IAF to retire Canberra jets Wednesday

[EagleEyes]

We will still use J-10 as a bomber.

Indeed that would be done. I guess money is the problem.

 

[Adux]

Indeed that would be done. I guess money is the problem.

I dont think the problem is the money, Problem is waiting till PLAAF get its requirement done. Time has a value which supercedes Money, PAF cant wait.

 

[Keysersoze]

Keys,

I was looking at the possibilites of MIG-29K becoming more effective, Lets imagine this, what will be the difference of payload when launched in vikramaditya(gorshkov) Ski jump or by the USS CVN catapult.

Russian Aircraft carrier follows a different doctrine and also by the lack of catapults, uses the SU-33K only for Air to Air defence.In my opinion a waste of a great aircraft. I was wondering in the Indian Scenario as well, since the MiG-29K is capable of buddy refuelling, why dont they launch MIG-29K with heavior payload, but less fuel, but once airborne advice buddy-buddy refuelling or IFR. Therefore being able to deliver more payload per sortie during strike missions not air to air defence.

The problem is that the Russian aircraft carrier also has limited space so in order to keep those few planes up you would have to use most of the flight component in order to keep a few planes in the air. The nature of the flight deck limits the on deck storage space if the full length is required for a take off (as in the case of the mig29) Which in turn means problems when launching and recovering aircraft. (You can't have aircraft in a "ready" position because it would foul the landing area for example)
The Su's can use the shorter run-off but as the videos have shown they have to run very light. The only way to make the carrier effecive would be to have a aircraft that will not be limited by weight and take-off limitations of the flight deck. (E.G. a purpose built stol or vstol aircraft)

A catapult would have solved all the problems but would require HUGE amounts of money and work in order to install.
That is why there are going to be Helicopter based AEW craft on board, They couldn't launch a small heavy aircraft off the deck.

 

[Muradk]

Keys,

I was looking at the possibilites of MIG-29K becoming more effective, Lets imagine this, what will be the difference of payload when launched in vikramaditya(gorshkov) Ski jump or by the USS CVN catapult.

Russian Aircraft carrier follows a different doctrine and also by the lack of catapults, uses the SU-33K only for Air to Air defence.In my opinion a waste of a great aircraft. I was wondering in the Indian Scenario as well, since the MiG-29K is capable of buddy refuelling, why dont they launch MIG-29K with heavior payload, but less fuel, but once airborne advice buddy-buddy refuelling or IFR. Therefore being able to deliver more payload per sortie during strike missions not air to air defence.


MuradK,

J-10 lacks the payload capacity to become a true bomber, its a multi-role fighter, bombing will be one of its role albeit not in the true sense of the meaning. It cant do a B-1 or Tu-22M, H-6 or even the Su-32

The only Bomber we had was B-57 , I dont think, PAF will every invest in a bomber like that, With all the missile Tec we dont need bombers any more. Like B-57.

 

[sword9]

Very true IAF is/was lucky to have Canberra's.

Sir,
So was the PAF. You'll flew the Americanese version called B-57.

 

[sword9]

Sir,

One Mig-21 crashed, one Mig-27 was shot, Mi-7 was shot, isnt that the tally in Kargil

I was just trying to prove a point about the Canberra.
Just a correction, the Mig-21 was SD by a ground based SAM not a MANPAD, and the Mig-27 flamed out.

 

[EagleEyes]

Mig-27 flamed out? How?

Source?

Thanks.