Mig 29K vs Rafale-M - which one should Indian Navy opt for ? Source: http:

[sancho]

So my main point was that F-35 can't be discounted. It is in the minds of the Naval Commanders. Now if we get a better offer from Russians we will go with that else F-35 has a good chance.

It can't be discounted, that's why IN sent an RFI to LM for F35C too, but it's simply not realistic that IN would take not only the most expensive fighter, but also the most restricted fighter for their future carriers (unless they have no choice), in terms of operational use, weapons and even maintenance, that might be done in S. Korea or Japan instead of India. I still give the F18SH a higher chance, but mainly because I don't think IN will have a choice, if they really want catapults. If they don't want it, they will go for naval FGFAs and possibly LCAs for sure.

 

[MST]

It can't be discounted, that's why IN sent an RFI to LM for F35C too, but it's simply not realistic that IN would take not only the most expensive fighter, but also the most restricted fighter for their future carriers (unless they have no choice), in terms of operational use, weapons and even maintenance, that might be done in S. Korea or Japan instead of India. I still give the F18SH a higher chance, but mainly because I don't think IN will have a choice, if they really want catapults. If they don't want it, they will go for naval FGFAs and possibly LCAs for sure.

Well there are two points here. First F35 vs F18
My hunch is that if the Chinese put their Fifth generation fighter on their next AC (which I feel is very likely) IN won't go for F18. The whole strategy of IN is centered around the concept of having qualitative edge over PLAN. Since we can't match quantitatively. Then the second point kicks in which is will US ever give us CATOBAR/EMALS without their fighter. Again my hunch is a big NO. So unless we are going for another STOBAR carrier in IAC 2, F-35 has a good chance. But again this is a hunch.

 

[koushik]

Well there are two points here. First F35 vs F18
My hunch is that if the Chinese put their Fifth generation fighter on their next AC (which I feel is very likely) IN won't go for F18. The whole strategy of IN is centered around the concept of having qualitative edge over PLAN. Since we can't match quantitatively. Then the second point kicks in which is will US ever give us CATOBAR/EMALS without their fighter. Again my hunch is a big NO. So unless we are going for another STOBAR carrier in IAC 2, F-35 has a good chance. But again this is a hunch.

The fact is Chinese have not yet put together any concrete plans for developing a 5th generation Naval Fighter......their fromtline carrier based fighter will be the J-15......along with Shore based Su-30MK2 s..........in this scenario the MiG-29k s are a good match......and I feel Rafale-M will be an ideal choice......more so than super-hornets keeping in mind the willing of US to allow the level of restriction free services..

 

[MST]

The fact is Chinese have not yet put together any concrete plans for developing a 5th generation Naval Fighter......their fromtline carrier based fighter will be the J-15......along with Shore based Su-30MK2 s..........in this scenario the MiG-29k s are a good match......and I feel Rafale-M will be an ideal choice......more so than super-hornets keeping in mind the willing of US to allow the level of restriction free services..

And when have the Chinese shared their concrete plans. Every thing that comes from their end is a surprise - DF 21, J20, J15...i can put down a long list.

You have to look from the Chinese perspetive that its inevitable that they will have 5th Gen fighters on the aircraft carrier if they ever dream of giving any challenge to USN. And China armed with 3 Trillion Dollars in reserve shouldn't have a lot of problem with it.

 

[koushik]

And when have the Chinese shared their concrete plans. Every thing that comes from their end is a surprise - DF 21, J20, J15...i can put down a long list.

You have to look from the Chinese perspetive that its inevitable that they will have 5th Gen fighters on the aircraft carrier if they ever dream of giving any challenge to USN. And China armed with 3 Trillion Dollars in reserve shouldn't have a lot of problem with it.

I agree with your views...and if a 5th gen Naval fighter is to selected then PAK-FA based naval fighter has to be the answer......the F-35 is a very very expensive jet....and it will come with considerable restrictions.....in that case F-35s would not be a good option rather a naval variant of the PAK-FA should be the way to go...
Gor forbid if there are no other ways then F-35 willingly or unwillingly the F-35 has to be the choice..

