What's new

Indian Navy News & Discussions

Gomig-21

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 16, 2016
6,831
11
12,430
Country
Egypt
Location
United States
Japan once had large number of aircraft carriers in service, they don't have one now becoz of pacifist constitution imposed on them by US after defeating them.

And Japan would most certainly have a gigantic carrier strike fleet if it could. It just can't because it lost in WWII like you said and the terms of its unconditional surrender was that she would never be able to form a naval threat that could repeat its imperialistic ambitions of the past. It also does have 4 helicopter carriers and honestly, it's remarkable how it was supposed to be stripped of its military power post WWII defeat & surrender, yet its military is in the top 5 strongest in the world!!! Go figure that one out.
 

Lava820

BANNED
Jul 19, 2022
374
-6
430
Country
India
Location
India
Firstly, the Rafale-M cannot fold its wings, making it take up more space on the hangar deck. The weapons and tip rails of the aircraft have to be removed for it to fit into the Elevator, which will carry it to the maintenance bay below.

Whereas the Super Hornet has a folding wing mechanism which means the aircraft can fit into the Lift of both INS Vikrant and INS Vikramaditya without needing removal of the radome cone and wingtip rails.

Also, F-18’s single-seater and twin-seater variants can operate from the aircraft carrier, unlike the Rafale-M, whose twin-seater variant works from the shore

Furthermore, Rafale-M has a limited production of fewer than 50 units, as the only operator of this aircraft is the French Navy, which is said to make this platform more expensive than the Rafale jet operated by the French Air Force and Super Hornets.

While in the case of the F-18, nearly 1,500 legacy and present generation examples were produced over the last four decades, which should reduce certain operating costs because of economies of scale
 
Last edited:

Skull and Bones

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 29, 2011
16,955
-6
29,684
Country
India
Location
United States
Firstly, the Rafale-M cannot fold its wings, making it take up more space on the hangar deck. The weapons and tip rails of the aircraft have to be removed for it to fit into the Elevator, which will carry it to the maintenance bay below.

Whereas the Super Hornet has a folding wing mechanism which means the aircraft can fit into the Lift of both INS Vikrant and INS Vikramaditya without needing removal of the radome cone and wingtip rails.

Also, F-18’s single-seater and twin-seater variants can operate from the aircraft carrier, unlike the Rafale-M, whose twin-seater variant works from the shore

Furthermore, Rafale-M has a limited production of fewer than 50 units, as the only operator of this aircraft is the French Navy, which is said to make this platform more expensive than the Rafale jet operated by the French Air Force and Super Hornets.

While in the case of the F-18, nearly 1,500 legacy and present generation examples were produced over the last four decades, which should reduce certain operating costs because of economies of scale
Not to mention, commonality of engine with Tejas and future AMCA program.
 

Super Falcon

ELITE MEMBER
Jul 3, 2008
15,583
-8
6,262
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
Why PAF failed to develop air to air missile and India succeed with Astra missile with Tejas developing at the other handit is just like buying a gun with bullets

 

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
788
1
1,658
Country
United States
Location
India
FZT5VGBWYAEAVPP
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom