Indian Naval Aviation

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

konaseema wrote:The capacity of both the aircraft carriers are 26 fixed wing aircrafts. We have around 40 Mig-29K's with us. That said, we can have a potential complement of 1/2 squadron on Vikrant, while Vicky can has its full complement.
Only one aircraft carrier will be on active deployment at any given time. When you see a picture or video of both vessels, it will be for a photo op. Just like a number of Vikrant and Viraat photos from the 80s and 90s.

So both vessels will operate a full complement of MiG-29K/KUBs when they are deployed. No 300 and No 303 Sqns will both be represented.

As the years pass, the fleet availability of the Vikramaditya will gradually decrease. She just came out of a refit though.
hgupta
BRFite
Posts: 477
Joined: 20 Oct 2018 14:17

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by hgupta »

Did they ever upgrade the engine of Vikramaditya? It would be nice to have that troublesome boilers replaced by a modern and more efficient CODAG engine.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

hgupta wrote:Did they ever upgrade the engine of Vikramaditya? It would be nice to have that troublesome boilers replaced by a modern and more efficient CODAG engine.
I don't believe so. Still use boilers. Unless the Navy plans to keep her in service till the 2050s (and beyond), it does not make sense to do a swap like that.

A follow-on Vikrant Class vessel would be the better path forward.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

This Wacky Wireframe Fighter Replica Is Used On India’s Newest Carrier
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/t ... st-carrier
11 July 2022

https://twitter.com/VikeyAspire21/statu ... qHoGxHa6Cw ---> 100% not photoshop, Wireframe is utilized for basic and advanced stages of testing to study hangar and deck movements.

Image
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

The MRCBF contest is going to down to the wire. A must read piece below...

Boeing Super Hornet, Rafale Marine or a surprise!
Race to identify deck-based fighter for IAC-1 Vikrant to heat up

https://www.financialexpress.com/defenc ... p/2590495/
12 July 2022
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Pratyush »

Rakesh wrote: I don't believe so. Still use boilers. Unless the Navy plans to keep her in service till the 2050s (and beyond), it does not make sense to do a swap like that.

A follow-on Vikrant Class vessel would be the better path forward.
I have been wondering for some time about this ship. Along with the Indian Navy's insistence on EMALS.

Once the Vikramaditya was under construction. Why didn't the Indian Navy start designing a 80k aircraft carrier powered by 4 Arihant reactors and fitted with 3 or 4 steam catapults. Especially when they knew that the reactor itself was safe and functional.

The French follow this approach.

Such a ship could has been under construction by 2016-17. With completion by 2024. This ship could handle the LCA or any imported jets safely. Build 2 of such ship's and once the 190 me reactor comes on line, then redesign the ship to run on 2 such reactors.
SidSoma
BRFite
Posts: 241
Joined: 16 Feb 2018 15:09

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by SidSoma »

Pratyush wrote: Such a ship could has been under construction by 2016-17. With completion by 2024. This ship could handle the LCA or any imported jets safely. Build 2 of such ship's and once the 190 me reactor comes on line, then redesign the ship to run on 2 such reactors.
Sir, I am not even sure why a follow on ship of Vikrant was not announced a couple of years back. It is an easy guess that Vikrant will surely be better than Adm Gorshkov in almost all spheres of operation. We could have built another vikrant, Installed a kill switch in Adm G and sold it to Bangladesh (pipe dream, just retire the Adm G). Current Navy thought process is perplexing
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Pratyush wrote:Once the Vikramaditya was under construction. Why didn't the Indian Navy start designing a 80k aircraft carrier powered by 4 Arihant reactors and fitted with 3 or 4 steam catapults. Especially when they knew that the reactor itself was safe and functional.
Navy Admirals wanted BARC to fund the reactor design to place aboard an aircraft carrier. When BARC heard about the proposal, they told the Admirals that they will not fund the reactor design and it will have to be Navy to provide the funding.

