Multi-Role Carrier Borne Fighter For The Indian Navy - Updates & Discussions

What should we select?


  • Total voters
    35

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,554
10,789
India
The MICA rail will be removed and reassembled in a similar way to a pylon under the wings without taking more time.
The benefit is that the aircraft will be able to pull 11 g instead of 7.5 g.

As long as the problem is solved, at least the competition will be based on merit rather than the ridiculous limitations of the carrier.

Although, I am not sure if the 7.5G vs 11G difference will matter as much for the navy.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,554
10,789
India
For me, when the opponent uses arguments of this kind it is a good omen, it means that he has no more serious argument to his credit.

The Americans have always been petty like this. They try to squeeze everything they've got in the form of advertisements.

But stuff like this is more important:
With the Indian Navy’s eleven P-8Is already in service, and an additional six to be procured; the Indian Navy will also be inducting other ‘US-Origin’ helicopters and unmanned systems. The Super Hornet Block III on offer to the Indian Navy will come with advanced network architecture that will provide opportunities to interface seamlessly with other U.S origin assets including Indian Navy’s P-8Is.

Full interoperability with the P-8Is, Sea Guardians and Tritons in the future is a huge advantage.

...both variants are carrier compatible to perform the full range of combat missions and can fully operate from the carrier deck.

Of course, the two-seat carrier compatibility.

...collaboration opportunities between the two navies for carrier integration, training, technology transfer, and so much more.

"...and so much more" is pretty much their biggest selling point. Unlike the IAF, the IN is going to be operating with very limited capability until 2040 at least.

The SH has far too many advantages for the IN even if the Rafale ends up with better performance and avionics.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: lcafanboy

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
17,189
13,065
Mumbai
For me, when the opponent uses arguments of this kind it is a good omen, it means that he has no more serious argument to his credit.
I think in order to show the US it's place , the government of France & Dassault ought to offer the Rafale M at half the cost thus getting even for what LM did to the latter in Finland plus showing LM that Dassault can play the price war too apart from compensating for the French loss in Australia subject to the fact that IAF orders at least 54 more Rafales plus offsets.

The advantage being there's no need to cut down on the prices of the Rafales meant for the Air Force so as not to jeopardize any future orders that Dassault is negotiating with countries like Indonesia .

That way there'd be no need for this competition plus it opens up the way for MII & gives the GoI talking points over the opposition.

It's a win win situation all around.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
3,452
4,049
73
France
The Americans have always been petty like this. They try to squeeze everything they've got in the form of advertisements.

But stuff like this is more important:
With the Indian Navy’s eleven P-8Is already in service, and an additional six to be procured; the Indian Navy will also be inducting other ‘US-Origin’ helicopters and unmanned systems. The Super Hornet Block III on offer to the Indian Navy will come with advanced network architecture that will provide opportunities to interface seamlessly with other U.S origin assets including Indian Navy’s P-8Is.

Full interoperability with the P-8Is, Sea Guardians and Tritons in the future is a huge advantage.

...both variants are carrier compatible to perform the full range of combat missions and can fully operate from the carrier deck.

Of course, the two-seat carrier compatibility.

...collaboration opportunities between the two navies for carrier integration, training, technology transfer, and so much more.

"...and so much more" is pretty much their biggest selling point. Unlike the IAF, the IN is going to be operating with very limited capability until 2040 at least.

The SH has far too many advantages for the IN even if the Rafale ends up with better performance and avionics.
It's a pure lie, the Rafale is as compatible with all this equipment as the F-18 SH, it's just a question of equipping it with the right data link and of course we'll equip it with the one IN will ask us. The Rafale is even compatible with American aircraft carriers. The US is always trying to make people believe that to have interoperability you have to have the same equipment, but fortunately this is not true.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
3,452
4,049
73
France
I think in order to show the US it's place , the government of France & Dassault ought to offer the Rafale M at half the cost thus getting even for what LM did to the latter in Finland plus showing LM that Dassault can play the price war too apart from compensating for the French loss in Australia subject to the fact that IAF orders at least 54 more Rafales plus offsets.

The advantage being there's no need to cut down on the prices of the Rafales meant for the Air Force so as not to jeopardize any future orders that Dassault is negotiating with countries like Indonesia .

That way there'd be no need for this competition plus it opens up the way for MII & gives the GoI talking points over the opposition.

It's a win win situation all around.
These are practices that are incompatible with Dassault.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
17,189
13,065
Mumbai
Its speciality is not making power points, it's making great planes.
Good thing @WHOHE is thread banned here. Else he'd have argued LM is good at both while repeating the same tired old claim ad nauseam ad infinitum of how the Rafale service rate is a mere 55% while remaining mum on what's it like for the F-35.

That's what exposure to superior marketing abilities does.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
3,452
4,049
73
France
Good thing @WHOHE is thread banned here. Else he'd have argued LM is good at both while repeating the same tired old claim ad nauseam ad infinitum of how the Rafale service rate is a mere 55% while remaining mum on what's it like for the F-35.

That's what exposure to superior marketing abilities does.
In french we say :" Ils ont plus de faire savoir et on a plus de savoir faire " translation "They have more make know and we have more know-how"
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_

Hydra

Senior member
May 19, 2020
2,755
1,319
Mumbai
In french we say :" Ils ont plus de faire savoir et on a plus de savoir faire " translation "They have more make know and we have more know-how"
I think we pissed off by Boeing,many of the offset obligations are yet to fullfill. If we ignore the fact, everything else is favouring Boeing here.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,554
10,789
India
It's a pure lie, the Rafale is as compatible with all this equipment as the F-18 SH, it's just a question of equipping it with the right data link and of course we'll equip it with the one IN will ask us. The Rafale is even compatible with American aircraft carriers. The US is always trying to make people believe that to have interoperability you have to have the same equipment, but fortunately this is not true.

The Americans won't allow it. It's not a lie, it simply doesn't apply to India 'cause we are not a formal ally. They have made concessions elsewhere, like allowing us to tap into CENTRIXS with non-American hardware, but that's special privilege and is unlikely to be applied to Rafale-M. Even the CENTRIXS access is considered as a "loan", they can take it back anytime they want.

So the IN has to choose between full interoperability with the USN or find roundabout means to connect to the Rafale-M, through other compatible systems like the P-8I, which is generally quite limited, particularly NLOS capabilities.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,816
3,679
Bangalore
Short points. A couple of F18E being modified. Will try to showcase operations with 2 dummy Harpoon missiles. Rafale showed flying with a single Exocet.

Unlike the IAF where I root for Dassault. In Navy's case I think we might finally operate an American Fighter Jet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra and Ashwin

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,554
10,789
India
Unlike the IAF where I root for Dassault. In Navy's case I think we might finally operate an American Fighter Jet.

Very likely. Although I am rooting for the Rafale here as well, the IN won't lose with the SH either. The non-fighter related advantages are immense with the SH, and much more relevant to the IN.

But the SH's future is absolutely dismal. It's okay for the next 20-25 years. But post that the upgrade opportunities are questionable.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Bon Plan

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,816
3,679
Bangalore
Very likely. Although I am rooting for the Rafale here as well, the IN won't lose with the SH either. The non-fighter related advantages are immense with the SH, and much more relevant to the IN.

But the SH's future is absolutely dismal. It's okay for the next 20-25 years. But post that the upgrade opportunities are questionable.
Well the upcoming trials are more of just showing the potential, proving it is done imo.

It remains to be seen what the G2G offers are received. Because although the initial buy will be for 26, it will go up imo. Let's wait and see. It's still a long time. May be by October we will get to know where Navy is leaning.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,554
10,789
India
Well the upcoming trials are more of just showing the potential, proving it is done imo.

It remains to be seen what the G2G offers are received. Because although the initial buy will be for 26, it will go up imo. Let's wait and see. It's still a long time. May be by October we will get to know where Navy is leaning.

The choice has to be made this year, 'cause they wanna expedite the R&D of the carrier.

As for numbers, assuming a 70% availability, we will need 40 SHs or 48 Rafales. Because the two-seat Rafales cannot be operated on carriers. So I think the price advantage belongs to the SH.