake design to cater to the need of F-414 and future engines.
F-414 will not go in MiG-29 because it needs the blessings of US. Current geopolitics and threat to any possible F-18 orders will not make it happen. Anyway the issue with MiG 29 is with the airframe, not the engine. So Navy won't burn cash to integrate and certify new engine to Migs.
Ghatak UAV is still in paper. The small scale prototype to test satcom-remote controlling called Swift just took to the sky few months back. A larger rudderless flying wing Ghatak is not coming for operations anytime before 2035. Even if it comes by 2035, can the single dry thrust Kaveri (if it matures that too in the tough marine environments) propel it from a SkiJump with all the fuel it needs to function as a refueller? Anyway by 2035 Tedbf will be here.

 

[NutCracker]

Mid air refueling is good to have once in a while can't do that again and again.

Besides mig29k doesn't have much fuel to spare . It's own fuel is barely adequate.

It's better to fly 1 mig29k and refuel 2 NLCA instead of flying 3 mig29k.

Mig29k internal can carry 5.4t + 2-3t external .

That's like normal payload of internal+ weapons.
It can re-fuel plenty , if probe is installed into NLCA.

Mig29k might take up 2.5T for 1 hr flight around 600kmph, rest is good to fuel 2 or even 3 NLCA.

 

[Corvus Splendens]

 

[omaebakabaka]

What nonsense? Who is this 'test pilot' genius who said that N LCA can carry 4 derby and 2 R73? Even the IAF Tejas won't carry such a payload. Technically it could be possible. But the drag and combat radius will be limited exponentially such that any decent mission will not be possible.
Now the N-LCA have to take of from a ski-jump on its on engine power with all these payload? Not even in dreams. Even the MiG 29k will not take of with such a oayload. N-LCA test pilot Mao sir himself has cleared that N-LCA is heavy and not powerful enough to carry significant payload from a ski jump to conduct any significant combat missions.

Max loads are rarely carried by even the land based fighters, has to be extreme or very serious mission to do so. I don't know but I would imagine that max loads mission profile probably fall outside the 3rd deviation.

 

[Photon]

 

[bhramos]

 

[Srinivas_K]

I had clowns like that in college. One drove a Polo and looked down on a Honda Accord saying 'uh it's just a Japanese cat, not EURO like mine'

Many such cases in US too. 'Yeah it's a shitty, unreliable dodge truck but atleast it's not a Toyota',, like WTF?

Honda Accord is a nice car, it do have good acceleration. I own Honda Accord.

 

[omaebakabaka]

IN haven’t even finalised the design of IAC-2. Don’t pretend they are taking this seriously. Just another case of pie in the sky thinking whilst the here and now suffers

If this is how Indian Navy thinks, then its pretty pessimistic future....this is insane and you can always sell the IAC-1 carrier since its indigenous mostly with supply chain and spares being available to other countries that have much different requirements. There is no reason to believe IN has any strategy at all at this point in non-nuclear fleet profile, no reason to believe without any evidence that they are serious about anything other than pie in sky and this extends to other branches too.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Any idea why INS Vikrant doesn't use bulbous bow?
The bulbous bow modifies the way the water flows around the hull, reducing drag and thus increasing speed, range, fuel efficiency, and stability.
Large ships with bulbous bows generally have twelve to fifteen percent better fuel efficiency than similar vessels without them.

 

[BlackViking]

<2>Rocket-Assited Take Off // RATO ?
i mean, RATO indeed used to be a thing in US Navy during era of propellar aircraft and so, a

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Any idea why INS Vikrant doesn't use bulbous bow?
The bulbous bow modifies the way the water flows around the hull, reducing drag and thus increasing speed, range, fuel efficiency, and stability.
Large ships with bulbous bows generally have twelve to fifteen percent better fuel efficiency than similar vessels without them.

No idea. But isn't it the same for most Indian warships? Only Navy ship with bulbous bow I remember is some tanker class.
BTW, even Nimitz class supercarriers didn't have bulbous bows initially. Only in last two Nimitz class it was added.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

No idea. But isn't it the same for most Indian warships? Only Navy ship with bulbous bow I remember is some tanker class.
BTW, even Nimitz class supercarriers didn't have bulbous bows initially. Only in last two Nimitz class it was added.

Nimitz was a old design.
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier do contain bulbous bow.

Bulbous bow is advantages for big ships like aircraft carriers.

I believe we should add Bulbous bow to our our next generation destroyers and frigates as it not only improves performance, fuel-efficiency and stability but also helps with sonar performance.