The Admirals were aghast at that idea. The proposal sunk to the bottom of the Indian Ocean, where it still lies.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

SidSoma wrote:Sir, I am not even sure why a follow on ship of Vikrant was not announced a couple of years back. It is an easy guess that Vikrant will surely be better than Adm Gorshkov in almost all spheres of operation. We could have built another vikrant, Installed a kill switch in Adm G and sold it to Bangladesh (pipe dream, just retire the Adm G). Current Navy thought process is perplexing
The 2000s and 2010s saw America's Asia Pivot policy take shape (to contain China's rise) and this subsequently gave birth to India's Look East policy. When the keel for the Vikrant was laid in 2009, the Malabar Exercises were progressing in full swing. Navy Admirals were amazed at the capability of how the US Navy's Nimitz Class carriers (and their battle groups) were able to influence a theatre of operations. They were fully sold on the idea of a nuclear powered, catapult take off, aircraft carrier and they desperately wanted one of their own.

The Navy Admirals went to the drawing board and churned out a utopian vessel i.e. a 65,000 ton, nuclear powered, state-of-the-art EMALS (catapult) system with a fleet of multi-role carrier borne fighters, ASW helicopters, airborne early warning aircraft, etc. But the Admirals made a cardinal mistake---> they announced it to the public* and she was to be called INS Vishal.

For the Americans, India having such a vessel played into their interests i.e. the sustainment of Pax Americana's MIC. So they did all they could to wind up our Navy Admirals on the idea of such a vessel. They set up a joint working committee on aircraft carriers, they displayed the operational capabilities of the F-18 Super Hornet, gave presentations on the E-2D Airborne Early Warning, the MH-60R anti-submarine helicopter, etc. The official (public) reasoning was India operating the same platforms as the US Navy, would make interoperability seamless. Okay :)

But our myopic Admirals forget one key ingredient - sanction of funds. When they walked with pride to the MoD office with their proposal, the Babus laughed them out of the room. Now she pops up un-ceremoniously ever so rarely on Navy Day and other press occasions. She sails listlessly in the halls of Naval HQ and the MoD. Newer proposals have been announced ---> nuclear reactor has been dropped, tonnage has been reduced, EMALS has been dropped...but the Navy still wants a catapult. So no follow on Vikrant Class.

I-must-have-a-CATOBAR-vessel-and-I-will-hold-my-breath-till-I-turn-BLUE. That is the strategy the Navy has adopted. A follow on Vikrant Class is hara-kiri Sir. The Navy believes it would be better off committing Seppuku (a form of Japanese ritual suicide by disembowelment).

The armed forces are required to be subservient to her civilian master i.e. the government. But when it comes to issues of national importance, the shoe is on the other foot. This nonsensical behaviour only hurts the country. But the master is unaware of this, because carrier operations is not the master's domain expertise. So the circus continues.

====================================

*This announcement whipped up a frenzy among the India-Must-Look-To-America cabal on BRF. The gyaan and lectures were a sight to see. CATOBAR vessels are the ultimate tool of power. CATOBAR vessels are invincible. CATOBAR vessels are the solution to all of India's woes. INS Vishal will influence events from the South China Sea to Alaska (including the salmon that swim there). INS Vishal will sail alongside Nimitz Class aircraft carriers in the South China Sea and destroy the PLAN. The bedtime stories were out of this world Sirjee. Even Bollywood movies have yet to come up with such a plot line. These guys put even Rajnikanth to shame!

And heaven forbid, if you questioned this gyan :rotfl: Tauba, Tauba! My Oh My!
Balar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 12:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Balar »

Maybe, the Admirals were looking at CATOBAR with one main advantage an AEWACS, which can take off from the carrier only if there is a CAT. Heli based AEW's may not provide the range and endurance that an E-2D can provide (although E-2D comes with the threat of sanctions).
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Balar wrote:Maybe, the Admirals were looking at CATOBAR with one main advantage an AEWACS, which can take off from the carrier only if there is a CAT. Heli based AEW's may not provide the range and endurance that an E-2D can provide (although E-2D comes with the threat of sanctions).
Balar, I changed your username as no numbers are permitted in usernames. Thanks.

