No, its required to create a base under Eastern Naval Command.
Even without that the cumulative package will be around 4.5 billion.
Twin-Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF)
- Thread starter Gautam
- Start date
Even without that the cumulative package will be around 4.5 billion.
Why 4.5 Billions, can you justify it? It may be the price of the F-18 but not the price of the Rafale. For example, when Qatar ordered 12 additional Rafales it paid only 1.1 Billion. And even if you have to equip a land base for these 26 Rafales, you won't have the big equipment such as flight simulators and maintenance training that the IAF has already acquired and that can be leased to the navy to reimburse the operating costs. And moreover, it will be for 26 half-time aircraft instead of 72 full-time aircraft.
The mig29K and Mig29UPG of IN and IAF are similar but so different at the same time.
Yes but there is only two kind of Rafale: Rafale M and Rafale B, the Rafale C is made with the front of the Rafale M on which the landing gear of the Rafale B is mounted and the rear of the Rafale B. And if we wanted to make a two-seater Rafale Marine, we would simply take the front of a Rafale B and mount the Rafale M landing gear on it, and the rear of the Rafale M.
And all these aircraft have the same functionalities and the same performance.
True in theory, but the Indian Navy and the Indian Air Force are not as closely integrated together as their French counterparts, so the IN will want to have its own equipment instead of sharing it with the IAF.
The Ministry of Finance may have a say. After all, it is a stop gap until the MRCBF.
8 year development time, 4 prototypes, 14,000 crore estimated development budget. NP5 to fly within few months.
LCA MK2 , AMCA MK2 and eventually TEDBF all will feature the more powerful engine.
3rd AC will be CATOBAR. Once load factors are released by Navy, the TEDBF can also be modified for CATOBAR use.
The issue is CATOBAR of Americans have different power , the one used by French have different and the EMALS have different.
IN will have to define IAC 3. What aircraft they intend to fly, etc.
The euro crash makes Rafale price competitive with the SH.
A billion bucks saved right off the bat. If things get worse post winter, it will get even cheaper.
Anyway, a land base is necessary. It will most likely be a new base in the east. Plus infrastructure for 3 carriers, not 2. If you know the price of equipping a carrier, that would help.
IN wants independence from IAF, hence the need for separate trainers.
What do you mean?
Which is a good thing, 'cause it will affect Stobar performance.
Plus there's a good chance TEDBF will not see a Catobar version ever inducted, even if ADA makes a prototype. It will end up becoming a TD for future aircraft though.
MRCBF. It will start operations from our current carriers and then more will likely be ordered for the Cat carrier.
SH has the obvious advantage; folded wings, excellent avionics, networking, additional thrust etc. But it's under review.
Things are gonna get really serious between India and China now, post CCP forum. So politically France is gonna be far less advantageous in dealing with them. We need to throw a bone at the Americans, and the SH is the ticket. So assume that the SH has already won.
If this were to be the case, it would mean that your aircraft carrier would be useless, the SH has too short a range.
On the land border yes, we will have issues with china. On the seas it is highly unlikely they will want to create any trouble for the foreseeable time. They will be more or less be trying out break out of american military fence. Its better to concentrate on our submarine fleet rather than spending humungous amount of money on these gimped carrier assets.
