as you see in above calculations, the aircraft suffers rolling friction drag and aerodynamic drag at the start of take off roll. so we need to calculate an equivalent deck roll weight which will be a combination of aircraft weight+rolling friction drag +aerodynamic drag. as the speed increases, the rolling friction drag reduces as the load on wheels reduces due to increased lift but the aerodynamic drag increases as the speed increases. so this figure will be nearly same thruout the deck roll.
Once the aircraft leaves the ramp, there is only aerodynamic drag and that too for 10* alpha for my design and this is considerable drag due to gears being down, flaps in take off position. Now you have to add this drag value to take off weight to calculate the acceleration. Adding engine thrust to lift due to launch angle or Beta as we call it, will also result in lower thrust value as the residual thrust for acceleration will be total thrust= vertical thrust+horizontal thrust or Horizontal thrust=total Thrust-vertical thrust. from the equivalent take off weight, you subtract the engine vertical lift component and calculate the acceleration using residual horizontal thrust. The drag value will remain constant during the trajectory as the drag reduction due to raising of gear is made up by the increased speed.
The time available for acceleration is only half the time of full trajectory from leaving the ramp to descending to ramp height as IN wants positive climb rate thruout the acceleration of the aircraft.
The above calculations are 2xHTFE 40KN dry and 64Kn wet thrust engines for MSA.
Once the aircraft leaves the ramp, there is only aerodynamic drag and that too for 10* alpha for my design and this is considerable drag due to gears being down, flaps in take off position. Now you have to add this drag value to take off weight to calculate the acceleration. Adding engine thrust to lift due to launch angle or Beta as we call it, will also result in lower thrust value as the residual thrust for acceleration will be total thrust= vertical thrust+horizontal thrust or Horizontal thrust=total Thrust-vertical thrust. from the equivalent take off weight, you subtract the engine vertical lift component and calculate the acceleration using residual horizontal thrust. The drag value will remain constant during the trajectory as the drag reduction due to raising of gear is made up by the increased speed.
The time available for acceleration is only half the time of full trajectory from leaving the ramp to descending to ramp height as IN wants positive climb rate thruout the acceleration of the aircraft.
The above calculations are 2xHTFE 40KN dry and 64Kn wet thrust engines for MSA.
Multi-Role Carrier Borne Fighter For The Indian Navy - Updates & Discussions
I think you can imagine that this point has not gone unnoticed and that there have been serious discussions between Dassault and the IN to solve it.
Last edited:
Both Rafale and SH have this problem. The only way to fix it is to cut the decks and modify the lifts. But Gorky's smallest lift will cut into the flight line.
What’s Wrong With The U.S. Navy’s F/A-18s?
Lara Seligman
The U.S. Navy flag officer leading an investigation into a spike in unexplained physiological events across the service’s fighter and trainer aircraft believes her team is turning the corner on finding a solution to the problem in the F/A-18 fleet.
But the Navy has a long way to go before pilots can climb into the cockpit without fearing potentially lethal changes in pressure or oxygen during flight.
The stakes are high for Boeing, which builds the legacy F/A-18A-D Hornet, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler electronic-warfare variant, all of which have experienced a sharp increase in hypoxia-like physiological events (PE) in the last decade. During a Feb. 6 congressional hearing, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.), ranking member on the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee, stopped just short of calling for a production halt.
Tsongas called on the Navy and Boeing to make improvements to the aircraft “that make them safer for our brave men and women in the military to operate, because we know there are lives at risk.”
It seems the Navy is heeding her advice. Rear Adm. Sarah Joyner and her PE team currently believe hypoxia—defined as lack of oxygen to the blood—and decompression events are the two most likely causes of the recent PEs, according to Joyner’s written testimony. In response, the service is looking to make a series of design changes to the F/A-18’s Onboard Oxygen-Generation System (OBOGS) and Environmental Control System (ECS) that it hopes will make the aircraft safer to operate, Joyner said during the hearing.
After almost a year of work, the team is beginning to see signs that the modifications are working, Joyner says.
“On F/A-18s, we are turning the corner,” Joyner told the subcommittee. On the sidelines of the hearing, she told Aviation Week: “We are going after the ECS to make it as steady as possible. We are going after the oxygen system to make sure we understand exactly what is going on. . . . PEs are not going to go away, but we are going to try to do our best to mitigate them and make them mild in nature as best we can.”
