INS Vikramaditya with su-33

[Cjc]

I was wondering how many su-33 could fit on the vik compared to the mig-29k if indea had decided to go that way, i think replacing 26 migs with 24 su-33 would work (thanks to the folding wings they didn't have that big of a square footage difference) but I don't really have the software to spot check this.

 

[CV12Hornet]

I doubt 24 Su-33 can replace 26 MiG-29K, especially on Vikramaditya. Vikramaditya's hanger is only 22.5 meters wide; while you can just barely squeeze three folded Su-33s abreast in there vice only two folded MiG-29Ks, in practice the fit is so tight that I doubt it would be done in operational practice. That the Su-33 is five meters longer is more relevant to the ability to cram more fighters into the carrier - not just in the hanger, but I'm looking at the starboard parking area on Vikramaditya and the Su-33 straight up doesn't fit in many of them, being too long.

Yeah, I think an extra five meters is going to make the plane intrude on the takeoff and landing zones in many of these parking spots.

 

[Bounce]

I thought the SU-33 was too big for it's elevators?

 

[CV12Hornet]

I thought the SU-33 was too big for it's elevators?

Correct, it's too long by about 3 meters.

 

[Cjc]

I thought the SU-33 was too big for it's elevators?

As far as I can tell (and I don't read hindi so its very posable that I missed it) but the elevators never came up when the discussions over the su-33 vs mig-29 were happening.

I doubt 24 Su-33 can replace 26 MiG-29K, especially on Vikramaditya. Vikramaditya's hanger is only 22.5 meters wide; while you can just barely squeeze three folded Su-33s abreast in there vice only two folded MiG-29Ks, in practice the fit is so tight that I doubt it would be done in operational practice. That the Su-33 is five meters longer is more relevant to the ability to cram more fighters into the carrier - not just in the hanger, but I'm looking at the starboard parking area on Vikramaditya and the Su-33 straight up doesn't fit in many of them, being too long.

Yeah, I think an extra five meters is going to make the plane intrude on the takeoff and landing zones in many of these parking spots.

I figured the length was going to be the big killer here. I wonder how hard it would be to make the su-33 have a folding nose? Either way how many su-33s do you think it could fit?

 

[paralay]

,

 

[CV12Hornet]

I figured the length was going to be the big killer here. I wonder how hard it would be to make the su-33 have a folding nose? Either way how many su-33s do you think it could fit?

A folding nose would be difficult; the avionics go right under the front of the cockpit.

Well, if the 24-meter number paralay posted is correct (Navypedia gives 22.5 meters) then 13 in the hanger. None on the flight deck, the parking area just plain isn't wide enough. If 22.5 meters, eight.

A 24-meter wide hanger allows three-abreast parking, and five Flankers parked end to end. Minus two spots for the elevator wells, that's 13. A 22.5-meter hanger, as I mentioned, only allows two-abreast parking.

 

[paralay]

,

 

[Anduriel]

The MiG-29K/KUB surpasses the Su-33 in "total combat effectiveness" by 2.1 times. The Su-33 was obsolete even before it was put into service in the nineties

You compare Su-33 with old systems to newer 9-41 with more modern electronics. But compare 9-41 to J-15, which is a modern Su-33, and I doubt that 9-41 will win.
If India really decided to go with Su-33, and implement necessary changes to elevators and other ship systems, we'd likely see a Su-33 with N011 and more.

 

[paralay]

,