 

[MST]

I agree with your views...and if a 5th gen Naval fighter is to selected then PAK-FA based naval fighter has to be the answer......the F-35 is a very very expensive jet....and it will come with considerable restrictions.....in that case F-35s would not be a good option rather a naval variant of the PAK-FA should be the way to go...
Gor forbid if there are no other ways then F-35 willingly or unwillingly the F-35 has to be the choice..

PAKFA would def be a better option its just that the Russians don't have the CATOBAR/EMALS technolgoy. And the US won't give us CATOBAR to launch PAKFA. Thats the big risk. From what the Naval Command as stated that IAC 2 will 60K Tonnes CATOBAR Carrier is true than sadly we won't have a choice. Also Budget and Indian Economy in 2015 onwards will be a factor as well. Thats an unknown that can't be predicted.

 

[MilSpec]

Something tells me we still haven't seen the last of the F/A 18 Super hornet.

 

[sancho]

Well there are two points here. First F35 vs F18
My hunch is that if the Chinese put their Fifth generation fighter on their next AC (which I feel is very likely) IN won't go for F18. The whole strategy of IN is centered around the concept of having qualitative edge over PLAN. Since we can't match quantitatively. Then the second point kicks in which is will US ever give us CATOBAR/EMALS without their fighter. Again my hunch is a big NO. So unless we are going for another STOBAR carrier in IAC 2, F-35 has a good chance. But again this is a hunch.

The relations you make here doesn't fit, because if IN is afraid of a Chinese carrier with a naval fighter soon, their first option is not F35C, but N-FGFA! They know FGFA is more capable, they already know how to develop STOBAR carriers and with the experience of IAC 1, it's much simpler and faster to go for a bigger version of it. F35C on the other hand will be not available for IN anytime soon, since it's already delayed and most partner countries and navies needs to be supplied first. Not to mention that we need catapults to operate them, which then again means, developing a new carrier...
I am totally with you that catapults will most likely come in combination with a fighter, but then IN has the choice to take it or not, since they have to evaluate if the the operational advantages are worth the restrictons of weapons, techs, or performance by US laws and that for both fighters! The restrictions for F35C are logically higher than for F18SH, which means catapults and SHs might be a compromise that IN makes, while developing a naval AMCA for catapult operations in the long run. F35C and catapults on the otherside means high restrictions and costs, which then might not make catapults worth it anymore, so it's not that simple and several different things has to be considered.
Imo, the F35C has very low chances, because IN can't afford to be so operationally limited by a foreign country, especially when the aim is projecting power! So my prediction is either F18SH as a compromise and in combination with AMCA, or FGFA and N-LCA on a STOBAR carrier.

And when have the Chinese shared their concrete plans. Every thing that comes from their end is a surprise - DF 21, J20, J15...i can put down a long list.

Because people still tend to underestimate the Chinese production capabilities! I also think that J15 is basically only a training aircraft for them, to gain experience in navalising and carrier operations, while the long term will be naval J31s, which might be even developed by selling them to export countries and make them cheaper againt.
China is very simple and pragmatic in such things, unlike us, that's why they can pull out such developments much faster than we can, since no pride reasons of the manufacturer, or the force will pose a problem. But that's exactly why I can't understand IN or many Indians putting their hope on N-LCA, rather then on developing a naval NG fighter as soon as possible?

 

[jha]

BTW according to a certain Mr. Gupta IN has already been given a presentation by US company ( probably GD )on EMALs.. So, we can not count EMALs+ F-35C out just yet...

 

[MST]

The relations you make here doesn't fit, because if IN is afraid of a Chinese carrier with a naval fighter soon, their first option is not F35C, but N-FGFA! They know FGFA is more capable, they already know how to develop STOBAR carriers and with the experience of IAC 1, it's much simpler and faster to go for a bigger version of it. F35C on the other hand will be not available for IN anytime soon, since it's already delayed and most partner countries and navies needs to be supplied first. Not to mention that we need catapults to operate them, which then again means, developing a new carrier...
I am totally with you that catapults will most likely come in combination with a fighter, but then IN has the choice to take it or not, since they have to evaluate if the the operational advantages are worth the restrictons of weapons, techs, or performance by US laws and that for both fighters! The restrictions for F35C are logically higher than for F18SH, which means catapults and SHs might be a compromise that IN makes, while developing a naval AMCA for catapult operations in the long run. F35C and catapults on the otherside means high restrictions and costs, which then might not make catapults worth it anymore, so it's not that simple and several different things has to be considered.
Imo, the F35C has very low chances, because IN can't afford to be so operationally limited by a foreign country, especially when the aim is projecting power! So my prediction is either F18SH as a compromise and in combination with AMCA, or FGFA and N-LCA on a STOBAR carrier.

My assertion is based on the data in the public domain.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/244721-indias-2nd-air-craft-carrier-would-catobar-type.html

This is what the article says:-

The displacement of the Vishal will exceed 65,000 metric tonnes, against the 40,000 metric tonnes of its two predecessors. In 2010, Chief of Staff of the Indian Navy Admiral Nirmal Kumar Verma announced that the future ship would be a “large aircraft carrier capable of hosting fighters, AWACS aircraft, [tactical flying] tankers, and other hardware.”

The technical specification automatically does away with STOBAR (Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery), adopted for the Vikramaditya and the new Vikrant, because the deployment of flying radars and tankers on board requires a fully operational CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery)

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian...carrier-would-catobar-type.html#ixzz2TInHVlwU

Based on this if its a CATOBAR I don't see really N-PAKFA being an option. Off course its a better fighter but IA wants AWACS (fixed wing) and Refuellers which can't be used from STOBAR. Now this gives a pretty good hint of where they are going with this if they have put this as requirement in Public. Russia doesn't have CATOBAR. Now if they come up with it in the next 5 years N-PAKFA has a chance otherwise don't think so.

Also the time line for IAC 2 is 2017-2022 (add to it the standard Indian delay of 2-3 years atleast) I don't think delivery of the F-35 C plane should be an issue ( If we get it around 2023. Lets say 2 years before carrier is commissioned)

Also F18 with CATAPULT is a very possible compromise as well esp. incase the economy is not too bright in the next decade.

Because people still tend to underestimate the Chinese production capabilities! I also think that J15 is basically only a training aircraft for them, to gain experience in navalising and carrier operations, while the long term will be naval J31s, which might be even developed by selling them to export countries and make them cheaper againt.
China is very simple and pragmatic in such things, unlike us, that's why they can pull out such developments much faster than we can, since no pride reasons of the manufacturer, or the force will pose a problem. But that's exactly why I can't understand IN or many Indians putting their hope on N-LCA, rather then on developing a naval NG fighter as soon as possible?

Agreed
I see LCA more as a testing platform for ADA/HAL/IN nothing more. It is too small to be a useful fighter on sea. The learning hopefully will be applied on N-AMCA

Another point I want to make (which can be controversial).
The restrictions on F 35 C may not be such a huge issue for IN. India will use F35C in anger only if India is projecting Power. And most likely that is the case when India (particualrly- IN) is USAs policeman in the Indian Ocean. Considering most of the US fleet moves to Pacific. They need some one to take that job in Indian Ocean. If not (which will be good for us) we will use F 35C in anger only in defense of our own sea either against China or Pakistan. In Both cases US should not impose restrictions.

 

[sancho]

Based on this if its a CATOBAR I don't see really N-PAKFA being an option.

Me neither, but catapults are not approved yet! What the admiral stated is, what IN wants for decades and even for IAC1 catapults were considered, but didn't worked out. So IF the same happens now again, N-FGFA is the best and fastest option to counter J31 on a STOBAR IAC2.
IF we get catapults we still have to decide if it's worth it to go for F35s, or if a Silent Hornet in lower numbers and AMCA in the long run would be the better choice and I clearly route for the 2nd option!

Agreed
I see LCA more as a testing platform for ADA/HAL/IN nothing more. It is too small to be a useful fighter on sea. The learning hopefully will be applied on N-AMCA

Me too, sadly IN and more importantly ADA/DRDO don't see it like that, otherwise they would have gone with a tech demo program only and had proposed AMCA to IN as a fully fledged naval NG fighter!

India will use F35C in anger only if India is projecting Power. And most likely that is the case when India (particualrly- IN) is USAs policeman in the Indian Ocean. Considering most of the US fleet moves to Pacific. They need some one to take that job in Indian Ocean. If not (which will be good for us) we will use F 35C in anger only in defense of our own sea either against China or Pakistan. In Both cases US should not impose restrictions.

