Indian Naval Aviation

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Mar 2017 02:22

Amen and that will make LM a whole lot richer than 100 F-16s

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Mar 2017 03:08

chola wrote:
Karan M wrote:My understanding is the MiG-29Ks have structural issues, hydraulics issues, radar problems and engine problems. IAF upgrade, we will know in some time.

Good god, is there anything on that thing that is not an issue?

The pilot.

The Russian Navy pretty much showed us what they think of the thing when they embarked only four (count them, 4) on their most publicized deployment in decades.

The Russians sold us a lemon and the IN knows it, thus the call out for the 57 new fighters when the 29Ks are all but brand new.

For once, we agree.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Mar 2017 04:55

Hmm, so IN needs a more sea worthy aircraft than the MiG-29K, and the IAF needs a few MRCA - are others seeing and thinking what I am?

Navy can load off brand new MiG-29ks, BRD can get rid of the landing gear and lighten the birds considerably, they have total commonality with the the IAF fulcrum upgrades (from avionics to sensors and weapons) making them an easy hand off. Navy gets 60-100 new Shornets or Rafales and IAF gets more up to date Baaz. Win win onlee. I know Navy guys will be happy, not sure about IAF though since they seem to have a thing for western birds right now.

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 04 Mar 2017 06:20

So the entire air wing of Indian Navy is now defunct. Another AK Anthony legacy we are paying for. A Supreme Court directed inquiry is needed.

- is there a deeper conspiracy by the Russians and the Chinese to sell us a lemon?
- who were in the decision making loop ?
- has mig been black listed from bidding for iaf for this reason?

Bigger question is what is the ultimate cost to the nation for the utter failure of drdo for failing to deliver on NLCA, kaveri.. It can't be less than $50B loss and 50k of jobs. Oh well.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Mar 2017 07:06

Rishi Verma wrote: Bigger question is what is the ultimate cost to the nation for the utter failure of drdo for failing to deliver on NLCA, kaveri.. It can't be less than $50B loss and 50k of jobs. Oh well.

What would be the loss in billions of future dollars, if DRDO isn't doing what it is doing at the moment and we don't do our homework and never learn and outsource the production facilities?

Please put a number nirav!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Mar 2017 08:19

Rishi Verma wrote: Bigger question is what is the ultimate cost to the nation for the utter failure of drdo for failing to deliver on NLCA, kaveri.. It can't be less than $50B loss and 50k of jobs. Oh well.

Do you just type whatever comes to your mind? Because let me call you out here. Forget knowing a lot, you know very little. And what you write is borderline trolling.

chola · Post by **chola** » 04 Mar 2017 10:11

Cybaru wrote:

Chola, If you think f35B is the only option for Navy, what makes some of us on the forum think that IAF will want Gripen/F16/F18 etc? It will want shiny new 100 F35As too!

I would too! But we won't get the F-35 production line. We can for the F-solah and possibly for the F-18 (for our CATOBAR/Nuclear IAC 3.)

The production line is the only reason I want the F-16.

chola · Post by **chola** » 04 Mar 2017 10:25

Rishi Verma wrote:
- is there a deeper conspiracy by the Russians and the Chinese to sell us a lemon?
- who were in the decision making loop ?
- has mig been black listed from bidding for iaf for this reason?

Every used car salesman in the world is in on the same conspiracy: selling lemons.

MiG has been an used car salesman for years now.

MiG should have been blacklisted years ago for selling us dangerously shitty designs supported by even shittier parts. The -21, -27 and their stablemates have killed literally HUNDREDS of Indians through crashes. We lost more than HALF of all 870 odd we operated. Hell yes, MiG should have been blacklisted.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 04 Mar 2017 10:33

chola wrote: MiG should have been blacklisted years ago for selling us dangerously shitty designs supported by even shittier parts. The -21, -27 and their stablemates have killed literally HUNDREDS of Indians through crashes. We lost more than HALF of all 870 odd we operated. Hell yes, MiG should have been blacklisted.

WTF? Let's not lose all perspective here. The Mig-21 has served us extremely well. Just ask the pilots who flew it in 1971. Especially the ones who shot down four examples of its main competitor when we first bought it - the F-104. The Mig-27 has also performed its role fairly well. We lost hundreds of Mig-21s because we kept using it in a role it was ill suited for - training rookie pilots who had only flown Kirans since we lacked an AJT for decades. And because we couldn't replace the old aircraft when they needed to be. The Mig-21 had its flaws but to call it a shitty design is just stupid.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 04 Mar 2017 10:37

Rishi Verma wrote: Bigger question is what is the ultimate cost to the nation for the utter failure of drdo for failing to deliver on NLCA, kaveri.. It can't be less than $50B loss and 50k of jobs. Oh well.

The "failure" of the NLCA is a falacy. A few years ago Kartik (or another BRF member, I don't remember) had spoken at length to Cmde Maolankar at Aero India. Even back then he mentioned that the Navy wasn't looking to acquire the NLCA Mk1 but was interested in the navalized MK2. They were however fully supporting the Mk1 effort because it was important to learn how to navalize the LCA and this was what would enable us to make the NLCA Mk2 in the future.

The current issue occurred because of IAF's interest in Tejas Mk1A which would be ideal for the IAF but not for the Navy. The Navy got spooked that the Mk2 would never arrive or be too late to fulfill the Navy's needs since resources would be diverted to the Mk1A.

And of course because the Mig-29K turned out to be a lemon. They could have waited for the Mk2 like they were planning to if the Mig-29k fleet wasn't facing the litany of problems that it is.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Mar 2017 10:43

one workable formula could be as suggested, hand over all the Mig29K to IAF for use to replace the Mig27 and any remaining Mig21. they can form 3 squadrons. can help the land based 12 jaguarIM as well.

so mainly goa-pune-bhuj-jamnagar-nalia belt will keep them near the sea and land based air defence and strike also with FULL payload.

no point tinkering with the undercarriage to de-navalize them...just get rid of the tailhook and fly them as-is. switzerland and canada operate land based F-18C

IN can for now run with the rafale or JSF-B and inevitably its future for ADS2 has JSF-C since there is nothing in france beyond the rafale - EU as of today does not have any manned 5th gen fighter project due to total lack of funds. most of them will fall in line and buy JSF-A after the Eurofighter and F-16s run out of life - others are already in line, hat in hand. France has no play left and can only wring its hands

the rafale deals that france is signing has no upgrade path - its the kamov bailout deal with a french twist. its tiny nose cannot take the big fighter based ABM and other large aperture sensors of future and its body is absolutely packed at present due to small size.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 04 Mar 2017 10:45

So the IAF after being told we can't afford more Rafales gets hand-me-down Mig-29s while the Navy gets shiny new Rafale's or even worse F-35s

We'll have riots in all IAF officer's messes across the country.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Mar 2017 10:47

Tough . but someone had to call it out.

or the IN can at its own cost and time attempt to fix whatever ails the Mig29K....which the russians will gleefully take for free and market it to TSP in due course.

INs needs are limited vs the IAF, so a few bmws are ok. plus its a life and death situation in high seas - scarce assets need to work really well, there is no "covering for" weaker platforms by calling in stronger ones from adjoining bases or declining combat because billion $$ warships depend on the umbrella that navair provides. no limping also-ran passengers can be carried in the high seas fleet.

I would say JSF-C all the way.

chola · Post by **chola** » 04 Mar 2017 10:48

nachiket wrote:
chola wrote: MiG should have been blacklisted years ago for selling us dangerously shitty designs supported by even shittier parts. The -21, -27 and their stablemates have killed literally HUNDREDS of Indians through crashes. We lost more than HALF of all 870 odd we operated. Hell yes, MiG should have been blacklisted.
WTF? Let's not lose all perspective here. The Mig-21 has served us extremely well. Just ask the pilots who flew it in 1971. Especially the ones who shot down four examples of its main competitor when we first bought it - the F-104. The Mig-27 has also performed its role fairly well. We lost hundreds of Mig-21s because we kept using it in a role it was ill suited for - training rookie pilots straight out of the academy since we lacked an AJT for decades. And because we couldn't replace the old aircraft when they needed to be.

They served well only because of the quality of our pilots. Look at MiG's record in the Middle East. It is horrendous.

At any rate, I don't dispute it is our fault for "mis-using" their aircraft (basically, it should not be doing any of the things a modern air force needs to do without a good probability of killing its pilot.)

Aside from all that, have you read about the Algerian air force rejecting old and substandard parts in their "new" MiG-29s? You think that hadn't been happening for years in their supplies to HAL?

srin · Post by **srin** » 04 Mar 2017 10:51

Who knows ? May be the naval fighter contest and single engine fighter contest may have a single winner - the F-35

negi · Post by **negi** » 04 Mar 2017 10:51

Issue with Mig-29K is not engines ; issue with it is it was not made for carrier borne operations ground up , I mean obviously you can use it if you curb your sorties. I have easons to believe it's bring back weight is abysmal too . Radar to bekar hi hai pehle se.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Mar 2017 10:57

this could well be IN JSFs tracking nasrs and baburs inbound over the land border. this is the future.

the frenchies for cost reasons have actually deleted the A2A OSF irst on most of their rafales, forget about networking in other EO and X- band sensors for ABM network

though I am not particularly fond of either platform, have to say a huge amt of sensor and sw $$ being thrown into the JSF program gives it decades of potential vs the mature rafale which has no real funding going fwd nor a need for the host country to do anything beyond bomb a few mud huts and canoes. JSF needs to deal with the best that Cheen can throw at it, so needs to fight to survive.

its like a pampered pet dog who needs bark and patrol its house, vs a wild jackal who needs to find a way to avoid getting killed all day and bring home the meat for the pups.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Mar 2017 11:01

Well when AmirKhan lost the MRCA runaround first time around, they offered up the JSF to win orders. http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20111103/main2.htm

IN can target both B/C for its carrier needs. The idea of offloading it for land based use to IAF makes great sense! The 35B for the current carriers and the 35C if the emals comes through. F35C is also going through rework, certification will take some time. It has wing issues. This will allow LM to set up a FACO line that makes all three.

srin · Post by **srin** » 04 Mar 2017 11:02

I protest against the attempts to bring Mig-29Ks to disrepute. They were the only planes for which an entire aircraft carrier was offered for free*

*Terms and Conditions apply. The free carrier offer is exclusive of guarantees, cost of upgrades to host the fighters, taxes, self-defense and anything else they can think of, and doesn't have a delivery date

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 04 Mar 2017 11:07

srin wrote:I protest against the attempts to bring Mig-29Ks to disrepute. They were the only planes for which an entire aircraft carrier was offered for free*

Come to think of it, if we consider the Mig-29k a lemon, then the Vikramaditya itself is a lemon for all practical purposes. Maybe retiring the Harriers was a hasty decision.

chola · Post by **chola** » 04 Mar 2017 11:17

nachiket wrote:
srin wrote:I protest against the attempts to bring Mig-29Ks to disrepute. They were the only planes for which an entire aircraft carrier was offered for free*
Come to think of it, if we consider the Mig-29k a lemon, then the Vikramaditya itself is a lemon for all practical purposes. Maybe retiring the Harriers was a hasty decision.

Well that particular lemon is "free" so more digestible?

negi · Post by **negi** » 04 Mar 2017 11:25

I personally believe IN's carrier operating goals are on the lines of nawabi shaukh ; I mean aside from the USN no one else has a carrier fleet worthy of being even concerned about. Russians knew that it was a money pit so they invested in heavy missile cruisers to me that philosophy is a lot more viable and at the same time effective , with advances in air defence and long range cruise/ballistic missile tech the role of carriers in the arena is much more confined , we do not have enough assets on surface or under the suface to protect a carrier of the class which will operate expensive stuff like the F-35 . I think we should go slow on carrier plans and instead go after Ticonderoga class stuff ; in future once NLCA materializes sure we can have say 2-3 carriers for niche roles.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 04 Mar 2017 11:38

Singha wrote:To
INs needs are limited vs the IAF, so a few bmws are ok. plus its a life and death situation in high seas - scarce assets need to work really well, there is no "covering for" weaker platforms by calling in stronger ones from adjoining bases or declining combat because billion $$ warships depend on the umbrella that navair provides. no limping also-ran passengers can be carried in the high seas fleet.

Well the Navy wants 57 new twin-engined jets in addition to the 45 Mig-29Ks, ostensibly because the NLCA "failed". That is not a few by any yardstick. If they are actually looking for replacing the Migs like we suspect they should come out and say so.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Mar 2017 13:04

I have a very simple solution.Ruussia is getting a first batch of 24+ MIG-29Ks identical to our lot. If the problem with our lot of 29Ks can be traced to a genuine flaw in the landing gear,whatever,then the OEM,MIG must make good by rectifying the aircraft for us. The existing lot of 29Ks could go to the Kuznetsov,while the new (rectified) 29Ks meant for the RuN come to us! A second lot of new rectified 29Ks can come in the second phase,or MIG hopefully would've sorted it all out once the local support establishments for support,spars,maint.,etc. are operational.

I've advocated before that we need to invest more for the IN in all dimensions.basing MP and strike aircraft at our island outposts will take the load off the IAF,who can then redeploy their MKIs to the Himalayas. MIG-29Ks and whatever else the IN acquires could operate both from the land/island bases as well as aboard the carriers. Right now a sqd. is supposed to be based at Vizag. In fact,as the years go by,the IN could be tasked with increasing responsibility for coastal defence,so that the IAF has superiority both in quality and numbers against Pak and China. MKIs need not be stationed at Tanjopre to look after any PRC mischief operating out of Hambantota in southern SL.29Ks and even LCAs could do the biz. However,for sheer speed of action,LRMP supersonic modified Backfirews (at least these readily available in dozens) ,with their super/hyper BMos anti-ship missiles will enable us to intercept any hostile maritime forces attempting to ingress into the IOR whether from the east or west.

negi · Post by **negi** » 04 Mar 2017 13:16

F-35 B will be a repeat of Harier episode ; in fact even worse because lift fan comes from RR while the engine itself is P&W ; HAL could never sevice Harriers engines which had to be flown to the UK for an overhaul I am not sure how will things work out with F-35 B . It is better for IN and GOI to wait for the NLCA and manage with Mig-29Ks for now, at least the RD-33 can be serviced here .

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Mar 2017 13:17

srin wrote:I protest against the attempts to bring Mig-29Ks to disrepute. They were the only planes for which an entire aircraft carrier was offered for free*

*Terms and Conditions apply. The free carrier offer is exclusive of guarantees, cost of upgrades to host the fighters, taxes, self-defense and anything else they can think of, and doesn't have a delivery date

May be we ask Amirkhan to sweeten F35C deal with a free Ford class AC.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Mar 2017 15:02

...while the new (rectified) 29Ks meant for the RuN come to us!

Well looking at their boo boo deploymemt off syria i would not hold my breath that anything is even tested to the extent IN has done.

nam · Post by **nam** » 04 Mar 2017 16:06

Offer LM 300 f35 deal (laf + in) , instead of f16

How much will LM produce in India. It meets parikar single engine criteria as well.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 06 Mar 2017 04:05

nachiket wrote:So the IAF after being told we can't afford more Rafales gets hand-me-down Mig-29s while the Navy gets shiny new Rafale's or even worse F-35s We'll have riots in all IAF officer's messes across the country.

Well the IAF did get their share of shiny Rafales after all - 36 of them shiny brand new ones

And the IN MiG-29s are not exactly hand me downs, most of these are brand new or close to brand new frames. Plus the IN MiG-29ks are certainly more capable than the IAF Baaz upgrades. They are newer and better airframe designs (based on the fulcrum M iirc) with more composites, internal fuel, payload capacity and hardpoints, and better engines - all in all, a very respectable package.

In due course (or immediately), these could be upgraded in an MLU with AESA and other sensors - convert them into regular MiG-35s. 45 of these will be quite potent ~ F-16 blk60, EF-2000 and Gripen NG peers.

GhalibKabir · Post by **GhalibKabir** » 06 Mar 2017 09:23

Can any one please share the current situation of ASW S-70B deal? I know we are stuck on price negotiations for 16+8 S-70... considering we need nearly 4-5 times that number... what is a realistic timeline factoring in our babudom's penchant to trip RM/MoD as much as possible...

i would have thought considering the PLAN naval base in Djibouti and the Yuan SSK sales to PN, the IN would have laid full emphasis on ASW capability enhancement vis a vis active, passive sonar capabilities on both ships and helos...(advance apologies if i come across as being naive )

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Mar 2017 12:11

I think seriously,we need to compartmentalise the issues of each force,aircraft,etc. Any defects in 29Ks should be sorted out with the OEM,and made good by it.If there are as alleged some design flaws,then the OEM is liable for rectifying the defect.

In the IN's case,even if it decides tomorrow what bird it wants for batch 2,it will take at least 5 years before such a bird arrives.Two years for selecting the bird and sealing the deal and 3 yrs. for delivery at a prod. rate of 16+/yr. That's 5 yrs. at the earliest.Therefore,IAC-1,the new Vikrant,when it is commissioned, will sail with 29Ks. The second batch of 50+ is clearly meant for IAC-2,whose design needs to be firmed up asap. I think that here the IN is putting the cart before the horse if it wants the aircraft firmed up and then design the carrier. The options are well known.Upgraded 29Ks and SU-33s,naval FGFA (when they arrive) from Russia.Rafales and Sea Gripen (when it appears) from Europe and the F-18SH and F-35 variants from the US. I don't add our NLCA to the list becos operating a decade from now,it will be overwhelmed by superior aircraft from both east and west and the IN has dumped it.Official statements say that the NLCA dev. based upon a MK-2 LCA will be a "tech-demo" only.

