India's 2nd air craft carrier would be, of Catobar Type.

[kurup]

Can't make out from the top view, but all of super-structure is yet to assembled.
I'm assuming they are going for some sort of modular construction where the deck structures are being fabricated in parallel, and later will be assembled together. But it still looks a good 4-5 years away from sea trials.

Yes , the ship is built by modular construction techniques and the super-structure is already built.

 

[S-DUCT]

Is it just me or IAC looks kind of small.
I guess once island is in place it might get bigger I suppose

mate, IAC is larger than INS Viraat even with no deck.

photo credit:A chauhan @***

 

[Abingdonboy]

And why not the Brits may I ask?

As has been said the UK is no expert in this field. Not only does the UK barely have the infrastructure to build such ships but it doesn't have the expertise either. Much of the QE class has been designed and built with significant French help and given the IN is looking for a CATOBAR design, the UK has about as much knowledge on this nowadays as the Indians! When it was proposed to install EMALS or Steam-catapults on the QE class (before the 3rd U-turn) BAE went straight to the US govt for assistance. And talk about inefficiency, the cost of the QE class has already mushroomed to almost TWICE the original estimate and commsioning will be,what, 5 years?

And the RN and QE Class ACCs are in the most precarious position of any ACC-operating navy I can think of. Not only will the ACCs be completed and commissioned with no planes to fly off them but as soon as the PoW is commsioned it will be almost immediately moth-balled for an unknown period. At one point there was serious talk of selling one or both and India looked like a serious buyer but clearly they have decided to, understandably, got their own way.


White elephants doesn't even cover it!

 

[kurup]

@sancho @Penguin> have you heard about this


Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/244733-makings-naval-power.html#ixzz2Py814qaN
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/244733-makings-naval-power.html#post4135854

Interesting concept , Although I cannot understand the use of ski-jump along with catapult.

Soviet aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[djsjs]

guys,dont you think the article is stupid?
when China decide to develop/buy a weapon,we never take India into consideration. that is not because we dont respect Indian army,but for that all we know we wont fight a war with India in decades.
if your army want to have more and better weapons,just do it QUIETLY.
as a Chinese,everytime i read such articles from India,i got to know that some guys are seeking chances to fill their pockets,nothing more!

 

[aakash_2410]

The Brits are not the best in the business now . They are out of kilter now where ACs are concerned especially CATOBAR designs now.
I may not be a Digger, but that is no reason not to call Brits-Poms. India's colonial past is a fact as is the fact that Britain is pretty much knackered now.

Brits are not the best in business? Yes, they may have some economical problems to tackle right now. But they have the most experience in aircraft carrier building. Even more than America I'd say. Plus CATOBAR is not the most advanced technology India can go for right now.

I am no British dalal but you taking cheap shots and uttering pure lies is also not appreciated. Brits are not best in the business? LOOL! Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) class 65,000 tonnes aircraft.

Plus the only aircraft carrier India has right now is also former British Navy's AC and I'm sure INS Vikramaditya wouldn't have taken so damn long if British were doing it.

Are you actually suggesting Frenchies are better in ship building and AC building than Brits? lool! List of aircraft carriers by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

France has made 8 ACs when UK has made 41 ACs till this date plus 2 Supercarriers under construction when France has no plan of making any more. UK is to ACs what US/Russia is to fighter planes.

And no you can't call them POMs unless you're an Aussie. It's an inside joke. Just like Indians have Punjabi/Gujju jokes. Pakistanis have their jokes about Pathans and Sayieen.

 

[SirHatesALot]

djsjs Indian Media is a joke

 

[Abingdonboy]

Interesting concept , Although I cannot understand the use of ski-jump along with catapult.

Soviet aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm guessing the ramp is for fighters and the catapults for larger,heavier a/c like AWACS and transports. The idea being the fighters don't require extensive re-designs to operate off CATOBAR carriers but the carrier can still launch heavier fixed-wing a/c like AWACS and transports.

Seems to impractical IMHO and the fighters using STOBAR brings about the same old drawbacks of this method of take-off ie having to fly either really light on fuel or compromising on the weapons load.

 

[sancho]

@sancho @Penguin> have you heard about this

That's what the Russians hope for, since they want and need us to join their carrier developments, as well as a Naval Pak Fa / FGFA. However, IN is clearly looking towards USN and their CATOBAR carriers, the fact that they even hope on EMALS shows that too.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Brits are not the best in business? Yes, they may have some economical problems to tackle right now. But they have the most experience in aircraft carrier building. Even more than America I'd say. Plus CATOBAR is not the most advanced technology India can go for right now.

I am no British dalal but you taking cheap shots and uttering pure lies is also not appreciated. Brits are not best in the business? LOOL! Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) class 65,000 tonnes aircraft.

