N-LCA out of the hangar

[Farahvar]

yes i guess you need high reliability in a carrier borne jet.... and single engine has its risks

 

[chachachoudhary]

Make Viraat a floating helicopter base!

Or Naval C&C :o

I was thinking on the same lines and in fact reading about Mistral at this very moment.

I was thinking viraat heli port will be ideal to be stationed on patrol duty near our island territories and will be handy to transport large number of troops.

 

[Guynextdoor]

Good proposal. They can completely overhaul Viraat and should make it a helicopter carrier to give back up for the amphibious warfare vessels.



Most possible they will do that only!

Structurally the Viraat is VERY old right...I mean how many times can we keep refurbishing the ship? At some time the inherent strcutral strength will stop making it economical. Plus, every time we get it on board for a refit, it sits there for months or even years. Do that a few times and you've probably spent enuf money to build a brand new ship

 

[ganimi kawa]

Structurally the Viraat is VERY old right...I mean how many times can we keep refurbishing the ship? At some time the inherent strcutral strength will stop making it economical. Plus, every time we get it on board for a refit, it sits there for months or even years. Do that a few times and you've probably spent enuf money to build a brand new ship

That is a correct assessment.
While it is possible to convert Viraat into a helicopter carrier (mainly asw role) or a naval c&c hub (an extra role she carried in Falklands campaign);given the current status of the hull (it has been 57 years since she was launched!) it's just not feasible.
Best solution would be to turn her into a naval museum, perhaps in collaboration with the British.
Let the old warrior retire in peace!

 

[ganimi kawa]

Friends,Here are some points about relevance of N-LCA that has been heavily discussed here. Hope this clears some doubts about what navy wants with this project.
1.What role does navy want tejas to perform?
According to this press release from GoI,
"Its primary role will be that of air defence and will provide a formidable platform with a higher thrust engine and an optimised mass for suitable replacement to the ageing Sea Harriers at a later date."

now please note-
a)comparing the parameters of Tejas and sea harrier we find that former packs a stronger punch while having similar dimensions.

b)Primary role played by the harrier in Falklands war was "air defence" with secondary ground attack.

c)The previous name of IAC-1 was "Air defence ship",thus it'd be safe to assume that it will remain her primary focus inspite of the recent scope creep.

Connecting the points one can assume that the navy wants tejas (replacing harriers) to protect the ships in the task force from the aerial threats with secondary anti shippping role which is synchronous with primary mandate for IAC-1.



2.Why navy wants 'tejas' to perform air defence?
Apart from having the attributes of a good point defence aircraft here are some advantages tejas has from IN point of view.
a)Indigenous-In accordance with the consistant IN policy of becoming a builder's navy

b)Cheaper-IN is not as flush with money as IA or IAF @ 30mil a pop,it's really good for making up numbers which are important for an air defence aircraft.

c)Lower turn around time-Especially comparing to MiG 29k.Resulting into higher no of sorties generated,again something very advatageous on a carrier based op.

d)Assured supply of spares- IN remembers the sea king episode!

e)Smaller size-So more can be carried on the ship.Not very sure about this,though.

f)Eye on the future-Helping the LCA--NLCA transition means easing the AMCA----N AMCA transition.

I hope to discuss the timelines of IAC 1,2; NLCA, NMRCA, N AMCA/PAKFA in the next post.
Seniors,please feel free to add.

 

[javaman]

for how much time india will use viraat

 

[ganimi kawa]

^^worst case scenario...upto 2020!

 

[d14gtc]

can it be used on INS Vikramaditya........in my point of view its been prepaired for INS Vikramaditya or IAC 1 instead of Viraat.........

 

[Chanakyaa]

yes i guess you need high reliability in a carrier borne jet.... and single engine has its risks

True but what about F 35 ??

India have operated Mirage 2000 for decades No Problem at all.
Same goes for F16s which have awesome record.

 

[CONNAN]

yes i guess you need high reliability in a carrier borne jet.... and single engine has its risks

every jet fighter in the world has its ups and down what matters is how good you maintain them. better maintainance and service will yield better track record of the particular fighter

 

[flanker143]

every jet fighter in the world has its ups and down what matters is how good you maintain them. better maintainance and service will yield better track record of the particular fighter

yup maintainence and timely upgrades is all that matters......

 

[Farahvar]

Yes, lets get vikrant out of its mothballs and make that into a
heli carrier as well..

