INS Vishal (IAC- II) Aircraft Carrier

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,391
Likes
33,431
Country flag
Actually they recommended and made a lot of good points, sharing the article here,
Govt accepts the necessity of third carrier. Debate is raging about it's size ( similar to vikrant or Much bigger ) tech ( Catobar or emals) and aircraft ( tedbf or Rafale import)
 

FalconSlayers

जयेम सं युधि स्पृध:
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
16,070
Likes
82,708
Country flag
Ya'll Nibbiars

We know that we may be a $3T economy now but in future we’ll be a much larger one as we’re the fastest growing major economy so a bigger 75-80k tonne IAC-II would we better considering you’ll be operationalising it in 2030s when India will almost be a $10T economy (3rd largest in the world), but again it depends on how Navy is going to cope up with their Nuclear submarine or for that matter conventional submarines budget. We in today’s date need future proofing because our equipment in all 3 services is becoming very very old and in future it will be very painful to modernise them all, so government should take the call and forcefully induct indigenous systems for modernisation, won’t be expensive, will build jobs here in India, will create future proof ecosystem and will not affect your budget much as all investment will go back to your economy.

Also we tend to forget that INS Vicky is a port loving carrier which sails very less compared to other carriers around the globe thanks to Roosis and incompetent GoI. In that case IAC-II definitely is a necessity. We might have heard defence media and experts saying 3rd AC is needed, 1 for Porki, 1 for chinks and in a given time 1 might be on repairs and maintenance, the AC that “might be under repairs and maintenance” is none other than INS Vicky.
 

Adm Kenobi

New Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
6
Likes
21
Country flag
We know that we may be a $3T economy now but in future we’ll be a much larger one as we’re the fastest growing major economy so a bigger 75-80k tonne IAC-II would we better considering you’ll be operationalising it in 2030s when India will almost be a $10T economy (3rd largest in the world), but again it depends on how Navy is going to cope up with their Nuclear submarine or for that matter conventional submarines budget. We in today’s date need future proofing because our equipment in all 3 services is becoming very very old and in future it will be very painful to modernise them all, so government should take the call and forcefully induct indigenous systems for modernisation, won’t be expensive, will build jobs here in India, will create future proof ecosystem and will not affect your budget much as all investment will go back to your economy.

Also we tend to forget that INS Vicky is a port loving carrier which sails very less compared to other carriers around the globe thanks to Roosis and incompetent GoI. In that case IAC-II definitely is a necessity. We might have heard defence media and experts saying 3rd AC is needed, 1 for Porki, 1 for chinks and in a given time 1 might be on repairs and maintenance, the AC that “might be under repairs and maintenance” is none other than INS Vicky.
1. Tonnage isn't what we should run after, a better design is what we need. Large flight deck & hangar capable of carrying 36 fighter jets, 2-3 AEW&C aircraft, 6-8 helis in normal days & further more in surge capacity.
2. Economy will not be $10T (nominal), more in park with $7T. 2 sister ships (total) can be built of IAC-2 class at that time (around 2030). Given we will still be investing 2.2-2.5% of GDP in defence. ($150-175B) with $7T economy.
3. 1st can be laid before 2030, 2nd around 2030. The 2nd if laid in time can replace Vikky.
4. For IOR, 2 super carrier & 1 medium carrier will still be sufficient, more might be built according to need & funds, only 3 are possible till 2040. More will be made, because 15T+ economy, 300B+ defence budget.
4.5. USN expects around 6 carriers in PLA N in 2040, given 4/6 are operational 2/4 will be operating in Chinese backyard that is ~East Asia, ESC. 1-2 projecting power outside. Liaoning like Vikky would likely be retired around 2040, meaning 5 CATOBAR in PLA N.
5. Really do not need the AC for Pakistan, it's close to shore. Land based aircrafts can do offensive there, the carrier is needed for Arabian sea & western IOR, 2nd for Eastern IOR. We have shore based aircrafts for Northern IOR.


Your opinion?
 

FalconSlayers

जयेम सं युधि स्पृध:
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
16,070
Likes
82,708
Country flag
1. Tonnage isn't what we should run after, a better design is what we need. Large flight deck & hangar capable of carrying 36 fighter jets, 2-3 AEW&C aircraft, 6-8 helis in normal days & further more in surge capacity.
Precisely, but with tonnage comes more capacity as well as capabilities. But we do need a super carrier for china (as Paki navy has only Karachi near Indian border on land plus Chinks don’t share a maritime boundary with us, its just near the Malaccas that a supercarrier or an expeditionary carrier battle group fits in. Nuclear propulsion is a must because your EMALS will be highly power consuming.
2. Economy will not be $10T (nominal), more in park with $7T. 2 sister ships (total) can be built of IAC-2 class at that time (around 2030). Given we will still be investing 2.2-2.5% of GDP in defence. ($150-175B) with $7T economy.
It is debateable, also I said 2030s not 2030 and “almost” $10T. And $7T is a bit conservative as nominal GDP includes various other things, like inflation and currency value. Anyways your economy will be 3rd largest thats for sure whether so you need future proofing.

And this 2 IACs for the cost of IAC-II is not great considering you’ll build 2 STOBAR carriers which will only create a logistics and maintenance mess also whatsup with this socialist thingy of dividing the costs lol?
1640961856949.jpeg
3. 1st can be laid before 2030, 2nd around 2030. The 2nd if laid in time can replace Vikky.
Nah dude, beyond 2030 you’ll be able to afford more Super carriers and helo carriers (LPDs and LHDs) so socialist sisterships is a bad idea.
4. For IOR, 2 super carrier & 1 medium carrier will still be sufficient, more might be built according to need & funds, only 3 are possible till 2040. More will be made, because 15T+ economy, 300B+ defence budget.
For 2030s we’ll have 1 Super carrier and 2 medium carriers, 2 for ops and vicky at the dockyard for repairs. Sisterships like you said is possible in one way, 2 medium CATOBAR carriers like the French Charles D’Gaulle beyond 2030, one to replace vicky and 1 for fleet expansion i.e. IAC-I + IAC-II + 2 (My PoV) medium CATOBAR sisterships
5. USN expects around 6 carriers in PLA N in 2040, given 4/6 are operational 2/4 will be operating in Chinese backyard that is ~East Asia, ESC. 1-2 projecting power outside. Liaoning like Vikky would likely be retired around 2040, meaning 5 CATOBAR in PLA N.
Not 5 CATOBARs, their carriers like their Type 001 (Liaoning) and Type 002 (Shandong) are ski jumps.
Liaoning will be decomissioned at the same time as Vicky as both Vikramaditya and Liaoning are of the same class and were supposed to serve together with USSR but then they became part of Indian and CCP navies. Their Type 003 is a CATOBAR and their Type 004 is supposed to be the largest on earth at more than 1 lakh tonnes. They’ll have more aircraft carriers than you expect.
5. Really do not need the AC for Pakistan, it's close to shore. Land based aircrafts can do offensive there, the carrier is needed for Arabian sea & western IOR, 2nd for Eastern IOR. We have shore based aircrafts for Northern IOR.
I know but don’t under estimate them, yes their economy is screwed and its an over militarised state but their navy is sizeable and on short term is a big threat coz they can’t sustain war for long term.
 

Adm Kenobi

New Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
6
Likes
21
Country flag
Precisely, but with tonnage comes more capacity as well as capabilities. But we do need a super carrier for china (as Paki navy has only Karachi near Indian border on land plus Chinks don’t share a maritime boundary with us, its just near the Malaccas that a supercarrier or an expeditionary carrier battle group fits in. Nuclear propulsion is a must because your EMALS will be highly power consuming.

It is debateable, also I said 2030s not 2030 and “almost” $10T. And $7T is a bit conservative as nominal GDP includes various other things, like inflation and currency value. Anyways your economy will be 3rd largest thats for sure whether so you need future proofing.

And this 2 IACs for the cost of IAC-II is not great considering you’ll build 2 STOBAR carriers which will only create a logistics and maintenance mess also whatsup with this socialist thingy of dividing the costs lol?
View attachment 128707

Nah dude, beyond 2030 you’ll be able to afford more Super carriers and helo carriers (LPDs and LHDs) so socialist sisterships is a bad idea.

For 2030s we’ll have 1 Super carrier and 2 medium carriers, 2 for ops and vicky at the dockyard for repairs. Sisterships like you said is possible in one way, 2 medium CATOBAR carriers like the French Charles D’Gaulle beyond 2030, one to replace vicky and 1 for fleet expansion i.e. IAC-I + IAC-II + 2 (My PoV) medium CATOBAR sisterships

Not 5 CATOBARs, their carriers like their Type 001 (Liaoning) and Type 002 (Shandong) are ski jumps.
Liaoning will be decomissioned at the same time as Vicky as both Vikramaditya and Liaoning are of the same class and were supposed to serve together with USSR but then they became part of Indian and CCP navies. Their Type 003 is a CATOBAR and their Type 004 is supposed to be the largest on earth at more than 1 lakh tonnes. They’ll have more aircraft carriers than you expect.

I know but don’t under estimate them, yes their economy is screwed and its an over militarised state but their navy is sizeable and on short term is a big threat coz they can’t sustain war for long term.

I'm sorry I missed that s in the 2030s...

And I'm suggesting to built two IAC-2, not follow up Vikrant (around 2030). Please read my reply again because I think we are having a misunderstanding here.

5 CATOBARs in PLA N by 2030->

2-3 003 class (320×79m) & some 004 (larger). The construction of 2nd 003 is yet to begin, 2 003 are expected by 2030 & 2 more larger carrier more till 2040 (it will ofcourse keep increasing) + 1 STOBAR Shandong. This is the 6 carrier fleet the document says about (likely)...
By building 2 IAC-2 (the 65k tonne CATOBAR) we will ensure we have 2 super carrier by 2040 & more under construction (we won't be stopping at 3 either, obvi).
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top