[Sankar]

NOTE: Video is of two RC models flying around and doing stunts (not of the real MIG aircrafts).

"Note:" should say CGI and not RC. Anything is possible in CGI but it it were radio controlled models it would have been slightly more impressive and interesting.

The software they used for it is in the description itself.
https://www.ikarus.net/en/#

Originally Posted by black_rider

That was informative. But I feel the embedded video should either be removed, it's clearly CGI, and does not add to serious discussion, or allowed to stay with disclaimer that it's CGI.

Yes, not fit for this thread.

[skanchan95]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

The ski jump was built when the Sea Harriers were to be inducted. The Sea Harriers were our only option and the ski jump was a necessity. As we see it is good to have a CATOBAR but you should also have the aircraft! As an aside the British believed we could not design a ski jump or modify the old INS Vikrant without their structural designs. But between the Navy's design office and Mazagon Docks they figured it out. .

The fitment of ski-jump on the INS Vikrant also meant an end of the Alize as a carrier borne ASW platform for the Navy. Although by the late 1970s, only five or six Alizes remained operational, it was still a valuable carrier based ASW asset. During the mid or late 80s when the INS Vikrant was fitted with a ski-jump to facilitate Harrier short take-offs(to reduce fuel consumption when they Take off Vertically). The Alizes, incapable of taking off from ski-jumps, had to be disembarked and used for coastal patrolling from shore airbases.

Even during Operation Pawan (IPKF operations in Sri Lanka), the Alizes flew from a remote airstrip is South India and sank LTTE boats. They also took part in Operation Cactus(to prevent coup against the govt of Maldives)

As for the Hawker Sea Hawks, the Indian Navy did consider the Sea Gnat concept before they ordered Hawker Sea Hawks. Ironically one of the Gnat's greatest strengths also proved to be its greatest weakness when it came to being fit for carrier borne operations - the Gnat's light weight!!! The Gnat's weight was considered too light to operate from steam catapults and recover safely onboard an aircraft carrier.

In the 60s, Folland did some preliminary work on the Navalised "Sea Gnat" concept. The Royal Navy also showed some interest in it. Teddy Petter, the legendary aircraft designer, in fact had directed Folland Design division to carry out design studies with an intent to also get other commonwealth Navies who were operating an aircraft carrier interested(Australia, Canada and India). The Indian Navy did how a great deal of interest in the Sea Gnat concept when the INS Vikrant was being acquired.

However, Folland designers failed to meet the minimum weight criteria of the aircraft as the catapult and arrestor gear needed an aircraft of atleast 10,000 lbs and the Gnat was just too underweight (the Gnat's empty weight was less than 5000 lbs)!!! Also, the requirement for long-stroke landing gear would have meant a complete re-design.

The Navy was forced to order Hawker Sea Hawks but the Folland worked on the Sea Gnat concept and had reportedly even developed a prototype - a Gnat F.1 fitted with a Gnat trainer's larger wings but ceased work soon after.

On a lighter note, the Gnat was shown as a carrier based aircraft in the Top Gun parody movie - Hot Shots (as the fictional Oscar EW-5894 Phallus Tactical Fighter Bomber). I believe one of those static single seat Gnat F.1s, painted in "The Navy" colours, was actually an ex-IAF example (all flying examples in the movie were Gnat T.1s).


You can see the faded IAF roundel & finflash

[skanchan95]

Originally Posted by devarshi84

Able to deploy R-77RVV-AE (AA-12 'Adder') air-to-air missile.

This basically confirms that the legacy IAF MiG-29s were not capable of carrying/firing the R-77. There were rumours floating around that IAF MiG-29s were upgraded in the late-1990s and were capable of firing the R-77. This was just around or after the time when the first Su-30MKs had arrived, but even they were not capable of firing the R-77. This also confirms that only BVR missile that could be fired by IAF fighters till the arrival of Su-30MKIs were R-27s(and R-23s on MiG-23MFs before it).

Originally Posted by devarshi84

Weapons load was increased to 4,500 kg on six underwing and one ventral hard points similar to the MIG-35.