But such a limitation on using the fighters only against targets the US approves is inacceptable for an independent country like India. It's one thing when they do such things with less important transport aircrafts for example, but MMRCA or a naval carrier fighter are the core of Indias defence and can't be controlled from outside.
Take Pakistan for an example, what if we find ourselfs in a war with them again and the US won't allow the attack them with F35s, because it would be against their interests in the region. And don't forget the reports about GE that wanted to restrict LCAs from beeing used against Pakistan, to prevent the techs being taken in case an LCA would be shot down and lands in Pakistan. These are critical operational limitations, that we don't need and that we shouldn't risk unless we get enough in return and if we have even better alternatives.
And as I mentioned, the maintenance of F35 is a huge issue, how do we want to operate useful numbers, when several fighter are abroad only because we are not allowed to maintain them in India? Too many downsides, to make F35 really interesting for us, I hope at least.

 

[Beerbal]

Stupid arguments..

1. Vikadi, IAC1 don't have catapult, so Most of plane (Including Rafael M) ruled out.
2. IAC II can have catapult, (some ppl suggesting it will have both catapult and ramp, like Ujkeskanov). If it will have catapult then only Indian can think of Rafael-M

3. N-FGFA: Is it possible to make something like this?? As I know PAK-FA was not meant to be Naval fighter, Navalising it may take much time and effort, In same effort Russia can make something better and efficient...




Summary: for next 15 years, MiG29 is only option.

 

[Archie]

But..
Mig 29K will be phased out in 2040 when Vikramaditya Retires

But Vikrant will remain in service till atleast 2060

So we would need to acquire a Jet to operate from Vikrant for the last 20-25 yrs of its life
And dont say NLCA
coz dat too will be useless in 2040
My guess is dat we will either be getting F35B in 2035
or will be converting Vikrant into an LHD

 

[sancho]

Stupid arguments..

1. Vikadi, IAC1 don't have catapult, so Most of plane (Including Rafael M) ruled out.

Only those that doesn't have the performance take off from it, or that can't be operated from it because of size issues, both wouldn't be an issue for Rafale btw.

3. N-FGFA: Is it possible to make something like this?? As I know PAK-FA was not meant to be Naval fighter, Navalising it may take much time and effort, In same effort Russia can make something better and efficient...

It's not different from navalising a Flanker, the Mig 29 or LCA, all of them were developed as a land based fighter first. However, when catapults are available, you need far more modifications, or better develop the fighter from the start as a carrier fighter too.

But..
Mig 29K will be phased out in 2040 when Vikramaditya Retires

But Vikrant will remain in service till atleast 2060

So we would need to acquire a Jet to operate from Vikrant for the last 20-25 yrs of its life
And dont say NLCA
coz dat too will be useless in 2040
My guess is dat we will either be getting F35B in 2035
or will be converting Vikrant into an LHD

The carrier might be phased out by 2040, the Migs and N-LCAs won't, since they have a life of 30 to 40 years, which means the oldest Migs can remain in service till 2052.

 

[Archie]

Only those that doesn't have the performance take off from it, or that can't be operated from it because of size issues, both wouldn't be an issue for Rafale btw.





It's not different from navalising a Flanker, the Mig 29 or LCA, all of them were developed as a land based fighter first. However, when catapults are available, you need far more modifications, or better develop the fighter from the start as a carrier fighter too.




The carrier might be phased out by 2040, the Migs and N-LCAs won't, since they have a life of 30 to 40 years, which means the oldest Migs can remain in service till 2052.

Fighters have service life of 40 yrs only if they remain competitive and are upgraded with a decent MLU

Mig29 , Like other legacy fighters like Mirage 2000, F-16, Su27/30, F-18, F-15 , will no longer be considered cutting edge post 2030
This was the reason why Rafale and Eurofighter were shortlisted in mmrca
COZ THEY WILL REMAIN CUTTING EDGE TILL 2040

Also to think that while IAF will retire its Mig29upgs by 2028 , Mirages by 2030 and will begin gradual phase out of Su30MKI in 2040
To think that Navy will hold on to its 45 Mig29K till 2052-55 is Damm stupid
infact the only 4++ Gen FIGHTER DAT MIGHT REMAIN IN SERVICE TILL 2055 , WILL BE THE RAFALE