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

[darshan978]

Range is still limited by food and fuel for aircrafts etc. Charles de Gaul is nuclear powered yet Wikipedia says it can only take 45 days of food.

Same goes for jet fuel , you can only store so much. That is why American carriers are over 100k ton as storing more fuel/ ammo is necessary for longer endurance.

Even then you need global port support for a carrier to have global operational capacity.

We have no such need now. Expense of nuclear carrier and maintenance then more expense when disposing the nuclear reactor at the end doesn't justify our use case of dominating only Indian Ocean.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Nuclear propulsion still gives edge over conventional.
You can take more food, and ammo instead of carrying tons of fuel in case of nuclear aircraft carriers...

 

[IndianHawk]

Nuclear propulsion still gives edge over conventional.
You can take more food, and ammo instead of carrying tons of fuel in case of nuclear aircraft carriers...

We need much more details to make that comparison. Going by Wikipedia nuclear Charles de Gaulle has same endurance of 45 days ( limited by food and fuel for aircrafts) as that of conventional vikramaditya. Of course Wikipedia is not the accurate source. So we need more information.

Meanwhile keep in mind that nuclear propulsion requires far more safety systems than conventional. These systems might end up taking equal space as that the carrier fuel will take.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Mikesingh]

We need much more details to make that comparison. Going by Wikipedia nuclear Charles de Gaulle has same endurance of 45 days ( limited by food and fuel for aircrafts) as that of conventional vikramaditya. Of course Wikipedia is not the accurate source. So we need more information.

45 days is not quite correct. An AC never sails alone but is supported by a strike grouping. A Carrier Strike Group (CSG) has a combined ammunition, oiler and supply ship (AOE/AOR), that provides fleet logistics support for up to 100 days to the CSG. However, it is less in active battle scenarios.

Even a nuclear propelled AC needs frequent replenishment, and so do nuclear subs which need to surface fairly often for the purpose, mainly for supplies, water, toiletries and so on.

 

[Gessler]

Dude, now don't make me laugh.

I don't need no third party source, have it from the horse's mouth :



http://www.ibtimes.co.in/lca-tejas-mk-2-testing-by-2017-drdo-chief-667693

So according to the DRDO chief, the Tejas Mk 2 will be "ready for induction" by 2024. Means just received the clearances. Like one year from there on, we may have a squadron ready. And all that is according to the DRDO's best & most optimistic estimations.

If you've been following the defence news for atleast an year, you'd know by now that their estimations count for next to nothing. Don't even expect to have the Naval Mk-2 ready before 2025-2026.

I'd long forgotten about this conversation...

So to summarize, a good 3+ years after the fact the then DRDO chief stated Tejas Mk-2 will be 'ready for testing' by 2017...we are still waiting for HAL to commence construction of the first prototype, forget testing - and the Mk-1A is expected to fly only in 2022.

A whole lot has happened since then with regard to changing ASRs (Mk-1A came up, Mk-2 underwent design evolution) but then this is to be expected. Every fighter goes through such changes in design process.

What we need to remember is that we shall be no more adherent to the Mk-2 and/or AMCA timeline as we were to any other project before it. It needs to be kept in mind before thinking of anything regarding IAF (or IN, as is the case of the thread) future composition.

 

[Arihant]

Me waiting for DRDO products since early 2000 when i checked the stalls of DRDO in Indian science congress. Still not completed.

 

[WolfPack86]

Indian Navy Keen to Have Third Aircraft Carrier. but the government has to take a decision on it, Admiral Karambir Singh said on Friday. The Chief of Naval Staff also said the Indian Ocean Region is facing a slew of challenges. “The Indian Navy is keen on having a third aircraft carrier. If you see the blue of 1950s, it was built on three aircraft carriers,” he said.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/TeamAMCA/photos/?ref=page_internal

 

[Armand2REP]

We need much more details to make that comparison. Going by Wikipedia nuclear Charles de Gaulle has same endurance of 45 days ( limited by food and fuel for aircrafts) as that of conventional vikramaditya. Of course Wikipedia is not the accurate source. So we need more information.

