INS Vishal might be nuclear-powered aircraft carrier : Naval Design Bureau

[nvKyleBrown]

Is a 60-65000 ton Carrier close to the US carriers?

65,000 tons is the size of the new UK carriers.

US Navy ships:
Nimitz class are officially 97,000 tons, but can run up to 100-104,000 tons, the US has 10 of these active.
The US also has around 10 "amphibious assault" ships. These run about 40-45,000 tons. They have a detachment of Harriers and a bunch of helicopters. In any other navy they would be helicopter carriers. In the Navy's defense, they also carry a substantial number of Marines and their landing craft, so they really can invade someone.

 

[HariPrasad]

N-LCA is more of a tech demo, rather than a functional plane, no one is going to put a low quality plane on carrier where space is at premium.

N LCA 1 is not intended to be put on the career. It will ve N LCA Mk2 with 118 KN engine.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

my personal opinion....The naval lca- will never figure anywhere close to the capabilities of a rafale. IT simply isnt designed to do so.

So ?

 

[Skull and Bones]

So ?

So it's more of a waste of deck space rather than packing a potent punch.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

So it's more of a waste of deck space rather than packing a potent punch.

It will be potent enough and strategies and tactics can and will be built around its strengths and not its weaknesses. End of the day its a military fighter jet, not a transport aircraft.

Clearly the IN thinks its not a waste of deck space and that is all that matters. Hates can hate.

 

[Skull and Bones]

It will be potent enough and strategies and tactics can and will be built around its strengths and not its weaknesses. End of the day its a military fighter jet, not a transport aircraft.

Clearly the IN thinks its not a waste of deck space and that is all that matters. Hates can hate.

Limited range, limited payload, perhaps two of the most important features missing that's required on a carrier based fighter aircraft. The only purpose it can serve is as a light attack/trainer jet. And a carrier based transport aircraft brings in a lot of tactical advantages, which you clearly missed.

And putting big words without technical inputs is very easy in forums.

 

[HariPrasad]

Limited range, limited payload, perhaps two of the most important features missing that's required on a carrier based fighter aircraft. The only purpose it can serve is as a light attack/trainer jet. And a carrier based transport aircraft brings in a lot of tactical advantages, which you clearly missed.

And putting big words without technical inputs is very easy in forums.

MK2 will have 118 KN engine with canard shifted to wing root. Navy has the trust in MK2. Navy has invested a fair amount of money in LCA program. MK2 will have a decent range very high T/W ratio and carry a lots of load.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Limited range, limited payload, perhaps two of the most important features missing that's required on a carrier based fighter aircraft. The only purpose it can serve is as a light attack/trainer jet. And a carrier based transport aircraft brings in a lot of tactical advantages, which you clearly missed.

And putting big words without technical inputs is very easy in forums.

I think its a lot easier to pretend to be an expert in a forum that second guesses IN Chiefs

Naval LCA has sufficient payload and sufficient range and as I mentioned, strategics and tactics will be build around its strengths. Unlike you, I actually work in the Aerospace sector and I can very well use bigger words. LOL. Only its not required to make a simple point.

 

[MilSpec]

Indian Navy unlike the IAF has a strong push towards indigenisation. I know for sure they would want an Indian Aircraft to fly off an Indian carrier. That is why they are pushing so hard for Naval LAC. To make sure they can use it on IAC-1.

It's called foresight.... With well thought out development plans, indigenous development yields more bang for the buck than imports can. If IAF would have owned the responsibility for all developmental work in Indian defense domain today, IAF sqdn strength would have matched the likes of PLAAF, with results and objectives at par with ISRO....

 

[风之南国]

India should design new aircraft, LCA's international reputation seems negative, now is the era of the stealth fighter.

 

[anonymus]

It will be potent enough and strategies and tactics can and will be built around its strengths and not its weaknesses. End of the day its a military fighter jet, not a transport aircraft.

Clearly the IN thinks its not a waste of deck space and that is all that matters. Hates can hate.

The fact that IN is supporting N-LCA for technology demonstration/development purpose ( so that next time ADA could come up with something more potent ) does not mean that Navy is going to put it on Aircraft carrier where space is at premium.

Navy aviation is not like Airforce ( where more is better ). An Aircraft carrier could carry between 20-40 Aircraft at max. Quality in Naval Aviation matters more than quantity. If you put inferior Aircraft on your carrier, you would neither have Aircraft, nor carrier left, at the end of the day.

MK2 will have 118 KN engine with canard shifted to wing root. Navy has the trust in MK2. Navy has invested a fair amount of money in LCA program. MK2 will have a decent range very high T/W ratio and carry a lots of load.

It is not just Engines. No IRST, Crappy radar, low payload , low range. In short, it was designed as point defence fighter, not a multi-role fighter.

After improvement, it would become a good land based fighter, but it would still not be capable enough to be fielded from Aircraft carrier.

 

[风之南国]

The fact that IN is supporting N-LCA for technology demonstration/development purpose ( so that next time ADA could come up with something more potent ) does not mean that Navy is going to put it on Aircraft carrier where space is at premium.

Navy aviation is not like Airforce ( where more is better ). An Aircraft carrier could carry between 20-40 Aircraft at max. Quality in Naval Aviation matters more than quantity. If you put inferior Aircraft on your carrier, you would neither have Aircraft, nor carrier left, at the end of the day.




It is not just Engines. No IRST, Crappy radar, low payload , low range. In short, it was designed as point defence fighter, not a multi-role fighter.

After improvement, it would become a good land based fighter, but it would still not be capable enough to be fielded from Aircraft carrier.

In favor of your point of view, the need to re-design aircraft, LCA seemingly limited potential. Superpower India needs its own stealth fighters and nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

 

[MilSpec]

So it's more of a waste of deck space rather than packing a potent punch.

I think it depends on the objectives, What if IN's Primary objective for the Carrier is to ensure fleet defense or sea denial, then a nimble agile fighter would be extremely potent.

Apart from that, with say three aircraft carriers, with a mix of high low fighters, the a/c can have both, active sea denial along with deep strike ability.
At the end of day, if navy chooses the strategic pay off in Indigenous development over the maximum strike potential, it must be a well thought one.

 

[anonymus]

In favor of your point of view, the need to re-design aircraft, LCA seemingly limited potential. Superpower India needs its own stealth fighters and nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

India is building both. It is timeline of their maturation that is worrying.

 

[Rockstar]

India should design new aircraft, LCA's international reputation seems negative, now is the era of the stealth fighter.

Don't worry India has one stealth aircrafts under development, The AMCA and has forged a joint partnership with Russia for the stealth PAKFA (T-50).