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

What should we select?


  • Total voters
    61
  • Poll closed .

India All Set To Order 26 Naval Rafale Jets

July 10, 2023 / By Team Livefist
1.jpg

Seven years after India ordered 36 Rafale fighters for the Indian Air Force, advanced clearances went through today to procure 26 naval versions of the French fighter for the Indian Navy. The Indian Ministry of Defence provided a crucial piece of clearance today at the level of the Defence Procurement Board (DPB) paving the way for what could a rapid series of forward approvals ahead of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Paris as chief guest for this year’s Bastille Day celebrations.

In February this year, Livefist reported the Indian Navy’s selection of the Rafale in a face-off contest against the American F/A-18 Super Hornet. You can read those details here. The selection was made after tests by both aircraft at in Goa in 2022. You can read about the Rafale’s trials here and the Super Hornet’s here.

Indian Navy’s first indigenous aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant, as well as the Russian-origin INS Vikramaditya. While the former doesn’t have an aircraft complement yet, the latter operates the Indian Navy’s only current fighter type, the Russian MiG-29K. Seven years after the Russian jets entered service, the Indian Navy decided it needed more capable and more available fighters for future carrier aviation needs. In 2017, the Indian Navy announced it was in the market for 57 new generation multirole carrier based fighters (MCBF). Over the years, the navy had to whittle down that number amidst budgetary pressures. The final figure of 26 Rafale fighters also accommodates the future arrival of a homegrown Twin-engine deck-based fighter (TEDBF). Over three years, while teams from the indigenous aviation complex had been trying to drum up support for a fully indigenous solution to the navy’s carrier-based fighter needs, the navy insisted it couldn’t wait, and that it needed at least 26 jets to bridge the capability gap until the proposed TEDBF comes online.

Ministry of Defence clearance notwithstanding, it is unclear just when this deal for Rafale-M fighters will be signed. There are several more layers of clearance before a deal can be concluded, including the Defence Acquisition Council and the Cabinet Committee on Security. As with the 2016 deal for IAF Rafales, announced a year previous by the Indian PM in Paris, the current deal could follow a similar path. Reports indicate that the leaders of India and France could make an announcement to the effect as early as this week when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in Paris, followed by a year or more of negotiations before contract signature in mid-late 2024. At any rate, the atmosphere is conducive. Four Indian Air Force Rafale fighters will be part of the Bastille Day flypast, while an Indian military contingent will march in the national day parade.

Alongside a comparable weapons package to the Indian Air Force fleet, the Indian Navy’s Rafale fighters will likely come with AM39 Exocet anti-ship missiles. You can read here about the other ‘add-ons’ that have been made available to both the Indian Air Force and Indian Navy since the original Rafale deal was signed. While negotiations will go into all aspects of the new deal, it is certain that India will push for more local production and sourcing of parts for Rafale jets as well as its weapons. On the latter front, missile house MBDA, which builds most Rafale weaponry, has an active joint venture with Indian private sector giant L&T, and will likely use this to front offers of local assembly. Offsets on the original 2016 Rafale deal envisage the transfer of two major missile assembly lines to India — the MICA and ASRAAM. That could speed up in light of the new deal.

India has had an aggressive year for defence contracting. Last month, during PM Modi’s visit to the U.S., the two countries announced the conclusion of a long-meandering deal for General Electric F414 jet engines to power India’s Light Combat Aircraft Mk.2. These are the same engines that power the Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet, a contender that the French Rafale has defeated for the Indian Navy deal. Buzz that the F414 deal put the Super Hornet back in the game in India have proven incorrect, at least insofar as the current momentum towards a deal for 26 Rafale-M fighters.

But it’s possible that the United States won’t rue the loss. For one thing, the U.S. offer of the F/A-18 expired at the end of June owing to pressures on a looming end-date for the aircraft’s production in 2026.

For all the multifarious trials that the Indian Air Force and Indian Navy have subjected fighters to over the years, nobody mistakes the overwhelming — and justifiable — geopolitical factor in Indian defence procurement. And that’s likely why, with the naval fighter deal going to the French, it’s possible that the Indian Air Force’s far bigger and more ambitious quest for 114 fighters puts the United States in pole position. As things stand, the U.S. has two horses in the multirole fighter aircraft (MRFA) contest: the Lockheed Martin F-21 and the F-15EX Eagle-II.
Boeing had likely sensed India’s plans across the two requirements years ago. While the F/A-18 Super Hornet had originally been aimed at the Indian Air Force (it was a contender in the aborted M-MRCA contest), Boeing sharpened its India plans around the Super Hornet pointed at the Indian Navy and the F-15EX for the Indian Air Force.
Livefist will report more this week on India’s looming Rafale-M deal.
 
However, the French financial newspaper La Tribune has dismissed these rumors, stating that no announcement is anticipated on Bastille Day unless an unforeseen last-minute surprise occurs. According to the weekly publication, the Rafale M order will instead be made in India, potentially on the sidelines of the G20 summit scheduled for September 9 and 10, 2023, in New Delhi.​
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Amarante and Ashwin
However, the French financial newspaper La Tribune has dismissed these rumors, stating that no announcement is anticipated on Bastille Day unless an unforeseen last-minute surprise occurs. According to the weekly publication, the Rafale M order will instead be made in India, potentially on the sidelines of the G20 summit scheduled for September 9 and 10, 2023, in New Delhi.​
If true,just another meaningless foreign trip by pm,in defence perspective.
 
However, the French financial newspaper La Tribune has dismissed these rumors, stating that no announcement is anticipated on Bastille Day unless an unforeseen last-minute surprise occurs. According to the weekly publication, the Rafale M order will instead be made in India, potentially on the sidelines of the G20 summit scheduled for September 9 and 10, 2023, in New Delhi.​

Yeah, without the final DAC and CCS clearances, it's not gonna happen. But it's always possible sometime this year. As of now, there's only an AON cleared.

And any local production will require time to flush out the details.

In any case, even if nothing is signed this week, at least we are 100% assured of France having won.
 
Could you explain your point of view a little, I don't quite understand. And where does this figure of 39 come from?

A combination of 8 Rafale B and 18 M would have a third of the fleet useless for carrier ops. So it was a good idea to simply give up on two-seaters thereby negating one main disadvantage, by making all 26 jets carrier-capable.

26 jets aren't sufficient for 1 carrier. While it's enough for peacetime operations with reduced numbers. Attrition, upgrades and hostilities require more numbers. 2 squadrons for a total of 39, similar to the IN's 2 squadrons of 45 Mig-29Ks, makes more sense. The increased numbers can also act as a stopgap when a CATOBAR carrier becomes operational, 'cause we most definitely won't have one of our own that quickly.

If Vikramaditya can carry 24 Mig-29Ks, then the Vikrant is bound to carry 22 Rafale Ms at the minimum. That leaves only 4 for training, attrition, upgrades etc. So it makes sense for the IN to add "up to" 13 more jets, ie 50% of the initial value, since the bureaucracy allows for an increase in such numbers if deemed necessary. Even 4 additional jets would be more useful, it will allow Vikrant to always be equipped with 100% of its complement.
 
Yet if there were a G To G of 72 combined with the IN 26, there would certainly be production in India of the majority of these Rafale, and if such production took place in India, the IAF would end up with well over 114 new Rafale.
In my calculations,Navy needs 83 new jets (Rafale/SH) minimum. The original 57 counts, another 18 to be stationed at A&N, remaining 8 at Goa as an attrition replacement/ complementing aircraft under repair.
A combination of 8 Rafale B and 18 M would have a third of the fleet useless for carrier ops. So it was a good idea to simply give up on two-seaters thereby negating one main disadvantage, by making all 26 jets carrier-capable.

26 jets aren't sufficient for 1 carrier. While it's enough for peacetime operations with reduced numbers. Attrition, upgrades and hostilities require more numbers. 2 squadrons for a total of 39, similar to the IN's 2 squadrons of 45 Mig-29Ks, makes more sense. The increased numbers can also act as a stopgap when a CATOBAR carrier becomes operational, 'cause we most definitely won't have one of our own that quickly.

If Vikramaditya can carry 24 Mig-29Ks, then the Vikrant is bound to carry 22 Rafale Ms at the minimum. That leaves only 4 for training, attrition, upgrades etc. So it makes sense for the IN to add "up to" 13 more jets, ie 50% of the initial value, since the bureaucracy allows for an increase in such numbers if deemed necessary. Even 4 additional jets would be more useful, it will allow Vikrant to always be equipped with 100% of its complement.
ADA & HAL and othe agents/dalals for inhouse shity defence equipment successfully brainwashed MOD by selling TEDBF. That's the reason for mere 26 number.
 
A combination of 8 Rafale B and 18 M would have a third of the fleet useless for carrier ops. So it was a good idea to simply give up on two-seaters thereby negating one main disadvantage, by making all 26 jets carrier-capable.
There's no need to learn how to land on an aircraft carrier with the operational aircraft. The French learn this on an American training aircraft, and when they have learned it they take their Rafale and land without difficulty. You have two-seater Mig 29s, which will enable you to qualify your pilots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Yet if there were a G To G of 72 combined with the IN 26, there would certainly be production in India of the majority of these Rafale, and if such production took place in India, the IAF would end up with well over 114 new Rafale.

That's the most optimum solution from our perspective, it saves us 3-4 years.

