Boeing is bidding to get the Navy in India to purchase the F-18 E/F Block III (was advanced, the X...) for its existing ski-jump equipped carriers as well as their scheduled to be commissioned CATOBAR future carriers. In a statement by Dan Gillian, VP of the Super Hornet program...

"We've done a lot of simulation work with the Indian Navy to better understand their requirements and we fill(sic.) comfortable that the Super Hornet can operate from all their carriers, both the ones fielded today and the ones in the future... We think we can move around the deck, be very mission capable with a relevant weapons load-out and fuel load-out to give the Navy what they need... The Super Hornet as built today can operate from Indian carriers."

It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. The deal would likely require local production and a significant tech transfer to India, as almost all of their deals to date have done. Obviously, military deals with India are fraught with peril from a business perspective, but it could give the F-18 a new lease on life.

The above information was garnered from this article:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/13 ... p-carriers

We do know that the Navy has previously tested the F-18 (and the F-14) on ski-jumps, so the claim is not outlandish, though I have no idea about what the actual war load of the frames might be...
(reference within this article)
http://allthingsaero.com/military-aviat ... g-ski-jump

I do wonder what sort of war load a ski jump launched super hornet can get airborne...

It doesn't fit the lifts

http://www.stratpost.com/failure-to-launch/

I mean it does, but it's tight.

Since their CATOBAR carrier is still years out, there is still time to expand the deck edge lifts. It won't be pretty or cheap, but it can be done. As for their older carriers, with the mid deck lift, I don't know how they'd make that work without quite literally years of fabrication work to expand the lifts and reroute everything that's more than likely tightly routed around them.

I still don't think that they'll do anything but go with more indigenously produced Mig-29K models. Anything else would require anyone doing business with them to basically give them so much tech and manufacturing capability that I don't know if India could possibly afford the price that should be asked.

Basically, yeah. But the Indian Navy really, REALLY likes the SHornet and really, REALLY dislikes the Fulcrum

I guess they like to spend money then.
Deactivate the mid deck lifts, install edge lifts, and go with hornets.

I'm still surprised there is no interest in the FC-31. Uses the same engines as the Migs and they could probably use the same electronics as the FGFA will have.

Another thing that surprises me, is that India, Russia and China are all developing carriers at the moment. You'd think that them all being part of BRICS and all budget constrained, that they would be working on a common design and split the development costs. Especially since their requirements and what they are working toward are very similar.

Slug71 wrote:

I'm still surprised there is no interest in the FC-31. Uses the same engines as the Migs and they could probably use the same electronics as the FGFA will have.

One it is chinese, two it is essentially slideware, three it has no customer, four no non prototype airframes, five no carrier variant nor experience designing a carrier capable airframe.

Slug71 wrote:

Another thing that surprises me, is that India, Russia and China are all developing carriers at the moment. You'd think that them all being part of BRICS and all budget constrained, that they would be working on a common design and split the development costs. Especially since their requirements and what they are working toward are very similar.

BRICS is not like that. There is no real economic cooperation or military integration. It is a hand holding flag waving organisation.

Ozair wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

I'm still surprised there is no interest in the FC-31. Uses the same engines as the Migs and they could probably use the same electronics as the FGFA will have.

One it is chinese, two it is essentially slideware, three it has no customer, four no non prototype airframes, five no carrier variant nor experience designing a carrier capable airframe.

Slug71 wrote:

Another thing that surprises me, is that India, Russia and China are all developing carriers at the moment. You'd think that them all being part of BRICS and all budget constrained, that they would be working on a common design and split the development costs. Especially since their requirements and what they are working toward are very similar.

BRICS is not like that. There is no real economic cooperation or military integration. It is a hand holding flag waving organisation.

1, Is really irrelevant
2, There are either two prototypes or the first one received pretty substantial updates.
3, it's still in development.
4, it's still in development.
5, yes there will be a carrier variant
And Shenyang J-15

And while not much, there is economic cooperation.
There is also military integration to an extent considering both China and India operate Russian carriers and aircraft. There's probably other ships or subs too. China also have aircraft based off russian aircraft and then theres the PAK FA / FGFA. There's probably a lot more (technology transfers) but they are not as open about their projects as the west is, so it takes a lot of research if the info is even available.
I'm sure there will be a military version of the Comac 929 or a variant thereof too.

