Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Well in that context then yes it was a military operation and they did strike targets from a carrier but that is it

My point is not to make a contest out of it, but to highlight the fact that 99% of all Indian media sources are nothing but propaganda

The war is as much as media war as it is a military war, the Indian media spin masters always turn claims into "history" but I can see past that

Funny how Indian naval high command and Indian Naval admirals have admitted no Indian vessel was near PNS Ghazi when explosions were heard yet the link Jeff post clams Indian frigates sunk the PNS Ghazi, but its not surprising since it's from Bharak Rakshak a well known propaganda media mouth peiece infact the link itself is full of lies and counter lies

After the war US and USSR offered to raise the Ghazi but India refused, its even in shallow water so why not? Because they don't want truth to come out, if it was like what India claims today 65 years on Pakistan would not exist as country yet we do, not only that we sent Soviets back with a bloody nose and withstood a enemy 7 times our size (India)

Indian media claimed that the current aircraft carrier projects would be in commission by 2010 yet no carrier is even handed over to Indian Navy and its approaching 2013

China might not have operated a carrier battle group and naval aviators but they are learning much faster than India their programme is more matured, efficient and effective

India has operated carrier for best part of 5 decades yet in the last 10 years they have lost almost half of thier carrier Naval Harrier fleet and lost dozen pilots in the process, the Indian carrier record is beyond terrible just look at IAF attrition rate

Indian carriers operators infact in my opinion are at a disadvantage when compared to China, reason is they have so many bad habits which have become institutionalised through the naval personal over the years, bad practices and sluggish operating procedures which will be harder to re-train and rectify than train completely new from start

China is in-cooperating world class procedures straight into their doctrine, they have the fundamentals correct, no doubt they will suffer the usual fate but they know where to go and how to get there same can not be said for Indian carrier programmes

Proof is in the pudding, Laioning is commissioned has a naval air wing in progress, has formidable DDG like Type 052D and FFG like Type 054A and new replenishment tankers like Type 903A, just last month USN personal boarded Type 054A for a joint excersizes in Gulf of Aden, USN admiral praised the level of pro efficienty of the PLAN crews, article in this months November 2012 Warship magazine

bd popeye said:

A Nimitz class can store 3.3 million gallons of aviation fuel. nearly 12,000 tons.... and that's not metric .

Click to expand...

On that case 1,500 tons sounds right to me for INS Viraat, so reason for fuel truck lies on 2 issues, cost and safety and over all practicality

Why use carrier fueling system when a mobile truck can be used for quick small number of touch and go, plus no need for the trained fueling operators to be Onboard when trials are happening, it's just over kill

The fueling systems will come to life once carriers have full complement of sailors and crews to operate them and do real life take offs and recovers

If we now see fuel truck on Liaoning after handed to Navy I will not return to Scotland for 30 days

bd popeye said:

Never, ever seen a fuel truck on any carrier I served on. Never. That's why the ship has a aviation fueling system. I say use it.

Click to expand...

Hi bd,

My humble inputs... almost a repeat of what I'd mentioned earlier w.r.t the fuel systems, but making it little more clearer. Hope it helps in the discussion regarding the fuel systems.

The Russians maybe using the fuel trucks mainly because they don't have a high number of aircraft to support. There is just around 12 x Su-33 and few Su-25 & helos to support. Neither do they have to undergo high tempo rates. So it could be the major reason they are using the fuel trucks. The maximum we see are two trucks and I'm guessing these can refuel 2 aircrafts simultaneously (only a guess, not sure). That is also the reason why I earlier said that I don't consider using the fuel trucks on the Kuznetsov as a drawback.

Now, are the Russians completely unaware of the usefulness of the fuel systems? Definitely No. I'd in earlier post mentioned how they have been 'generous' on much smaller ship (project 1174) with two dedicated replenishment points. So there has been on-deck fuel stations on all their carrier, but not sure how many points are there in total. But there is atleast two for sure. There was someone else who had pointed out earlier that maybe they are not using it frequently and I completely agree with that view.

So like I said earlier in one of my reply... It looks like they are currently using, on Kuznetsov & Vikramaditya a single (or maybe more than one) station at the front and using it to fill the truck and then making it available to the aircrafts stationed aft of the island rather than operating all the available fuel stations on the deck/deck edge.


In this old documentary, starting around 8:28 till 8:38 we can see the Yak-38 stationed aft of the island getting refueled from the hose which is coming from the deck edge location.
[video=youtube;u8hEf5wU4Tg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=u8hEf5wU4Tg[/video]

So that is a visual confirmation that the old Gorshkov had fuel stations, just in case if there is any doubts. The modified Gorshkov (Vikramaditya) also have stations at the front which we can see from the few video clips available online after the start of the MiG-29K/KUB trials on the deck.

So the only question that should only remain w.r.t the fuel system is, how many such points/station are there on the Kuznetsov and Vikramaditya.