Most notably, the Navy intends to issue a request for proposals (RFP) to industry in the near future for a new F/A-18 OBOGS, Joyner confirms. The current version is built by Cobham. In particular, the Navy wants to replace the concentrator, the heart of the system, to conform to the latest MIL-STD 3050, Joyner tells Aviation Week.
She wants the new F/A-18 OBOGS to adopt some of the features of the F-35 system, built by Honeywell, including inlet/outlet pressure and data monitoring, she says. She could not provide a time line for release of the RFP.
The Navy has also redesigned certain internal components of the existing OBOGS to provide an improved filter and to incorporate a catalyst that will prevent carbon monoxide from reaching the pilot, Joyner stated in her written testimony. These new components have been installed in 92% of the in-service F/A-18 fleet.
A NASA team looking into the PEs pointed out in its recent comprehensive report that the existing OBOGS was originally qualified and accepted with “dry air under steady-state flow conditions,” which generally does not reflect actual flight operating conditions. The Navy intends to continue testing the OBOGS in realistic, off-nominal conditions, but Joyner tells Aviation Week that previous such tests have failed to make the system perform in an unsatisfactory manner.
“We’ve baked it, cooked it, soaked it, done tremendous badness to this concentrator, and we haven’t managed to make it really perform poorly,” Joyner says.
In addition to the OBOGS issues, the NASA report pointed out potential design flaws with the ECS, which is essentially the air-conditioning system of the aircraft. A problem with the F/A-18 breathing gas system as a whole is that the OBOGS gets fed last, according to the report. The enormous amounts of cooling air required for avionics and radars (particularly on the Growlers) means that the ECS controls “preferentially direct flow to them,” it concludes.
This is a particular problem for the newer Super Hornets and the Growlers, which have substantially larger demands for airflow than legacy aircraft, due to the sheer amount of electronics stuffed onto the airframe. Despite the increased demand for cooling air, key ECS components and primary ducting systems are essentially unchanged, the NASA team writes.
They also pointed out that significant changes in cabin pressure can occur due to the way the Cabin Pressure System is designed. There is no active pressure control in the cockpit, and there is a general lack of data about how the ECS performs in a real-life flight environment, according to the report.
Further, the Navy appears to have little insight into elements of the ECS control programming logic, because this information was not part of the original contract deliverable for the F/A-18—which was first fielded in the 1980s—“and therefore may no longer be documented in any form,” the NASA team writes.
Joyner disagrees with the NASA conclusion that the ECS controls preferentially direct flow to the avionics over the OBOGS. However, she agrees that the Navy needs to better regulate the ECS to ensure steady airflow.
The service is implementing eight “corrections” to the ECS to try to “smooth the flow,” she told the subcommittee. Meanwhile the legacy Hornets are undergoing a phased ECS overhaul, which will include replacing several critical components such as valves, duct lines and brackets. In addition, the Navy is working with Boeing to upgrade the ECS software on the F/A-18 and EA-18G Growler to mitigate fluctuations in cabin pressurization due to moisture freezing in the system’s piping, Joyner says.
The service also intends to develop and install a new system to monitor cabin air pressure and alert the pilots to any abnormalities as well as to replace the F/A-18’s cabin pressure regulator valve, Joyner confirmed during the hearing. Right now, aircrew carry “SlamSticks,” small pressure recording devices, on all sorties to help investigators track and collect cabin pressure data.
The Navy has constructed an ECS laboratory to further investigate the issue, according to Joyner’s testimony.
She cited the success of the changes the Navy has made to the T-45 Goshawk trainer as reason for Congress to have confidence in the PE team’s approach to the F/A-18. After a similar cluster of PEs caused the service to ground the Goshawk fleet in April, the T-45s are now fully operational, Joyner says.
The U.S. Navy’s legacy F/A-18A-D Hornet, F/A-18E and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler electronic warfare variant, the backbone of naval aviation, have all seen a sharp increase in hypoxia-like physiological events in the last decade. Credit: Seaman Ryan Carter/U.S. Navy
In addition to updating maintenance and cleaning procedures for the T-45’s OBOGS, the PE team also installed new sieve beds—to filter out contaminants—and a new water separator, and incorporated a carbon monoxide catalyst, according to Joyner’s testimony.
The Navy also fielded new CRU-123 solid-state oxygen-monitoring units, which alert aircrew of changes in delivery changes. This ability to log data has provided “invaluable” insight into the performance of the T-45 oxygen system and given aircrew “new confidence,” Joyner says. As of Jan. 24, a total of 163 new oxygen monitors have been installed.
The Navy has also released a draft RFP for a new T-45 oxygen concentrator, dubbed the GGU-25, which will be a “significant increase in capability” over the 1980s-era system the aircraft now uses, she adds.
“We have turned the corner on [the] T-45,” Joyner says. But “we are not declaring victory. We have a Root Cause Corrective Analysis team that goes line by line, starting with the human, ending with the human, trying to find the root cause for both the T-45 and the F/A-18 [PEs].”
The Navy plans to install an automatic backup oxygen system on the T-45, but it has no plans to install a similar system at this time on the F/A-18, Joyner confirmed in response to questions from Tsongas.
Lara Seligman
The U.S. Navy flag officer leading an investigation into a spike in unexplained physiological events across the service’s fighter and trainer aircraft believes her team is turning the corner on finding a solution to the problem in the F/A-18 fleet.
But the Navy has a long way to go before pilots can climb into the cockpit without fearing potentially lethal changes in pressure or oxygen during flight.
The stakes are high for Boeing, which builds the legacy F/A-18A-D Hornet, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler electronic-warfare variant, all of which have experienced a sharp increase in hypoxia-like physiological events (PE) in the last decade. During a Feb. 6 congressional hearing, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.), ranking member on the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee, stopped just short of calling for a production halt.
- A top lawmaker stopped just short of calling for halting production of Boeing’s F/A-18s
- The Navy believes it is “turning the corner” on the F/A-18 PEs
- The service will issue an RFP for a new F/A-18 OBOGS
- NASA report points out potential design flaws in the F/A-18 ECS
Tsongas called on the Navy and Boeing to make improvements to the aircraft “that make them safer for our brave men and women in the military to operate, because we know there are lives at risk.”
It seems the Navy is heeding her advice. Rear Adm. Sarah Joyner and her PE team currently believe hypoxia—defined as lack of oxygen to the blood—and decompression events are the two most likely causes of the recent PEs, according to Joyner’s written testimony. In response, the service is looking to make a series of design changes to the F/A-18’s Onboard Oxygen-Generation System (OBOGS) and Environmental Control System (ECS) that it hopes will make the aircraft safer to operate, Joyner said during the hearing.
After almost a year of work, the team is beginning to see signs that the modifications are working, Joyner says.
“On F/A-18s, we are turning the corner,” Joyner told the subcommittee. On the sidelines of the hearing, she told Aviation Week: “We are going after the ECS to make it as steady as possible. We are going after the oxygen system to make sure we understand exactly what is going on. . . . PEs are not going to go away, but we are going to try to do our best to mitigate them and make them mild in nature as best we can.”
Most notably, the Navy intends to issue a request for proposals (RFP) to industry in the near future for a new F/A-18 OBOGS, Joyner confirms. The current version is built by Cobham. In particular, the Navy wants to replace the concentrator, the heart of the system, to conform to the latest MIL-STD 3050, Joyner tells Aviation Week.
She wants the new F/A-18 OBOGS to adopt some of the features of the F-35 system, built by Honeywell, including inlet/outlet pressure and data monitoring, she says. She could not provide a time line for release of the RFP.
The Navy has also redesigned certain internal components of the existing OBOGS to provide an improved filter and to incorporate a catalyst that will prevent carbon monoxide from reaching the pilot, Joyner stated in her written testimony. These new components have been installed in 92% of the in-service F/A-18 fleet.
A NASA team looking into the PEs pointed out in its recent comprehensive report that the existing OBOGS was originally qualified and accepted with “dry air under steady-state flow conditions,” which generally does not reflect actual flight operating conditions. The Navy intends to continue testing the OBOGS in realistic, off-nominal conditions, but Joyner tells Aviation Week that previous such tests have failed to make the system perform in an unsatisfactory manner.
“We’ve baked it, cooked it, soaked it, done tremendous badness to this concentrator, and we haven’t managed to make it really perform poorly,” Joyner says.
In addition to the OBOGS issues, the NASA report pointed out potential design flaws with the ECS, which is essentially the air-conditioning system of the aircraft. A problem with the F/A-18 breathing gas system as a whole is that the OBOGS gets fed last, according to the report. The enormous amounts of cooling air required for avionics and radars (particularly on the Growlers) means that the ECS controls “preferentially direct flow to them,” it concludes.
