[dhanushmenon]

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

Why was the retaliatory attack cancelled?

Just an hypothetical question: What is the equipment wise (not structurally or the those needed to operate an aircraft from a carrier) difference between the MiG-29K and the UPGs? Would IN be able to acquire the 60 odd IAF MiG-29s and with minimum modifications, operate them from its land-based airports?
I guess the Naval pilots should be in a position to fly the Airforce MiGs and vice versa (only from shore-bases) if an unified command is created in the future to be operated from island bases or even from new bases that might be created in the future.

The Navy MiG 29 pilots can fly the IAF MiG 29s with a small conversion syllabus. May be one week of ground training and about five to six training sorties. However, it needs to be said that except for the name without suffix, the two aircraft are completely different from each other.

Airframe and design are similar, not same. The sensors and weapon fit in MiG 29Ks are completely different from IAF MiG 29s. Engines are different and also is performance. The Naval version has a sturdy and heavily built undercarriage to sustain heavy deck landings too. It also has a tail hook that's used for landing on carriers.

[DrPriyankT]

ANI just reported that a detachment of Indian Naval Mig 29K's have been deployed to the northern sector to operate in conjunction with the IAF. Looks like these naval aviators have gotten the chance of a lifetime, as they were accustomed to flying over the featureless seas, now they fly over the ragged Himalayan peaks. Also a point to be noted is die to the current status of India's relations with the PRC, both our nuclear subs are out of harbor.
https://idrw.org/navy-moves-mig-29k-...rthern-sector/

[AlphaKilo]

Originally Posted by DrPriyankT

ANI just reported that a detachment of Indian Naval Mig 29K's have been deployed to the northern sector to operate in conjunction with the IAF. Looks like these naval aviators have gotten the chance of a lifetime, as they were accustomed to flying over the featureless seas, now they fly over the ragged Himalayan peaks. Also a point to be noted is die to the current status of India's relations with the PRC, both our nuclear subs are out of harbor.
https://idrw.org/navy-moves-mig-29k-...rthern-sector/

That is similarly hard because of the terrain and night flying will make their life even harder. Hallucinations and shadows can cause a huge issue and IAF has enough experiences in flying in these challenging terrains. The barren terrains in summer and only white snow all around can lead to lot of wrong judgement. But will be a great experience for the aviators to experience some salt free air.

[DrPriyankT]

The Naval flyboys will truly learn a lot from flying in the Himalayas. There is a lot to learn from the IAF teams they will be flying with in terms of how to operate from high altitude fields.

[ads11]

F/A-18 Super Hornet Is Now Undergoing Ski Jump Launch Trials For The Indian Navy

Boeing has been flying an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet off a ground-based ski jump at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland. This is part of a demonstration effort for the Indian Navy to show that the aircraft can operate from short take-off but arrested recovery configured (STOBAR) aircraft carriers, such as the INS Vikramaditya and the future INS Vikrant.

"Boeing and the U.S. 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," Justin Gibson, a Boeing spokesperson, told The War Zone. "Boeing completed extensive analysis and more than 150 flight simulations on F/A-18 compatibility with Indian aircraft carriers, and 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. More details will be released upon the conclusion of the test demonstration."

Looks like Boeing is putting it's money where it's mouth is - an honest to god physical demonstration off a mock up ski jump would go a long way towards strengthening their case. A fact I discovered reading this article is apparently in it's infancy, Mcdonnell Douglas actually ran ski jump tests of the F-18.

McDonnell Douglas, which developed the original F/A-18 Hornet and was subsequently acquired by Boeing, had also previously conducted ski jump tests with that aircraft at the tail end of the Cold War. That testing showed that with as little as a nine-degree incline, the total required takeoff roll for the Hornet could be cut in half, though it's unclear what the jet's gross weight had to be to achieve this performance. Ski jumps generally increase the takeoff performance of combat jets in the absence of catapults and also provide an added margin of safety.

F/A-18 Hornet test jet taking off a ramp c.1980s

While it's obvious the overwhelming commonality argument would favour the IN going with the Rafale M to work in tandem with the Rafale's of the sister service. However the Super Hornet isn't without interesting possibilities of it's own.

Should we acquire the Super Hornet I imagine the benefits would be thus:

1. Cost: It's likely to be cheaper than the Rafale, I'd imagine Boeing would be eager to chuck in some sweeteners to keep their production line going, and maybe shifting a large part to their Indian partner (Tata iirc)
2. Platform synergy across services: Potentially that opens up the Super Hornet for the IAF by the back door, if the IN goes in for it, might as well aim to achieve uniformity through backing the American jet.
3. Synergy with regional friendly nations: in particular Australia. The RAAF is looking to fly their Super Hornets well into the future and having a regional partner with strong alignment with India should mean ample opportunity for cross pollination of ideas, training and operational doctrine (considering both have to deal with a more muscular China)
4. Advanced UAV programme: On the Australia note - I wonder then if this opens the way for India to seek to get involved with their loyal wingman programme. That could prove to be an excellent force multiplier for supposed 4+ gen jets, and allow India to enter the teamed UAV domain. Furthermore, the programme is an exclusively Australian one undertaken by Boeing, so it won't have the immediate weight of the Pentagon to deal with in terms of getting India involved, instead it should come down to ties with Canberra mostly.

