Aircraft Carrier Based AWACS for Indian Navy Importance

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
I think the Osprey is a good option. Already the forces have expressed interest in it. It takes away the need of a catapult which is a high maintanence system.

The MKI with it's 8000 mms range can be called in from Pune if required.
The Osprey is only going to serve as the US marines fast trasport platform.

Can you imagine the cost required to get it modified for AEW/AWAC useage, and will the costs be justified for 4 to 6 platforms.

May be if we are able to get all of the other nations planning or operating small to medium carriers with out catapults, even in that scenario we will loose the biggest of the player, UK which is constructing two carriers and has rejected the osprey option.

Navy Matters | Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control

The MKI is not a AEW/AWAC, its radar can only look in one direction and it is extremly limited in the numbers of targets it can detect and track when compared to a AEW/AWAC, a AEW/AWAC also has crew which is dedicated towards scanning the skies, and instructing friendly forces to respond to all the threats.

The MKI has two people who have to do a host of tasks already.

E-2 Hawk eye
Crew: 5 (2 pilots, 3 naval flight officers - combat information center officer, air control officer, radar operator)

The Lockheed Martin AN/APS-145 radar is capable of tracking more than 2,000 targets and controlling the interception of 40 hostile targets. One radar sweep covers six million cubic miles. The radar's total radiation aperture control antenna reduces sidelobes and is robust against electronic countermeasures. It is capable of detecting aircraft at ranges greater than 550km. The Lockheed Martin AN/UYQ-70 advanced display system and computer peripherals provide operators with multicolour displays, map overlays, zoom facilities and auxiliary data displays.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/hawkeye/

Bars radar on Su-30 MKI

Target detection range, km:
air-to-air mode 60-140
air-to-surface mode 40-150
Number of simultaneously tracked targets: not more than 15
Number of simultaneously attacked targets: 4


http://www.rusarm.ru/cataloque/airf0rces_cataloque.html
 
J

John

Guest
more P-8s, possibly more C-130J orders as well, The V-22s being mobile and versatile, C-17s, Chinooks, Apaches and i think AEGIS will come to India, eventually even the KC-777.

N-MCA, is possible but in order to do that we have to perfect N-LCA-mk2 and all associated technology and then we could develop N-MCA to be launched using magnetic catapults. But i don't this happening before 2025. unless until we start thinking about N-MCA and start working on it, it wont come till 2025 and beyond. Aegis will be acquired for P-17A, they will be armed with, MR-SAM, SM2/3 missiles, Brahmos-2 hypersonic cruise missiles and Nirbhay. We'll need to start work on nuke carriers and bigger bommers by 2015 and get them ready by 2020-2022.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Right, sure, in the long run, the long run in naval affairs is 2050.

And we have to build up to it, not waste money building that capability now.
Aren't we already working for it. Our first Nuclear powered Sub will be out soon, our ADS will be ready. In the future you will see larger nuclear powered ACs, which the Navy has already planned post 2020.

So, what do you want? You want technology and then not pay for it. Buying catapults technology will be more expensive than building our own. Buying foreign technology is always more expensive than going indigenous.

Look around France is a great power, far ahead of us in military technology, we will be lucky to be at the same level in a 2025 scenario.
France no longer has the kind of funds necessary to expand. They are merely replacing their old capability rather than building new ones. They are obviously much more advanced, but, it doesn't take away the fact that the IN don't want to sit with foreign maal in the long run. We have to spend both ways. We have to buy foreign technology and build our own too.

Perhaps looking at the mountain of trouble we have in constructing the scorpene submarines would be a simple example.
ToT and construction of foreign systems is significantly harder than building our own. Our delays with the Shivalik class Frigate is proof of that. But, at the same time the indigenous Delhi class Destroyer took far lesser time.

So you will launch a P-8 like aircraft from a aircraft carrier, what aircraft carrier would this be a 5,00,000 ton aircraft carrier?
LOL. No. You were talking about expenses incurred when inducting 4-6 AWACS. So, I got back with IN plans to buy 30 wide bodied aircraft. So, what's 6 carrier AWACS. You are looking at India being poor even in 2020. Our purchasing power will get a boost and so will research and development . We won't need any more foreign help by then.

None of the aircrafts indian navy, airforce or army is going to purchase in by 2022 is fit for the role of a carrier based AEW/AWAC plane which will have to be stored in the hangers of the aircraft carrier, repaired in the hanger, and launch from the aircraft carrier.
We may have one, we may not. But, it doesn't take away the fact that the India of today will not be the same India of 2020. We will need larger carriers and IN has plans for it. So, do expect Carrier borne AWACS by then.
 

Vikramaditya

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
702
Likes
321
Country flag
I think "V22 Osprey" or "P 8i" with DRDO AWACS will be better.
V22 Osprey and P 8i
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
Aren't we already working for it. Our first Nuclear powered Sub will be out soon, our ADS will be ready. In the future you will see larger nuclear powered ACs, which the Navy has already planned post 2020.

So, what do you want? You want technology and then not pay for it. Buying catapults technology will be more expensive than building our own. Buying foreign technology is always more expensive than going indigenous.
From the existing nations with nuclear submariens and aircraft carrier it seems that the nuclear propulsion(reactor, reactor shielding, and the power to propulsion)on submariens and aircraft carrier are two different things, we have to start on the reactor for the aircraft carrier if we want it operational by 2020-2025, and that requires efforts now.

The current IAC project (it’s not called the air defence ship anymore). Design study, engines, vessel design, propulsion plant, power plant, construction, sea trials, we needed help in all of these fields.

A 2022 planed start for a nuclear carrier with catapults, advanced propulsion and power distribution can not be completely indigenous, its not possible in 11-13 years, we should pace ourselves correctly instead of putting our head into every single problem on earth.

How on earth will developing catapults for a class of two carriers be more economical than purchasing them?

Developing indigenous technology is beneficial
When the indigenous requirement to offset costs exists.
When we are sure there is a market for the technology we have developed.
When the technology is not available without making a major compromise, or its not available at all.

The catapults are not something that would be a major technological no no for export.
The nuclear reactor for the ship will not be made available to us; we need to source the resources towards that.

France no longer has the kind of funds necessary to expand. They are merely replacing their old capability rather than building new ones.

They are obviously much more advanced, but, it doesn't take away the fact that the IN don't want to sit with foreign maal in the long run. We have to spend both ways. We have to buy foreign technology and build our own too.
Look at the direct military presence France has outside of its own nation, and look at their military programs, even in the next 10-15 years timeframe they even far more research and development projects going on (hence it doesnot look like they want to remain stagnant).

Obviously we have to, but not at the cost of current capability, and not with school boy optimism, it has to be cold calculative and rational, the funds we have are required at several places at the same time.
ToT and construction of foreign systems is significantly harder than building our own. Our delays with the Shivalik class Frigate is proof of that. But, at the same time the indigenous Delhi class Destroyer took far lesser time.
Kolkata and Shivalik class have had several problems, including problems as simple as getting the requirements right and changing them midway, the Delhi class had a its share of imported equipment along with consulting in design and integration.
When the technology is unavailable it has to be imported or developed.
Developing our own technology that is equal and above the global standards is the most difficult part and that requires generations of successive designs, meanwhile we can not (in an environment as active as ours) compromise on the quality of the equipment we provide to the military forces.
LOL. No. You were talking about expenses incurred when inducting 4-6 AWACS.

So, I got back with IN plans to buy 30 wide bodied aircraft. So, what's 6 carrier AWACS. You are looking at India being poor even in 2020. Our purchasing power will get a boost and so will research and development.

We won't need any more foreign help by then.
We are not paying for the development of the complete aircrafts the modification of a available plane into a LRMP plane like the P-8I can reach figures of 40-50 billion dollars for a nation that has experience in building the components and take up to a decade to complete.

You expect our industry to churn out a more difficult new design for a carrier based AEW/AWAC in similar time for a production line that might churn out 4 to 6 airframes, sounds kind of complicated especially by 2022 as there are no current plans to go towards that direction.

It might be better to concentrate on coming out with a improved generation of the current AWAC that DRDO is working on (based on a Brazilian plane and waiting for consulting on integration). Because that plane will have a bigger domestic and possibly international demand, if we succeed in meeting our own expectations then we should then concentrate on a naval AEW/AWAC version which has something common with the land based version to offset the costs.
We may have one, we may not. But, it doesn't take away the fact that the India of today will not be the same India of 2020. We will need larger carriers and IN has plans for it. So, do expect Carrier borne AWACS by then.
We have only one way to go that’s up, so by 2020 we will be a different nation, however for the things you said, I Won’t hold my breadth.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
From the existing nations with nuclear submariens and aircraft carrier it seems that the nuclear propulsion(reactor, reactor shielding, and the power to propulsion)on submariens and aircraft carrier are two different things, we have to start on the reactor for the aircraft carrier if we want it operational by 2020-2025, and that requires efforts now.
The ATV's nuclear reactor is a part of the process. We began all of this in the 90s. It takes less than 6 years to build a portable Nuclear reactor and goes critical.

The current IAC project (it’s not called the air defence ship anymore). Design study, engines, vessel design, propulsion plant, power plant, construction, sea trials, we needed help in all of these fields.
You can expect JVs rather than imports. It's already happening.

A 2022 planed start for a nuclear carrier with catapults, advanced propulsion and power distribution can not be completely indigenous, its not possible in 11-13 years, we should pace ourselves correctly instead of putting our head into every single problem on earth.
This is military technology. Your head is always in the earth when you begin.
BARC attempted making a nuclear reactor for the ATV and failed. We did see some Russian involvement in this process and we succeeded at IGCAR. But don't expect it to be replicated again and again and again. After some point foreign help in no longer required. Now we can build our own reactors.

Catapults isn't some alien technology, especially when we have designed our own fighter. It is very simple. It is not being used around the world mainly because of its maintenance and the size of the carriers.

How on earth will developing catapults for a class of two carriers be more economical than purchasing them?
It's always cheaper to develop, build and invest the profits in our own country rather than letting money go out.

Developing indigenous technology is beneficial
When the indigenous requirement to offset costs exists.
Offsets almost always exist when foreign deals are struck and not with Indian companies. Offsets are meant to keep all the money in the country, which is one of the main points of indeginization anyways.

When we are sure there is a market for the technology we have developed.
That is no guarantee. Look at Arjun, it has no market. It may have been a loss but DRDO is going to modify Arjun even further for later. Those are the risks you have to take.

Half of Russian and American products developed have not been sold, only prototypes.

IN is always a reliable customer.

When the technology is not available without making a major compromise, or its not available at all.
That's silly. In this case we have no choice but to go indigenous. But, that's no reason to say this option is to be exercised all the time even with technology that can be produced in house.

The catapults are not something that would be a major technological no no for export.
We don't need it to be exported. It is a very simple technology that can be built in house.

The nuclear reactor for the ship will not be made available to us; we need to source the resources towards that.
We have been building our own since a decade. We are working on a number of reactors for our 3 ATVs that's to be ready by 2012-2015.

Look at the direct military presence France has outside of its own nation, and look at their military programs, even in the next 10-15 years timeframe they even far more research and development projects going on (hence it doesnot look like they want to remain stagnant).
That's not the point. The French military spends more on research than most militaries. I am comparing French economy to American, Russian and Japanese and Chinese and Indian in the future. The French Navy is a modest force that is technologically and numerically similar to the Indian Navy. It's far from a Great Power. It's simply a regional power.

Obviously we have to, but not at the cost of current capability, and not with school boy optimism, it has to be cold calculative and rational, the funds we have are required at several places at the same time.
It is no school boy optimism. We are setting up our foundation and in a few years we will reap it.

Private Sector Shipyards To Build Naval Vessels | India Defence Online

Private players are entering the fray too. L&T is already involved in building the ATV and are looking at the Scorpenes too. Expect major involvement by the private players pretty soon.

Kolkata and Shivalik class have had several problems, including problems as simple as getting the requirements right and changing them midway, the Delhi class had a its share of imported equipment along with consulting in design and integration.
The Shivaliks are modernized Krivaks. Nothing major. It is basically a customized Russian ship. The Delhi Class and Kolkata class had troubles that were handled in house. The propulsion systems and electronics are foreign. No big deal when the entire ship was designed and built on our own.

We are soon giving out tenders for a new batch of stealth frigates for JVs. That's the way to go. Importing is no longer an option for something that can be built at home.

When the technology is unavailable it has to be imported or developed.
Developing our own technology that is equal and above the global standards is the most difficult part and that requires generations of successive designs, meanwhile we can not (in an environment as active as ours) compromise on the quality of the equipment we provide to the military forces.
That's where JVs come into the picture. Most of the money stays home and we get the experience required to build something good.

We are not paying for the development of the complete aircrafts the modification of a available plane into a LRMP plane like the P-8I can reach figures of 40-50 billion dollars for a nation that has experience in building the components and take up to a decade to complete.
There are some things which we can do and some which we cannot. We don't have a major aerospace industry to build wide bodied aircraft. Even with an investment of $40-$50Billion we cannot build a P-8. But, modifying existing aircraft to carry our own radar is not difficult. Embraer is expected to complete our first AWACS in 3 years for less than a billion $.

You expect our industry to churn out a more difficult new design for a carrier based AEW/AWAC in similar time for a production line that might churn out 4 to 6 airframes, sounds kind of complicated especially by 2022 as there are no current plans to go towards that direction.
I gave 2020-22 as the starting date for all big ticket ventures like large displacement SSBNs, LPDs, ACs and HCs. It is a modest date quoted by Admirals too. Foreign players will continue to participate.

It might be better to concentrate on coming out with a improved generation of the current AWAC that DRDO is working on (based on a Brazilian plane and waiting for consulting on integration). Because that plane will have a bigger domestic and possibly international demand, if we succeed in meeting our own expectations then we should then concentrate on a naval AEW/AWAC version which has something common with the land based version to offset the costs.
So, that means the CAEW will be ready by 2012, perhaps 2015 and then we work on a N-AWACS. So, thats after the 2015 period. So, expect it to be ready by 2018 or 2020. Modest. That's when manufacture of our 5th gen prototypes will commence.

We have only one way to go that’s up, so by 2020 we will be a different nation, however for the things you said, I Won’t hold my breadth.
JVs and better management is the way to go.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
The E-2 will make a better AEW aircraft compared to the Osprey. A major requirement for any aircraft to be an AWACS is the service ceiling. The E-2 is better at that.

The Charles de Gaulle is of the same size and displacement as that of the Vikrant class. The French Carrier operates the E-2. Unfortunately a CATOBAR system is a requirement. So, don't expect any AWACS on our first 3 carriers.
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
The ATV's nuclear reactor is a part of the process. We began all of this in the 90s. It takes less than 6 years to build a portable Nuclear reactor and goes critical.
We still have to mate the reactor and get the mechanism to transmit the power, the french had similar problems with their nuclear propulsion with K-15 reactors on CdG

You can expect JVs rather than imports. It's already happening.
JVs on projects related to the nuclear powered aircraft carrier, where would you find the partners from?

Any nations outside Russia do not seem to have similar plans; well PRC is there however they are a bit of a problem JV-wise.
This is military technology. Your head is always in the earth when you begin.
BARC attempted making a nuclear reactor for the ATV and failed. We did see some Russian involvement in this process and we succeeded at IGCAR. But don't expect it to be replicated again and again and again. After some point foreign help in no longer required. Now we can build our own reactors.

Catapults isn't some alien technology, especially when we have designed our own fighter. It is very simple. It is not being used around the world mainly because of its maintenance and the size of the carriers.
Nuclear reactor, all electric propulsion, EMAL.

Steam won’t sustain in a 2030 ocean.
It's always cheaper to develop, build and invest the profits in our own country rather than letting money go out.
Not if the class has two ships to distribute all the development costs and the next development is 30 years away.
Offsets almost always exist when foreign deals are struck and not with Indian companies. Offsets are meant to keep all the money in the country, which is one of the main points of indeginization anyways.
Not that offset, the total requirement that offsets (counterbalance) the development costs over a number of items produced.
That is no guarantee. Look at Arjun, it has no market. It may have been a loss but DRDO is going to modify Arjun even further for later. Those are the risks you have to take.

Half of Russian and American products developed have not been sold, only prototypes.

IN is always a reliable customer.
Arjun had projections of domestic requirement in the region of 1000-2000 tanks, no export orders were requierd, if the Army chooses to induct it with all the imported parts developed inhouse under lisence/JVs we still have a good deal.

Soviets and Americans were in a global arms race, and had become the only two world super powers; we are far away from that level.

Outside of that, i think prototypes that do not make it to the main force reflect more of a nations defence industry than the ones that make it through.
That's silly. In this case we have no choice but to go indigenous. But, that's no reason to say this option is to be exercised all the time even with technology that can be produced in house.

We don't need it to be exported. It is a very simple technology that can be built in house.
We have a choice, which goes with all the agreement our government is signing.

I am talking about a all electric system EMALS,we should not be stuck with steam post 2020 the carrier will be in service for 30-40 years.
We have been building our own since a decade. We are working on a number of reactors for our 3 ATVs that's to be ready by 2012-2015.
Not for a aircraft carrier.

That's not the point. The French military spends more on research than most militaries. I am comparing French economy to American, Russian and Japanese and Chinese and Indian in the future. The French Navy is a modest force that is technologically and numerically similar to the Indian Navy. It's far from a Great Power. It's simply a regional power.
In that case there is but one great power, it’s the USA.
France is far above us, and more than a regional power.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | French President Sarkozy opens UAE base

The French Military in Africa - Council on Foreign Relations

They are one of the very few nations with independent foreign military bases, outside of global frameworks.

The French navy has had successive generations of nuclear submarines (attack/ballistic), aircraft carriers, helicopter carriers, amphibious assault ships, destroyers, frigates.

How are we technologically similar to them?

It is no school boy optimism. We are setting up our foundation and in a few years we will reap it.

Private Sector Shipyards To Build Naval Vessels | India Defence Online

Private players are entering the fray too. L&T is already involved in building the ATV and are looking at the Scorpenes too. Expect major involvement by the private players pretty soon.
Yes all efforts in the field get us a good crop, that is not a justification for treating ourselves as technology outcasts and give our adversaries a technological edge, an example would be the LCA mark-II it’ll have foreign radar and a foreign engine.

The private sector is entering into the defence market, and the government knows its importance, still plenty of nations around the world have private sector in defence. It’s not a silver bullet.
The Shivaliks are modernized Krivaks. Nothing major. It is basically a customized Russian ship. The Delhi Class and Kolkata class had troubles that were handled in house. The propulsion systems and electronics are foreign. No big deal when the entire ship was designed and built on our own.

We are soon giving out tenders for a new batch of stealth frigates for JVs. That's the way to go. Importing is no longer an option for something that can be built at home.

That's where JVs come into the picture. Most of the money stays home and we get the experience required to build something good.
Delhi class had Russian consulting and design influence, the design method is used in the Shivalik class.

The Shivaliks are being designed and built in India involve the same amount of consulting plus added contracts for issues like signature management, advanced networks, and propulsion, they crossed over the krivaks a long time ago, and it is a major project.

And that’s the way we are going, JVs for importing construction and design tech. Instead of a leap into the complete development (design, engine, propulsion, weapons etc.) ourselves, slow and steady, we are still importing equipment for these ships, instead of just trusting that we would develop them our self.

There are some things which we can do and some which we cannot. We don't have a major aerospace industry to build wide bodied aircraft. Even with an investment of $40-$50Billion we cannot build a P-8. But, modifying existing aircraft to carry our own radar is not difficult. Embraer is expected to complete our first AWACS in 3 years for less than a billion $.

I gave 2020-22 as the starting date for all big ticket ventures like large displacement SSBNs, LPDs, ACs and HCs. It is a modest date quoted by Admirals too. Foreign players will continue to participate.

So, that means the CAEW will be ready by 2012, perhaps 2015 and then we work on a N-AWACS. So, that’s after the 2015 period. So, expect it to be ready by 2018 or 2020. Modest. That's when manufacture of our 5th gen prototypes will commence.
Embraber had the platform ready, once we integrate it completely (have a fully working FOC crossed platform), we will have something very few nations have, a dedicated department working on successive generations of the sensors (the T/R modules).

Still the integration work remains, and I think tenders are to be floated for that, it’s a major part of the equation (Phalcon and Tophat being painful examples), we should let the project finish first instead of putting pressure on the project team by quoting deadlines, no matter how much time and resources they take, it’s a very important step for our nation.

For the Naval AEW/AWAC plane, we would need to identify a plane in the global market that is suitable for marine operation, can be reinforced for catapult assisted take-off and arrested landing. Is large enough to have a good patrol time and house all the sensors and the men, still is small enough to fit into a aircraft carriers hanger. There is only one nation that builds a plane large enough for that purpose and they are clever enough to deny integration of our sensors on their plane.
JVs and better management is the way to go.
True.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
We still have to mate the reactor and get the mechanism to transmit the power, the french had similar problems with their nuclear propulsion with K-15 reactors on CdG
We have managed a much more difficult feat. Integrating a reactor in a sub is much more difficult than in a ship.

JVs on projects related to the nuclear powered aircraft carrier, where would you find the partners from?

Any nations outside Russia do not seem to have similar plans; well PRC is there however they are a bit of a problem JV-wise.
Sarcasm noted. Russia is all we need. No problems. We already jointly developed the current reactor.

Nuclear reactor, all electric propulsion, EMAL.

Steam won’t sustain in a 2030 ocean.
JVs. Nuclear propulsion is no longer as complex now as it had been in 1988.

Not if the class has two ships to distribute all the development costs and the next development is 30 years away.
We are inducting more than just 2 ships of the same class. The next development will happen immediately after the completion of the P-15 project. We are a growing Navy not a stagnant navy.

Soviets and Americans were in a global arms race, and had become the only two world super powers; we are far away from that level.
we will soon be in an arms race with China.

Outside of that, i think prototypes that do not make it to the main force reflect more of a nations defence industry than the ones that make it through.
There is no comparision between the industrial and technological capabilities of the US or Russia compared to India. We do not have many companies vying for a single project in India. It will soon change in a decade. BSNL had to compete with Tata Indicom for setting up a part of the AFNET. If the Viper is chosen in the MRCA deal, LM will be satisfying the offset clause with a JV with Tata in the development of some new systems.

We have a choice, which goes with all the agreement our government is signing.

I am talking about a all electric system EMALS,we should not be stuck with steam post 2020 the carrier will be in service for 30-40 years.
We cannot buy the same technology that is being used on the Nimitz. Even the French go into a JV for developing a catapult system for the CDG. The Nimitz system was obviously too big.

Not for a aircraft carrier.
IN has requirements for much larger capacity reactors. The 80MW reactor is obviously not enough. Expect new reactors in the future.

In that case there is but one great power, it’s the USA.
France is far above us, and more than a regional power.

They are one of the very few nations with independent foreign military bases, outside of global frameworks.
We are getting carried away from what France is now and what India is now. I am talking about the 2020-2030 period. I read a CIA report somewhere that said IN is expected to be among the top 3 in the world by 2025.

France has what, 1 carrier, 4 SSBNs, 6 SSNs, some 20 destroyers and Frigates. And half of them due for retirement. France still cannot setup the funds required for the new carrier she requires.

By 2020 we plane to have some 40 destroyer and Frigates, 3 carriers, 5 SSBNs, 1 or 2 SSNs etc. We are trying to achieve a gola of being a global force by 2030.

Private participation will only increase our ship building capability. In the 2020 period, we are mainly working on replacing our existing ships that are due for retirement. But, post 2020, IN will work on capacity buillding rahter than replacement.

In the future, IN may as well be a 500 ship navy competing with the navies of US, China and Russia.

The French navy has had successive generations of nuclear submarines (attack/ballistic), aircraft carriers, helicopter carriers, amphibious assault ships, destroyers, frigates.

How are we technologically similar to them?
As of date a lot of our ships are imported. With a lot of French equipment. Except for their newest ships and nuclear propulsion, their ships and our ships are almost the same in technology.

Yes all efforts in the field get us a good crop, that is not a justification for treating ourselves as technology outcasts and give our adversaries a technological edge, an example would be the LCA mark-II it’ll have foreign radar and a foreign engine.
Less imports and more JVs in no way makes us technological outcasts. We have so many JVs with Israel and every one of them is world class. We are working on the mayawi suite which will be used on the LCA and Israeli F-35. In 2000, the Israelis built a more advanced version of the Greenpine for us. We are working on new radar systems for our ships.

LCA's radar will be the 2052 initially. DRDO has already initiated the development of a new radar with the Israelis for future LCA variants. As for the engine, how long do you think India will continue using the foreign engines. Maybe in a decade we will have Kaveri on the LCA.

The private sector is entering into the defence market, and the government knows its importance, still plenty of nations around the world have private sector in defence. It’s not a silver bullet.
Private companies have the best management and the projects are almost always well managed. It depends on how well the military is funded and how well the military funds the private sector for development. Do you think LM and Boeing developed the F-22 by themselves? US govt paid most of the money.Also, private companies in ship building means more ships can be built quickly.

Delhi class had Russian consulting and design influence, the design method is used in the Shivalik class.

The Shivaliks are being designed and built in India involve the same amount of consulting plus added contracts for issues like signature management, advanced networks, and propulsion, they crossed over the krivaks a long time ago, and it is a major project.

And that’s the way we are going, JVs for importing construction and design tech. Instead of a leap into the complete development (design, engine, propulsion, weapons etc.) ourselves, slow and steady, we are still importing equipment for these ships, instead of just trusting that we would develop them our self.
This is happening only now. I am talking about a decade in the future, when India has a decade of experience building almost 60 ships for the IN using imported design principles. We have requested for help in modular construction for the new stealth frigates. Do you think, in a decade, we will stand up and ask for help again? No.

After the first few steps we are capable of walking on our own.

Embraber had the platform ready, once we integrate it completely (have a fully working FOC crossed platform), we will have something very few nations have, a dedicated department working on successive generations of the sensors (the T/R modules).

Still the integration work remains, and I think tenders are to be floated for that, it’s a major part of the equation (Phalcon and Tophat being painful examples), we should let the project finish first instead of putting pressure on the project team by quoting deadlines, no matter how much time and resources they take, it’s a very important step for our nation.
Nevertheless, integration is not something that will take an entire decade to acheive. Standardization helped a lot.

For the Naval AEW/AWAC plane, we would need to identify a plane in the global market that is suitable for marine operation, can be reinforced for catapult assisted take-off and arrested landing. Is large enough to have a good patrol time and house all the sensors and the men, still is small enough to fit into a aircraft carriers hanger. There is only one nation that builds a plane large enough for that purpose and they are clever enough to deny integration of our sensors on their plane.
We will find many planes like that. This is a good start.


or this though it was never finished.



The Russians plan on operating 6 ACs. So, expect them to make new aircraft for Carrier aviation. We can get into JVs with Russia if the Americans play spoilsport. After all the deadline is only after 2020.
 

vijaytripoli

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
377
Likes
37
I HAVE READ in some article that India need atleast 100 c-17 galaxy cargo aircrafts and could place a order for that! can somebody confirm?
Thanks in advance!
chau
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
I HAVE READ in some article that India need atleast 100 c-17 galaxy cargo aircrafts and could place a order for that! can somebody confirm?
Thanks in advance!
chau

It is 10 in numbers not 100

In June 2009 the Indian Air Force (IAF) was reported to have selected the C-17 to meet a Very Heavy Lift Transport Aircraft requirement. The service uses the Ilyushin Il-76 for heavy lift. Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Pradeep Vasant Naik has been quoted as saying that the IAF requires ten C-17s. The proposal is being considered by the Indian Ministry of Defence,[76] but an order has not been placed.[77]
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
We have managed a much more difficult feat. Integrating a reactor in a sub is much more difficult than in a ship.
Consider the reactor, power transmission, all electric systems, EMALS, together it is tougher than anything we have done.
Sarcasm noted. Russia is all we need. No problems. We already jointly developed the current reactor.
The only trouble being Russia is as clueless as us when it comes to making a next generation aircraft carrier.
JVs. Nuclear propulsion is no longer as complex now as it had been in 1988.
JVs with whom? Propulsion along with a lot of other requried techs is still difficult, even if one is making another ship of a established class.
We are inducting more than just 2 ships of the same class. The next development will happen immediately after the completion of the P-15 project. We are a growing Navy not a stagnant navy.
The plans are for two medium-large aircraft carriers, and thats it.
we will soon be in an arms race with China.
We are in a arms race with PRC, however they are no USSR or USA.

There is no comparision between the industrial and technological capabilities of the US or Russia compared to India. We do not have many companies vying for a single project in India. It will soon change in a decade. BSNL had to compete with Tata Indicom for setting up a part of the AFNET. If the Viper is chosen in the MRCA deal, LM will be satisfying the offset clause with a JV with Tata in the development of some new systems.
And thats why we have to be careful.

We cannot buy the same technology that is being used on the Nimitz. Even the French go into a JV for developing a catapult system for the CDG. The Nimitz system was obviously too big.
Its a USN Type C13 catapult.

A Electro-Magnetic Launch for Carriers based on a all electric ship is the way to go, the size of the ship doesnot matter, its a system, all it needs is the electricity.
IN has requirements for much larger capacity reactors. The 80MW reactor is obviously not enough. Expect new reactors in the future.
We can expect a whole new design from the reactor, generator to the propulsion, still it will take some more time.

We are getting carried away from what France is now and what India is now. I am talking about the 2020-2030 period. I read a CIA report somewhere that said IN is expected to be among the top 3 in the world by 2025.

France has what, 1 carrier, 4 SSBNs, 6 SSNs, some 20 destroyers and Frigates. And half of them due for retirement. France still cannot setup the funds required for the new carrier she requires.

By 2020 we plane to have some 40 destroyer and Frigates, 3 carriers, 5 SSBNs, 1 or 2 SSNs etc. We are trying to achieve a gola of being a global force by 2030.

Private participation will only increase our ship building capability. In the 2020 period, we are mainly working on replacing our existing ships that are due for retirement. But, post 2020, IN will work on capacity buillding rahter than replacement.

In the future, IN may as well be a 500 ship navy competing with the navies of US, China and Russia.
MN: 1 aircraft carrier, 1 helicopter cruiser, 2 amphibious assault ships, 2 Landing Platform Dock , 23 frigates(official term for destroyer/figates), 9 corvettes, 4 ballistic missile submarines, 6 nuclear attack submarines, with plans to include newer classes of ships the funding problem will remain, its not a good time to allot funds.
IN by 2020: 30 destroyer and frigates, 3 carriers, 3 large amphibious assault ships, the SSBN and SSN part has not been commented on in any details, first 3-5 will lean towards SSBNs.
3 P15A, 4 follow ups to 15A, 3 Delhi class, 7 P17A, 3 shivalik class, 3 modified Talwar Class, 3 Talvar class, 3 BP class, 12-18 corvettes.

Well a lot of things can happen in the future
As of date a lot of our ships are imported. With a lot of French equipment. Except for their newest ships and nuclear propulsion, their ships and our ships are almost the same in technology.
They have rafales taking off and landing from the CdG, they have successive classes of nuclear submarines (SSNs and SSBNs) with a active program working on the next class, they had commissioned the first La Fayette class back in 1996, first of the Horizon class is in service.
Less imports and more JVs in no way makes us technological outcasts. We have so many JVs with Israel and every one of them is world class. We are working on the mayawi suite which will be used on the LCA and Israeli F-35. In 2000, the Israelis built a more advanced version of the Greenpine for us. We are working on new radar systems for our ships.
If JV includes joint development, us it is of great advantage to us.
Israel can not use its home developed systems on the F-35, that is not a option for them.
LCA's radar will be the 2052 initially. DRDO has already initiated the development of a new radar with the Israelis for future LCA variants. As for the engine, how long do you think India will continue using the foreign engines. Maybe in a decade we will have Kaveri on the LCA.
I think the very first LCA planes will have 2032.

May be in a decade, may be in two, however it’s not worth waiting for that to happen before inducting the LCA, and that is what I have been arguing about.

Private companies have the best management and the projects are almost always well managed. It depends on how well the military is funded and how well the military funds the private sector for development. Do you think LM and Boeing developed the F-22 by themselves? US govt paid most of the money.Also, private companies in ship building means more ships can be built quickly.
Yes that will happen, and the US gov. pays the initial amount of money for these projects, however it’s a long time before our private firms start churning out F-22s or Sea wolfs.

It’s a start, lots of distance to cover, many decades probably.

This is happening only now. I am talking about a decade in the future, when India has a decade of experience building almost 60 ships for the IN using imported design principles. We have requested for help in modular construction for the new stealth frigates. Do you think, in a decade, we will stand up and ask for help again? No.
After the first few steps we are capable of walking on our own.
In a decade, we still very well might be importing gas turbines, radars, missiles etc. In a couple of decades we will be exporting all of that.

I do not think the complete indigenous projects are feasible in a 2020 time line.
Nevertheless, integration is not something that will take an entire decade to acheive. Standardization helped a lot.
Not a clue depends on the design, the current array is not that complicated (as compared to the Tophat), however it’s a project that will keep on churning out successive generations for a long time to come, and must not be rushed, its too important.
(Coming up with successive generations of T/R modules will take).
We will find many planes like that. This is a good start.


or this though it was never finished.



The Russians plan on operating 6 ACs. So, expect them to make new aircraft for Carrier aviation. We can get into JVs with Russia if the Americans play spoilsport. After all the deadline is only after 2020.
Both these planes never flew from a carriers catapult so are of no help at all.

I do not even know when they plan to start the design study or the type of designs they are considering, so can not comment on that, they do not seem to have any current capability to design these type of planes, however if they do plan 6 carriers, we can develop a plane with them, at least the risk and costs will be cut down a little.

USA will sell us almost any equipment/technology short of military reactors even consulting from the firms doing the development/construction of the current Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers; they will not however allow us to modify their equipment.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Consider the reactor, power transmission, all electric systems, EMALS, together it is tougher than anything we have done.
No matter how complex it sounds, a mechanical system is always easy to build. We don't have the experience, but it's not difficult.

The only trouble being Russia is as clueless as us when it comes to making a next generation aircraft carrier.
Er. So is that an excuse to not work on it at all. The Soviets were working on the Ulyanovsk(85k Tons) before the breakup.

JVs with whom? Propulsion along with a lot of other requried techs is still difficult, even if one is making another ship of a established class.
The Russians have built more than a 100 Nuclear subs over 50 years. That experience is enough.

The plans are for two medium-large aircraft carriers, and thats it.
We are starting small. So, are the British and the French.

We can expect a whole new design from the reactor, generator to the propulsion, still it will take some more time.
10 years is a lot of time mate. In the early and mid 90s we had no idea what comes in a fifth gen aircraft(as told by an official from DRDO). But, by 2003 we were building 5th gen technology at home.

Unlike before we have plans in place. We plan on completely networking the Navy by 2022.

Israel can not use its home developed systems on the F-35, that is not a option for them.
Israel can put what they want in the F-35 as long as they don't touch the mission computer. The F-35 coming to Israel will have no EW suite. Israel intends to build their own system with us.

I think the very first LCA planes will have 2032.
Yes. The first LCA Mark 2 will have the 2052. Mark 1 will use the 2032.

Yes that will happen, and the US gov. pays the initial amount of money for these projects, however it’s a long time before our private firms start churning out F-22s or Sea wolfs.
What our private sector can really do in the short term is free up Mazagaon dock and Vizag by taking up the less intensive projects and leave the big ones to the Govt owned shipyards. This will remove a lot of pressure from the old shipyards, free up a lot of labour and improve build times.

It’s a start, lots of distance to cover, many decades probably.
The private sector can take their own sweet time. Nothing big is expected from them atleast till after 2040.

In a decade, we still very well might be importing gas turbines, radars, missiles etc. In a couple of decades we will be exporting all of that.
We are ready to do that in terms of Nuclear Propulsion within this decade itself. The govt has already given the green light for large displacement Nuclear Subs. We are working on our own BMD systems and also the Barak II with the Israelis. We are also jointly developing the AESA radars meant for ships and will be going on our later variants of Kolkata class destroyers and the Project-17a frigates once ready.

EL/M-2248 MF-STAR Naval Multi-Mission Radar

I do not think the complete indigenous projects are feasible in a 2020 time line.
Its impossible. That's why I have been saying JVs with foreign companies. When it comes to ships, we can work on the designs with the Italians or French, we can work on the electronics with Israel and propulsion and power with the Russians and our own private industries like TATA Power. By 2020, we can develop all of this at home instead of buying it off the shelf as you suggest.