This is a particular problem for the newer Super Hornets and the Growlers, which have substantially larger demands for airflow than legacy aircraft, due to the sheer amount of electronics stuffed onto the airframe. Despite the increased demand for cooling air, key ECS components and primary ducting systems are essentially unchanged, the NASA team writes.
They also pointed out that significant changes in cabin pressure can occur due to the way the Cabin Pressure System is designed. There is no active pressure control in the cockpit, and there is a general lack of data about how the ECS performs in a real-life flight environment, according to the report.
Further, the Navy appears to have little insight into elements of the ECS control programming logic, because this information was not part of the original contract deliverable for the F/A-18—which was first fielded in the 1980s—“and therefore may no longer be documented in any form,” the NASA team writes.
Joyner disagrees with the NASA conclusion that the ECS controls preferentially direct flow to the avionics over the OBOGS. However, she agrees that the Navy needs to better regulate the ECS to ensure steady airflow.
The service is implementing eight “corrections” to the ECS to try to “smooth the flow,” she told the subcommittee. Meanwhile the legacy Hornets are undergoing a phased ECS overhaul, which will include replacing several critical components such as valves, duct lines and brackets. In addition, the Navy is working with Boeing to upgrade the ECS software on the F/A-18 and EA-18G Growler to mitigate fluctuations in cabin pressurization due to moisture freezing in the system’s piping, Joyner says.
The service also intends to develop and install a new system to monitor cabin air pressure and alert the pilots to any abnormalities as well as to replace the F/A-18’s cabin pressure regulator valve, Joyner confirmed during the hearing. Right now, aircrew carry “SlamSticks,” small pressure recording devices, on all sorties to help investigators track and collect cabin pressure data.
The Navy has constructed an ECS laboratory to further investigate the issue, according to Joyner’s testimony.
She cited the success of the changes the Navy has made to the T-45 Goshawk trainer as reason for Congress to have confidence in the PE team’s approach to the F/A-18. After a similar cluster of PEs caused the service to ground the Goshawk fleet in April, the T-45s are now fully operational, Joyner says.
The U.S. Navy’s legacy F/A-18A-D Hornet, F/A-18E and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler electronic warfare variant, the backbone of naval aviation, have all seen a sharp increase in hypoxia-like physiological events in the last decade. Credit: Seaman Ryan Carter/U.S. Navy
In addition to updating maintenance and cleaning procedures for the T-45’s OBOGS, the PE team also installed new sieve beds—to filter out contaminants—and a new water separator, and incorporated a carbon monoxide catalyst, according to Joyner’s testimony.
The Navy also fielded new CRU-123 solid-state oxygen-monitoring units, which alert aircrew of changes in delivery changes. This ability to log data has provided “invaluable” insight into the performance of the T-45 oxygen system and given aircrew “new confidence,” Joyner says. As of Jan. 24, a total of 163 new oxygen monitors have been installed.
The Navy has also released a draft RFP for a new T-45 oxygen concentrator, dubbed the GGU-25, which will be a “significant increase in capability” over the 1980s-era system the aircraft now uses, she adds.
“We have turned the corner on [the] T-45,” Joyner says. But “we are not declaring victory. We have a Root Cause Corrective Analysis team that goes line by line, starting with the human, ending with the human, trying to find the root cause for both the T-45 and the F/A-18 [PEs].”
The Navy plans to install an automatic backup oxygen system on the T-45, but it has no plans to install a similar system at this time on the F/A-18, Joyner confirmed in response to questions from Tsongas.
These Americans are going to suffocate and kill their pilots for their stupid and faulty ECS and OBOGS. I want @ AverageAmerican here for bashing him.
Flying blind and freezing: Navy investigating terrifying EA-18G Growler flight
WASHINGTON — The two-seater EA-18G was cruising at 25,000 feet Jan. 29, about 60 miles south of Seattle on a flight from Washington State’s Naval Air Station Whidbey Island to Naval Weapons Station China Lake. The crew received a warning that the system that controls the cockpit air temperature and cabin pressure, known as the environmental control system, was icing.
By the time the flight was over, an elite aircrew with Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Nine was being rushed for medical treatment, and yet another failure of the EA-18G Growler’s environmental control system — one not seen in any of the previous physiological episodeslinked to the ECS — was raising new concerns in the Navy’s sisyphean fight to stop physiological episodes from putting pilots at risk in the sky.
The temperature inside the cockpit suddenly plunged to temperatures reaching -30 degrees and a mist pumped into the the cockpit, covering the instruments and windows in a layer of ice, rendering the pilots almost completely blind, according to several sources familiar with the incident and an internal report obtained by Defense News.
The fog inside the aircraft iced over the instrument panel, forcing the pilot and electronic warfare officer to use a Garmin watch to keep track of their heading and altitude while air controllers began relaying instructions to the crew. The pilot and EWO were forced to use the emergency oxygen supply, which was completely depleted by the end of the flight.
A heroic effort by the two-person crew and the ground-based controllers managed to guide the aircraft back to Whidbey Island, but both pilot and EWO suffered serious injuries due to frostbite. The aircrew suffered from “severe blistering and burns on hands,” according to the Navy internal report.
In a statement, Naval Air Forces spokesman Cmdr. Ron Flanders confirmed the incident and that the Navy was trying to determine the cause of the incident.
“The aircrew was treated upon landing; one of the aircrew is already back in a flight status; the other is not yet back in a flight status but is expected to make a complete recovery,”
“The mishap is under investigation; I cannot comment further. Once the investigation is complete, the Navy will determine which further actions are necessary.”
ECS failures
While the specific failure of the environmental control system in this instance hasn’t been recorded by the Navy previously, the ECS has been a persistent problem as it grapples with a recent spike in PEs in Hornets and Growlers.
The Navy describes the system as “a complex aggregate of sub-components, all of which must function for the system to work as a whole.” The Navy believes that aging parts and inadequate testing procedures have contributed to certain PEs that result from depressurization inside the cockpit and oxygen deprivation.
But overpressurization has also been a problem. Two years ago, a pilot and EWO were horrifically injured when their cockpit overpressurized and exploded, shattering the plexiglass canopy and sending shards in all directions.
Overall, about 25 percent of the PEs suffered by aircrews in the Super Hornets and the Growlers have been traced back to ECS failures, according to a Navy official who spoke on background. Those numbers were much higher in the legacy Hornets.
Meanwhile the head of the Navy’s Physiological Episodes Action Team, Sara “Clutch” Joyner, is being pulled from the project after less than a year in the position and is taking a job on the Joint Staff, raising some alarm bells in Congress. Her replacement has not been named.
PEs have wreaked havoc in the aviation community. In 2016, the Navy had its worst year on record for PEs, including 125 total in the Growler/Hornet community.
Last April, Navy instructor pilots staged a borderline mutiny when they felt like their supervisors were ignoring serious PE problems with the Navy’s T-45 aircraft. The Navy has since made progress in T-45 PE incidents but the revolt of the instructor pilots grabbed the attention of senior leadership and made the PE issue front-and-center.
But definitive answers as to what is causing the spike in PEs are elusive and the Navy is continuing to chip away at the issue. Joyner has said that she doesn’t believe there is one solution for all the PE issues but that the Navy has made progress in some areas.
Flying blind and freezing: Navy investigating terrifying EA-18G Growler flight
I tell you guys, how can Boeing *censored* up its ECS so bad? Even in Hunter we did not have any problems. Even our good old French pilot of the other forum had stated so. Between him and I, we have over two decades of fighter flying experience between us. Neither he nor did I ever suffered such problems in any fighter that we had flown as fighter pilots.
Growlers are very very old. I have always wondered how warthogs, growlers, B52s etc. are kept flying for so long (sometimes 4 decades and more). It's generally worked out well for them in most cases but I don't know if I will be surprised if some issues crop up every now and then.
No they aren't. Are you confusing them with some other aircraft, like the Prowler?
The Growlers were introduced in service in 2009. The oldest Growler in service is merely nine-year old.
Boeing makes a pitch for F/A-18s to India
New Delhi: Pitching its F/A-18 Super Hornet to India’s air force and navy, US military contractor Boeing Co. has said the twin-engine fighter plane is cheaper to operate than a single-engine jet, citing a US government study.
In an interview, Boeing Defence Space and Security chief executive Leanne Caret, speaks about the company’s plans to pursue an upcoming multi-billion dollar fighter programme, Make in India opportunities and the defence ecosystem in the country. Edited excerpts:
What brings you here?
I have been doing business in India for almost a decade. There’s incredible talent here and I have always had a general mindset that as a global firm, we need to have that global reach and that local presence, and need to provide that uncompromising service to our customers around the world. I am so excited by all the incredible progress we have made here in India not only in the products and services that we provide but also in how we have a localized workforce of more than 1,500 and we are continuing to grow every day.
Tata Boeing Aerospace (TBAL) inaugurated its facility in Hyderabad today. What is this joint venture (JV) all about?
When you talk about being a global firm and especially if you are US-based, many times it means you are exporting outside the US. However, we believe that a win abroad is a win at home. So this partnership is really critical and as we have looked at future opportunities…just thinking through the lens of exporting the goods wasn’t going to be good enough.
It’s about making sure we take full advantage of the talent and capability here in India. So, the JV is just a series of steps we have taken over the years…One of the first outputs of TBAL will be the Apache fuselage that will be provided to the global market space. It won’t be just for customers here in India but for all our customers.
But Indian customers are also going to get the real benefits of having that product made here. So, it’s a pretty exciting time and we will build upon that. There are the IAF Apaches and the army Apaches… both will benefit from this JV on day one.
India is looking at building war planes locally under the ‘Make in India’ plan and the IAF has been asked to come up with its requirements. Will you build F/A-18s here?
We believe the F/A-18 provides great capability to the Indian government. We believe it’s a viable candidate in the competition. We obviously need to wait for procurement to begin and for the government to decide whether they are going to have a two-phased competition or a single competition. Boeing will respond appropriately. What we have always committed to from day one is that we are looking to put significant work content here in India, and the actual requirement of fighters will determine the final outcome.
In a scenario where India is keen to go for F/A-18s, will you consider setting up a factory in the country and also export?
We are assessing all options. It goes back again to what is the quantity. If you are talking about a small quantity of aircraft—because they have not come out with the official number—it will dictate what is affordable, because whatever we do has to be affordable.
I met many of the services today. The number one comment across the service branches—army, navy and IAF—was ‘we need affordable’. And making certain we do the right thing that provides best value for money is our focus, and how we can best do that, is where our intent will be.
What is your sense of the Indian requirement for fighters? What will be a good number to set up a production line here?
This is one of those where it is important for the customer to lead. It is important they put out their requirement and then we respond in kind. They have had numerous requests for information on capability and different things that we have responded to.
But I very much respect the process the government is going through in terms of what is the capability they need and how do they best want to fulfil that—and then we will respond appropriately.
What makes you feel the F/A-18 is a viable platform for India, considering that Boeing was knocked out of an earlier competition?
I am not going to go back to the outcome of that competition. The US Navy continues to show great confidence in the F/A-18, and we are moving forward with an upgrade and continue to put modernization efforts into it, called the Block 3.
You know about the recent announcement by Kuwait to buy additional planes. This is a viable capability that continues to prove itself in conflicts, and is a great strategy in terms of a fleet mix for a number of countries. For that reason, and based on how the air force and navy operate their fleet, we think the capabilities are a good fit and look forward to the competition.
How different is the F/A-18 you are offering now from what was offered a decade ago?
It once again goes back to what the customer’s requirements are. If we wanted to push just a point solution, that would be one conversation….rather, Boeing prides itself on a close relationship with customers by listening to them and responding appropriately to bring forward affordable solutions to meet their capability needs. That’s really what is at the heart of our strategy.
The defence sector ecosystem in India is work in progress. Your comments on the strengths and weaknesses?
Talent here is most important and India is recognized for having amazing technology and innovation. This is something that as a global company we really want to take full advantage of, and make it part of the fabric of what we do.
I think that is a win-win for the country as well, because when you have firms like Boeing and others that see this type of capability and talent, and we can invest in these projects together…it helps by definition in creating that ecosystem. There is no lack of expertise and talent here and we want to take full advantage of that.
India has ordered 36 Rafale fighter jets and there’s buzz about the F-35 stealth fighters being offered to the IAF. And you are offering F/A-18. What do you make of it?
Each country has its own needs and will determine its own fleet mix and how they operate. I think it will be inappropriate of anyone in the industry to say what that fleet mix should be like.
