[dragracer567]

Amongst the plethora of international exercises that the Indian military has taken part in the last few years, the P8i of the Indian navy took part in the Sea dragon exercise, an annual ASW exercise that takes place in Guam and India had taken part last year as well. Other countries include the American hosts, India, Japan, Canada, Australia and South Korea who fielded P8A, P8I, P1, CP140 Aurora and P3C Orion maritime reconnaissance aircraft - the best ASW aircraft of the democratic realm.

There some “claims” now that the proposal to purchase 6 additional P8i aircraft is under review with the possibility of an indigenously made maritime patrol version of the C295 being considered instead. I hope these remain rumours as the P8i is a much more capable aircraft for this role and we would still need additional maritime patrol aircraft as the 12 + 6 P8i aircraft wouldn’t be sufficient to patrol the IOR, so there is still room for an indigenous C295 maritime patrol fleet.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

There some “claims” now that the proposal to purchase 6 additional P8i aircraft is under review with the possibility of an indigenously made maritime patrol version of the C295 being considered instead. I hope these remain rumours as the P8i is a much more capable aircraft for this role and we would still need additional maritime patrol aircraft as the 12 + 6 P8i aircraft wouldn’t be sufficient to patrol the IOR, so there is still room for an indigenous C295 maritime patrol fleet.

Huh? Why would we go and do that? Bin additional orders of the most cost effective and ever growing platform for an as yet on paper one? Only in Indian procurement I tell you. I sure hope this isn't the case. The P8 is clearly an undoubted success given the growing operators and increasingly the creative new roles it adopts. As the community grows India should double down on it, especially given the synergies that come from allied operators (think of all the combined data when it comes to ASW tracks on PLAN boats by the IN, USN, RAN, RN, etc), and most welcome of all for our procurement Babu's, cost going down as a result.

Admirable though it may be to attempt to have a C295 based indigenous ASW fixed wing variant, let's be real, there's a very good off the shelf platform that has widespread usage already. Why complicate the maintenance chain? Besides, this domestic effort should be very low on the list of priorities given there's much more pressing domestic efforts that have yet to get off the ground (I'm looking at the tanker programme, the AWAC programme, just to name a few).

And besides, instead of wasting what little development money there is on this C295 ASW variant, just order more Sea Guardian drones to expand the persistence and reach within the IOR. It's available now, and it's a known quantity. Plus being an American platform too, it'll likely play well with the P8. Heck India could make a case to pioneer joint teaming for ASW platforms. There, that's your ambitious but actually useful goal if you're that hell bent on it. That's a model if successful I'm sure our regional allies would happily get on board with.

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by ads11

Huh? Why would we go and do that? Bin additional orders of the most cost effective and ever growing platform for an as yet on paper one? Only in Indian procurement I tell you. I sure hope this isn't the case. The P8 is clearly an undoubted success given the growing operators and increasingly the creative new roles it adopts. As the community grows India should double down on it, especially given the synergies that come from allied operators (think of all the combined data when it comes to ASW tracks on PLAN boats by the IN, USN, RAN, RN, etc), and most welcome of all for our procurement Babu's, cost going down as a result.

Now, the sources are a bit sketchy - one was a defense forum which is clearly tabloid and another was YouTube channel I follow. The latter concerned me more as they try to be as objective as possible. The only "official" news report I found was an India Today article on defense contracts that are being canceled in lieu of domestic production and it was mentioned that the contract for six P8i aircraft is 'under review' as well, nothing about the C295 being bought instead while another article on The Print stated that systems bought under Foreign Military Sales or other government to government deals aren't being culled. Let's just hope this whole thing is just a misunderstanding.

Admirable though it may be to attempt to have a C295 based indigenous ASW fixed wing variant, let's be real, there's a very good off the shelf platform that has widespread usage already. Why complicate the maintenance chain? Besides, this domestic effort should be very low on the list of priorities given there's much more pressing domestic efforts that have yet to get off the ground (I'm looking at the tanker programme, the AWAC programme, just to name a few).

