Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Status
Not open for further replies.

cn_habs

Junior Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

The take-off run and landing run available quite the same, but on the Indian carrier there is less space to the left and to the right for mistakes. The Chinese carrier is safer in this manner, like modern US carriers are safer than their predecessors because they have less aircraft on less crowded decks.

acc2.jpg

The Indian pilots who will be landing on that ship better get paid really well...That's literally landing right into the superstructure.

Why the heck did the Indians give the redesign the go ahead?
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

Just watched a youtube video, a copy of the original record. It showed the C-130 took off under its own power. That was quite astounding.

The C-130 is still quite astounding, in SEA the C-130 used some very short dirt strips, the C-130 has an outstanding power to weight ratio, as a lad during an Open house at LRAFB, prob about 1970-71 time frame, they had an allison on display which which if my memory serves was rated at 4400+hp, and while I'm certain they have been uprated, the gross weight has likely gone up as well, with fuselage plugs etc. The 130 can also be fitted with RATO bottles. I saw a RATO assisted take off that day, and later observed the Blue Angels- Fat Albert perform a RATO departure. My only real experience aboard a C-130, other than an unathorized flight simulator session at Sewart AFB in Tennessee, was on a Saturday morning maintenance check of a 130 that had an engine replaced. My Dad took me along, was probably around 1972, and did a full run-up prior to return to service. It was positively frightening, I have never been so close to so much horse power before or since, after a rather lengthy preflight, the GPU running at full power, we turned em and lit the fire on each one. I have never been exposed to that much noise, as I recall ground idle puts the engines at 96% rpm which is screaming, as all the systems and avionics where brought up, and the engines reached the bottom of the green, the ground crew pulled the chocks an we were moved off the flight line by another ground crewman who directed us onto the taxi-way. There was a run-up pad on each end of the runway, as my Dad set the brakes, he brought two engines up to full power, first the inboards and then the outboards one on each side for symetrical thrust, all the dust in the airplane became airborne creating a near dust storm from the vibration. I was certain the brakes would fail, or a wing would fly off as the props where slowly cycled to full power and the temps and pressures carefully noted by the flight engineer. For the finally the old man advanced all four props to max take-off thrust again noting temps, fuel flows etc,etc. I was truly astounded that the wings did not depart the aircraft, thats how violent the whole thing was, the aircraft pulsing like a thing alive and screaming at the top of her four lungs like a caged animal in a rage. I'm not lying when I said I was afraid as I was belted into the central jump seat behind my Dad and a co-pilot, I secretly hoped for a hop around the pattern, but alas the run-up ended and we dutifully taxied her back in to the line, pulled into place, where again chocked by ground crew and began the whole process in reverse to shut it down. The closest I ever came to that in my own flying was in the right seat of a Mitsubishi Marquise turbo prop, with about 715 hp on each side, love it, pushing that little yellow start button and watching-listening to those geared Garrets spool up to ground idle. As some may know the mitsi has a very similar config to the 130, with a high wing, tubular fuselage and pod mounted main gear on each side, I was able to imagine my own little mini airlifter, it was still quite awsome empty, but a whole nother story with a full load. Screamers, Wow!

---------- Post added at 12:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 AM ----------

View attachment 6555

The Indian pilots who will be landing on that ship better get paid really well...That's literally landing right into the superstructure.

Why the heck did the Indians give the redesign the go ahead?

The Indian pilots will do fine, they are some bright lads you know, they are a cut above many of us, and like all fighter pilots, they know that HEH, Heh! Oh, and they will be well paid as are the US lads. A lot of those guys are likely transitioning out of the Mig-21s, and if you survive that bad girl, the 29K will be like a free school lunch, I'm sure they can't wait, they're prolly watching Top Gun tonight, HEH HeH! good night Brat Out!
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

Just to want to compare the layout of the two carriers (Chinese carrier and INS Vikramaditya). Not inciting anything.

It seems the Indian navy and its Russian contractor had a harder time to optimize the deck for aircraft carrier use.

I borrowed Jeff's carrier schematics. Hope you dont mind.
The former Gorshkov was not designed to be a full length carrier, and not designed for anything but the very small Yaks and helos they carried. Turning it into a full deck, ski-jump STOBAR carrier was a far harder task than what the Chinese faced.

They had a purpose built STOBAR carrier, and a large one, that they needed to refurbish. Yes, they had to find engines, and they had to take out missile silos ...but the basic structure was there for what they wanted because it was what she was also originally designed for.

The Gorshkov to Virklamaditya went from a short straight aft deck with a large forward space full of weapons systems, to completely redo the forward areas structurally to accomodate an aircraft carrier deck extending all the way forward. The vessel is slimmer and shorter to boot...so yes, they had a harder time making that conversion.

No problem using those pics...just attribute them in your posts and I am fine.
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

View attachment 6555

The Indian pilots who will be landing on that ship better get paid really well...That's literally landing right into the superstructure.

Why the heck did the Indians give the redesign the go ahead?
That pic makes it appear that the aircraft land straight onto the carrier. This is a falacy and well understood as such by anyone understanding carrier operations and the whole concept of an angled deck.

The aircraft land at an angle, coming in from behind and from right to left away from the island.

On large carrriers with enough length and breadth (like a US carrer) this allows them to conduct launching of aircraft forward at the same time they are landing aircraft aft.

So, draw a line that angles across the deck from the upper right corner of the deck to the lower left corner of the angled deck, and you will see that there is plenty of room.

For example, just look at the way the landing deck is painted on both vessels:

INS VIKRAMADITYA
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


PLAN AIRCRAFT CARRIER
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Clearly more room on the PLAN Carrier (it is 20,000 tons larger), but notice the trap wire locations and you will see that the Indian aircraft will stop before the island and be angling away from it in any case.
 

peperez

New Member
Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

That pic makes it appear that the aircraft land straight onto the carrier. This is a falacy and well understood as such by anyone understanding carrier operations and the whole concept of an angled deck.

The aircraft land at an angle, coming in from behind and from right to left away from the island.

On large carrriers with enough length and breadth (like a US carrer) this allows them to conduct launching of aircraft forward at the same time they are landing aircraft aft.

So, draw a line that angles across the deck from the upper right corner of the deck to the lower left corner of the angled deck, and you will see that there is plenty of room.

For example, just look at the way the landing deck is painted on both vessels:

INS VIKRAMADITYA
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


PLAN AIRCRAFT CARRIER
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Clearly more room on the PLAN Carrier (it is 20,000 tons larger), but notice the trap wire locations and you will see that the Indian aircraft will stop before the island and be angling away from it in any case.

Russian designed aircraft carriers are equipped with an automatic landing system. The system can, inclusive, control the ejecting seat to save pilot life.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
Where is the money going to come from to pay for all of this ? And who are you going to fight ? The USN can beat anyone in the world today that includes Russia and China. I believe that even if Russia, China and India today put up a joint fleet that it would still not be enough to defeat the USN.

Even Russia+China+Japan+British+French+Germany+India not even a match to USN :)
 

delft

Brigadier
Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

OT
@ Air Force Brat
Remember the An-22, with four gas turbine engines with nearly 15000 hp driving contra-rotating props? Aircraft are designed to handle the engines they are equipped with. Only occasionally do you get such cases as the engines of the Lockheed Electra, ancestor of the P-3, destroying its wings by fatigue in the 1950's.
 

aksha

Captain
Re: Does india really need aircraft carriers

[video=youtube;t8RMGHcTBX0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8RMGHcTBX0&feature=player_detailpage[/video][video=youtube;oLDtQ9xwmsM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLDtQ9xwmsM&feature=player_detailpage[/video] ins vikramaditya sea trials
 
Last edited:

Franklin

Captain
The take-off run and landing run available quite the same, but on the Indian carrier there is less space to the left and to the right for mistakes. The Chinese carrier is safer in this manner, like modern US carriers are safer than their predecessors because they have less aircraft on less crowded decks.

Another factor to consider is the fact that the MiG-29K has a higher landing speed than the SU-33/J-15. (240km/h vs. 250km/h) This is one of the reasons why the Russians went for the SU-33 instead of the MiG-29K.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Apong

New Member
Another factor to consider is the fact that the MiG-29K has a higher landing speed than the SU-33/J-15. (240km/h vs. 250km/h) This is one of the reasons why the Russians went for the SU-33 instead of the MiG-29K.

Is it the canards that help these heavy fighters to attain a lower landing speed? So what do you say about Rafale.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top