Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That is the basis of my assumption. However, the F/A-18E/F still classifies as a heavy fighter and with it, all the operational hassles, that are not really required when we already have a bloody long range fighter which can pull an equal amount of ordnance if required.The Flanker series of aircraft are considerably larger and heavier than the F/A-18 E/F. Even the Super hornet's larger predecessor, the F-14 Tomcat, a behemoth in its own right along with the USAF's F-15s fall shy of the weight and size comparison against the Flankers.
Undoubtedly the Super hornet is largest of the aircrafts being fielded in this MRCA competition; but I'm not really sure it can be categorized alongside the Su-30MKI.
I completely agree with you on the fuel consumption, operational costs and general serviceability being the most critical deciding factors. If in this regards, the Rafale is superior, then it will certainly stand a better chance.
Well, the French did say that the Mirage 2000 production line can be modified to produce Rafale, and as IAF has a good experience in operating Mirage 2000's, and considering that the production has to take place here, IAF might think it the best option. Remember that IAF already wanted the Mirage 2000 as its original MRCA, they wanted it to be manufactured here, the govt didnt go through with it.Although the IAF has always held the Mirage2000 in high regards when it comes to these factors, I just hope they don't automatically assume that the same will be true for the Rafale. The latter is in a completely different category and should be considered a brand new and radically different platform that requires an evaluation from the ground up.
You hit the nail on the head. It will be a F/A-18E/F with a token ordinance. It is pointless.I believe Boeing has conducted simulations to determine that the super hornet can in fact be operated from a Ski Deck. That being said, I still don't think the IN can possibly field this aircraft because I'm assuming that the simulation was based on a highly stripped down version of the Super hornet which would impede its operational capacity akin to what has happened with the Su-33.
The design for the second indegenous Carrier is already fixed as per what i read in some reports. Fixing the Cats in the third Carrier however maybe a feasible option. But for that the tonnage of the Carrier has to increase as well.As a side note, I think it is really important that the IN start looking into acquiring the catapult system for its two new planned carriers, not only to enable the possible launch of fully loaded Rafales or Super hornets, but more importantly for AEWs.
The F-18 E/F super hornet is still close and may just end up taking this away given the aircrafts technical proficiency and most of all the political and economic benefits associated with this purchase. The only impediment of course is the US Congress' EUA clause; but I have a feeling they'll be willing to be highly ameliorative with this when engaging in a strictly bilateral agreement with India without third party involvement.
EM catapults no. I don't think they're fully operational yet. The steam catapults yes. The French Navy has bought this tech from the US to enable Rafale launches from the Charles de GaulleOne more point here only US operates steam catapults and moving towards electromagnetic ones. Correct me if I am wrong but US has not transferred this tech to any one.
EM catapults no. I don't think they're fully operational yet. The steam catapults yes. The French Navy has bought this tech from the US to enable Rafale launches from the Charles de Gaulle
Thanks energon, but suppose India chooses F18/F16 as the MRCA winner what will be the cost of providing the infrastructure for them. I mean India operates lot of Russian, French, Israel weapons like R77/73 Matra, Python etc. etc. Will US allow them to be integrated with her planes? If not then the total infrastructure need to be created for new planes. This can also play a major role in the decision making.
Israeli and French weapons will not be an issue on F/A-18 and the Viper however Russians would be. I doubt that IAF would want to integrate Russian weapons on US aircraft. US or the Europeans have a solution available to match anything the Russians offer in terms of their weapons so I doubt that anyone would go for the headache to pay for integration and testing of Russian weapons on US aircraft.
Israeli and French weapons will not be an issue on F/A-18 and the Viper however Russians would be. I doubt that IAF would want to integrate Russian weapons on US aircraft. US or the Europeans have a solution available to match anything the Russians offer in terms of their weapons so I doubt that anyone would go for the headache to pay for integration and testing of Russian weapons on US aircraft.
i dont think the us,french,eads will allow foriegn missiles to equip their planes,if they do they will modify the software but the swedes have said that they will give us the source code so that we can change it to accomodate our weapons of choice.may be even russians may allow this on their planes,but i may be wrong