According to the MoD official, the government would prefer an agreement involving the Navy, Russia and HAL to undertake structural improvements for the MiG-29K fighters.

The call for improved ruggedness originates from an issue after deck landings. The MiG-29K fighter’s settings reportedly require a reset after landing on the deck of the carrier.

“After every carrier landing (which is virtually like a crash), components of the aircraft crack, break or stop functioning. The aircraft, then goes to the workshop for repair/replacement of the part, which often has to come from Russia,” Prakash said.

Dutchy wrote:

Interesting, a carrier aircraft which seems not be carrier capable. So will we see another aircraft picked? Rafale M perhaps with the Rafale picked for the airforce? Expensive, yes, but it will work.

Currently, six planes are compatible for aircraft carrier flying. They are Rafale (Dassault, France), F-18 Super Hornet (Boeing, US), MIG-29K (Russia), F-35B and F-35C (Lockheed Martin, US) and Gripen (Saab, Sweden).

Ozair wrote:

Poor reporting though given the Gripen has never landed on a carrier nor is the Gripen carrier capable.

LightningZ71 wrote:

Well, that was unexpected...

That's a considerable amount of investment for essentially one possible customer.

Slug71 wrote:

I imagine there will be a naval version of the Mig-35 at some point.
I think the Shenyang F/C-31 is also supposed to have a naval variant in the future.

Dutchy wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

I imagine there will be a naval version of the Mig-35 at some point.
I think the Shenyang F/C-31 is also supposed to have a naval variant in the future.

I think Indian navy might be fat up with Mikojan-Goerevitsj after getting these MiG-29K's.

Apparently yes, the Shenyang FC-31 is going to be converted for carrier operations. Good catch. Although changes that this will fly with the Indian navy are slim at best. China and India aren't BFF's.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... arrier-ops

Slug71 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

I imagine there will be a naval version of the Mig-35 at some point.
I think the Shenyang F/C-31 is also supposed to have a naval variant in the future.

I think Indian navy might be fat up with Mikojan-Goerevitsj after getting these MiG-29K's.

Apparently yes, the Shenyang FC-31 is going to be converted for carrier operations. Good catch. Although changes that this will fly with the Indian navy are slim at best. China and India aren't BFF's.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... arrier-ops

I don't think the relationship is as tainted as the media likes portray though. I'm sure they have their differences, but they are both members of BRICS.
The Indians are already familiar with the RD-93 engine too.

I'm going to cross post this to not derail the thread, but I'm actually surprised that Mikoyan hasn't approached Shenyang to produce a licensed version. Sukhoi has the SU-35 alongside the T-50 while Mikoyan has no 5th Gen offering, and the F/C-31 is sized around the Mig platform. Would save a lot in the R&D department.

Dutchy wrote:

Interesting, a carrier aircraft which seems not be carrier capable. So will we see another aircraft picked? Rafale M perhaps with the Rafale picked for the airforce? Expensive, yes, but it will work.

Phosphorus wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Interesting, a carrier aircraft which seems not be carrier capable. So will we see another aircraft picked? Rafale M perhaps with the Rafale picked for the airforce? Expensive, yes, but it will work.

Well, the US learned this lesson the hard way -- adapting land-based fast jets to carrier operations is a task not worth undertaking: poor investment overall; on the other hand, adapting fast jets, designed for carriers, to operate from land bases, is doable, and sometimes quite successful.

Soviets hoped to overcome those difficulties with the adaptation of MiG-29 into carrier operations as MiG-29K. Apparently, the results were not up to (at least Indian Navy's) expectations.

Dutchy wrote:

Ozair wrote:

Poor reporting though given the Gripen has never landed on a carrier nor is the Gripen carrier capable.

Still Saab is keen to develop such a variant. https://saab.com/hu/region/india/about- ... air-power/

SAS A340 wrote:

Yes they are, and it,s named Gripen M (Maritime)....
http://www.gripenblogs.com/Lists/Posts/ ... px?ID=1632

VSMUT wrote:

Not if Brazil foots the bill.

Slug71 wrote:

I imagine there will be a naval version of the Mig-35 at some point.
I think the Shenyang F/C-31 is also supposed to have a naval variant in the future.

