Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

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

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by Agent_47, Jan 28, 2017.

  1. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,404
    Likes Received:
    5,415
    That part in red is what I had pointed out before. The modifications to the Aviation Facilities Complex will be time consuming and will cost a lot of money. The carriers are simply not prepared for any other aircraft.

    It is cheaper to buy 57 Mig-29s, 24 F-35Bs and a Mistral with better aviation facilities.
     
  2. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,033
    Likes Received:
    5,834
    Country Flag:
    France
    I didn't said you asked, I said you have to ask.
     
  3. X_Killer

    X_Killer Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    917
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    Country Flag:
    India
    Boeing positions Block III Super Hornet to meet Indian requirements
    Boeing has offered to build its twin-engine Super Hornet fighter aircraft in India if selected to meet Indian armed forces requirements.
    In comments to Jane’s on 6 September, Dan Gillian, vice-president of Boeing Defense, Space & Security’s F/A-18 and E/A-18 programmes, confirmed that the US corporation is positioning the F/A-18E/F Block III Super Hornet to meet requirements in the Indian Navy (IN) and Indian Air Force (IAF).
    The IN requirement for Multi-Role Carrier Borne Fighters (MRCBFs) is supported by a global request for information (RFI) issued in January 2017.
    Incidentally the US Navy has also been offered the new Block III Superhornet which had earlier okayed the upgrades over the existing Block II. Tbe upgrades mainly focused on better network integratation through TTNT( Tactical Targeting Network Technology) and stealth.
    The upgrades Included in Block 3 the Raytheon AN/APG-79 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, an Enclosed Weapon Pod (EWP) for stealth, an Elbit Systems large area display (LAD) ‘glass’ cockpit and next-generation avionics; an infrared search and track (IRST); ‘shoulder-mounted’ conformal fuel tanks (CFTs); Integrated Defensive Electronic Counter Measures (IDECM); and new General Electric F-414-400 enhanced engines.
    Pictures -
    1. Block III upgrades;
    [​IMG]

    2. Block II IRST(incl in blk-III);
    [​IMG]

    3. Elbit large cockpit display;
    [​IMG]

    4. RCS reduction features;
    [​IMG]

    5. New GPS Tx/Rx antenna with TTNT
    [​IMG]
     
    Gessler, Sancho, nik141993 and 3 others like this.
  4. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,559
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Country Flag:
    India
    Can someone explain this?
     
  5. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,559
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Country Flag:
    India
    Be realistic, There is no requirement for assault ships and Cheaper doesn't mean better.
     
    Sancho likes this.
  6. Vyom

    Vyom Captain GEO STRATEGIC ANALYST

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes Received:
    1,825
    A GPS integrated comm set with two way communication facility, with Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) in operation.
    "TTNT is the high throughput, low-latency solution for addressing the sensor to shooter link and providing other real-time information. TTNT is an Internet Protocol (IP) based, high-speed, dynamic ad hoc network designed to enable the U.S. military to quickly target moving and time-critical targets. TTNT enables net-centric sensor technologies to correlate information among multiple platforms, precisely locating time-critical targets"
     
    Sathya, PARIKRAMA, Sancho and 2 others like this.
  7. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,404
    Likes Received:
    5,415
    It's the SATCOM housing.
     
  8. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,559
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Country Flag:
    India
    In comments to Jane’s on 6 September, Dan Gillian, vice-president of Boeing Defense, Space & Security’s F/A-18 and E/A-18 programmes, confirmed that the US corporation is positioning the F/A-18E/F Block III Super Hornet to meet requirements in the Indian Navy (IN) and Indian Air Force (IAF).

    The IN requirement for Multi-Role Carrier Borne Fighters (MRCBFs) is supported by a global request for information (RFI) issued in January 2017.

    http://www.janes.com/article/73598/...-iii-super-hornet-to-meet-indian-requirements

    The Block III will also have built-in fuel tanks, said Boeing VP Dan Gillian, so the upgraded Super Hornet and the F-35 will have “comparable” range. (Exact ranges depend on weapons carried and are kept secret). These “conformal fuel tanks” are more aerodynamic than traditional drop tanks, making them not only more fuel-efficient but also more stealthy. However, Gillian told reporters at Sea-Air-Space, the current Block III package doesn’t include the stealth enhancements of Boeing’s earlier Advanced Super Hornet proposal, nor does it include an expensive new engine being worked on by GE.

