Indian Navy still have eyes on F-35

[Eastman]

I just wonder if I am in support for Domestically produced weapon system, I become ultra nationalistic self if it is yes I am :accepted:

 

[Eastman]

----Dupe--------

 

[Eastman]

Where did I say that they will have problem operating them. I am simply saying that you can house lesser number of bigger aircraft on a carrier.

my bad as you have never simply stated that.

 

[Defcon 1]

You must know offensive foreign import weapons are not without strings attached, feel free to acknowledge if their is a communication problem in laungage then stating my debate as Ultra or something.

Just go back and read my post again using your brain. I told you about SCALP to show that even medium weight fighters have strike weapons. So just because a Sukhoi can carry Brahmos, it doesn't mean it is superior. Is it so difficult to understand? Plus if you had actually bothered to google Brahmos 3, you would have known that Brahmos will soon be available to medium weight fighters as well.

I just wonder if I am in support for Domestically produced weapon system, I become ultra nationalistic self if it is yes I am :accepted:

Brahmos is not domestically produced. The fact that you don't even know this speaks volume. The so called "production centres" of Brahmos are nothing more than assembly workshops

my bad as you have never simply stated that.

Again, go back and read. The difficulties with MTOW will exist, the weight of IAC-2 is already decided. And ACs today carry heterogeneous combination of aircraft. So suggesting that IAC-2 will be optimized to carry a particular type of aircraft is stupid.

 

[ersakthivel]

Let me say this for once. The earliest possible date of induction of FGFA is 2022, if everything goes well.
Making a carrier version of FGFA could take 8-10 years, but since that is not on the cards, we can safely assume that no carried version of FGFA will be built.
IAC-2 can be delayed, sure, but by how much? not 8-10 years. It is expected to enter service around 2022. So there are no chances of it getting AMCA. We will have to source fighters from outside.
The problem with heavy fighters is more than about space, they are much heavier than medium weight and hence it is difficult for them to take off at MTOW, since the runway on a carrier is much shorter than on an airfield. If a heavy fighter can't take off at MTOW, whats the use of having it in the first place. Thats why IN rejected the more capable Su33 in favor of Mig29K.

F35 won't kill AMCA, its just being bought for one ship. Likewise, Rafale didn't do anything to either FGFA or Tejas. Only ADA has got to be blamed for Tejas's failures. But that isn't the topic of discussion

DOn't put your own subjective judgements on who failed on what and , then bail out saying that is not the topic of discussion.

Then I too can post that no major airforce in the world is having rafale in it(especially with the fleet of 270 su-30 MKI). And IAF's insistence on this is just a ploy to kill Tejas mk2 prospect. And I will paraphase it with a standard term , that it is also a topic for another discussion.

Does Russian airforce has a mid segment as IAF is desperately wants to have like a three tier air force? If it is not for Navy's seed funding of1000 crore tejas mk2 in 2009 the entire tejas project could have been buried like HF-24 Marut. IAF simply killed the Snecma -GTRE JV and made no effort to push the MOD for a higher powered engine in place of K-10 they opposed.

And even in stratpost conferences various retired IAF officers are bundling out tons of lies like they never asked for any ASR revision and tejas falls short of original 1984 ASR!!!

DO they think people are fools to forget the entire FSED phase-2 started in 2004 was in response to IAF's request for higher weight , higher launch stress WVR missile R-73 in place of the older R-60, which led to the redesign of wing?

 

[Santu]

f-35 C PAK-FA
length -- 15.7 m 19.8 m
wing span -- 13.1 m 13.35 m
empty weight -- 15800 kg 18000 kg
max takeoff weight -- 31800 kg 35000 kg
range -- 2500 km 3500 km

now make your calculation and decide which one to go.
F-35 advantages: 1. Flying aircraft and in advanced phases of design
2. only known stealth CATOBAR supported aircraft
3. donno for sure but it might stealthier than PAK-FA
PAK-FA advantages: 1. 50% share in design and development phase
2. Indigenous manufacturing and full TOT
3. Russia is more trusted partner than usa
4. and most importantly higher service ceiling , combat radius , 3d-thrust vectoring , exp in flying sukhoi made aircrafts

 

[Eastman]

Just go back and read my post again using your brain. I told you about SCALP to show that even medium weight fighters have strike weapons. So just because a Sukhoi can carry Brahmos, it doesn't mean it is superior. Is it so difficult to understand? Plus if you had actually bothered to google Brahmos 3, you would have known that Brahmos will soon be available to medium weight fighters as well.