That again goes back to our fundamental belief that we want to listen to what the customer wants. There is a multitude of products that they rely upon and how they wish to execute their missions during both peacetime and wartime. And what we want to make certain is… to allow them to get the best capability that they need in whatever mission they are serving.
Does the F/A-18 match the Rafale and F-35?
Let’s put it this way. My point continues to be that we need to know what the customer’s requirements are, and then we will put forward our best offer in support of that requirement.
If numbers make a good business case, would you be willing to set up a production line in the country? And have you done any math on what kind of production opportunities could arise from India for your other global customers?
We have clearly looked at a range of options. This conversation has been ongoing for a number of years and so quantities will dictate how we can provide the best value. It wouldn’t be the first time or the last time we have looked at opportunities to do more work for nations outside the principal location.
Going back to the example of TBAL, I think it gives you exactly the point, that we are not just building fuselages for Apaches here in India but are building fuselages for our worldwide supply.
And therefore, we have already put on the record and proven that we are willing to do that. Again, it is about the business case closing and making certain all the numbers work out.
Will Tata be the partner for other platforms too? Or are you exploring other options ?
Both. I am not going to divulge names of other companies we are having discussions with. What I will say is, we are continuing to look for ways to localize our presence. It is part of the commitment.
Are all agreements in place for unhindered transfer of technology? Or are there any barriers?
Some of the overarching technologies are at a government-to-government level, where parameters have been set when it comes to certain products and certain pieces of equipment.
There is a process that governments work together on to get the (technologies) released and those are done on a case-to-case basis, as requirements pop up. I think it’s a very cooperative process…And if for some reason some piece of equipment wasn’t approved, then what are alternative pieces providing similar capability…is all part of the process we work through.
Which bureaucracy is more difficult to deal with—Indian or US?
(Laughs.) We all have our plusses and minuses. I think we have been growing together.
When did you last fly in an F/A-18?
I flew in a Super Hornet last year. I didn’t pull as many Gs (G forces) as my contemporaries have pulled. Let’s just say, we flew around for quite a while and I flew upside down. It was the ride of a lifetime.
New Delhi: Pitching its F/A-18 Super Hornet to India’s air force and navy, US military contractor Boeing Co. has said the twin-engine fighter plane is cheaper to operate than a single-engine jet, citing a US government study.
In an interview, Boeing Defence Space and Security chief executive Leanne Caret, speaks about the company’s plans to pursue an upcoming multi-billion dollar fighter programme, Make in India opportunities and the defence ecosystem in the country. Edited excerpts:
What brings you here?
I have been doing business in India for almost a decade. There’s incredible talent here and I have always had a general mindset that as a global firm, we need to have that global reach and that local presence, and need to provide that uncompromising service to our customers around the world. I am so excited by all the incredible progress we have made here in India not only in the products and services that we provide but also in how we have a localized workforce of more than 1,500 and we are continuing to grow every day.
Tata Boeing Aerospace (TBAL) inaugurated its facility in Hyderabad today. What is this joint venture (JV) all about?
When you talk about being a global firm and especially if you are US-based, many times it means you are exporting outside the US. However, we believe that a win abroad is a win at home. So this partnership is really critical and as we have looked at future opportunities…just thinking through the lens of exporting the goods wasn’t going to be good enough.
It’s about making sure we take full advantage of the talent and capability here in India. So, the JV is just a series of steps we have taken over the years…One of the first outputs of TBAL will be the Apache fuselage that will be provided to the global market space. It won’t be just for customers here in India but for all our customers.
But Indian customers are also going to get the real benefits of having that product made here. So, it’s a pretty exciting time and we will build upon that. There are the IAF Apaches and the army Apaches… both will benefit from this JV on day one.
India is looking at building war planes locally under the ‘Make in India’ plan and the IAF has been asked to come up with its requirements. Will you build F/A-18s here?
We believe the F/A-18 provides great capability to the Indian government. We believe it’s a viable candidate in the competition. We obviously need to wait for procurement to begin and for the government to decide whether they are going to have a two-phased competition or a single competition. Boeing will respond appropriately. What we have always committed to from day one is that we are looking to put significant work content here in India, and the actual requirement of fighters will determine the final outcome.
In a scenario where India is keen to go for F/A-18s, will you consider setting up a factory in the country and also export?
We are assessing all options. It goes back again to what is the quantity. If you are talking about a small quantity of aircraft—because they have not come out with the official number—it will dictate what is affordable, because whatever we do has to be affordable.
