Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Not wanting to dampen the Indian' s achievements. Just a couple of questions as I'm not an expert.
I thought (from reading on here) that it is generally accepted by most navy that a single engine plane that needs runway is not a good ideal for carrier operation.
And if India is considering using this fighter as their carrier wing, then what's wrong with the Mig 29?
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Political backing for one, even if the Tejas is proven to be less than optimal for carrier ops India will still support it to the hilt because it is the only domestic fighter they have .
Another is the avionics of the MIG-29K which is somewhat dates especially in comparison with the latest China has to offer. Now with the JF-17 blk 3 having a supposed aesa radar there is pressure on India having the same as well. They might be able to get Russia to convert the MIG-35 into a carrier jet but that is up to debate.
Thanks, just as I thought.
But this is not smart, and you are putting the defence and the life of servicemen at risk. If the Mig 29K is better suited to carrier ops, then Tejas doesn't make sense. If its radar, can't they upgrade radar on it?
Possibly for accumulating experience for the local Aviation Development Institutes?
If you scroll go back a few pages in the thread, there are posts about India's newly announced TEDBF ( India and its love for acronyms...sigh). This project (Tejas Carrier mod) will help the local development institute get a good idea about carrier operations and aircraft structural requirements. Very critical things for a country without a good history of Carrier aviation development and production (just like China but worse).
India is going to launch and commission its own carrier next year ( if things go well for them). That means India won't have another carrier this decade (2020 - 2030). That means ORCA and TEDBF (two projects that were announced last year) are going to have only more similarities than acronyms would like to convey. Sort of their own Rafale and Rafale-M versions.
India cannot put anything on the Tejas fighter without sacrifices. The fighter jet is just as big as a T-50 golden eagle. Where's the volume and power required for additional goddies in the aircraft? It's a dead end! Why can't the Indians understand that? Seems to me that they have understood it well. Or why is there no pickup in production rates? The Pakistani jf-17 is produced in 100s while India's Tejas fighter gets two dozen? Unacceptable.
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Yeah I mean look at the F-35C with it's single engine design............. oh wait.
Jokes aside, single engined naval fighters are not necessarily bad choices. 2 engines are more for guarantee in the case one actually fails. It all depends on the needs and wants of the navy in question. A single engine fighter is smaller can more can be packed onto the ship.
For the MIG-29K it is tricky, because any weapons upgrade and procurement has to go through the gauntlet of Indian red tape bureaucracy which is notorious for it's demands and shifting standards. And on the Russian side, they have yet to field a functioning AESA radar on a MIG-29 platform as of yet.
Mig-35's AESA is not designed for naval operations so it won't be a simple matter of swapping.
But having said that the Tejas being navalised is not just so that the IN can eventually field a carrier fighter with an AESA. The Uttam isn't even fielded or in series production. Even then, the first gen version of a very small AESA may not even match Mig-29K's current radar performance. Or indeed for the airforce equivalent, a Bars radar.
Therefore the radar isn't the reason at all. More likely that since the Mig-29K has had issues with IN service, the Indians are more than happy to put a domestic fighter onboard and why wouldn't they? As long as it meets or exceeds the Mig-29K's utility overall.
The real problem with such a carrier fighter is low payload and low range. Lower payload than Mig-29K is almost guaranteed.
But having said that the Tejas being navalised is not just so that the IN can eventually field a carrier fighter with an AESA. The Uttam isn't even fielded or in series production. Even then, the first gen version of a very small AESA may not even match Mig-29K's current radar performance. Or indeed for the airforce equivalent, a Bars radar.
Therefore the radar isn't the reason at all. More likely that since the Mig-29K has had issues with IN service, the Indians are more than happy to put a domestic fighter onboard and why wouldn't they? As long as it meets or exceeds the Mig-29K's utility overall.
The real problem with such a carrier fighter is low payload and low range. Lower payload than Mig-29K is almost guaranteed.
Lower payload as well as lower performance with a reduced flight envelope (already constrained).
The aircraft is simply too small.
Tejas naval is Nothing more than a test bed. TEDBF is much more promising.
But another angle exists-
Considering that there are constraints on Human Capital, Financial and Production capacities, wouldn't multiple programs of TEDBF, ORCA etc make AMCA a fighter of 2030s? Wouldn't by 2035, AMCA find itself in an unenviable position of being technically inferior by 2030 standards?
