Indian Naval Aviation : Updates and Discussions

[Sathya]

Navy to test Rafale-M jet for INS Vikrant

The Rafale-M fighter will be pushed through an intensive trial to assess whether it is best suited for IAC-1.

www.hindustantimes.com

Rafale-M fighter will be pushed through intensive trial at the 283 metre mock-up ski jump facility at INS Hansa for nearly 12 days to assess whether the fighter aircraft is best suited for IAC-1.

there is a strong possibility that the Indian Navy may ask the French manufacturers of the aircraft to lease four to five Rafale -M in 2022 so that the aircraft carrier is made operational.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Navy to test Rafale-M jet for INS Vikrant

The Rafale-M fighter will be pushed through an intensive trial to assess whether it is best suited for IAC-1.

www.hindustantimes.com

Rafale-M fighter will be pushed through intensive trial at the 283 metre mock-up ski jump facility at INS Hansa for nearly 12 days to assess whether the fighter aircraft is best suited for IAC-1.

there is a strong possibility that the Indian Navy may ask the French manufacturers of the aircraft to lease four to five Rafale -M in 2022 so that the aircraft carrier is made operational.

If this happens, would be a big issue for TEDBF. Even if say bare minimum of 12 aircrafts are imported to just get IAC1 a modern squadron, this will be a issue for TEDBF program. We need to remember that 2035-40 is the time when INS Vicky might get decommissioned. If that happens, it would be likely replaced by CATOBAR IAC2. So all the TEDBF effort would have meant for not more than 24-28 aircraft production run.

In my opinion, TEDBF should be designed keeping in mind CATOBAR and Stealth so that when IAC 2 comes online , and maybe it's sister ship to replace R33, we will have an system in place.

28 Rafale M if procured would be more than enough for IAC 1.

Just my 2 paisa

 

[Gautam]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1476492791232356352

 

[_Anonymous_]

If this happens, would be a big issue for TEDBF. Even if say bare minimum of 12 aircrafts are imported to just get IAC1 a modern squadron, this will be a issue for TEDBF program. We need to remember that 2035-40 is the time when INS Vicky might get decommissioned. If that happens, it would be likely replaced by CATOBAR IAC2. So all the TEDBF effort would have meant for not more than 24-28 aircraft production run.

In my opinion, TEDBF should be designed keeping in mind CATOBAR and Stealth so that when IAC 2 comes online , and maybe it's sister ship to replace R33, we will have an system in place.

28 Rafale M if procured would be more than enough for IAC 1.

Just my 2 paisa

Why aren't you looking at the possibility of the IN deploying shore based fighters as well in the near to long term future using the TEDBF or the fact that in view of budgetary constraints they could well go in for a sister ship of the INS Vikramaditya in the interim before going in for the definitive 60,000 Tr + in the 2030's , catapult , EMALS et all ?

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Why aren't you looking at the possibility of the IN deploying shore based fighters as well

6500-8000 hours is the minimum IN will get out of Mig29K fleet, that's minimum of 35 years of service. TEDBF/MRCBF will by end of 2035 ensure that the remaining lives of Mig29K is spent in Goa and A&N as shore based assets or reserves for R33 and R44.

Why not before, because even though it's a good option, neither the Navy has raised such a requirement as of now, nor any official gave any such hints.

Further we have Jaguars with Harpoons in Jamnagar, Su30MKI in Pune and Su30 with Brahmos in TN. This means that even if IN were to raise such a requirement, IAF will fight back saying that it's their domain. Untill the office of CDS has done the theaterisation and we come to know which sectors come under whom it's difficult. A&N will surely be under Navy, that's where a fighter detachment will surely be helpful. But you see the numbers still are not big.

in view of budgetary constraints they could well go in for a sister ship of the INS Vikramaditya in the interim

Budget won't cause that to happen. Because when we talk of adding a carrier , we talk if raising a CBG. That means additional 4-5 Air defence destroyers, 3-4 Frigates, a couple of SSNs. We may go for a STOBAR carrier, but that won't still be cheap. Because we still will need to order the same number of other capital ships. We will still need to order the same sensors. And we will be stuck with a fighter with limited capabilities.

We can say for sure Navy will not go for another STOBAR. We will have our IAC 2 by 2035 and it's sister ship by 2040 when R33 will likely retire.

There isn't simply a place for a STOBAR placed fighter without any stealth in current times. Untill TEDBF turns out to be a stealthy design for CATOBAR which can also fly from STOBAR, it would be Arjun all over again.

 

[_Anonymous_]

6500-8000 hours is the minimum IN will get out of Mig29K fleet, that's minimum of 35 years of service. TEDBF/MRCBF will by end of 2035 ensure that the remaining lives of Mig29K is spent in Goa and A&N as shore based assets or reserves for R33 and R44.

Why not before, because even though it's a good option, neither the Navy has raised such a requirement as of now, nor any official gave any such hints.

Further we have Jaguars with Harpoons in Jamnagar, Su30MKI in Pune and Su30 with Brahmos in TN. This means that even if IN were to raise such a requirement, IAF will fight back saying that it's their domain. Untill the office of CDS has done the theaterisation and we come to know which sectors come under whom it's difficult. A&N will surely be under Navy, that's where a fighter detachment will surely be helpful. But you see the numbers still are not big.

Budget won't cause that to happen. Because when we talk of adding a carrier , we talk if raising a CBG. That means additional 4-5 Air defence destroyers, 3-4 Frigates, a couple of SSNs. We may go for a STOBAR carrier, but that won't still be cheap. Because we still will need to order the same number of other capital ships. We will still need to order the same sensors. And we will be stuck with a fighter with limited capabilities.

We can say for sure Navy will not go for another STOBAR. We will have our IAC 2 by 2035 and it's sister ship by 2040 when R33 will likely retire.

There isn't simply a place for a STOBAR placed fighter without any stealth in current times. Untill TEDBF turns out to be a stealthy design for CATOBAR which can also fly from STOBAR, it would be Arjun all over again.

I've read chatter on Twitter from veterans saying that the IN doesn't expect to run the MiG-29Ks beyond 25yrs of service. @vstol Jockey

Agree with the rest of your points except the ones on STOBAR. At the end of the day we're up against the PN & PLAN not the USN .

Both STOBAR & non stealth fighters still find a place there till 2045 though arguably the ADA should come out with a LO TEDBF.

 

[Sathya]

6500-8000 hours is the minimum IN will get out of Mig29K fleet, that's minimum of 35 years of service. TEDBF/MRCBF will by end of 2035 ensure that the remaining lives of Mig29K is spent in Goa and A&N as shore based assets or reserves for R33 and R44.

Why not before, because even though it's a good option, neither the Navy has raised such a requirement as of now, nor any official gave any such hints.

Further we have Jaguars with Harpoons in Jamnagar, Su30MKI in Pune and Su30 with Brahmos in TN. This means that even if IN were to raise such a requirement, IAF will fight back saying that it's their domain. Untill the office of CDS has done the theaterisation and we come to know which sectors come under whom it's difficult. A&N will surely be under Navy, that's where a fighter detachment will surely be helpful. But you see the numbers still are not big.

Budget won't cause that to happen. Because when we talk of adding a carrier , we talk if raising a CBG. That means additional 4-5 Air defence destroyers, 3-4 Frigates, a couple of SSNs. We may go for a STOBAR carrier, but that won't still be cheap. Because we still will need to order the same number of other capital ships. We will still need to order the same sensors. And we will be stuck with a fighter with limited capabilities.

We can say for sure Navy will not go for another STOBAR. We will have our IAC 2 by 2035 and it's sister ship by 2040 when R33 will likely retire.

There isn't simply a place for a STOBAR placed fighter without any stealth in current times. Untill TEDBF turns out to be a stealthy design for CATOBAR which can also fly from STOBAR, it would be Arjun all over again.

i think in DDR interview with ADA, it was told TEDBF is not designed to be cartobar capable.
Not sure though. Will check later.

 

[randomradio]

If this happens, would be a big issue for TEDBF. Even if say bare minimum of 12 aircrafts are imported to just get IAC1 a modern squadron, this will be a issue for TEDBF program. We need to remember that 2035-40 is the time when INS Vicky might get decommissioned. If that happens, it would be likely replaced by CATOBAR IAC2. So all the TEDBF effort would have meant for not more than 24-28 aircraft production run.

In my opinion, TEDBF should be designed keeping in mind CATOBAR and Stealth so that when IAC 2 comes online , and maybe it's sister ship to replace R33, we will have an system in place.

28 Rafale M if procured would be more than enough for IAC 1.

Just my 2 paisa

INS Vikramaditya has a 30-year standard life and a further 10 years with life extension. So that's closer to 2050.

And MRCBF will shift over to IAC-2 when ready.

 

[randomradio]

6500-8000 hours is the minimum IN will get out of Mig29K fleet, that's minimum of 35 years of service. TEDBF/MRCBF will by end of 2035 ensure that the remaining lives of Mig29K is spent in Goa and A&N as shore based assets or reserves for R33 and R44.

Why not before, because even though it's a good option, neither the Navy has raised such a requirement as of now, nor any official gave any such hints.

Further we have Jaguars with Harpoons in Jamnagar, Su30MKI in Pune and Su30 with Brahmos in TN. This means that even if IN were to raise such a requirement, IAF will fight back saying that it's their domain. Untill the office of CDS has done the theaterisation and we come to know which sectors come under whom it's difficult. A&N will surely be under Navy, that's where a fighter detachment will surely be helpful. But you see the numbers still are not big.

The IN needs 4 squadrons of 19 each for 2 STOBAR carriers. That takes us to 76 jets. Then we can assume 19 jets for each of our main islands in the A&N chain. That's 38 jets. So there's potential for 114 TEDBF.

 

[randomradio]

We can but we won't do so without an approval. It is likely we will get the Russians to agree to replacing their subsystems with ours. Replacing older Russian sub systems with newer Russian subsystems is not possible with the CAATSA. Going against American sanctions for important systems like S-400 makes sense. But picking fights over relatively low end stuff is not worth it.

The Russians would want to keep their hold over the Indian naval aviation market especially with Boeing & Dassault jumping into the fray. It makes sense for the Russians to give in to our demands & not bicker over low end stuff if it mean orders for high end stuff (like S-500, S-550) keeps coming.

We have an advantage in bargaining & it seems we are pressing our advantage. Let's see how it goes.

That's what they are seemingly trying to do. The eventual goal is to get the entire Russian sensor suite replaced with Indian sensors, including the radar.

CAATSA doesn't cover systems that are already operational. And it's actually more desirable for the Americans to see India switching our Russian stuff with Indian. We also need Indian stuff on our carriers so they can speak with American systems.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

The IN needs 4 squadrons of 19 each for 2 STOBAR carriers. That takes us to 76 jets. Then we can assume 19 jets for each of our main islands in the A&N chain. That's 38 jets. So there's potential for 114 TEDBF.

INS Vikramaditya has a 30-year standard life and a further 10 years with life extension. So that's closer to 2050.

And MRCBF will shift over to IAC-2 when ready.

If the MRCBF and TEDBF can fly from CATOBAR with minimal changes , that solves almost all problems.

 

[Ashwin]

i think in DDR interview with ADA, it was told TEDBF is not designed to be cartobar capable.
Not sure though. Will check later.

He said it's easy to add CATOBAR if navy asks.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

i think in DDR interview with ADA, it was told TEDBF is not designed to be cartobar capable.
Not sure though. Will check later.

If with minimal changes that can be done , then it's ok. But without it , it will be difficult for TEDBF to take off, if MRCBF happens. Because Navy will be now eventually looking to switch to full CATOBAR operations to remove any limitations on aircrafts and use other advantages like E2D.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

First we need to see if both Dassault and Boeing get their aircraft to perform with acceptable results from SBTF. If both do pass then we will need to choose.

 

[Sathya]

If with minimal changes that can be done , then it's ok. But without it , it will be difficult for TEDBF to take off, if MRCBF happens. Because Navy will be now eventually looking to switch to full CATOBAR operations to remove any limitations on aircrafts and use other advantages like E2D.

In interview he said it ll take 1 year to redesign according to performance requirements.

But we are making stobar capable aircraft only. Which cannot be converted later.

Without knowing aircraft weight & cartobar parameters I think we are unable strengthen the aircraft.

I wonder how Rafale designed Naval aircraft first.

 

[Ashwin]

In interview he said it ll take 1 year to redesign according to performance requirements.

But we are making stobar capable aircraft only. Which cannot be converted later.

Without knowing aircraft weight & cartobar parameters I think we are unable strengthen the aircraft.

I wonder how Rafale designed Naval aircraft first.

It's preliminary design please It's a long way from design freeze. There is ample time.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

In interview he said it ll take 1 year to redesign according to performance requirements.

But we are making stobar capable aircraft only. Which cannot be converted later.

Without knowing aircraft weight & cartobar parameters I think we are unable strengthen the aircraft.

I wonder how Rafale designed Naval aircraft first.

There only are so many variations for CATOBAR today. I think with even France ordering EMALS for its future carrier , we can have rough estimates atleast of what a possible IAC2 will look like. With EMALS fixed and more or less the takeoff length known , designers can keep some room for possible adjustments in future.

 

[randomradio]

First we need to see if both Dassault and Boeing get their aircraft to perform with acceptable results from SBTF. If both do pass then we will need to choose.

SH already cleared it "last year". We are in 2022.

If the MRCBF and TEDBF can fly from CATOBAR with minimal changes , that solves almost all problems.

It's not necessary. I forgot that the French are only going to operate 20+ FCAS from their new carrier. So in our case, 26 MRCBF is more than enough even for IAC-2. The rest will be composed of drones.

 

[randomradio]

It's preliminary design please It's a long way from design freeze. There is ample time.

They shouldn't switch TEDBF to CATOBAR. It will increase risk and delay the induction. Plus CATOBAR configuration will decrease the overall capability of the TEDBF from the first 2 carriers due to the increased weight. And developing two different variants is wasteful without enough numbers being ordered.

A better option is to develop a new CATOBAR capable jet post TEDBF for IAC-3, 4 etc.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

SH already cleared it "last year". We are in 2022

Isn't it supposed to come at SBTF too?

The rest will be composed of drones.

That's one way to look at things.