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.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63609
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Singha » 30 Nov 2018 23:04

looks like when vikrant plans were finalized a decade ago, the Mig29K had either not arrived or was ok in honeymoon phase @ goa...so nobody was thinking of plan-B

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1576
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby nam » 30 Nov 2018 23:08

chola wrote:
LOL. Still amazing that this can happen to a brand new ship, Admiral.

In fact, I don’t think it could have happened if Indian designers were truly in control. I believe this “feature” is because we bought the “aviation complex” from Russia and depended on the russkie Nevoske design bureau.


I think probably the assumption that any carrier we will induct will have fold-able wings like Mig-29K. IN had no plans to inducts Rafales or Hornets or F35. They expected Mig29 to the last import and to soldier on till LCA/AMCA comes along. For a Indian aircraft we can make the wings fold as much we want.

So technically IN was right in it's thinking.

In a way IN was supporting local solution!

Mig29k going downhill got us in this situation.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1576
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby nam » 30 Nov 2018 23:13

I have a feeling IN doing this replacement RFP is to force Mig to find a solution to the 29k problems. There are no real plans to buy any of rafales/f18s.

Would be embarrassing for Russia to see Mig29k getting replaced.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6977
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Prasad » 30 Nov 2018 23:34

With their only carrier wrecked, Roos has no initiative to do that though.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 30 Nov 2018 23:48

Singha wrote:looks like when vikrant plans were finalized a decade ago, the Mig29K had either not arrived or was ok in honeymoon phase @ goa...so nobody was thinking of plan-B

The first batch of MiG-29Ks started operational service with the Indian Navy's No 303 Black Panthers Squadron in February 2010. INS Vikramaditya was commissioned in November 2013, almost four years later. Only when regular carrier ops commenced, did the airframe stress issues started popping up. Till then - as you said - it was OK in honeymoon phase.

From wiki chacha ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29K#India

In a 2016 report, India's national auditor CAG criticized the aircraft due to defects in engines, airframes and fly-by-wire systems. The serviceability of Mig-29K was reported ranging from 15.93% to 37.63% and that of MiG-29KUB ranging from 21.30% to 47.14%; with 40 engines (62%) being rejected/withdrawn from service due to design defects. These defects are likely to reduce the service life of the aircraft from the stated 6000 hours.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63609
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Singha » 01 Dec 2018 00:38

vikrant blueprints would have been signed off before the keel got laid, ie well before 2014

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1576
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby nam » 01 Dec 2018 02:10

This is DRDO's LR- MFR. It's use is not known.

Image


It has two face. If this going to be our MF-Star and still use two faces, then it might be similar to Sampson radar. Revolving with faces, instead of static four faces like MF-Star.

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 01 Dec 2018 04:18

Indian Navy chief to seek urgent help from Russia for MiG-29Ks, the only fighter jets on INS Vikramaditya
https://www.indiandefencenews.co.in/ind ... ramaditya/

Increasing the serviceability of the 45 MiG-29K aircraft, the only fighters on the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya, as well as other pending projects of the Indian Navy are topping the agenda of the Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Sunil Lanba four day visit to Russia starting today. Senior Naval officers confirmed to FE that, “The serviceability of the MiG-29 from the present 60% to up to 80% or more and there is an urgent requirement to meet with the agencies in an effort to expedite the process. There are issues related to the landing of the aircraft on the carrier and due to the heavy landing regular maintenance is required to address the wear and tear issues.” The Navy chief will be meeting with the Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG and discuss maintenance related issues with them which includes problems in the air frames, engines as well as other systems onboard.

State-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) is the nodal body which is expected to overhaul the engines as well as carry out any other urgent structural changes of these MiG-29K aircraft.As has been reported by FE earlier, the Indian Navy is urgently trying to acquire 57 multi-role fighters for its aircraft carrier to replace the existing fleet for the MiG-29K. “Since the procurement process is long, we need to ensure that the existing fleet of MiG-29K is in operational readiness,” a naval officer explained. Global aerospace giants including Boeing Company with its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet; the French Dassault Aviation’s Rafale M, Swedish Saab with Gripen Maritime and Russia's MiG-29K, have already expressed their interest in response to request for information issued by the MoD. Presently, India is the second biggest operator with almost 110 MiG-29s flying with both the Indian Navy as well as the Indian Air Force (IAF)—as the air defence fighter. The fleet of the IAF is already going through upgrades which are India specific at the HAL facility and the Electronic Warfare suite which has been developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

In the recent weeks, the government has cleared several major deals with Russia including the latest frigates. The deal for the Grigorovich-class ‘Project 1135.6’ frigates, between Goa Shipyard Ltd (GSL) and the Russia’s state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport has been inked last week in New Delhi, as has been reported by FE earlier. The deal is worth $ one billion for two frigates which will be built at Russian Yantar shipyard at Kaliningrad. Besides meeting with top military officials including General VV Gerasimov, Chief of General Staff and First Deputy Defence Minister of Russia, the Navy chief will also be meeting with representatives of Rosboronexports as well as other agencies who are participating in various projects related to the Indian Navy. With the aim of further deepening military engagements with Russia, the Navy chief will hold wide-ranging talks with his Russian counterpart, Admiral Vladimir Korolev.

The most critical issue that will be on the table for discussion includes the rupee-rouble payment route, as the Trump administration has put several Russian firms under sanctions under Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). As has been reported earlier, “During the annual India-Russia summit which concluded in October, both sides had discussed the possibility of reviving the rupee-rouble route of payments,” sources had told FE. “Besides visiting the Nakhimov Naval School and Admiralty Shipyard, the chief will also visit the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and deliver a talk on “Indian Navy’s Perspective on Maritime Security”, the official spokesperson of the Indian Navy Capt DK Sharma has been quoted.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3247
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Cain Marko » 02 Dec 2018 00:18

Viv S wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:saar why is rafale out?

Failure to Launch
The real ‘show stopper’ for the entire MRCBF requirement, however, is the configuration of IAC-1. Unlike Vikramaditya, and like most contemporary carriers, the aircraft lifts on IAC-1 are positioned on the starboard edge of the deck allowing longer aircraft to ‘hang out’ over the water with only their landing gear on the platform. But because the carrier was designed around an air wing of MiG-29Ks and Naval LCAs, the lifts were sized for wingspans no larger than eight metres. 10 x 14 metres, to be precise. While MiG-29Ks and N-LCAs can fit on these lifts with parts of their noses or empennages hanging over the edges, the Super Hornet and Rafale once again cannot.

Both Boeing and Dassault are apparently working on solutions to allow their aircraft to fit the lifts. Sources close to the programme said that Boeing is considering a system that would allow the Super Horner to sit canted on the lift, the tilt of the (folded) wings thereby resulting in a slightly shorter overall span measured parallel to the deck. With its fixed wings, the Rafale cannot offer such a solution, and Dassault is understood to be exploring a detachable wingtip, although this involves greater engineering and certification challenges.

Basically, the Vikrant's lifts are 10 m wide while the Rafale's wingspan is nearly 11 m.

Wingspan:
Rafale - 10.8 m
Super Hornet - 9.4 m (folded)
Gripen E - 8.3 m
MiG-29K - 7.8 m (folded)
F-35B - 10.7 m
F-35C - 9.1 m (folded)
N-LCA - 8.2 m

Thanks Viv but dassault is working on a solution right? Just like Boeing. I can see that perhaps Boeing has a better chance but why count the raffle out completely?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 02 Dec 2018 05:23

Cain Marko wrote:Thanks Viv, but dassault is working on a solution right? Just like Boeing. I can see that perhaps Boeing has a better chance but why count the raffle out completely?

Did you read the bit about detatchable wing tips? In war tempo setting, does the IN have time to attach wing tips on a carrier deck and then launch the aircraft. How feasible is such an idea?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chola » 02 Dec 2018 19:55

Rakesh wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Thanks Viv, but dassault is working on a solution right? Just like Boeing. I can see that perhaps Boeing has a better chance but why count the raffle out completely?

Did you read the bit about detatchable wing tips? In war tempo setting, does the IN have time to attach wing tips on a carrier deck and then launch the aircraft. How feasible is such an idea?


Also Boeing’s proposal to have the undecarriage lower one side of the F/A-18 onlee so just one wing dips to allow enough space. These solutions sound so gimicky ...

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3247
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Cain Marko » 02 Dec 2018 23:58

Rakesh wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Thanks Viv, but dassault is working on a solution right? Just like Boeing. I can see that perhaps Boeing has a better chance but why count the raffle out completely?

Did you read the bit about detatchable wing tips? In war tempo setting, does the IN have time to attach wing tips on a carrier deck and then launch the aircraft. How feasible is such an idea?

TBH I did read it, but my mind just automatically filtered detachable as foldable... :shock: . Can't imagine how detachable could work

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 03 Dec 2018 23:44

Jay S, Can the Mig-29 be re-engined with Mirage or Kaveri engine?
All data from wiki only.

Mig 29 engine:

Specifications (RD-33)

Data from Janes Aero Engines, Klimov Website
General characteristics

Type: afterburning turbofan
Length: 4,229 mm (166.50 in)
Diameter: 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
Dry weight: 1,055 kg (2,326 lb
)

Components

Compressor: 2 spool axial, 4 low pressure stages, 9 high pressure stages
Combustors: annular combustor
Turbine: Single stage high pressure, single stage low pressure

Performance

Maximum thrust: 50.0 kN (11,230 lbf) Dry, 81.3 kN (18,285 lbf) Afterburning.
Overall pressure ratio: 21:1
Bypass ratio: 0.49:1
Turbine inlet temperature: 1,407 °C (2,565 °F)
Specific fuel consumption: 75 kg/(kN·h) (0.77 lb/(lbf·h)) dry, 188 kg/(kN·h) (1.85 lb/(lbf·h))
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 4.82:1 (dry), 7.9:1 (afterburning)
Life expectancy: 4,000 hours



GE-F404:

Specifications (F404-GE-402)
General characteristics

Type: Afterburning turbofan
Length: 154 in (391 cm)
Diameter: 35 in (89 cm)
Dry weight: 2,282 lb (1,036 kg)


Components

Compressor: Axial compressor with 3 fan and 7 compressor stages
Combustors: annular
Turbine: 1 low-pressure and 1 high-pressure stage

Performance

Maximum thrust:
11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) military thrust
17,700 lbf (78.7 kN) with afterburner

Overall pressure ratio: 26:1
Bypass ratio: 0.34:1
Specific fuel consumption:
Military thrust: 0.81 lb/(lbf·h) (82.6 kg/(kN·h))
Full afterburner: 1.74 lb/(lbf·h) (177.5 kg/(kN·h))
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 4.8:1 (dry), 7.8:1 (wet/afterburning) (76.0 N/kg)

GE F414
Specifications (F414-400)

Data from GE Aviation[27] and Deagal.com[28]
General characteristics

Type: Afterburning turbofan
Length: 154 in (391 cm)
Diameter: 35 in (89 cm)
Dry weight: 2,445 lb (1,110 kg) max weigh
t

Components

Compressor: Axial compressor with 3 fan and 7 compressor stages
Combustors: annular
Turbine: 1 low-pressure and 1 high-pressure stage

Performance

Maximum thrust:
13,000 lbf (57.8 kN) military thrust
22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) with afterburner

Overall pressure ratio: 30:1
Air mass flow: 170 lb/s (77.1 kg/s)
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 9:1



M-88 Engine:

Specifications (M88-2)

Data from Safran Aircraft Engines[7]
General characteristics

Type: Afterburning turbofan
Length: 353.8 cm (139.3 in)
Diameter: 69.6 cm (27.4 in)
Dry weight: 897 kg (1,978 lb)


Components

Compressor: Axial, 3-stage LP, 6-stage HP
Combustors: Annular
Turbine: 1-stage LP, 1-stage HP

Performance

Maximum thrust: 50 kN (11,200 lbf) and 75 kN (16,900 lbf) (with afterburner)
Overall pressure ratio: 24.5:1
Bypass ratio: 0.3:1
Air mass flow: 65 kg/s (143 lb/s)
Turbine inlet temperature: 1,850 K (1,580 °C)
Fuel consumption: 3,977 kg/h and 12,695 kg/h (with afterburner)
Specific fuel consumption: 22.14 g/kNs and 47.11 g/kNs (with afterburner)
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 5.68:1 (dry) and 8.52:1 (with afterburner)



Kaveri


Specification (GTX-35VS Kaveri)
General characteristics

Type: afterburning turbofan
Length: 3,490.0 mm (137.4 in)
Diameter: 909.3 mm (35.8 in)
Dry weight: 1,236 kg (2,724 lb)
[Goal: 953–1,111 kg (2,100–2,450 lb)]

Components

Compressor: two-spool, with low-pressure (LP) and high-pressure (HP) axial compressors:
LP compressor with 3 fan stages and transonic blading
HP compressor with 6 stages, including variable inlet guide vanes and first two stators
Combustors: annular, with dump diffuser and air-blast fuel atomisers
Turbine: 1 LP stage and 1 HP stage

Performance

Maximum thrust:
Military thrust (throttled): 52 kN (11,687 lbf)
Full afterburner: 81 kN (18,210 lbf) (planned to be refined to >95 kN)
Specific fuel consumption:
Military thrust (throttled): 0.78 lb/(lbf•h) (79.52 kg/(kN·h))
Full afterburner: 2.03 lb/(lbf•h) (207.00 kg/(kN·h))
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 7.8:1 (76.0 N/kg)

Engine cycle

Airflow: 78 kg (172 lb) per second
Bypass ratio: 0.16:1 (it should be increased to 0.5:1)
Overall pressure ratio: 21.5:1 [Goal: 27:1]
LP compressor pressure ratio: 3.4:1 [Goal: 4:1]
HP compressor pressure ratio: 6.4:1
Turbine entry temperature: 2,218–2,601 °F (1,214–1,427 °C; 1,488–1,700 K) [Goal: 3,357 °F (1,847 °C; 2,120 K)]



Engine Length Diameter Weight Thrust Delta
Dry After-burner Length Dia Weight
RD-33 4229 1040 1055 50 81.3
F 404 3910 890 1036 49 79 319 150 19
F 414 3910 890 1110 58 98 319 150 -55
M-88 3538 696 897 50 75 691 344 158
Kaveri 3490 909 1236 52 81 739 131 -181


M-88 will need an adapter and is quite feasible.
Kaveri if it gets reliability numbers is good as it is.
However weight will be a problem. 2X 181 kg.

Big advantage will be the ski jump carriers don't need modification if Mig 29K has reliable engine.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6980
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Indranil » 04 Dec 2018 00:16

Ramana sir,

The problem is not with the engines.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3599
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby JayS » 04 Dec 2018 00:51

Without having access to FCS source code..? I would rather put all the money and efforts on NLCA MK2 and NAMCA.

I do not know factually, but I tend to agree with IR, engine doesnt seem to be the main issue for MiG29K. More like Airframe related issues - both design and maintenance, from what I recollect.

PS - Engine also has some reliability issues. But looks like airframe has serious design faults. Second link quotes CAG report saying defects in Engines, airframes and FBW. Looks like we got a half baked aircraft.

Some links from quick googling. On Mobile, i'll post excerpts later.

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/0 ... uggedized/


https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2016/ ... -problems/

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 245
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby souravB » 04 Dec 2018 01:06

Seems like Navy coming to gripe with the reality too. According to LiveFist
“The case for the second Indigenous Aircraft Carrier has received the necessary impetus. Though it is at least a decade away, the Aircraft Carrier project would accrue signficant national gains in terms of boosting indigenisation and the country’s economy, through its life cycle of construction, maintenance and upgradation. We are looking at ways and means to incorporate the immense potential of Academia, private industry and DRDO into the Project. Spread over period of ten years, the expenditure would not only be feasible, but would also be ploughed back into our own economy. We are also hopeful that naval version of LCA produced by HAL would fly from its deck,” Admiral Sunil Lanba said this morning.

Cheers?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6792
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby brar_w » 04 Dec 2018 01:13

souravB wrote:Seems like Navy coming to gripe with the reality too. According to LiveFist
“The case for the second Indigenous Aircraft Carrier has received the necessary impetus. Though it is at least a decade away, the Aircraft Carrier project would accrue signficant national gains in terms of boosting indigenisation and the country’s economy, through its life cycle of construction, maintenance and upgradation. We are looking at ways and means to incorporate the immense potential of Academia, private industry and DRDO into the Project. Spread over period of ten years, the expenditure would not only be feasible, but would also be ploughed back into our own economy. We are also hopeful that naval version of LCA produced by HAL would fly from its deck,” Admiral Sunil Lanba said this morning.

Cheers?



It would be prudent to get into Catapult/EMALS launch early on for the N-LCA team given the commitment to EMALS or some sort of assisted launch. This also pretty much rules out the MiG-29 on IAC-2 given that there is no way MiG would be allowed time at Lakehurst or integration data shared unless HAL acts as some sort of intermediary which itself would be complicated and require IP from MiG. This also opens up the possibility of a partnership with France on both design and flight integration as they too appear to be looking at an EMALS carrier for entry into the service in the post 2030 time-frame.

The Navy chief revealed today that the second indigenous aircraft carrier would be a 65,000 ton flat-top, unlike the navy’s sole current boat, the INS Vikramaditya and the under construction Vikrant-class boat, both of which use ski jumps to launch their aircraft. It is also unclear if the navy’s show of keenness in operating the LCA Navy on the IAC-2 will be followed by specific guidance on modifying the aircraft for a catapult-assisted launch. The IAC-2, it was also revealed today, would sport a General Atomics-designed electro magnetic launch system (EMALS), technology on offer to India as part of a defence-technical cooperation framework. General Atomics, incidentally, opened its India office in Delhi last week.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63609
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Singha » 04 Dec 2018 10:27

The pa2 design with emals based on qe2 template would be a good 65000t , 40 fighter, 10 helis, 3 e2 design if we dont want to go cleansheet

It will save the time and derisk the build in kochi

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chola » 04 Dec 2018 10:42

Singha wrote:The pa2 design with emals based on qe2 template would be a good 65000t , 40 fighter, 10 helis, 3 e2 design if we dont want to go cleansheet

It will save the time and derisk the build in kochi


A 65K ton STOBAR seems such a waste of yard space and material. The Navy plans a 65K ton CATOBAR for the Vishal and that is the right choice imo.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15735
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Karan M » 04 Dec 2018 12:47

nam wrote:This is DRDO's LR- MFR. It's use is not known.

Image


It has two face. If this going to be our MF-Star and still use two faces, then it might be similar to Sampson radar. Revolving with faces, instead of static four faces like MF-Star.

Image


It's likely a BMD or HPR test bed. We discussed this a few months back. It's two faces are not back to back. It's designed to cover only the frontal 180 degree arc and a gimbal will have to be provided for full coverage which is expensive and comes with reliability issues. Usually test beds have a reduced configuration to tinker with and proof, the hardware and software without worrying about the cost.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1576
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby nam » 04 Dec 2018 14:45

Can we not get a INS Vikrant based IAC-2 using EMALS with a deck? Would be much cheaper and quicker to build, instead of 65k tonner..

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2829
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chola » 04 Dec 2018 15:08

https://m.indiatimes.com/news/india/the-construction-of-india-s-third-aircraft-carrier-will-begin-in-three-years-navy-to-get-56-warships-and-submarines-357844.html

The Construction Of India's Third Aircraft Carrier Will Begin In Three Years

Shaurya Karanbir Gurung
Updated: Dec 03, 2018, 17:29 PM IST


Yes!? A decision had been made? Sixty-five K tons CATOBAR? Doesn’t have to be nook or EMALS.

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby arvin » 04 Dec 2018 18:37

gr8 news.!
vaguely remember reading somewhere, Navy was planning an electric propulsion for the vessel due to advances in battery tech. Diesel gen will charge the batteries instead of engine turning the prop. Emals would have been a drain requiring a seperate power pack and added mechanical complexity.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63609
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Singha » 04 Dec 2018 20:02

chola wrote:
Singha wrote:The pa2 design with emals based on qe2 template would be a good 65000t , 40 fighter, 10 helis, 3 e2 design if we dont want to go cleansheet

It will save the time and derisk the build in kochi


A 65K ton STOBAR seems such a waste of yard space and material. The Navy plans a 65K ton CATOBAR for the Vishal and that is the right choice imo.


i meant that too - PA2 is catobar. french r taking a look at emals also. but in their case will be nuclear powered so no lack of electric power.

Image

two x big lifts capable of bringing up 2 fighters side by side . 2 lifts for munitions in the parking areas

a 40,000t carrier would struggle to operate the E2 effectively. sure they exist on the CDG but only 2 I believe not the 3-4 the bigger ones carry and 65000t permits a stronger air wing without compromising on ASW helos.

I think of 40,000t as a entry level DSLR - nice, cheaper, decent features for amateurs but simply outclassed by the next higher rung of DSLR meant for professionals who earn a living using it daily. vikramaditya is a russian ISO100 film camera and a bit quirky at that.

Cheen will look to build 'strike carriers' in the 65000-100,000t range once they have the J31 and AEW thing under more control.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 05 Dec 2018 00:10

chola wrote:Yes!? A decision had been made? Sixty-five K tons CATOBAR? Doesn’t have to be nook or EMALS.

Tentatively yes. And EMALS is coming as per Shiv Aroor's article in Livefist. And if EMALS comes, expect the F-18 Block III Super Hornet.

Amreeka not going to sell EMALS without the F-18. They will go hand-in-hand.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6977
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Prasad » 05 Dec 2018 00:16

EMALS = NLCA.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 05 Dec 2018 00:33

Prasad wrote:EMALS = NLCA.

EMALS = NLCA + F-18 Super Hornet :mrgreen:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 05 Dec 2018 00:33

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1069955401679024128 ----> Likely the first public image of an AGM-84L Harpoon Block II drop from an Indian Navy P-8I. That's air frame IN 321 from the Albatross squadron.

Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6792
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby brar_w » 05 Dec 2018 01:01

Rakesh wrote:
chola wrote:Yes!? A decision had been made? Sixty-five K tons CATOBAR? Doesn’t have to be nook or EMALS.

Tentatively yes. And EMALS is coming as per Shiv Aroor's article in Livefist. And if EMALS comes, expect the F-18 Block III Super Hornet.

Amreeka not going to sell EMALS without the F-18. They will go hand-in-hand.


I am not so sure about EMALS being contingent on F/A-18 selection. For one, the timelines may not align unless the F/A-18 production is shifted to India and the other being that these are different products with different OEMs being marketed by different entities. A carrier air-wing focused order can still be placed along with EMALS by say ordering the E-2D, or even MQ-25. Similarly, General Atomics has been discussing UAV/UCAV's with India so that is a possibility. The Rafale and the F-35C too can now come into the picture and the former will enjoy a sizable advantage if the IAF gets a few dozen more. I think in the end it will come down to how serious the Navy is about the 57 aircraft RFI. If they pursue the Rafale then it will be extremely unlikely that they will then also buy the SHornet or anything else for the big carrier. If that goes nowhere then perhaps they can assess the market in the mid 2020s and see what stands out.

This does now open up a great opportunity for the N-LCA. It takes time to put out and operationalize a CATOBAR fast jet with the full capability to perform on the deck. They need to get going on it in the next couple of years so that the Navy gets an extremely mature product over the next decade and the teams have the experience to transition their efforts on MK2 and NAMCA.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 05 Dec 2018 01:21

Valid points. But a product such as EMALS will likely come with an American bird. If not the F-18, then the F-35C as you have indicated above. The US will want (and will likely get) a share of the fighter pie, whether it is from the IAF or the IN. Operating the Rafale M from an EMALS-equipped IN carrier would be nice, but I do not see politically how that will work. If India pulls that off, it will be a coup!

I believe the IN is very serious about the 57 aircraft RFI. It is the MoD that will likely throw a spanner in the works, when the final costs are brought to the table.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6792
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby brar_w » 05 Dec 2018 01:35

I just do not see EMALS being contingent upon a fighter sale. The export clearance for that product has been granted and I believe it extends to India and France. Beyond this, unless there is a design partnership on the carrier, the entire EMALS deal could be kept as a commercial venture between General Atomics and India if the MOD choose to pursue it via the commercial route.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2018 01:46

Rakesh, Don't say that.
MoD has to make a balanced decision and it will be made.
Very clear that In has four theaters to operate in and needs a carrier in two of them.
And then add carrier refit time of 2- 4 years.
By making IAF responsible for the A&N airfield one carrier requirement there is eliminated.
In fact more capable planes can be deployed. And area of responsibility is stretched.


I think 57 is not right.

I have not seen how 57 was arrived at.
Hope tsarkar or chetak can cast light.

It will be a round number.
Odd number makes procurement cost go up.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2018 01:47

brar_w, It will be G2G deal.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6792
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby brar_w » 05 Dec 2018 01:55

It may very well be, but my point was that the option to directly negotiate with the vendor exists as they have approval to sell it commercially in these two markets. It is however, quite likely that the relationship goes beyond just EMALS procurement and extends possibly to other aspects of the carrier and integration as the N-LCA and in the future NAMCA would need some lead time to work closely on development and integration activities.

I just do not see a SHornet being a shoo-in in this case because there are other elements that can be acquired to make it sweeter for the other side without having to pick a fighter. That imo will be based on whichever aircraft wins the current competition. If it is the Rafale, then the IN will likely go with it for the long term and work with France which incidentally will also be trying to integrate Rafale with EMALS around the same time (which will be a much easier effort given that it already operates on a CATOBAR).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2018 01:58

X-posting...

Vips wrote:Indigenous Aircraft Carrier-1 to be inducted into Indian Navy in 2020.

The first of the two Indigenous Aircraft Carriers (IAC) is expected to be inducted into the Indian Navy in 2020 and will be based with the Eastern Naval Command (ENC) here, Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the ENC, Vice-Admiral Karambir Singh said Monday.

Addressing a press conference onboard the INS Sahyadri on the eve of Navy Day here, Singh said IAC-1 was currently being built in Kochi under the Maritime Capability Perspective Plan. A MiG-29 squadron would also be positioned at the ENC once the IAC-1 was inducted, he said.

"In keeping with the country's maritime interests, the Navy has a requirement of two operational aircraft carriers. The Maritime Capability Perspective Plan envisages a force level of three aircraft carriers to ensure availability of at least two Carrier Battle Groups at any given time," the Vice-Admiral said.

While INS Vikramaditya has already been inducted in line with this plan, IAC-1 was under construction, he said. "The case for IAC-2 is being progressed to meet all future requirements without any degradation in force levels," he added.

The Navy was building required infrastructure like berthing facilities and associated services at the ENC for IAC-1. Plans were also afoot to build a 10,000-ton ship-lift facility at the Naval Dockyard here. Once commissioned, this would be the second such facility in the country after the one at Karwar, he said.

Singh said orders were issued for building 27 warships and submarines under the Make in India initiative that would aid the capability building programme of the Navy.

"On an average, four to five warships, including submarines, are normally inducted in a year. So, the new ones are expected to be inducted in the next five or six years," he said, in reply to a question.

On the increasing positioning of rival warships in the Indian Ocean region, the ENC chief said they too enhanced deployment of ships, submarines and aircrafts.

"We have transitioned to mission-based deployments, aimed at maximising our time at sea with defined outcomes. We also have automatic identification systems in place, specially in 'choke points' like the Malabar Straits," he said.

Having designated our role in the Indian Ocean Region as the net security provider, the aim of these deployments is to have presence in relevant areas so as to secure our maritime interests and also assure our friends in the region that we are available to assist in the event of a developing situation," the Vice Admiral said.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2018 01:59

Also understand that the reports of PLAN in IOR, means less ships in Pacific which takes pressure off Japan.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 05 Dec 2018 02:15

ramana wrote:Rakesh, Don't say that.

Sorry

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1576
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby nam » 05 Dec 2018 02:30

I don't understand what is stopping IN from initiating a Program office and funding N-AMCA. All i seeing is we would like to have a N-AMCA, we would like to have that etc ... but no funding been committed?

Even if the end result may not have VLO features, however the state IN is in at this moment, it will be happy to receive a naval jet. If IAF wants to wait for it's perfect AMCA before funding, they can wait.

IN should just go ahead and fund N-AMCA.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2018 02:34

nam, Where do the funds come from?
They don't have slush funds.
if they ask for the N-AMCA, some babu will rise objection and worse cut funds from the long term perspective plan for this.
Right now they are concentrating on the 227 ship Navy by 2027.

Am sure they have a small detachment working with ADA on the N-AMCA requirements.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1576
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby nam » 05 Dec 2018 02:47

Yes, it will come from IN budget. And I am not asking for IN to fund the entire development. Fund the first 1/2 prototype.

Once the prototype is out, then IAF can be brought on-board and MOD can then give some of the money back to IN from IAF budget.

IN will not get a naval version first, if it plans to only piggy bank on IAF funding the development. If it can commit to a 65k carrier, I am sure it can commit to fund couple of AMCA prototypes.

AMCA is still a wind tunnel model, because neither IAF nor IN wants to fund it and waiting to see if MoD takes the bait. Then they will piggy bank.

And MoD will not fund it because neither of the services want to commit for it! Usual chicken egg...


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aditya_V, Khalsa, mody, Ravishankar and 41 guests