Why compare BrahMos active service missile with some thing concept (I guess)

Brahmos is not domestically produced. The fact that you don't even know this speaks volume. The so called "production centres" of Brahmos are nothing more than assembly workshops

Yet BrahMos is domestically produced

Again, go back and read. The difficulties with MTOW will exist, the weight of IAC-2 is already decided. And ACs today carry heterogeneous combination of aircraft. So suggesting that IAC-2 will be optimized to carry a particular type of aircraft is stupid.

is the design of IAC-II frozen :suspicious:

 

[p2prada]

I don't know about the others, but I am the biggest supporter of F-35s for the Indian Navy.

It will mean commonality with other nations like US, Japan, Australia and Singapore. This will allow our navy to more effectively counter China. The navy works in an entirely different environment compared to the IAF.

Anyway, Russia is planning to develop a naval version of PAKFA, but it will most likely be a STOBAR aircraft, this will make the F-35 the only aircraft in the running for any future naval requirement.

If the navy orders 80 or more jets, then there is a possibility a private company can be roped in for license assembly, followed by maintenance and support in the country. A joint spares and supplies program can be worked out with F-35 operators in the IOR, like Singapore and Australia. I wouldn't be surprised if we end up manufacturing spares for ourselves and the others.

 

[Pulkit]

The present partner countries of F35 programme and rethinking there approach towards it....
Its cost is sky rocketing and many experts claim that it is not what is was meant to be....

The orders are reducing or are at hault or re negotiations are going on....

The partner countries like Australia and Canada were or are facing issues regarding it....


the capability or potency of the aircraft is under scanner.......


but wait its the best..... Why ?

1) It is foreign
2) It is too costly
3) It is the only available 5th gen so it has the monopoly

and top of it

4) We need not to make our own.(After paying that much we wont be able to thats a different case)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pteMgYPm1xM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQB4W8C0rZI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05FnUjnJOCU

I am no expert but just listen to world around....

They need buyers for F35 to reduce its cost and they want to trap India aswell.....

 

[rock127]

Do we have enough $$$ to pump in F-35?

We can't even decide on Rafale and talking about F-35.

 

[p2prada]

Do we have enough $$$ to pump in F-35?

Yes we do. If the navy plans to double its surface fleet in the next 15 years, we can buy a paltry 80 jets.

Each of their three submarine projects alone are as big as Rafale deal.

The Scorpene deal that we signed in 2005 was bigger than the Su-30MKI deal. Where do you think they got the money from?

 

[SajeevJino]

The present partner countries of F35 programme and rethinking there approach towards it....
Its cost is sky rocketing and many experts claim that it is not what is was meant to be....

The orders are reducing or are at hault or re negotiations are going on....

The partner countries like Australia and Canada were or are facing issues regarding it....


the capability or potency of the aircraft is under scanner.......


but wait its the best..... Why ?

1) It is foreign
2) It is too costly
3) It is the only available 5th gen so it has the monopoly

and top of it

4) We need not to make our own.(After paying that much we wont be able to thats a different case)


I am no expert but just listen to world around....

They need buyers for F35 to reduce its cost and they want to trap India aswell.....

if you have doubts in F 35 series you should talk to Col.Ajay Shukla He is on twitter and shoot your Questions

 

[Pulkit]

I am no expert but you dont know how much it will cost you....?
I am no expert but i believe its need will not be raised say untill 2022 till the IAC-2 is launched...
What will be the contract like... just sale or co production?
what will be our priorities by then?
BY just saying that we need not to pay all together does not solve the issue....

