INS Vikrant, India's First Indigenous Aircraft Carrier, To Be Handed Over To Indian Navy In May

[GamoAccu]

Meanwhile China blockaded east Pakistan using its air craft carrier and with the help of Russia even stopped USS enterprise and its accompanying ships.
Indeed


Are you an idiot?

Thats NO Bulbous bow!

This is a Bulbous bow!

View attachment 840674

Still now convinced?

View attachment 840675

Source : http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/91342/49898754-MIT.pdf;sequence=2

Can you provide us the link to the picture below that is CVN 71 and not another CVN? The picture looks and matches CVN 68 with the rusts according to the google and reddit.. And can you tell us what is that curvy thing on the aircraft carrier?

https://www.reddit.com/r/HumanForScale/comments/asq4mp

 

[Joe Shearer]

You need at least 3 aircraft carriers at all time to have any capability. One for training, one for maintenance, and one for operating.

Who told you this? India, with one aircraft carrier, did a reasonably good job and used it in action. More than can be said for your middle-of-the-night conjectures or for your daddies with one casino, one home-built carrier and the whole of how to operate a carrier looming ahead of them.

Why don't you come down to earth?

It might give you two or three less topics to jump up and down and make an exhibition of yourself about, but the less you expose yourself, the better, for you; it reduces the number of people who merely laugh at your posts and move on. As I do, except on rare occasions like this one.

 

[GamoAccu]

Who told you this? India, with one aircraft carrier, did a reasonably good job and used it in action. More than can be said for your middle-of-the-night conjectures or for your daddies with one casino, one home-built carrier and the whole of how to operate a carrier looming ahead of them.

Why don't you come down to earth?

It might give you two or three less topics to jump up and down and make an exhibition of yourself about, but the less you expose yourself, the better, for you; it reduces the number of people who merely laugh at your posts and move on. As I do, except on rare occasions like this one.

Relax my Jai Hind nationalist guy. How did you even get the title as a "professional" and don't even know that a country would need at 3 aircraft carriers for training, maintenance, and operation to be effective. Go ask real navy experts who have written aircraft carrier articles about it. At least China aircraft carriers are always active unlike India's operational aircraft carrier sitting in the dock.

 

[HydraChess]

Can you provide us the link to the picture below that is CVN 71 and not another CVN? The picture looks and matches CVN 68 with the rusts according to the google and reddit.. And can you tell us what is that curvy thing on the aircraft carrier?

https://www.reddit.com/r/HumanForScale/comments/asq4mp

View attachment 841964

I have a much better thing for you. Here is a thesis submitted to MIT, Department of Ocean Engineering by a masters student. Refer to this page in it please. It clearly identifies that CVN-71DOES NOT have a bulbous bow while CVN-77 does.

Source : http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/91342/49898754-MIT.pdf;sequence=2


Now, I know a lot of people have a lot of hard-on (pun intended) for bulbous bow, mostly Chinese and Pakistani, but let me direct you to someone who knows about them and their pros and cons.

Here is a marine engineer who describes when and why a bulbous bow may make sense and when it can actually HURT to have one. Also, he tells HOW they really work.

Based on this, its clear why Indian naval designers chose to avoid having one. INS Vikrant is not a 100,000 tone super carrier. Most of its deployments will likely to be in India's regional water ie Bay of Bengal or Arabian sea and having a bulbous bow may actually HURT in terms of fuel consumption and pitching if it is operated at a speed different from what is optimal for bulbous bows. India for most of its part needs to project its power in its immediate vicinity and not half the way around the globe.

It might go for one in INS Vishal which is supposed to be bigger than INS Vikramaditya.

 

[GamoAccu]

I have a much better thing for you. Here is a thesis submitted to MIT, Department of Ocean Engineering by a masters student. Refer to this page in it please. It clearly identifies that CVN-71DOES NOT have a bulbous bow while CVN-77 does.

Source : http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/91342/49898754-MIT.pdf;sequence=2
Now, I know a lot of people have a lot of hard-on for bulbous bow, mostly Chinese and Pakistani, but let me direct you to someone who knows about them and their pros and cons.

Here is a marine engineer who describes when and why a bulbous bow may make sense and when it can actually HURT to have one. Also, he tells HOW they really work.

I am asking for the link for this picture you given us. What CVN is that?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Why can't you answer my basic questions? India has 50+ years of operating aircraft carrier and you can't even tell me where is the farthest it ever sailed to or countries visited? Are you embarrass to answer my questions?