You do require a CATOBAR to launch an AEW. A ski jump is not going to work. CATOBARs are very useful, but it requires significant investment which the GOI is not willing to do. The navy has a myriad of other programs/projects that require funding. The army and air force have their own wishlist. And that is just the Ministry of Defence. There are a whole bunch of other ministries in the GOI that are also clamouring for the same finite money pot.

Cochin SY has stated that they can do a follow-on vessel in 7 years. Even if you stretch that to 10 years, it still makes sense. Back in 2015 (mid-way of the Vikrant construction), they should have laid the keel for the follow on Vikrant. It would have been ready by 2025. We now have one aircraft carrier (Vikrant) which will arrive next month, but will be available for active deployment only next year. The less said about INS Vikramaditya, the better. The IN has made their bed and they will lie in it.

My assumption is that there is a fear at Naval HQ, that if a follow-on Vikrant Class vessel is built...the GOI will then not permit the construction of a CATOBAR aircraft carrier for the foreseeable future. Because then the Navy will have three aircraft carriers (Vikramaditya, Vikrant and follow-on Vikrant) in active service.

Even now there is time. Lay the keel for the follow on Vikrant Class vessel now and lay the keel for a super carrier by the end of this decade. By the early 2030s, the follow on Vikrant Class vessel will be ready for active service and the Vishal will be midway through her construction. Retire the Vikramaditya (along with her MiG-29K/KUB airwing as planned) at the same time. The ball lies in the Navy's court.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

Rakesh wrote:....
There is absolutely ZERO chance of an Indian carrier going to sea with a fighter other than the 29K this side of 2026/7 BEST CASE. I know you are saying the leasing option exists but that’s not an overnight process in itself- training and creating necessary support infra is itself a 2-3 year long period- maybe even more as we are talking about carrier aviation here.

And this only starts AFTER a contract is signed, the IN says they’ll make a judgment later this year, so let’s assume mid-2023 given how these things actually go, then 2-3 years of contract talks possibly with added drama if Rafale is selected (highly optimistic, they took >5 years to conclude cost negotiations for C-295).

So 2026-27 is the *best best case* for a LEASED fleet, 2-3 years plus on top of this for a new build airframe (maybe more given Dassault's backlog).

Just like with MRFA the reality is these are pipedreams that won’t solve any immediate issues if they are ever taken to fruition which seems exceedingly unlikely.
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1994
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by bala »

The saga of the next Aircraft Carrier is squarely on the shoulders of Ministry of Defence (MOD). The next evolution requires a lot of R&D in the following areas: Power Plant for the Carrier - Nuclear preferred because of the size upgrade; Catobar - emals preferred; Aircraft for deck based operations - TEDBF is a must and its engine. The MOD should pump in adequate funds and hasten the development times for these critical items. Some work is being done but again leadership needs to understand that these are vital / critical for operational Indian Navy. The Indian Navy has done a lot in terms of indigenous development. They require the funding support and clear goals from MOD.

Another Aside IMO: A heavier and larger VIKRANT should be looked into and work started rightaway just to keep IN force projection in the interim.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

bala wrote:The saga of the next Aircraft Carrier is squarely on the shoulders of Ministry of Defence (MOD). The next evolution requires a lot of R&D in the following areas: Power Plant for the Carrier - Nuclear preferred because of the size upgrade; Catobar - emals preferred; Aircraft for deck based operations - TEDBF is a must and its engine. The MOD should pump in adequate funds and hasten the development times for these critical items. Some work is being done but again leadership needs to understand that these are vital / critical for operational Indian Navy. The Indian Navy has done a lot in terms of indigenous development. They require the funding support and clear goals from MOD.

Another Aside IMO: A heavier and larger VIKRANT should be looked into and work started rightaway just to keep IN force projection in the interim.
While the MoD/GOI and even Babus share blame, a large chunk of this falls on the Navy's shoulders.

The Navy had no business asking for a 65,000 ton nuclear powered, EMALS capable, aircraft carrier...when they did not get such an approval from the MoD/GOI for this program. Don't go announcing such grandoise programs to the media and then go ask for funding. They did they same thing with the 57 MRCBF contest as well. The then Navy Chief - Admiral Sunil Lanba - even categorically stated that there is no budgetary shortfalls in acquiring them. We all know how that panned out.

The budget tussle between the late CDS - General Bipin Rawat - and the then Naval Chief - Admiral Karambir Singh - is also well known. The latter wanted everything i.e. CATOBAR carrier, six SSNs, six Project 75I vessels, 57 MRCBF aircraft, etc. He reportedly commented that is this all financially affordable. Living in la la land.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

Rakesh wrote:While the MoD/GOI and even Babus share blame, a large chunk of this falls on the Navy's shoulders.

The Navy had no business asking for a 65,000 ton nuclear powered, EMALS capable, aircraft carrier...when they did not get such an approval from the MoD/GOI for this program. Don't go announcing such grandoise programs to the media and then go ask for funding. They did they same thing with the 57 MRCBF contest as well. The then Navy Chief - Admiral Sunil Lanba - even categorically stated that there is no budgetary shortfalls in acquiring them. We all know how that panned out.

The budget tussle between the late CDS - General Bipin Rawat - and the then Naval Chief - Admiral Karambir Singh - is also well known. The latter wanted everything i.e. CATOBAR carrier, six SSNs, six Project 75I vessels, 57 MRCBF aircraft, etc. He reportedly commented that is this all financially affordable. Living in la la land.
I know the common wisdom has been to say the IN is the most professional and optimised service, but their actions or lack thereof in the last 10-15 years paints a different picture.

Almost ALL their proposed follow on vessels (NGD, NGF, NGC, NGMV, FSS, P75I, MCMV, IAC-2 etc etc ) remain merely on the drawing boards with not a single penny assigned to any of them let alone a keel laying to be seen. That’s before we even talk about the disaster that is their aviation arm- NUH circus (abject refusal to accept ALH for this role), NMRH that hasn’t gone anywhere in 8+ years now, MRCBF which was always a fantasy, etc, etc.

In the last decade they’ve really achieved little and failed to plan for the next 1-2 decades as they should have meaning come mid/late 2020 all of their major ship deliveries will cease and they’ll go the best part of a decade before they resume. What’s the last major ship they approved? P-17A in 2017? (11356s were forced on them) whilst
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Most of the article is behind a paywall. Do click on the link, but please do not paste excerpts. If anyone has access to the paid section, please post your own summary. Thanks.

One thing is confirmed - the RFI for the Navy required that the chosen MRCBF be able to carry at one anti-ship missile (obviously!). So the Rafale M carried one AM-39 Excoet (mimicking her anti-ship mission payload from the CDG), while Boeing upstaged the show with the F-18E/F carrying a pair of AGM-84 Harpoons. Advantage - Boeing :)

* Also note that the AGM-84 Harpoon has a longer range than the AM-39 Exocet. Advantage - Boeing.
* The twin seater, combat capable F-18F which does not exist on the Rafale M. Advantage - Boeing.
* More powerful turbofans in the form of the GE F414 versus the twin M88s. Advantage - Boeing.

Gives an insight into why Safran is setting up MRO facilities in India. The competition is intense.

