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

[randomradio]

Australia thinks the D is ok. It ordered $1.2B...450 of them in 2016

Australia to Buy 450 Advanced US-Made Air-to-Air Missiles

The U.S. State Department has cleared a sale of advanced air-to-air missiles to Australia.

thediplomat.com

Considering the D entered service in 2014, it was the most cutting edge American missile in service at the time. It was natural for Australia to go for it. Then came the PL-15, followed by the Meteor, after which Derby ER attained IOC and now there's the R-77M.

The D was significantly outclassed by the Chinese in just 2 years, in 2016, which is why the development of AIM-260 began in 2017. Raytheon's new competing missile must be a cheap upgrade over the D.

Very likely to be what was tested, but called D, the second missile.

 

[Hydra]

2024 is the first flight. So it should take until 2028 before it's inducted.


It's a choice. If you want it, they can provide it. To date, no one has asked for it.

2028 is pretty good time frame, but again probability of getting accidental pregnancy during a safe s*x with co***m is many fold higher while comparing to indian finishing a defence project on time.

 

[randomradio]

As far as weapons go, I don't see why the ASRAAM & Meteor can't be integrated on the SH - the ASRAAM especially as its now being assembled in India. For BVR the Meteor is an expensive option, but so is AIM120D, which is why I think the Americans' willingness to allow integration of local weapons like Astra BVR to be one of the factors to be considered. The French score in that regard.

A2G mission sets will require integration of ARMs and ASMs. If the local NGARM/Rudram-1 can be integrated, we're golden (Rafale will allow this, remains to be seen if SH will) otherwise purchase of AGM88 (or AARGM-ER in future) will become necessary. I'd prefer if SH would allow for integration of the Rudram family (-2 & 3 will offer capabilities similar to AARGM platform) like Rafale would.

ASMs is a mission set where I feel SH has an advantage - the OEM missiles (Harpoon & Exocet) give SH the advantage. AGM84L is lighter + longer ranged. Plus already operated by P8I & maritime Jaguars. Rafale is more likely to allow integration of Brahmos-NG but here's the problem - I don't think it would make much sense in a naval application especially from STOBAR.

I'm not even sure if an across the board integration of Indian weapons is expected. From the IAF PoV, their jets will visit various different bases and every base may not have customised weapons, they will have to use whatever's available. Which is why the MKI has been integrated with pretty much our entire inventory, and the LCA, Rafale and MRFA will get the same treatment. The IN doesn't face this issue yet.

Plus the fact that the inventory expected will be small anyway. Integration could costs tens of millions to hundreds of millions, and then we buy just 50 or 100 units of each weapons type, which in some cases would cost as much as the integration itself. While IN can latch on to the IAF's inventory if they choose Rafale, I don't think the IN will integrate anything much on the SH.

Its a 1.5 ton missile. For the same payload you can carry 3 x AGM84s (realistically 2, each about ~550kg), or better yet Kongsberg JSM (each ~420kg, actual possibility for 3 rounds). The JSM would give you similar range as Brahmos-NG (280km) at sea skimming, but up to 560km with hi-lo profile.

Not to mention, 2 or 3 subsonic missiles would offer a better chance of penetrating defences than a single supersonic missile.

Only way I see it feasible to carry Brahmos-NG would be to forego drop tanks. That would have to put the Carrier group in uncomfortable proximity to enemy surface assets.

Payload is limited by hardpoint design. In theory, SH should be able to carry 4 Brahmos NGs or 4 AGM-84s. So the quality of the weapon carried comes into the picture.

 

[Optimist]

Considering the D entered service in 2014, it was the most cutting edge American missile in service at the time. It was natural for Australia to go for it. Then came the PL-15, followed by the Meteor, after which Derby ER attained IOC and now there's the R-77M.

The D was significantly outclassed by the Chinese in just 2 years, in 2016, which is why the development of AIM-260 began in 2017. Raytheon's new competing missile must be a cheap upgrade over the D.

Very likely to be what was tested, but called D, the second missile.

Again I'll take this as your opinion, Only I'll add 'more uninformed' this time. AIM-120D-3 or SIP3

You are also mistaken with the date of the 260

 

[Optimist]

The JATM is planned to start flight tests in 2021 and achieve initial operational capability (IOC) by 2022. The AIM-260 production is expected to overtake AIM-120 production by 2026.

 

[Lolwa]

I think we all can agree that missiles are as classified as Aircraft, in some way even more so. We are all guessing our opinions. Perhaps it is more than wiki specs?