Indian aircraft carrier groups have sailed to Oman, to Dubai and to Bandar Abbas.

Now that you know this, what difference does it make to your understanding of carrier doctrine or practice?

UK and France have more capability than India. In the pass 50+ year India still has not have their "Made in India" aircraft carrier in service. lol

You are comparing the capability of the recent Indian Navy that started as the Royal Indian Navy and became the Indian Navy in 1947 with the Royal Navy that began under Edward III, or with the French Navy that Richelieu started in the 17th century? Good comparison.

How many carriers did your country of origin build in that time?
OK, unfair question.
How many destroyers did your country of origin build in that time?
Damn. Not that either.
How many frigates....ah, to heck with it.

I believe it depends upon the country, its threat perception and its requirements. Having one carrier does not preclude a country from gaining require expertise. Does it really need an operational carrier at all the time? Its a question that countries need to find an answer for.

India optimally need 3 carriers, no doubt. One for arabian sea, one for bay of bengal and one under repairs. It has one operational, one under outfitting and one in planning. However, having one does not stop it from training the man power needed to operate carriers and fighter pilots for them.

The short answer is, "Yes."

The long answer is, "Yes. We showed it could be done, and naval action undertaken."

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Relax my Jai Hind nationalist guy. How did you even get the title as a "professional" and don't even know that a country would need at 3 aircraft carriers for training, maintenance, and operation to be effective. Go ask real navy experts who have written aircraft carrier articles about it. At least China aircraft carriers are always active unlike India's operational aircraft carrier sitting in the dock.

Bhai - a few years ago, Chinese were having none aircraft carrier.

Russian is also operating only one and same as other few countries.

Ins vikramaditya is going under refit and Ins vikrant will join soon to indian navy.

So it means that at least one aircraft carrier will always be available for the duty at any given time.

And critical times, both would be available.

3 aircraft carriers are required for at least 2 aircraft carriers at sea..... One for repair.. At any given time...

 

[Joe Shearer]

Relax my Jai Hind nationalist guy. How did you even get the title as a "professional" and don't even know that a country would need at 3 aircraft carriers for training, maintenance, and operation to be effective. Go ask real navy experts who have written aircraft carrier articles about it. At least China aircraft carriers are always active unlike India's operational aircraft carrier sitting in the dock.

Who is a real naval expert? You? The Chinese, whom you swoon about, don't have the three your naval experts want a country to have. Are you aware, genius, that not a single country in the world, not one, has that number in operation other than the US?

Incidentally, regarding MY expertise on naval matters, name a neutral person on the moderation staff and I will tell him about my specific naval expertise; he already knows why I am designated a professional on more than one forum.

 

[GamoAccu]

Indian aircraft carrier groups have sailed to Oman, to Dubai and to Bandar Abbas.

Now that you know this, what difference does it make to your understanding of carrier doctrine or practice?

You are comparing the capability of the recent Indian Navy that started as the Royal Indian Navy and became the Indian Navy in 1947 with the Royal Navy that began under Edward III, or with the French Navy that Richelieu started in the 17th century? Good comparison.

How many carriers did your country of origin build in that time?
OK, unfair question.
How many destroyers did your country of origin build in that time?
Damn. Not that either.
How many frigates....ah, to heck with it.


The short answer is, "Yes."

The long answer is, "Yes. We showed it could be done, and naval action undertaken."

Boasting about 50-60 years of aircraft carriers and India's first built aircraft carrier still not in service. lol

 

[Joe Shearer]

Boasting about 50-60 years of aircraft carriers and India's first built aircraft carrier still not in service. lol

And so?

What is the connection?

 

[HydraChess]

I am asking for the link for this picture you given us. What CVN is that?

If your link says its CVN 68, its CVN 68.

That being said, CVN 71 is from the same class and has very similar hull design.

 

[GamoAccu]

If your link says its CVN 68, its CVN 68.

That being said, CVN 71 is from the same class and has very similar hull design.

Can you tell us what is this curvy thing on the aircraft carrier?

 

[HydraChess]

Can you tell us what is this curvy thing on the aircraft carrier?

Why and whats the point?

I have already given enough references and reasons for why Bulbous bow is NOT a must in hull design even for carriers. Beyond that, I don't see a reason to further elucidate things.

 

[GamoAccu]

Why and whats the point?

You said that is not bulbous bow then what is that thing?

 

[HydraChess]

You said that is not bulbous bow then what is that thing?

Its not a bulbous bow thats what matters. You have reference for it too. Beyond that, I do not think I need to say anything.