Indian Naval Aviation

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
ernest
BRFite
Posts: 147
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ernest »

My prayer is being answered, all too quickly :shock: :D

https://twitter.com/singhshwetabh71/sta ... CfSE3U5zrA
Days after Navy indicating they might order more ALH Mk3, Indian Air Force has now indicated it might go for more ALH MK4s (ALH-WSI Rudra).
With Helina recently tested on a Rudra in Ladakh, and report below mentioning high-alt ops, seems things might align
More Dhruv / Rudra for our mountains
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1975
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by bala »

If Indian Navy and Indian Air Force induct ALH in numbers, then we have a solid foothold in the Helo business, Indian Army and Indian Coast Guard are already using them. 1000s of helos deployed, jingo kush hua. This provides a good brochure AD for other countries to consider ALH as an alternate to expensive Helos from other nations. I say good job HAL.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

bala wrote:If Indian Navy and Indian Air Force induct ALH in numbers, then we have a solid foothold in the Helo business, Indian Army and Indian Coast Guard are already using them. 1000s of helos deployed, jingo kush hua. This provides a good brochure AD for other countries to consider ALH as an alternate to expensive Helos from other nations. I say good job HAL.
If proposed IAF and IN orders go through (~40+60) ALH’s production run will get to at least ~450 units


I really hope they can aggressively market ALH abroad, there’s got to be a demand for 50+ of them out there, it’s a world class product today
basant
BRFite
Posts: 889
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by basant »

KSingh wrote:https://twitter.com/thingsnavy/status/1 ... QpF_di89_Q

111 for a foreign OEM becomes 60 for HAL but even still this will be amazing news if it happens
Conversely ex-CMD HAL observed:
It could be mentioned that HAL even then was being most proactive and, post Kargil, had proposed a dedicated attack helicopter and was also developing a Light Utility Helicopter (LUH), the latter shelved in 2002 to enable the Indian Army to import 60 (later increased to 197) 3 tonne class helicopters. The LUH was later revived and sanctioned in February 2009 and now has finished the last stage of high altitude trials recently.
Indian Navy Ignoring Crucial Advantages Of Dhruv As NUH (October 14, 2020)
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by KSingh »

basant wrote:
KSingh wrote:https://twitter.com/thingsnavy/status/1 ... QpF_di89_Q

111 for a foreign OEM becomes 60 for HAL but even still this will be amazing news if it happens
Conversely ex-CMD HAL observed:
It could be mentioned that HAL even then was being most proactive and, post Kargil, had proposed a dedicated attack helicopter and was also developing a Light Utility Helicopter (LUH), the latter shelved in 2002 to enable the Indian Army to import 60 (later increased to 197) 3 tonne class helicopters. The LUH was later revived and sanctioned in February 2009 and now has finished the last stage of high altitude trials recently.
Indian Navy Ignoring Crucial Advantages Of Dhruv As NUH (October 14, 2020)

It’s genuinely nauseating to piece together all these missed opportunities and sabotage attempts, so much lost progress because certain quarters wanted it that way
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

This is the Indian Naval Aviation thread. Please stick to topic.

I have moved posts to other threads.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/alpha_defense/statu ... BCwg7lLXsA ---> HAL Nasik team to carry out the Technical support of Flight Test Instrumentation (FTI) on IN-529 Sea King helicopter, during flight trials of Light Weight Torpedo (LWT).

Image
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3113
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by JTull »

Rafale Marine: France is studying the sale of second-hand aircraft for the benefit of India
For several months, France has been studying the sale of used Rafale Marine to promote the signing of a new contract with India. In this country, Dassault Aviation is currently participating in two calls for tenders, one for the Air Force (114 aircraft), the other for the Navy (up to 57 aircraft in several tranches). The Indian Navy must in particular arm its first "Made in India" aircraft carrier, the INS Vikrant (262 m), which must be commissioned in 2023. As part of this call for tenders, the Rafale Marine carried out very successful trials in January in Goa on a terrestrial platform. The French Navy was able to demonstrate all its know-how in naval aviation (landing) and convinced the Indians of the performance of the Rafale Marine.

According to concordant sources, the sale of four used Rafale Marine to the F3R standard is likely to give a competitive advantage to France against the Americans in the context of the Indian call for tenders to equip the INS Vikrant. These four recently modernized devices could indeed be quickly put into service on the Indian aircraft carrier. The Rafale Marine is well suited to the configuration of the Indian aircraft carrier in terms of size: it can in particular easily use the elevators of the INS Vikrant. Which would not be quite the case for its American rival, the Boeing F-18, which shoehorns into the elevators of the Indian aircraft carrier (across), we explain to La Tribune. The F-18 does has meanwhile not completely completed its tests, which began last December. After some logistical setbacks, it should resume testing in May. India could make its decision at the end of the year for a total of 26 aircraft, including two Air two-seaters dedicated to training.
Last edited by ramana on 30 Apr 2022 03:44, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Added bold ramana
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ramana »

How much commonality is there between the land and marine Rafales?
That would improve the logistics commonality.
It would be better if France can find 6 Rafale M instead of 4.
So from above, it's 24+2 trainers.
And milestone is Vikrant's commissioning in August 2022.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

ramana wrote:How much commonality is there between the land and marine Rafales?
That would improve the logistics commonality.
Nearly identical. From the Dassault website.

https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/de ... -airframe/
The Rafale, a fully “Omnirole” fighter, is available in three variants:

the Rafale C single-seater operated from land bases,
the Rafale M single-seater for carrier operations,
the Rafale B two-seater flown from land bases.'

All three variants share a common airframe and a common mission system, the differences between naval and land versions being mainly limited to the undercarriage and to the arresting hook.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

ramana wrote:It would be better if France can find 6 Rafale M instead of 4.
So from above it's 24+2 trainers.
And milestone is Vikrant commissioning in 2023.
This new naval competition is for 18 single seat fighters and 6 trainers. All 26 F-18E/F variants will be available for carrier duties, while only 18 Rafale Ms will be available for carrier duties. The six Rafale trainers will be of the B variant and is not carrier compatible.

Vikrant commissioning is in Aug 2022, but deployment will only be in 2023.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ramana »

As stated above F-18 E/F have a compromise fit in the lifts.
And there will be common logistics with IAF Rafales.
asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 373
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by asbchakri »

Rakesh wrote: All three variants share a common airframe and a common mission system, the differences between naval and land versions being mainly limited to the undercarriage and to the arresting hook.
[/quote]

So in that case our TEDBF can also be converted as such (ORCA). Last I heard it was still under consideration. Would it not be a less expensive version to AMCA and can be built in numbers to complement AMCA. I guess all our homegrown fighters (LCA, TEDBF, AMCA) have a lot in commonality and should not be a maintenance headache in the long term like the IAF has today with so many different platforms.

I just wish the IAF will stop this 114 nonsense for foreign fighters and stick with homegrown platforms. I don't mind them going for limited numbers like they did with Rafale until our's are ready.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ramana »

ORCA was an IAF boondoggle to sink the TEDBF. So IN and higher-ups realized fast and decoupled it.
The reason is the nation cannot afford three fighter plane programs for IAF: Tejas Mk2. AMCA and ORCA.
Makes more sense to order 114 TEDBFm (2x 57) for IN and rotate the squadrons on carriers and station them in airbases for port defense and relieve IAF of the onerous task.
They love to do flypasts and disaster relief anyway.
asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 373
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by asbchakri »

ramana wrote:ORCA was an IAF boondoggle to sink the TEDBF. So IN and higher-ups realized fast and decoupled it.
The reason is the nation cannot afford three fighter plane programs for IAF: Tejas Mk2. AMCA and ORCA.
Makes more sense to order 114 TEDBFm (2x 57) for IN and rotate the squadrons on carriers and station them in airbases for port defense and relieve IAF of the onerous task.
They love to do flypasts and disaster relief anyway.
That works for me. Just curious, how big of a technological changes are need for it (ORCA) to be considered a 3rd fighter program if it is just, as Rakesh pointed out, undercarriage and arresting hook, I may be mistaken though.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

asbchakri wrote:
ramana wrote:ORCA was an IAF boondoggle to sink the TEDBF. So IN and higher-ups realized fast and decoupled it.
The reason is the nation cannot afford three fighter plane programs for IAF: Tejas Mk2. AMCA and ORCA.
Makes more sense to order 114 TEDBFm (2x 57) for IN and rotate the squadrons on carriers and station them in airbases for port defense and relieve IAF of the onerous task.
They love to do flypasts and disaster relief anyway.
That works for me. Just curious, how big of a technological changes are need for it (ORCA) to be considered a 3rd fighter program if it is just, as Rakesh pointed out, undercarriage and arresting hook, I may be mistaken though.
A deck based fighter is a completely new design. Everything has to be designed to meet the more rigorous req of carrier landings.
If it was that simple then the Mig29 would not have its current problems and be a hangar queen no?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Pratyush »

Instead of adapting a land backed fighter for ship based fighter. Why not adapt a ship based fighter for land based application.

Eg. The F4.

IMO the Rafael was designed to be a Deck based fighter from the onset along with the land based version.

It was not adapted from one role to the next.

The F35 also comes to mind.
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7806
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Anujan »

Call me an eternal optimist but

a. There is dekhonomoney for 200 plane MRFA like Rafale
b. Upgrades for our Sukhoi fleet is probably difficult, given current geopolitics
c. Everything from Hammer to Astra is integrated with Tejas FOC

The future is Tejas Mk1a, Mk2 and AMCA.

Given Tejas Mk1a will be better than the FOC and MK2 will be better than MK1, gradually the ship will turn and people will see the light.

Look at what is happening with the arty. Once everyone realized that nobody is getting imported maal, Our requirements are getting mapped on to the Sharang, Dhanush, Vajra and now Garuda.
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1975
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by bala »

A deck based fighter is a completely new design. Everything has to be designed to meet the more rigorous req of carrier landings.
Yes, it is a new design. However HAL's Naval LCA has shown how to do this and the experience gained from NLCA is very valuable for Twin Engine based navy fighter. I have full faith in HAL to go about this task and show India that it is quite capable of building such fighters for the Indian Navy.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

bala wrote:
A deck based fighter is a completely new design. Everything has to be designed to meet the more rigorous req of carrier landings.
Yes, it is a new design. However HAL's Naval LCA has shown how to do this and the experience gained from NLCA is very valuable for Twin Engine based navy fighter. I have full faith in HAL to go about this task and show India that it is quite capable of building such fighters for the Indian Navy.
Agreed. I was just responding to the posters comment / question about landing gear etc etc.
iI no way should that be construed as a lack of faith in ADA / HAL.
asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 373
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by asbchakri »

ks_sachin wrote:
bala wrote: Yes, it is a new design. However HAL's Naval LCA has shown how to do this and the experience gained from NLCA is very valuable for Twin Engine based navy fighter. I have full faith in HAL to go about this task and show India that it is quite capable of building such fighters for the Indian Navy.
Agreed. I was just responding to the posters comment / question about landing gear etc etc.
iI no way should that be construed as a lack of faith in ADA / HAL.
That was my thought, we are already there with LCA and NLCA. The base designs and technologies developed for LCA & NLCA are what going into TEDBF (again my assumption). So for my initial thought, it need not be a fighter developed from scratch. I do not disagree with ramana and bala a Naval variant or a Land based variant are different designs if we started them from scratch, but we are not. We are building on technologies developed over a period of time (LCA). Will it still has to be treated as a different program, just trying to be optimistic :).

Just an afterthought, financially maybe you are right, we may not have the funds to develop both at this time.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

Technologies yes. But design considerations will be different.
Consider this for a stronger landing gear you need stronger body. Perhaps larger wheels to meet carrier landing reqts and attendant structural changes.Stronger body adds weight. Now to arrive at a set of performance measures that were originally based around a land based fighter something has to give.

On the flip side why would you carry over the additional structural strengthening when weight is the biggest enemy.

I am not an expert but if you have heard any interviews by Cdr Maolankar the it is always easier to design out to a land based fighter than it is to use a land based fighter and adapt that to carrier.
Last edited by ks_sachin on 01 May 2022 18:50, edited 1 time in total.
SinghS
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Jul 2021 20:24

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by SinghS »

Some points a naval fighter differs from an AF one out of many:

1. A different wing geometry --- lift and sink requirements are different
2. Different fastening and anchor points and system in airframe structure --- to have a decent life of airframe and damp excessive vibrations inside
3. A different downward visibility requirements --- need a clear view of approach as angle of descent is steeper (stooped nose cone)
4. An entirely different landing gear ---- the G-shocks are way higher
5. A folding wing --- to fit in lift---side-effect: changes G which can be pulled at various speed
6. An entirely different avionics
7. A different system of engine mounting for ease of replacements in constrained spaces
8. Marinized components and bodywork

In a nutshell, whatever work has been done for LCA Navy is just a warm-up exercise for TEDBF.

TEDBF is an entirely new plane. R&D effort would be minimal yet engineering/design effort would be substantial. So TEDBF would require substantial manpower to be dedicated to it along with sustained funding and monitoring.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ks_sachin »

I think twin engined deck based fighter program is happening. I remember a TP mentioning this recently when I happened to mee him.
Barath
BRFite
Posts: 474
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Barath »

ramana wrote:ORCA was an IAF boondoggle to sink the TEDBF. So IN and higher-ups realized fast and decoupled it.
The reason is the nation cannot afford three fighter plane programs for IAF: Tejas Mk2. AMCA and ORCA.
Makes more sense to order 114 TEDBFm (2x 57) for IN and rotate the squadrons on carriers and station them in airbases for port defense and relieve IAF of the onerous task.
They love to do flypasts and disaster relief anyway.
ORCA seemed to be an internet fanboy obsession, which aimed to add business case to the TEDBF R&D investment, but with no reception from the IAF.
Your statement seems illogical, because if the TEDBF could be afforded, a minor later variant with reduced landing gear should not be a huge unaffordable burden.

2x57 TEDBF do not make sense, numbers wise - the 65,000t QE itself only holds 24-36 fixed wings; a 55000 t IAC-2 which has to make space for both UAVs and helicopters, may not have space for 57 manned fixed wing airplanes on top of that . And it's unclear for whom the 2nd flight of 57 is meant for. [Since the IN desires 26 F-18SH/Rafale M for the existing carriers, one would assume that these would not be put out to pasture immediately]. The logic (eg flight size + training aircraft + 10-15% attrition reserve) is not apparent
asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 373
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by asbchakri »

ks_sachin wrote:Technologies yes. But design considerations will be different.
Consider this for a stronger landing gear you need stronger body. Perhaps larger wheels to meet carrier landing reqts and attendant structural changes.Stronger body adds weight. Now to arrive at a set of performance measures that were originally based around a land based fighter something has to give.

On the flip side why would you carry over the additional structural strengthening when weight is the biggest enemy.

I am not an expert but if you have heard any interviews by Cdr Maolankar the it is always easier to design out to a land based fighter than it is to use a land based fighter and adapt that to carrier.
I understand that and all valid points, but here my initial question was to base TEDBF for ORCA, it's the other way round. Would it be a big effort to do that and I will accept if it is, just trying to understand.
I think twin engined deck based fighter program is happening. I remember a TP mentioning this recently when I happened to mee him.
I have no question that it is not happening, it should.
SinghS wrote:1. A different wing geometry --- lift and sink requirements are different
2. Different fastening and anchor points and system in airframe structure --- to have a decent life of airframe and damp excessive vibrations inside
3. A different downward visibility requirements --- need a clear view of approach as angle of descent is steeper (stooped nose cone)
4. An entirely different landing gear ---- the G-shocks are way higher
5. A folding wing --- to fit in lift---side-effect: changes G which can be pulled at various speed
6. An entirely different avionics
7. A different system of engine mounting for ease of replacements in constrained spaces
8. Marinized components and bodywork
Thank you for that information, basically it's not just the Landing gear but a lot of components are different between both variants, it makes sense.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by LakshmanPST »

ramana wrote:ORCA was an IAF boondoggle to sink the TEDBF. So IN and higher-ups realized fast and decoupled it.
The reason is the nation cannot afford three fighter plane programs for IAF: Tejas Mk2. AMCA and ORCA.
Makes more sense to order 114 TEDBFm (2x 57) for IN and rotate the squadrons on carriers and station them in airbases for port defense and relieve IAF of the onerous task.
They love to do flypasts and disaster relief anyway.
I doubt IN will buy 114 TEDBFs in current configuration...
The reasons are simple:-
1) TEDBF is currently being designed only for STOBAR operations... CATOBAR requires a strengthened Forward section of fuselage, which is currently not being considered as confirmed in some interview during AeroIndia 2021...
2) IN currently have only 2 Aircraft Carriers and both are STOBAR carriers... One carrier operates 45 MIG29Ks... For the other, they're trying to buy 26 F/A18s or Rafales...
3) IN may order only around 40 jets in its current form after a decade for replacement of MIG29Ks...
4) If IN goes for a 3rd Carrier and if it is CATOBAR, they need a TEDBF Mk2 which is CATOBAR compatible... Instead, if IAC2 is STOBAR and similar size of IAC1, then the order may go upto 80 jets...
5) I also see a turf war between IAF and IN about shore-based Anti-Ship operations... If IN wins this, we may see additional TEDBF jets for shore based operations and IAF completely stopping shore-based operations... But I don't think IAF will give it up that easily...
----
So, TEDBF numbers will be
1) around 40, if no 3rd AC
2) around 80, if IAC2 is STOBAR
3) around 40 Mk1 + 60 Mk2, if IAC2 is bigger CATOBAR
4) extra 40-60, in case IAF stops all shore-based Anti-ship operations and IN takes over
----
Personally, I feel IAF should join TEDBF/ORCA program... They should order around 4 squadrons and may use them primarily for shore based Anti-Ship roles replacing Jaguar IM and Su30s...
This will ensure lot of commonality between IAF and IN jets in terms of weapons, avionics, spares, upgrades etc. and also stabilizes TEDBF program as total orders will go up to 150-200 jets...
konaseema
BRFite
Posts: 115
Joined: 16 Nov 2020 09:54

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by konaseema »

The capacity of Vicky & Vikrant will be 26 fighter aircrafts each. If you take 20 aircrafts per squadron and buy 3 squadrons, it will be 30 + 30 split between 2 aircraft carriers. That said, we will have 4 + 4 = 8 as reserves or trainers. That said, I don't see a need for any more than 60 aircrafts, unless IN goes for a compromise and settle for a Vikrant sized 3rd carrier. On the other hand, Vicky won't last more than this decade (worst case) or last until 2035 (best case). If IN sticks to a 3 carrier fleet, then we will see 1-2 aircraft carriers ordered between 2024 - 2032. This will lead to another 60 aircrafts (TEDBF) for a total of 120 aircrafts being ordered between 2028 - 2035. As explained by others above, if the operational scope of Indian Navy is expanded, then we can expect shore based fighters (ORCA) being developed which can eventually replace the initial 4 squadrons of Su-30 MKI, with the ability to carry Brahmos missile. My dream is for IAF & IN have a fleet of Tejas Mk1/A (8 Squadrons), Mk2 (12 Squadrons), Twin Engine Desi Fighter in the 30 ton category (12 Squadrons), TEDBF (6 Squadrons), Rafale (6 Squadrons) & AMCA (8 Squadrons) by 2040 for a fleet of 52 squadrons.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ramana »

Why can't IN planes be shore-based and rotate onto carriers as needed?
That frees up IAF planes from shore defence.
Barath
BRFite
Posts: 474
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Barath »

@ramana Why should IN play the role of mini IAF ashore ?

While there can be a surge situation (eg Ladakh where navy Mig29K flew over the Himalayas; India had ~41 Mig 29K but only 1 carrier for a max of ~26 planes usable by carrier), planning a permanent mission for IN that is same as IAF removes role clarity and causes more organizational co-ordination and training overheads. let IAF be sized for IAF roles.

We already have a chopper problem overlap with IA and IAF.. why increase the confusion ?
Barath
BRFite
Posts: 474
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Barath »

LakshmanPST wrote:.
Personally, I feel IAF should join TEDBF/ORCA program... They should order around 4 squadrons and may use them primarily for shore based Anti-Ship roles replacing Jaguar IM and Su30s.....
If you think that Tejas Mk2 with 6.5T payload undercuts the case for 114 MRFA, imagine how TEDBF/ORCA with ~9t payload would undercut the case for 114 MRFA for the IAF. IAF is still pushing for MRFA (and ideally starting in say 2027+ timeframe instead of 2032+ TEDBF). And IAF will therefore be supremely uninterested for some years, until/unless it becomes clear to the IAF that MRFA is impossible, TEDBF is progressing great and AMCA is running into issues. If AMCA is ahead of or on schedule , IAF would prefer (as now) to fill in domestic medium with AMCA

Incidentally there is the forum tweet https://mobile.twitter.com/RAFIndia_/st ... 6339278850 of a CATOBAR TEDBF. IMHO, it would be better for a single config of TEDBF to allow scale and maximize cross decking opportunities & flexibility.

Further, you should subtract out the number of UAV that IAC-2 can hold from the number of fixed wing equivalents - given the stated plan. And add trainers and attrition reserve - at least 10%. I concur with you that IAF would be loath to give up shore based roles.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... llWobY_aNw ---> Report: India has already carried out over 150 simulation studies and ski-jump tests to find out whether the American F-18E/F Super Hornet Blk-III fighter jet is capable of operating from domestic aircraft carriers such as the INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant.
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4282
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by fanne »

Barath wrote:@ramana Why should IN play the role of mini IAF ashore ?

While there can be a surge situation (eg Ladakh where navy Mig29K flew over the Himalayas; India had ~41 Mig 29K but only 1 carrier for a max of ~26 planes usable by carrier), planning a permanent mission for IN that is same as IAF removes role clarity and causes more organizational co-ordination and training overheads. let IAF be sized for IAF roles.

We already have a chopper problem overlap with IA and IAF.. why increase the confusion ?
It solves one other problem -
If for some reason IAF is playing brinkmanship and won't take any new planes (read LCA MK1, MK2 or even Rafale) and only will take or invest in 114 MRFA (not even bulk upgrade of SU30MKI), IN can have these 'Shore' based planes (i.e. Rafales), that can be used in LAC or in LOC, thus augmenting IAF strength (and India's).

Now the above sounds ridiculous, but I have made some very bad assumptions which unfortunately to an objective observer sounds correct.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by kit »

fanne wrote:
Barath wrote:@ramana Why should IN play the role of mini IAF ashore ?

While there can be a surge situation (eg Ladakh where navy Mig29K flew over the Himalayas; India had ~41 Mig 29K but only 1 carrier for a max of ~26 planes usable by carrier), planning a permanent mission for IN that is same as IAF removes role clarity and causes more organizational co-ordination and training overheads. let IAF be sized for IAF roles.

We already have a chopper problem overlap with IA and IAF.. why increase the confusion ?
It solves one other problem -
If for some reason IAF is playing brinkmanship and won't take any new planes (read LCA MK1, MK2 or even Rafale) and only will take or invest in 114 MRFA (not even bulk upgrade of SU30MKI), IN can have these 'Shore' based planes (i.e. Rafales), that can be used in LAC or in LOC, thus augmenting IAF strength (and India's).

Now the above sounds ridiculous, but I have made some very bad assumptions which unfortunately to an objective observer sounds correct.
Well if the Poseidons can work over the Himalayas , why not IN Rafales., granted there would a penalty with lesser payload capacity ; we should stop thinking of IN / IAF assets seperately., remember we are talking about integrated theater commands.. i do think we need to rename threads accordingly !!
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

VIDEO: https://twitter.com/IndiaToday/status/1 ... n44Sqtk1Pg ---> France set to offer Indian Navy 4 upgraded 'used' Naval Rafale jets. @gauravcsawant brings you the details.

France may sell Rafale Marine to India to pip US F/A-18s for Navy's Contract: Report
https://indiaaheadnews.com/india/france ... rt-135852/
04 May 2022
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ldev »

Boeing to Fly Two F/A-18 Jets to India for Operational Demo
The aerospace giant said that it is in talks with India for the F/A-18 Super Hornet, P-81, F-15 EX, and KC-46 tanker for aerial refueling, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities..........

..........India’s potential procurement was also a matter of discussion during the recent ministerial dialogue between India and the US in Washington.

India has already conducted more than 150 simulation studies and ski-jump tests to find out whether the American jet is capable of operating from domestic aircraft carriers such as the INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant.
Indian Navy to test Super Hornet fighters: Boeing CEO heading to India, to discuss P-8i delivery?
Though no official dates have been declared, David L Calhoun, CEO& President of Boeing Company is likely to meet with the top officials in the Ministry of Defence when he visits India.

According to the buzz in the corridors of South Block, he is expected to fly to India soon. His visit comes close on the heels of his recent meeting with defence minister Rajnath Singh ahead of the 2+2 Indo-US ministerial dialogue in Washington DC.

India’s defence minister had met with Boeing and Raytheon – two major aerospace & defence companies to take advantage of the government’s Make in India initiative and to move towards ‘Make for the World’.
Haresh
BRFite
Posts: 1491
Joined: 30 Jun 2009 17:27

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Haresh »

Boost for India’s plan to be aircraft maintenance hub as Navy planes get heavy work done in TN
https://theprint.in/defence/boost-for-i ... tn/943849/
05 May 2022
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Haresh wrote:Boost for India’s plan to be aircraft maintenance hub as Navy planes get heavy work done in TN
https://theprint.in/defence/boost-for-i ... tn/943849/
05 May 2022
I saw this news on twitter as well.

The value of having a MRO facility (of foreign aircraft) is worth its weight in gold. Instead of doing screwdrivergiri factories, this is where the investment should be made. India is a now a regional MRO hub for the P-8. Good move by Boeing.

Best part is Air Works is a private firm, not a public PSU ---> https://www.airworks.aero/
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by Rakesh »

Boeing And Air Works Undertake Navy’s P-8I Fleet Maintenance Checks In India
https://bharatshakti.in/boeing-and-air- ... -in-india/
05 May 2022

https://twitter.com/aneeshp/status/1522 ... eSFldOP4bA ---> Three Indian Navy P-8I maritime aircraft simultaneously undergoing heavy maintenance checks at Air Works, Hosur.

Image
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Post by ramana »

Boeing thinks this will get more P8I orders. That boat has sailed.
Post Reply