Multi-Role Carrier Borne Fighter For The Indian Navy - Updates & Discussions

What should we select?


  • Total voters
    61
  • Poll closed .
message-editor_1597871929236-hornet-jump.jpg


An F/A-18A Hornet takes off from a ground-based ski jump during a test in the late 1980s.

 
Looks like Navy and Govt are serious about giving equal chance to F18.
IDK how Navy is planning to manage a Salad of Fighter jets in their limited budget.
 
Looks like Navy and Govt are serious about giving equal chance to F18.
IDK how Navy is planning to manage a Salad of Fighter jets in their limited budget.

Not sure why Australia, Canada, Germany are buying F18?
Less maintenance?
 
Not sure why Australia, Canada, Germany are buying F18?
Less maintenance?
Not sure why Australia, Canada, Germany are buying F18?
Less maintenance?
Perhaps because there Forces are not as much confused as ours.
That’s why despite being super rich, all three operating only single or max two types of jets.
Meanwhile we are in the league of ‘Best Democracy in the ME’-Aloo Zeera News channel aka Qoter and ‘My Favourite Dictatorship’-Trump aka Egypt.
We have 100 gms of every masala. Still our *censored* gets whooped every now and then by Ola Über’s Airforces and Nevy.
 
Not sure why Australia, Canada, Germany are buying F18?
Less maintenance?
When Australia bought F18s , it aim was to replace the Mirage family, meaning having very decent air to ground capability and bare minimum self defence capacity. Other alternative was F16 , which was single engined and short legged then.

For Canada , they wanted a twin engine platform with endurance. F18 thus was bought.

Germany if finally signs , will again sign only because it wants to have an aircraft in its inventory capable of deploying nukes.

All in all, because F18 family is a great bomb truck and good at self defence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
When Australia bought F18s , it aim was to replace the Mirage family, meaning having very decent air to ground capability and bare minimum self defence capacity. Other alternative was F16 , which was single engined and short legged then.

For Canada , they wanted a twin engine platform with endurance. F18 thus was bought.

Germany if finally signs , will again sign only because it wants to have an aircraft in its inventory capable of deploying nukes.

All in all, because F18 family is a great bomb truck and good at self defence.

Sukhoi of Navy?

I am just guessing why F18 instead of Rafale M

# Cost of procurement, Maintenance & Upgrade
# interoperability USA & Nato
# Emergency procurement from large US stocks of jets & armament s
# Political scoring
# GE414 commonality.
# Cartobar / Emal procurement & Training.
#Growler

Technically I am not sure of lift size and arrangements.

But Rafale doesn't lose much in the above points too.

And also more modern .
Flexible with Indian made weapons?
We an avoid one more set of weapons & monitoring.
Some technologies as offsets.
Less strings
Product support for longer time.


If there is a choice between Rafale & F18, I think it's better to stick with Rafale than to introduce new player in the mix.
 
Sukhoi of Navy?

I am just guessing why F18 instead of Rafale M

# Cost of procurement, Maintenance & Upgrade
# interoperability USA & Nato
# Emergency procurement from large US stocks of jets & armament s
# Political scoring
# GE414 commonality.
# Cartobar / Emal procurement & Training.
#Growler

Technically I am not sure of lift size and arrangements.

But Rafale doesn't lose much in the above points too.

And also more modern .
Flexible with Indian made weapons?
We an avoid one more set of weapons & monitoring.
Some technologies as offsets.
Less strings
Product support for longer time.


If there is a choice between Rafale & F18, I think it's better to stick with Rafale than to introduce new player in the mix.
The only place fa18 has a real advantage over the rafale is in the ea 18 growler. Otherwise its an ugly pig with a lipstick. The thing is growler would be a huge boost in our ew capability where we are not that we'll positioned. We really need sead and dead aircraft and one with a proven track record like growler would be good. The question is can we convert 12 of 57 aircrafts into growlers. If yes then we should buy the SHornets. If no it's better to stick with the rafale's. They can carry more, can actually fly. The radar doesn't have questionable performance. It's also has proven interoperability since the rafale can use U.S aircraft carriers to land. Apart from that the only loss is the U.S variety of a2g munitions we will miss out on . That might be covered up if we buy the f15ex but that's not going to happen.
 
kpA3aTj.jpeg


The interesting photo in this post was taken in 1982 at Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent River, Md. and shows the left-side view of an F-14A Tomcat fighter aircraft taking off from a ramp, raised nine degrees, during “ski-jump” feasibility tests.

The ski-jump tests, which involved also the T-2, F/A-18, and AV-8 Harrier, were conducted in an effort to reduce the length of the carrier flight deck needed for an aircraft to become airborne—without the aid of a catapult.

According to The Patuxent River Naval Air Museum, flight tests showed that the basic theory was sound: all aircraft tested took off in significantly shorter distances than they could from flat decks. But except for the AV-8 Harrier, none of these aircraft ever flew from ski-jump-equipped carriers. In fact the upward push of the ski-jump means that aircraft structures need to be stronger to bear the extra launch loads. This could lead to aircraft that “weigh—and cost—more.”

