For my Indian friends: Taking Off In A MiG-29K From A Carrier At Night Is A Fiery Thrill

[temp1994]

The E-2D is a certainty mate (if the IN goes for a CATOBAR configuration)- it is by FAR the most advanced carrier-borne AEW system on the planet and the IN has shown a great deal of interest in it (and India is also one of the few nations that the USG has cleared the E-2D to be exported to).

I am doubtful about the V-22, with a fixed-wing AEW, what role will the V-22 play on the IN's ACCs? I do think the V-22s are likely to see service with the IN though in the long term- they are very interested in building up their amphibious assault/expeditionary capabilities.

Wouldn't V-22 based AWACS be better suited than Russia based to fly from our STOBAR carriers?

 

[Abingdonboy]

It could very well be a question of larger carrier holding up the final design though, especially since the Rafale design (canard) limits the number of aircraft that can be placed on board a carrier, meaning a greater deck area will be required.

It's not the canards that mean the Rafale take up more shape but the fact the delta wings can't fold. And I seriously doubt the IN is designing their future carrier around the Rafale anyway.

 

[Abingdonboy]

What about our own version of E-2D?.

Not going to happen in the next 20 years (at least).

 

[Abingdonboy]

Wouldn't V-22 based AWACS be better suited than Russia based to fly from our STOBAR carriers?

Indeed the V-22 AEW would be far more capable than the Ka-31 AEW helos that will fly off the Viky and IAC-1 BUT, the AEw version of the V-22 has not been developed- the IN would have to fund it themselves and the V-22 already being an incredibly expensive machine means this would cost the IN a lot of money. Secondly the IN is more inclined to have the more capable (and already in service) E-2D especially for their future CATOBAR ACCs (IAC-2 and beyond) so I doubt the IN would go for two (costly) AEW a/c. It is a compromise but the E-2D is just more attractive especially for the future, the Ka-31 will have to make do for the IAC-1 and Viky.

 

[temp1994]

What about our own version of E-2D?.
Now a days GoI gives preference to JV or indigenous version.We cant reject a possibility of JV with Russia in that direction.

I don't think that we could JV or indigenous version of E-2D. It is better than even Phalcon AWACS.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I don't think that we could JV or indigenous version of E-2D. It is better than even Phalcon AWACS.

I wouldn't go that far. The PHALCON is still the more capable AWACS given its size and thus larger sensor and processing power but for a carrier-borne AWACS the E-2D is just incredible- having the ability to put that bird above your fleet/air wing in the middle of the ocean is a real game changer.

 

[SrNair]

Not going to happen in the next 20 years (at least).

We dont know the business that can be happen in future.
Fact is Russia has a fullfledged aero industry .If they forward a proposal for JV in naval AEW area then that is possibility.Perhaps I am wrong.
IN would aim for maximum punch in Vishal means maximum number of most capable fifth generation fighter in its deck. Almost in favour for F 35 unless some development in FGFA .

 

[temp1994]

Indeed the V-22 AEW would be far more capable than the Ka-31 AEW helos that will fly off the Viky and IAC-1 BUT, the AEw version of the V-22 has not been developed- the IN would have to fund it themselves and the V-22 already being an incredibly expensive machine means this would cost the IN a lot of money. Secondly the IN is more inclined to have the more capable (and already in service) E-2D especially for their future CATOBAR ACCs (IAC-2 and beyond) so I doubt the IN would go for two (costly) AEW a/c. It is a compromise but the E-2D is just more attractive especially for the future, the Ka-31 will have to make do for the IAC-1 and Viky.

How difficult is it to put an AWACS on a chopper?

I mean most of the fittings have to be internal. If a V-22 could lift the weight of an AWACS, then how difficule would it be to fit one into it.

 

[temp1994]

We dont know the business that can be happen in future.
Fact is Russia has a fullfledged aero industry .If they forward a proposal for JV in naval AEW area then that is possibility.Perhaps I am wrong.
IN would aim for maximum punch in Vishal means maximum number of most capable fifth generation fighter in its deck. Almost in favour for F 35 unless some development in FGFA .

Output of E-2D is in megawatts. It is more than most of land based AWACS.

 

[Didact]

It's not the canards that mean the Rafale take up more shape but the fact the delta wings can't fold. And I seriously doubt the IN is designing their future carrier around the Rafale anyway.

Canard too plays its role in preventing optimal usage of deck space. It rules out certain high density aircraft positioning methods. Though I'll concede the fixed wing escaped my mind.

They obviously are not designing the future carrier around Rafale, but the ground realities remain the same, regardless of the aircraft. We need sufficient flight deck area (and hanger area) to position 50-60 aircraft. Any less and the cost-to-benefit ratio wouldn't be justifiable to go for a nuclear powered carrier in the 2025 time line.

 

[SrNair]

Output of E-2D is in megawatts. It is more than most of land based AWACS.

More than Phalcon AWACS that is strange while we considering Phalcon large sensing capability

 

[Abingdonboy]

How difficult is it to put an AWACS on a chopper?

I mean most of the fittings have to be internal. If a V-22 could lift the weight of an AWACS, then how difficule would it be to fit one into it.

For reference:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gko7nFAjgjY/Ui3c03sTfLI/AAAAAAAA2pc/PSaEZKy_AsU/s640/faq38h11.jpg


And to answer your question- it is not as simple a task as you make out, the design, testing and certifying of such a system is going to cost a LOT. It is not simply a question of "strap a radar onto the airframe- job done!".

 

[sancho]

Sir, all the signs are pointing to CATOBAR for the IAC-2

Which signs? Us rejecting US ATGMs because of the lack of ToT agreements with them? The M777 still not procured because of offset problems with the US? Did you even saw an improvement in the political relations with the US government during or after the visit of the PM with the public rejections of support in the fight agains IS or not joining US, Japan and Australia in a defence alliance?
So what exactly makes you belive they will provide us even steam catapults?

I wasn't aware the IN had shown any interest in making the IAC-1 CATOBAR configured though.

That's why Rafale was considered as an option since the early 2000s, there was a good report of former Admiral Arun Prakash about the way IN evaluated the options for IAC1 back then.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Canard too plays its role in preventing optimal usage of deck space. It rules out certain high density aircraft positioning methods. Though I'll concede the fixed wing escaped my mind.

I really don't think the canards make a huge difference but it doesn't matter as the biggest issue (in terms of space saving or lack thereof) is that the Rafale M's wings don't fold:

http://www.deagel.com/library1/medium/2012/m02012040500012.jpg

They obviously are not designing the future carrier around Rafale, but the ground realities remain the same, regardless of the aircraft. We need sufficient flight deck area (and hanger area) to position 50-60 aircraft. Any less and the cost-to-benefit ratio wouldn't be justifiable to go for a nuclear powered carrier in the 2025 time line.

You are right and this is why it is suggested the IN is looking at a 65,000+ ton carrier design for the IAC-2.

 

[pursuit of happiness]

View attachment 148489

The Indian Navy's young and potent MiG-29K fleet gives their long-awaited aircraft carrier, the INS Vikramaditya, a serious punch. India remains committed to simpler ski-jump instead of catapult configured carriers, and what is not great for a fighter's range and payload is fantastic for visuals, as you can see in the video below.


In many ways, the MiG-29K is the ultimate comeback kid. The earliest version of this MiG-29 Fulcrum derivative first flew in 1988. After the fall of the Soviet Union there were no funds available to field two carrier fighters for what was then Russia's rusting navy.

View attachment 148491

Mikoyan and Gurevich continued to tinker with their carrier capable MiG-29 over the years and by the mid 2000s, when India came shopping for a fixed wing aircraft carrier, the Mig-29K suddenly leaped back into life. During India's initial evaluations, the MiG beat out the current operational Russian naval fighter, the gargantuan Sukhoi SU-33.

View attachment 148492

After negotiating the refitting and purchase of the derelict Russian carrier Admiral Gorshkov, India also purchased 16 highly evolved MiG-29Ks to fly off of it. As the program matured, India doubled down on the MiG-29K with another order of 25 examples. Russia, as part of its revitalization of its expeditionary forces, is also now ordering the MiG-29K to be deployed on its own carrier, the Admirial Kuznetsov, replacing the big but dated SU-33 entirely.

View attachment 148531

24 examples will be delivered to the Russian Navy by the end of 2015, although this number could substantially grow over time if Russia actually realizes its plans for expanded its naval power projection capabilities by adding additional aircraft carriers. At this time, such a proposition is still a paper one, but the MiG-29k is seen as the aircraft that Russia would build a multi-carrier force around.

View attachment 148494

It is very exciting to see the MiG-29 line continue to evolve and thrive in what is a very fickle and crowded international marketplace for fighter aircraft. The MiG-29K is a very different machine than its legacy brethren, even from the first prototype aircraft that took the designation some 26 years ago.

The MiG-29K features a totally redesigned wing and leading edge root extension, beefier landing gear, a modern glass cockpit and the proven and upgradable Zhuk-ME radar. It also carries much more gas than the "legacy" MiG-29 (40% more internal fuel), includes a full fly-by-wire flight control system, has true multi-role capability and includes a high-degree of sensor fusion, at least for a Russian design. All of this comes in a package with the ruggedness that is a hallmark of MiG designs. As a comparison, the MiG-29K is very roughly analogous to something between an F/A-18C/D Hornet and a early block F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

In the end, the MiG-29K seems like a rational mix of capability, size and cost (unit cost around $32M). It also offers the multi-role capability, relatively advanced weaponry and ability to act as a buddy tanker that have been lacking in past Russian naval fighter designs. Still, I would love to know what type of actual payload and range envelopes these machines can achieve when working off of ski-jump equipped aircraft carriers.

Regardless of the MiG-29K's actual combat radius or its ability to lift heavy loads off the boat, once it is airborne it represents a formidable and modern threat.

Taking Off In A MiG-29K From A Carrier At Night Is A Fiery Thrill

thanks for sharing