Slug71 wrote:

1, Is really irrelevant

Hardly irrelevant if you are proposing that India acquire a Chinese aircraft. We have only recently had one of the worst border disputes between the two nations in a significant period of time.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/world/asia/china-india-standoff-withdrawal.html?mcubz=0

That is hardly the political climate for India to decide to acquire a Chinese military aircraft...

Slug71 wrote:

2, There are either two prototypes or the first one received pretty substantial updates.

And that is an excellent review of the situation. No one knows if there is one or two aircraft but either way it doesn't matter. There is so little detail and so much vapourware when it comes to the FC-31 that no one has any idea what is truth and what is rumour.

Slug71 wrote:

3, it's still in development.

Sorry that doesn't cut it. Can you name a single military fighter aircraft that is being developed without a customer? There is no indication that the Chinese are actually going to acquire the aircraft and it appears that Shenyang are developing it to export. So far there has been no confirmed sale or even interest by a credible customer and certainly not one who is likely to fund the development.

Slug71 wrote:

4, it's still in development.

The F-35 has 16 jets in its development phase, the PAK-FA appears to have at least ten, the J-20 appears to have at least 8-10. Still there aren't more than two FC-31s. It clearly is not really in development, not in the context of military fighter aircraft development. It is just being shopped around by Shenyang looking for someone to fund the dev work required and currently the FC-31 is more equivalent to the X-32/35 than their subsequent prototype variants.

Slug71 wrote:

5, yes there will be a carrier variant

Saying there will be a carrier development when they don't even have a customer for a land based version is naive.

Slug71 wrote:

And Shenyang J-15

My personal opinion is that China built the J-15, by way of extensive Chinese copying of the Su-33. The J-15 has also not finished development and Shenyang has had numerous issues such as the below.

China National Radio reported yesterday that a top-class PLA J-15 pilot died after he lost control of his plane during a simulated deck landing exercise at a unspecified inland base. “When Zhang Chao was flying a carrier-based jet fighter in a mock landing on an aircraft carrier on April 27, he encountered a breakdown with the fly-by-wire flight control system,” the report said. “At the critical moment, Zhang tried his best to save the aircraft. When the pushrods failed, he ejected and died as a result of an injury on landing.”

Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Dong warned that the fatal accident might indicate that the J-15 was not of high enough standard for an aircraft carrier, which would be a major disappointment to the navy.
The reason behind the crash of the J-15 could either be a failure in the flight control system or a problem with production quality
“As was with case with accidents during trial flights of the Su-27s in the 1980s, the reason behind the crash of the J-15 could either be a failure in the flight control system or a problem with production quality,” Wong said.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/1995729/fatal-crash-chinese-j-15-carrier-jet-puts-question-mark

So the jury is still out on the ability of Shenyang to design and build a viable carrier based aircraft and given the context of this thread, that India is having issues with the Russian designed and manufactured MiG-29K, it seems highly unlikely that India would fund the development and acquisition of a new carrier aircraft from a manufacturer who, as with MiG, has yet to demonstrate competency.

Slug71 wrote:

There is also military integration to an extent considering both China and India operate Russian carriers and aircraft. There's probably other ships or subs too. China also have aircraft based off russian aircraft and then theres the PAK FA / FGFA. There's probably a lot more (technology transfers) but they are not as open about their projects as the west is, so it takes a lot of research if the info is even available.
I'm sure there will be a military version of the Comac 929 or a variant thereof too.

That is not integration, it is merely commonality and in actual practical terms India and China operate vastly different variants of Russian aircraft and carriers. Both have been customised and modified heavily from their Russian base versions.

What does the Comac 929 have to do with this thread, are they planning on flying it off a carrier...

Ozair wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

1, Is really irrelevant

Hardly irrelevant if you are proposing that India acquire a Chinese aircraft. We have only recently had one of the worst border disputes between the two nations in a significant period of time.

Neither friends nor enemies, nor frenemies for that matter, are forever.
That said, I would agree that the chances of India acquiring Chinese military aircraft is highly improbable in the near and mid term future. As for the far future, murky it is.