There is a distinction here, none of these "sources" mention ASW role for the C295 but rather as just a Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA). Now, the navy has a requirement for turboprop MPAs for which a version of the ATR-72 was considered while airbus offers an MPA option for the C295 as well. While I understand that this is a separate requirement, I don't understand the rationale behind replacing a turbofan ASW aircraft with a much smaller turboprop MPA. The P8i is easily the most important platform of the navy as it plugs the gap of surface ships and submarines that India has with the PLAN, so limiting the number of the P8i inducted would severely restrict the future capability of the Navy. Self-reliance is good but this would be shooting oneself on the foot (please mind my strong language).

And besides, instead of wasting what little development money there is on this C295 ASW variant, just order more Sea Guardian drones to expand the persistence and reach within the IOR. It's available now, and it's a known quantity. Plus being an American platform too, it'll likely play well with the P8. Heck India could make a case to pioneer joint teaming for ASW platforms. There, that's your ambitious but actually useful goal if you're that hell bent on it. That's a model if successful I'm sure our regional allies would happily get on board with.

Infact, the Navy originally had a requirement for 24 P8i aircraft but budget constraints limited the number to 18 with the gap in capability to be filled by the 10 MQ-9 Predator drones being ordered for the Navy and 20 more for other services (which is also taking a suspiciously long time). I just hope that the P8i program doesn't end up like the C17 where when the Navy finally decides to order more, it's no longer available. As you said, while India was the first export customer, atleast 5 other Navies apart from the Americans have ordered the P8s including Europeans who normally prefer Airbus while the Australians operate just as many P8s as India, so there certainly must be something formidable about this platform.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

Let's just hope this whole thing is just a misunderstanding.

Let's hope so indeed. Mind if I ask what the forum and what the youtube channel were?

There is a distinction here, none of these "sources" mention ASW role for the C295 but rather as just a Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA). Now, the navy has a requirement for turboprop MPAs for which a version of the ATR-72 was considered while airbus offers an MPA option for the C295 as well. While I understand that this is a separate requirement, I don't understand the rationale behind replacing a turbofan ASW aircraft with a much smaller turboprop MPA.

I guess the only reason for the turboprop MPA would be running cost grounds but like you point out, a much smaller platform wouldn't have as much capacity for onboard systems (or the flexibility to carry and lob munitions the way the Neptune/Poseidon can). Furthermore, given the patrol range, a turboprop would take longer to get to station and have reduced range in comparison. Only when we look at an unmanned turboprop, do the benefits start to make sense for me.

Infact, the Navy originally had a requirement for 24 P8i aircraft but budget constraints limited the number to 18 with the gap in capability to be filled by the 10 MQ-9 Predator drones being ordered for the Navy and 20 more for other services (which is also taking a suspiciously long time).

I guess in all Indian procurement we just have to live with the fact that we'll never see out procurement contracts reach the full complement once budgetary pressures inevitably kick in. Having the MQ-9 fill in the shortfall was an eminently sensible approach but yeah, seeing that being held up is a predictable bummer (wonder if there's anything doing with S-400 related enforced delays by the current US admin..).

I just hope that the P8i program doesn't end up like the C17 where when the Navy finally decides to order more, it's no longer available. As you said, while India was the first export customer, atleast 5 other Navies apart from the Americans have ordered the P8s including Europeans who normally prefer Airbus while the Australians operate just as many P8s as India, so there certainly must be something formidable about this platform.

I don't think we have quite as clear a fear of the P8 going the C-17 route. The latter was a multitude of factors. From memory, Boeing warned multiple times that it would shutter the manufacturing line without further orders but all customers, mostly the USAF (overseas customers basically waited and relied on the USAF to blink first), decided to call Boeing's bluff to drive down costs. Boeing let the deadline pass and all the end users ended up looking like right idiots at this blunder.

The P8 line however is seeing export success, as navies globally come round to the idea that we're reentering an era of increased subsurface competition and atrophied ASW capabilities needing a much needed boost. Plus there's the fact that the P8 is based on a hugely successful long running commercial platform (the 737 NG iirc). I guess that makes a lot of the spare parts and maintenance tail a much more palatable and manageable prospect than other bespoke military fixed wing platforms, further adding to the appeal. And given the size advantage it enjoys over the P3 Orions, you have room to add more capability, a clean slate if you will. Thus you can see military planners getting super creative with the P8 as their base: be it toying with the idea of it being an arsenal ship for tube dropped UAV swarms; or a platform to go after surface ships too with the likes of the Naval Strike Missile; or even an overland ISR asset (as seen in domestic use) - you can start to see the appeal in the platform.

Australia are an interesting analogue I feel, given the fact that they've fully come to terms with getting their elbows out against muscular Chinese posturing, the RAN is going to need to cope with increased PLAN boats in their neighbourhood. Thus they've made the investments to get ahead of the problem. I think given the fact that the Australian military is primarily gearing itself against the PLAAF and PLAN, has budgetary pressures of their own (like India, though perhaps not on the same overall total budget scale), I think there could be important lessons to be learned for the Indian side in how best to get the most out of their capabilities. I'm a big fan of Australia's Airpower Teaming concept (ie, Loyal Wingman drones to augment their 4th gen fighters). I think that's an excellent example of clever thinking in how to meet the operational requirements within the fiscal constraints that could be insightful for Indian defence planning and procurement (that being said Australia's decision to purchase a 70+ order of M1A Abrams MBTs is baffling, so maybe there synergies go further..).

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by ads11

Mind if I ask what the forum and what the Youtube channel were?

The tabloid link 1

The tabloid link 2


Youtube Link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2r5F1UJ_yA

India Today link that likely caused all this speculation

The Print link which claims that FMS deals and government to government deals won't be impacted

Having the MQ-9 fill in the shortfall was an eminently sensible approach but yeah, seeing that being held up is a predictable bummer (wonder if there's anything doing with S-400 related enforced delays by the current US admin..).

Seems highly unlikely that the MQ-9 order was impacted by the S400. Diplomatic exchanges between India and US are as frequent and friendly as ever while India just attended the ASW exercises in Guam with what seems like a select invited group. I am pretty much convinced that the delay is from the Indian side for this one.

The need for more ASW aircraft becomes more pressing when you realize that the first IL-38 maritime patrol aircraft has been retired today with the entire fleet likely to be retired soon. So, apart from the Kamov helicopters and domestically manufactured aircraft, India's entire ASW and maritime patrol fleet would be of US origin!

I think that's an excellent example of clever thinking in how to meet the operational requirements within the fiscal constraints that could be insightful for Indian defence planning and procurement (that being said Australia's decision to purchase a 70+ order of M1A Abrams MBTs is baffling, so maybe there synergies go further..).

Australia has much smaller limitations including the luxury of fielding a much smaller land army. India is geographically blessed and cursed in the sense that we have huge land and sea borders and have to defend both but most of our conflicts have emanated from the land border giving disproportional focus on land defense. Also, this is a consequence of having the polity based in land-locked Delhi. We must remember that while India has a relatively huge defense budget, our single largest expenditure right now is pensions followed by salaries and then there is very little left for CAPEX.

[skanchan95]

Race heats up for naval fighter deal, US says it meets all tech criteria

The race to supply new aircraft-carrier-borne fighter jets to the Indian Navy is heating up, with the US offering set to follow the French Rafale M in an operational demonstration in Goa in March and its manufacturers saying that all technical requirements will be met.

The competition to initially supply 26 jets (18 single seaters and eight twin-seat trainers) to the Indian Navy is being processed under a government-to-government mode, with requests for an operational demonstration sent to the US and French embassies.

The French Rafale M has already conducted a series of trials at the Shore Based Test Facility in Goa and the US F/A 18 Super Hornet will follow suit, with its developers saying that all issues with the aircraft, including the ability to lower it into the hangar of the Indian aircraft carrier, have been resolved.

“Boeing has developed a capability specifically for the F/A-18 Super Hornet that will allow for the faster movement of the aircraft between the flight deck and hangar deck without having to remove or modify any part of the aircraft,” said Surendra Ahuja, managing director, Boeing Defense India.


Ahuja, a former Indian Navy test pilot who retired at the rank of rear admiral, added that the fighter will be able to fit the elevator onboard Indian carriers – a critical requirement for the navy as the current design is suited for smaller aircraft like the MiG 29Ks that are in service. “This capability is compatible with the current elevator configuration aboard Indian aircraft carriers,” he said.

The French side has also resolved the problem, with a solution that requires removing a part of the wing of the Rafale before it can fit the carrier elevator. It is important to move carrier-borne jets into the hangar for maintenance works as well as to create space for other equipment and aircraft on the flight deck.

The US side says that it has also shared data collected during a shore-based test of the F/A Super Hornet from a ski jump conducted in December 2020 with the Indian Navy. “This extensive data has been utilised to model the performance to demonstrate the ability of the Super Hornet to meet or exceed Indian Navy ski jump requirements ahead of Super Hornet’s operational demonstration that will be conducted in Goa within the next few months,” said Alain Garcia, vice president, Boeing Defense.

The Indian Navy currently relies on the Russian-origin MiG 29K fighter jets that can take off from the ski jump flight deck of the INS Vikramaditya as well as the under tests aircraft carrier Vikrant. The new fighter requirement is for the Vikrant but aircraft available globally are designed to fly with a catapult-assisted launch system. The ski jump tests being conducted in Goa will determine if these aircraft can be suitable for the Indian Navy requirements.

Source

Removing a part of the Rafale's wing before it is taken down in the lift? Is it even practical???

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by ads11

Indeed, I don't quite follow the turn of events. It's pretty clear that the French jet for sure won't fit however which way we cut it - so why the trials?? And are they seriously going to make a folding wing spec of the Rafale M for such limited volumes, knowing full well that it would send Indian procurement babus running for the hills once the price increase gets factored in? Seems rather bizarre. I get that there's a fat contract waiting at the other end but it all screams 'square peg, round hole' in this particular regard..

And modifying the carrier at this stage seems baffling still! My only guess and even then it's really clutching at straws is someone is hoping for a jugaad solution of perhaps parking the jet on the elevator on the diagonal (again I don't even know if that would realistically be possible, I can't recall ever seeing any carrier navy doing as such).

There was a new article in the economic times that answers a lot of our questions.

For starters, the numbers seem to have shrunk further from 36 to 26 fighters consisting of 18 single-seaters and 8 twin seaters - just about enough to fill the air wing of the Vikrant. This will be bought via a government-to-government deal and not as a tender, so the acquisition process should be short.

Dassault seems to have "resolved" the problem of the Rafale not fitting in the elevators by removing a part of the wing of the Rafale before it can fit the carrier elevator. I am not entirely sure how feasible this solution is though, is removing a wing of a fighter jet as easy as removing a door of a Jeep wranger?

The MD of Boeing defense India meanwhile, has stated that "Boeing has developed a capability specifically for the F/A-18 Super Hornet that will allow for the faster movement of the aircraft between the flight deck and hangar deck without having to remove or modify any part of the aircraft" which means that the FA-18 will fit in the elevators with its folding wing mechanism in a not-so-indirect reference to the solution for the Rafale.

Overall, I am guessing that the Navy will get to make the orders before the Air Force given this is a government-to-government while the IAF is going for a tender.

Link

[ads11]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

Dassault seems to have "resolved" the problem of the Rafale not fitting in the elevators by removing a part of the wing of the Rafale before it can fit the carrier elevator.

The MD of Boeing defense India meanwhile, has stated that "Boeing has developed a capability specifically for the F/A-18 Super Hornet that will allow for the faster movement of the aircraft between the flight deck and hangar deck without having to remove or modify any part of the aircraft" which means that the FA-18 will fit in the elevators with its folding wing mechanism in a not-so-indirect reference to the solution for the Rafale.

Originally Posted by skanchan95

Removing a part of the Rafale's wing before it is taken down in the lift? Is it even practical???

Wow, I was curious just How Dassault were going to tackle this particular problem. I guess we have our answer. This is such a clunky solution. I mean you already have an operational tempo handicap with a STOBAR ski deck carrier in terms of being unable to launch and retrieve simultaneously. To add having to bolt on the ends of the wings after you bring the jets up from the hangar further slows down the whole process. Because I can guarantee it'll be quite the involved process. The only way this works is if Dassault consults with F1 teams to have the process as quick and easy as a front wing swap!!

As for Boeing, they still haven't said exactly what their specific capability for the Indian F-18 will be. Maybe they just move the wing joint inboard (ie, make the folding segment larger)?

For starters, the numbers seem to have shrunk further from 36 to 26 fighters consisting of 18 single-seaters and 8 twin seaters - just about enough to fill the air wing of the Vikrant. This will be bought via a government-to-government deal and not as a tender, so the acquisition process should be short.
..
Overall, I am guessing that the Navy will get to make the orders before the Air Force given this is a government-to-government while the IAF is going for a tender.

Typical. I can see it already. A piece meal order just big enough for the Vikrant air wing (for now and an undeserved pat on their own backs by the procurement babus), and then, to no surprise, a fresh tender down the line for a new carrier borne fighter to fulfil the requirement for the CATOBAR IAC-2. TBC in a decades time at least..

Wry joking aside, I guess timeline wise maybe this time next year we can expect a decision on this deal realistically speaking. I don't suppose there are plans for live trials, even on the elevators of the Vikrant itself? I guess that would be the best way to test the efficacy of the two separate approaches.

[Dieseltuned]

I am a bit fluxomed. Should not we have carried this exercise of selecting the fighter for IAC1 atleast a couple of years back ? We are doing trials in 2022, our beauracracy will hopefully place the order in 2023 and the first planes for IAC 1 may come in by 2025, so what's the point of commissioning an aircraft carrier if we do not have any aircrafts to fly from it ?

Interesting are the functioning of our behemoth country

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Dieseltuned

I am a bit fluxomed. Should not we have carried this exercise of selecting the fighter for IAC1 atleast a couple of years back ? We are doing trials in 2022, our beauracracy will hopefully place the order in 2023 and the first planes for IAC 1 may come in by 2025, so what's the point of commissioning an aircraft carrier if we do not have any aircrafts to fly from it ?

Whenever we observe decisions or lack thereof in Defence that seem stupid to armchair admirals like you and me always look for that dreaded six letter word B-U-D-G-E-T. It is not because the real Admirals are fools or the bureaucrats are all paper pushing decision delaying jerks {though some are} but simply that India's defence outlay is 50% lower than what it ought to be. And the Navy gets the tiniest piece. By the time INS Vikrant commissions it will be time for Vikramaditya to enter into a long refit of probably 18 months or so. The aircraft from Vikramaditya will transfer over to INS Vikrant. So if the new machines are delivered in 30 months we should be fine,

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by ads11

As for Boeing, they still haven't said exactly what their specific capability for the Indian F-18 will be. Maybe they just move the wing joint inboard (ie, make the folding segment larger)?

Most likely. Also, found these interesting claims on the official website of Boeing India about the F/A-18 Block III:

CARRIER COMPATIBILITY

• Fully compliant with both INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant
• Safe, proven wing-fold solution for carrier lift fitment
• No risk to structures removal (Radome Cone, Wing Tip Rails) on deployment

Boeing India Link

So, Boeing claims that the F/A-18 is not only compatible with the Vikrant but also the Vikramaditya which I believe has even smaller elevators. Also, the last point on the risk to structures removal seems targeted specifically at the Rafale.

Now, the F/A-18 does seem to have an edge due to the fact that it would actually fit in the elevators and would probably have a lower unit cost. But then, infrastructure already exists for the Rafale in India and India has never really flown American fighter jets since atleast WW2 (and I'm told familiarity really matters for complex systems like fighter jets).

Typical. I can see it already. A piece meal order just big enough for the Vikrant air wing (for now and an undeserved pat on their own backs by the procurement babus), and then, to no surprise, a fresh tender down the line for a new carrier borne fighter to fulfil the requirement for the CATOBAR IAC-2. TBC in a decades time at least..

It's understandable, the Navy has two options, either try to order more jets but wait for what could be forever before the tender is finalized and/or when the budget permits or make a piece meal order through a government to government contract which can be done almost immediately. The Navy has learned the right lessons from the MRCA ordeal!

[sridhar-v]

I am not even qualified to be an armchair admiral. But here are my few thoughts:-
1. The new leaks being floated regarding the cancellation of further orders of the P8I seem to be a way of signalling to the USA that too much sermonising about CATSA means we have other options - alibet not as optimal.
2. From the way things are developing it seems like the political brass has thrown their weight behind AMCA & TEDBF. So whatever fighter is bought for the Vikrant will be a stop gap arrangement.
3. Something is cooking on the Nuclear Attack Submarine scene. If the french play along we can see a govt. to govt. order with possibly some subs from the french yards. In this case the IAC-2 will be pushed back, but will definitely come later. In my humble opinion they will try and see if the nuclear reactor tech for the attack submarine can be used in the IAC-2.

[sierrabravo98]

Originally Posted by sridhar-v

I am not even qualified to be an armchair admiral. But here are my few thoughts:-
3. Something is cooking on the Nuclear Attack Submarine scene. If the french play along we can see a govt. to govt. order with possibly some subs from the french yards. In this case the IAC-2 will be pushed back, but will definitely come later. In my humble opinion they will try and see if the nuclear reactor tech for the attack submarine can be used in the IAC-2.

This I believe is a really plausible thought. The massive CAPEX allocation to the Navy in this year's budget points to something VERY expensive being acquired. The fighter jet deal is unlikely to go through this FY. The SSN has been in the works for quite some time now and when the geo-political scenario of our neighbourhood is considered, the SSN acquisition makes sense (considering that it will take atleast 5 years from the time one is ordered to being commissioned).

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

And the Navy gets the tiniest piece. By the time INS Vikrant commissions it will be time for Vikramaditya to enter into a long refit of probably 18 months or so. The aircraft from Vikramaditya will transfer over to INS Vikrant. So if the new machines are delivered in 30 months we should be fine,

While this has been historically true, this year, in a break from this dangerous tradition, the Navy has been allotted the highest amount of CAPEX. Considering that the Navy has always been able to spend most of its budget (in contrast to the Army which returns thousands of crores unutilised back to the Finance Ministry), we should see some good acquisitions from the Navy this year.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by Dieseltuned

Interesting are the functioning of our behemoth country

There's a reason why Indian defence procurement is viewed with the same exhausted fear that someone from ancient Crete would've treated the Labyrinth. It's a dizzying maze that often makes no sense and will likely end in hurt but the prospect of the reward at the end is still enough to tempt vendors to keep trying due to the size of the prize.

Originally Posted by Dieseltuned

so what's the point of commissioning an aircraft carrier if we do not have any aircrafts to fly from it ?

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

B-U-D-G-E-T.

Indeed budget is often the issue. In fact this isn't the most recent example of a capital ship like a new carrier being commissioned before the very fixed wing jets that form the core of its air wing have been bought. Think of the RN's QE class ships. The HMS QE had to wait a while before any F-35s operated off it (and even then it was a combination of RN and RAF jets augmented by USMC ones). In a similar vein you could make the argument that the JMSDF Izumo class ships also were commissioned before their air wing had arrived (though that's more a case of a wolf in sheeps clothing in the sense it ostensibly paraded itself as a helicopter carrying destroyer for its early life).