F/A-18 demonstrates ability to launch from Indian carriers with ‘upsized' loadout
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/nava ... ed-loadout
14 July 2022
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

Rakesh wrote:CATOBAR vessels are the solution to all of India's woes. INS Vishal will influence events from the South China Sea to Alaska (including the salmon that swim there).
Admiral,

This is gold. Sure you were not a journo in your previous life?
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5352
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Cain Marko »

Rakesh wrote:While the MoD/GOI and even Babus share blame, a large chunk of this falls on the Navy's shoulders.
It's not just the CV boondoggle where naval procurement has been a sham. IMHO it was worse in the case of there nlca. A blind arm chair jernail from Rawalpindi could've told them that nlca would never have worked for full ops on a stobar CV since even the AF version was having twr issues. But they persisted and it seemed to work (to promote their image as the "only service that promotes Desi products".) But when the time came, they dropped the ball like a hot brick and happily laid the blame of an "underpowered" bird on the developers. *Uckery of the highest order. Now they want tedbf. Like they couldn't have pushed for this earlier. :roll:

The p75i sub saga is another boondoggle. The lack of foresight is appalling in armed forces planners!
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Rakesh wrote:F/A-18 demonstrates ability to launch from Indian carriers with ‘upsized' loadout
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/nava ... ed-loadout
14 July 2022
https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... SH_Fmdvlsw ---> Report: Boeing is confident the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block III will secure a production contract with the Indian Navy (IN) and beat competition from Dassault’s Rafale M in the process. Boeing says total number for IN could rise to over 50.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ldev »

The lack of a CATOBAR carrier will handicap both the Rafale and the Super Hornet in terms of the payload that each is capable of carrying via a CATOBAR assisted take off as opposed to a ski jump.

For reference given below is a picture of a Super Hornet taking off from a US carrier, loaded to just shy of it's maximum take off weight. This kind of payload is what the Super Hornet is capable off if CATOBAR assisted, not just 2 Harpoons:

This Syria-Bound Super Hornet Is Carrying A Uniquely Massive Bomb Load

Image
This F/A-18F Super Hornet, belonging to VFA-213 "Blacklions" and operating aboard the USS George H.W. Bush in the eastern Mediterranean, is equipped with one uniquely massive and highly destructive payload.

No less than ten 1,000lb GBU-32 JDAMs are slung under its wings. In addition, a pair of 188lb AIM-9X Sidewinders adorn its wingtips. A 400lb ATFLIR targeting pod is attached on its left intake station, and a 480 gallon centerline fuel tank rounds out its external stores list. Add in the four multiple ejector racks and the pylons, not to mention 412 rounds of 20mm ammo, and this "Rhino's" stores load-out grosses out at roughly 16,750lbs. This does not count the expendable decoys the jet is carrying and there may also be an AIM-120 AMRAAM on the other intake station, but since we can't be sure, we will leave it off the list.

The Super Hornet, which weighs roughly 32,000lbs empty, and has a max takeoff weight of 66,000lbs, in this configuration still has 17,250lbs of payload available. Add a full internal fuel load of 13,500lbs, and the jet is left with roughly 3,750lbs of lifting capacity before hitting its max takeoff weight.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Boeing looks to India for Super Hornet success after European setbacks
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/air- ... t-success/
17 July 2022
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Boeing fighter shows it can operate off Indian carriers: demonstrates ski-jump take-off
https://www.ajaishukla.com/2022/07/boei ... e-off.html
18 July 2022
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

X-Post from the Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion thread...
fanne wrote:The rot is not individual, it is systematic.
The most charitable explanation can be that they know what they are talking about and we civilians do not know the real detail. In many cases I can see their point of view (and will make me highly unpopular here), but some defy any explanation.
I can understand IN not wanting ALH as NUH without folding blades (how they will otherwise stow the heli - a genuine concern).
Or T-90 preferred over Arjun (even though Arjun is way better than T-90, T-90 is adequate for TSP and Chicom, is cheaper (1/2 to 1/3rd of Arjun), by the last count over 96% can be produced in India (whereas major components for Arjun have to be imported), logistically similar to T-72, can be transported to LAC (where Arjun may not be, at least until a few years ago), the developer (Avadi) is seriously lacking, so on and so forth - Please remember, T-90 was designed by Russia, but for India).
But LCA (specially marked 1a) compared to Mig 21s and at least 10 number plated Squadrons? When the enemy is growing in size, that too with better planes, LCAMK1A is better than a nonexistent plane (or Mig 21s). At least it can drop bombs and be in a dog fight when PLAAF or PAF planes come visiting.
OR the upgrade of SU30MKI? It is like IAF has put a gun to the nation's head and said, unless you get me my MFRA, I will not buy/upgrade anything and lose the war.
Without getting into semantics and going too off topic a quick rebuttal

ALH-NUH, HAL has offered IN 3 different solutions for stowing ALH on ships. Remember this is to replace Chetaks, ALH is a huge upgrade no matter what way you cut it


https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... xSi40dZQzA

Who did DRDO design the Arjun for if not the IA? They created the ASQR and then at the end of the entire process IA says Arjun is too heavy, too expensive etc etc and they go and order more T90 a tank that was delivered without night sights or even AC but it supposedly Indianised. On cost front- if they ordered ore Arjuna unit price would drop, it’s basic economics


But for these super competent Indian generals Chetak, MiG-21, T90 (that is getting blown to bits in Ukraine and is inherently a death trap) etc are all superior to ALH, LCA MK1A, Arjun…..that is until a war actually happens then it’s time to start issuing billions in emergency contracts


We don’t need to be experts to see the rot in the armed forces’ inventories
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

KSingh I was intrigued by your comments on the ALH - the Naval Version and the folding blade issue.

I would urge you to read these two articles if you have not already done so.

1 - https://www.livefistdefence.com/alh-dhr ... irst-hand/ by Hari Nair sir.
2 - https://kaypius.com/2020/06/09/naval-al ... al-debate/ - by another Naval Aviator.


I this I side with the Navy where while the ALH is superior to the Chetak in every respect safe operations on board a ship are something it probably falls short on. I have been inside the hangar of INS Sahyadri and bloody hell real estate is tight. But I am no expert.
basant
BRFite
Posts: 894
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by basant »

Reposting articles for their relevance.

From the interview of HAL CMD in June, 2020.
Providing the first concrete timeline to HAL’s promise on the Dhruv, Madhavan has told Livefist, “I can categorically say that the Dhruv will meet all requirements of the navy. Within 24-36 months from the time an order is placed, we will develop and deliver the product. Our rate of production is also far higher. So project time will be much shorter than what the navy has envisaged in its request for quotation.”
First flight of Advanced Light Helicopter with 2-segmented main rotor blades, pre-cone main rotor head carried out

Also another:
The 2-Segment MRBs and Pre-Cone Configuration of MRH are incorporated to cater to the stringent stowage dimension requirement specified by the Indian Navy. The two features will improve the Time Between Overhauls (TBO) life of the Main Gear Box, said Mr R. Madhavan, CMD, HAL.

As per the HAL release, after the mandated ground testing, the prototype helicopter was built with ‘Segmented Pre-Cone MRBs’ and ‘Pre-Cone MRH’.
“The two-segmented blade adopted for the first time on the LUH rotor system offers a compact folded dimension. It can fold the blades within 7 minutes and can be used in aircraft carriers,” says Girish Linganna, adding that “if HAL has met the Indian Navy standards then NUH must have met the 7 minute folding and 3.5 m stowing.”
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

So we should see some orders now that the bird is being tested..
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

ks_sachin wrote:KSingh I was intrigued by your comments on the ALH - the Naval Version and the folding blade issue.

I would urge you to read these two articles if you have not already done so.

1 - https://www.livefistdefence.com/alh-dhr ... irst-hand/ by Hari Nair sir.
2 - https://kaypius.com/2020/06/09/naval-al ... al-debate/ - by another Naval Aviator.


I this I side with the Navy where while the ALH is superior to the Chetak in every respect safe operations on board a ship are something it probably falls short on. I have been inside the hangar of INS Sahyadri and bloody hell real estate is tight. But I am no expert.
This topic (ALH/NUH) is one of my pet peeves so I’ve focused quite a bit of my energy on it over the years. Suffice to say the IN’s position is completely unjustifiable in 2022.

https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... dNxasDkXFQ

https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... dNxasDkXFQ

https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... dNxasDkXFQ

https://twitter.com/reviewvayu/status/1 ... dNxasDkXFQ

https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... dNxasDkXFQ

https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... dNxasDkXFQ

These are just the games that are played against IDDM once serviced have their eyes set on foreign toys, in this case it’s Panther and in LCA MK.2’s case it’s the MRFA. Any IDDM substitute is seen as a threat to their dreams.
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4282
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by fanne »

Just to clarify, my comment on NUH was that Hal Alh did not meet IN criteria in the beginning. Now Hal has demoed foldable blade and tail, it does meet IN needs (and unlike IAF for Tejas) I do not see any pushback from IN, except when there is genuine concern that Hal is not addressing, and want Hal to be serious about it -(two such recent issues 1)folding time and 2) ease of folding operation, there being no space near blade to fold and the place being slippery).
Auto folding is where IN has given Hal a pass as no heli in this category has that.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

Thanks KSingh.
Most informative.
I hope we get Hari Nair Sirs take on this.
basant
BRFite
Posts: 894
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by basant »

From Mk2 thread.

KSingh, the second link you posted is especially informative. Thank you!

Not to miss in the entire saga is the point on which many criticized IN was 0.5t overweight for AUW, one of the 2 specs that could not be met (the other being blade folding). This made no sense whatsoever that given that we are talking of Navy, and not some 64t MBT trying to cross canals and rivers! Now let's wait and see. Hopefully, IN will stand up to its reputation for indigenization.
Zynda
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2309
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Zynda »

Boeing is putting out a lot of SH promotional materials & videos of trials in Goa...are they touting off SH winning or trying to drum up last moment support. Dassault is completely quiet...are they confident that Rafale-M will get selected?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Zynda wrote:Boeing is putting out a lot of SH promotional materials & videos of trials in Goa...are they touting off SH winning or trying to drum up last moment support. Dassault is completely quiet...are they confident that Rafale-M will get selected?
Staying quiet serves one of two purposes;

1) Best not to beat the drum if you believe you are not going to win. Exit with grace.

OR

2) If you believe you have it in the bag, then best to keep quiet. For Dassault, gloating is usually a waste of time.

P.S. If you have the links to the promotional materials and videos from Boeing, please post. Thank You.
Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 263
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Chinmay »

Boeing has a video of the F-18 taking off from INS Hansa

https://twitter.com/Boeing_In/status/15 ... 9786651648
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Thank you Chinmay Saar.

Greatly appreciated.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by kit »

ldev wrote:The lack of a CATOBAR carrier will handicap both the Rafale and the Super Hornet in terms of the payload that each is capable of carrying via a CATOBAR assisted take off as opposed to a ski jump.

This Syria-Bound Super Hornet Is Carrying A Uniquely Massive Bomb Load

This F/A-18F Super Hornet, belonging to VFA-213 "Blacklions" and operating aboard the USS George H.W. Bush in the eastern Mediterranean, is equipped with one uniquely massive and highly destructive payload.

The Super Hornet, which weighs roughly 32,000lbs empty, and has a max takeoff weight of 66,000lbs, in this configuration still has 17,250lbs of payload available. Add a full internal fuel load of 13,500lbs, and the jet is left with roughly 3,750lbs of lifting capacity before hitting its max takeoff weight.
so that is theoretical, given that India does not deploy any CATOBAR carrier!!

What is the actual payload with a ski jump, comparing the Rafale to F-18?
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by kit »

Rakesh wrote:The Navy had no business asking for a 65,000 ton nuclear powered, EMALS capable, aircraft carrier...when they did not get such an approval from the MoD/GOI for this program. Don't go announcing such grandoise programs to the media and then go ask for funding. They did they same thing with the 57 MRCBF contest as well. The then Navy Chief - Admiral Sunil Lanba - even categorically stated that there is no budgetary shortfalls in acquiring them. We all know how that panned out.

The budget tussle between the late CDS - General Bipin Rawat - and the then Naval Chief - Admiral Karambir Singh - is also well known. The latter wanted everything i.e. CATOBAR carrier, six SSNs, six Project 75I vessels, 57 MRCBF aircraft, etc. He reportedly commented that is this all financially affordable. Living in la la land.
well then, aim for the stars, you could just hit the moon :wink:
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Chinmay wrote:Boeing has a video of the F-18 taking off from INS Hansa

https://twitter.com/Boeing_In/status/15 ... 9786651648
A slightly longer video (with interview) in the video below...

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Check out that payload in the first picture...2 Paveways, two AMRAAMs and a pair of AIM-9s.

https://twitter.com/ReviewVayu/status/1 ... NcGrFIeBtg ---> Great new photos! Boeing's F/A-18 Super Hornet successfully completed operational demonstration tests at Indian Naval Station Hansa in Goa, India, and reinforced the Super Hornet’s ability to effectively and safely operate off Indian Navy carriers.

https://twitter.com/ReviewVayu/status/1 ... NcGrFIeBtg ---> Two U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornets completed multiple ski-jumps, roll-in and fly-in arrestments, as well as performance flights, in a variety of weights in the air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to-surface configurations, meeting the Indian Navy test requirements.

Image

Image
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

ldev wrote:The lack of a CATOBAR carrier will handicap both the Rafale and the Super Hornet in terms of the payload that each is capable of carrying via a CATOBAR assisted take off as opposed to a ski jump.

For reference given below is a picture of a Super Hornet taking off from a US carrier, loaded to just shy of it's maximum take off weight. This kind of payload is what the Super Hornet is capable off if CATOBAR assisted, not just 2 Harpoons:

This Syria-Bound Super Hornet Is Carrying A Uniquely Massive Bomb Load
This F/A-18F Super Hornet, belonging to VFA-213 "Blacklions" and operating aboard the USS George H.W. Bush in the eastern Mediterranean, is equipped with one uniquely massive and highly destructive payload.

No less than ten 1,000lb GBU-32 JDAMs are slung under its wings. In addition, a pair of 188lb AIM-9X Sidewinders adorn its wingtips. A 400lb ATFLIR targeting pod is attached on its left intake station, and a 480 gallon centerline fuel tank rounds out its external stores list. Add in the four multiple ejector racks and the pylons, not to mention 412 rounds of 20mm ammo, and this "Rhino's" stores load-out grosses out at roughly 16,750lbs. This does not count the expendable decoys the jet is carrying and there may also be an AIM-120 AMRAAM on the other intake station, but since we can't be sure, we will leave it off the list.

The Super Hornet, which weighs roughly 32,000lbs empty, and has a max takeoff weight of 66,000lbs, in this configuration still has 17,250lbs of payload available. Add a full internal fuel load of 13,500lbs, and the jet is left with roughly 3,750lbs of lifting capacity before hitting its max takeoff weight.
STOBAR will prove to be a major blunder on IN’s part in the long term. It’s only marginally a step up on V/STOL but the limitations placed on payload/fuel renders the entire experiment potentially failed. It’s a lazy shortcut.

Added on top of this that IN is breaking the fundamentals of STOBAR with MRCBF as neither SH nor Rafale M will be compatible with the RGS on the 2 STOBAR carriers which is both unsafe and potentially limits payload/fuel even more as for a launch they may not be able to get to sufficient thrust before they are rolling as they are now having to use toe brakes only to remain in place.

And lastly why do neither STOBAR carrier have a jet blast deflector? PLAN’s STOBAR carriers do. This is a serious safety concern for deck crews and equipment and also limits operational tempo as a jet cannot line up behind a launch spot she another is powering up
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

Rakesh wrote:Check out that payload in the first picture...2 Paveways, two AMRAAMs and a pair of AIM-9s.
Definitely neat pictures but I think this highlights the futility of the entire thing even more

https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... Fw8gf-r-aw
Post Reply