Meanwhile keep in mind that nuclear propulsion requires far more safety systems than conventional. These systems might end up taking equal space as that the carrier fuel will take.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

If the crew needs to eat MREs for more endurance then they do what they must. The nuclear lasts far longer than the people.

You do not need wikipedia to know that a nuclear carrier does not carry diesel fuel for its engines, that space is used for more aviation fuel for its air group which triples the number of sorties.

Keep in mind that Russian carriers use conventional propulsion and they explode on fire all the time. It is not the method of propulsion that is the safety issue but the manner in which you practice maintenance and training.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Indian Navy Keen to Have Third Aircraft Carrier. but the government has to take a decision on it, Admiral Karambir Singh said on Friday. The Chief of Naval Staff also said the Indian Ocean Region is facing a slew of challenges. “The Indian Navy is keen on having a third aircraft carrier. If you see the blue of 1950s, it was built on three aircraft carriers,” he said.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/TeamAMCA/photos/?ref=page_internal

I don't know if we can afford to have it now.. It would be better to have airstrips all around the islands we have in Indian Ocean and then having lot of fighter jets to cover it first with and lots of anti ship missiles ,antisubmarine warfare capabilities. Vicky will be with us till 2040 around along with the new sea beast coming up soon.May be we should delay the third carrier battle group to enter in service by mid 30s . We will have N AMCA ready by then .

 

[IndianHawk]

If the crew needs to eat MREs for more endurance then they do what they must. The nuclear lasts far longer than the people.

You do not need wikipedia to know that a nuclear carrier does not carry diesel fuel for its engines, that space is used for more aviation fuel for its air group which triples the number of sorties.

Keep in mind that Russian carriers use conventional propulsion and they explode on fire all the time. It is not the method of propulsion that is the safety issue but the manner in which you practice maintenance and training.

Carrier may be nuclear but jets still need liquid fuel and ammunition and that needs to be replenished regularly.

Unless you are USA with supply based all over the world your carrier is always range limited as you will have no way to replenish jet fuel and ammo and spares if the carrier is far away from home waters.

 

[Akula]

I don't know if we can afford to have it now.. It would be better to have airstrips all around the islands we have in Indian Ocean and then having lot of fighter jets to cover it first with and lots of anti ship missiles ,antisubmarine warfare capabilities. Vicky will be with us till 2040 around along with the new sea beast coming up soon.May be we should delay the third carrier battle group to enter in service by mid 30s . We will have N AMCA ready by then .

Or we can order second Vikrant class carrier.

 

[binayak95]

I don't know if we can afford to have it now.. It would be better to have airstrips all around the islands we have in Indian Ocean and then having lot of fighter jets to cover it first with and lots of anti ship missiles ,antisubmarine warfare capabilities. Vicky will be with us till 2040 around along with the new sea beast coming up soon.May be we should delay the third carrier battle group to enter in service by mid 30s . We will have N AMCA ready by then .

If you start working on the project TODAY, the new carrier will be ready for service by 2029 at the earliest, and easily will slip past that date into early 30s.
It takes ten years of work on a project of this scale, even with all the experience and technical expertise of the IN's DND and shipyards.
As far as Money goes, rarely do governments deny IN their budgetary requirements - because most of the money is ploughed back into the system - since 80-90% of the ship is built here itself.

 

[Flying Dagger]

If you start working on the project TODAY, the new carrier will be ready for service by 2029 at the earliest, and easily will slip past that date into early 30s.
It takes ten years of work on a project of this scale, even with all the experience and technical expertise of the IN's DND and shipyards.
As far as Money goes, rarely do governments deny IN their budgetary requirements - because most of the money is ploughed back into the system - since 80-90% of the ship is built here itself.