Ozair wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

1, Is really irrelevant

Hardly irrelevant if you are proposing that India acquire a Chinese aircraft. We have only recently had one of the worst border disputes between the two nations in a significant period of time.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/world/asia/china-india-standoff-withdrawal.html?mcubz=0

That is hardly the political climate for India to decide to acquire a Chinese military aircraft...

Slug71 wrote:

2, There are either two prototypes or the first one received pretty substantial updates.

And that is an excellent review of the situation. No one knows if there is one or two aircraft but either way it doesn't matter. There is so little detail and so much vapourware when it comes to the FC-31 that no one has any idea what is truth and what is rumour.

Slug71 wrote:

3, it's still in development.

Sorry that doesn't cut it. Can you name a single military fighter aircraft that is being developed without a customer? There is no indication that the Chinese are actually going to acquire the aircraft and it appears that Shenyang are developing it to export. So far there has been no confirmed sale or even interest by a credible customer and certainly not one who is likely to fund the development.

Slug71 wrote:

4, it's still in development.

The F-35 has 16 jets in its development phase, the PAK-FA appears to have at least ten, the J-20 appears to have at least 8-10. Still there aren't more than two FC-31s. It clearly is not really in development, not in the context of military fighter aircraft development. It is just being shopped around by Shenyang looking for someone to fund the dev work required and currently the FC-31 is more equivalent to the X-32/35 than their subsequent prototype variants.

Slug71 wrote:

5, yes there will be a carrier variant

Saying there will be a carrier development when they don't even have a customer for a land based version is naive.

Slug71 wrote:

And Shenyang J-15

My personal opinion is that China built the J-15, by way of extensive Chinese copying of the Su-33. The J-15 has also not finished development and Shenyang has had numerous issues such as the below.

China National Radio reported yesterday that a top-class PLA J-15 pilot died after he lost control of his plane during a simulated deck landing exercise at a unspecified inland base. “When Zhang Chao was flying a carrier-based jet fighter in a mock landing on an aircraft carrier on April 27, he encountered a breakdown with the fly-by-wire flight control system,” the report said. “At the critical moment, Zhang tried his best to save the aircraft. When the pushrods failed, he ejected and died as a result of an injury on landing.”

Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Dong warned that the fatal accident might indicate that the J-15 was not of high enough standard for an aircraft carrier, which would be a major disappointment to the navy.
The reason behind the crash of the J-15 could either be a failure in the flight control system or a problem with production quality
“As was with case with accidents during trial flights of the Su-27s in the 1980s, the reason behind the crash of the J-15 could either be a failure in the flight control system or a problem with production quality,” Wong said.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/1995729/fatal-crash-chinese-j-15-carrier-jet-puts-question-mark

So the jury is still out on the ability of Shenyang to design and build a viable carrier based aircraft and given the context of this thread, that India is having issues with the Russian designed and manufactured MiG-29K, it seems highly unlikely that India would fund the development and acquisition of a new carrier aircraft from a manufacturer who, as with MiG, has yet to demonstrate competency.

Slug71 wrote:

There is also military integration to an extent considering both China and India operate Russian carriers and aircraft. There's probably other ships or subs too. China also have aircraft based off russian aircraft and then theres the PAK FA / FGFA. There's probably a lot more (technology transfers) but they are not as open about their projects as the west is, so it takes a lot of research if the info is even available.
I'm sure there will be a military version of the Comac 929 or a variant thereof too.

That is not integration, it is merely commonality and in actual practical terms India and China operate vastly different variants of Russian aircraft and carriers. Both have been customised and modified heavily from their Russian base versions.

What does the Comac 929 have to do with this thread, are they planning on flying it off a carrier...

Yes they have had issues over the border for a while. But I don't think the relationship is as bad as the media paints it. And it's irrelevant when you consider it uses Russian engines, the can switch out all the electronics, produce a lot of their own parts and apply their own RAM coating and paint.
Nothing is impossible.

All the Chinese projects are kept quiet. No one knew how many J-20s China had for a long time. Still don't. No one even knew about the FC-31 until it flew! Nor saw the second prototype until flight. China is not open about their military stuff. Heck, they even managed to keep one of their new carriers well hidden.

The FC-31 does have a customer. China!
Pakistan is a potential.
I highly doubt they are just offering it for export. That a lot of money and work to put into something in the hopes you can sell it. Why go through the trouble of such big changes for the second prototype. Not everyone treats development the same.
There are a number of reports saying that China will be operating them from their new carriers.

