Philip wrote:Thus far we've yet to see any naval fighter other than a 29K or NLCA operate from the VikA.
Right. And this is because the IN does not operate another type capable of operating on the ship.
SAAB came out with a plan for the Sea Gripen to operate from the
What was the last naval fighter SAAB developed?
PS: clarified the Boeing statement with a former adm. some time ago. It can't in regular fashion.It supposedly has to be kept in an inclined attitude while on the lift requiring a cradle,whatever.Great fun to handle in choppy seas! One can also imagine the increased turn around time to transport these birds from hangar to deck. In any case,its pointless to look for 50+ new birds that cannot operate from the two current CVs..
Nothing that you've mentioned is something that cannot be verified in actual testing and demonstrations. Naval aviation and the ability to test and validate has come a long time since aircraft first took off from ships. All the impact which you claim will occur can be modeled and demonstrated and compared with other pros and cons of such a move. Nothing need be left to chance if the IN pursues this further. Both Dassault and Boeing would be happy to fly their aircraft, read-in multiple IN pilots into the program and work with IN's support and maintenance teams to validate their concepts and demonstrate them in a desirable operationally relevant environment. They do this all the time. In fact, the first two Boeing Block III Super Hornet's will spend a greater part of the next 12 months doing this with the US Navy.
when CV no.3 is dead in the water. 15 years hence,even if it arrives,a 5th- gen bird would be required..
A high performance stealth fighter is hard. A high performance naval stealth fighter is even harder. Expect there to be a considerable lag between AMCA operationalization and a potential Naval AMCA being brought into the fleet. Your entire Low Observable strategy and technology base has to be able to confidently deliver on a naval platform, within a pretty strict support footprint and in an operationally harsh environment. The F-35B/C is the only 5th gen/LO naval fighter. FCAS won't come online till 2040. Besides these two, China is the only other nation that may field a naval stealth fighter. No one else has either a need, or the technological base and/or resources to do so. Naval forces are there for fleet protection and to rapidly bring re-deployable offensive capability to bear during a conflict. Naval aviators will continue to do that with 4th, 4.5th or 5th generation aircraft. Basically all that they can get their hands on because ships, submarines, and other naval weapons and technologies often get precedence over naval fighters (compared to AF's which are usually run by fighter pilots). Even the USN won't be a all stealth fleet till well into the 2050's.IN's willingness to pursue a stealth fighter program will likely be influenced by what it sees as the overall AC footprint in the future IN fleet. The USN can afford to field this because they have a need for about 700 F-35's (B/C). Prior attempts at smaller fleet sizes (like A-X and N-ATF) didn't go anywhere because the cost to develop and field a small fleet would have been cost prohibitive to buy and then support.