    It looks like Boeing deliberately trimmed Block III down to the must-have enhancements that can easily be inserted into the Navy’s existing F-18s when they next go in for overhaul. The Navy already plans to rebuild hundreds of its Super Hornets to extend their service life by a third, from 6,000 to 9,000 flight hours. “The first airplanes will hit six thousand hours early this year,” Gillian said. “It’ll start slow, (but) you get into the 20s, and we’ll see 60, 70 airplanes a year.” As long as the planes are in the shop, why not upgrade them to Block III standard for what he estimates as “a few million dollars”?

    That rough estimate brings us to the bottom-line reason why the F-35 and F-18 are complementary: money. The carrier-capable F-35C variant currently costs $121.8 million, but Lockheed promises to get it down to $100 million. That’s compared to $70-odd million for a new Block III Super Hornet — which the Navy is still buying — or maybe $5 million to upgrade an old one.

    http://breakingdefense.com/2017/04/...-hornet-high-end-complement-to-f-35-stackley/

    @PARIKRAMA @Sancho @randomradio @Gessler @Abingdonboy
     
    PARIKRAMA, Sancho and GuardianRED like this.
  9. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,404
    Likes Received:
    5,415
    But it is better.

    Our carriers are simply air defence ships. It can only operate fighter jets. And the new Mig-29 with Mig-35 technologies will be good. The combination of Brahmos-NG/Brahmos-2 and a Meteor-equivalent can handle most threats easily, especially with FGFA tech. Not to mention, the F-35s will bridge the capability gap between the Mig-29s and Rafales.

    Let's not forget that the F-35s can actually be supported by carriers in the Bay of Bengal and be operated from highways in the North East. That's what makes it special because most of the air bases will be destroyed in a war against China.

    The point is the Mig-29 or Rafale are not going to be good enough to deal with future threats like the J-20. So we can rather invest in more flexibility, like the Mig-29's agility and the F-35B's STOVL capability to complement each other until we get the N-AMCA.

    As for assault ships, it appears that the IAC-2 will be delayed to 2040. 1 or 2 assault ships are a cheap substitute to the delayed carrier. We are going to be building 4 LHDs anyway, so add 1 or 2 more modified LHDs to the list.
     
    Angel Eyes likes this.
  10. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    =>

    =>

     
    Agent_47 and PARIKRAMA like this.
  11. sunstersun

    sunstersun Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    565
    Likes Received:
    327
    Country Flag:
    Canada
  12. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    The navy has maintenance problems, partially of their own mistakes in the spare supply, but also because the fighter has engine and reportedly quality issues that are caused by the carrier landings.

    That however doesn't take away it's capability in air defence roles. It is still a good fighter for close combats and anti ship missions for INs air defence and sea control roles and as far as we know, the only oprion that fits both carriers without issues.

    So if you can upgrade the Mig with additional capabilities (more indigenous once) and solve some of the problems, it still could be a cost-effective option.
     
    Angel Eyes likes this.
  13. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    @Lion of Rajputana

    Check this article to get a better understanding on it.

    http://indiandefence.com/threads/mu...updates-discussions.57779/page-31#post-588678

    Rafale has no folding wings, all you can do is, to park the fighter on deck, remove the wingtip pylon and missiles and then try to fit it somehow on the lifts, which still might not work, because the fixed wingspan is still too much. Not to mention that it's not a practical solution to remove and add the pylons and missiles all the time a fighter needs to get to or from the hangar.
    Speaking of the hangar, the wider wingspan, also means less fighters can be parked next to each other:

    [​IMG]

    As you can see in the rear, the with of the hangar allows to place roughly 2 x Migs with folded wings and a helicopter or spares. That space will be dramatically reduced, if you have 2 fixed winged Rafales instead. The same also goes for the parking spots on the deck. Rafale means less aircrafts can be parked on deck as well.


    P.S. please don't be shy to post! Sharing info's, news, opinions, or simply asking questions is fine.
     
  14. Lion of Rajputana

    Lion of Rajputana Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    1,255
    Likes Received:
    1,720
    Country Flag:
    United States

    I've already seen that article.

    And who's to say folding wings can't be designed? The aircraft carrier these would go on isn't built yet, the IAF hasn't got it's own Rafales yet. If India is serious, then Dassault has the capability and time to solve this.
     
  15. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    Nobody said that it can't be done, but that it doesn't have it today. So off the shelf, the Rafale doesn't fit and if we want the re-design, we have to pay for it extra, which makes the already most costly fighter in the tender, even costlier.

    Well not fully, it wasn't designed for fighters with fixed wings, that's why lift requirements, deck and hangar space are crucial requirements.
     
    sunstersun likes this.

Share This Page