Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Now with all these talks about the arms sales to india. Hypotheticlay assuming the IN would get the KH and the F-18s, at the end of the next decade she will have one CATOBAR and two (indigenous) STOBAR carriers. It also seems the Sea Harriers will be retired rather soon. If the Mig deal will then be killed, can / will F-18s operate from Vikrant class carriers?

If the Kitty Hawk deal does go ahead the two IACs will most likely recieve new catapults from the US too in order to operate F/A-18E/F/Gs alongside the new LCA Tejas and (probable) Hawkeyes mentioned in the deal. The IACs are ceratinly large enough to operate the Rhino and the Hawkeye. The LCA is not currently designed for catapult launch but if the deal goes through soon enough the necessary design changes could be carried out before the carriers enter service.
 

man overbored

Junior Member
The US offered Brazil the Forrestal so there is some precedence for such an offer to India. In Brazil's case the ship was far too large for the 25 aircraft air wing they intended to operate. They took the old Foch instead. A Kitty Hawk class will be darned expensive to operate, even if everything is in top shape. Fuel and payrolls alone will be huge. Then again the Indians are receiving their carrier training in the US and making their first arrested landings on a Nimitz class. Wouldn't it be something to see MiG-29's and Helix operating from the old Kitty?
Obi Wan Russel, why would Kitty need new cats? A full up Tomcat with six Phoenix and a full bag of gas weighs in at 73,000 lbs, greatly exceeding the all up weight of any F/A-18 or MiG-29 variant? Tomcats operated from the Kitty for decades. Kitty Hawk inherited the Midway's old airwing when it moved to Japan, and Midway could not operate the Tomcat. When the F-4 and A-7 were withdrawn from service the Midway could only ship Hornets, hence Kitty's current airwing. All the Kitty Hawk class flew Tomcats routinely.
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Man Overbored: Please re read my last post; I didn't sat that Kitty Hawk would need new cats, I said the two IACs (Indigenous Aircraft carriers) currently planned by India (and the first one, Vikrant, has been ordered) and at present scheduled to have a STOBAR configuration to operate Mig-29Ks and N-LCAs would likely recieve cats from the US to operate the same aircraft as KH, ditching the ski jumps currently expected.
 

man overbored

Junior Member
My bad Obi Wan, you are correct.
Geez, I just realized the IAC is the same size as a FRAM II Essex, not very big for something like a Fulcrum. Essex could never handle the Phantom, only Crusaders and Skyhawks. This is going to be a very tight ship to fly a big Fulcrum from.
 

man overbored

Junior Member
You are correct Obi Wan. I mis-read your post.
I noticed the IAC is the same length and displacement as an Essex class after the SBC-25 or SBC-27 modification program. Not a very big deck for something with the size and performance of a Fulcrum. The Essex and the nearly identically sized Foch carried the F-8F Crusader as the primary fighter. Their flight decks, A-gear and cats couldn't handle much more. The Crusader's MTOW was 34,100 lbs. The Fulcrum's the Indian Navy are buying are listed with a normal take off weight of 40,895lbs and a max take off weight of 49,383 lbs. heavier even than an F/A-18C. Take a look at the cats on the Charles de Gaulle. Those are shortened versions of the normal USN C-13 cat on any Nimitz, 75 meters for the French vs 95 meters for a Nimitz. In actual practice the French Navy found their shortened cats to be inadequate and their next carrier will have the full length C-13. One has to think any cat used to fling a Fulcrum into the air would have to just as long. Where do you put a 95 meter long cat on a 252 meter long ship like the IAC without intruding into the landing area? I also noticed an Indian site claiming the MiG's take off run could be up to 195 meters using a ski jump. I reckon launching and recovering similtaneously are out of the question, eh. I think the sortie rate of the IAC will be inferior to a STOVL design.
 

sidewinder

New Member
Indian Navy eyes three-dimensional force to project power and stability in IOR

By Prasun K. Sengupta


The Indian Navy (IN) in the next five years plans to deploy two potent carrier battle groups (CBG) to project power as well as act as a stabilising influence in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and beyond. The basic aim behind a powerful three-dimensional naval force, with the ‘blue-water element’ jumping from the present 40 per cent to 60 per cent, is to keep India’s primary area of interest in IOR under adequate surveillance and to ensure that economic activity is not hindered. It is for this reason that the 44,570-tonne aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov, rechristened INS Vikramaditya, was contracted for in January 2004 and was originally scheduled to be inducted into service by the IN by August 15 this year.

India has already paid around USD 460 million of the USD 974 million earmarked for Gorshkov’s refit under a fixed price contract. However, Moscow now wants an additional USD 1.2 billion to refurbish the aircraft carrier, as the Russian shipyard, Sevmashpredpriyatiye, near the city of Archangelsk, has to do recabling work of 2,400 km (as opposed to 800 km as per original estimates), with the vessel being readied for service only by 2011. As things now stand, the Vikramaditya will have on board the Poima-E CMS comprising nine multi-function consoles, Podberezovik-ET1 long-range air/surface search radar and a Fregat-M2EM medium-range radar, all built by Salyut State Moscow Plant FSUE. Close-in air defence will be provided by four Kashtan-M systems, while medium-range air defence will be provided by 64 Altair 9M317ME medium-range surface-to-air missiles (SAM) mounted on four 16-cell vertical launchers.

To cater for the unforeseen unavailability of the Vikramaditya, the IN could contract state-owned Cochin Shipyard Ltd (CSL) to undertake another refit of its ageing 28,000-tonne aircraft carrier INS Viraat in 2008 to take care of any contingency through to 2012. But this option makes sense only if the navy in the near future acquires up to 12 pre-owned but refurbished AV-8B Harrier V/STOL combat aircraft from the US Marine Corps and upgrades them. This move will, in turn, avert another crisis facing the navy, this being the steadily dwindling fleet of Sea Harrier FRS Mk51 V/STOL aircraft that now numbers less than 10.

Another option that needs to go hand-in-hand is for CSL to expedite construction of the first 37,500-tonne indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC), which as of now is due for delivery only by 2012, with a second, larger IAC (displacing 64,000 tonnes) following in 2017. The primary early warning sensors and on-board air defence systems of the IAC will be identical to that on board the Project 15A DDG (these being the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR active phased-array radar with four antennae and Barak-2 long-range SAMs). In addition, twin OTOBreda 76-mm/62 main guns will be mounted. The IAC’s integrated platform management system, propulsion control system, automatic fire detection system, advanced power management system and battle damage control systems are all now being designed by L-3 MAPPS. Fincantieri (part of Italy’s Finmeccanica group) is designing and supplying the integrated propulsion system centered around four GE LM-2500 marine industrial gas turbines.

A third option for the IN (one that it prefers the most but is being prevented from voicing out due to political reasons) concerns the US offer, made late last year, to lease to India for a 10-year period the conventionally-fuelled aircraft carrier, the 81,780-ton USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63), with India in return committing to the off-the-shelf purchase of about 40 Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and four EA-18G Growlers, six Northrop Grumman E-2D Hawkeye AEW & C aircraft and up to 12 Boeing/BAE Systems T-45C Goshawk lead-in fighter trainers.

The US has also offered to supply the critical steam catapults for the second, bigger IAC to be built by CSL, which will enable the vessel to house all aircraft types acquired by the IN for conducting operations from the leased Kitty Hawk (in contrast, the Vikramaditya and the first IAC will have STOBAR configurations that preclude the need for a steam catapult for launching aircraft from the carriers’ decks). If this option is exercised by India, the Kitty Hawk, which can accommodate 85 aircraft and helicopters (it is presently home ported in Yokosuka, Japan and will be decommissioned by the year’s end) will be subjected to a 15-month service life extension programme (SLEP) costing about USD 150 million, which will add another 10 years of service life to the vessel. At the same time, its on-board armaments suite will be upgraded to accommodate two Raytheon-built RIM-162 ESSM medium-range SAM launchers and a close-in weapons system comprising four RIM-116 RAM missile launchers and four Vulcan Phalanx 20mm gatling guns. The entire commercial transaction, if undertaken, will be channelled through the US’ Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contract implementation process.

link:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


decominfo at:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

man overbored

Junior Member
Well, Obi Wan my apology has disappeared three times now, so here goes again. You are correct, the IAC not the Kitty will need cats. I don't understand why my post on this thread has disappeared three times now. I guess it's a newbie thing. Mods???
Looking at the first IAC, it is almost exactly the same size as an SBC-25 or SBC-27 Essex, kinda small for a 21 plus ton MiG-29K. One Indian site I referenced claims a 195 meter take off run over the ski jump on a 252 meter long deck. I reckon the IAC will not be able to conduct similtaneous launches and recoveries. At least something the size of a Kitty Hawk can support non-stop launches and recoveries, the bow cats do not intrude into the landing area at all.
I wonder if some of those India pilots who carrier qualled on a Nimitz class ( the USN is providing the training for India's new tail hookers ) had a look at the old Lexington on display down on the Gulf coast and are having second thoughts about trying to bring that big MiG aboard such a comparatively small deck? Trapping a modern high performance jet is noting like landing a Harrier to a spot aft. Maybe even a Nimitz' landing area begins to look kinda small when the landing speed is in excess of 120 kts? :)
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Well, Obi Wan my apology has disappeared three times now, so here goes again. You are correct, the IAC not the Kitty will need cats. I don't understand why my post on this thread has disappeared three times now. I guess it's a newbie thing. Mods???

As a mod I apoligize for any inconvenience. You are not the only person to suffer this problem. The webmaster is aware of it and I hope he's trying to repair the problem.

Kitty Hawk inherited the Midway's old airwing when it moved to Japan, and Midway could not operate the Tomcat

True enough. But I remember reading about a Turkey trapping on the Midway. I just searched a couple of Midway sites but could not find a picture of the blessed event.

I served on the Midway in '73 & '74. We still had F-4s, A-7s, A/6s etc..We even had "Hooky Twos":) SH-2F Sea Sprites..
 

man overbored

Junior Member
Japan is constitutionally constrained from having offensive weapons, and is specifically prohibited from having surface ships that displace more than 20K tons ( I think? ) and cannot legally have "aircraft carriers". The 16DDH seems to walk a fine line around these restrictions. No ski jump and no plans to ship F-35B's. It will carry helo's only. Ahem. How much does the forum want to bet that sooner or later some USMC Harriers or F-35B's cross deck to one of those ships, just to test "compatablilty" or some such diplomatically couched excuse. Prepare for the resulting outrage.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Japan is constitutionally constrained from having offensive weapons, and is specifically prohibited from having surface ships that displace more than 20K tons ( I think? ) and cannot legally have "aircraft carriers". The 16DDH seems to walk a fine line around these restrictions. No ski jump and no plans to ship F-35B's. It will carry helo's only. Ahem. How much does the forum want to bet that sooner or later some USMC Harriers or F-35B's cross deck to one of those ships, just to test "compatablilty" or some such diplomatically couched excuse. Prepare for the resulting outrage.

You and Jeff Head seem to be thinking along the same lines. I know we discussed this matter in this thread or our orignal CV thread.

As it stands now, in my opinion, The Japanese will have to re-learn CV ops with their DDH16. I'm sure they will get plenty of training from the USN. Then some years down the road we may see F-35s on the DDH16.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top