F-18 Advanced Super Hornet

[Zebra]

May be few people are not comfortable with it.

These type of words, I saw on few places ---> "people bluntly refused F-16."

But can't help much here, as IAF / IN wants twin engine aircraft as their MRCA.

 

[WolfPack86]

How Far India-US Have Come After 2 years of Modi.
As Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government nears its two-year anniversary, it is worth taking stock of its foreign policy toward the United States, a much-hyped strategic partner. Modi even has a strong personal rapport with U.S. President Barack Obama. So then, where do India’s political, defense, and economic relations with the United States stand after two years of the Modi government? So far, the score card shows mixed results.
The Modi government, over the past two years, has certainly scored major victories in building positive ties between India and the United States. The prime minister himself has taken proactive measures to build a rapport with important U.S. political leaders. He met Obama six times just in his first 24 months in office and visited the United States three times. Such is his relationship with Obama that he inspired the leader of the most powerful country in the world to write a note supporting him for Time magazine’s 100 Most Influential People list for the year 2015.
Interactions among other leaders in India and the United States have also picked up. Just over the past two years, U.S. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has met India’s Minister of Defense four times. Secretary of State John Kerry has visited India twice and met Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj several times. Several influential U.S. congressional committee members have also visited India. Starting in the early months of that new government, Senator John McCain and three cabinet members flew to India to hold consultations about the bilateral relationship. This followed visits by Senator Angus King, member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, and Senator Tim Kaine, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on South and Central Asian Affairs. Many such high-level visits from the United States have since continued, engaging Indian policymakers and leaders at a steady pace. This trend has accelerated considerably since Obama’s visit to India last January, when he graced the Indian Republic Day celebrations as the chief guest. At a political level, it is clear that there have been significant improvements in the bilateral relationship.

Defense relations have also continued their steady pace. The United States has for some time been the country with which India conducts the largest number of military exercises. This engagement is growing in complexity and sophistication. Issues of co-development and co-production of military equipment have also gathered some momentum, but have seen only modest progress over the past two years. Only a couple of low-end projects, such as the research and development of mobile electric hybrid power sources and the next-generation protective body suits, have been taken up, with talk continuing of moving to other more sensitive technologies. The recent signing in principle of the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) would allow mutual support for refueling, supplies, and spare parts and is an important sign of both sides overcoming bureaucratic and other logistical hurdles in the pursuit of closer cooperation. In this direction, the creation of the India Rapid Reaction Cell in the Pentagon, the first country-specific cell of its kind, for simplifying defense collaboration, is another small but significant step toward overcoming bureaucratic bottlenecks.
Of course, the India-U.S. bilateral defense relationship also depends on the sale of military equipment. India in recent years has emerged as one of the most important export markets for the U.S. defense industry, with defense trade volume surpassing $10 billion dollars in the past decade. In fact, the Indian market for U.S. defense products might expand considerably as India takes a second look at the Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet after downsizing a deal to buy French Rafale fighters. No numbers have been officially mentioned yet, and the deal may take years before producing any tangible results. Some conservative estimates suggest that India could be looking to purchase 100 to 150 Boeing jets. If this deal actually goes through, it has the potential to usher in a qualitatively different relationship–one not of buyer-seller, but of co-producers. The Modi government can justifiably take some credit for this change in Indian thinking.
Despite the advances in political and defense ties, one area that has not seen expected results after Modi’s first two years is the India-U.S. economic relationship. Although data available from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis shows an upward trend in trade and investment ties, there is a growing feeling among political and economic observers that bilateral economic relationship has reached a plateau. A comparison between the last two years of the Manmohan Singh government and the first two years of the Modi government hits home this point. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s data, bilateral trade volume stood at $95 and $101 billion respectively in 2012 and 2013, with a net increase of $6 billion dollars between 2012 and 2013. However, under Modi, the improvements have been modest: $104 and a little over $107 billion in 2014 and 2015. The slow pace at which U.S.-India economic ties have expanded under Modi is baffling and concerning.
This slow pace of economic cooperation is particularly concerning for two reasons. First, the Modi government ran on an electoral platform that emphasized boosting India’s economic standing in the world, which would have been difficult to achieve without strengthening economic ties with the world’s largest economy. Modi’s personal reputation as a business-oriented leader was considered a critical component in the achievement of this agenda. So far, that business-friendly reputation appears to have borne little fruit for India. Second, the Obama administration has expended tremendous effort on expanding economic and trade ties with Asian countries, as evidenced by the vigor with which it has pursued international trade pacts like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The concern for India is that it might be left behind in Asia as the U.S. advances its trade agreements with other countries. One adverse consequence for India could be that it would remain forever stuck in a middle-income trap, a promising economy never truly materializing its potential.
All said, the past two years of the Modi government paint a mixed picture for the India-U.S. relationship. Defense ties have continued along a decisively upward trajectory of growth and sophistication, but economic ties have lagged behind. Indeed, the political relations between the two countries have benefited the most under Modi. The prime minister has built a good personal rapport with the U.S. president. In the United States, several high-level officials and leaders have shown interest in further improving relations with India. However, as the recent history of India-U.S. ties shows, when the political winds shift their course, it is ultimately the defense and economic ties that keep bilateral relations afloat. It is precisely these areas, particularly the economic component of the bilateral, that the Modi government must emphasize in its future policy toward the United States.
Shivaji Kumar is assistant professor at the Centre for International Politics at Jawaharlal Nehru University’s School of International Studies.
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/05/how-far-have-india-us-ties-come-after.html

