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

[Optimist]

Sorry to ask this.. & pardon my ignorance if u have already given link...

Will u please post the recent link where 116 kn engine is offered.

Few things I remember, new conformal fuel tank was part of USN upgrade which was dropped due to some issues.

And extra fuel tank was required for newer engines I think. Otherwise range would suffer with more powerful engines. Especially in Stobar configuration.


After that ( dropping of conformal fuel tank)
I haven't seen any news about more powerful engine upgrade.

Simply, he is confused. There is no current engine that has more power. The option has been and still is available, if someone wants to fund it. It was offered to Australia to do, we declined.

You think that Boeing would keep a new engine a secret? While trying to sell the planes?

 

[Sathya]

Simply, he is confused. There is no current engine that has more power. The option has been and still is available, if someone wants to fund it. You think that Boeing would keep this a secret? While trying to sell the planes?

Even I am also confused.
Few years back everything was part of upgrade for USN.
When conformal tank plans were dropped.
Engine upgrade also was dropped?

 

[Optimist]

It was a paper upgrade that needed funding. There wasn't any funding for the engine and conformal tanks were rejected by USN. Boeing still has the option if anyone wants to fund it. The current Block lll is currently being installed on the existing Super Hornets, including Australia's

 

[Parthu]

You think that Boeing would keep a new engine a secret? While trying to sell the planes?

Exactly - if an engine that would give the SH a clear-cut TWR advantage over Rafale was indeed part of the offer, it would be front & centre in marketing.

 

[randomradio]

Sorry to ask this.. & pardon my ignorance if u have already given link...

Will u please post the recent link where 116 kn engine is offered.

Few things I remember, new conformal fuel tank was part of USN upgrade which was dropped due to some issues.

And extra fuel tank was required for newer engines I think. Otherwise range would suffer with more powerful engines. Especially in Stobar configuration.


After that ( dropping of conformal fuel tank)
I haven't seen any news about more powerful engine upgrade.

For the IN deal or the IAF deal? The 116KN version was made for India and has been pitched since a long time for the IN deal.

 

[randomradio]

Exactly - if an engine that would give the SH a clear-cut TWR advantage over Rafale was indeed part of the offer, it would be front & centre in marketing.

Both Boeing and Dassault have only advertised general capabilities in the media.

You will notice that all the specific capabilities only come out through defence articles and scientific literature, like GaN. Like, neither side is advertising GaN, that doesn't mean it's been offered.

 

[Hydra]

For the IN deal or the IAF deal? The 116KN version was made for India and has been pitched since a long time for the IN deal.

What is the electrical o/p for the engine offered to IN?

 

[Optimist]

It is like the Rafale. India had to pay an extra $60 million R&D and manufacture per plane to get what they wanted. Likewise India would have to fund the R&D and manufacture of this proposed engine upgrade.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

The F18-E/F Block 3 of USN minus the data link is what IN will get if it buys, nothing more. And the block 3 of USN has standard 400 series engines with standard thrus.

 

[Optimist]

One for the frogs who like to use this UK pilot, because he has said some nice things about the Rafale, compaired to the Harrier.

2:45 "the SH is the worlds best self escort strike fighter..Full stop" He then goes into red flag and A2A superior SA

 

[randomradio]

One for the frogs who like to use this UK pilot, because he has said some nice things about the Rafale, compaired to the Harrier.

2:45 "the SH is the worlds best self escort strike fighter..Full stop" He then goes into red flag and A2A superior SA

Not really talking about what gives it an advantage over the Rafale. Meaning, both are the same in context.

@Parthu
Watch from 4:30 onwards, he talks about AWACS being useless.

 

[Optimist]

You silly boy, you are making unfounded assuptions. The Super hornet block ll is based on the failed x-32 bid. The hardware and software was transfered. It is 5th gen in a 4.5gen frame.
He says because of the situational awareness of the super Hornet. An AEW&C doesn't add to his information. They say the same about the F-35.

Without any hesitation the SH is superior to the Rafale. Although for india, I would get the Rafale M for easier support and training with the airforce

 

[randomradio]

You silly boy, you are making unfounded assuptions. The Super hornet block ll is based on the failed x-32 bid. The hardware and software was transfered. It is 5th gen in a 4.5gen frame.
He says because of the situational awareness of the super Hornet. An AEW&C doesn't add to his information. They say the same about the F-35.

Er...

He was referring to the large payload alongside SA. In the West, only the Rafale has this combo, the F-35 doesn't.

Without any hesitation the SH is superior to the Rafale.

Depends on what you're talking about. The SH lacks a dedicated IRST and MAWS, for example. If we look at Rafale's future capabilities, like conformal radars, the SH has no equivalent. So the platform-specific information advantage belongs to the Rafale.

Where the SH is superior is offboard information superiority, which the French currently lack, both platform-based and space-based, over the Indo-Pacific. This is especially important to navies compared to platform-specific advantages. To match this, the Indian Rafales will have to be upgraded with Link 16/TTNT, which I feel is unlikely to happen for Indian Rafales, or India will have to build its own large scale surveillance capabilities, especially satellites, that duplicates American capabilities, a long term program.

Although for india, I would get the Rafale M for easier support and training with the airforce

To the IN, the SH is more relevant. The IN operates a lot of American surveillance assets, with plans to buy more. The P-8, SeaGuardian and MH-60 to begin with, and the E-2D and Triton to follow. Naturally more will come in later on, including satellites.

