INS Vikrant (IAC1) & INS Vikramaditya - News & Discussions

Hello everyone. I'm new here and I don't know how things work here but I wish to straight away begin by asking a few questions. Please bear with me😅 🙏

Firstly, how effective is the MiG 29K as a naval fighter? Despite it being quite a capable and decent naval fighter, I feel like it's capabilities are hardly talked about or so to say not properly appreciated by both our country and also by defense experts and navies of other countries. Is it because of the serviceability, maintenance and design issues it face? From what I've learned (Correct me if I'm wrong), the MiG 35 is a further development of the MiG 29M and Mig 29K. MiG 29K has a lot of similarities with the much hyped and advertised MiG 35. Even their engines are the same (RD 33MK). Both of them basically have the same weapons package. A lot of articles on the internet keep saying that MiG 35 is a very modern aircraft capable of keeping up with even the most capable 4th gen fighters like the F16, Super Hornet, Rafale and so on. Russia is even pitching it for MMRCA 2. So why is it that the MiG 29K which is (Again, correct me if I'm wrong) of the same specification and design and capability as the MiG 35, regarded so poorly by our navy and in worse cases, made into a source of joke and a laughing stock by a lot of defence experts and analysts from other countries. I know that they have different radars, MiG 29K has the Zhuk-ME while the MiG-35 is supposed to get the Zhuk-AESA. But the rest are more or less the same or very similar and also I feel that the present radar of the 29K is still a decent one and not bad. And apart from the radar, all other aspects of the 29K is considered modern and capable.

Secondly, what role will will our carriers play in a future conflict with Pakistan or China? I read in an online article (I forgot the source, I'm sorry) that our carriers have too few planes to spare in order to make a significant strike against the Pakistani mainland from the sea. It also says that the payload and range of the MiG 29K is severely limited due to the STOBAR configuration of our carriers and they'll be mostly limited to air defence roles for our navy vessels against Pakistani attacks from the mainland with land based fighters. Is this true?
 
AnBU said:
Hello everyone. I'm new here and I don't know how things work here but I wish to straight away begin by asking a few questions. Please bear with me😅 🙏

Firstly, how effective is the MiG 29K as a naval fighter? Despite it being quite a capable and decent naval fighter, I feel like it's capabilities are hardly talked about or so to say not properly appreciated by both our country and also by defense experts and navies of other countries. Is it because of the serviceability, maintenance and design issues it face? From what I've learned (Correct me if I'm wrong), the MiG 35 is a further development of the MiG 29M and Mig 29K. MiG 29K has a lot of similarities with the much hyped and advertised MiG 35. Even their engines are the same (RD 33MK). Both of them basically have the same weapons package. A lot of articles on the internet keep saying that MiG 35 is a very modern aircraft capable of keeping up with even the most capable 4th gen fighters like the F16, Super Hornet, Rafale and so on. Russia is even pitching it for MMRCA 2. So why is it that the MiG 29K which is (Again, correct me if I'm wrong) of the same specification and design and capability as the MiG 35, regarded so poorly by our navy and in worse cases, made into a source of joke and a laughing stock by a lot of defence experts and analysts from other countries. I know that they have different radars, MiG 29K has the Zhuk-ME while the MiG-35 is supposed to get the Zhuk-AESA. But the rest are more or less the same or very similar and also I feel that the present radar of the 29K is still a decent one and not bad. And apart from the radar, all other aspects of the 29K is considered modern and capable.

Secondly, what role will will our carriers play in a future conflict with Pakistan or China? I read in an online article (I forgot the source, I'm sorry) that our carriers have too few planes to spare in order to make a significant strike against the Pakistani mainland from the sea. It also says that the payload and range of the MiG 29K is severely limited due to the STOBAR configuration of our carriers and they'll be mostly limited to air defence roles for our navy vessels against Pakistani attacks from the mainland with land based fighters. Is this true?
Click to expand...

The Mig-29K is a pretty good aircraft. It's good enough to deal with threats that use pre-2000s technology.

It's in good standing in the navy. The only people who think it's a bad aircraft are those who are not users of the aircraft.

With the exception of F-16 Block 52 and JF-17 Block 3, it's on par/better than the rest of the PAF fleet.

It can perform air superiority and strike against Pakistan, while also diverting a significant amount of assets away from Pak's eastern border. It can perform air defence against PLAN at the Sunda strait, while also launching AShMs at Chinese ships.

It definitely needs an AESA and modern BVR upgrade in the near future.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AnBU
randomradio said:
The Mig-29K is a pretty good aircraft. It's good enough to deal with threats that use pre-2000s technology.

