Indian Navy MiG 29K

[Trololo]

Don't underestimate this beauty. It's Air Force variant has served us well in conflicts. The K version is probably the last that it will sell. The Su-75 should have been marketed under the MiG banner (since they are all under the same UAC corporation).

Should extract the maximum benefits from it until our own aircrafts come in the picture. Which wont happen until the end of this decade.

 

[Tshering22]

Should extract the maximum benefits from it until our own aircrafts come in the picture. Which wont happen until the end of this decade.

Let's hope, bud. I don't know what we will make out of a 50% availability if poop hits the fan. 29Ks are ferocious fighter jets, but availability is a big, big factor. Navy isn't happy with the downtimes. Also the MTBOs are too quick.

 

[Trololo]

Let's hope, bud. I don't know what we will make out of a 50% availability if poop hits the fan. 29Ks are ferocious fighter jets, but availability is a big, big factor. Navy isn't happy with the downtimes. Also the MTBOs are too quick.

Work was initiated to deal with the availability issue. Idk how far it has progressed.

 

[Adm Kenobi]

MiG-29K with two 88 KN engines can carry only few AAMs, then how can Rafale-M with just 75KN engines can takeoff from our carriers with enough weapons? It won't be suitable for our carriers right?

MiG-29k can carry 0-8 A2A missiles depending on the mission requirement (CCM included).

MiG-29k can take off with a maximum take off weight of around 22.4T from Vikramaditya' long take off position. I don't have the numbers for the short take off position but it is estimated at around 21T.

MiG-29k doesn't have the same empty weight as other 29s, it's empty weight is estimated at 12-12.1 (a tonne heavier than initial 29s). Fuel capacity is also increased to 4.8-4.9T & a payload capacity of 5.5T

29k has 9 hardpoints, 1 at centreline (for fuel or refueling pod) & 8 wings (4 each).
It would carry at least 1 centreline fuel tank (2150L) or two smaller tanks (1150L each) when on CAP.
For long range ops (A2A) it would carry 3 tanks & 6 A2A missiles
(8.3-8.4T fuel, a weight of 21.5T + lots of drag).

Rafale M has demonstrated that it can take off with some >19.6T weight from the SBTF (full internal fuel of around 4.7T & a payload of ~4.3T).
Two 2000L tanks, 1 Exocet, 4 Mica.
(7.9T fuel, weight of >19.6T + lots of drag).

Rafale M has superior lift generating feature & a lighter airframe compared to MiG-29k allowing Rafale M to close the gap of payload (from STOBAR) to just 1T.

But as far as payload goes it can also carry more payload than the Chinki J-15, I believe it is also same for Tejas naval as @Bleh pointed out earlier

Simply no, 29k can carry some 5.5T max payload with full fuel when launched from long take off position compared to 6.5T of su33/J15 with full fuel & long take off position.
LCA Navy sits much below at some <2T & full fuel. N LCA doesn't have the range nor payload to be a naval "fighter", it can be an excellent trainer.



In 2018, Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba had said that "issues related to maintenance and availability of spare parts for the MiG 29K fleet had been addressed." The main problem in availability of 29k/kub were the engine spares & the fault in them as half of them didn't meat the qualitative requirements..later resolved^

We have 37 K & 5 KUB currently, divided between sq 300 & 303, both sq are deployed on Vikramaditya (some aircrafts from both, experience for both sq). We can deploy all 37+5 on Vikky+Vikrant if need be, availability rate is applied *after* that not before. So the argument of only 60-70% of 29k/kub (25-29) can be put on 2 carriers is **completely** false. With 37 MiG-29k available, we can put all 37 on the 2 AC when Vikrant comes + 5 KUB for training.
18 MiG-29k can be deployed on each (enough for peace time ops + less number of aircrafts coupled with the same amount of spares will result in better availability on board).
70% is achievable, 12-13 MiG-29k ready to launch on the flight deck of each carrier when 18 are deployed on each carrier. Not a pretty number but we have operated even less than that in peace time.
for war time we need more, 24 MiG-29k (or equivalent) for each + trainers. + IN also wants to operate shore based ones...req for fighters is high in the navy.

The availability depends on the number of spares available, and the number of spares depend on how many you can produce which depends on how much you are willing to spend.
Somebody had already mentioned this in the thread, availability isn't kept at high rates when tense situations aren't present & Rafale M availability with Marine Nationale is 50% (now >55%). MiG-29k availability went down because the spare engines sent by Russia were faulty, which was later resolved & availability was improved. RFI for 57 MRCBF was released 1 year before this (Jan 2017) to replace all 45 MiG-29k/kub (3 crashed later). With financial constraints & the issues resolved with MiG-29k/kub the number went down to 36 & now 26. 18 fighter & 8 trainer, just for Vikrant. The rest of the MiG-29k/kub to be used by Hansa & Vikky if 26 MRCBF are bought.

So please don't bring the 2014-15 availability numbers & the issue that has been resolved for 4+ years

Cuz I know for a fact atleast one lift on INS Vikramaditya is not compatible with the dimensions of Rafale M?

Neither of the lifts in Vikky are 10m/+,