Furthermore, where the IN plans to operate, the IAF cannot support them. And air assets in the peninsula are going to be moved under a theater command headed by the IN, so the IAF's job will only be air defence. The only supporting forces in the IN's area of operations will be the US and Australia.

 

[randomradio]

The F18-E/F Block 3 of USN minus the data link is what IN will get if it buys, nothing more. And the block 3 of USN has standard 400 series engines with standard thrus.

I don't think the data link will be an issue since India already operates Reapers. COMCASA has given us access to the data link.

Integrating the IN with the USN has been one of the Pentagon's prime agendas since the mid-2000s, ever since the Malabar exercises started. They used to give us their links for the exercises and take it back after it was done. After 2018, their links stayed permanently on our ships. So I don't see why we can't link up with them via SHs. There will be limitations of course, the same as Japan, which is why CENTRIXS exists.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

I don't think the data link will be an issue since India already operates Reapers. COMCASA has given us access to the data link.

Integrating the IN with the USN has been one of the Pentagon's prime agendas since the mid-2000s, ever since the Malabar exercises started. They used to give us their links for the exercises and take it back after it was done. After 2018, their links stayed permanently on our ships. So I don't see why we can't link up with them via SHs. There will be limitations of course, the same as Japan, which is why CENTRIXS exists.

Networking will be different, to what extent cannot say. And yes as Navy doesn't have much overlap with IA and IAF it's kinda unique position to work with the Americans.

 

[Optimist]

Er...

He was referring to the large payload alongside SA. In the West, only the Rafale has this combo, the F-35 doesn't.

You have no logic in your thoughts. The weapon load has nothing to do with the SA and AEW&C. Also the F-35 has external weapon stations and is quite large

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

You silly boy, you are making unfounded assuptions. The Super hornet block ll is based on the failed x-32 bid. The hardware and software was transfered. It is 5th gen in a 4.5gen frame.
He says because of the situational awareness of the super Hornet. An AEW&C doesn't add to his information. They say the same about the F-35.

Without any hesitation the SH is superior to the Rafale. Although for india, I would get the Rafale M for easier support and training with the airforce

The only thing you are overlooking is that the Rafale's situation awareness is better than the F-35's because its data fusion works unlike the F-35's, and this advantage will be amplified with the F4 standard which will bring a MADL type inter patrol link and satellite links. It is fair to say that the Rafale's SA will be as good as the F-35's simulators.

Sensor fusion has improved markedly in the aircraft, but there will always be situations when the F-3525

While the three variants of the F-35 were designed to operate in different environments, the sensor package, onboard avionics, and central processing units are identical. In this Backgrounder, the term JSF (or F-35 without the variant—A, B, or C) applies to all three JSF/F-35 variants.
displays present multiple or duplicate images for a single threat. The foundational systems and geospatial algorithms in satellites, U-2s, and other off-board platforms will feed the JSF coordinates that are slightly different than those plotted by F-35A sensors. The F-35’s radar is by far the most accurate and trusted sensor within the JSF’s fusion feed options. When it tracks a target, the fusion algorithm correlates its tracks with other F-35 sensors and off-board feeds, and the jet’s fusion process eliminates the respective errors, “fusing” whatever multiple tracks there may be for the same target together to what is really there.


When an F-35 turns away from the threat and there are no other F-35s pointed down range, the system’s master fusion sensor is no longer able to track those targets. As other systems continue to feed the pilot situational cues on the threats behind him, the opportunity for multiple images to appear for the same target returns. Most every pilot interviewed felt that the process is both accurate and consistently works well in the jet, but that very real anomaly does not happen in the simulator because sensor fusion there works ideally.

The F-35A Fighter Is the Most Dominant and Lethal Multi-Role Weapons System in the World: Now Is the Time to Ramp Up Production

In February 2018, the Defense Department’s F-35 Joint Program Office began to field the combat employment software for the F-35A. The software, referred to as Block 3F, or simply 3F, delivers the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program’s full operational capability to the Air Force. The changes and...

www.heritage.org

 

[randomradio]

Networking will be different, to what extent cannot say. And yes as Navy doesn't have much overlap with IA and IAF it's kinda unique position to work with the Americans.

Yeah, the Five Eyes network is different from CENTRIXS, in the sense that CENTRIXS networks into the system separately with limitations. But it's good enough, it will allow us to see what the enemy is doing, but not entirely what the Five Eyes allies are doing. But during wartime, India and Japan could end up getting the whole picture if we are both fighting with the US. Even if we are doing our own thing, the network will help.

 

[randomradio]

You have no logic in your thoughts. The weapon load has nothing to do with the SA and AEW&C. Also the F-35 has external weapon stations and is quite large

He quite literally says it's the weapons load and variety of weapons that makes it special. I have also literally argued about the same things in the list of the SH's advantages over the Rafale.

The AWACS comment was for something else entirely, nothing to do with the SH.

 

[Parthu]

@Parthu
Watch from 4:30 onwards, he talks about AWACS being useless.

He's talking about what we talked about.

SH can manage its mission needs & a drone swarm (when it gets it) just fine, but all the same it cannot manage the whole battlespace, nor can it see what's happening behind it or tell the ground forces what to do.

That role will continue to be performed by manned AWACS for the foreseeable future, and unmanned ones in the distant future.