Actually the F-14 flew 28 times from a ski-jump but never achieved maximum take-off capability because of single-engine operating concerns.

Source: U.S. Navy; Photo credit: PH3 Ron Vest / U.S. Navy
 
Boeing pushes hard for Indian fighter aircraft contracts

US aerospace major, Boeing, which accounts for most of the $18-billion worth of weaponry that Washington has sold India since 2005, is pressing hard to win a $7-8 billion Indian Navy contract for 57 aircraft carrier-borne fighters.

Boeing has begun testing its flagship naval fighter, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which it intends to offer the Indian Navy,to prove it can operate from any of the Indian Navy’s three carriers: the in-service INS Vikramaditya; Vikrant, which is to be commissioned by 2022; and INS Vishal, which is still on the drawing board.

“Boeing and the US Navy are in the beginning phases of operating an F/A-18 Super Hornet from a ski jump at Naval Air Station Patuxent River to demonstrate it is STOBAR compliant for the Indian Navy,” states Boeing.

In STOBAR (short take off but arrested recovery) aircraft carrier operations, fighters get airborne by flying off a “ski-jump” like slope at the end of the flight deck. The aircraft land back by snagging their tail hooks on arrestor wires spread across the deck, which drag them to a halt. Both INS Vikramditya and Vikrant are STOBAR carriers.



US Navy aircraft carriers and their aircraft such as the Super Hornet are, however, built for “catapult assisted take off but arrested recovery” (CATOBAR). In this, on-board aircraft are accelerated to take-off speed by a steam or electro-magnetic catapult, doing away with the need for a ski-jump. INS Vishal is being built as a CATOBAR carrier.

Proving that the Super Hornet can operate off both STOBAR and CATOBAR carriers would enhance India's fleet commonality and economy.

Before commencing ski-jump tests, Boeing says the Super Hornet has completed more than 150 computer simulations. “While our assessment has shown the Block III Super Hornet is very capable of launching off a ski jump, this is the next step in demonstrating that capability,” said Boeing.

The shore-based ski-jump at Patuxent River was built to test the F-35B Lightning II – the short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) version of the Joint Strike Fighter. India, too, has built a similar shore-based facility in Goa for testing the naval version of the Tejas fighter.

The Indian Navy began the acquisition of 57 multi-role carrier borne fighters (MRCBF) in 2017 by issuing a Request for Information (RFI) about “day and night capable, all weather, multi-role, deck based combat aircraft, which can be used for air defence, air-to-surface operations, buddy refuelling, reconnaissance [and] electronic warfare missions from Indian Navy aircraft carriers.”

The 2017 RFI specifically asks vendors whether the fighter they are offering is capable of STOBAR as well as CATOBAR operations.

The quest for a MRCBF is rooted in the navy’s disappointment over the unreliable performance of 45 MiG-29K/KUB fighters that it procured from Russia along with INS Vikramaditya.

The need for a MRCBF was made even more urgent by delays in developing a naval version of the indigenous Tejas light fighter. The navy assessed that the single-engine fighter could not carry enough weaponry, or fuel payload, to allow it to operate effectively off a carrier. Naval planners, therefore, have rejected the Tejas Mark 1 and stated they want a heavier, more powerful, twin-engine fighter that India can develop only by 2025.

The formal MRCBF tender is still awaited but industry analysts believe the contenders will be: The Super Hornet, the MiG-29K/KUB and navalised versions of the Rafale and Gripen E, called the Rafale Marine and Sea Gripen, respectively.

Ironically, Boeing’s thrust in the MRCBF procurement comes at a time when a stressed defence budget has placed a question mark over the acquisition of a third carrier. The Indian Air Force (IAF) argues that shore-based air power is more effective than carrier-based fighters, and costs less. The tri-service chief, General Bipin Rawat, who prioritises expenditure between the three services, has expressed reservations over spending heavily on an aircraft carrier and its air wing.

Boeing could also offer the Super Hornet in the ongoing IAF procurement of 114 medium fighters, achieving economy of scale by taking the numbers up to 171 aircraft. Saab will seek similar benefits, while Dassault – which has already sold India 36 Rafales and would also compete in both these tenders – would garner even greater benefits of scale.

Meanwhile, Boeing is also weighing restricting the Super Hornet offer to the Indian Navy, while offering the IAF its upgraded F-15EX fighter. Pratyush Kumar, who oversees the F-15 programme, confirmed last month that Boeing had requested the US government for a marketing licence to commence discussions with New Delhi about the F-15EX. However, Boeing will only decide whether to offer the Super Hornet or the F-15EX once the IAF defines the specifications of the fighter it wants.



 
How IN convince goi on development of in-house deck based fighter if f18 is coming?
Logically i want IN to fo for f18 or rafale, i dont think that our aircraft will be coming out in nearby future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rai Saahab
@vstol Jockey continuation from Rafale thread
Sir,asper you SH18 is gonna win IN tender,but do SH can take off with full load using existing F414 engine?
What is your opinion,will IAF choose SH18 too?
 