 

[sancho]

Friends,Here are some points about relevance of N-LCA that has been heavily discussed here. Hope this clears some doubts about what navy wants with this project.
1.What role does navy want tejas to perform?
According to this press release from GoI,
"Its primary role will be that of air defence and will provide a formidable platform with a higher thrust engine and an optimised mass for suitable replacement to the ageing Sea Harriers at a later date."

now please note-
a)comparing the parameters of Tejas and sea harrier we find that former packs a stronger punch while having similar dimensions.

b)Primary role played by the harrier in Falklands war was "air defence" with secondary ground attack.

c)The previous name of IAC-1 was "Air defence ship",thus it'd be safe to assume that it will remain her primary focus inspite of the recent scope creep.

Connecting the points one can assume that the navy wants tejas (replacing harriers) to protect the ships in the task force from the aerial threats with secondary anti shippping role which is synchronous with primary mandate for IAC-1.

You are right about that, but the important point we have to keep in mind is, that this was the initial idea behind N-LCA, but things have changed now!
N-LCA development is very delayed and although they rolled out the mock up version now, it doesn't mean anything, because we know that N-LCA will be based on LCA MK2, which will come only by 2014!
There is no decision for the engine yet, AESA radar is not developed, same goes for IRST, not to mention that airframe changes could be possible too (bigger air intakes, different weapon stations, or fuselage design). To sum it up, N-LCA is nowhere close to be inducted and that exactly is the reason why IN has gone for additional Mig 29K.
Mig 29 are meant for the same roles N-LCA was initially meant for, air defense and anti-ship, it has some strike capabilities now too, but not comparable to latest carrier fighters like Rafale, or F18SH and N-LCA will not even come close to them either. So with 45 Mig 29s for INS Vikramaditya and IAC1, what role will be left for N-LCA and how many of them are needed now? It won't be better than the Mig in air defense, or anti-ship and doesn't offer any advantage in strike role too. The only role where it has some advantages is recon, with a good recon pod and the advantages of its low RCS, but that won't require numbers of them right? Also the STOBAR layout of these carriers will limit the payload of N-LCA (Sea Gripen has 1/3 less payload than Gripen NG according to Saab), which means less external load anyway.

2.Why navy wants 'tejas' to perform air defence?
Apart from having the attributes of a good point defence aircraft here are some advantages tejas has from IN point of view.
a)Indigenous-In accordance with the consistant IN policy of becoming a builder's navy

Exactly and that should be the main aim of still keeping N-LCA development allive!

b)Cheaper-IN is not as flush with money as IA or IAF @ 30mil a pop,it's really good for making up numbers which are important for an air defence aircraft.

Mig 29K is said to cost $46 millions each, LCA Mk2 should be around $30 millions with AESA and foreign engines...and carrier fighters are always a bit more expensive, so possibly $10 millions less each, while offering less performance too.

c)Lower turn around time-Especially comparing to MiG 29k.Resulting into higher no of sorties generated,again something very advatageous on a carrier based op.

Shouldn't the Mig carry more fuel, be it internal, or external? If yes, it can remain in the air for longer, while N-LCA has to return.

d)Assured supply of spares- IN remembers the sea king episode!

But what if we go for US engine?

The idea of an indigenous light class carrier fighter for air defense and light anti-ship role (what exactly is the role of INS Vikramaditya and IAC1), might be good if N-LCA could be fielded in numbers, complemented by fewer number of more capable twin engine fighters. However, now things are different and makes N-LCA hardly useful, or needed anymore. It's doubtful that IN still plans to induct numbers of them aymore.

 

[Leonidas]

yup we can call it as "horny flanker"

 

[Sri]

The idea of an indigenous light class carrier fighter for air defense and light anti-ship role (what exactly is the role of INS Vikramaditya and IAC1), might be good if N-LCA could be fielded in numbers, complemented by fewer number of more capable twin engine fighters. However, now things are different and makes N-LCA hardly useful, or needed anymore. It's doubtful that IN still plans to induct numbers of them aymore.

I agree with you to some extent and I believe the success of LCA now solely depends on what they are bringing to the table with MK2 version like better t/w, weapon load, LO design, internal fuel , AESA etc
I believe ADA & HAL should get it dead right for the survival of LCA PG or it might remain as a POC/small numbers.