 

[BON PLAN]

On that note, dont you think that the French pilots (who are the only pilots flying and talking about it) will talk bad about their "national product" ?

sure not.
But they have some good more reasons to do so.

And.... don't forget Egypt pilots, Qatar pilots on training cursus and all the test pilots who tried our national product

 

[BON PLAN]

How Far India-US Have Come After 2 years of Modi.
As Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government nears its two-year anniversary, it is worth taking stock of its foreign policy toward the United States, a much-hyped strategic partner. Modi even has a strong personal rapport with U.S. President Barack Obama. So then, where do India’s political, defense, and economic relations with the United States stand after two years of the Modi government? So far, the score card shows mixed results.
The Modi government, over the past two years, has certainly scored major victories in building positive ties between India and the United States. The prime minister himself has taken proactive measures to build a rapport with important U.S. political leaders. He met Obama six times just in his first 24 months in office and visited the United States three times. Such is his relationship with Obama that he inspired the leader of the most powerful country in the world to write a note supporting him for Time magazine’s 100 Most Influential People list for the year 2015.
Interactions among other leaders in India and the United States have also picked up. Just over the past two years, U.S. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has met India’s Minister of Defense four times. Secretary of State John Kerry has visited India twice and met Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj several times. Several influential U.S. congressional committee members have also visited India. Starting in the early months of that new government, Senator John McCain and three cabinet members flew to India to hold consultations about the bilateral relationship. This followed visits by Senator Angus King, member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, and Senator Tim Kaine, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on South and Central Asian Affairs. Many such high-level visits from the United States have since continued, engaging Indian policymakers and leaders at a steady pace. This trend has accelerated considerably since Obama’s visit to India last January, when he graced the Indian Republic Day celebrations as the chief guest. At a political level, it is clear that there have been significant improvements in the bilateral relationship.

Defense relations have also continued their steady pace. The United States has for some time been the country with which India conducts the largest number of military exercises. This engagement is growing in complexity and sophistication. Issues of co-development and co-production of military equipment have also gathered some momentum, but have seen only modest progress over the past two years. Only a couple of low-end projects, such as the research and development of mobile electric hybrid power sources and the next-generation protective body suits, have been taken up, with talk continuing of moving to other more sensitive technologies. The recent signing in principle of the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) would allow mutual support for refueling, supplies, and spare parts and is an important sign of both sides overcoming bureaucratic and other logistical hurdles in the pursuit of closer cooperation. In this direction, the creation of the India Rapid Reaction Cell in the Pentagon, the first country-specific cell of its kind, for simplifying defense collaboration, is another small but significant step toward overcoming bureaucratic bottlenecks.
Of course, the India-U.S. bilateral defense relationship also depends on the sale of military equipment. India in recent years has emerged as one of the most important export markets for the U.S. defense industry, with defense trade volume surpassing $10 billion dollars in the past decade. In fact, the Indian market for U.S. defense products might expand considerably as India takes a second look at the Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet after downsizing a deal to buy French Rafale fighters. No numbers have been officially mentioned yet, and the deal may take years before producing any tangible results. Some conservative estimates suggest that India could be looking to purchase 100 to 150 Boeing jets. If this deal actually goes through, it has the potential to usher in a qualitatively different relationship–one not of buyer-seller, but of co-producers. The Modi government can justifiably take some credit for this change in Indian thinking.
Despite the advances in political and defense ties, one area that has not seen expected results after Modi’s first two years is the India-U.S. economic relationship. Although data available from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis shows an upward trend in trade and investment ties, there is a growing feeling among political and economic observers that bilateral economic relationship has reached a plateau. A comparison between the last two years of the Manmohan Singh government and the first two years of the Modi government hits home this point. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s data, bilateral trade volume stood at $95 and $101 billion respectively in 2012 and 2013, with a net increase of $6 billion dollars between 2012 and 2013. However, under Modi, the improvements have been modest: $104 and a little over $107 billion in 2014 and 2015. The slow pace at which U.S.-India economic ties have expanded under Modi is baffling and concerning.
This slow pace of economic cooperation is particularly concerning for two reasons. First, the Modi government ran on an electoral platform that emphasized boosting India’s economic standing in the world, which would have been difficult to achieve without strengthening economic ties with the world’s largest economy. Modi’s personal reputation as a business-oriented leader was considered a critical component in the achievement of this agenda. So far, that business-friendly reputation appears to have borne little fruit for India. Second, the Obama administration has expended tremendous effort on expanding economic and trade ties with Asian countries, as evidenced by the vigor with which it has pursued international trade pacts like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The concern for India is that it might be left behind in Asia as the U.S. advances its trade agreements with other countries. One adverse consequence for India could be that it would remain forever stuck in a middle-income trap, a promising economy never truly materializing its potential.
All said, the past two years of the Modi government paint a mixed picture for the India-U.S. relationship. Defense ties have continued along a decisively upward trajectory of growth and sophistication, but economic ties have lagged behind. Indeed, the political relations between the two countries have benefited the most under Modi. The prime minister has built a good personal rapport with the U.S. president. In the United States, several high-level officials and leaders have shown interest in further improving relations with India. However, as the recent history of India-U.S. ties shows, when the political winds shift their course, it is ultimately the defense and economic ties that keep bilateral relations afloat. It is precisely these areas, particularly the economic component of the bilateral, that the Modi government must emphasize in its future policy toward the United States.
Shivaji Kumar is assistant professor at the Centre for International Politics at Jawaharlal Nehru University’s School of International Studies.
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/05/how-far-have-india-us-ties-come-after.html

Stop dreaming of SH18. It's not the product india need. Better taking Mig 35.
SH18 is a kind of new Tornado GR : a bomb truck (but with relatively small loading capacity). Just a Tornado with a nice radar.

 

[asianobserve]

SH certainly isn't just a truck bomb. I would rather consider it as the new generation of American muscle cars like the new Corvette, Mustang or Camaro. They are not the most nimble sports cars in the market but they definitely are the biggest bang for the buck. In fact European exotics are playing catch up in terms of performance against these new generation of relatively cheap American muscle cars.

With the trend of A2A combat now firmly in BVR the SH is currently the biggest bang for the buck in the market.

In BVR, the SH is very lethal due to its combination of reduced RCS, AN/APG-79 and 12 AMRAAMs. It means that the SH can see an enemy 4 or 4+ gen fighter before the latter can see it while its 12 AMRAAMs means that it has more than enough missiles to lob at the enemy from very long distances.

And should the fight reaches the WVR, I don't think the SH is at a disadvantage against any opposing 4 or 4+ gen fighter. It may not have TVC but it has one of the best nose pointing abilities of any current 4 or 4+ gen fighter (without losing too much energy during maneuvers - TVC equipped Russian fighters quickly lose energy in intensive subsonic maneuvers). Certainly, the SH has a better nose pointing ability than the Rafale. in any case, since the SH is already equipped with HMD and AIM 9x it wouldn't have to maneuver a lot to fire at the enemy.

But as a word of caution for those fanboys who are so enamored with agility in fighter the recent study in the trends of recent missile era air combats has solidly concluded that A2A combat will very rarely happen in WVR. In fact the vast majority of air combat kills since the advent of A2A missiles have been done in BVR. Here is the study for your perusal: file:///C:/Users/MICHAEL%20PC/Downloads/Air-to-Air-Report-%20(2).pdf

 

[WolfPack86]

New Kit on the Block II
Changing Course, Rules of Engagement for Maritime Strike
May 16, 2016 in Defense
During recent flight tests at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, Boeing and the Navy launched a network-enabled Harpoon Block II Plus from an F/A-18. Once in flight, the crew input new coordinates that redirected the missile to hit a moving target.

“Adding a datalink to the Block II Harpoon is much like adding an app to a smart phone,” said Beth Kluba, vice president of Boeing Weapons & Missile Systems. “It gives warfighters a brand-new level of precision targeting and flexibility to stay ahead of threats while keeping costs and the learning curve low.”

The U.S. Navy and Boeing are on schedule to deliver this new capability to the fleet in 2017.

Watch the video to learn from the program’s lead test pilot how the Harpoon Block II Plus will redefine war-at-sea tactics.

The Harpoon Block II Plus missile rests on the wing of the F/A-18 moments before a test launch at Naval Air Station China Lake in California.

The Harpoon Block II Plus missile completed a successful test launch from an F/A-18.
http://www.boeing.com/features/2016/05/new-kit-on-the-block-05-16.page

 

[WolfPack86]

F/A-18F Super Hornet Block II Promo Video

 

[asianobserve]

And the best thing about the SH line is this:

It will neutralize any current and future air defense system that China or Pakistan, or Russia if needed, can throw at India. The Growler is poised for a quantum leap with the NGJ:

 

[Bahamut]

Here is the study for your perusal: file:///C:/Users/MICHAEL%20PC/Downloads/Air-to-Air-Report-%20(2).pdf

Sir unable to open the file,can you give another link

SH certainly isn't just a truck bomb.

