Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
F18 Details -Why Should India Consider Them  
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 9052 times:

After Hearing of the US offering F16s to Pakistan,which are older version,compared to those being offered to India with license production & the F18s.
Why would India be Interested in the F18s,when we have Mirage 2000s,Mig-29s & Su-30s to choose from.With no sanction stopping risk  Smile
regds
MEL


Think of the brighter side!
41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAseem From India, joined Feb 2005, 2046 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 8967 times:

I think the offering is to pacify India, knowing very well that we won't buy it. What Govt of India is looking for is increased co-operation in space and development of weapon systems. It is for the first time that such a thing has been offered by US.
rgds
Aseem



ala re ala, VT-ALA ala
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 8611 times:

Quoting Aseem (Reply 1):
knowing very well that we won't buy it

Maybe We should buy a few & continue purchase our Favourites [Mig 29/Su30/Mirage 2000].

Wouldn't it pay to have a model flown by your Top rival [Pak] known to you.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2206 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8548 times:

Exactly what niche does the F/A-18 fit into in our defence forces ? The Hornet is a carrier based fighter in the USN. We don't have a carrier that can hold it; Viraat isn't going to be able to handle it, and as far as I know, both Gorshkov and the ADS are not going to be CATOBAR, or at least, not able to fire F/A-18s.

If we want to experience F-16s, there's Israel. Indian armed forces have already collaborated with them in that aspect. We should just move on and invite Israel to joint exercises as well. And in any case, this F/A-18 business is all just mindless irresponsible tamasha by the US to justify its proliferation of advanced weaponry to an unstable dictatorial regime. That reminds me, are the US forces still training at the CIJWS in Mizoram, or have they been ordered out ?



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5358 posts, RR: 53
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8555 times:

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 3):

Exactly what niche does the F/A-18 fit into in our defence forces ? The Hornet is a carrier based fighter in the USN. We don't have a carrier that can hold it; Viraat isn't going to be able to handle it, and as far as I know, both Gorshkov and the ADS are not going to be CATOBAR, or at least, not able to fire F/A-18s.

Hate to interrupt a really good "Down with the US, they're all evil" rant you've got going, but I might point out here, BarfBag, that several Air Forces use the Hornet in a land-based role, including Australia, Kuwait, Finland, Switzerland, Spain, Canada, and Malaysia. Far be it from me to state why India would want to acquire it - after all, it's made in the USA, and goodness knows that it's posh to hate on everything American these days, but I would be quick to point out that the F/A-18 features Fly-by-Wire, a HOTAS cockpit (two things which the MiG-29 lacks), and a wider array of air-to-ground ordnance than the Fulcrum. To its credit, the MiG-29 does have more powerful engines and that nifty helmet-mounted sighting system, and the variant that India will acquire to use off the Gorshkov will feature a HOTAS cockpit .

I have no doubt that India will purchase the aircraft that it feels is in its best interest to acquire, but I would like to state that badmouthing the aircraft simply because it was made in the States and talking about an aircraft without looking at its basic specifications, including who operates it, is neither the intelligent nor objective thing to do. And most importantly, let's not forget Chuck Yeager's immortal words - "It's the man, not the machine" that determines who wins an air battle.

[Edited 2005-03-28 21:45:50]


South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8541 times:

A land based version of the F-18 without the extra gear needed for carrier operations is available. This version offers better performance as a result of being lighter. I believe many foreign governments have ordered that version.


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8531 times:

Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 4):
but I would like to state that badmouthing the aircraft simply because it was made in the States is neither the intelligent nor objective thing to do.

And they are even offering India co-production. I don't know if any offsets were offered in the previous international F-18 sales.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2206 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8526 times:

Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 4):
Hate to interrupt a really good "Down with the US, they're all evil" rant you've got going,

Oh brother. Another American going off his rocker because I didn't have the nicest possible words to say about an American plane. The F/A-18 has never been seriously considered for any Indian mission role, particularly carrier based ops, where there's latitude for considering a capable aircraft. Make an argument where it fits into our orbat, if you can. Other countries have their own priorities, and they're not necessarily applicable to our own.

Go back to the part of my response that you yourself quoted and show me the anti-American rant part. Geez, your response is amazing. I make what I see as a valid argument about the technical basis for the F/A-18 not being suitable for our use, and you go bawling "why do they hate us?" Nonav forum really scrapes off all the outer layers of peoples' skin eh ?  Wink :-|



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5358 posts, RR: 53
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8523 times:

'Bag - it's not that you didn't "have the nicest possible words to say about an American plane" that ticked me off but rather the fact that you were making commentary on the aircraft with only barebones knowledge, that being that the USN operates it. In addition, there are a handful of Indian posters around (one in particular) who has a rather visceral "foaming at the mouth" reaction to anything American. Simply put if one were to build an F/A-18 in Russia and put the Russian roundel on it, he'd be happy with it (I'm sure you know who I'm talking about) so apologies if I unfairly painted you into that corner as well.