   Because this is a strictly Australian project, the arrangement circumvents U.S. restrictions on exports of these types of highly sophisticated unmanned systems.

   
   The Airpower Teaming System Vehicle developed by Boeing exclusively for the RAAF
5. Future proofing for any IN flat top: Having the Super Hornet means the IN fleet air arm would have a jet that would in principle be able to work off a future IN CATOBAR carrier just fine. In fact the Rafale M also is proven off CATOBAR, unlike the Mig-29K which unfortunately is STOBAR rated only.

Some background on the drone

Once operational, this cutting-edge drone will be expected to take on a range of different functions, including working alongside fighters, tankers, maritime patrol aircraft, and even airborne early warning and control platforms. The cornerstone of the concept is a low-cost unmanned platform to work alongside traditional manned combat aircraft and operate as a force-multiplier, adding “mass” while also undertaking more hazardous tasks and missions when required.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ture=emb_title

So there are my thoughts, really it's the prospect of the IN operating teamed Super Hornets and UAVs that's the most tantalising aspect. As usual the oft discussed issues arising from any dealings with Uncle Sam remain. It doesn't change the fact that in principle, figuring out the money issue should really be the only stumbling block to a larger order of Rafales for both IAF and IN service. However if Indian procurement were so simple, you wouldn't have the entire cottage industry that's come up trying to work out what curveball will come up next out of New Delhi

[Dieseltuned]

Does not the American weaponry come with a clause of non usage in aggression ? Which basically makes this just a show off toy ? Why would I buy a weapon and sign a clause of non usage when I am living with 2 very hostile neighbours ?

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Dieseltuned

Does not the American weaponry come with a clause of non usage in aggression ? Which basically makes this just a show off toy ? Why would I buy a weapon and sign a clause of non usage when I am living with 2 very hostile neighbours ?

If you buy/receive American weapons on a subsidized basis then yes they bring in some conditions mainly that their approval is needed before it is used aggressively. Daft but true. The only such weapon we ever purchased to best of my knowledge in INS Jalshwa, the amphibious ship. Almost every weapon Pakistan has procured from USA has been on a subsidy. When you buy it on a full commercial basis no such conditions apply because they, the Americans, would get wiped out of the selection competition on day zero. Why would you call a Super Hornet a show off? Can you name one weapon we have procured for show off?

Ideally the IN should check out both the Super Hornet and the Rafale M. I would root for the Rafale on grounds of logistics and economics.

[skanchan95]

The biggest fear in buying American fighters is the crippling effect sanctions can have on the availability of these fighters. After Pokhran 98, we know how sanctions led to delay in the LCA programme and the spare parts availability for the Navy's Westland Sea King Fleet.

An example that India should learn from is that of Indonesia. In the 80s, the Americans wooed Indonesia and offered to replace their MiG-21F-13 fleet with F-5E/Fs. They looked the other way when Israel secretly transferred ex-Israeli Air Force A-4s to Indonesia - something unimaginable for a predominantly Muslim country like Indonesia to do!!! The Indonesians even bought quite a few F-16A/Bs. So their fighter fleet consisted of F-5s, A-4s and F-16s. They tried to buy a few Su-30Ks from Russia but the deal was cancelled partly because of American pressure and partly because of their not so good economic situation. Those Su-30Ks meant for Indonesia were later offered to and bought by India.

That romance between Indonesia and US ended when, rightly or wrongly, sanctions were imposed on Indonesia for their military intervention in East Timor at the end of last century. That led to virtual grounding of their American fighter fleet which forced them to turn to Russia for supply of Su-27s and 30s. The Americans did lift the sanctions and the F-16s were back in service along with 'new' ex-USAF F-16s but imagine the nightmare of having your entire or most of the fighter fleet grounded because of sanctions!!! The Pakistanis too have great experience in this matter

So I will only say this - fairly evaluate both the Rafale and Super Hornet but select the one that will not be affected by the whims and fancies of Future American presidents and members of the US Congress - which in one line means - "Select the Rafale" (in Capitals) ! Although I am big fan of the Super Hornet's design and capabilities especially in its Block 3 Advanced Super Hornet Configuration, I feel the Rafale is a safer bet.

[Jeroen]

looks like the US navy is about to pull the plug on the production of the super hornet from next year onwards.

https://news.usni.org/2020/03/10/nav...extension-work

I am not sure what sort of production numbers are required to keep a production line up and running. But if India wants F18 Super hornets, you might want to get your order in quickly!

Jeroen

[ads11]

It's been no secret that the US uses their arms sales as another arm of the diplomatic apparatus of the State Dept - in the sense that they have used it to ensure that for the most part their model of a liberal democratic world order is maintained. However this Pax Americana can often be at odds with the domestic needs of the afflicted nation so for sure it's a big bug bear to keep in mind. Think of it as a veritable sword of Damocles over American origin kit, a kill switch the moment Congress might feel you are out of step with those values they wish to propagate. In that sense, the Rafale will always have a major feather in its cap due to the purely transactional (for the most part) nature of French defence sales.

Part of me feels that if the US is desperate to offload a production line of an American built fighter to India, instead of it being the F-16 derivative, India might be better placed with a localised assembly line for the F-18 as it fits the bill for both services. As Jeroen pointed out, if India wanted new build Super Hornets they'd need to act fast, hence why I mentioned Boeing was trying to drive the point home by publicly doing these ski jump mock up tests at Patuxent. Plus I've clearly had my head turned a bit by the tantalising prospect of getting in on Australia's wingman programme. It really could be an extremely potent and cost effective force multiplier for the IN or IAF.

Let's see, for all we know the bureaucrats in Delhi might be fluttering their eyelids at the Super Hornet to try and force Dassault and the French to the table with more of a discount on the unit costs. Knowing India watch us flub both gambits.

Indonesia's air force fleet is one of the few that can match the IAF for sheer diversity and the consequent issues that come with it, that sadly we've become all too familiar with.

[Sutripta]

Seems like IN absolutely does not want the helicopters HAL is offering. Thoughts anyone.

Sutripta

[ads11]

I must've missed some new development, what happened?

But if it's true, and considering the ugly public spat we saw come to the fore recently, I can't say I blame them (the IN that is). If anything, we've hardly ever seen such vociferous rebukes from service staff, but the fact that there was not one but so many well publicised and detailed statements from current and former IN staff shows that perhaps the pushback from HAL was the final straw that broke the camel's back. From what we've read it hardly seemed like a coordinated IN effort to torpedo HAL's helicopter offerings. Instead, I'd have to say that the recurring theme is that HAL's staggering lapses time and time again (borne out by the many common threads to the complaints we kept hearing) brought this upon themselves. If only there were accountability at the offices of HAL this would be treated as the deeply embarrassing chiding that it is and immediate steps taken to rectify the glaring quality control issues brought to light. Thing is, if HAL dig their heels in, the only way this plays out is everyone loses. I'd rather they get egg on their face and actually make a concerted effort to improve - they've got a long enough list of things out there in multiple public domain to work upon.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Sutripta

Seems like IN absolutely does not want the helicopters HAL is offering. Thoughts anyone.

The Dhruv flew for the first time 28 years ago this week. Count that 1-2-3-.....In 28 years despite this being initially designed to be the more capable replacement for the Alouette HAL & DRDO have failed to develop a version with a folding tail and rotor. Normally you design in these fundamental structural & motor features at the start. Failing with you can do it with effort in round 2. But 28 years? A shipboard helicopter without folding rotors and tail simply doesn't work given the tight confines of shipboard hangars.

The attitudes of HAL towards their customers and partners in shockingly callous and with no sense that they exist to serve the customer or the nation. Deep repair or refit of an aircraft that should take 60 days can take a year - I speak from direct experience - with no remorse. Take it or leave it. I shall refrain from sharing worse. The Armed forces have been consistently treated with disdain.

Originally Posted by ads11

Instead, I'd have to say that the recurring theme is that HAL's staggering lapses time and time again (borne out by the many common threads to the complaints we kept hearing) brought this upon themselves. If only there were accountability at the offices of HAL this would be treated as the deeply embarrassing chiding that it is and immediate steps taken to rectify the glaring quality control issues brought to light. Thing is, if HAL dig their heels in, the only way this plays out is everyone loses. I'd rather they get egg on their face and actually make a concerted effort to improve - they've got a long enough list of things out there in multiple public domain to work upon.

+1 to that

[DragonHawk]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

The attitudes of HAL towards their customers and partners in shockingly callous and with no sense that they exist to serve the customer or the nation. Deep repair or refit of an aircraft that should take 60 days can take a year - I speak from direct experience - with no remorse. Take it or leave it. I shall refrain from sharing worse. The Armed forces have been consistently treated with disdain.

+1 to that

HAL`s way of working is more like come up with an aircraft and force customers to buy it rather build something which customer wants. I wonder what kind of market research these guys employ. Best example is weaponised Hawk AJT and instead of putting time and effort of these, they should rather give 100% on projects which our armed forces is interested on. With HTT40, things are slowly changing but still a long way to go.

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by ads11

I must've missed some new development, what happened?

Nothing new.

Seems (to me) that the HAL copter is going to be forced down INs throat, and what we (the aam admi) are seeing is the last ditch flailing of the IN before the inevitable.

And I'm sure there will be no shortage of conspiracy theories!

Sutripta