Originally Posted by dragracer567

So, Boeing claims that the F/A-18 is not only compatible with the Vikrant but also the Vikramaditya which I believe has even smaller elevators. Also, the last point on the risk to structures removal seems targeted specifically at the Rafale.

The latter is definitely a dig at the Rafale. However the claim about fitting the Vikramaditya is new, and if so, is rather bold because those elevators most definitely were only designed for smaller jets. I guess it's up to Boeing to put their money where their mouth is at some point and trial the Super Hornet on board either of the carriers.

Originally Posted by sridhar-v

1. The new leaks being floated regarding the cancellation of further orders of the P8I seem to be a way of signalling to the USA that too much sermonising about CATSA means we have other options - alibet not as optimal.

I'd be wary about such a strategy. Why risk future deliveries of a fantastically useful and well loved platform when as yet CATSA hasn't been waved in that direction? Last I remember the opposite happened that opened up a lot of capability with some of the US platforms that previously were guarded.

Originally Posted by sridhar-v

2. From the way things are developing it seems like the political brass has thrown their weight behind AMCA & TEDBF. So whatever fighter is bought for the Vikrant will be a stop gap arrangement.

I must be in a Greek mythological frame of mind because honestly I feel like the TEDBF deal and to an extent AMCA will become a bit of a Ship of Theseus deal.

Originally Posted by sridhar-v

If the french play along we can see a govt. to govt. order with possibly some subs from the french yards.

Originally Posted by sierrabravo98

The massive CAPEX allocation to the Navy in this year's budget points to something VERY expensive being acquired.

Not to hijack a carrier related thread but the only thing I can see going for the French SSN deal is the fact that they're smarting at losing the Australian contract, and its an election year in France, which means Macron will be keen for a huge deal to bolster his credentials. I also find it a bit hard to buy for the simple fact that as far as domestic long term defence planning goes, the SSBN programme seems to be going ahead at a good rate of knots (though there's precious little in the open domain about it). The natural follow on is to utilise that domestic knowhow towards an indigenous SSN and that seems within grasp (albeit likely over a decade away if we're being honest). So buying from France at this juncture would signal to me that maybe the goalposts have moved in terms of the need of the hour and someone reckons this is an opportune moment to gain one from an operator with considerable domestic experience in this regard.

Originally Posted by sridhar-v

In my humble opinion they will try and see if the nuclear reactor tech for the attack submarine can be used in the IAC-2.

If memory serves correctly I believe the French use the same compact reactor design for both their submarines and the CdG. However I'm pretty sure that approach did lead to some issues plaguing the CdG - to my knowledge, the USN for eg has an entirely different class of reactors for it's Nimitz class ships compared to any of their undersea fleet. I don't think in practice it's as easy as dropping in the domestic reactor design of say the Arihant class into IAC-2 and calling it a day. I guess it's kind of the logic of having say a turbo charged 1L engine in a much bigger vehicle having to work a lot harder than say a NA 1.5L engine which would likely last longer and work better (because it isn't stressed as much in operation).

On a final note, in this era of the revival of great power competition, expect to see naval budgets be bolstered. If India wants to play in that game then it's only natural that the IN will start getting a bigger piece of the pie (relative to historically). You need only look at the changes Xi Xinping made when he revamped the Chinese military, with massive cuts to the PLA but Huge increases to the PLAN, and to a lesser extent the PLAAF.

[skanchan95]

The Indian Navy has received its 12th and final P-8I. The aircraft has landed in Dabolim. This completes the optional clause for four additional P-8Is, signed in 2016.

The 12th and final P-8I is N674DS (c/n 64893, l/n 8834). It's flew as BOE234 from Boeing Field(King County International Airport) to Dabolim, India, with stops at Honolulu and Guam International Airports , and will be registered as IN331 after its induction in Dabolim based INAS316 - the 2nd P-8I squadron.