Bagha,<BR>MIG-29K is naval variant of SMT and is quite a formidable fighter. Having only 15 fighters makes no sense for a navy of our size and ambition. <BR>I would say 25 too is small [ideally I vote for a Kuznetsov-type carrier] but good enough for Pukis or for Bay operations<P>------------------<BR>Adios<BR>Saurabh
David, Bagha, have you checked the archives for all the posts about deploying naval flankers onboard the Gorshkov, they are too big, they cannot be deployed onboard.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
yes i have been through all the posts and articles that say why the Su cannot be used on the Gorshkov class.<BR>1)Inability of the lifts to handle Su<BR>2)The hanger is not big enough to handle it.<BR>My question is a bit more basic.<BR>Are we sacrificing future firepower for the sake of a stopgap arrangement i.e., an available carrier?<BR>What is the role of a carrier? is the MiG29K competent enough to fulfill these tasks as well as a Su or a Tomcat?<BR>Another thing that is having me confused is the fact that the Naval LCA is being talked of as a fighter in a support role to the MiG. I would have thought that considering its instability, 9G capability and 1.7 mach capability it would be as good as a 29K if not better. What is the basis for having a preference for the 29K as far as combat capability is concerned? I mean on paper it is perfect.<BR>
in the su33 vs mig29 vs LCA debate one has to remember the size of the future IN carriers. they will most likely be in the neighborhood of 40,000 tons and most likely not be able to carry anything bigger than a mig-29 or LCA. the ADS size more than anything else will determine the plane we use now and later.<P>on a different but relevant topic i doubt the IN will be able to use a large AEW plane with the ADS. most likely a mig-29 or LCA would have to be modified to be a sort of AEW with ka-31s as support.
Quote<BR>"think that if we could get a carrier capable of carry a naval variant of the su-30mki"<P>i know the su-30s cant fit on the gorshkov nandai<BR>I was saying that it would be great if we could buy a carrier that COULD carry them<BR>not that they should b put on the gorshkov
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by exelsior:<BR><B>I believe that depending on cost & condition of the ship, it makes more sense for India to buy Admiral Kuznetsov and convert the Su33s to MKI standard (call it Su33MKI). The Russians should be able to do this conversion quickly considering they've already started converting Su30K to MKI.<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I dont think India can afford a big carrier and its supporting battle group. Though i like the idea of standardizing the airframes and also many of the subsystems in case of the SU I think the MiG29K is better suited for the smaller aircraft carriers we will be using. Navy is planning the ADS for furture acquisitions which will not be able to handle the SU. So it doesn't make any sense going in for the Su + Kutznetsov if that aircraft is not going to be used anywhere else. <BR>What I would prefer is that the jags be replaced by some SU30s optimized for the maritime strike role like we did with the jags. Anyways the maritime strike squadron is under the airforce so aircraft common to the airforce ones makes sense.
Hi,<BR>I am not much of a naval tech expert, but I remembered something I overheard during the BR meet at the Maz docks. This is wrt the reference to the proposal on Kuznetsov. Before we start examining the proposal at all, we must remember that none of the Indian ports/docks can support a carrier of that size!! If we buy it, we have to spend another fortune trying to upgrade the shore infrastructure..And just for one ship!!! Dont think its worth it..<P>Somnath
One Naval base is to be modified by the Russians to handle the Groshkov. One of the main reasons for not buying the Vajrag was because it was too big for Indian naval bases to handle. If we could handle such big ships, then the US carriers would also come to India for minor repairs instead of going all the way to the US.<P>------------------<BR>Y.Avinash
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 19
- Joined: 01 Oct 1999 11:31
- Location: Chennai,Tamil nadu,India
What makes the forum members so sure the Russians will sell the Kuznetsov , I know the west has exaggerated Russia willingness to sell but the Russians still have pride and will not sell their most important ship to us
The fact that our defence planners are planning for small carriers as the only carriers of the future, makes my question more relevant.<BR>Are we sacrificing our future for the sake of the present?<BR>The Russians are proud?<BR>Well good for them, we'll make them prouder. Take their help for designing and building medium sized carriers. The ship building industry would be proud to see a medium sized carrier based on russian design and flying the most potent plane, which incidentally is also russian. Maybe we will be able to squeeze in an AEW plane inside as well.<BR>BUT.......................................<BR>if we consider the need for carriers in the immediate future then we must go for the light carriers as the medium carriers would take ages to come. but then i believe that if we are going to have carriers then it is best to have carriers capable of carrying a heavy fighter bomber like the Su-33(MKI?)<BR>Maybe in the future...........
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests