Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

I don't believe even US super carrier would be effective against any major power (Russia, China, France or British), try to get closer to their shore, let's say 200 km ... no doubt it would get sunk in real war. It will be different story to other weaker countries ... i.e Iran, Iraq, Turkey, etc

Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

antiterror13 said:

I don't believe even US super carrier would be effective against any major power (Russia, China, France or British), try to get closer to their shore, let's say 200 km ... no doubt it would get sunk in real war. It will be different story to other weaker countries ... i.e Iran, Iraq, Turkey, etc

Click to expand...

During the the US Navy did exactly that and the Chinese weren't able to locate these. Locating a carrier is one thing, locking missiles on it is a whole world of more problems to solve. Just don't believe every advertising campaign for AShBM and look at the technical details of homing missiles.

Just do some physics and you'll find out that the detection range for carriers is quite limited in comparison to the strike range of this naval platform. http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/future-naval-warfare-ideas-6021.html
You are however right that old carriers (they are old because of the long service life in the US Navy) like old warships get increasingly easier to detect and destroy.

Franklin said:

We have different definitions of the word fatal. To me very inhibiting and accident prone is fatal since it could cost lives and you could end up even losing the ship.

Click to expand...

Then, by that definition, every carrier has "fatal" flaws because they all can have accidents that cause fatalities and potentially lead to the loss of the vessel...and not due to any enemy action. The US has suffered such accidents and you cannot design them out because you are dealing with loading jet aircraft with high octane fuel and explosive ordinance that at anytime, anywhere, no matter what the deck layout is, can suffer an accident that can cause such incidents. (Note: the US Foresstal and the US Enterprise accidents)


1967 USS Forrestal Accident and fire - 134 dead, 161 injured


USS Enterprise accident and fire - 27 killed, 314 injured

Franklin said:

Those are mainly VSTOL carriers with aircraft like the Sea Harriers or the Yak-38 that can land vertically.

Click to expand...

Well, actually that is not what I meant. The US operated World War II Essex class carriers clear into the 1970s and it was not until the mid to late 1950s that they began receiving modernizations (very large and expensive refits of the time to modernize them) which included angle decks and in-deck elevators moved to the deck edge fore and aft.

Until then, the US operated jet fighters off of aircraft carriers that had similar arrangements with elevators that impeded deck operations.

Franklin said:

Well since the INS Viraat is quickly losing her air wing due to attrition. The INS Vikramaditya will become the flag ship in the IN for years to come. The first IAC is not going to be commissioned in to IN at least untill 2016 or 2017.

Click to expand...

That is correct. But even if they had more Harriers, the fact that the Vikramaditya can launch and recover Mig-29Ks for fleet defense and for strike missions means she is a far more capable carrier than the older vessel with the Harriers.

Finally, the Mig29K has a max loadout weight of 18,500 kg (40,500 lbs). Clearly, they will be loading the aircraft with its armament and most fuel on deck (otherwise the 30K lb lift could not handle them).

But the max ordinance is 6,500 kg and the max fuel on the Mig-29K has been increased to 4,560 kg. This means fuel and ordinace that can be added to the aircraft equals 11,060 kg.

Subtracting that from the 18,500 kg total, you end up with a dry/empty weight of the Mig29K of about m 7,440 kg or about 16,500 lbs...which means, in an emergency, empty Mig-29Ks could be moved to the deck on the 20k lb lift.

The other Mig-29Ks in the airwing, minus the ones preparing for take off (let's say up to six) and the 9 parked fore and aft of the Island, would be below in the hanger.

So, if they had 24 Mig-29Ks on board in some kind of maximum Mig-29K count, they would have to have 9 of them below deck.

If they embarked with 20 Mig-29Ks, then they would have to have five of them below deck.

With 15 aboard, they could all be on deck at once being loaded up, and preparing for take-off.

franklin said:

PS that's the Admiral Kuznetsov. The island is all the way to the side and it's flying the Russian Navy flag. You can see the weapons in the corner includes a VLS system that the Vikramaditya doesn't have.

Click to expand...

Correct and my bad. Got the wrong pic on that post, it belongs on my Kuznetsov page. I removed it from the post above. Thanks for noticing that.

Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

CottageLV i certainly was not talking about USA i was refering to India

and even if u hit a American surface ship they have second to none battle damage control teams, a technique they pioneered back in WWII, when Americans ships get direct hit they dont go down, after that u have the damage control teams which spring into action and by sheer bravery save ships, we have seen this time and time again, for a aircraft carrier, well its probably next to impossible


USS Bunker Hill was hit by 2 Kamakazi's, 30% of the entire crew was wiped out and the ship was decimated, but survived

USS Franklin was crippled by a Japanese air attack, it had almost 800 crew killed, but it survived and didnt go down

and the aircraft USS Enterprise which in 1969 was almost destroyed by fires and explosions, but it still steamed back to port for repairs

USS Stark was clipped by 2 of the worlds best anti-ship missiles, the French built air launched Exocet, a missile that played havoc with the Royal Navy just 5 years earlier, but even then it didnt go down

and so the list goes on, knocking out US surface ship is no easy task, ur chances are very slim

Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

stardave said:

I think India just like any country, can have whatever they like, but for India's sake, they are not doing a good job at getting those carriers, I feel like they are buying them for the sake of having them, just like Thailand, besides carrier they need to invest in escort ships, submarines etc... India is just not willing to invest the equal amount of resource into them.

Click to expand...

Actually, India has invested a LOT of money and research in its escort fleet and has some decent vessels already in the water, and newer, very modern ones building.

They also have just acquired their first nuclear attack sub from the Russians and intend to build more.

So I would not say at all, or in the least that they are acquiring them just for the sake of having them. They have many decades experience using carriers and escort vessesl together with increasingly more modern and capable escorts and are now about to increase the capability of their carrier strike groups significantly.

Please, do a little more study before you make such a statement. The Indian Navy consoists of the following modern or relativel modern Designs:

DDG (Guided Missile destroyers)
Kolkata - 2 (9 more building)
Delhi - 3
Rajpout - 5
-----------
10 DDGs (9 more building)

FFG (Guided Missile Frigates)
Shivlak - 3 (7 more building)
Talwar - 4 (3 more building)
Brahmaputra - 3
Goddarvi - 3
Sunarna - 6
----------
19 FFGs (10 more building)

SS (Diesel/Electric Submarines)
Scorpion - (6 building)
Kilo - 10
Type 209 - 4
----------
14 (6 more building)

SSN (Nuclear Attack Submarines)
Akula - (1 more building)
----------
1 (1 more building)

This is a large investment of combatant vessels and the new Kolkata (or Delhi) DDGs and 2-4 Shivlak or Talwar FFGs, with one of the nuclear subs, would make for a very strong Carrier Strike Force (CSG) when coupled with the Vikramadtya or one of the new Vikrant carriers.

Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

Kurt said:

During the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis[/url] the US Navy did exactly that and the Chinese weren't able to locate these. Locating a carrier is one thing, locking missiles on it is a whole world of more problems to solve. Just don't believe every advertising campaign for AShBM and look at the technical details of homing missiles.

Click to expand...

And back then, China was not a major country by military standard. In fact for the past decade, the whole motivation of their military has to do with sinking the carrier one way or the other. You cannot possibly compare Chinese military today to 1996.

If the same crisis happening today, I don't even think US will want to send a carrier into the straits.

---------- Post added at 10:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 PM ----------

Jeff Head said:

Actually, India has invested a LOT of money and research in its escort fleet and has some decent vessels already in the water, and newer, very modern ones building.

They also have just acquired their first nuclear attack sub from the Russians and intend to build more.

So I would not say at all, or in the least that they are acquiring them just for the sake of having them. They have many decades experience using carriers and escort vessesl together with increasingly more modern and capable escorts and are now about to increase the capability of their carrier strike groups significantly.

Please, do a little more study before you make such a statement. The Indian Navy consoists of the following modern or relativel modern Designs:

DDG (Guided Missile destroyers)
Kolkata - 2 (9 more building)
Delhi - 3
Rajpout - 5
-----------
10 DDGs (9 more building)

FFG (Guided Missile Frigates)
Shivlak - 3 (7 more building)
Talwar - 4 (3 more building)
Brahmaputra - 3
Goddarvi - 3
Sunarna - 6
----------
19 FFGs (10 more building)

SS (Diesel/Electric Submarines)
Scorpion - (6 building)
Kilo - 10
Type 209 - 4
----------
14 (6 more building)

SSN (Nuclear Attack Submarines)
Akula - (1 more building)
----------
1 (1 more building)

This is a large investment of combatant vessels and the new Kolkata (or Delhi) DDGs and 2-4 Shivlak or Talwar FFGs, with one of the nuclear subs, would make for a very strong Carrier Strike Force (CSG) when coupled with the Vikramadtya or one of the new Vikrant carriers.

Click to expand...

And tell me, which one of those escort ships have aegis or similar to aegis capability?

Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

stardave said:

And tell me, which one of those escort ships have aegis or similar to aegis capability?

Click to expand...

You tell me what that question has to do with what you said in the post I responded to?

There, you said this:

stardave said:

I feel like they are buying them for the sake of having them, just like Thailand, besides carrier they need to invest in escort ships, submarines etc... India is just not willing to invest the equal amount of resource into them.

Click to expand...

I simply responded and showed you that in fact India has made a significant investment to have "escort ships and submarines". Nowhere did you indicate that they had to be .

But, once the first Kolkata is commissioned, I will be adding them to the AEGIS-like portion of that web site. That's because, as a matter of fact, the new Kolkata Class DDGs (about 3/4 billion US dollars each) have a significant AEGIS-like capability with new AESA radars, a supposeldy strong battle management system (which is the type of system AEGIS is) and some significant armament:

1 x 76mm main gun
16 x Brahmos ASuW missiles (VLS)
64 x Barak II LRSAM missiles (2 x 32 VLS)
6 x 533 mm Torpedo tubes
2× RBU-6000
CIWS:
4 × 30 mm AK-630
32 x Barak I AAW Missiles
Aircraft:
2 x ASW helos (Pad and Hanger)

Now, no one believes their new system will be as good as the current AEGIS or the UK/European Daring/Horizon systems, but they are developing the capability and the vessels are heavily armed.

BTW, they have now launched three of these Kolkata DDGs with the first commissioning this year and the others following yearly.

Here's a picture of all three of those already launched (one to the right, two more in the middle of the picture, numbers one, two and three from right to left):



Here's a picture of two more building:

Jeff, as you well know aircraft on a carrier are never fuelled or armed in the hangar, so always ride the lifts in empty condition. I think the only restriction on Mig-29s riding on the after lift is their width even with wings folded. It is an unusually narrow lift platform, having ben designed originally for folded helicopters and just big enough for the Yak-38 Forger STOVL jet the Kievs were equipped with. And that was a tight squeeze too...

The basic problem with the Vikramaditya is that the Kievs began as Missile Cruisers with a hangar and flight deck grafted onto the side, rather uncomfortably, instead of being designed as carriers from the start. The hangar deck does not extend beyond the forward lift, which is quite far back anyway. A purpose built 40,000 tonne carrier could operate a lot more aircraft and do so much more safely and efficiently than the 'Vik', but that is not to say she will not be a useful or effective ship and as I've always said, any carrier is better than no carrier in your fleet.

Obi Wan Russell said:

Jeff, as you well know aircraft on a carrier are never fuelled or armed in the hangar, so always ride the lifts in empty condition. I think the only restriction on Mig-29s riding on the after lift is their width even with wings folded. It is an unusually narrow lift platform, having been designed originally for folded helicopters and just big enough for the Yak-38 Forger STOVL jet the Kievs were equipped with.

The basic problem with the Vikramaditya is that the Kievs began as Missile Cruisers with a hangar and flight deck grafted onto the side, rather uncomfortably, instead of being designed as carriers from the start. The hangar deck does not extend beyond the forward lift, which is quite far back anyway. A purpose built 40,000 tonne carrier could operate a lot more aircraft and do so much more safely and efficiently than the 'Vik', but that is not to say she will not be a useful or effective.

Click to expand...

Agreed, Obi. She has significant deficiencies and disadvantages...but she is by no means, IMHO, fatally flawed.

I am just making the point, that in an emergency, I bet the COB and the old salts would figure out a way to get those aircraft up on deck uising the after lift...and the INdians may have insisted that, during this major refit, alterations were made to make it possible. The certainly could have done it in the yards over this time given what the US did in the 1950s overhauling the Essex class carriers, adding the angled deck and completely moving the lifts so they were deck edge.

Finally, I also believe that even though the newer puprose built carriers the INS is building will be much more effective, and even though other newer carriers with other nations are too in terms of the deck handling, in the past carriers have operated regularly with similar restrictions, in terms of the lifts coming up in places on deck where they were "in the way" and yet they went on with those restrictions and did a fine job...IOW, they were not fatally flawed.

The Indians will make good use of the Vik, and she will be an upgrade for them over the Viraat with the Harriers.

Certainly not the best solution by any stretch, but early on it was considered a quicker solution (which it is still proving to be) and cheaper (which has ballooned...even though at 2.3 billion the carrier and airwing together are still a good price IMHO).

It will be interesting to find if the Indians got any structural changes to improve that after lift out of this...they had a perfect opportunity to do so and I would be surprised if they didn't do somehting along those lines. Perhaps the structural integrity kept them from it...but in the yards there is one heck of a lot they can do to change things and then compensate structurally because they have as much steel as they need and can make whaytever necessary changes.

Oh well...now I am going on too much about it.

Time will tell.

BZ.

There is now smoke coming out of the Vikramaditya