JonSSo let us watch how much weaponsload the ‘MiG-29K new’ will lift-off operating in tropical waters really?!
What amount of ‘wind over the deck’ is in need to operate those MiGs safely and do not restrict the tactical movement of the carrier too much by that?!
How many years of carrier operations have those MiGs accumulated so far?!
So let us wait and see!
too lazy to google? Mig-29k requires <90 meters for NTOW from stobar and <190 meters for MTOW from stobar however this was using RD-33K with 8300 kg of thrust. As for the wind over deck it was claimed that it can operate 90% efficiency with 10 knot wind over deck.
The RN and its Harriers took several years of experiences before to become usefull tool in the end.
You are comparing VTOL/STOVL aircraft with Mig-29k :rolleyes: anyway it has been flying from kuznetsov for 7 years back when it was in devolopment and has been flying for last couple years as well.
JonSthreaten to pull out off iraq that should get US to cooperate, its time blair learned how to play foreign politics rather than be a Yes man to bush
JonSWanshan
If you can fly a fully loaded F8 Crusader (34,000 lbs) of Foch, you should be able to fly an F/A-18 equipped for a fighter mission (36,710 lbs) of it as well .
shouldnt the landing speed of those aircrafts also matter, F-8 landing speed is very low around 100 knots hornet should be more than that.
JonSIf the US offered India one of the Forrestals, would India accept? Would be neat to see SU-33s and MIG-29s operating off one of them. But, I suupose they too manpower intensive….
Many of the forrestal that are in storage are in very poor condition they aint no viraat even thou they are the same age.
Or is there a rule, that Rafale, F-22, F-35 run into development problems always, when in Russia or India the Fulcrums and Flankers do not?
Well the difference being US is reinventing the wheel with those two ACs, were as Mig-29k is nothing revolutionary. Anyway isnt the fact that its already undergoing production make you whole argument invalid. As for Su-33 for gorshkov or ADS its unlikely because flankers greatest advantage payload is negated when having to takeoff from ski jump.
JonSAbout India there is a lot of “ifs” too in the same way as you guessing prices for Rafale. I wrote before that the MiG-29K had no competition, because of ‘stobar’.
how is there any ifs i am basing on price dassault its offering to RSAF only “if” is that rafale-m probably end up costing more than rafale-c which i didnt take into account.
Yeah i read that you said mig-29k had no competition but then you flip flopped and said it costs no less to than any competing fighters IN could have purchased instead. Thats what this whole argument is about.
But it will not get a cheap one compared to its competitors.
JonSsa-n-1 is decent its comparable to the early sea dart, there was plans to upgrade it with wonder what happened. As for replacing it with shtil fiting in the launcher shouldnt be a problem but fiting in fregat and orekh will be a hassle. Probably be simpler to just fit in more barak instead.
Don’t think the Kashins are going to be retired anytime soon.
isnt INS rajput close to 25 yrs old most russian vessels in IN arsenal havent been operational longer than that?
JonSThe ‘fly-away’ price will be ~ 50 Mio €. When more Rafale are sold, the share of development cost for each aircraft drops accordingly. Dassault is clever enough to do a mixed calculation over a longer period to get that orders.
i love how you make so much assumptions the keyword there being “if” more rafale are sold, so IN should just wait another decade for the price for rafale to drop before procuring them :rolleyes: . IN needs them know not 10 yrs down the road, Considering how dassault is asking currently for 100 million+ for the rafale i doubt they will reduce their price. A squadron of Rafale will easily cost about $ 2 billion+ all costs included.
Anyway the key issue with rafale is not mainly price also its takeoff ability from stobar, orginally rafale was considered when IN considered catapults for gorshkov since thats ruled out. I dont see how rafale can takeoff from stobar expecially with france’s lack of experience with stobar.
JonSWhy would the IN get them cheaper than taiwan?
because it was tied with US military aid so there is little leverage in negotiating the price.
JonSHawkeye 2000 would be the most advanced such system around (i think it is upgrade/increment to the advanced hawkeye or the other way around)..I would go for them if i was the IN provided that there are some FAVOURABLE CLAUSES in the contract (something that the pentagon and white house have been inclined on doing lately)..however i am not certain of its capability to TOAL on the ADMRL. GORKSH. and/or the new indegenous carrier.
IN ruled out E-2C for solely gorshkov. But IN has requirement for some land based AWACS support since you cant really count on IAF to provide that with just 3 Phalcon’s, I think it will be considered along with drdo’s revived AWACS programme. Fact that it can probably land and takeoff from gorshkov near empty if needed to would make hawkeye attractive (and be refueled by Mig-29k ) and from what I read it isn’t too expensive. Taiwan paid around 180 million each, IN could probably get it for little cheaper 150 mill?
JonSWell, if NK decides to try anything in the next three years, they may or may not get a shot off; with the Bush Doctrine we’d attack them preemptively 😀
wasnt there a recent poll in SK which indicated most of population would back NKorea if a war were break out between NK and US?
JonSBarak already on Rajput class????!! Or merely projected to be?
its rumoured to have been fitted on two rajputs, dont know if IN wants to fit them on first three since they will be retired soon.
JonSDo you have personal problems? When running out of arguments, there is no reason to get personal.
sigh do you actually have any proof to back up any of your arguments or just make those up as you go on just like you did on the normal weight of Mig-29 argument a while back.
If the next generation Rafale is much more expensive, is questionable by that, as long as we do not know if the software development for the MiG-29K runs on shedule.
Lets start with rafale not being more expensive you do realise the unit cost is 63 million each and thats how much French navy spent, a customised export version will surely cost more (around 100 million each for dassault’s Rafale bid for RSAF requirement from what i recall). And once again were did u hear that software devolopment wasnt on schedule or is it more opinion without facts, especially considering mig-29k already hitting production.
Bars-29 and the other stuff are just options on offer and we do not know if they will ever taken really.
I do not question, that India will get a capable naval fighter. But it will not get a cheap one compared to its competitors.
As for your argument on bars-29 and Rd-43 if they are eventually devoloped why wouldnt IN purchase them, especially considering as i mentioned before RD-43 was to be part of SMT-II from which current Mig-29k is derrived from mainly.
As for your argument on cost were is the proof on that, so you are claiming that rafale,f-18E all cost less than 29k while their base price alone for either aircraft is 60 million.
JonSThere were just two prototypes from 1992. Not fully tested and certificated to start with. When all the 16 MiG-29 K/UKs are new ones, they all will be “hand-built”. 700+ Mio $ is with weaponary too I hope.
fully “hand built”? just because its 8 per year lmao BS. You do realise Dassault and boeing also takes that long/or longer to build if the order was miniscule(fyi it took dassault 4+ yr to deliver the 10 M-2000-H). Heck hal is building mki at pace of 14 per year so by your logic those planes are hand build. Anyway mig-29k deal includes training/simulators and probably some R&D as well, either way its much lower than the cost of rafale-m.
As for bars-29 and Rd-43 with TVC currently they are still being devoloped there manufacturers are hopeful that they will completed and be ready for testing soon. Too late for first batch of Mig-29ks but IN wants those for its Mig-29. They will likely be incoporated into later blocs of Mig-29ks if IN chooses to buy 30 more.
JonS[QUOTE=crobato]Look whose talking about flaming. You got to be one of those idiots jumping at FC-1/Pakistan topics.
more childish namecalling and you say i am flaming. Besides when was that i flamed, only thing i recall doing was correcting what the pakistani oracle said.
In the Luhai it was meant as a stopgap, but then the VLS system originally meant for the Luhai could not come to be back in the ’90s. So it was rebuilt for the HQ-7/reloader. But then, look at the new 051s being built in Dalian that is very likely to have VLS.
as usual i assume you have proof to back it up or are you once again acting like the chinese oracle, how is 051 have anything to do with this?
You don’t have to retrofit a vessel if you plan it well ahead enough.
Some how china knew ahead to design the vessel for vl-shtil :rolleyes: once again more prophecy’s and no proofs to back it up? Let see even if you ignore the whole issue of topweight problems or power requirements, there is the still the problem of integrating different Systems. So you’re basically what you are saying is that china build a magic “plug n play” FFG that can fitted with any SAM or weapon system that will be available in the near future. Mk 41, Aster, VL-shtil, rif-m etc all you have to strap one of systems on into 054 and its good to go. May be USN should build some of these instead of LCS eh.
JonSFlame wars and other BS? I see you one of the main sources of it in this forum. Yeah, you expressed an OPINION. And I disagreed with you and I pointed out no one else supports that opinion. Then you go off tangent by calling members of the Chinese forums 13 year olds?
right what was the last flame war i got into?, everytime someone expresses some opinion thats contradictory to yours you flame at them all the J-10 topics are prime example of that. Anyway i am not even touch such this subject, when did people posting in the internet become valid enough source for factual information.
It is not similar to it. It is exactly like it. There is no point for a size increase since from the beginning the 054 is large enough to carry such systems, but resorted to using the HQ-7 with reload when the appropriate SAM system isn’t available yet. The HQ-7 with reload is a stopgap.
And i assume you once again have facts or some evidence to back it up or is just one of those claims like when you guys claimed that HQ-7 in JW-III and Luhai etc were stop gapmeasures last i recall those vessels have yet to be fitted with anything new. For VL system to fitted on it it would require extensive structural modifications (ie deck penetration).
Rarely has a large VLS system been retrofitted on a vessel already built because of the issues like cost, time and top weight issues (the french have yet to fit aster onto la fayette due to those reasons).
Not to mention there is a gap between the launcher and the hatch. So overall, there is more than enough space for that to fit 12 VLS cells. Just remember, that the octel launcher with reloader is already holding 16 missiles between the two of them in this given area. The fact that 054 has HQ-7 plus reloader makes it quite bigger than the Jiangweis, and the size increase built into the 054 isn’t just there for the benefit of the HQ-7s.
No its not 12 vls cells its 2 to 4 rows of 12 vls cells or is that what the experts told you? So what you are suggesting is that china knew the specs of VL-shtil in late 90s and was able to make accomdations for it in 054 which seems rather inplausible.
IMO both 54 and 54a will be procured, 054 FFG will be built in large nos as cheap pocket destroyers and will replace older PLAN ffg. Whereas the latter will be procured in small batches to serve as Multi purpose FFG.
Sign In