Similar to the MiG-35? The MiG-35 has nine weapon stations( four on each wing and one on the centerline for the drop tank). Even our MiG-29K/KUBs too have nine weapon stations like the MiG-35.
But our MiG-29UPGs have seven stations (three on each wing and one on the centerline) - same as their legacy avatars. But yes in their UPG avatar, they acquired the capability to fired guided a2g missiles and bombs. The legacy MiG-29s, conceived as an interceptor in pure air to air role, had limited ground attack capability and could fire rockets and dumb bombs.

MiG-35:


MiG-29UPG:

[NPV]

A well written article and the author is truly qualified to write about fighter jets


Rafale to be inducted on Sept 10: Why the french fighter jet is really a game changer?

[skanchan95]

Originally Posted by NPV

A well written article and the author is truly qualified to write about fighter jets

Such a beautifully written and easy to understand article. Thanks for sharing.

The Rafale is definitely a quantum leap in terms of capabilities of the IAF that has our adverseries truly worried. I wish for more numbers of these French beauties than just two "Silver Bullet" Squadrons.

[Dr.Naren]

Glimpses of the Rafale in action with IAF

https://youtu.be/azBaBXrxDfk

[locusjag]

The Greek ("Hellenic") Air Force have ordered 18 Rafales

https://www.flightglobal.com/greece-...140150.article

[Foxbat]

Taking the liberty of posting my just completed 1/72 IAF Rafale model

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Taking the liberty of posting my just completed 1/72 IAF Rafale model

Congratulations Foxbat. A beautiful model with plenty of detail to excite the enthusiast. Thank you for sharing.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Taking the liberty of posting my just completed 1/72 IAF Rafale model

Gorgeous model, very well build, congratulations. Which kit brand is this?

Jeroen

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Gorgeous model, very well build, congratulations. Which kit brand is this?

Jeroen

Thanks. Its actually from a relatively low cost Italeri kit of a French Navy Rafale M. I applied IAF colours to it.

[AlphaKilo]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Thanks. Its actually from a relatively low cost Italeri kit of a French Navy Rafale M. I applied IAF colours to it.

I was about to ask the same, as to why does IAF Rafael has a rope arrestor and strengthened nose landing gear with extended struts and slots for front arrestor mechanism. Doesn't the IAF Rafael have 14 hardpoints vs the 10/12 for the Naval version?

[basuroy]

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

I was about to ask the same, as to why does IAF Rafael has a rope arrestor and strengthened nose landing gear with extended struts and slots for front arrestor mechanism. Doesn't the IAF Rafael have 14 hardpoints vs the 10/12 for the Naval version?

All versions have rope arrestor. It’s a design feature lifted from American jets which have rope arrestors by default( even f-15 and f-16).

I don’t believe any version of rafale has 14 airframe hardpoints. Most common is 8 plus one centreline and two right under the engine intake( though any one is used for the targeting pod). Two further outwing( not wingtip) pylons can be fixed but that appears to be very rare.

The inner wing stations can also be equipped with a Multiple election rack for bombs.

[Tucker48]

Fox news talks about first test fight of 6th gen aircraft. That means in less than a decade, USAF will be inducting 6th Gen aircrafts, even before Indian Air Force inducts 5th Gen aircrafts.
Unless, our leaders and decision making body don't think out of box and come up with a strategy for a shortcut or a totally different approach to warfare in the skies, I don't see Indian Air force a dominating force even in the long term.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Tucker48

Fox news talks about first test fight of 6th gen aircraft. That means in less than a decade, USAF will be inducting 6th Gen aircrafts, even before Indian Air Force inducts 5th Gen aircrafts.
Unless, our leaders and decision making body don't think out of box and come up with a strategy for a shortcut or a totally different approach to warfare in the skies, I don't see Indian Air force a dominating force even in the long term.

This journalistic fashion of calling fighters 4th gen or 5th gen or God Almighty 4.5th gen is a more recent trend popularized by Russian writers to show how advanced their re-souped & re-armed Su-27 or MiG-29 derivatives are. No one in aviation thinks this way. The capability of a fighter is a potent combination of the 5 fingers of -- Fighter, Missiles carried, C3I, the Pilot himself and Training. If there were 10 ten fingers the remainder five would be training, training and training. All of these working in co-ordination determine effectiveness, range of your destructive ability and your actual performance when life, limb, a parched throat, death and milli-seconds all merge together in a fog. So while journalists in their need for boxing things into simple bags like to say this is 5th generation or whatever it really means little to the pilot, engineer, AWACS operator. There are no hard lines only a gradual flow.