Dutchy wrote:

That is quite an interesting question. How does the MiG-29K do with the Russian Navy?

Ozair wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

Not if Brazil foots the bill.

What incentive would they have to do that? Brazil has retired their carrier and are highly unlikely to have a new carrier in service for at least the next 15 years. No point paying for a carrier variant of an aircraft just in case…

Brazil cancels aircraft carrier modernisation plans wrote:

The Brazilian Navy's said acquiring a new aircraft carrier and naval aircraft will become the service's third priority, after its submarines and Tamandaré-class corvette programmes that are part of the service's strategic project 'Construção do Núcleo do Poder Naval'. The navy hopes to develop and locally build two aircraft carriers each displacing approximately 50,000 tonnes.

VSMUT wrote:

Brazil still has ambitions to become a carrier power. Right from the start, the Foch was just an interim carrier until they got round to building their own. They currently state a goal of having it in service by 2029. Brazil has more or less been the driving force behind the Sea Gripen ever since they selected the Gripen NG.

seahawk wrote:

The simple and save solution is the Super Hornet. The LCA will use the engine anyway and the frame is tried and tested for carrier ops.

Ozair wrote:

If we are adding naval aircraft then the J-15 fits as well but there is next-to-zero chance that India will acquire a Chinese military jet.

Ozair wrote:

and a refurb of the San Paolo was deemed too costly while a new build would be at least twice that.

Ozair wrote:

A lower risk option would be to acquire a US amphib, such as a LHA-6, and purchase used AV-8Bs or F-35Bs. Cheaper to operate, maintain and train aircrew and with F-35Bs more capable than any other naval airframe the Brazilians could acquire.

Ozair wrote:

Either way, India almost certainly won't be selecting the Gripen M, the risk is simply too great given the aircraft has never flown and India would remain the sole operator of the airframe for a significant period of time.

VSMUT wrote:

IMHO, they won't select it because far more obvious and better suited choices exist, namely the Rafale and MiG-29K.

SAS A340 wrote:

Yes they are, and it,s named Gripen M (Maritime)....
http://www.gripenblogs.com/Lists/Posts/ ... px?ID=1632

keesje wrote:

Why ignore the obvious..

Despite recent reports that the two Western MRCBF competitors could operate from INS Vikramaditya in addition to the Indian Navy’s future carriers, this is simply not possible. The converted Soviet-era ‘aircraft carrying cruiser’ has two aircraft elevators that are located within the flight deck, instead of on the deck-edges, and both are too small to accommodate either the Super Hornet or the Rafale. The larger forward lift, beside the carrier’s superstructure, is 18.8 x 9.9 metres, while the Super Hornet’s wings fold to just under 10 metres and the Rafale’s wings, slightly less than 11 metres wide, do not fold at all. The aft lift is narrower, with an 8.6-metre width that is barely able to fit the MiG-29K’s 7.5-metre folded span. The Naval LCA, with a wingspan of a little over eight metres, would certainly have fit the forward lift if not the aft one – the Navy prefers for aircraft carrier elevators to be sufficiently larger than the aircraft they will carry for ease of aircraft handling and movement.

The real ‘show stopper’ for the entire MRCBF requirement, however, is the configuration of IAC-1. Unlike Vikramaditya, and like most contemporary carriers, the aircraft lifts on IAC-1 are positioned on the starboard edge of the deck allowing longer aircraft to ‘hang out’ over the water with only their landing gear on the platform. But because the carrier was designed around an air wing of MiG-29Ks and Naval LCAs, the lifts were sized for wingspans no larger than eight metres. 10 x 14 metres, to be precise. While MiG-29Ks and N-LCAs can fit on these lifts with parts of their noses or empennages hanging over the edges, the Super Hornet and Rafale once again cannot.

Both Boeing and Dassault are apparently working on solutions to allow their aircraft to fit the lifts. Sources close to the programme said that Boeing is considering a system that would allow the Super Horner to sit canted on the lift, the tilt of the (folded) wings thereby resulting in a slightly shorter overall span measured parallel to the deck. With its fixed wings, the Rafale cannot offer such a solution, and Dassault is understood to be exploring a detachable wingtip, although this involves greater engineering and certification challenges.