Or we can order second Vikrant class carrier.

The plan is to bring UK 's Queen class carrier it will be expensive. And yes it takes a lot of time but they were planning to bring it around 2027- 2030 that's why I think should push it in mid 30s . N AMCA will rule out more Rafales or other foreign option too.

It takes a lot amount of money to operate a carrier battle group . We can use many islands we have as airstrips to project power in Indian Ocean for now.

 

[binayak95]

The plan is to bring UK 's Queen class carrier it will be expensive. And yes it takes a lot of time but they were planning to bring it around 2027- 2030 that's why I think should push it in mid 30s . N AMCA will rule out more Rafales or other foreign option too.

It takes a lot amount of money to operate a carrier battle group . We can use many islands we have as airstrips to project power in Indian Ocean for now.

Ehh no. You're confused between sea denial and sea control. Islands can't exercise sea control since they are not mobile.
Coastal missile batteries and airbases on islands are fine and dandy to stop a surface group - but what about submarines?
And say, a year from now a Middle Eastern nation goes kaput, how will you pull out the millions of Indians there?
How will your hundreds of missiles and dozens of submarines help?
Or are you like the PLAN -sending in nuclear submarines for anti piracy patrols?

Leave the doctrinal aspect to the experts, ergo, the IN.

 

[Filtercoffee]

The cochin ship yard is ready to make another Vikrant class carrier (Virat 2) as they said their build time will be half, 5 years. I think another Vikrant class carrier then would be the best choice instead of buying a foreign A/C and then have them overhaul it for the IN. If not done as stated by me, it will show an underground nexus as the main players will be exposed and will be public knowledge and will take another 15 years to resolve.

They have the edge now to get another very quickly, other then that its a shame to consider another design or fully 'restored' A/C which then would make the IN train on the platform, which wastes the sailor and officer years as a lot of them are hoping for another Vikrant class, Indian made aircraft carrier as soon as possible. If they do go in for a foreign A/C, the crew will go through a thorough depression which the country doesnt need now in the Navy too. We have the Air force already there.

 

[Filtercoffee]

The main despresion of the armed forces personnel is the in ability of the government to have faith in the Indian war machine and its ability to manufacture and operate the product line made by the hard working populace of the Republic of India so we dont need a foreign A/C or design.

Also fighter choice is to be done considering the entire crew which has maintenance also and not by how it looks and goodies coming with it, what that means is other then military related items; which creates another micro ecosystem to nurture when the entire armed forces are under paid, ill treated with having inferior equipment in numbers and their individual product designed abilities which can get overwhelmed by the enemy and their build up of the same.

 

[Armand2REP]

Carrier may be nuclear but jets still need liquid fuel and ammunition and that needs to be replenished regularly.

Unless you are USA with supply based all over the world your carrier is always range limited as you will have no way to replenish jet fuel and ammo and spares if the carrier is far away from home waters.

It comes down to autonomy, the nuclear carrier can stay on station up to twice as long as a conventional carrier without resupply. It is harder to do it outside the range of your basing agreements as the AOR has to travel longer to get supplies but that is needed more by the escorts which can be rotated out. The carrier cannot afford to stop as it is the tip of the spear. The true thing limiting the on station time of a carrier is the heavy lift ability to get weapons and spare engines on board. You either need heavy life helicopters with internal storage or Greyhound type aircraft that can use a catapult.

We are France, we have bases all over the world and basing agreements with the important nations that have bases... like India. France needs India because it gives us the ability to watch the Malacca Strait, the only shipping passage we don't control. We can control all of the others except for the Russian Arctic passage... if you call that a shipping lane.

 

[Vande1947]

It comes down to autonomy, the nuclear carrier can stay on station up to twice as long as a conventional carrier without resupply. It is harder to do it outside the range of your basing agreements as the AOR has to travel longer to get supplies but that is needed more by the escorts which can be rotated out. The carrier cannot afford to stop as it is the tip of the spear. The true thing limiting the on station time of a carrier is the heavy lift ability to get weapons and spare engines on board. You either need heavy life helicopters with internal storage or Greyhound type aircraft that can use a catapult.

We are France, we have bases all over the world and basing agreements with the important nations that have bases... like India. France needs India because it gives us the ability to watch the Malacca Strait, the only shipping passage we don't control. We can control all of the others except for the Russian Arctic passage... if you call that a shipping lane.

the arctic passage will become a shipping lane in 20-30 yers if the rate of icecap melting continues at this rate

 

[IndianHawk]

It comes down to autonomy, the nuclear carrier can stay on station up to twice as long as a conventional carrier without resupply. It is harder to do it outside the range of your basing agreements as the AOR has to travel longer to get supplies but that is needed more by the escorts which can be rotated out. The carrier cannot afford to stop as it is the tip of the spear. The true thing limiting the on station time of a carrier is the heavy lift ability to get weapons and spare engines on board. You either need heavy life helicopters with internal storage or Greyhound type aircraft that can use a catapult.

We are France, we have bases all over the world and basing agreements with the important nations that have bases... like India. France needs India because it gives us the ability to watch the Malacca Strait, the only shipping passage we don't control. We can control all of the others except for the Russian Arctic passage... if you call that a shipping lane.

France have lots of islands but maintaining war level supply bases at so many locations is prohibitively costly.

We are talking about options for Indian carrier which won't have much wartime base support outside of ior. Heck if India has only 3-4 carriers it won't be able to spare to carrier for operations outside of ior. Within ior conventional carrier is enough for now. No need for expensive nuke platform . SSN are more lethal and more suitable.

Same limitations apply to France also with just one carrier french will have to chose hard where to deploy it .

 

[Bleh]

Originally planned replacement of Russia's Kuznetsov class aircraft carriers was Ulyanovsk class, scrapped due to fall of USSR.
At 70-80,000 ton the concept was of comparable size as Vishal but had 4 launching positions, 2 on the ski-jump ramp & 2 electromagnetic catapults for larger ones (along the landing strip from where long takeoff starts).

If any of their SHTORM supercarrier or medium-carrier concepts materialise, they'll also be similarly modeled.

Replicating Lamantin would allow India fighter aircraft interchangeability between IAC1-IAC2 while reducing operational cost as well as enhanceing scramble rate.
Fighters won't alway need to be catapulted & 1 EMACLS can do the job when they are heavily loaded or for larger ones.

 

[Suryavanshi]

Originally planned replacement of Russia's Kuznetsov class aircraft carriers was Ulyanovsk class, scrapped due to fall of USSR.
At 70-80,000 ton the concept was of comparable size as Vishal but had 4 launching positions, 2 on the ski-jump ramp & 2 electromagnetic catapults for larger ones (along the landing strip from where long takeoff starts).

If any of their SHTORM supercarrier or medium-carrier concepts materialise, they'll also be similarly modeled. View attachment 41657
Replicating Lamantin would allow India fighter aircraft interchangeability between IAC1-IAC2 while reducing operational cost as well as enhanceing scramble rate.
Fighters won't alway need to be catapulted & 1 EMACLS can do the job when they are heavily loaded or for larger ones.

Are bro we can barely produce a 40,000 t ship, an aspiration of 90,000+ t is a bit long shot don't u think.
Let me phrase it out loud, our ship building capability is absolute down the gutter pathetic.
Aside from Cochin shipyard and HSL Shipyard who do u think can handle high DWT ships?
Two of our biggest shipyards filed for bankruptcy recently. The shipbuilding industry is in a nosedive as it is so I don't see any market stimulated growth.

If anything I'll say the Socialist era policy hit ship building industry the most.

Whatever shipyard had the intention to boost their infra have already done it in 2008 shipping boom, now it's just stagnation.