I'm sure the J-15 has issues. It's a first experience for them and if I'm not mistaken, was reverse engineered.
It's currently estimated that they have around 20 of them them. So 1 accident really isn't too bad.
My point is, they do have experience.

All I'm saying is, for budget strained forces, the FC-31 has potential. And since China is carrying the development costs, you're probably not going to find a 5th Gen fighter anywhere for the same cost. $70mil is claimed.

I'm copying this post over to the FC-31 thread since we are derailing this one.

Slug71, surely you're not being serious?

angad84 wrote:

Slug71, surely you're not being serious?

Why not?
Just look at India's recent shopping debacles. Cut the order of Rafales, then possible F-16s produced in India, selected and cancelled the A330MRTT - TWICE, issues with the MiGs, FGFA is dragging along, having trouble with the AMCA etc..
They want a lot for nothing. And they're typically not a fan of using US stuff because of the strings attached.
Their P-8s use different electronics to the US variant.
I highly doubt they will buy any F/A-18s.

To get what they really want, they either need deeper pockets or look outside the box.

Slug71 wrote:

angad84 wrote:

Slug71, surely you're not being serious?

Why not?
Just look at India's recent shopping debacles. Cut the order of Rafales, then possible F-16s produced in India, selected and cancelled the A330MRTT - TWICE, issues with the MiGs, FGFA is dragging along, having trouble with the AMCA etc..
They want a lot for nothing. And they're typically not a fan of using US stuff because of the strings attached.
Their P-8s use different electronics to the US variant.
I highly doubt they will buy any F/A-18s.

To get what they really want, they either need deeper pockets or look outside the box.

For a Nation that aren't a fan of the US stuff, they did well ordering C17's, C130J's, P8's along with Chinooks and Apaches.

Slug71 wrote:

And they're typically not a fan of using US stuff because of the strings attached.
Their P-8s use different electronics to the US variant.

India is buying US arms not because they like the hardware (although it seems that they do like the hardware). They are buying the arms because the Indian wants the technology transfer relating to the industrial off-set. They are making the US companies set up shop in India and "train" the indigenous companies in the ways of "western" aerospace manufacturing. The wind fall will not only support India's military aviation manufacturing capabilities, but also the commercial aviation (and space) as well.

It is very unlikely that India will get this kind of industrial know how from China, especially in the long run the two will be competitors for low cost aerospace manufacturing capacity.

As for the P-8s. It may be true that the Indian variant may have some diminished capabilities to the US variant relating to the highly sensitive equipment. However there are tons of other functionalities that are not dialed back, and the Indians will benefit from those technological upgrades as the US upgrades their P-8A's.

bt

angad84 wrote:

Basically, yeah. But the Indian Navy really, REALLY likes the SHornet and really, REALLY dislikes the Fulcrum

And the US Government is going to agree to Super Hornet related technology transfer this time?

best regards
Thomas

wezgulf3 wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

angad84 wrote:

Slug71, surely you're not being serious?

Why not?
Just look at India's recent shopping debacles. Cut the order of Rafales, then possible F-16s produced in India, selected and cancelled the A330MRTT - TWICE, issues with the MiGs, FGFA is dragging along, having trouble with the AMCA etc..
They want a lot for nothing. And they're typically not a fan of using US stuff because of the strings attached.
Their P-8s use different electronics to the US variant.
I highly doubt they will buy any F/A-18s.

To get what they really want, they either need deeper pockets or look outside the box.

For a Nation that aren't a fan of the US stuff, they did well ordering C17's, C130J's, P8's along with Chinooks and Apaches.

Cargo planes and helicopters don't have any sensitive equipment. Their P-8is have a lot of indigenous electronics and sensors.

Slug71 wrote:

Cargo planes and helicopters don't have any sensitive equipment. Their P-8is have a lot of indigenous electronics and sensors.

We have domestic comms and IFF on our P-8Is, because we haven't signed CISMOA/COMCASA. The bulk (all?) of mission related hardware and software is American.

tommy1808 wrote:

And the US Government is going to agree to Super Hornet related technology transfer this time?

best regards
Thomas

That's the idea but we'll only know if this fighter deal moves from RFI to RFP. All indications are that it will not.

angad84 wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

Cargo planes and helicopters don't have any sensitive equipment. Their P-8is have a lot of indigenous electronics and sensors.

We have domestic comms and IFF on our P-8Is, because we haven't signed CISMOA/COMCASA. The bulk (all?) of mission related hardware and software is American.

Correct, which is my point. The sensitive stuff is switched out. The AN/APY-10 also has export restrictions put on.

Good image in this link of all the indigenous equipment.

http://thestrategictimes.com/p-8i-neptune/amp/

Slug71 wrote:

angad84 wrote:

Slug71, surely you're not being serious?

Why not?

Because if you haven't noticed, China and India are so close to a major war that their soldiers are having fisticuffs on the border.

angad84 wrote:

That's the idea but we'll only know if this fighter deal moves from RFI to RFP. All indications are that it will not.

It appears that the Indian Navy is moving forward with the process, has down selected Boeing and Dassault and may issue an RFP later this year.

The Indian Navy has officially opened vendor discussions with Boeing Defense and Dassault Aviation under its most ambitious current aviation thrust, a quest for 57 multirole fighters to operate off its future aircraft carriers. Livefist can confirm that while the navy did receive four responses in response to its call for information last year, only two are being regarded as ‘serious contenders’.

A top Indian Navy aviation and procurement officer confirmed proceedings on the Multirole Carrier Borne Fighter (MRCBF) project to Livefist. He said, “We are treating only two of the responses as being from serious and ready contenders. This is in the interests of our current requirements and timelines.”

As projected here on Livefist before, the contest is progressing as a direct face-off between Boeing’s F/A-18 Block III Super Hornet and a modified version of Dassault’s Rafale M F3R standard. Livefist can confirm that the Indian Navy isn’t regarding by the same measure of seriousness the two other responses it has received — from Russia for the MiG-29K and from Sweden’s Saab for the concept Gripen Maritime. It is all but official, therefore, that these last two contenders don’t have a place in the potential race.

A request for proposal (RfP) process for the 57 naval fighters, to be executed under the Strategic Partnership (SP) model, could begin later this year. The navy is in the process of finetuning operational staff requirements before freezing naval air staff requirements (NASR).

While the navy hasn’t stipulated engine numbers and launch configuration in its RFI sent out last year, Livefist gathers that planners are steeply inclined towards catapult launch (CATOBAR) operations, all but confirming that India’s future aircraft carriers (IAC-2 onwards) will be flat-top vessels, rather than the ski-jump fitted aircraft carriers it has operated thus far (barring the original INS Vikrant in its early configuration). India’s first indigenous aircraft carrier, the new Vikrant-class, will be a ski-jump fitted ship like the INS Vikramaditya and INS Viraat before it.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/01 ... sault.html

Gripen E/F for Indian airforce and Gripen M for the Navy.

YuriMG2 wrote:

Gripen E/F for Indian airforce and Gripen M for the Navy.

SAAB was one of the four manufacturers for the RFI but it appears that the Gripen M didn't make it to down select by India.

Ozair wrote:

YuriMG2 wrote:

Gripen E/F for Indian airforce and Gripen M for the Navy.

SAAB was one of the four manufacturers for the RFI but it appears that the Gripen M didn't make it to down select by India.

That's no down select. It's the standard post-RFI/pre-RFP discussion with prospective vendors. No one has been removed from the competition. The Navy would probably like a straightforward two-way fight, but they are bound by the MoD's procurement rules. We are still some time away from a formal RFP, a LOT of time away from selecting the winner, and about a decade out from delivery. And this is all contingent on the Government ponying up for 57 new jets that'll likely cost north of $12 bn. Carrier aviation is not a priority at the moment.

angad84 wrote:

That's no down select. It's the standard post-RFI/pre-RFP discussion with prospective vendors. No one has been removed from the competition. The Navy would probably like a straightforward two-way fight, but they are bound by the MoD's procurement rules. We are still some time away from a formal RFP, a LOT of time away from selecting the winner, and about a decade out from delivery. And this is all contingent on the Government ponying up for 57 new jets that'll likely cost north of $12 bn. Carrier aviation is not a priority at the moment.