It's in good standing in the navy. The only people who think it's a bad aircraft are those who are not users of the aircraft.

With the exception of F-16 Block 52 and JF-17 Block 3, it's on par/better than the rest of the PAF fleet.

It can perform air superiority and strike against Pakistan, while also diverting a significant amount of assets away from Pak's western border. It can perform air defence against PLAN at the Sunda strait, while also launching AShMs at Chinese ships.

It definitely needs an AESA and modern BVR upgrade in the near future.
Click to expand...

I see. Thank you so much. (y)
 
Make_In_India_V5_cdr (2).png

Recent image
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Pundrick, Chain Smoker, Nikhil and 5 others
randomradio said:
The Mig-29K is a pretty good aircraft. It's good enough to deal with threats that use pre-2000s technology.

It's in good standing in the navy. The only people who think it's a bad aircraft are those who are not users of the aircraft.

With the exception of F-16 Block 52 and JF-17 Block 3, it's on par/better than the rest of the PAF fleet.

It can perform air superiority and strike against Pakistan, while also diverting a significant amount of assets away from Pak's eastern border. It can perform air defence against PLAN at the Sunda strait, while also launching AShMs at Chinese ships.

It definitely needs an AESA and modern BVR upgrade in the near future.
Click to expand...

I am the last person to disregard capabilities of the enemy , but in terms of kinematic performance jf17 block 3 will not come close to mig29 . I have no idea on block 3 electronics etc so till that time I will hold it inferior to mig29k .

How can one compare a twin engined jet with a long operational history with a single engined jet with dogey history butted up with propaganda .

Let block 3 come then everything will be clear

LCA mk1a will chew up block 3

One can gauge paf confidence when they kept jf17 in the rear while the iaf mig21 went into a merge with f16s . Why did the jf17 not intercede , one of the reasons inferior kinematic performance
 
Last edited:
hellbent said:
I am the last person to disregard capabilities of the enemy , but in terms of kinematic performance jf17 block 3 will not come close to mig29 . I have no idea on block 3 electronics etc so till that time I will hold it inferior to mig29k .
Click to expand...

In terms of performance, the Mig-29K is naturally better than the JF-17 and more or less on par with the F-16. But I was referring to electronics. The Mig-29K is about 10 years behind the JF-17 B3.

But, since it's a naval aircraft, it's more likely to use avionics in comparison to kinematics to get the job done. The F-16 has a BVR missile advantage, and the JF-17 B3 has a radar and BVR missile advantage.

If the JF-17 fails to get the PL-15, then it's a different story.
 
randomradio said:
In terms of performance, the Mig-29K is naturally better than the JF-17 and more or less on par with the F-16. But I was referring to electronics. The Mig-29K is about 10 years behind the JF-17 B3.

But, since it's a naval aircraft, it's more likely to use avionics in comparison to kinematics to get the job done. The F-16 has a BVR missile advantage, and the JF-17 B3 has a radar and BVR missile advantage.

If the JF-17 fails to get the PL-15, then it's a different story.
Click to expand...

Lets agree to disagree

Jf17 b3 radar performance spec is a matter of speculation and as for bvr advantage the point is moot , because tactics translates to bvr advantage . Range is a over blown factor thanks to media feed perception . What matters is the kill probability and the NEZ which is in turn tied to the aircraft performance - kinematic and at sensor level to deliver and guide the missile

Performance of most bvr decreases with range , and if defending aircraft is kinematically strong it will get in the radar notch at every instance , concurrently onboard EWs will do the job to evade the bvr

Pl 15 is not a magic stick which will find its mark always , only more than necessary lungi wetting by Indians.

It best it will have a mission kill if things go well , forget about target kill at such long ranges unless the pilot is incompetent or unlucky

Personally don't think such discussions serve any purpose

Anyways let see what future holds

As I said LCA mk1a + I derby er will chew jf17 b3 + pl 15 , hold me to it .
 
Last edited:
hellbent said:
Lets agree to disagree

Jf17 b3 radar performance spec is a matter of speculation and as for bvr advantage the point is moot , because tactics translates to bvr advantage . Range is a over blown factor thanks to media feed perception . What matters is the kill probability and the NEZ which is in turn tied to the aircraft performance - kinematic and at sensor level to deliver and guide the missile

Performance of most bvr decreases with range , and if defending aircraft is kinematically strong it will get in the radar notch at every instance , concurrently onboard EWs will do the job to evade the bvr

Pl 15 is not a magic stick which will find its mark always , only more than necessary lungi wetting by Indians.

