They may want at least one of them: the integration of the Astra missile, which is used by their MiG-29K/KUB.
We have our own universal launchers in development. Once done, integration of that launcher to any hardpoint and all our Weapons (Astra series, Rudram series and SAAW series) becomes easier.
But then again....
why is the Hawk 132 unsafe? translation miss?
The article has all the new info, admiral.
What about the INS Vikrant?
Perhaps the limiting factor, the Russian arresting gear, would be adequate if the F-18 E had the empty weight of the Rafale while being capable of carrying the same load as it, i.e. 1 tonne more.
Copied from Russian design only. ( Make in India G mein daal lo: This is why I voted for TEDBF)
Indeed, I'm not sure how the translator thought "unsafe" was a valid translation of non-navalisé. Perhaps it just didn't recognize the word and made a guess from a context... This is kind of concerning about such automatic translators if they can twist and deform meaning without even indicating where the translation is tentative.
I have shown that the margin of error is lower for the Rafale, when the missiles and their wingtip launch rails are removed.
On the other hand, it is better to work a little and have an aircraft that can carry a ton more while having a better range, and especially that can bring back the weapons it has not fired on the aircraft carrier, whereas the F-18 E cannot because it is too heavy for the Russian designed arresting gear.
The arresting gear of Vikky and Vikrant has limit of 7/23Ton. Min arresting weight is 7 tons and max is 23 tons. As I had written earlier, F-18 blk3 with 116KN engine is capable of taking off at MTOW of 30 tons from both the STOBAR carriers. However in case of a turn back, the aicraft will not be able to land back quickly at that kind of loadout due to the limit of 23 tons for arresting gear.
If this is true, he should be able to manage with a quick vacuum for internal fuel and by dropping tanks.
Perhaps the limiting factor, the Russian arresting gear, would be adequate if the F-18 E had the empty weight of the Rafale while being capable of carrying the same load as it, i.e. 1 tonne more.
@vstol Jockey had pointed this out quite a few years ago.
Apparently the arrestor gear is limited to only the weight of the Mig-29K, that's 22.5T, so possibly 23T. He said the Russians may not allow increasing it unless it's for an Indian jet.
There we go.
Is it really a problem though? The bring-back weight is 4T for both jets, so the restrictions should be the same.
Rafale = 11+4 = 15T
SH = 14.5+4 = 19T
That's 3T for 2 LRASM and 4 missiles and about ton of fuel. Gotta lose the fuel tanks.
Yes, but they put new engines on it so it can take off with a bigger load than the Rafale and it can't take off with a bigger load because it can't get rid of more fuel. Indeed, if it has to keep 4 t of armament it means that it has less than 4100 kg of fuel in external load because it can only carry 8100 kg and as 3 tanks weigh 4450 kg it can only carry two, that is to say 2957 kg.
So if we don't take into account the reserves, it can only lighten by 2957+ 6241 = 9198 kg, less than the Rafale which in the same conditions can lighten by 9600 kg.
The load it can carry is therefore 4t + 2.9 t = 6.9 t which is comparable to the Rafale without modification. On the other hand, upgrading the M-88 to 8.3 t would allow the Rafale to take off at 24.5 t and to land at 15 t with 9.5 t under the wings, including 4 t of bring back. Which is way better for autonomy.
Yes, it can be done easily but the empty weight of F-18 Blk3 is 14.5 tons and with nearly 7 tons of internal fuel, it goes to about 22 tons after that comes the weapons load of 8 tons. The minimum fuel for joining landing pattern is abt 1200 kgs for IN. This leaves you with only 3.2 tons of bombload. But the F-18 Blk3 has a limit of the amount of fuel it can dump. And that is the main reason. No aircraft has a fuel dumping feature which allows for all the internal fuel to be dumped as a matter of safety. Should the pilot get distracted and fails to switch off fuel dumping at the correct time, the aircraft will flame out for want of fuel.
The same arresting gear is used by Russian Carrier for Su-33s which are much higher, so they can easily increase the max trap weight. They may demand a heavy price for it. Given the present situation due to Ukraine war, we maybe able to extract a cheaper deal to increase the max trap weight.
Okay, the bring-back load is 4T for the Rafale and 4.5T for the SH.
If we consider the IN wants 1.2T of fuel for landing, then we are talking about ammo payloads of 2.8T for the Rafale and 3.3T for the SH. Assuming the IN can relax the Rafale's fuel requirement a bit 'cause it's a low consumer, then the weapons payload of either jet is pretty much the same. Everything above that has to be dropped anyway, so it doesn't matter what either jet took off with initially.
Excess fuel can be consumed with afterburner to bring it down to 1.2T or below.
So I am unable to understand the problem here. Both jets can only bring back 3T of weapons regardless of what they took off with. And with just a 4-4.5T payload, both jets are well below 23T.
Or is it possible the arrestor cable's limit is 17 or 18T or so, far less than SH's 19T? Then it would make sense.