Plus the only aircraft carrier India has right now is also former British Navy's AC and I'm sure INS Vikramaditya wouldn't have taken so damn long if British were doing it.

Are you actually suggesting Frenchies are better in ship building and AC building than Brits? lool! List of aircraft carriers by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

France has made 8 ACs when UK has made 41 ACs till this date plus 2 Supercarriers under construction when France has no plan of making any more. UK is to ACs what US/Russia is to fighter planes.

And no you can't call them POMs unless you're an Aussie. It's an inside joke. Just like Indians have Punjabi/Gujju jokes. Pakistanis have their jokes about Pathans and Sayieen.

Past performance does NOT equal future success. Yes the UK has historically extensive experience in the ACC construction field but to say this means the UK are more capable ACC builders than the US or even the French is more than an overreach. The fact is the UK's ship production industry is almost non-existent today.

Does the UK have anything like the ship-building powerhouse that is DCNS?

Looking at the ground realities of TODAY the UK is behind the US and French for sure and the "young guns" of India and China are catching up fast.


After the QE class I can guarantee the UK will not be building any ACCs ever again for both political and economic reasons.

 

[kurup]

I'm guessing the ramp is for fighters and the catapults for larger,heavier a/c like AWACS and transports. The idea being the fighters don't require extensive re-designs to operate off CATOBAR carriers but the carrier can still launch heavier fixed-wing a/c like AWACS and transports.

Seems to impractical IMHO and the fighters using STOBAR brings about the same old drawbacks of this method of take-off ie having to fly either really light on fuel or compromising on the weapons load.

You are right : catapults for larger,heavier a/c and ramp for fighters was their intention but it is a rather stupid design as you explained.

But replacing ramp with 2 catapults gives a nice CATOBAR AC design .

 

[SirHatesALot]

Nuclear propulsion would have been better and much cheaper fuel wise. That way no need to stop for bunkers.

It would be better if we first see how arihant's reactor does.

 

[Abingdonboy]

That's what the Russians hope for, since they want and need us to join their carrier developments, as well as a Naval Pak Fa / FGFA. However, IN is clearly looking towards USN and their CATOBAR carriers, the fact that they even hope on EMALS shows that too.

The IN seems to have become pretty "Americanised" in philosophy and increasingly its systems.

 

[asad71]

Second and third, eh! What about the first one?

 

[aakash_2410]

Past performance does NOT equal future success. Yes the UK has historically extensive experience in the ACC construction field but to say this means the UK are more capable ACC builders than the US or even the French is more than an overreach. The fact is the UK's ship production industry is almost non-existent today.

Does the UK have anything like the ship-building powerhouse that is DCNS?

Looking at the ground realities of TODAY the UK is behind the US and French for sure and the "young guns" of India and China are catching up fast.


After the QE class I can guarantee the UK will not be building any ACCs ever again for both political and economic reasons.

It is not about past success or glory it is about experience. The fact is UK may not be building ACs or ships right now for economical and political reasons as you mentioned but that doesn't change the fact that they're best AC building. No one can deny that. They can help India more than France can.

British Shipbuilding Corporation? BAE systems?
Appledore Shipbuilders
Sir W. G. Armstrong Whitworth & Company
Vickers-Armstrongs, Limited
Austin & Pickersgill Ltd
Barclay Curle & Company
William Beardmore & Company
Caledon Shipbuilding & Engineering Company
Robb Caledon Shipbuilders
Clelands Shipbuilding Company
William Denny & Brothers
William Doxford & Sons
Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company
Ferguson Brothers
Appledore Shipbuilders
Hall, Russell & Company
Harland & Wolff
R. & W. Hawthorn, Leslie & Company
Henry Robb
Palmers Shipbuilding & Iron Company
John Readhead & Sons
Short Brothers of Sunderland
Smiths Dock Company
Swan, Hunter & Wigham Richardson
Thames Ironworks, Shipbuilding and Engineering Company
John I. Thornycroft & Company
Upper Clyde Shipbuilders
Fairfields, Govan
Alexander Stephens and Sons, Linthouse
Charles Connell and Company, Scotstoun
Yarrow Shipbuilders Ltd (YSL), Scotstoun
John Brown and Company, Clydebank
Vickers, Sons & Maxim, Ltd
Vickers-Armstrongs, Limited
VSEL
BAE Systems Surface Ships
BAE Systems Submarine Solutions
Vosper & Company
J. Samuel White

Just to name a few. Britain is not building any ships nowadays is simply because they don't need to. But that doesn't mean they have forgot how to make them.

Plus it was the navies that Britain relied on heavily in past and Britain being an island has great maritime and naval history. To even suggest that France or any other European nation comes even close to Britain is laughable.