It is a excellent strike bomber and OK fighter ,IAF reject it due to its low max speed and low max G limit being only 7.5g instead of desired 9g

In BVR, the SH is very lethal due to its combination of reduced RCS, AN/APG-79 and 12 AMRAAMs. It means that the SH can see an enemy 4 or 4+ gen fighter before the latter can see it while its 12 AMRAAMs means that it has more than enough missiles to lob at the enemy from very long distances.

The very foundation for BVR combat is Friend or Foe Identifying system which cannot be fooled and there is no electronic Jamming or attack .It can used against Pak but not China .

nose pointing abilities of any current 4 or 4+ gen fighter

HMD and HMTS along with HBS missile have made nose point ability obsolete

TVC equipped Russian fighters quickly lose energy in intensive subsonic maneuvers

TVC are use very carefully they increase the the instantaneous turn rate to very high number about twice to thrice that of non TVC fighter which at those speed lead to high lose but allow to doge missile and give a edge in dogfight as you have tighter turn and faster roll and better acceleration.

It will neutralize any current and future air defense system that China or Pakistan, or Russia if needed, can throw at India. The Growler is poised for a quantum leap with the NGJ:

Pak will be easy but with S 400 with China it will be difficult as there are too many sensors and any passive so it will be difficult to take out ,S 500 is put of question.With Russia we have good relation and with China the economic angle makes the war difficult .
Some more info on NGJ:

• IN FOCUS: US NAVY NEXT GENERATION JAMMER PROCEEDS, BUT F-35 INTEGRATION DEFERRED INDEFINITELY

IN FOCUS: US Navy Next Generation Jammer proceeds, but F-35 integration deferred indefinitely

• 
  

• 11 MAY, 2012
  
• BY: DAVE MAJUMDAR
  
• WASHINGTON DC

The US Navy is moving full-steam ahead on its Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) pod development effort, but integration onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) has been deferred indefinitely.

Instead, the USN is focusing on getting the NGJ developed and fielded onto the Boeing EA-18G Growler by 2020. The service expects the EA-18G will be in service until at least the mid-2030s. The NGJ is expected to replace the current AN/ALQ-99 jamming pods found on the Growler and the aging Northrop Grumman EA-6B Prowler.

At present, the USN hopes to have a final request for proposal (RfP) issued for the programme by the end of June. The USN recently issued a draft RfP earlier in April as it prepares to move the NGJ from a technology maturation effort into a full-scale developmental programme.

©US Navy




Captain John Green, the USN programme manager for airborne electronic attack, says that the NGJ effort is a little unusual in that there is usually an analysis of alternatives (AoA) prior to a Milestone A decision to start an acquisitions programme. However, on the NGJ endeavor, various technology maturation efforts started before that formal decision point because those technologies were not yet sufficiently mature.

The USN is currently undertaking a 33-month technology maturation effort with contracts issued to four companies: BAE Systems, ITT Exelis, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman. But that phase is coming to a close and a full-scale prototype effort will soon be underway.

"We expect to release the final RfP for this in late June," Green says. The Pentagon should approve the document by mid-June, he adds.

Proposals from would-be vendors should be in by August after which the USN will conduct a source selection. Only one vendor will be picked for the technology development phase-which will involve building a full-scale prototype and a preliminary design. That contact will be awarded next June, Green says. "This is a kinda a winner-take-all type of competition we're going into," he adds.

The technology demonstration contract will run for 22 months from June 2013 to about April or May of 2015, Green says. After that, the effort will transition into a "sole-source" engineering, manufacturing, development (EMD) phase. That EMD contract will cover integration of the NGJ into the EA-18G in addition to the traditional milestones of critical design review (CDR) and building developmental test articles.

The EMD phase should run for about four years through 2019, Green says. The programme will then go into operational test late in 2019 or early 2020. Initial operational capability should happen in 2020.

The current focus for the NGJ programme is to develop a mid-band jammer, Green says. Mid-band is the most urgent need for the USN because most of the threats are found in that range. There is a relatively new and very capable low-band pod that is currently in production, Green says, which means that it does not need to be replaced immediately. Moreover, there are upgrades planned for that low-band jammer pod to keep it relevant to current and anticipated threat environment, he adds.

"The really urgent need is in the mid-band," Green says. "Ultimately, we'll have to look at upgrading the low-band and also add a high-band capability."

