Hypothetically

FSU CBG v/s USN CBG

Launch 20+ Su-33 Flankers with P-800 / PJ-10 and release at range. Launch another 20 Su-33 when the first strike is on the way back – keep at it till results achieved! :dev2:

In order to keep up with air-frame attrition and retaliatory counter strikes by the USN, the “only” thing this strategy needs are lots and lots of air-frames and decks to launch them from. Which is easier said than done.

At the end of the day unless you can catch the USN napping (could happen), and lucky missile / torpedo gets through, it will become a numbers game, at which the USN is the absolute king of the hill.

The F35 is still only an offer so far. Its not even sure the IN will be interested in them.

Further the IN has always been ahead of the other branches as far as domestic development and production goes. So if they want to use the HFx (navy), they are pretty sure they can use it and have good use for it. Being the smallest of the three branches and with the tightest budget for the most expensive equipment (on a per unit basis), they have a proven record of not wasting money.

If they reject it, most observers would not be upset. They have a splendid history wrt indiginization – starting with the little bits and pieces, then the larger ones and now with complete ships such Shivaliks, Kolkatas and the IAC.

I agree with holding off on purchase of the second fighter type. If in the future the PAK-FA or the F35 is deemed suitable and desireable by the navy, then go for by all means.

Abhimanyu,

I absolutely agree with you. I have no problem with them purchasing 100s of aircraft, even if foreign. However when this is done by discouraging indiginization and underfunding by the GoI, it really is annoying.

As regards the jholawalla’s – sadly I suspect you are correct. There seems to be no other explanation of this behavior from them.

Witcha,

The Mig29 and derivatives seem good enough, there is no need for another aircraft type as you so rightly mention.

Since the Vik already has plans for the MiGs and the IACs are being constructed with plans for both the MiGs and the naval variant of the HF?? – Tejas, there really is no need of a thrid type of aircraft like the F35.

As regards the Naval variant of the HF??- Tejas, the IN has shown itself perfectly capable of and eager for indiginization, hence if they do reject it it really would taken as something the navy really could not use. Even then there seems to be little use for the F35 flying IN colours over the Indian Ocean.

The agreement to inform each other is for balistic missile tests – not for cruise missile tests.

Nick_76,

I understand the deal will help a lot of struggling officers in the MoD and IAF.

Still thats Rs. 4,310 crores for SIX aircraft (albeit with training and spares)! This price can buy India 16 additional MiG 29Ks (with spares, armaments and training), or 3 more fully equipped Talwar class frigates!

Why not just give Rs. 100-200 crore to IIT-KGP or some such and have them develop J/RATO packs for the AN32s. There’s your short field T/O capability right there at < 5% the cost.

Here’s what I see/feel recently. The IAF and the IA have been acting like spoilt children whose parents have come into more disposable income. They are in sweet-shop heaven and want to taste every available sweet in the shop. When India couldn’t afford to buy or was shut out from 1st world goodies at 1st world prices they were satisfied with what India got for them and did well anyway.

An interesting fact – After the ’71 war, every budget speech has included words to the effect “for defence – Rs. xxxx crore. More will be provided whenever needed”.

The last part of that statement was never implemented. That is till Kargil in 1999. In 1999 the NDA did 2 things never done till then. They prosecuted a war against invaders inspite of being an outgoing caretaker government, and they “provided more Rs. to defence when needed” for immediate spending. When they were re-elected, as part of their election manifesto, they acceded to almost every budget demand from the armed forces.

The present UPA govt. can’t be seen to be soft on defence. So like the previous NDA govt. they allocate 2.1%-2.2% of GDP to defence almost automatically as a mantra – no questions asked.

With growing GDP this has resulted in unspent budget allocations which have to be sent back to the FinMin central kitty at the end of the budget year. Only to be “clawed out” again in the subsequent financial year. So now the IAF and the IA attempt to spend everything given to them before their sweet-shop money is taken away.

This particular purchase to me seems to be one of those frivolous buys being made to use up their current and future budget allocations, thats all.

IMHO the armed forces of India need to be made accountable for the money they request and spend. In todays world its the MoD which answers for their budget. The babus of the MoD don’t question why a particular piece of CapEx is requested, however the MoD babucracy controls the armed forces by loosening the CAG of India on them. So we get these strange reports from CAG saying that “the army bought 536 rocket launchers, when they (the army) has stated they needed 512 rocket launchers! This resulted in in unnecessary expenditure of 3 crores with the purchase of 24 unnecessary extra rocket launchers”.

Some way needs to be found to make the armed forces more directly responsible for their budget requests. Frivolous (to me) purchases such as 6 130Js for a billion+ dollar spend needs to stopped dead! That money can be better spent elsewhere.

I know above is a little long, but if you look at some recent IAF and IA purchases / wish-lists some of their CapEx decisions start to make a weird sort of sense.

Just a general rant not directed towards anyones post.

Robban,

You say you do not have information about both aircraft, yet you insist the Gripen is better! :rolleyes:

Doesn’t work that way. Opinion does not count, since you say the Gripen is better, you must provide verifiable proof. Saying its wing sweep and twist makes it better than the LCA holds no meaning. Another will come along and say the Tejas’ wing sweep and twist makes it better than the Gripen.

Who to believe? Your opinion or anothers opinion? Both opinions are equally useless without verifiable proof.

BTW wing twist and wing sweep DO NOT affect turn rate. In a turn, the wing provides no or very little lift. Thats a fact. Hence the reason why the turn rate formula does not take lift into account. Since these are proven and used on a daily basis on aircraft undertaking millions of turns a year, I will stick with them, rather than your rather biased opinion. Unless you can prove it to be wrong of-course, then I will be glad to learn something new from you.

Further maximum ITR is affected by how soon the airframe can reach corner velocity. With approximately the same thrust and 700 kg less weight, the Tejas has a corner velocity about 100 kph lower than the Gripen. Hence better turn rate.

As regards “instability” both the Gripen and the Tejas are “instable”. So what? How does that effect how quickly corner velocity is reached to achieve maximum ITR.

Once ITR has been achieved and the aircraft continues to maintain its turn, velocity sloughs off the airframe. At this time since velocity has dropped max g cannot be sustained, hence turn rate will decrease. When the pilot continues to maintain the turn, that is when sustained turn rates are observed. The formula for calculating Sustained Turn Rate is the same as that for calculating Instantaneous Turn Rate. Only the STR changes dynamically as its velocity drops off during the turn. No secret wing twists and wing sweeps will make an airframe behave significantly differently.