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

[selvan33]

I don't have any open source info on this, but two naval officers on BR forums have said that the CURRENT delays are due to delays in getting the Barak-8. Note that B8 is not ready yet, and without it the Kolkata class destroyers cannot be completed.

Earlier its construction WAS delayed due to Ukraine defaulting on the propulsion system, which we then bought from Russia. Then there were delays in getting high grade steel from Russia. We managed to get both these, and construction is now held up due to the non-arrival of Barak-8. There were some opinions that we should go ahead with an older Russian system, and use B8 on the project P-15B.

If you have any sources which say that any delays occured due to design changes, please provide them.

Thanks for your info. that barak LR SAM design changes also one reason that because initially we planned for russian missile KASHTAN but later our navy moved to Barak LR SAM. but that's not a main problem. we can a build a launcher based on missile design and later we can test that missile with launcher. and we can have ship without a SAM because we can modify missile launcher to accommodate another type of missile but holding the whole process for just one missile delay is some thing unimaginable. or we can use MR SAM now and later we can retrofit it with LR SAM.
Navy's wavering delaying warships by years | Business Standard
here you can get few details related to warship delay.

 

[Dillinger]

USS Enterprise has 8 reactors and USS Nimitz has two reactors

so housing more than 1 reactors in AC is not impossible, but will be tricky

That is true yaraa, but check out the MW rating on the reactors in the Nimitz, not just the MW rating for propulsion but the total count, each reactor churning out 350MW+ and total around 700MW, now do you see the difference? Even the French with 42K tonne carrier operate it with a total 400MW, we need to get the 180MW reactor going- then we can rely on a 4 reactor coupling which is pretty much standard and not difficult.

 

[Anony]

That is true yaraa, but check out the MW rating on the reactors in the Nimitz, not just the MW rating for propulsion but the total count, each reactor churning out 350MW+ and total around 700MW, now do you see the difference? Even the French with 42K tonne carrier operate it with a total 400MW, we need to get the 180MW reactor going- then we can rely on a 4 reactor coupling which is pretty much standard and not difficult.

IAC-2 will be conventionally powered. No decision of nuclear power AC for India is taken as of now.

 

[Dillinger]

IAC-2 will be conventionally powered. No decision of nuclear power AC for India is taken as of now.

True that, that's exactly what we were talking about. The DAE deadline for completing the 180MW reactor will expire only when the IAC-2 will have already commenced construction so nuclear power is a no go.

 

[anant_s]

I am not saying that nuke power will work or not, I am saying that we had serious issues while making only the 80MW PWR of INS Arihant & integrating it to the sub, we will get serious tech. challenges if we go for bigger ones & want to integrate it to the IAC-2.

IAC-2 should remain conventionally powered, IAC-3 can be made a nuclear powered one though.

Scaling up the reactor is not an issue, the bigger issue is availability of Highly enriched Uranium for the reactor. India has very limited U235 enrichment facilities (almost all our civilian reactors run on Natural Uranium) and the limited resources available for propulsion reactors may probably be diverted towards Submarine program (follow up of INS Arihant) . So i suppose, priority for nuclear propulsion is somewhere else.
secondly, once INS Arihant goes to trials and later service designers will get a good insight into any deficiencies in our domestic reactor and certainly modify for future AC.
At this moment it is a risky tactic to lay your faith on relatively untested technology, may be in future (IAC 3 perhaps) we will have Nuclear propulsion along with 80-90K Tons of displacement, till then current diesel engine/gas turbine technology is the safest and most logical path to tread.

 

[sancho]

@sancho what are your feelings on the IAC-2's air group if we are know taking it as a given it will be CATOBAR-configured? I'd for sure like to see the E-2D and Rafale-M. F-35 is too limited and the Rafale-M offers more advantage to India than the F-18SH (yet ANOTHER fighter in Indian service )

My "wishlist" would be very different:

- EMALS (which should be fully developed and mature till IAC2 needs it)
- V22 AEW, MRTT & MPA for all Indian carriers (AEW with DRDO radar system, MPA with P8I systems, India as a JV partner for these varients with parts of the production)
- F18 Growler Lite with Silent Hornet upgrades (Growler Lite with Israel or DARE jamming pods)
- Naval AMCA developed as a carrier fighter in the long run, with Boeing and GE as co-development partners for the fighter and the Kaveri K10


Shocking isn't it?

 

[selvan33]

My "wishlist" would be very different:

- EMALS (which should be fully developed and mature till IAC2 needs it)
- V22 AEW, MRTT & MPA for all Indian carriers (AEW with DRDO radar system, MPA with P8I systems, India as a JV partner for these varients with parts of the production)
- F18 Growler Lite with Silent Hornet upgrades (Growler Lite with Israel or DARE jamming pods)
- Naval AMCA developed as a carrier fighter in the long run, with Boeing and GE as co-development partners for the fighter and the Kaveri K10


Shocking isn't it?

Full of US made weapons. sancho what is this . and about AMCA am not sure whether we will get that in 2024 or 2025 which IAC 2 will enter into serviceor trials. because most probably N AMCA will be at 2030 or later.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

A US nuclear powered Aircraft Carrier carries enough emergency supply of fuel to support fleet operations for up to 30 days of high speed run much longer for less taxing endevours. In addition, nuclear power is used to desalinate water for drinking and sanitation and can support the emergency needs of the entire carrier battle group.

But using nuclear reactors needs to be supported with policy structures. An attack on a nuke powered carrier is inherently risky because of it's reactors, so the US has a clear policy- any attack on it's Carriers will invite nuclear retaliation. I'm not sure India will adopt that policy- our stated position is no first use. This means that even if an entire carrier group is sunk, we will not retaliate unless the adversary has used a nuclear weapon.

 

[sancho]

Full of US made weapons. sancho what is this . and about AMCA am not sure whether we will get that in 2024 or 2025 which IAC 2 will enter into serviceor trials. because most probably N AMCA will be at 2030 or later.

Hehe, as I said it would have been my "wishlist" and to much preferable conditions to Indian, our industry and our forces than the US will offer to us. But if they would agree to them, this mix would be the most beneficiary for us.
EMALS for example offer a lot of operational and maintenance advantages for a carrier, but since it is their latest tech, it's doubtful they will provide it to us, unless we buy enough other US stuff in return and that's where imo the F18SH offers us the best option to please them for a reasonable cost, while it might suit INs requirements better than the Rafale M too (twin seaters and folding wings are advantages).
The F35C again is their latest tech and would come only with high restrictions and limitations, not to mention high costs, which doesn't make it worth it for us, which again would increase the chances of an upgraded and customised Super Hornet as a stopgap for the AMCA.
The V22 as I often stated it actually the perfect aircraft for special roles in IN, be it AEW for STOBAR carriers, long range and higher capacity in the transport tanker roles, or as a long range ASW option for sub hunting. But again, we need a customised option and industrial advantages in return for our fundings, otherwise it wouldn't be worth the high costs.
Boeing and GE as partners for AMCA and Kaveri K10 would be logical options, Boeing has a lot of experience with naval-, as well as stealth fighters, we already cleared a licence production for the GE 414 in India and their know how surely would help us to improve Kaveri engine. But we all know that this will never happen, since the US keep rejecting the share of techs to us, while demanding and posing high restrictions. As long as that behaviour remains the same, this will remain a wishlist only and Russian, French or Israelis will remain our prefered partners.

However, more realistic might be steam catapults with normal F18SHs and E-2Ds .

 

[Abingdonboy]

My "wishlist" would be very different:

- EMALS (which should be fully developed and mature till IAC2 needs it)
- V22 AEW, MRTT & MPA for all Indian carriers (AEW with DRDO radar system, MPA with P8I systems, India as a JV partner for these varients with parts of the production)
- F18 Growler Lite with Silent Hornet upgrades (Growler Lite with Israel or DARE jamming pods)
- Naval AMCA developed as a carrier fighter in the long run, with Boeing and GE as co-development partners for the fighter and the Kaveri K10


Shocking isn't it?

Wow, I wasn't expecting that to say the least! lol!


This is a nice wish-list, but I'm sure you'll admit a bit optimistic. The IN and India would have to go a long way into the US camp to get such tech and might have to sign a few agreements along the way. MPAs and transports are one thing but for the US to start handing over offensive and advanced kit like the F-18 growler (with Silent Hornet upgrades) and the like I doubt whether the current US and Indian postions on defence agreements would be enough to satisfy Washington.

Also the Growler lite would only be complements to the fighters- E/F (with Silent Hornet upgrades).

Also why chose the V-22 AEW version over the E-2D? For CATOBAR ACC the E-2D by lieu of its air frame, is just a better performer- it can fly higher,faster and longer. Is it purely because of the wish to see Indian AWACS tech incorporated into the V-22 platform?



I have to say, if the IN could get this package there would be few on the planet who could touch the IN.

 

[Abingdonboy]

@sancho why not give the order of IAC-2 to a US shipyard as well?? LOL

lol, the IN could have it by 2020 then!

 

[sancho]

Wow, I wasn't expecting that to say the least! lol!

I thought so.

but for the US to start handing over offensive and advanced kit like the F-18 growler (with Silent Hornet upgrades)

Actually that is't that unlikely, since the Growler lite offer from Boeing doesn't include the advanced ALQ 99 jammers, what's left is basically what we get through SPECTRA as well and combined with some of the Silent Hornet upgrades (more thrust, integrated IRST, additional EW sensors...), which basically are available for export customers of the SH anyway, we would get a version that is more comparable to the Rafale as well, so wouldn't make compromises on capabilities either.
The interesting part would be, if they allow us to integrate certain Indian techs and weapons, like they do with Israel for example.

Also why chose the V-22 AEW version over the E-2D? For CATOBAR ACC the E-2D by lieu of its air frame, is just a better performer- it can fly higher,faster and longer. Is it purely because of the wish to see Indian AWACS tech incorporated into the V-22 platform?

Partially! Beeing dependent on the US for the AESA radars of the fighters is limitation enough, but beeing even more dependent on them with an US AWACS system, is troubling me. A V22 AWACS besides it's limitations as a platform compared to the E-2 platform, could be done as a joined development and therefor would provide IN with an own AWACS system, that gives them full operational freedom.
Besides, I prefer to have a ballenced AWACS capability for all IN carriers, instead of having a very limited capable Ka 31 for 2 carriers and a highly capable E-2D for a single carrier. Also think about an Indo-Chinese war scenario, where we have to send our carriers (IAC 1 and IAC 2) towards the South Chinese Sea.

How should we link the Mig 29K with the E-2D?
What operational limitation would the carriers have with a few E-2Ds, while the Ka 31 would be next to useless?

IN would basically have the same problems as PAF has now, with the one AWACS basically linked with western fighters, the other linked with Chinese. So to avoid such complications and operational limitations, a joint AWACS system for all carriers would be the best choice for IN, even if the E-2D has some advantages over the V22.

I have to say, if the IN could get this package there would be few on the planet who could touch the IN.

True, but don't tell anybody, I have to keep my reputation as US hater.

@sancho why not give the order of IAC-2 to a US shipyard as well?? LOL

I don't give anything to the US, but wouldn't deny their high techs and expertise as long as they suit our requirements and conditions. The advantages that I mentioned would be interesting for IN or Indian industry for sure!

Btw, if we give it to US shipyards, we would see the carrier beeing much more costly than planned as well, see their latest vessels and what kind of costoverruns they face.

 

[Abingdonboy]

But @sancho why go for the F-18 at all? Why not stick to the RAFALE (-M) and "Indianise" that way as I'm sure the IAF's Rafales will be in some way.

As you say the Growlers on offer to India are (lite) stripped-down versions that don't offer a huge advantage over,say, the Rafale-M as it is. Is it purely because you are antiicpating that to get access to EMALs and the like the IN would have t chose a US fighter and, for you, the F-18 is a better candidate then the F-35C?



And I agree with you on the V-22 AEW front, I'm just wondering how accommodating the US would be to any Indian requests to intergarate their AWACS systems onto a US platform when India still hasn't signed any of the deals the US has been pushing so hard for.


For any of this to happen, a "quid pro quo" will have to take place and is the above kit worth India selling out certain elements of its sovereignty? I think the IN can look for a custom package, sourcing tech from all over the world and India to come up with an equally capable, yet less heavily agreement-laden. package. But minus the EMALS (which is a real shame).

 

[Dillinger]

But @sancho why go for the F-18 at all? Why not stick to the RAFALE (-M) and "Indianise" that way as I'm sure the IAF's Rafales will be in some way.

As you say the Growlers on offer to India are (lite) stripped-down versions that don't offer a huge advantage over,say, the Rafale-M as it is. Is it purely because you are antiicpating that to get access to EMALs and the like the IN would have t chose a US fighter and, for you, the F-18 is a better candidate then the F-35C?



And I agree with you on the V-22 AEW front, I'm just wondering how accommodating the US would be to any Indian requests to intergarate their AWACS systems onto a US platform when India still hasn't signed any of the deals the US has been pushing so hard for.


For any of this to happen, a "quid pro quo" will have to take place and is the above kit worth India selling out certain elements of its sovereignty? I think the IN can look for a custom package, sourcing tech from all over the world and India to come up with an equally capable, yet less heavily agreement-laden. package. But minus the EMALS (which is a real shame).

I believe that a British company, Coversteam, was making an electronic aircraft launch system too "EMCAT". I think the Brits pulled the plug, albeit the company did design the electronic propulsion system being fitted on to the new carrier and the type-45 ship. Any way the project might be resuscitated? It would be easier for us procure it from your compatriots yaara. The US wouldn't put in a crimper since they've stopped vetoing our purchases and none of their associated products are concerned. You could even put in a good word or two for us.

 

[sancho]

But @sancho why go for the F-18 at all? Why not stick to the RAFALE (-M) and "Indianise" that way as I'm sure the IAF's Rafales will be in some way.

As I said, I expect the sale of catapults beeing a combined one with US fighters, therefor I prefer an upgraded and customised F18SH at reasonable costs, over a purely US F35C at high costs.
Secondly, the Rafale M has the limitations that I mentioned, of not having twin seaters (which N-LCA and Mig 29 has) and of not having folding wings, which means it needs more parking space on the deck, compared to a SH (10.80 m vs 9.32 m),

As you say the Growlers on offer to India are (lite) stripped-down versions that don't offer a huge advantage over,say, the Rafale-M as it is.
Is it purely because you are antiicpating that to get access to EMALs and the like the IN would have t chose a US fighter and, for you, the F-18 is a better candidate then the F-35C?

Exactly, the Growler lite capabilities would make the SH more capable for us, while the SH also is more cost-effective and might come with less restrictions than the F35. Remember, the F35 operators are not allowed to maintain their fighters alone and have to send them to special maintenance facilities, in Europe AFAIK Itakly, in Asia it might be Japan. That might not be the case for the SH and adds clear advantages for IN.

And I agree with you on the V-22 AEW front, I'm just wondering how accommodating the US would be to any Indian requests to intergarate their AWACS systems onto a US platform when India still hasn't signed any of the deals the US has been pushing so hard for.

That's up to negotiations of course, they do allow Phalcon systems on US aircrafts for example and as said, the V22 AEW could be a co-development and not asking to replace the US system on the E-2D, which they obviously will never allow.
Not to forget that they would have several advantages out of this through exports as well!!!
Japan, S. Korea, Australia, Italy and UK will operate LHDs or carriers that can't operate E-2s, that means they would be potential buyers for the V22 AEW too, although they won't be ready to fund it. The US could sell them with the same US system that the E-2D has, so we have to take the co-development as an exception for us, since we fund it.

For any of this to happen, a "quid pro quo" will have to take place and is the above kit worth India selling out certain elements of its sovereignty? I think the IN can look for a custom package, sourcing tech from all over the world and India to come up with an equally capable, yet less heavily agreement-laden. package. But minus the EMALS (which is a real shame).

Infact this would only increase the sovereignty of India, because we would have much more important systems sourced by Indian counterparts, with maintenance and spares partially even done and produced in India, that to simply take an E-2D with a US radar system and the the highly restricted F35. And what other options do we have?
No other country can offer us catapults anytime soon and even the French have to use US AWACS aircrafts on their carrier and the recent rejection of upgrades to their E-3s once again shows, that India can't afford to make itself dependent on the US on crucial systems! When they do it with a NATO partner, why shouldn't they do it with us?
So when you still want stuff from them, but without beeing dependent, this would be a balanced compromise don't you think?