I met many of the services today. The number one comment across the service branches—army, navy and IAF—was ‘we need affordable’. And making certain we do the right thing that provides best value for money is our focus, and how we can best do that, is where our intent will be.
What is your sense of the Indian requirement for fighters? What will be a good number to set up a production line here?
This is one of those where it is important for the customer to lead. It is important they put out their requirement and then we respond in kind. They have had numerous requests for information on capability and different things that we have responded to.
But I very much respect the process the government is going through in terms of what is the capability they need and how do they best want to fulfil that—and then we will respond appropriately.
What makes you feel the F/A-18 is a viable platform for India, considering that Boeing was knocked out of an earlier competition?
I am not going to go back to the outcome of that competition. The US Navy continues to show great confidence in the F/A-18, and we are moving forward with an upgrade and continue to put modernization efforts into it, called the Block 3.
You know about the recent announcement by Kuwait to buy additional planes. This is a viable capability that continues to prove itself in conflicts, and is a great strategy in terms of a fleet mix for a number of countries. For that reason, and based on how the air force and navy operate their fleet, we think the capabilities are a good fit and look forward to the competition.
How different is the F/A-18 you are offering now from what was offered a decade ago?
It once again goes back to what the customer’s requirements are. If we wanted to push just a point solution, that would be one conversation….rather, Boeing prides itself on a close relationship with customers by listening to them and responding appropriately to bring forward affordable solutions to meet their capability needs. That’s really what is at the heart of our strategy.
The defence sector ecosystem in India is work in progress. Your comments on the strengths and weaknesses?
Talent here is most important and India is recognized for having amazing technology and innovation. This is something that as a global company we really want to take full advantage of, and make it part of the fabric of what we do.
I think that is a win-win for the country as well, because when you have firms like Boeing and others that see this type of capability and talent, and we can invest in these projects together…it helps by definition in creating that ecosystem. There is no lack of expertise and talent here and we want to take full advantage of that.
India has ordered 36 Rafale fighter jets and there’s buzz about the F-35 stealth fighters being offered to the IAF. And you are offering F/A-18. What do you make of it?
Each country has its own needs and will determine its own fleet mix and how they operate. I think it will be inappropriate of anyone in the industry to say what that fleet mix should be like.
That again goes back to our fundamental belief that we want to listen to what the customer wants. There is a multitude of products that they rely upon and how they wish to execute their missions during both peacetime and wartime. And what we want to make certain is… to allow them to get the best capability that they need in whatever mission they are serving.
Does the F/A-18 match the Rafale and F-35?
Let’s put it this way. My point continues to be that we need to know what the customer’s requirements are, and then we will put forward our best offer in support of that requirement.
If numbers make a good business case, would you be willing to set up a production line in the country? And have you done any math on what kind of production opportunities could arise from India for your other global customers?
We have clearly looked at a range of options. This conversation has been ongoing for a number of years and so quantities will dictate how we can provide the best value. It wouldn’t be the first time or the last time we have looked at opportunities to do more work for nations outside the principal location.
Going back to the example of TBAL, I think it gives you exactly the point, that we are not just building fuselages for Apaches here in India but are building fuselages for our worldwide supply.
And therefore, we have already put on the record and proven that we are willing to do that. Again, it is about the business case closing and making certain all the numbers work out.
Will Tata be the partner for other platforms too? Or are you exploring other options ?
Both. I am not going to divulge names of other companies we are having discussions with. What I will say is, we are continuing to look for ways to localize our presence. It is part of the commitment.
Are all agreements in place for unhindered transfer of technology? Or are there any barriers?
Some of the overarching technologies are at a government-to-government level, where parameters have been set when it comes to certain products and certain pieces of equipment.
There is a process that governments work together on to get the (technologies) released and those are done on a case-to-case basis, as requirements pop up. I think it’s a very cooperative process…And if for some reason some piece of equipment wasn’t approved, then what are alternative pieces providing similar capability…is all part of the process we work through.
Which bureaucracy is more difficult to deal with—Indian or US?
(Laughs.) We all have our plusses and minuses. I think we have been growing together.
When did you last fly in an F/A-18?
I flew in a Super Hornet last year. I didn’t pull as many Gs (G forces) as my contemporaries have pulled. Let’s just say, we flew around for quite a while and I flew upside down. It was the ride of a lifetime.