@vstol Jockey continuation from Rafale thread
Sir,asper you SH18 is gonna win IN tender,but do SH can take off with full load using existing F414 engine?
What is your opinion,will IAF choose SH18 too?
I always stated that F-18 needs 25% more power to go with load from Vikky. They have done it. be prepared to have F-18 land bsed fighter as the next fighter for IAF & IN. IAC- 1 has longest STOBAR run of 210m. This means about 0.6m additional accelaration on deck for every meter of deck space available and that changes it all. Rafale-M has lower than that. So F-18E/F with F414EPE with 116KN thrust each is far superior to Rafale-M and it has folded wingspan which meets the lift requirements of Vikky and IAC-1. Bye bye DA. You fooled us. But no more now. Ahuja will ensure that we have F-18. you just can't beat him. I have knwn hin from 1987. !41 PC of AFA, Dundigal.
Rafale even with 83/54KN engines cant beat F-18 due to 48* sweep back. You guys have no clue as to how winglonding and sweepback are interlinked with lifting capability. I had lots of debates with a guy called @ ersaktivel on this issue longback.
 
Last edited:
I always stated that F-18 needs 25% more power to go with load from Vikky. They have done it. be prepaqred to have F-18 land bsed fighter as the next fighter for IAF & IN. IAC- 1 has longest STOBAR run of 210m. This means about 0.6m additional accelaration on deck for every meter of deck space available and that changes it all. Rafale-M has lower than that. So F-18E/F with F414EPE with 116KN thrust each is far superior to Rafale-M and it has folded wingspan which meets the lift requirements of Vikky and IAC-1. Bye bye DA. You fooled us. But no more now. Ahuja will ensure that we have F-18. you just can't beat him. I have knwn hin from 1987. !41 PC of AFA, Dundigal. I always scored better than Him.
Rafale even with 83/54KN engines cant beat F-18 due to 48* sweep back. You guys have no clue as to how winglonding and sweepback are interlinked with lifting capability. I had lots of debates with a guy called @ ersaktivel on this issue longback and he was an Idiot.
Its sad,if we are going for FA18 SH for mmrca. F15EX could be better choice.
So we can expect AIM120C5,D AIM260 with IN & IAF. But now the grey area is weather we are getting AGM 158 (it's anti ship & land attack version) & EA18 growlers.
 
I always stated that F-18 needs 25% more power to go with load from Vikky. They have done it. be prepaqred to have F-18 land bsed fighter as the next fighter for IAF & IN. IAC- 1 has longest STOBAR run of 210m. This means about 0.6m additional accelaration on deck for every meter of deck space available and that changes it all. Rafale-M has lower than that. So F-18E/F with F414EPE with 116KN thrust each is far superior to Rafale-M and it has folded wingspan which meets the lift requirements of Vikky and IAC-1. Bye bye DA. You fooled us. But no more now. Ahuja will ensure that we have F-18. you just can't beat him. I have knwn hin from 1987. !41 PC of AFA, Dundigal. I always scored better than Him.
Rafale even with 83/54KN engines cant beat F-18 due to 48* sweep back. You guys have no clue as to how winglonding and sweepback are interlinked with lifting capability. I had lots of debates with a guy called @ ersaktivel on this issue longback and he was an Idiot.

What about F-35B/C instead of the SH?

I'd rather see IN going for the F-35 with Israeli upgrades, including the new CFT, than the SH.
 
W

Well it's good that we got the f18 for the navy. It's just a more mature platform over the rafale m. MMRCA is a different scenario. The rafale,f15 and f 18 all have decent chances..
If IN getting SH with a twin 116 KN engine, it's gonna win mmrca2 too.
 
What about F-35B/C instead of the SH?

I'd rather see IN going for the F-35 with Israeli upgrades, including the new CFT, than the SH.
Why do you want to complicate it,if you want f35 pursue for it. What I am not understanding is why every one insisting each tom dick & Harry things we import to have Israeli upgrades? What sort of upgrade do you want from Israel? Do you think that f35 designed by USA is inferior & they need Israeli help to tweak it to a world class fighter?
 
If IN getting SH with a twin 116 KN engine, it's gonna win mmrca2 too.
Mmrca 2 is still open with possibilities. F18, f15ex and rafale all have decent chances of winning. I wanted f18 anyway in the navy. It will make inducting f35b/c easier in the future. Rafale is good for an air force doctrine but just can't compete with f18 in naval aviation because of the experience of the platform. F 15 would be the costly upgrade we need but don't deserve. I personally want all three aircraft in our armed forces inventory. The thing is how to invest because all three aircraft can fill certain requirements. If the kaveri snecma deal is successful we could very well make rafale's in India.
F 15 will replace all our deepstrike ground strike inventory of jaguars,mig23,mig27.
The rafale will remove the mirage and mig 29
Tejas our mig 21
The mki has still a lot more potential as a platform...
The f18 a good naval platform and will give us a dedicated sead dead aircraft provided we convert some into growlers..
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hydra