While I’m not up to date on Indian MoD procurement rules this quote from the article seems to indicate it has become a two horse race.

A top Indian Navy aviation and procurement officer confirmed proceedings on the Multirole Carrier Borne Fighter (MRCBF) project to Livefist. He said, “We are treating only two of the responses as being from serious and ready contenders. This is in the interests of our current requirements and timelines.”

Slug71 wrote:

I'm still surprised there is no interest in the FC-31. Uses the same engines as the Migs and they could probably use the same electronics as the FGFA will have.

Another thing that surprises me, is that India, Russia and China are all developing carriers at the moment. You'd think that them all being part of BRICS and all budget constrained, that they would be working on a common design and split the development costs. Especially since their requirements and what they are working toward are very similar.

Please tell me you're joking because otherwise this post will go to posterity as one of the most idiots of the decade. You must be Groot from Guardians of the Galaxy 2!

Nean1 wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

I'm still surprised there is no interest in the FC-31. Uses the same engines as the Migs and they could probably use the same electronics as the FGFA will have.

Another thing that surprises me, is that India, Russia and China are all developing carriers at the moment. You'd think that them all being part of BRICS and all budget constrained, that they would be working on a common design and split the development costs. Especially since their requirements and what they are working toward are very similar.

Please tell me you're joking because otherwise this post will go to posterity as one of the most idiots of the decade. You must be Groot from Guardians of the Galaxy 2!

I'm not joking and entitled to my own opinion. If you want to come out swinging with personal insults and then have no constructive opinion to offer in return, doesn't say much about your own character.

Slug71 wrote:

Nean1 wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

I'm still surprised there is no interest in the FC-31. Uses the same engines as the Migs and they could probably use the same electronics as the FGFA will have.

Another thing that surprises me, is that India, Russia and China are all developing carriers at the moment. You'd think that them all being part of BRICS and all budget constrained, that they would be working on a common design and split the development costs. Especially since their requirements and what they are working toward are very similar.

Please tell me you're joking because otherwise this post will go to posterity as one of the most idiots of the decade. You must be Groot from Guardians of the Galaxy 2!

I'm not joking and entitled to my own opinion. If you want to come out swinging with personal insults and then have no constructive opinion to offer in return, doesn't say much about your own character.

BRICS isn't a union, it was a term made up by an American economist to give a term to upcoming countries. They do not share many geopolitical interests together, and actually, have some conflicting interest. China and India aren't the best of friends, China supports Pakistan and there were some border clashes between them in recent years. Russia and India are developing a fighter together, so that might be worth to also share the cost of an aircraft carrier development, but I don't know if they have the same requirements.

So yes, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but in this case, I don't think it holds much water.

Ozair wrote:

angad84 wrote:

That's no down select. It's the standard post-RFI/pre-RFP discussion with prospective vendors. No one has been removed from the competition. The Navy would probably like a straightforward two-way fight, but they are bound by the MoD's procurement rules. We are still some time away from a formal RFP, a LOT of time away from selecting the winner, and about a decade out from delivery. And this is all contingent on the Government ponying up for 57 new jets that'll likely cost north of $12 bn. Carrier aviation is not a priority at the moment.

While I’m not up to date on Indian MoD procurement rules this quote from the article seems to indicate it has become a two horse race.

A top Indian Navy aviation and procurement officer confirmed proceedings on the Multirole Carrier Borne Fighter (MRCBF) project to Livefist. He said, “We are treating only two of the responses as being from serious and ready contenders. This is in the interests of our current requirements and timelines.”

If the MoD procurement office decides that Antonov should be sent a tender for a carrier fighter, it will happen. The Navy is chasing the SHornet and Rafale, but that doesn't mean they get to pick how the procurement is handled. For instance, take a look at the carrier and fighter they currently operate...

Dutchy wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

Nean1 wrote:

Please tell me you're joking because otherwise this post will go to posterity as one of the most idiots of the decade. You must be Groot from Guardians of the Galaxy 2!

I'm not joking and entitled to my own opinion. If you want to come out swinging with personal insults and then have no constructive opinion to offer in return, doesn't say much about your own character.