Green says he believes that the mid-band jammer will have to be a two-pod solution to allow for 360® coverage around the aircraft. There will be one pod on each side of the jet, not unlike the current system. However, the USN had originally wanted a single-pod solution.

The NJG will use active electronically scanned arrays (AESA) for its jamming pods. Unlike current generation systems which use gallium arsenide-based (GaAs) transmit/receive modules in those AESA antennas, the NGJ will use next-generation Gallium Nitride (GaN) chips.

"It blows my mind," Green says. "It is incredible the work that's been done over the last five or six years in GaN by the industry."

The new GaN chips could offer a better than ten-fold performance increase over the GaAs-based hardware-that includes superior handling of wide frequency bands.

"It's at least that," Green says. "We're seeing some very very good numbers."

Given the sheer power of the system, there is potential for the hardware to provide a powerful surveillance capability. The USN is examining the possibilities, but there would be limitations imposed by the shape and size of the pods.

The USN has dropped an earlier supersonic requirement for the new NGJ pod because the performance penalty in other areas of the flight envelop are too great. The current ALQ-99 pods are limited to Mach 0.95 even through the Super Hornet-derived E/A-18G is a supersonic airframe. The new NGJ pod will probably be optimized for subsonic speeds around Mach 0.9 or below.

"The reality of it is that we don't often have to go above 0.85 or 0.9," Green says. "It's not an optimum environment for what these aircraft do."

©US Navy




It is still an open question as to whether the NGJ will be integrated onto the F-35. Analysis has shown that it will be costly to integrate the new pods onto the stealthy fifth-generation jet, Green says. "Some of the preliminary numbers that we had for integration on the F-35-these were not small numbers," he says. "With the budget challenges that we have, it was decided that we would really take a singular approach right now with the Growler."

It will be several years before the USN takes another look at integrating the NGJ onto the F-35, Green says. That is because of the sheer cost of integration. In fact, when that might happen is anyone's guess.

"Depending upon the capacity that we need in airborne electronic attack, it is conceivable that we would stay with the Growler and not even look at a second platform until late into the next decade," Green says.

The US Department of Defense (DoD) is looking at alternative ways of conducting the electronic warfare mission. One of those might involve dispersed pieces of the NGJ pods flying on unmanned aircraft or other platforms which are commanded via data-links, Green says. Those dispersed jamming pods could be controlled from the ground or potentially from a Growler.

An early example of that concept can be found in the guise of the US Marine Corps' Intrepid Tiger II jamming pod that was developed in-house at the Naval Air Systems Command, Green says. The Intrepid Tiger II is controlled via data-links by controllers on the ground. That pod will be deploying to Afghanistan this summer.

 

[BON PLAN]

SH certainly isn't just a truck bomb. I would rather consider it as the new generation of American muscle cars like the new Corvette, Mustang or Camaro. They are not the most nimble sports cars in the market but they definitely are the biggest bang for the buck. In fact European exotics are playing catch up in terms of performance against these new generation of relatively cheap American muscle cars.

With the trend of A2A combat now firmly in BVR the SH is currently the biggest bang for the buck in the market.

In BVR, the SH is very lethal due to its combination of reduced RCS, AN/APG-79 and 12 AMRAAMs. It means that the SH can see an enemy 4 or 4+ gen fighter before the latter can see it while its 12 AMRAAMs means that it has more than enough missiles to lob at the enemy from very long distances.

And should the fight reaches the WVR, I don't think the SH is at a disadvantage against any opposing 4 or 4+ gen fighter. It may not have TVC but it has one of the best nose pointing abilities of any current 4 or 4+ gen fighter (without losing too much energy during maneuvers - TVC equipped Russian fighters quickly lose energy in intensive subsonic maneuvers). Certainly, the SH has a better nose pointing ability than the Rafale. in any case, since the SH is already equipped with HMD and AIM 9x it wouldn't have to maneuver a lot to fire at the enemy.

But as a word of caution for those fanboys who are so enamored with agility in fighter the recent study in the trends of recent missile era air combats has solidly concluded that A2A combat will very rarely happen in WVR. In fact the vast majority of air combat kills since the advent of A2A missiles have been done in BVR. Here is the study for your perusal: file:///C:/Users/MICHAEL%20PC/Downloads/Air-to-Air-Report-%20(2).pdf

A muscle car ?

Where are the muscles? low powered it is.

A muscle car only able to run straigh forward (only 7.6G when all the others reach 9)

12 AMRAAM ? it's only a "Le Bourget" show configuration.
In this case we must put on the Rafale : 1 Meteor on each fuselage side. 3 Meteor on a tri station pod (as AASM one) on each hard point of wings (4 hard points => 3x4 = 12 Meteor). And add 2 MICA on each external points of wings and 2 MICA on each wingtip.
Grand total : 14 METEOR and 4 MICA. There is one hard point free (centerline) for a 2000+ external fuel tank.

Nose pointing ability ? I think you are viewing SH18 air show in accelerate mode. It is anemic. YES, it can put high AoA, but slowly and with a huge energy leak.

HMD? Rafale is the sole to non have it, but in 2018 it will be done. Even a Gripen has it now.

And Rafale have MICA IR. A great advantage against shorter range AIM9X.

SH18 is definitly a old horse.

 

[BON PLAN]

New Kit on the Block II
Changing Course, Rules of Engagement for Maritime Strike
May 16, 2016 in Defense
During recent flight tests at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, Boeing and the Navy launched a network-enabled Harpoon Block II Plus from an F/A-18. Once in flight, the crew input new coordinates that redirected the missile to hit a moving target.

“Adding a datalink to the Block II Harpoon is much like adding an app to a smart phone,” said Beth Kluba, vice president of Boeing Weapons & Missile Systems. “It gives warfighters a brand-new level of precision targeting and flexibility to stay ahead of threats while keeping costs and the learning curve low.”

The U.S. Navy and Boeing are on schedule to deliver this new capability to the fleet in 2017.

Watch the video to learn from the program’s lead test pilot how the Harpoon Block II Plus will redefine war-at-sea tactics.

The Harpoon Block II Plus missile rests on the wing of the F/A-18 moments before a test launch at Naval Air Station China Lake in California.

The Harpoon Block II Plus missile completed a successful test launch from an F/A-18.
http://www.boeing.com/features/2016/05/new-kit-on-the-block-05-16.page

A Powerfull weapon.
It's more than time EXOCET block 3 (more than 180 km range) be integrated on Rafale.....

 

[BON PLAN]

The very foundation for BVR combat is Friend or Foe Identifying system which cannot be fooled and there is no electronic Jamming or attack .It can used against Pak but not China .

I'm quite sure, in case of a high intensity war, the air will be full of electronic signals, counter signals, noise, lack of GPS because satelittes being destroyed... and the sky full of planes : foe of course, but also friends.... So to avoid friendly fire, it will be "back to basics" : WVR fire.

 

[WolfPack86]

Boeing Delivers 1st EA-18G Growler Featuring Bharat Electronics Limited Cockpit Subassembly
BEL also produces cockpit subassemblies for F/A-18E/F Super Hornets
Follow-on order further expands Boeing’s relationship with Indian industry
BANGALORE, India, May 30, 2012 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] on May 3 delivered to the U.S. Navy the first EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft with a cockpit subassembly produced by Bangalore-based Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL). The subassembly provides cockpit floodlighting compatible with the aircraft's Night Vision Imaging System (NVIS).

Boeing awarded BEL an initial contract in March 2011 for work on Super Hornet cockpit subassemblies. That contract included options to renew annually for up to four years. As a result of BEL's demonstrated performance, Boeing recently exercised an option to renew the contract for another year.

"BEL continues to demonstrate its capabilities and its position as a valued partner to Boeing," said Dennis Swanson, vice president of International Business Development for Boeing Defense, Space & Security in India. "BEL's work on P-8I, Super Hornets and Growlers is another example of how Indian companies are becoming a part of the global supply chain while Boeing helps them expand their opportunities across the global aerospace industry."

Other EA-18G parts produced by BEL include a complex-machined stowage panel for the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System connector cable and an avionics cooling system fan test switch panel with an NVIS-compatible floodlight assembly. Some of these cockpit subassemblies also will be installed on Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets.

In addition to its F/A-18E/F and EA-18G work, BEL provides Identification Friend or Foe interrogators and Data Link II communications systems for the Indian Navy's fleet of P-8I maritime reconnaissance aircraft. Boeing and BEL also partnered to establish the Analysis & Experimentation Centre in Bangalore in 2009. The center is a resource for collaboration, experimentation and discovery where the two companies work together to help the Indian Armed Forces understand the potential operational impacts of new system concepts, innovative technologies, and emerging and evolving processes.

BEL is an Indian defense public sector company and a leading Indian defense electronics company. It is engaged in the design, development and manufacture of a wide range of cutting-edge Command, Control, Communications, Computing and Intelligence solutions; military communication systems; radars and sonars, as well as naval and electronic warfare systems for defense and security applications.
A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world's largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world's largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $32 billion business with 61,000 employees worldwide. Follow us on Twitter: @BoeingDefense.
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2012-05...harat-Electronics-Limited-Cockpit-Subassembly

 

[WolfPack86]

Boeing Unveils EA-18G Growler for Australia

 

[asianobserve]

Sir unable to open the file,can you give another link

Sorry for that. Please google "Trends in Air-to-Air Combat."

It is a excellent strike bomber and OK fighter ,IAF reject it due to its low max speed and low max G limit being only 7.5g instead of desired 9g

It is true that is has a lower speed than some of the 4 or 4+ gen fighters out there which is mainly due to its wing design. But the upcoming advanced SH will have more powerful engines. The 2g difference is not significant given the tech available to SH and its turning and nose pointing abilities:

The very foundation for BVR combat is Friend or Foe Identifying system which cannot be fooled and there is no electronic Jamming or attack .It can used against Pak but not China .

No. The very basic foundation of BVR air combat is the ability to see and shoot first. IFF is built in all US air assets. As of now the US is set to induct Mode 5. Anybody would be a total fool to think that the US has not considered China in its offensive and defensive system. Right now China is the front and center of the major threat that the US is planning for. India would be best served if it will hitch in this effort.

HMD and HMTS along with HBS missile have made nose point ability obsolete

I just pointed out the noise pointing authority of the SH since fanboys are fond of measuring the abilities of fighters to do air ballet.

In fact you are right about the obsolescence of WVR maneuvering in air combat. Please read the study I mentioned above. According to the study if similarly equipped fighters (with modern HOBS missiles slaved to HMD) engage in WVR the most likely end result is mutual kills.

TVC are use very carefully they increase the the instantaneous turn rate to very high number about twice to thrice that of non TVC fighter which at those speed lead to high lose but allow to doge missile and give a edge in dogfight as you have tighter turn and faster roll and better acceleration.

You should ask yourself why Western countries do not employ TVC in their frontline fighters (except the US in F-22 which is only in 2D) despite having studied it and built up prototypes even before the Russians. On a cost-benefit analysis the cost of TVC far outweighs benefits.

Pak will be easy but with S 400 with China it will be difficult as there are too many sensors and any passive so it will be difficult to take out ,S 500 is put of question.With Russia we have good relation and with China the economic angle makes the war difficult .
Some more info on NGJ:

The previous instances of Western fighters (mostly flown in by Israelis) being able to get past state of the art Soviet-made air defenses should tell you a lot about the ability of Western electronic warfare systems. The latest NGJ that is set to be introduced into SH Growlers is substantially more powerful and smarter.

You also have to consider other systems like MALD.

• IN FOCUS: US NAVY NEXT GENERATION JAMMER PROCEEDS, BUT F-35 INTEGRATION DEFERRED INDEFINITELY

IN FOCUS: US Navy Next Generation Jammer proceeds, but F-35 integration deferred indefinitely

The F-35 does not really need the NGJ pod. It has been designed from the outset to have its own electronic warfare system. And the F-35 can link its electronic warfare system to other assets.

The F-35 system has enhanced radar warning (which provides instantaneous analysis, identification and tracing of emitting radars), and multi-spectral countermeasures for self-defense against both radar and infrared guided threats. It is also capable of electronic surveilance, including geo-location of radars. This allows the F-35 to evade, jam, or attack them, either autonomously or as part of a networked effort. The enhanced capabilities of the ASQ-239 (and integration with F-35's other systems) allows it to perform SIGINT (signals intelligence) electronic collection. The aircraft's stealth capabilities make it possible for an F-35 to undertake passive detection and SIGINT while operating closer to an emitter with less vulnerability. For the use of active deception jamming, the F-35's stealth design also allows false target generation and range-gate stealing with less use of power.

The EW system also sends and receives data and status and warning information from other on board systems through the MADL datalink.

The ASQ-239 has ten dedicated apertures, six on the wing leading edge, two on the trailing edge, and two on the horizontal stabilizer trailing edge. The system also has the potential to use the F-35's other apertures, most notably that associated with its APG-81 EASA radar. In addition to functioning with the radar, this array, transmitting only at high power, could function as a stand-off jammer.

When used in receive only mode, the APG-81 provides enhanced SIGINT capability. The radar could also be used , following future upgrades, as an electronic attack weapon, burning out emitters with pure power or injecting hostile radars or command and control systems with computer inputsthat would provide false targets, misleading information, or shut down of an air defense system.

Combining these capabilities and data links will give F-35s to do more than defend themselves or jam or attack enemy emitters they locate.

(Sorry I cannot paste the source)

[/QUOTE]

 

[asianobserve]

A muscle car ?

Where are the muscles? low powered it is.

Judge for yourself which is low powered:

1. Snecma M88 - Max. thrust: 50 kN (11,250 lbf) dry, 75 kN (16,900 lbf) wet (afterburning) / T/W ratio: 5.7:1 (dry), 8.5:1 (wet/afterburning)
2. GE F414 - Max thrust: 13,000 lbf (57.8 kN) military thrust, 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) with afterburner / T/W ratio" 9:1

For the IAF, the induction of the Sh would have the added benefit of engine commonality between its Tejas and the SH.

A muscle car only able to run straigh forward (only 7.6G when all the others reach 9)

That's why I said the SH is like the current muscle cars of the Americans, they are as nimble as the European exotics for the lesser price. These new muscle cars handles better and has better engines than more expensive European cars. Note, if you're a car enthusiast you should know that the current gen of Corvette, Camaro and Mustang are not the same as their predecessors. The only advantage of European exotics over current gen American muscle cars are the interior/materials quality and external looks.

12 AMRAAM ? it's only a "Le Bourget" show configuration.
In this case we must put on the Rafale : 1 Meteor on each fuselage side. 3 Meteor on a tri station pod (as AASM one) on each hard point of wings (4 hard points => 3x4 = 12 Meteor). And add 2 MICA on each external points of wings and 2 MICA on each wingtip.
Grand total : 14 METEOR and 4 MICA. There is one hard point free (centerline) for a 2000+ external fuel tank.

That is the max load-out for SH. In case required there is no reason it cannot use it.

BTW, I think you're being disingenuous with your Rafale A2A weapons load out. for the record the air force Rafale has only 14 hardpoints. Where will you put that 4 more MICA?

In any case, Rafale is 40% more expensive than the SH without clear advantage. So sorry, the SH has the clear over-all advantage.

Nose pointing ability ? I think you are viewing SH18 air show in accelerate mode. It is anemic. YES, it can put high AoA, but slowly and with a huge energy leak.

Watch:


Note that the Su30 has TVC and yet the SH matches its maneuvers without much loss in energy. The SH right from the start was designed for subsonic maneuvering, it is where it excels at.

HMD? Rafale is the sole to non have it, but in 2018 it will be done. Even a Gripen has it now.

Fact is Rafale has no HMD while the SH's JHMCS is undergoing upgrades already. So from BVR to WVR Rafale will be toasted against the SH.

And Rafale have MICA IR. A great advantage against shorter range AIM9X.

Rafale is lucky if it can aim its MICA at the SH before it is blasted out of the sky by AMRAAMM shot. And if the fight reaches WVR, the partnership of the JHMCS and AIM 9x is far superior to MICA without HMCS.

SH18 is definitly a old horse.

Google is your friend:

1. Rafale - 1970's design, first flight 1986;
2. SH - 1990s design, first flight 1995.

And don't say that the SH is merely an evolution of the legacy Hornet for it is not. The only thing it shares with the legacy Hornet is its general external layout (which was done for marketing purposes so that the US Congress will not balk at the prospect of designing an "all-new" Navy fighter (which actually that's what they got in the SH).

 

[asianobserve]

I'm quite sure, in case of a high intensity war, the air will be full of electronic signals, counter signals, noise, lack of GPS because satelittes being destroyed... and the sky full of planes : foe of course, but also friends.... So to avoid friendly fire, it will be "back to basics" : WVR fire.

Please review the studies on air-to-air combats for friendly fire between Western fighters is very low. In fact you will be surprised to know that there was actually no coalition aircraft fratricide during the 1991 Gulf War despite the fact that the air campaign generated the most number of air combat sorties since the Korean War. During the first day alone there were 1,300 coalition sorties into Iraqi airspace versus only 100 Iraqi combat sorties.

Tellingly, almost all air kills (against competing fighters as versus helicopters or transport aircrafts) during Gulf War were done BVR. This alone should tell you that more than 20 years ago dogfighting was already passe. Now technology in air combat has moved in leaps and bounds already making it even more difficult for opposing fighters to reach WVR combat.

So please google "Trend in Air-to-Air Combat" so that you can read an in dept academic study on this topic.

 

[BON PLAN]

Judge for yourself which is low powered:

1. Snecma M88 - Max. thrust: 50 kN (11,250 lbf) dry, 75 kN (16,900 lbf) wet (afterburning) / T/W ratio: 5.7:1 (dry), 8.5:1 (wet/afterburning)
2. GE F414 - Max thrust: 13,000 lbf (57.8 kN) military thrust, 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) with afterburner / T/W ratio" 9:1

Judge by yourself :
Dry weight of Rafale : 9.5 tons.
Dry weight of SH : more than 14 tons.

 

[BON PLAN]

BTW, I think you're being disingenuous with your Rafale A2A weapons load out. for the record the air force Rafale has only 14 hardpoints. Where will you put that 4 more MICA?

Just have a look : 4 mica on external points and wing tip of each wing.

And a tri station for 3 meteor on each of the four hard points under wings (where you can see on this picture : 2 x 2000L tanks and 2 x tri station for AASM bombs).

 

[BON PLAN]

In any case, Rafale is 40% more expensive than the SH without clear advantage. So sorry, the SH has the clear over-all advantage.

Maybe when 1 euro = 1.4 USD, 2 years ago.
Now 1 euro = 1.1 USD....