But even our serving ACM, Bhadauria, whose initials are now on the Rafale's fins and was instrumental in signing the GTG, is backing the RFP over more GTG Rafales. So there must be something to it that we haven't thought of.

The only technical argument I can think of is the RFP has been timed to match the introduction of the F5. But that's too shallow. It's much more likely that the IAF has delayed the RFP to allow the Indian industry to catch up, and the tender will then allow them to compare the progress made by the industry with that of FOEMs. 'Cause this may very well be the last large-scale import of fighter jets in India's history, so the IAF will want to make sure domestic tech is as good as imports.

When you think about it, the MKI MLU, LCA Mk2, AMCA and MRFA RFP have all been timed to be finalised in 2022-23. So it's created a very good benchmark for the IAF to compare everybody, even the Russians via FGFA. So MRFA will be the last piece of the puzzle. And by 2025 or so, when Indian programs are in an advanced stage, the IAF will have a clear trajectory of where India is headed. And by 2026-27 or so, when the contract is being negotiated, any technical holes in the Indian industry will expected to be filled in by the FOEM.

So the choice is between saving 3-4 years now or securing India's aviation future for the next 3-4 decades. It's a no-brainer to me.
 
In my calculations,Navy needs 83 new jets (Rafale/SH) minimum. The original 57 counts, another 18 to be stationed at A&N, remaining 8 at Goa as an attrition replacement/ complementing aircraft under repair.

Coastal basing is not under consideration right now, the IAF needs to get their numbers up first. Any future IN requirement can be filled by AMCA.

ADA & HAL and othe agents/dalals for inhouse shity defence equipment successfully brainwashed MOD by selling TEDBF. That's the reason for mere 26 number.

The decision on TEDBF was a joint decision. The IN needs an indigenous carrier aviation industry, 'cause their carrier plans are big. Over a 50-year period, we will need the same size and strength as our biggest rivals. It's not a choice.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Valhalla
There's no need to learn how to land on an aircraft carrier with the operational aircraft. The French learn this on an American training aircraft, and when they have learned it they take their Rafale and land without difficulty. You have two-seater Mig 29s, which will enable you to qualify your pilots.

Yes. As long as the IN has found a workaround, it's fine. They wanted to be independent from the IAF, but it appears they will just depend on the IAF in this case.
 
Coastal basing is not under consideration right now, the IAF needs to get their numbers up first. Any future IN requirement can be filled by AMCA.



The decision on TEDBF was a joint decision. The IN needs an indigenous carrier aviation industry, 'cause their carrier plans are big. Over a 50-year period, we will need the same size and strength as our biggest rivals. It's not a choice.
AMCA,I don't think it will land & take off from any category of ACs.

We will take minimum 20 years, or atleast 15+ years to complete the R&D work of TEDBF,if started now. You think that TEDBF will be of any use by 2040 timeframe?
 
Could you explain your point of view a little, I don't quite understand. And where does this figure of 39 come from?

I forgot to add that the IN has dropped hints of increasing numbers. 26 will keep the initial acquisition costs low, and then they can always buy more. I guess it depends on the performance of TEDBF. So the IN could increase Rafale M to 2 full squadrons or even 4-6 if TEDBF fails.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Valhalla
AMCA,I don't think it will land & take off from any category of ACs.

You were referring to coastal basing.

We will take minimum 20 years, or atleast 15+ years to complete the R&D work of TEDBF,if started now. You think that TEDBF will be of any use by 2040 timeframe?

No, all the base technologies and engine for it have already been developed for LCA Mk2. They just need to design and certify a new aircraft and combine that with LCA Mk2/AMCA technologies. So instead of 15 years, it will take only 10.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Valhalla
No, all the base technologies and engine for it have already been developed for LCA Mk2. They just need to design and certify a new aircraft and combine that with LCA Mk2/AMCA technologies. So instead of 15 years, it will take only 10.

How much time it will take? As per your calculations.

They need to develop an algorithm for FBW. No matter how experience you are ( in our case,we are nothing close to this category), it will take a hell lot of time. Only god know how long the EW, Avionics part will take. Weapons integration timing is icing on the cake.
You were referring to coastal basing.
It is nothing but meaningless to induct a new aircraft for Navy ,only for coastal defence job.
 
How much time it will take? As per your calculations.

They need to develop an algorithm for FBW. No matter how experience you are ( in our case,we are nothing close to this category), it will take a hell lot of time. Only god know how long the EW, Avionics part will take. Weapons integration timing is icing on the cake.

10 years. All of the above is already done.

It is nothing but meaningless to induct a new aircraft for Navy ,only for coastal defence job.

Better than an import. Anyway, right now the IAF is handling coastal defence. IN is only authorised to use carrier jets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion