Indian Navy still have eyes on F-35

[sancho]

Addtionally it is unknown if the Russians would/could develop the N-FGFA as a fighter able to take off from a Catapult

They surely have the knowledge, but won't do it, since it' far too complicated and costly to do it now, when Pak Fa / FGFA was developed as a land based fighter. Navalising it for STOBAR use will be difficult and costly enough. They are aiming on STOBAR carriers, with additional EMALS for larger AEW, transport aircrafts or UCAVs, while the naval Pak Fa and Mig 29Ks will be used via ski-jump. The Chinese might go for the same approach, unless the J31 has already airframe and gear strengthenings included in its design now.

Wrt the F35, it's not the limited capability and problems of the fighter alone that makes it a bad choice, but also the restrictions and operational limitations that comes with it. IN would be highly limited and that's clearly not good for India.

 

[Echo_419]

IN has already stated that the only point they support N-LCA was, that India get experience in naval fighter design. But even if that's a good cause, it doesn't justify anything more than a tech demonstrator program. And by the fact that we hired EADS to help us with the navalising, we can't really expect that we have any knowledge to do it with FGFA. The funny thing however is, that the Russians are ready to let HAL do the navailising part, but for obvious reasons, since that would fund the development of the naval version, which Russia don't have to fund anymore. Not to mention that they know, when HAL can't do it, Sukhoi will simply take over anyway.
Yes it's far more difficult to navalise a fighter, when it's not developed with airframe or gear strengthenings in the first place, but LCA MK2 is just a basic upgrade with very minor external changes. It still is a fighter developed for Air Force, which needs a propper re-design for the naval use. That's why if ADA/DRDO would had learned from their mistakes, they would develop AMCA as a carrier fighter and divert a version from that later to replace MKIs in IAF later. Far more logical and far more useful for both forces, but sadly ADA/DRDO doesn't give a damn about what the forces want or what is logical and simple.

No one will give away such crucial work away without money & i am just hoping that Modi Sarkar reforms these Institutions

 

[sancho]

No one will give away such crucial work away without money & i am just hoping that Modi Sarkar reforms these Institutions

They would, since they know that it would just be a HAL project on paper, funded by Indian government, while the Russians would remain to be a partner in the navalisation and might still provide the basics.
Even today with the Mig 29K, we can see it happen, since we funded the development, testing and production of systems to a good extend and Russia knows that we will continue to operate and upgrade them for a long time. That's the reason why they opted against upgrading and ordering new Su 33s and taking Mig 29Ks as their low end instead, since they can benefit from the much larger orders of IN.

 

[OrionHunter]

And we're discussing what some feather-brain wrote in his blog? Rantings of a clueless mind!

 

[GURU DUTT]

its better to go for F35 naval version than anything else avilable as of yet but i guess rafale M with aesa radar is the best naval fighter bomber owt there im sure that modi govt will finalise either of them for its IAC 2 ..rumour is USA is ready to give EMALS if F/A-18 E-F is chosen for IAC-2 and that too without any strings attached but the nagociations are stuck deu to price and that is where french are hopefull

 

[sancho]

its better to go for F35 naval version than anything else avilable as of yet but i guess rafale M with aesa radar is the best naval fighter bomber owt there im sure that modi govt will finalise either of them for its IAC 2 ..rumour is USA is ready to give EMALS if F/A-18 E-F is chosen for IAC-2 and that too without any strings attached but the nagociations are stuck deu to price and that is where french are hopefull

Anything that comes from the US is with strings attached, that's why we have to see to get the most effective solution, that gives us enough value for the strings. F35 will obviously come with higher strings and high costs, which is why I prefer this one for the navy, if we have to buy something from the US to get catapults:

Catapult capable - check
Twin seaters - check
Folding wings - check
Full internal fuel carriage - check
At least partial internal weapon carriage like the F35 - check (both will carry IR missiles with strike configs externally)
Advanced cockpit - check
Advanced EW - check (although not at the level of Rafale and F35)

Be it per unit or per operational hour cost, this should be the most cost-effective catapult capable solution, which operationally offers more advantages over the Rafale, while being close enough to the F35 and the licence production of GE 414 engines in India will already be established.

 

[Echo_419]

Anything that comes from the US is with strings attached, that's why we have to see to get the most effective solution, that gives us enough value for the strings. F35 will obviously come with higher strings and high costs, which is why I prefer this one for the navy, if we have to buy something from the US to get catapults:

Catapult capable - check
Twin seaters - check
Folding wings - check
Full internal fuel carriage - check
At least partial internal weapon carriage like the F35 - check (both will carry IR missiles with strike configs externally)
Advanced cockpit - check
Advanced EW - check (although noth at the level of Rafale and F35)

Be it per unit or per operational hour cost, this should be the most cost-effective catapult capable solution, which operationally offers more advantages over the Rafale, while being close enough to the F35 and the licence production of GE 414 engines in India will already be established.

What Industrial benifits can we gain from selection of F-18 & Boeing is desperate to sustain the F-18 production line

 

[Sergi]

The IN has all but confirmed the IAC-2 will be larger

ok. Agree. IAC-2 will be larger in tonnage. Nodoubt.

and in a CATOBAR configuration.

Nope. Nobody said that. I can tell you for sure thats the one thing holding designers and shipyard from making their own timeline.
My friend IAC-2 is still not clear what it will be.

Naturally there are only 2 options for this- steam catapults or EMALS, tech which is controlled by the US alone and would cost India untold millions and possibly decades to develop themselves. In Chuck Hagel's recent visit he stated EMALS had been cleared for sale to India.

i am sorry I think I missed that. Do show me please. Last I know USA want India to but 42 F-18S for catapult.

Anyway, of course the IN is still interested in the F-35C, there are not many fighters that can take off and land from a carrier and even fewer that would be of interest to a navy who was looking for a next generation fighter for their brand new carrier coming into service in the next decade. To me there seems only 3 options- the Rafale-M, N-FGFA and F-35C.

yes only three options. But only two possibilities.
USA cant mod its laws for India. The whole Javelin JV was the result of "inability to transfer tech as is. Correct me if I am wrong

However the Rafale-M is a 4.5+ ten fighter (yes with some 5th gen capabilities and will be enchanted over the years), the N-FGFA is a paper plane as of yet and the FGFA is yet to even fly to date. Addtionally it is unknown if the Russians would/could develop the N-FGFA as a fighter able to take off from a Catapult, if they can't then the N-FGFA is a no-go (sadly as it would be ideal). So through the process of elimination you are left with the F-35C which is okay but there are serious issues with the F-53 program as a whole and the I would much rather see the N-FGFA on the IN's decks.

Russians don't have catapult. And frankly they never felt the need for one. Sukhoi made it clear there will be a naval fighter in due time. But a ski-jump deck. ( 2/3 years ago may be )

 

[sancho]

What Industrial benifits can we gain from selection of F-18 & Boeing is desperate to sustain the F-18 production line

Depends, this won't be a licence production order, but they will be build on Boeings lines. Since we have the engine licence production however, we might extend it to the twin engine varient too. Also if we fund the Silent Hornet upgrades, or at least some of them, we also might be able to get the production to India. The touchscreen display for example, could be a useful feature for both sides, since HALBIT is offering it through their JV and if I'm not wrong Elbit also is offering it to the USN as upgrades of the Super Hornet. Letting us produce them in India obviously will bring costs down and more manufacturing share to India, similar could be done with certain EW sensors that are meant to be added (MAWS, LWR).
However, we won't get our hands on US radar or EW techs, nor on their advanced jammers, but all in all the best compromise to get the catapults, even better if we would aim on developing a 5th gen carrier fighter on top of the Silent Hornet, since we might combine the deal with Boeing as a consulting partner.

 

[sancho]

Russians don't have catapult. And frankly they never felt the need for one. Sukhoi made it clear there will be a naval fighter in due time. But a ski-jump deck. ( 2/3 years ago may be )

They do felt the need and were even developing a new carrier and aircrafts suitable to their catapult system, but the fall of the Soviet Union stopped that. Now they started EMALS developments, for their future carriers, but as said, only for the take off of AEW aircrafts or UCAVs, not for fighters.

Earlier Ulyanovsk class carrier:

Latest carrier model with naval Pak Fa:

 

[Agent_47]

Another BS article of IDRW...

- IN has no importance on 5th gen fighters, if they had, they would not waste time and money on N-LCA
- IN is highly interested in Rafale M since the early 2000s, but so far came to the conclusion, that it would need carriers with catapults to use it efficiently, which they don't have
- there is no decision from the US side, if we get catapults for IAC 2 yet

And to answer your question, the question is not naval Pak Fa / FGFA or F35, but ski-jump or captapult take off, because the naval Pak Fa / FGFA won't be able to be used from catapults. So if the US keep denying us catapults, we will build bigger IAC1s, which then could carry Mig 29Ks, N-LCAs or naval Pak Fa / FGFA and rejects the need of any other foreign fighter. IN btw sent the RFI to LM only because they are developing naval fighters, not because they are particularly interested in the F35 and they only asked for the C version, while LM decided to brief IN about the B version too, but IN is quiet clear that they don't want more STOVL fighters anymore, since they have carriers with arrested landing systems.

Why do you think we will go for a heavy / twin engine fighter ? (Considering our ACs will not weight more than 60k ton).
Whey not AMCA ? (Use small no rafale /Mig 29k/F3 as a stop gap.)

 

[Echo_419]

Depends, this won't be a licence production order, but they will be build on Boeings lines. Since we have the engine licence production however, we might extend it to the twin engine varient too. Also if we fund the Silent Hornet upgrades, or at least some of them, we also might be able to get the production to India. The touchscreen display for example, could be a useful feature for both sides, since HALBIT is offering it through their JV and if I'm not wrong Elbit also is offering it to the USN as upgrades of the Super Hornet. Letting us produce them in India obviously will bring costs down and more manufacturing share to India, similar could be done with certain EW sensors that are meant to be added (MAWS, LWR).
However, we won't get our hands on US radar or EW techs, nor on their advanced jammers, but all in all the best compromise to get the catapults, even better if we would aim on developing a 5th gen carrier fighter on top of the Silent Hornet, since we might combine the deal with Boeing as a consulting partner.

This sounds good,we can learn from 2 of the best aeronautic powers in the world at the same time Russia & USA

 

[sancho]

Why do you think we will go for a heavy / twin engine fighter ? (Considering our ACs will not weight more than 60k ton).
Whey not AMCA ? (Use small no rafale /Mig 29k/F3 as a stop gap.)

It will be pretty much in the size of the Kuznetsov-, or Queen Elizabeth 2 class carriers which makes using heavy class fighters not that difficult, the huge benefit of Pak Fa / FGFA is the internal fuel capacity, which gives it more range and endurance even without mid air tanker available. The only problem is, that the take off via ski-jump limits the payload, which means it needs to refuel after take off, but then offer clear advantages over F35 or any other carrier figther.
A naval AMCA is a good choice too and I am suggesting that for a long time, but it makes sense only if we develop it as a carrier fighter now. Skip N-LCA and go for N-AMCA and common weapons and systems to FGFA, then it is a realistic chance. If we wait for DRDO to develop an IAF version instead and then might convert that into a naval version, nothing good will come as a result, especially not a fighter that can use catapults.

 

[sancho]

This sounds good,we can learn from 2 of the best aeronautic powers in the world at the same time Russia & USA

We actually have plenty of option to develop AMCA with partners as a carrier fighter, but our (ADA and DRDO's) egos however will work against it!

Option 1) Single engine AMCA converted from FGFA, same engine, same systems comparable design, but complete new structure, Sukhoi as possible consultancy partner

Option 2) Rafale for IAF + Dassault consultancy for AMCA based on Rafale M and use of similar parts (same structural parts, Kaveri engine based on M88 ECO, Topsight HMS and FSO...)

Option 3) Silent Hornets as stop gaps including funding and production of certain upgrades + Boeing consultancy for AMCA and use of similar parts (GE 414 engines, HALBIT display, EW sensors...)

Option 4) Mikoyan consultancy for AMCA based on the Mig 29K and use of similar parts (Kaveri engine, indigenous AESA, EW and weapons...), although they don't have expertise in developing catapult capable fighters either


That's the advantage of access to foreign defence markets and companies that I often point out, that we sadly don't use to our maximum advantage. We only must get rid of pride and play our cards right.

 

[Echo_419]

We actually have plenty of option to develop AMCA with partners as a carrier fighter, but our (ADA and DRDO's) egos however will work against it!

Option 1) Single engine AMCA converted from FGFA, same engine, same systems comparable design, but complete new structure, Sukhoi as possible consultancy partner

Option 2) Rafale for IAF + Dassault consultancy for AMCA based on Rafale M and use of similar parts (same structural parts, Kaveri engine based on M88 ECO, Topsight HMS and FSO...)

Option 3) Silent Hornets as stop gaps including funding and production of certain upgrades + Boeing consultancy for AMCA and use of similar parts (GE 414 engines, HALBIT display, EW sensors...)

Option 4) Mikoyan consultancy for AMCA based on the Mig 29K and use of similar parts (Kaveri engine, indigenous AESA, EW and weapons...), although they don't have expertise in developing catapult capable fighters either


That's the advantage of access to foreign defence markets and companies that I often point out, that we sadly don't use to our maximum advantage. We only must get rid of pride and play our cards right.

This looks like the best thing,we cannot compromise on the engine front the engine must be 100% Indian,since it is the most crucial part of a plane,if it cannot e developed by JVs we should try to do it on our own.Take it up as a national project