Navy ‘no’ to n-energy on aircraft carriers

[angeldemon_007]

I think for blue water navy, In should rethink on this issue.

 

[pmukherjee]

Nuclear powered ACs are frightfully expensive. Yes, they do have a lot of advantages over non nuclear ones but we do not have America's global aspirations, do we? Exactly how prudent it is to go for such highly expensive capital ships in this era of antiship missiles is not yet known. This is a wise decision by the IN. Sometime in the future maybe but now we have more important things to do with that money.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Nuclear powered ACs are frightfully expensive. Yes, they do have a lot of advantages over non nuclear ones but we do not have America's global aspirations, do we? Exactly how prudent it is to go for such highly expensive capital ships in this era of antiship missiles is not yet known. This is a wise decision by the IN. Sometime in the future maybe but now we have more important things to do with that money.

Better to go for Nuclear submarines though for strategic purposes.

 

[pmukherjee]

Better to go for Nuclear submarines though for strategic purposes.

Yes, submarines, especially those carrying SLBMs have to be nuclear powered. Without the endurance that nuclear power gives them, they would not be of much value for second/third strike deterrence. Enter the fleet of Indian SSBNs.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Yes, submarines, especially those carrying SLBMs have to be nuclear powered. Without the endurance that nuclear power gives them, they would not be of much value for second/third strike deterrence. Enter the fleet of Indian SSBNs.

The current ones we plan to procure from Russia can only fire cruise missiles , guess they"ll play a tactical role

though i wonder if a longer range cruise missiles can serve strategic purpose.

 

[harpoon]

Considering the fact that Nuclear ACs need only replenishment once in every 10 years or so, how much cost effective it is when compared to conventional ACs

 

[pmukherjee]

The current ones we plan to procure from Russia can only fire cruise missiles , guess they"ll play a tactical role

though i wonder if a longer range cruise missiles can serve strategic purpose.

Oh yes they can. The US operates 43 Los Angeles class subs firing Tomahawks from torpedo tubes. Russia is also going for cruise missile firing subs in a big way.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Oh yes they can. The US operates 43 Los Angeles class subs firing Tomahawks from torpedo tubes. Russia is also going for cruise missile firing subs in a big way.

Makes sense then ! they wish to use cruise missiles for dual role , though i'd prefer MIRV ones for strategic purposes.

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

China to build 93,000-ton atomic-powered aircraft carrier do we have any update.

I think India will follow China... for now IAC I and IAC II will be Non Nuclear... May be IAC III will be Nuclear.

 

[nomi007]

China to build 93,000-ton atomic-powered aircraft carrier do we have any update.

I think India will follow China... for now IAC I and IAC II will be Non Nuclear... May be IAC III will be Nuclear.

nice picture
but showing f-35 on indian carrier

 

[DarK-LorD]

nice picture
but showing f-35 on indian carrier

That's because F-35 is one of the participant in naval MRCA.

 

[pmukherjee]

Considering the fact that Nuclear ACs need only replenishment once in every 10 years or so, how much cost effective it is when compared to conventional ACs

1997 figures for the USS NImitz class of ACs are as under-
>Construction Costs - $4.5 billion
>Mid life overhaul Costs - $2.3 billion
>Operating and Support Costs - $14 billion
>Other Costs - $1 billion
>>Total Average Cost - $22 billion each
One can guess the costs in today's figures.

The estimated cost including R & D of the new Gerald S Ford carriers which is under construction is likely to be $14 billion while the AC itself will cost around $9 billion. As a rough thumb rule, nuclear powered ACs cost 58% more than conventional ones.

 

[harpoon]

1997 figures for the USS NImitz class of ACs are as under-
>Construction Costs - $4.5 billion
>Mid life overhaul Costs - $2.3 billion
>Operating and Support Costs - $14 billion
>Other Costs - $1 billion
>>Total Average Cost - $22 billion each
One can guess the costs in today's figures.

The estimated cost including R & D of the new Gerald S Ford carriers which is under construction is likely to be $14 billion while the AC itself will cost around $9 billion. As a rough thumb rule, nuclear powered ACs cost 58% more than conventional ones.

But all the carriers operated by US are the so called supercarriers and they are all nuclear powered. There is no fossil fuel powered supercarrier in existence as of now. So how can one say that nuclear powered AC will be costlier to operate than a conventional one.

 

[desimorty]

France has one nuclear powered Carrier and that didn't turn out too well.
But the IN wants to patrol the Indian ocean with 3 carriers, that should be enough. If you want to venture out of the Indian ocean to the Atlantic, then you need a nuclear powered AC, but who are you going to use it against? Europe? America? It would be sitting duck. Its best for India to protect its own nest rather replace the long arm of the USN. Their power will fade and regional powers will develop and fill the void, ie Brazil, Europe, Japan, China.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Putting aside the French CDG, the only nuclear powered ACC are the USN SUPERCARRIERS it is clear to see why 100,000+ ton ships with 5,000+ sailors need so much power from nuclear energy. If powered conventionally it would require huge fuel reserves and refuelling every few days. Not to mention with USN operating 11+ such beasts and each costing $5 BN+ they have the $$ and demand for such. As IAC-1 and Vikramditya are relatively small carriers who are likely to only project their power regionally as opposed to SUPERCARRIERS and CDG which deploy globally, there is no real need for nuclear power yet. But like I said it is more than likely in future IN carriers- if not IAC-2 then almost certainly IAC-3 especially if the former is to be 65,000+ tons and the later even bigger.