However, We have left the radar and one way data link out of this, so far. I think they are both relevant

The sh won't have a nuclear option, unless India pays for its development, so a negative there

The nuclear role is limited to the airforce. So that reasoning won't come here. The radars are pretty much on par in capability. There isn't going to be a massive difference. Let's see if Boeing offers the GaN radar for this deal

, I don't see why the ASRAAM & Meteor can't be integrated on the SH - the ASRAAM especially as its now being assembled in India

Asraam can be but the meteor requires a European radar for integration.

 

[Lolwa]

Australia thinks the D is ok. It ordered $1.2B...450 of them in 2016

Australia to Buy 450 Advanced US-Made Air-to-Air Missiles

The U.S. State Department has cleared a sale of advanced air-to-air missiles to Australia.

thediplomat.com

Aim 120d is the best bvr missile after the meteor. So it's a good missile. The question is how good the pl-15 would be against the amraam 120d.

 

[Parthu]

Payload is limited by hardpoint design. In theory, SH should be able to carry 4 Brahmos NGs or 4 AGM-84s. So the quality of the weapon carried comes into the picture.

On land launch or CATOBAR operation the limiting factor would be the hardpoints - but from STOBAR, thrust-to-weight is everything as the entire burden of takeoff is on the engine itself. Your payload capacity is determined by that - and it would only be a fraction of CATOBAR launch (even with the benefit of buddy-refuel after takeoff).

Now the question is, if you were to allocate 1.5 ton of your overall capacity for just 1 ASM how much are you left to play with for the other required items like DTs & AAMs. And whether it wouldn't be a wiser choice to choose a subsonic ASM which would allow you to deploy more ASMs per fighter while still carrying the same amount of fuel & other weapons.

 

[TARGET]

The nuclear role is limited to the airforce. So that reasoning won't come here. The radars are pretty much on par in capability. There isn't going to be a massive difference. Let's see if Boeing offers the GaN radar for this deal

Asraam can be but the meteor requires a European radar for integration.

There is a plan to integrate Meteor in F35B by UK, F35B is not going to change its radar for integration.

 

[Sathya]

There are instances where lessons are learnt.

Like post Balakote, intensive CAPs, when missile are on flight, their life time is reduced to like 50 hours or something.

Getting our own missile is very important.

First number of missile s available can be increased as per our need without having to let know the world by importing the numbers OEM can offer.

Second maximum numbers of target can be shot if we have more missile s.
Russia is using so many missile s in ints operations. With import we cannot use as much and sustained operations. We have to depend on OEM to provide for sustained operations.

Against china not having this sustainable capability with become major drawback.

Third Nirbhay Derivative s are being developed, we can have subsonic or supersonic bhramosNG Or both as per our need,

Fourth Our missile development time cycle is almost short & reliable now.

 

[Hydra]

There is a plan to integrate Meteor in F35B by UK, F35B is not going to change its radar for integration.

That Radar restriction is just imposed for India, we were so desperate to get Meteor after our *censored* burning incident of Feb19, so that India will choose either rafale or gripen in MRFA.

 

[Hydra]

Fourth Our missile development time cycle is almost short & reliable now.

Where is Quick reaction missile indiction? Supposed to complete by 2020 or 21. Akash 2 also behind th schedule.
Nirbhay is shelved and now we are back to drawing board with a clean slate.
K5 & A6 only god knows about its maiden flight.

 

[Innominate]

Again I'll take this as your opinion, Only I'll add 'more uninformed' this time. AIM-120D-3 or SIP3

You are also mistaken with the date of the 260

This is the same guy that said the J-20 is a better A2G fighter than F-35.

 

[TARGET]

That Radar restriction is just imposed for India, we were so desperate to get Meteor after our *censored* burning incident of Feb19, so that India will choose either rafale or gripen in MRFA.

This radar clause is only for the made-in-India fighter jets, if the USA will ask MBDA to integrate the Meteor on F18 I am sure they are going to say Yes Sir! but IN will be more interested in the "LRASM" rather than Meteor

 

[Hydra]

This radar clause is only for the made-in-India fighter jets, if the USA will ask MBDA to integrate the Meteor on F18 I am sure they are going to say Yes Sir! but IN will be more interested in the "LRASM" rather than Meteor

First part, i doubt. Second part, yeas IN will be intrested in antiship missiles over a2a capabilities.

 

[randomradio]

 

[randomradio]

On land launch or CATOBAR operation the limiting factor would be the hardpoints - but from STOBAR, thrust-to-weight is everything as the entire burden of takeoff is on the engine itself. Your payload capacity is determined by that - and it would only be a fraction of CATOBAR launch (even with the benefit of buddy-refuel after takeoff).

Now the question is, if you were to allocate 1.5 ton of your overall capacity for just 1 ASM how much are you left to play with for the other required items like DTs & AAMs. And whether it wouldn't be a wiser choice to choose a subsonic ASM which would allow you to deploy more ASMs per fighter while still carrying the same amount of fuel & other weapons.

Granted that 4 NGs is stretching it, but it's possible in theory. For realistic payloads, 1 or 2 Brahmos NG with 1 or 2 drop tanks and 4 AAMs will be enough.

I believe the expectation will be for the two aircraft to lift over 6 tons apart from internal fuel, if not 7 tons. That's enough for 2 Brahmos NGs, 2 drop tanks and 4 AAMs.

You can see that the inlet and wingtip HPs are covered by AAMs. And there's still space on the 5 heavy points, each one rated to carry 1.5T worth of fuel.

 

[randomradio]

You are also mistaken with the date of the 260

This article from 2017 quotes the General. So the missile was already in the works by then.

US puts rush order on long-range air-to-air missile

Video: AIM-260 needed to counter Chinese, Russian missiles with ranges over 300km.

arstechnica.com

In 2017, US Air Force General Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle cited the Chinese missiles in a call for a new, longer-ranged missile that would allow the Air Force and Navy to "out-stick" the PL-15.

The New Chinese Missile That Has the U.S. Air Force Spooked

America has spent hundreds of billions on stealthy fighter jets to rule tomorrow’s skies. Could a new Chinese weapon negate that edge?

www.thedailybeast.com

“Look at our adversaries and what they’re developing, things like the PL-15 and the range of that weapon,” Carlisle said in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., on September 15—the same day that China reportedly test-fired the PL-15 for the first time. “How do we counter that and what are we going to do to continue to meet that threat?” Carlisle asked rhetorically.

The very next day, Flight Global magazine published an interview with Carlisle in which the general doubled down on his worried tone. “The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick [sic] that missile,” he said, using an Air Force term for “out-shoot.”

The U.S. Air Force’s F-15EX Could Lob A New ‘Outsize’ Air-To-Air Missile Nearly 200 Miles

A new model of Boeing’sBA classic F-15 Eagle fighter is the U.S. Air Force’s future aerial sniper. The flying branch for the first time has revealed its plan to arm the new F-15EX Eagle II with an “outsize … air-to-air” missile.

www.forbes.com

The “outsize” missile probably is the AIM-260, which the Air Force and Lockheed Martin LMT +0.6% have been developing under a highly secretive program that began in 2017. There are hints the AIM-260 could range twice as far as the Raytheon AIM-120, currently the Pentagon’s farthest-flying air-to-air missile.

 

[randomradio]

This is the same guy that said the J-20 is a better A2G fighter than F-35.

Not me, General Hostage did.

 

[Parthu]

Granted that 4 NGs is stretching it, but it's possible in theory. For realistic payloads, 1 or 2 Brahmos NG with 1 or 2 drop tanks and 4 AAMs will be enough.

I believe the expectation will be for the two aircraft to lift over 6 tons apart from internal fuel, if not 7 tons. That's enough for 2 Brahmos NGs, 2 drop tanks and 4 AAMs.

6-7 tons apart from fuel is beyond stretching it - just not feasible without catapult.

The maximum ASM load that Rafale was supposedly qualified from SBTF was a single AM39 on the centreline - and that's only a 670kg missile - two 2000L DTs on inner wing stations and 4 AAMs. Broadly that's <5 tons payload. Mind you we don't know how much internal fuel its flying with, probably not much for a strike mission (planning to rely on buddy refuel after takeoff).

Super Hornet's Indian Ski-Jump Demo Next Month

Two U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornets will arrive in Goa late May for operational demonstration off a ski-jump

www.livefistdefence.com

"...As part of demonstrations of ski-jump launches with meaningful weapons payloads, Livefist learns the F/A-18s will be flying with two dummy Harpoon missiles — an attempt to show up the Rafale’s ability to only deploy one comparable Exocet anti-ship missile on its centreline hardpoint..."

We have seen this config flying:

The SH supposedly can pull off a similar load but with 2 x ASMs (Harpoons) - though we haven't seen any pictures of that config flying yet. So far the only pics available are with 2 x drop tanks and 2 x wingtip AIM9s.

All in all, I don't see it being very feasible to carry anything other than PERHAPS a single Brahmos-NG on the centreline of either jet. Which then raises the question isn't it better to go with 2 x or more subsonic ASMs (which will stack with every jet in a strike package so 6 planes can deploy 12 ASMs instead of 6).

From future CATOBAR flattops Brahmos-NG would make sense but from Vikrant/Vikramaditya not so much.