Not a clue depends on the design, the current array is not that complicated (as compared to the Tophat), however it’s a project that will keep on churning out successive generations for a long time to come, and must not be rushed, its too important.
(Coming up with successive generations of T/R modules will take).
I agree if only DRDO is involved with this project. IAF plans on employing atleast 20-30 of these aircraft once built. At the same time, we have been building the Swordfish radar since 2003-04.

Both these planes never flew from a carriers catapult so are of no help at all.
The aircraft are built for a marine environment and have AWACS. Landing gear modifications are necessary for catapult launch, that's all.

USA will sell us almost any equipment/technology short of military reactors even consulting from the firms doing the development/construction of the current Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers; they will not however allow us to modify their equipment.
Every country allows modifications on their systems. I doubt the Americans will be that unrelenting for only a platform like the E-2. Anyways, the American only have the E-2 for radome radars. Developing new aircraft is not difficult for the Russians. Just because they haven't tried it does not mean they cannot do it.
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
No matter how complex it sounds, a mechanical system is always easy to build. We don't have the experience, but it's not difficult.
Considering that the technology is still in development and will take over 10 years to develop, I think its difficult enough
Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System - EMALS

Er. So is that an excuse to not work on it at all. The Soviets were working on the Ulyanovsk(85k Tons) before the breakup.
Yes but USSR is divided, and along with it all the R&D facilities were divided.
The Russians have built more than a 100 Nuclear subs over 50 years. That experience is enough.
They have not built a single carrier of the type we wish to build, and even for the current IAC project, a lot of design and construction consulting went to European firms, that should tell us something.

We are starting small. So, are the British and the French.
Well consider this.

The three IACs will form two carrier groups, one with each fleet, and one in the dock for maintenance, these would act as sea control and defence carriers for the two fleets, taking charge of the busy sea lanes around India.

We will construct two medium to large carriers with CATOBAR, nuclear reactor, and the whole works to form a single carrier group that will be working as our third fleet, dedicated towards power projection.

The next class of carriers will have to wait for some time, as these fleets in my views serves all our interests.

The British and the French have one major advantage over us, their neighbourhood is one of the safest and most stable in the world, they do not need a strong navy to protecting their own region.
10 years is a lot of time mate. In the early and mid 90s we had no idea what comes in a fifth gen aircraft(as told by an official from DRDO). But, by 2003 we were building 5th gen technology at home.

Unlike before we have plans in place. We plan on completely networking the Navy by 2022.
From all the presentations that DRDO has made public, the plane do not seem to be targeting the levels of F-22 and F-35, and we have to prove much of the technology that will be required, so lets wait till the development goes into a prototype.

We need time and successive generations of these projects.
Israel can put what they want in the F-35 as long as they don't touch the mission computer. The F-35 coming to Israel will have no EW suite. Israel intends to build their own system with us.
Israel one step closer to F-35 JSF procurement

The F-35 is scheduled to fly in Israel by 2014.

US, Israel agree on most major issues in troubled procurement process

08:35 GMT, July 13, 2009

The negotiations for the delivery, as well as the integration of domestically designed systems on the F-35, have seen considerable turbulence as Israel originally pushed for delivery of the aircraft by 2012. Yet, the date had to be postponed due to rising costs for the aircraft from $60 million to $100 million. Furthermore, Israel’s requirement to install its own radar, munitions, electronic warfare and command-and-control systems had been refused by the US government. Also, the Israeli condition to be allowed to independently maintain the plane in the event of a technical or structural problem has been an issue.

According to senior IDF officers, the Defence Ministry and the Pentagon have reached understandings on most of the major issues that have been at the core of disagreement between the sides.
defence.professionals | defpro.com

We are ready to do that in terms of Nuclear Propulsion within this decade itself. The govt has already given the green light for large displacement Nuclear Subs. We are working on our own BMD systems and also the Barak II with the Israelis. We are also jointly developing the AESA radars meant for ships and will be going on our later variants of Kolkata class destroyers and the Project-17a frigates once ready.

EL/M-2248 MF-STAR Naval Multi-Mission Radar
MF-STAR and Barak-8 for naval and land based use, exactly what are we contributing? There is no mention of India’s contribution in the projects.

As quoted by DRDO officials, BMD-I will finish and then they will develop high altitude interceptors in the form of BMD-II along with more evolved sensors, another project that requires all the funding and support we can give.

What i am arguing is that there are many fields we will need to use imports with ToT or JVs, completely indigenous projects across the board are not feasible in the 2017-2022 window.
Its impossible. That's why I have been saying JVs with foreign companies. When it comes to ships, we can work on the designs with the Italians or French, we can work on the electronics with Israel and propulsion and power with the Russians and our own private industries like TATA Power. By 2020, we can develop all of this at home instead of buying it off the shelf as you suggest.
Many systems will not be available through JVs, and I doubt that they will be developed at home in that time frame.
The advanced catapult systems under development, the generator and power distribution systems, advanced versions of the E-2D Hawkeye AEW (the D version with the AESA), F-35 would be well into its production phase by then.
Hence must be purchased for the projects going on at that time.
I agree if only DRDO is involved with this project. IAF plans on employing atleast 20-30 of these aircraft once built. At the same time, we have been building the Swordfish radar since 2003-04.
Swordfish had Israeli origins, this is our home grown tech.
IAF can procure foreign systems if the first generation is not to its liking however the project still has to get unrestricted resources for continuous development.
The aircraft are built for a marine environment and have AWACS. Landing gear modifications are necessary for catapult launch, that's all.
The problem is that first plane did not satisfy the set conditions and the second plane never progressed from the wooden mock up stage.

Any new project will have to be a fresh start.
Every country allows modifications on their systems. I doubt the Americans will be that unrelenting for only a platform like the E-2.

Anyways, the American only have the E-2 for radome radars. Developing new aircraft is not difficult for the Russians. Just because they haven't tried it does not mean they cannot do it.
The americans know where they can make a sale, they wont sell the only available option for catapult launched plane without selling us a host of electronics.

E-2D Advanced hawk eye
The fleet's new eyes | Machine Design
Advanced Hawkeye promises quantum leap in US Navy's AEW capability - Jane's Defence Business News
AN/APY-9 Airborne Early Warning Radar | Lockheed Martin
E-2D Advanced Hawkeye


Can the Russians do it, if they get the funding i don’t doubt it, however they would need to start a completely new project, and no one knows how long that will take.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Too much to reply to. So, lets just stick to the topic for now.

The americans know where they can make a sale, they wont sell the only available option for catapult launched plane without selling us a host of electronics.
The option for selling a single platform always exists. Also considering we go for a CATOBAR system in the future or a STOBAR system. If the Americans sell the F-35, a big IF, then IN will directly go for a STOVL configuration.

Our need for an AEW plane is only after 2022. Our current ACs will operate only in the Indian Ocean for now and can be complemented by AEW support from the mainland or the Andaman Islands if the need arises.

Another option is the Helicopter AEWs. There are 3 options with one already in use by the IN. The Westland is the best version.
Kamov Ka-31 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Westland Sea King - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
AgustaWestland AW101 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But, the Helicopter AEWs are never as good as a plane which can fly faster and higher.

Also, the E-2 does not have an AESA. Therefore a modification will be required. And there is also the question whether the US is already developing a new AEW platform for the Ford class ACs. This would free up the E-2 platform for export.

Can the Russians do it, if they get the funding i don’t doubt it, however they would need to start a completely new project, and no one knows how long that will take.
When it comes to planes, I doubt Russia will delay it after already having built a lot of different types already. The requirement for IN is being considered only after 2022. So, time is not of concern to us if the Russians get involved.
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
Too much to reply to. So, lets just stick to the topic for now.

The option for selling a single platform always exists. Also considering we go for a CATOBAR system in the future or a STOBAR system. If the Americans sell the F-35, a big IF, then IN will directly go for a STOVL configuration.
I think we will not go for STOVL, the whole point of larger carrier will be a higher sortie rate with larger payloads, AEW and EW will be a important part of a expeditionary fleet for power projection, our regional goals are easily met by the current plans. Although they (STOVL) do come in handy at heavy sea states.

USA will sell us anything, including the F-35, although we would not be able to make any changes to it.
Our need for an AEW plane is only after 2022. Our current ACs will operate only in the Indian Ocean for now and can be complemented by AEW support from the mainland or the Andaman Islands if the need arises.

Another option is the Helicopter AEWs. There are 3 options with one already in use by the IN. The Westland is the best version.

But, the Helicopter AEWs are never as good as a plane which can fly faster and higher.

Also, the E-2 does not have an AESA. Therefore a modification will be required. And there is also the question whether the US is already developing a new AEW platform for the Ford class ACs. This would free up the E-2 platform for export.
E-2 D advanced hawkeye will have a AESA, and thats the version that USA will approach us with once the plans for the carrier get funding.

USA is not developing any new AEW platforms, its the E-2D advanced hawk eye that will be in service with US military forces.

The modifications required will be accomodating the data links.

The first two E-2D Advanced Hawkeye development aircraft – Delta One and Delta Two – completed first flights in 2007, and its new Lockheed Martin AN/APY-9 radar was along for the ride.

“While the external appearance of the E-2D is similar to the E-2C, the systems are completely redesigned and the capabilities are vastly expanded. At the heart of the aircraft is the new AN/APY-9 radar. The AN/APY-9 radar has a solid-state silicon carbide-based transmitter with higher power for extended range, and digital receivers to increase sensitivity. The surveillance envelope of the UHF radar is about 250 percent larger than the E-2C's and can ‘see’ smaller targets and more of them at a greater range. The new rotodome contains an electronically scanned array that provides critically important, continuous, 360-degree scanning. This capability allows flight operators to focus the radar on select areas of interest.”

Over the last several months, the Advanced Hawkeye has flown more than 270 radar flights to log over 700+ hours of radar operation over water, near land and over land. Recently, ten out of ten flights were conducted during a successful Operational Assessment in preparation for Milestone C. “To date, radar detection sensitivity matches Lockheed Martin’s Technical Performance Measure predictions and exceeds specifications,” said Dr. Doug Reep, Lockheed Martin’s Program Management Director for Advanced Early Warning. “Radar video and track quality performance have also been very good.”
AN/APY-9 Airborne Early Warning Radar | Lockheed Martin

When it comes to planes, I doubt Russia will delay it after already having built a lot of different types already. The requirement for IN is being considered only after 2022. So, time is not of concern to us if the Russians get involved.
They have not built any for carrier based fixed wing AEW purpose, may be they could start a new program.
I do not even know when their design study will take place, or if it is underway, what are their requirements (STOVL, STOBAR, CATOBAR), what is the time frame.

If the russians decide against fielding a fixed wing AEW plane from their carrier then what?
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
I think we will not go for STOVL, the whole point of larger carrier will be a higher sortie rate with larger payloads, AEW and EW will be a important part of a expeditionary fleet for power projection, our regional goals are easily met by the current plans. Although they (STOVL) do come in handy at heavy sea states.
The French will have CATOBAR on their ships and will also operate the E-2. The British may work on something similar. A hybrid STOVL for the F-35 and CATOBAR for the E-2. Who knows what we may go for? We intend to field these carriers only after 2020.

USA will sell us anything, including the F-35, although we would not be able to make any changes to it.
On a side note: The F-35 is already way too advanced for us to bother with. There are 2 versions of EW suites on the F-35. One is being built by LM for US and the other is being built by BAE for export.

Anyways, India "may" face similar restrictions with the MRCA deal. Then, I doubt we will go with the American fighters especially considering IAF love to tinker with their aircraft.

E-2 D advanced hawkeye will have a AESA, and thats the version that USA will approach us with once the plans for the carrier get funding.
Then that's fine in the short run. In the long run we will have to look for our own version. No doubt the Chinese and Russians will want to work on their own AEW aircraft too.

The modifications required will be accomodating the data links.
Link 22 of course or do you mean the ODL.

They have not built any for carrier based fixed wing AEW purpose, may be they could start a new program.
Mate the 2 pictures I posted were both meant for carrier aviation. An-71 and Yak-44.

An-71 Madcap

An interesting read
Yak-44 AEW (YAKOVLEV)

I do not even know when their design study will take place, or if it is underway, what are their requirements (STOVL, STOBAR, CATOBAR), what is the time frame.
The Russians will go for STOBAR, no STOVL since they plan to use Flankers for their carriers. CATOBAR, I doubt it.

If the russians decide against fielding a fixed wing AEW plane from their carrier then what?
The Russians will employ AEW on carriers since they have already worked on it before. The An-71 and Yak-44 were being built for STOBAR operation.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top