Therefore,since their sizes/dimensions are well known,the design of the carrier's lifts should be large enough to accommodate any of these types.Their approx MTO is also known,so cats/EMALS,whatever,should factor in the launch load.Ski Jumps pose no problem.Power plant nuclear if EMALS is used for the extra power. A 75,000t carrier should be able to carry 60+ aircraft and helos. 2 sqds, of the second batch,with one on shore for trg. and reserves,plus 20+ helos,AEW aircraft/helos,etc.,should be its usual complement.

The IAF which is short of numbers to face China and Pak,should focus more on the air war to be fought in the northern,eastern and western theatres bordering Pak and China and hand over more responsibility to the IN for defending the IOR theatre,from Southern Command southwards,including the A&N islands and Lakshadweep.MIG-29Ks and LRMP aircraft could operate from the island territories too,as well as batch-2 fighters when they arrive.If we add at least 8 upgraded TU-22M Backfires to the list,then the IN will have a very potent air capability to sanitise enemy forces (China and Pak) from operating in the IOR.The IAF would then be able to transfer at least 2 MKI sqds methinks to the more volatile theatres apart from beefing up its inventory too,which will give it a better numbers ratio.

PS: Remember that the IN is to build a fully operational naval air base too at Karwar.It already has naval air stations at Vizag,Arkonam (where the Bears are based) and Goa. The INS Baaz base at Campbell Bay on Great Nicobar island needs to be fully upgraded to having a 10,000 ft runway as planned,along with other BRD facilities to operate both fighter and LRMP aircraft like P-8Is,etc.

The devastation of the IAF Car Nic base by the IOR tsunami in which over 110 personnel and family members were killed indicates the vulnerability of our premier air base. Lesser known is NAS Shibpur,an FOAB meant to monitor the north Andamans region.This will eventually have a 12,000ft runway,which will allow even Bears to operate from there.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Mar 2017 21:48

The Eff solah and Grippen is all maya onlee.
GoI's singil injine make in india plane was always the Eff thirty five onlee

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 06 Mar 2017 22:45

The Dornier from HAL is being made into a seaplane and additional engine is being considered to power the radar for future AWACS, why not put 2+2 together and add the balance beam radar with another engine to the Dornier? along with wings folding it has the footprint of a medium sized naval chopper.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 06 Mar 2017 22:55

While we are at it, why don't we add a refuelling drogue and tail hook for carrier landing.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 06 Mar 2017 23:06

so true, if there is a tail hook miss, one can always land in sea using the skids

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 06 Mar 2017 23:48

What are you guys talking about?

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 07 Mar 2017 00:29

well the intention was to see if the seaplane with a radar is possible, it is expected that the radar is relative to the plane size

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Mar 2017 11:39

There was another DO-228 amphib option from Oz I think,where the flotation device is under the fuselage.This way the engines remain in the same position as the existing ones. Thisis a very innovative idea,i don't think floats are necessary in this version. It would be very interesting to see of an AEW version could be developed,but where would the third engine go? It would have to be a concealed APU as seen on many civvy jets. Remember how our erstwhile Packets had a jet pack added atop the fuselage? Here on a DO,it wouldn't be poss. since the slab radar would sit atop it,but could be hidden in a tailcone with the intake an aperture below the cone/rear fuselage. The length of a DO is only approx 16.5M when compared with a naval SU,22+M. Therefore,on our larger carrier,the lifts would easily be able to accomodate an AEW DO-228.The IL_114 being offered to us for a JV,is also ideal for a cost-effective platform for turboprop AEW aircraft apart from other transport/civvy variants.

Here is the link to the LIvefist exclusive on the DO amphib options.Drawings included.
http://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02/ ... faces.html

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 07 Mar 2017 17:35

vasu raya wrote:so true, if there is a tail hook miss, one can always land in sea using the skids

Doubt it. Too risky.

In carrier landings the planes spool to max power immediately on touch down so that if they miss the arrestor cables they can take off and come round for another attempt

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 07 Mar 2017 21:26

Indranil wrote:What are you guys talking about?

Just being sarcastic.