There are other photos which shows the aircrafts on Kuznetsov getting refueled on the deck, if I get the links to the pictures I'll include it with the post or will try to upload later after going through...

In the below picture of Kuznetsov we can see the hose at the aft on the deck



Few more pictures of Kuznetsov with MiG-29s on the deck being refueled from the aft fuel station. IMHO, how may of them and where all are they installed should be the real question.

He's is correct!

In response to Bose post above I posted this in the PLAN CV thread..

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/nav...news-videos-photos-ii-14-6173.html#post210261

Anyone know if the extra work and delays in handing over the Vikramaditya to the Indians is going to impact the Mid-life refit of the Admiral Kuznetsov at Sevmash? The Vikramaditya was originally due to be handed over in December and the Kuznetsov's refit start at the end of 2012. Or is the opposite true i.e. the near year long delay in handing over the Vikramaditya is due to the fact the yard now has bigger fish to fry!

The next generation in flight operations coming to a carrer deck near you






The wireless hand controller for maneuvering the X-47B on the aircraft-carrier deck.



The battery-powered device uses an RF data link to control nosewheel steering, engine thrust, mainwheel brakes and tailhook, and provides a display, keys and lights to communicate aircraft status to the operator maneuvering the unmanned X-47B on the flight deck.

Initial deck handling trials are planned for this week on the ramp at Pax using air vehicle 2. The operator will stand directly behind the "yellow shirt" flight-deck director, both of them looking at the aircraft, and follow the director's hand signals to maneuver the X-47B.

Using the hand controller, the deck operator will maneuver the X-47B on to the catapult, run up the engine to tension the cat, initiate a control "wipe out" to check the flight-control surfaces are clear and indicate the aircraft is ready to launch, then hand over control to the mission operator below decks.

On landing, once the aircraft has caught the wire, sensed the deceleration and reduced the engine to idle, the deck controller with take command of the X-47B from the mission operator, raise the hook and maneuver the aircraft off the wire and out of the way of the next to land.

NikeX said:

The next generation in flight operations coming to a carrer deck near you

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The wireless hand controller for maneuvering the X-47B on the aircraft-carrier deck.

The battery-powered device uses an RF data link to control nosewheel steering, engine thrust, mainwheel brakes and tailhook, and provides a display, keys and lights to communicate aircraft status to the operator maneuvering the unmanned X-47B on the flight deck.

Initial deck handling trials are planned for this week on the ramp at Pax using air vehicle 2. The operator will stand directly behind the "yellow shirt" flight-deck director, both of them looking at the aircraft, and follow the director's hand signals to maneuver the X-47B.

Using the hand controller, the deck operator will maneuver the X-47B on to the catapult, run up the engine to tension the cat, initiate a control "wipe out" to check the flight-control surfaces are clear and indicate the aircraft is ready to launch, then hand over control to the mission operator below decks.

On landing, once the aircraft has caught the wire, sensed the deceleration and reduced the engine to idle, the deck controller with take command of the X-47B from the mission operator, raise the hook and maneuver the aircraft off the wire and out of the way of the next to land.

Click to expand...

While that may be kinda Kool, I still think its kinda stupid to put your marbles in a DRONE, it will probably end up bombing its own carrier, just like those creepy movies?

Air Force Brat said:

While that may be kinda Kool, I still think its kinda stupid to put your marbles in a DRONE, it will probably end up bombing its own carrier, just like those creepy movies?

Click to expand...

Drones can punch holes through enemy air defenses for manned aircraft to follow. Drones were used with great success in the Bekaa Valley air campaign in 1982. Used against a modern air defense system hell can be introduced.

"...Another technological innovation that contributed to the Israeli victory was the remotely piloted vehicle (RPV). The IAF used this drone aircraft in the months preceding the invasion to "fingerprint" surface-to-air radar, providing information vital to Israeli countermeasures. When the battle actually began, RPVs were used as "decoys" to simulate electronically the radar signature of full-size strike aircraft and trick the Syrians into activating their SAM target acquisition and tracking radars. This ruse provided ample targets for the AGM-78 Standard antiradiation missile (ARM) and AGM-45 Shrike air-launched ARMs that followed. Other RPVs served as cheap and survivable intelligence platforms because they were constructed out of aluminum and composite materials for a minimal radar and infrared signature. once launched, they were employed most often as photographic platforms or "real-time" video intelligence systems whose fields of view, zoom ratios, and flight plans could be preprogrammed or changed at the discretion of the commander. Once the tactical reconnaissance and deception functions were completed and strike aircraft were directed to the SAM sites, air-launched laser-guided ordnance was guided to the target by laser designators mounted on the RPVs..."

Remember: Drones are fearless.

The X-47B is a long way from being deployed on a CVN.. A long way.

First off there are only two aircraft built. Two.

Second there's no funding in place to build any others. Zero green American dollars.

Third.. the first carrier quals are due to take place sometime next year..that's the plan..