I’m not saying the LPD incident was in any way America’s fault, just that the sale hardly resulted in improved US-India relations.

That is not true, The p8 and other orders came after that. Would you believe me that IAF is holding back its procurement of attack choppers so that Bell and Boeing can get their bids in ?

India is a large country with a billion people, so there is going to be considerable opposition to friendly relationship with the U.S, when you got a billion you will get a few million for any cause !

Don’t go by the news papers with left parties staging anti American protests, its hardly a measure of India, U.S relations. The Ruling party and the Opposition is committed to the strategic alliance, and they are going to be taking turns in the Union Government for the foreseeable future.

All of which fall under the normal FMS heading of ‘you give us the cash and press these buttons and we’ll do the rest’. And the ex-LPD is hardly a great example for a nice warm strategic relationship, now is it?

The incident on the LPD which led to the death of several sailors can hardly be blamed on its previous operators. Unless you listen to the communist parties of India who are Anti-American in every sense of the word.

The simple fact is Scot that the IN isnt the USN. The IN is not going to be building a dozen strike carriers. They’ll have 2 duty flat-tops one on each coast. They will not be invading China on the strength of they deployable naval aviation potential and they will not be steaming down under for a spot of Lebensraum on Bondi….though you may forgive them the endeavor.

There is going to be 3 carriers by 2025. The thrid will never be on permanent re fit. Indian navy is seeking to be a true bluewater navy, I think the Third ship will be doing port visits and travelling around the world, projecting our Naval power. 🙂

India wouldn’t even start getting their first F-35s until most likely 2025 at the earliest.

Which is exactly what i said 10-15 years 🙂

In the meantime, they have two other fifth generation projects of their own which I can see no reason for not developing for carrier use if they so chose. And that’s in addition to all the strategic reasons Jonesy’s already stated.

The MCA is not even in the design phase. The PAK FA is intended to replace the SU 27 in the Russian Arsenal so we can expect a big fighter like the Raptor which is hardly ideal for operating out of the IACs.

The third point is that The Carriers are going to be in service for a long time, so its highly unlikely that large conventional fighters are going to operate out of Indian carriers by that timeframe.

Hard to see, if the IN wanted to spend the money on a more capable and future-proof solution why they would have to wait for F-35C?.

The point is that IAF do not want to do that now, and indications are that the Vikramaditya and the IACs cannot operate the Rafale M or the SH (debatable).

We are looking at a 10-15 year timescale when India will have 3 Aircraft carriers in service, and China will have about 2, they will be operating SU 33 and we Mig 29 and LCA ( which is hardly ideal).

F 35B can operate easily out of the smaller Ski Jump carriers we are going to have and should ideally replace the Mig 29s in atleast the two IACs. These are designed with the help of Fincantieri which has built the Cavour for Italy, The Cavour is going to be operating the F 35.

And Jonsey, India has plans to build a true Blue water navy, that is why it is acquiring three carriers and up to 6-8 Nuclear submarines. So your argument about punitive short range strikes do not hold water.

There is one simple fact here, India cannot compete with China on sheer numbers, It should have a qualitative edge over the Chinese carriers and for that Mig 29K or dare I say SH is not ideal. Because the Su 33 or the Chinese copy of it can also evolve.

Its possible :). Not given reality. Very easily possible infact. Even Archaic Aussie Hornets have those,

This article is a bit deceptive. The weight increase may be compensated for by increase in thrust , that would be a good thing to do , however the wing performance cannot be compensated for by an increase in thrust. What this article is is speaking of is the T2W ratio being maintained by upping the thrust in accordance with the weight .

Actually the article does not say anything like that, what it does say is that the added weight don’t affect the ‘renowned’ aerodynamic performance.

. Otherwise to really maintain parity they would have had to re design the wing which would have been very costly , time consuming , expensive and pointless!!

They could have used the Mitsubishi F2 aiframe 🙂

smart move, and if one day a Shiite gains power, they’ll turn it right back at the US.

Time for weapon testing then, the real combat efficency of JSF and F 22 vs legacy fighters to be demonstrated etc etc.