It best it will have a mission kill if things go well , forget about target kill at such long ranges unless the pilot is incompetent or unlucky

Personally don't think such discussions serve any purpose

Anyways let see what future holds
Click to expand...

The PL-15 isn't just a perception. There's no way the US would have committed to making a stopgap BVR missile as an emergency just because of perception.

Also, no, you can't use your previous perception of BVR missiles and apply it to the PL-15. A dual pulse motor changes the equation quite a bit since the missile can regain energy during end game.

If long range wasn't important, then no one would bother with it.

As I said LCA mk1a + I derby er will chew jf17 b3 + pl 15 , hold me to it .
Click to expand...

Yep. But that's irrelevant though. 'Cause Mig-29K.
 
Tatvamasi said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1270009475462770688
Click to expand...
The problem is that we simply don't have the economics to put up a 3rd CBG anytime soon. A carrier doesn't mean a single ship. It means 10 billion worth of aviation assets it will carry, it means dedicated SSNs , larger and extensive fleet of resupply vessels, more Air Defence destroyers and frigates and more ASW assets.

Now the problem is that we have a very old SSK fleet. The modern ones lack their torpedoes. AIP is still a distant dream. That needs investments. Not small but billions.

Then we will have 2nd operational SSBN within a year maybe. And 3rd by 2024-25. It means we will need SSNs to protect them. That will need funding.

We don't have any viable Minesweeping capability as of now. That needs investments. Imagine operating aircraft carrier but no Minesweeper?

Our ships are still flying vintage helicopters. That needs investments.

And within 5 years, our Corvette fleet inducted during Soviet era and 90s will start retiring en-mass. We will need then funding to NGMV , NGC and NOPV projects.

We simply cannot afford the 3rd aircraft carrier. Anybody who says otherwise is living in a lala land.

What we need vs what we can afford are two different things.
GuardianRED said:
View attachment 16368
Click to expand...
I haven't yet seen Mig29K flying from either Kuznetsov or Vicky with even a A2A load out. That puts doubts.

Hopefully Boeing and Dassault give us options wherein the aircraft atleast can take off with 4 AAMs and 1 AShCM/2 Guided Munitions from the STOBAR carriers.

Will mean real capability addition to our fleet.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Chain Smoker, _Anonymous_ and GuardianRED
Tatvamasi said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1270009475462770688
Click to expand...

The article underestimates the cost of a carrier, let alone a CBG.

While I definitely agree we need an additional carrier at the minimum, and would even argue that we actually need 6, but the reality is we won't be able to achieve it anytime soon simply because we have failed at the modernisation of the air force and funds are needed there to fix that big hole in our capability.
 
INS Vikramaditya In the ocean

INS Vikramaditya is a warship of 44,500 tonnes, 284 metres long and 60 metres high. In a comparison way, its length is equal to about three football fields and the height is about 22-storey building. The warship is very inspiring and encouraging because of strategic importance. A total of 22 boat floors are present in the ship.


INS Vikramaditya in Indian Navy

With more than 1,600 personnel on board the vessel, INS Vikramaditya is literally a 'city of walks''. With a capacity of more than 8,000 tonnes of LSHSD, the warship has more than 7,000 nautical miles or 13,000 km. is equipped with the potential of strategic activity to the extent of more than that.

Fully prepared vessel during launch & deployment

In order to enable the city of Steel to pass through sea waves at a speed of up to 30 nautical miles on the go of this 44,500 tonne, the vessel is powered by 08 new generation steam boilers producing a total capacity of 180,000 SHP production.
These boilers are larger than the height of four giant conductors, each diameter, than the average male height. Four such propellers - four shaft configurations are another first in the Indian Navy.
The power generation capacity on the ship is about 18 MW which is sufficient to meet the lighting requirement of a small town.
A comprehensive improvement in sensors including long-range air surveillance radars, improved electronic warfare room equipment is able to monitor the warship for a distance of more than 500 km around it.


INS Vikramaditya: Everything you Need to Know about warship
 
Ashwin said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1288716823769178112
Click to expand...
NEW DELHI: The commissioning of India’s second aircraft carrier has been delayed till September next year because of the Covid-19 pandemic. While reconciling to this setback, the Navy remains all the more keen to push its case for a third aircraft carrier as well as two new fighter squadrons to counter China’s expanding footprint in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).
m.timesofindia.com

Indian Navy keen on 3rd aircraft carrier to retain edge over China, even as 2nd delayed yet again | India News - Times of India

India News: The commissioning of India’s second aircraft carrier has been delayed till Sept 2021 because of the Covid-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, the Navy remains k
m.timesofindia.com m.timesofindia.com
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hellfire
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom