Indian Naval Aviation
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Rakesh there was that troubling video of pitching during lower sea state at the sea trials(the wake pattern was odd). Hope that was an uneven ballast to simulate for wartime damage while testing. So lift width are not the only concern.
So yeah, lots of work need to be done and hopefully a 10-15k extra tonnage one with more LCAC access gets ordered as a follow on to keep IOR islands safe from chinese aggressions
But nevertheless a great moment for India. Merely twenty years back, we would not have been envisaging the sort of highly complex systems that are getting checked out by Indian designers and engineers.
So yeah, lots of work need to be done and hopefully a 10-15k extra tonnage one with more LCAC access gets ordered as a follow on to keep IOR islands safe from chinese aggressions
But nevertheless a great moment for India. Merely twenty years back, we would not have been envisaging the sort of highly complex systems that are getting checked out by Indian designers and engineers.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Yikes! Is there a link to this video? Has the issue been fixed?hnair wrote:Rakesh there was that troubling video of pitching during lower sea state at the sea trials(the wake pattern was odd). Hope that was an uneven ballast to simulate for wartime damage while testing. So lift width are not the only concern.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Ramana-ji, please see these pictures below. And keep scrolling belowramana wrote:Rakesh will the F-18 fit the Vikramaditya lift also?
I don't know how Boeing is claiming that the F-18SH will fit on the Vikky's lifts, if these dimensions below are correct.
Lift dimensions of Vikky are 9 x 19 meters. Please set aside what I stated earlier, if this is true.
https://twitter.com/malavpa32463019/sta ... eaVUvKLjIw ---> Lucky timing of satellite. Vikramaditya with both it's lift open.
The F-18SH with wings folded is 32.6 feet or 9.9+ meters. Length is 60.3 feet or nearly 18.4 meters.
Source: https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ac/f-18.htm
How is the SH going to fit in a 9 x 19 meter lift on the Vikky? At this rate, these 26 aircraft will serve only on the Vikrant.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
As of July 2022, Boeing is claiming that the F-18SH will fit on the Vikky's lift.
F/A-18 Super Hornet built for carrier ops, ‘compliant’ with INS Vikramaditya & Vikrant — Boeing
https://theprint.in/defence/f-a-18-supe ... g/1047629/
20 July 2022
F/A-18 Super Hornet built for carrier ops, ‘compliant’ with INS Vikramaditya & Vikrant — Boeing
https://theprint.in/defence/f-a-18-supe ... g/1047629/
20 July 2022
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Rakesh wrote: Yikes! Is there a link to this video? Has the issue been fixed?
Probably uneven ballast test for a simulation, like I said. But has not heard more on this from retired naval architect types, although they did express concern. But judging by the wake pattern, will be risky for a plane fully loaded with fuel and ordinance to accelerate off a ramp. Also heard there are lots of options to fix such issues that might come up. A second ship of same design would have a better time from lessons learned
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Like I said above, unless their jig puts the plane near vertical on the lift it’s nonsense but nonsense that gets repeated by all and sundry. I notice that the SH is the clear favourite amongst internet fanboys because they’ve played some US centric video games and Boeing is very aggressive on their PR but I’m more convinced that Dassualt’s complete radio silence means they are quietly confidentRakesh wrote:As of July 2022, Boeing is claiming that the F-18SH will fit on the Vikky's lift.
F/A-18 Super Hornet built for carrier ops, ‘compliant’ with INS Vikramaditya & Vikrant — Boeing
https://theprint.in/defence/f-a-18-supe ... g/1047629/
20 July 2022
+ if Boeing are proposing a jig, why can Dassualt not do the same? The wingtip thing I don’t know where it came from but there’s not too much difference in fixed Rafale wing and folded SH
++ the entire lift discussion has omitted the fact that this is only one part, it doesn’t look like the hanger entrance itself is any bigger than 9.5-9.6m
https://twitter.com/ksingh_1469/status/ ... O3S2B5NoYQ
This same issue will be on the Vikky- 9m might be the loft size but you’ll need clearance either side (0.2 either side?)
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
just curious... why were the lifts on the IAC Vikrant designed with such dimensions? Was it only designed with Mig-29K and NLCA in mind with no thought to other contemporary naval fighters that are available? According to Rakesh's post above, the Super Hornet would not fit in the lift even with its wings folded and the naval Rafale would not fit at all with no wing folding mechanism and its over all length.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Pretty much, yes.Luxtor wrote:just curious... why were the lifts on the IAC Vikrant designed with such dimensions? Was it only designed with Mig-29K and NLCA in mind with no thought to other contemporary naval fighters that are available? ..
Noob question. To hold the aircraft do the lifts have fixed recessed hinged clamps or portable wheel stop locks ?
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Just a small nitpick - my post above is about INS Vikramaditya.Luxtor wrote:just curious... why were the lifts on the IAC Vikrant designed with such dimensions? Was it only designed with Mig-29K and NLCA in mind with no thought to other contemporary naval fighters that are available? According to Rakesh's post above, the Super Hornet would not fit in the lift even with its wings folded and the naval Rafale would not fit at all with no wing folding mechanism and its over all length.
The Vikrant's lift will be able to handle both
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
InS Vikrant 'a lifts can handle a Hornet with folded wings, bit there will be only 10cm on either side,it will be tight fit, on carrier being tossed about with waves and speed required for war time operations.
I suspect this Rafale M and F18 contest is more for a 3rd Catobar carrier which will be not much bigger than INS Vikrant. Ability to operate from INS Vikrant will be a plus. It will be very rare when both INS Vikrant and INS VikramAditya will be operationally deployed together. 44 Mig K plus a few LCA Navy can suffice for this.
26 Aircraft is a back up for TEDBF does not arrive when MiG 29K retire or 3rd Aircraft carrier is commissioned
I suspect this Rafale M and F18 contest is more for a 3rd Catobar carrier which will be not much bigger than INS Vikrant. Ability to operate from INS Vikrant will be a plus. It will be very rare when both INS Vikrant and INS VikramAditya will be operationally deployed together. 44 Mig K plus a few LCA Navy can suffice for this.
26 Aircraft is a back up for TEDBF does not arrive when MiG 29K retire or 3rd Aircraft carrier is commissioned
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
I thought the aircraft lifts in Vikrant were located on the edge of the flight deck and not right in the middle of it ?!
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
?? do you mean Rafale & Super HornetRakesh wrote:Just a small nitpick - my post above is about INS Vikramaditya.Luxtor wrote:just curious... why were the lifts on the IAC Vikrant designed with such dimensions? Was it only designed with Mig-29K and NLCA in mind with no thought to other contemporary naval fighters that are available? According to Rakesh's post above, the Super Hornet would not fit in the lift even with its wings folded and the naval Rafale would not fit at all with no wing folding mechanism and its over all length.
The Vikrant's lift will be able to handle both INS Vikrant and INS Vikramaditya.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Oops LOL...that is what I meant. I made the correction in my original post. Thank you Saar.asbchakri wrote:?? do you mean Rafale & Super HornetRakesh wrote: Just a small nitpick - my post above is about INS Vikramaditya.
The Vikrant's lift will be able to handle both INS Vikrant and INS Vikramaditya.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Cyrano-ji, my apologies because it appears my post (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7308&p=2562940#p2562876) was not very clear. I confused Luxtor as well. The picture above is of INS Vikramaditya and not INS Vikrant.Cyrano wrote:I thought the aircraft lifts in Vikrant were located on the edge of the flight deck and not right in the middle of it ?!
INS Vikramaditya has her lifts in the middle of the flight deck, while INS Vikrant has her lifts at the edge of the flight deck.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
TEDBF width with folded wings is 7.6m.
So it is an interim issue.
Meantime might have to make do with Mig-29Ks.
Rafale M won't fit either of the two
F-18 will barely fit Vikrant in calm waters.
So why not get more Mig 29Ks to tide over?
PLAN has nearby threats in East Pacific and Indo-China Sea that will keep them busy.
The Indian Ocean is a faraway deployment that is mostly subs and a few surface ships.
These can be handled with P-8Is and MH-60s and not to mention Su-30MKIs with Brahmos from Sulur.
So Maritime Theater Command becomes more important.
So it is an interim issue.
Meantime might have to make do with Mig-29Ks.
Rafale M won't fit either of the two
F-18 will barely fit Vikrant in calm waters.
So why not get more Mig 29Ks to tide over?
PLAN has nearby threats in East Pacific and Indo-China Sea that will keep them busy.
The Indian Ocean is a faraway deployment that is mostly subs and a few surface ships.
These can be handled with P-8Is and MH-60s and not to mention Su-30MKIs with Brahmos from Sulur.
So Maritime Theater Command becomes more important.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 528
- Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Can Ghatak takeoff & land from Vikrant? (ofcourse Ghatak has to fly first, but by design how much runway is expected?)
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Thanks for clarifying Rakesh ji.
That would make quick multiple launches and simultaneous launch and recovery from vikramaditya extremely difficult if not impossible, wouldn't it?
That would make quick multiple launches and simultaneous launch and recovery from vikramaditya extremely difficult if not impossible, wouldn't it?
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
INS Vikramaditya started life as a Kiev class “aviation cruiser”, which meant it did not have full flight deck and its aircraft complement was limited to ASW with limited fleet defense using fast but short legged VTOL (Yak38). It’s main armament was heavy AShMs and SAMs with the aircrafts providing a secondary function. Which means it was heavy cruiser hull with a slanted flight deck bolted on. It’s lifts are hence not on the sides like a conventional carrier, which needs to cater to back and forth traffic more than the cruiser’s limited air wing. So Kiev class has hangers towards aft of ship (from midpoint on) and hence elevators right at the middle of the cruiser hull
So when India asked for a conversion to aircraft carrier, they just wiped out the heavy cruiser AShM missile tubes to the front replaced that area with a ski ramp, extended the flight deck around the superstructure (which is also an oddity for an aircraft carrier design) and hence is stuck with the central lifts. They could not cut the sides and rebuild the lifts, which means more cost overruns.
It was an interesting compromise
Fast launch and recovery has got nothing to do with aircraft lifts as such, since flight refueling and most of the ordinance can be fitted on to an aircraft at the flight deck itself using ordinance elevators, which are separate from the aircraft elevators. Gerald Ford has TWELVE linear motor based ordinance elevators, even though they have smoothened the kinks only recently. A carrier with a slanted through deck carrier like Vikramaditya can theoretically launch and recover simultaneously. So Vikramaditya can do pretty ok on that front. However a deflector shield would be nice to have, if you want a line of fueled and ready crafts to be launched a bit more faster. It is like having a full length taxiway for a commercial airport vs having the aircraft use the main runway to reach the takeoff start point if there is no taxiways. No show stopper as such. Just slower rate
So when India asked for a conversion to aircraft carrier, they just wiped out the heavy cruiser AShM missile tubes to the front replaced that area with a ski ramp, extended the flight deck around the superstructure (which is also an oddity for an aircraft carrier design) and hence is stuck with the central lifts. They could not cut the sides and rebuild the lifts, which means more cost overruns.
It was an interesting compromise
Fast launch and recovery has got nothing to do with aircraft lifts as such, since flight refueling and most of the ordinance can be fitted on to an aircraft at the flight deck itself using ordinance elevators, which are separate from the aircraft elevators. Gerald Ford has TWELVE linear motor based ordinance elevators, even though they have smoothened the kinks only recently. A carrier with a slanted through deck carrier like Vikramaditya can theoretically launch and recover simultaneously. So Vikramaditya can do pretty ok on that front. However a deflector shield would be nice to have, if you want a line of fueled and ready crafts to be launched a bit more faster. It is like having a full length taxiway for a commercial airport vs having the aircraft use the main runway to reach the takeoff start point if there is no taxiways. No show stopper as such. Just slower rate
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Because MiG-29K is a disaster. It has not been ruggedized for naval ops. Many accounts by now. For all practical purposes, the MiG-29Ks need to be replaced in IN service.ramana wrote:TEDBF width with folded wings is 7.6m.
So it is an interim issue.
Meantime might have to make do with Mig-29Ks.
Rafale M won't fit either of the two
F-18 will barely fit Vikrant in calm waters.
So why not get more Mig 29Ks to tide over?
PLAN has nearby threats in East Pacific and Indo-China Sea that will keep them busy.
The Indian Ocean is a faraway deployment that is mostly subs and a few surface ships.
These can be handled with P-8Is and MH-60s and not to mention Su-30MKIs with Brahmos from Sulur.
So Maritime Theater Command becomes more important.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
What can be the thought process for not ordering 5-10 LCA Navy twin and single seaters.Karan M wrote: Because MiG-29K is a disaster. It has not been ruggedized for naval ops. Many accounts by now. For all practical purposes, the MiG-29Ks need to be replaced in IN service.
1. They will release Mig-29 Ks from costly training
2. They can serve simple duties (with probably 2 AAMs)
3. The Mig-29Ks can be used for type conversion and advanced training
4. They will provide much needed data and experience in studying long term Aircraft ops (of Tejas systems which will eventually move to TEDBF) from Carrier.
Its not like they are super expensive or maintenance intensive.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Dont think IN wants or likes the 29ks anymore with with service availability and spares issues. That is money down the drain for a "stop gap" solution. Putting money into TEDBF would give more dividends. or IN would be better off leasing some naval Rafales !!
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Billions of dollars down the drain along with a decades worth of potential and yet nobody from IN/MoD takes any responsibility for this ill fated decision. Move on the next dream of super carrier owner/operator I guess.kit wrote:Dont think IN wants or likes the 29ks anymore with with service availability and spares issues. That is money down the drain for a "stop gap" solution.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Ramana-ji,ramana wrote:TEDBF width with folded wings is 7.6m.
So it is an interim issue.
Meantime might have to make do with Mig-29Ks.
Rafale M won't fit either of the two
F-18 will barely fit Vikrant in calm waters.
So why not get more Mig 29Ks to tide over?
Rafale M will fit the Vikrant, but with modifications. Please see this post ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7308&start=2320#p2562638
If the F-18SH is the winner, a decision can be announced much earlier (towards the end of this year as planned) or early next. The Rafale is politically radioactive and any such deal close to the 2024 elections could spell disaster for the BJP Govt. But if the decision over the MRCBF contest is not announced by the stakeholders by the end of 2022 or even in 2023, I will stick my neck out and state that Dassault will win both - MRFA and MRCBF. Once the 2024 elections are over, then such a mega deal can be announced.
If the Rafale M does end up winning, the political storm that will occur will be a sight to see. And no amount of evidence that the GOI provides to the public, will make the opposition happy. But it will be fun to watch.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
ramana wrote:Need to cut off the NWC Rhode Island access.
IN already have their War College in Mumbai.
The tweet below is from the official twitter account of INS Vikrant. It was in response to the official twitter account of the US Embassy in India, congratulating the Indian Navy on the commissioning of the aircraft carrier.
https://twitter.com/IN_R11Vikrant/statu ... GWjuYfPUCQ ----> 30 years since the first Malabar; 17 years since carriers from both navies (Viraat & @NimitzNews) collaborated in a Malabar. Looking forward to taking Dosti to the next level towards a rules-based, safe & secure, Indo Pacific.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
INS Vikrant Commissioned: What Next? Rafale-M or F-18 Super Hornet?
https://military-wiki.com/ins-vikrant-c ... er-hornet/
04 Sept 2022
https://military-wiki.com/ins-vikrant-c ... er-hornet/
04 Sept 2022
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
See Ashley Tellis' comment - the decision of F-18SH versus Rafale M could be surmised below.
A question that Naval HQ is asking itself right now, but one that the Govt of the United States has been trying to influence via the Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Technology Cooperation (JWGACTC) and through (lobby) organizations like the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where Ashley Tellis contributes as a Senior Fellow.
The push for the second and larger IAC-2 vessel comes from sources like them, who are eager to see United States become India's preferred military supplier. But that status comes with its own set of headaches for India.
https://twitter.com/Chandra1Naik/status ... GWjuYfPUCQ --->
A question that Naval HQ is asking itself right now, but one that the Govt of the United States has been trying to influence via the Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Technology Cooperation (JWGACTC) and through (lobby) organizations like the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where Ashley Tellis contributes as a Senior Fellow.
The push for the second and larger IAC-2 vessel comes from sources like them, who are eager to see United States become India's preferred military supplier. But that status comes with its own set of headaches for India.
https://twitter.com/Chandra1Naik/status ... GWjuYfPUCQ --->
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
The cat will choose the door per ITS requirements.
Good bon mot Aparna!
The third IAC is really the second IAC as Vikarmadditya is not up to snuff.
And Adm Ramdas long ago said three of a kind/class are needed to break even.
So the second IAC will be more like a 50K gas turbine ship that can be back up for Vikrant.
And will field the TEDBF.
Good bon mot Aparna!
The third IAC is really the second IAC as Vikarmadditya is not up to snuff.
And Adm Ramdas long ago said three of a kind/class are needed to break even.
So the second IAC will be more like a 50K gas turbine ship that can be back up for Vikrant.
And will field the TEDBF.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
The false info when it comes to the dimensions of the Rafale in relation to the Vikrant's lift has taken on a life of its own.
See this video below from @StratPost ---> https://twitter.com/StratPost/status/15 ... kA-aAdN1Vg
I avoid getting into Twitter wars (I prefer doing that on BRF), but I had to reply to that video.
You can see my comments in the link above.
See this video below from @StratPost ---> https://twitter.com/StratPost/status/15 ... kA-aAdN1Vg
I avoid getting into Twitter wars (I prefer doing that on BRF), but I had to reply to that video.
You can see my comments in the link above.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
hnair ji,
Thank you for the informative post.
Thank you for the informative post.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
France, US tussle to sell fighter jets for India's homemade aircraft carrier
https://www.rfi.fr/en/international/202 ... ft-carrier
11 Sept 2022
https://www.rfi.fr/en/international/202 ... ft-carrier
11 Sept 2022
Captain Rajat Kumar, who leads INS Vikrant’s air wing, has reservations about the MiG-29s that will come on board his carrier, powered by four gas turbines that can pump out 88 megawatts of power. “The MiG-29 is a large aircraft – it was designed by the Russians and it is quite challenging to land on a deck,” Kumar told media on board the new carrier that cost 2.52b euros and took 20 years to build.
^^^ Including the lift and the hangar entrance?France too sent the naval variant of its Rafale aircraft for shore-based testing at the Goa facility in June last year and then again in January. The company says its craft meets all requirements of the Indian navy.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
If Captain Rajat Kumar's concern is about the MiG-29K being challenging to land on a carrier's deck - due to its size - which of the two aircraft below is best suited for the Vikrant?
The F-18SH has advantage in aircraft height, while the Rafale M has advantages in length, wingspan and wing area. All specifications below are from Wikipedia. On a vessel like the Vikrant, every inch counts. She is already quite small to begin with, when compared to other aircraft carriers.
MiG-29K ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29K
Length: 17.3 m (56 ft 9 in)
Wingspan: 11.99 m (39 ft 4 in)
Height: 4.4 m (14 ft 5 in)
Wing area: 43 m2 (460 sq ft)
F-18SH ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/ ... per_Hornet
Length: 18.31 m (60 ft 1.25 in)
Wingspan: 13.62 m (44 ft 8.5 in)
Height: 4.88 m (16 ft 0 in)
Wing area: 46.5 m2 (500 sq ft)
Rafale M ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale
Length: 15.27 m (50 ft 1 in)
Wingspan: 10.90 m (35 ft 9 in)
Height: 5.34 m (17 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 45.7 m2 (492 sq ft)
The F-18SH has advantage in aircraft height, while the Rafale M has advantages in length, wingspan and wing area. All specifications below are from Wikipedia. On a vessel like the Vikrant, every inch counts. She is already quite small to begin with, when compared to other aircraft carriers.
MiG-29K ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29K
Length: 17.3 m (56 ft 9 in)
Wingspan: 11.99 m (39 ft 4 in)
Height: 4.4 m (14 ft 5 in)
Wing area: 43 m2 (460 sq ft)
F-18SH ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/ ... per_Hornet
Length: 18.31 m (60 ft 1.25 in)
Wingspan: 13.62 m (44 ft 8.5 in)
Height: 4.88 m (16 ft 0 in)
Wing area: 46.5 m2 (500 sq ft)
Rafale M ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale
Length: 15.27 m (50 ft 1 in)
Wingspan: 10.90 m (35 ft 9 in)
Height: 5.34 m (17 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 45.7 m2 (492 sq ft)
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
If anyone wants to put a face to the name (Captain Rajat Kumar), please click on this link below. Skip to 1:00 in the video. He does state in the video, that the MiG-29K is challenging to land on an aircraft carrier's deck. This would apply to both the Vikramaditya and Vikrant, but he does specifically highlight the Vikrant. So we can conclude that size is one of the main factors in the Navy's decision in the MRCBF contest. Therefore the "size" factor will apply during the landing phase, the transportation phase (from deck to hangar and vice versa) and even the storage phase (within the hangar).
The link below is a Vishnu Som/NDTV video from earlier this month, likely at Vikrant's commissioning.
https://twitter.com/ndtv/status/1565584 ... TwzrJ0yXgg
The link below is a Vishnu Som/NDTV video from earlier this month, likely at Vikrant's commissioning.
https://twitter.com/ndtv/status/1565584 ... TwzrJ0yXgg
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5393
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Then why all the gnashing of the teeth when the Navy decided not to pursue the Tejas as an operational variant?vcsekhar wrote: He also pretty much says that they realized early on that the current configuration of the LCA would not meet the operational requirements but they needed it to develop the flight control laws and other aspects of landing and taking off from a ship.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
I think the weeping and gnashing of teeth was because people felt that the Indian defence planners (admiral / mantri / babu complex) were giving a perfectly adequate Indian aircraft (Naval Tejas) the shaft in favour of some preferred foreign dream (Rafale / Super Hornet / Mig29).Cain Marko wrote:Then why all the gnashing of the teeth when the Navy decided not to pursue the Tejas as an operational variant?
I'm not saying that's what was actually happening, I'm saying that's what people (the gnashers of teeth) assumed was happening.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
No assumption. Since its founding, carrier aviation till the Mig-29 was always single-engined.
Sea Hawks, Harrier, Alize, etc.
If this was the criterion then ADA would have made the Naval LCA twin-engined from the beginning.
Till Naval LCA landed and took off from the Vikramaditya there were daily threats of cancellation from the Hawai admirals and MoD.
So cant claim to be in favor of Naval Tejas all along.
Only Cdre Mao was in full support.
Once he did the landing he got retired!!!
Sea Hawks, Harrier, Alize, etc.
If this was the criterion then ADA would have made the Naval LCA twin-engined from the beginning.
Till Naval LCA landed and took off from the Vikramaditya there were daily threats of cancellation from the Hawai admirals and MoD.
So cant claim to be in favor of Naval Tejas all along.
Only Cdre Mao was in full support.
Once he did the landing he got retired!!!
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
Apart from the Blueskies podcast interview with Commodore Maolankar (Retd), I am reposting this interview from Tarmak Media House. The interview was conducted by Anantha Krishnan. This video is from January of this year.
-----------------------------------------------------
Commodore Jaideep Maolankar (Retd) (Test Pilot, LCA), shares his thoughts on Naval LCA and the road ahead. He also shares the challenges of operating from the deck of a carrier.
-----------------------------------------------------
The Blueskies Podcast - LCA Part 7 - Jaideep Maolankar - Naval LCA - Part 2/2
https://blueskiespodcast.com/episodes
-----------------------------------------------------
Commodore Jaideep Maolankar (Retd) (Test Pilot, LCA), shares his thoughts on Naval LCA and the road ahead. He also shares the challenges of operating from the deck of a carrier.
-----------------------------------------------------
The Blueskies Podcast - LCA Part 7 - Jaideep Maolankar - Naval LCA - Part 2/2
https://blueskiespodcast.com/episodes
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... sd7jGNXa0A ---> US may offer AIM-120D AMRAAM BVR A2A missiles, along with F-18 Super Hornet Block III to India.
https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... kyhwv55Y1w ---> Report: US likely to offer Indian Navy both AGM-154C-1 Joint Stand Off Weapon (JSOW) with 130 km range and AGM-158B-2B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM ER) with 500+ km range along with the F-18 Super Hornets.
AGM-154 Info Sheet ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_J ... off_Weapon
AGM-158 Info Sheet ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM
https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... kyhwv55Y1w ---> Report: US likely to offer Indian Navy both AGM-154C-1 Joint Stand Off Weapon (JSOW) with 130 km range and AGM-158B-2B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM ER) with 500+ km range along with the F-18 Super Hornets.
AGM-154 Info Sheet ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_J ... off_Weapon
AGM-158 Info Sheet ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
A range of 300km plus brings the weapon under the MTCR. US violate the regime to supply India with the unique capacity.
Or India has capacity to build such weapons by itself and not supplying this will be loss of market opportunity.
Or India has capacity to build such weapons by itself and not supplying this will be loss of market opportunity.
Re: Indian Naval Aviation
India too is a signatory to the treaty and can be sold this kind of weapons. India's entry in the MTCRT is what paved the way for us to increase the range of the Brahmos to the current 450 Kms, with work ongoing to increase it to about 600Kms. Earlier it was software restricted to 290Kms.Pratyush wrote:A range of 300km plus brings the weapon under the MTCR. US violate the regime to supply India with the unique capacity.
Or India has capacity to build such weapons by itself and not supplying this will be loss of market opportunity.