Make a logical statement as to why it should fit into the Indian OrBat? That, indeed, is where it gets difficult due to the wide array of aircraft types the IAF currently fields, but I'd say to replace your MiG-29As, Bs, and UBs with it. Don't get me wrong - pursue the MiG-29Ks for Gorshkov, but do like more of the former Eastern-bloc nations are doing and junk your old Fulcrums. To start out with, the F/A-18 is one of the most easily maintained and most reliable fighter aircraft around so naturally, maintenance costs would be lower than, say, your MiG-29As or -Bs. Even early model F/A-18As were infamous for flying 3 times more hours than any other USN tactical jet while requiring half the maintenance. Also, if memory serves, the Klimov turbofans on the -29s require more intensive maintenance than the GEs on the Hornet. Further, as I stated, the F/A-18 carries a much wider array of air-to-ground ground armament than the MiG-29, which increases its value against any potential opponents of the IAF. Fly-by-wire controls give it a tactical edge as does the HOTAS design and the ability to switch from being a fighter to an attack jet at the push of a button. Lastly, the F/A-18, even with its infamous fuel factor woes, has better range than a MiG-29.

That's just my 2 cents in the few spare minutes I have to post this when my boss isn't looking.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2206 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8505 times:

Look, I'm not about to take the hit for anyone else's attitude. Just because Roy or shadowy 'Indian posters' yank your chain is not a valid reason to tar and feather me as well. I'll certainly defend what I believe are my country's best interests, regardless of whether they are viewed as in favor of or against that of yours. Calling that 'anti-American' is plain rubbish.

My statement about the F/A-18 is based on multiple arguments:
a) It has never been seriously considered for any Indian combat aircraft requirement, not because it's a lemon, because of it has either not been suitable for a specific requirement, or as an American platform (and based on the very poor defence relationship between the countries) it was struck out. I also see it as nothing more than an act of mollification, and the statement about co-production of F/A-18s is something I can only respond to with "I'll believe it when I see it".
b) Our carrier-based aircraft have been more or less decided upon. MiG-29Ks on the Gorshkov in the immediate basis, and N-LCAs on both Gorshkov and the multiple ADSs in future. If the F/A-18 is a legit contender, I have to ask why the US never pushed it until now, when it had to have a face saver for its planned Pakistan F-16 deal. I have grave concerns about the sincerety of this proposal, considering our carrier-based platform has been up in the air for a while, and the Hornet was never put forth. Plus, I don't believe the Hornet will be optimal for the Gorshkov or the ADS, but that is a question of the ship's capability.

On a purely technical basis, sure the Hornet kicks ass. I know plenty about it (but not as much about its users), though I would ideally see us use it only as a carrier-based fighter (hence my ignorance of its land-based users). We have a preponderance of aircraft for land-based roles, in particular the Su-30MKI which is IMHO by far a better option for its role.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8500 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 4):
nifty helmet-mounted sighting system

GP....new Rhinos have the HMCS as standard equipment. The upgrade is available for the previous models.

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 7):
Go back to the part of my response that you yourself quoted and show me the anti-American rant part.

BBAG....you do tend to offer a uniquely Indian view of things that leads people to believe that everyone who is not Indian can kiss your ass and if they don't want to do it the Indian way they can kiss your ass. Its the kind of thing Americans get hammered for all the time. I refer you to your previously stated opinions on Kashmir and other topics. I also refer you to the following quote...

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 3):
That reminds me, are the US forces still training at the CIJWS in Mizoram, or have they been ordered out ?

There are other ways you could have put that statement to make it less confrontational. You choose not to, so don't be surprised to see that you touch on nerves.

Where would the F-16 or F/A-18 fit into the Indian order of battle, GP is correct that the IAF would do well to replace the MiG-29 fleet with a more capable aircraft. Fewer aircraft would be needed to get the same serviceable a/c working and then fewer aircraft per mission would be needed to get the jobs done. Also the MiG-21 fleet is way past needing to go away and either of the two US fighters would be better replacements than the LCA. But that said, I don't think that the Indians want the airplanes as much as they want the jobs building them will create for a few years.


BTW...what the hell is

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 3):
tamasha

?



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2206 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8493 times:

BBAG....you do tend to offer a uniquely Indian view of things that leads people to believe that everyone who is not Indian can kiss your ass and if they don't want to do it the Indian way they can kiss your ass. Its the kind of thing Americans get hammered for all the time.

Shucks, you and GP tend to project that yourself. Never mind if its couched in much more 'reasonable sounding' prose. I object to the first statement about anyone who's not Indian having to kiss my behind, but certainly, if they have a problem with how India does it  Wink Oh, I'm just being facetious.

The act of pulling the plug on US co-in training personnel at Vairengte is just simple retaliation. We had our personnel in the US shown the door right after the 1998 nuclear tests, and you buggers refused to return our LCA avionics testbeds (which we were working on with Lockheed Martin) as well. So what's the big deal. In any case, the mandarins in New Delhi are pissed. Condi Rice was here last week and claimed no F-16 deal was in the works, and the news comes up days after she leaves. Surely you don't expect us to not do anything ?

The MiG-21's chosen successor is the LCA. The MiG-29 isn't due for replacement in a hurry. The PAK-FA or MCA is slated for the heavy fighter role in future. The Hornet is really not going to be inducted just because it happens to be a great aircraft. I personally prefer that we built our planes indigenously. From a purely technological capability viewpoint, there's nothing better. It might cost more and take time and lives, but its worth it. With apologies to David Ricardo, there are times when India should master critical high technology itself, not just buy it from the west.

Tamasha = comedy in Hindi



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 8400 times:

While I personally think anyone, including the USAF, USN, or USMC would be better off buying modern Su-30MK's over F/A-18F's for their respective prices, a decent fleet of Block II F/A-18F's could be a very wise investment.

Per the permission of the US State Deparment of course on just how much tech would be allowed to be transferred, which may or may not be a wise move, could yield some very good technology to India such as AESA radar, AIM-9X and JHMCS, AMRAAM and soon-to-be future models incorporating much longer ranges, as well as the current crop of goodies such as JDAM, LGB, perhaps even SHARP and/or EA-18G's possibilities.

I always like to be well rounded and if offered in it's entirety, Block II F/A-18F's or even F-15E/K's specifically specialized for India might be very potent. I'd much rather support India in opposistion to China versus Pakistan who is allied with China, especially if China continues to thump their chest over the issue of Taiwan.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 8393 times:

Oh, and keep in mind that just because the White House mentioned F/A-18's, I don't see where F-15E/K's would be any less acceptable an offer for India, other than their price that is!

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 8391 times:

The F-15 is not light aircraft like the F-16 and F-18 are.


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 8394 times:

Light aircraft? Well the only Hornet Boeing now makes is the Super Hornet, and it's not exactly in the same class as the F-16 and Legacy Hornet are. Is this why India isn't just considering more Sukhoi's? Block II Super Hornets or specialized Strike Eagles might give the Indian Air Force the next best thing to the level of tech of a JSF if outfitted appropriately.

User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7982 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 8371 times:

You know, I wonder why the Europeans have not yet offered the Eurofighter Typhoon to the Indians. That is unless the Indian AF already has a superior dogfighter in the Su-30's they got already.

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 8362 times:

Well how much lighter will a non-carrier Super Hornet be?


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 8353 times:

Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 4):
To its credit, the MiG-29 does have more powerful engines and that nifty helmet-mounted sighting system

I see em install this thing on Legacy Hornets all the time over at Boeing..tis a nice system.

The new 'Rhino engines should give a closer margin of performance to the MiG's. Not like they have a huge choice anyways, either new build Supers, or some of our older A models that we're slowly getting rid of.

DeltaGuy


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2061 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6756 times:

I'm pulling this old thread out because I didn't want to start a new thread.

Here is a nice video of what Boeing is offering . . .

http://geneva-globaldefence.blogspot...o-india-2011-reveals-advanced.html

bikerthai



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinespudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 300 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6708 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 14):
The F-15 is not light aircraft like the F-16 and F-18 are

Empty weight of F18 E/F = 32,000 lbs

Empty weight of F15 E = 31,700 lbs

Stripping out the carrier specific items like the launch bar and some of the startup equipment from the SH might liberate another 1,000lbs max but I doubt it. You'll still have a structure and landing gear designed for carrier landings and operations. Years ago Northrop offered the F18L as a stripped out version of the F18 purely for land use. This alternate design was 7,000lbs lighter but no orders were received.


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1439 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6658 times:

Quoting spudh (Reply 20):

Did not verify your numbers but the F-15E with CFT's holds alot more gas which equals longer loiter times plus alot more ordinance and is still a superb platform for air to air. But unless the IAF buys a boom equipped tanker the F-15 is not in their future. BTW the USN is currently training the Indian Navy's pilots to be carrier qualified.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlinespudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 300 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6645 times:

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 21):
Did not verify your numbers but the F-15E with CFT's holds alot more gas which equals longer loiter times plus alot more ordinance and is still a superb platform for air to air.

Hey, I'm not knocking the F15, I actually think it would be much better suited to the IAF than the SH. I was pointing out that the SH is far, far from a lightweight fighter.

For me, the only real advantages the SH has over the F15 is in cost per flight hour and cutting edge Radar/Avionics. The SH has reputedly genuine light fighter running costs, the F15 is still a 1970s vintage hangar queen in this respect.

As a pure airframe the F15 is still one hell of an ordnance delivery machine, probably the best mud mover out there and can still mix it with the best A to A.

BTW, the figure are from Wikipedia so treat them as such, but they're good enough to make the point.

[Edited 2011-02-10 10:45:06]

User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6630 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 19):
I'm pulling this old thread out because I didn't want to start a new thread.

   Was at a loss why the points made were so behind the times!



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2061 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6608 times:

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 23):
Was at a loss why the points made were so behind the times!

   Couldn't find a recent thread concerning the curent India MRCA competition.

The competition decision will be made soon. I'm sure someone will start a new thread on this matter.

Until then, I was sure Aneters would appreciate the PR video of the latest F-18 incarnation.

bikerthai



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
25 LMP737 : No such version exists. To produce such an aircraft would drive up production costs. Spain took the launch bar off their F-18 fleet. I believe they a
26 Post contains images spudh : Given that the Iranians managed to reverse engineer parts for the F-14 I don't think manufacturing parts for an SU 30 would be an insurmountable prob
27 Post contains links and images DEVILFISH : Ah.....there's this thread which has only been current for the past 4-1/2 years..... IAF Lightweight Fighter Competition (by DEVILFISH Sep 6 2006 in
28 bikerthai : Foolish me . . . I was searching for Medium Weight Fighter. You can put this thread to bed and move the Video to the other thread. LOL. bikerthai
29 LMP737 : What happens in the time between support cutoff and making your own parts? We all can figure that one out. Let's be honest, the whole idea of the US
30 Venus6971 : I think even removing all the carrier landing equipment seriously affects the weight and balance of the acft. I think Spain did remove the ILS box on
31 Venus6971 : They have never been known for customer service, if your jet breaks they tell to fly it back to the factory. Just like that commercial about the capt
32 bikerthai : I've move the video link to the post suggested by DEVILFISH. We can let this post rest in peace if everyone agree. Moderator : suggest you lock this p
33 wvsuperhornet : What use were you going to have for them? If India is wanting a proven and reliable strike aircraft I got some bad news there isnt much out there bet
34 Shmertspionem : Heres the F-18 International Roadmap on offer to India 1 Nope - this more About shiny jet syndrome than proven and reliable. What's wanted is a techno
35 GolfOscarDelta : I think the closest the US has ever come to flying soviet made stuff in the armed forces are the Mig/Su/USSR/Russian Airforce liveried F-18's that th
36 DEVILFISH : Perhaps an extended and more intimate association with Boeing's, LockMart's or Eurofighter's finest offerings could alter that perception a bit, than
37 Post contains images LMP737 : And like rockstars you never know when you are going find one in the morning OD lying in a pool of his own vomit. Sorry, I could not help myself.
38 wvsuperhornet : Well I disgree with you on this there is no garantee that India would support the US in a conflict with China if needed. Unlike Australia (who purach
39 Post contains images bikerthai : Remember, chances are the bulk of these fighters will be assembled in India. So along with the technical merit of each fighter, India will be acquiri
40 Post contains links Shmertspionem : Here's the latest reason why NOT TO BUY AMERICAN - http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-ind...s/article1565235.ece?homepage=true http://www.thehindu.com/n
41 Post contains images bikerthai : Not until India get more clout in the US Congress. Maybe then they can get the politicians to keep the bureaucrats of your back
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic F18 Details -Why Should India Consider Them
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Should I Pick The Military? posted Sat Nov 23 2002 23:57:04 by Plane_lover
Video: Pakistan India 1965 War posted Sun Oct 8 2006 10:28:31 by Bravo45
Why Did RB-57F Need The Extra J 60 Turbojets? posted Sat Sep 23 2006 23:20:31 by 747400sp
E-4B Retirement..what Will Happen To Them? posted Sun Sep 17 2006 05:28:48 by SLCPilot
Why So Long For A KC-135R To Get Into The Air? posted Sun Sep 10 2006 02:01:28 by 747400sp
Why Not A B-736 For The Army's Sigint? posted Tue Aug 29 2006 01:57:52 by DEVILFISH
Why To Usaf Never Order KC-11? posted Sat Aug 26 2006 21:03:21 by 747400sp
SR-71 Blackbird At MSP - Why? posted Fri Aug 18 2006 07:34:08 by Aviationwiz
Why Is The Phantom A Twinseater? posted Thu Aug 10 2006 23:31:58 by TheSonntag
Why No Dedicated Thunderbirds Transport Aircraft? posted Fri Aug 4 2006 04:43:57 by TheRonald

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format