Even Rafale is a headache left by previous govt for this govt ... Why?because it costs too much....

Our economy is growing so is the cost.... So is the population and so is the need....

Yes we have all the money in the world .... but the price of such expensive toys is just not money but lives of many INDIANS too.....


So No to all expensive goods as being expensive doesnot mean they are good.....

Do we have enough $$$ to pump in F-35?

We can't even decide on Rafale and talking about F-35.

 

[rock127]

Yes we do. If the navy plans to double its surface fleet in the next 15 years, we can buy a paltry 80 jets.

Each of their three submarine projects alone are as big as Rafale deal.

The Scorpene deal that we signed in 2005 was bigger than the Su-30MKI deal. Where do you think they got the money from?

Any idea about lifetime cost of other planes? Below is a 2012 article for F35.

Exclusive: U.S. sees lifetime cost of F-35 fighter at $1.45 trillion | Reuters

 

[Pulkit]

if you have doubts in F 35 series you should talk to Col.Ajay Shukla He is on twitter and shoot your Questions

I didnt get your point ... you want me to tweet asking him a question or what?

 

[HMS Astute]

f-35 C PAK-FA
length -- 15.7 m 19.8 m
wing span -- 13.1 m 13.35 m
empty weight -- 15800 kg 18000 kg
max takeoff weight -- 31800 kg 35000 kg
range -- 2500 km 3500 km

now make your calculation and decide which one to go.
F-35 advantages: 1. Flying aircraft and in advanced phases of design
2. only known stealth CATOBAR supported aircraft
3. donno for sure but it might stealthier than PAK-FA
PAK-FA advantages: 1. 50% share in design and development phase
2. Indigenous manufacturing and full TOT
3. Russia is more trusted partner than usa
4. and most importantly higher service ceiling , combat radius , 3d-thrust vectoring , exp in flying sukhoi made aircrafts

Pointless to compare them as they're differently designed for different purpose. T-50 is Russia's best aircraft, whereas F-35 is only the 2nd best aircraft of the US/UK. Bare in mind, F-35 is stealthier.

 

[p2prada]

Any idea about lifetime cost of other planes? Below is a 2012 article for F35.

Exclusive: U.S. sees lifetime cost of F-35 fighter at $1.45 trillion | Reuters

It's no longer $1.45 Trill. It's dropped to less than $1 Trill, $857 Billion today.

This is from 2013 by the same source.
Pentagon cuts F-35 operating estimate below $1 trillion: source | Reuters

The U.S. government has slashed its estimate for the long-term operating costs of Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets by more than 20 percent to under $1 trillion, according to a senior defense official, a move that could boost international support for the program.

Real contracts are a better bet.
Australia orders 58 F-35 Lockheed Martin stealth fighters | Reuters

Australia will order 58 more F-35 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) for A$12.4 billion ($11.61 billion), Prime Minister Tony Abbott said on Wednesday, a purchase that will raise its air combat power to among the world's most advanced.

58 jets at $11.6 Billion puts the lifecycle cost at $200 Million per aircraft. That's a very good price. The deal comes with 40 years of support and many years of training. That's $300 million per year. That's affordable.

Costs are decreasing every year.

 

[Defcon 1]

What some people fail to see is, even after all its problems, the F35 program will stand simply because the program has been extremely lucky. It has benefitted from cancellations of F22 and 2018 bomber, it has benefitted from the fact that Europeans don't have a stealth fighter, and now it is benefitting from the fact that Russia and China are developing their own 5th gen platform. So F35 is here to stay.

 

[HMS Astute]

US alone will buy and operate around 2,450x F35 aircraft and there are already 10x foreign countries which are getting this aircraft. Good for defence contractors.

 

[Santu]

I did mention that F-35 is stealthier and mentioned as "not sure" as i donno about stealthiness of PAK-FA.. one thing is that one aircraft carrier for example can accommodate say 20 F-35 then it it can easily accommodate 15 pak-fa's and PAK-FA is indigenous..