BRICS isn't a union, it was a term made up by an American economist to give a term to upcoming countries. They do not share many geopolitical interests together, and actually, have some conflicting interest. China and India aren't the best of friends, China supports Pakistan and there were some border clashes between them in recent years. Russia and India are developing a fighter together, so that might be worth to also share the cost of an aircraft carrier development, but I don't know if they have the same requirements.

So yes, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but in this case, I don't think it holds much water.

It was a term made up by the then Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Since then, they have become a lot more than just a "term". They absolutely share interests. They have set up the New Development Bank and BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA). And poured Billions into them. They are also working on a project called BRICS Cable, laying out a new fiber optic network between the nations. They have summits every year and are basically trying to establish a new economic order. Sure, they have had some spats and corruption issues etc. It's politics..

All those countries are cash strapped when it comes to their military. Both China and India have previously bought Carriers from Russia. If you look at their new carrier designs, they are very similar. At least externally. From a cost stand point, it would have made sense to co-operate on a common hull and then outfit them themselves with their own electronics, propulsion and defense. Chances are, that India will be using a Russian radar anyway and China probably a 'knockoff' thereof.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, India seems to be a headache when it comes to the acquisition of aircraft. They are even struggling with their own domestic products. No reason to think this F-18 proposal will be any different. They seem to be getting nowhere with the FGFA with Russia either. Like I said, they either need deeper pockets or they need to think outside the box a little. A little military co-operation between India and China may actually help their relations.

Slug71 wrote:

It was a term made up by the then Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Since then, they have become a lot more than just a "term". They absolutely share interests. They have set up the New Development Bank and BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA). And poured Billions into them. They are also working on a project called BRICS Cable, laying out a new fiber optic network between the nations. They have summits every year and are basically trying to establish a new economic order. Sure, they have had some spats and corruption issues etc. It's politics..

All those countries are cash strapped when it comes to their military. Both China and India have previously bought Carriers from Russia. If you look at their new carrier designs, they are very similar. At least externally. From a cost stand point, it would have made sense to co-operate on a common hull and then outfit them themselves with their own electronics, propulsion and defense. Chances are, that India will be using a Russian radar anyway and China probably a 'knockoff' thereof.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, India seems to be a headache when it comes to the acquisition of aircraft. They are even struggling with their own domestic products. No reason to think this F-18 proposal will be any different. They seem to be getting nowhere with the FGFA with Russia either. Like I said, they either need deeper pockets or they need to think outside the box a little.

China has the ambition to lead the world, sure China will work with other nations, but don't think BRICS means anything to them in the long term, the Chinees play the long game.

Slug71 wrote:

A little military co-operation between India and China may actually help their relations.

Don't think it will work like that in the real world.

Slug71 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

I'm not joking and entitled to my own opinion. If you want to come out swinging with personal insults and then have no constructive opinion to offer in return, doesn't say much about your own character.

BRICS isn't a union, it was a term made up by an American economist to give a term to upcoming countries. They do not share many geopolitical interests together, and actually, have some conflicting interest. China and India aren't the best of friends, China supports Pakistan and there were some border clashes between them in recent years. Russia and India are developing a fighter together, so that might be worth to also share the cost of an aircraft carrier development, but I don't know if they have the same requirements.

So yes, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but in this case, I don't think it holds much water.

It was a term made up by the then Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Since then, they have become a lot more than just a "term". They absolutely share interests. They have set up the New Development Bank and BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA). And poured Billions into them. They are also working on a project called BRICS Cable, laying out a new fiber optic network between the nations. They have summits every year and are basically trying to establish a new economic order. Sure, they have had some spats and corruption issues etc. It's politics..

All those countries are cash strapped when it comes to their military. Both China and India have previously bought Carriers from Russia. If you look at their new carrier designs, they are very similar. At least externally. From a cost stand point, it would have made sense to co-operate on a common hull and then outfit them themselves with their own electronics, propulsion and defense. Chances are, that India will be using a Russian radar anyway and China probably a 'knockoff' thereof.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, India seems to be a headache when it comes to the acquisition of aircraft. They are even struggling with their own domestic products. No reason to think this F-18 proposal will be any different. They seem to be getting nowhere with the FGFA with Russia either. Like I said, they either need deeper pockets or they need to think outside the box a little. A little military co-operation between India and China may actually help their relations.

You seem to be missing a very important piece of this jigsaw puzzle, and unwilling to accept it when handed to you by any one of the many members that have already commented on this issue.

Dutchy wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

It was a term made up by the then Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Since then, they have become a lot more than just a "term". They absolutely share interests. They have set up the New Development Bank and BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA). And poured Billions into them. They are also working on a project called BRICS Cable, laying out a new fiber optic network between the nations. They have summits every year and are basically trying to establish a new economic order. Sure, they have had some spats and corruption issues etc. It's politics..

All those countries are cash strapped when it comes to their military. Both China and India have previously bought Carriers from Russia. If you look at their new carrier designs, they are very similar. At least externally. From a cost stand point, it would have made sense to co-operate on a common hull and then outfit them themselves with their own electronics, propulsion and defense. Chances are, that India will be using a Russian radar anyway and China probably a 'knockoff' thereof.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, India seems to be a headache when it comes to the acquisition of aircraft. They are even struggling with their own domestic products. No reason to think this F-18 proposal will be any different. They seem to be getting nowhere with the FGFA with Russia either. Like I said, they either need deeper pockets or they need to think outside the box a little.

China has the ambition to lead the world, sure China will work with other nations, but don't think BRICS means anything to them in the long term, the Chinees play the long game.

Slug71 wrote:

A little military co-operation between India and China may actually help their relations.

Don't think it will work like that in the real world.

Agreed and you're probably right.

angad84 wrote:

You seem to be missing a very important piece of this jigsaw puzzle, and unwilling to accept it when handed to you by any one of the many members that have already commented on this issue.

But i'm not missing it and I do accept the situation. It's not like I had high expectation or hopes for anything to happen.

Not sure this isn;t something we didn;t already know but thought I would post anyway.

Saab responds to India Navy RFP with Sea Gripen

Saab has responded to an Indian navy request for proposals for carrier-borne fighter aircraft with an offer based on a marinised variant of its Gripen NG.

The navy is reported to require up to 57 multi-role combat aircraft that would replace its current fleet of Sukhoi Su-30s.

No details on the timeline for any acquisition have been released, with Saab officials indicating that they are unsure of when any decision would be made by New Delhi.

Saab says it is open to technology transfer as part of any Gripen deal. The Swedish manufacturer has previously partnered with Embraer to work on the Gripen E/Fs ordered by Brazil.

The Swedish manufacturer says the Sea Gripen will have all the capabilities of the Gripen E/F as well as a "small logistic footprint".

Meanwhile, Saab says it is confident of acquiring more operators for the GE Aviation F414-powered fighter in the Asia-Pacific, revealing that it is in talks with "prospects" including Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.

However, Saab admits that it will have to wait and see if military budgets "match [their] ambitions".

Within the region, Thailand is the only Gripen operator with 11 examples of the C/D variant.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ea-445649/

Poor reporting from Flight Global though, not sure any Su-30s are going to be replaced by Sea Gripens anytime soon...

Ozair wrote:

Not sure this isn;t something we didn;t already know but thought I would post anyway.

Saab responds to India Navy RFP with Sea Gripen

Saab has responded to an Indian navy request for proposals for carrier-borne fighter aircraft with an offer based on a marinised variant of its Gripen NG.

The navy is reported to require up to 57 multi-role combat aircraft that would replace its current fleet of Sukhoi Su-30s.

No details on the timeline for any acquisition have been released, with Saab officials indicating that they are unsure of when any decision would be made by New Delhi.

Saab says it is open to technology transfer as part of any Gripen deal. The Swedish manufacturer has previously partnered with Embraer to work on the Gripen E/Fs ordered by Brazil.

The Swedish manufacturer says the Sea Gripen will have all the capabilities of the Gripen E/F as well as a "small logistic footprint".

Meanwhile, Saab says it is confident of acquiring more operators for the GE Aviation F414-powered fighter in the Asia-Pacific, revealing that it is in talks with "prospects" including Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.

However, Saab admits that it will have to wait and see if military budgets "match [their] ambitions".

Within the region, Thailand is the only Gripen operator with 11 examples of the C/D variant.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ea-445649/

Poor reporting from Flight Global though, not sure any Su-30s are going to be replaced by Sea Gripens anytime soon...

Link says "not found" but a lot of the avweek/FG reporting from the Singapore Airshow has been shockingly awful. Very disappointing.