MiG-29K competition for aircraft carriers of India: Boeing Corporation is testing the F / A-18 Super Hornet to take off from a springboard


The American Boeing Corporation intends to squeeze Russian MiGs in the Indian market. The chosen direction is the creation, especially for the needs of the Indian Navy, of a carrier-based fighter, which they could use on aircraft carriers. At the moment, India is ready to equip its aircraft carrier Vikrant under construction with MiG-29K fighters.


However, Defense World published material claiming that Boeing Corporation announced plans to test the F / A-18 Super Hornet to take off from a springboard.

From the material:

The Boeing F / A-18 Super Hornet must be tested and certified for springboard take-offs before it can take the step to contract with Indian partners.

According to US Vice President Tom Breckinridge, the Super Hornet will be thoroughly tested on the springboard. From his statement:

Such plans are already underway.

Thus, the American Boeing is trying to seize the contract from Russia, putting New Delhi with its F / A-18 Super Hornet instead of the MiG-29K. So far, the contract has not been signed, but in 2017, Indian authorities expressed their intention to buy 14 MiG-29K aircraft.

Recall that a few weeks ago, during a speech by representatives of the Ministry of Defense and the manufacturing sector of India in the country's parliament, Russia was accused of "delaying the supply of carrier-based fighters."

Currently, the Indian Navy has more than 40 MiG-29K fighters. New Delhi plans to buy another 57 carrier-based fighters, including for the promising aircraft carrier INS Vishal.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

56 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 07: 53 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Recall that a few weeks ago, during a speech by representatives of the Ministry of Defense and the manufacturing sector of India in the country's parliament, Russia was accused of "delaying the supply of carrier-based fighters."

    Well, of course ... Again found the extreme
    1. bessmertniy 14 February 2020 08: 10 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      As far as I remember, then it was said that India simply did not apply for our fighters. And there is no order - there is no breakdown. what
    2. IL-18 14 February 2020 08: 24 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Here it is more interesting to hear these representatives on the topic of variability in fighter aircraft. Anyway, immediately available MiG-29K will not be replaced by hornets.
      But our defense industry at least something to offer them on AFAR and other Wishlist on dates, prices, etc., offering options.
      But you shouldn’t blame the gypsies and dancers, the Indians, like all normal people, are looking for benefits.
  2. URAL72 14 February 2020 07: 59 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    It’s easier for them to buy Rafal-M, otherwise the fleet is already too colorful. I think the Hornet will fly by ...
    1. TermNachTer 14 February 2020 19: 09 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      What about the price? For the same money, you can buy MiGs twice as much.
      1. URAL72 14 February 2020 21: 54 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Well, if you do not want to? They have too many complaints about MiG, and Rafal already has one. If, according to the results of operation, they prefer a Flurry, then so be it. What to do, competition ...
        1. TermNachTer 14 February 2020 22: 19 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          And where did Rafal manage to demonstrate his outstanding performance characteristics? Except on paper, nowhere else. But the price is my mother dear, almost F - 35.
  3. Amateur 14 February 2020 08: 02 New
    • 0
    • 9
    -9
    And where did you find the Boeing springboard? Yes, even suitable for steepness and trajectory. Or in the Crimea on the "Thread" will be tested? recourse
    1. K-612-O 14 February 2020 08: 22 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Elizabeth as an option. In general, the Hornet is still the best Amerov plane after Tomcat and Orel. He has high chances to compete with MiG, especially since he is cheaper than Rafal
      1. Amateur 14 February 2020 09: 08 New
        • 1
        • 5
        -4
        Elizabeth as an option

        Lizzy is designed for the F-35B. And for him, completely different characteristics of the springboard are needed. So she will not do.
        The hornet is so far the best Amerian plane after Tomcat and Orel. Chances to fight with MiG are high

        If a Boeing modifies it under the "Soviet" springboard.
        1. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 09: 50 New
          • 5
          • 5
          0
          Quote: Amateur
          If a Boeing modifies it under the "Soviet" springboard.

          what for? Hornet and so take off from it, without any modifications.
          1. PROXOR 14 February 2020 10: 39 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            But this is a question. What is the load? So far, only our cars have a coefficient. more than 1 take-off thrust.
      2. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 11: 11 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: K-612-O
        He has high chances to compete with MiG, especially since he is cheaper than Rafal

        I do not think that Hornet has a great chance. Unless, of course, the Indians still have at least a drop of reason and corruption has not become comprehensive. They now have MiG-29 and Rafal on deck, and they are going to push their Tejas there too. And in the appendage is Hornet still? This is 4 (!!!) type of decked aircraft ???
    2. Magog 14 February 2020 09: 41 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      News of 2013: "The Russian analogue of the Soviet aircraft training complex Nitka, which is being built in the Kuban, where Russian pilots of carrier-based aviation are training, will be ready for operation this fall."
    3. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 09: 49 New
      • 11
      • 1
      +10
      Quote: Amateur
      And where did you find the Boeing springboard?

      So they (the Americans, that is) have long tested their aircraft for takeoff from a springboard. Building a springboard is not a tricky business.




      Any modern fighter will be able to take off from the springboard, be it MiG-29, Su-33, F-18, F-16 or Rafal
      1. Amateur 14 February 2020 10: 04 New
        • 3
        • 7
        -4
        Any modern fighter will be able to take off from the springboard, be it MiG-29, Su-33, F-18, F-16 or Rafal

        And why then the "stupid" Americans are building aircraft carriers with the most complicated steam catapults, and now they are trying to make the electromagnetic one.
        Well stupid (M.Zadornov)
        In do not read.
        ps In your photo number 2 just Lysine F-35B.
        1. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 10: 18 New
          • 6
          • 3
          +3
          Quote: Amateur
          And why, then, "stupid" Americans build aircraft carriers with the most complicated steam catapults

          because the catapult allows you to launch heavier aircraft, and with a smaller range. Because they now have Hokkai hanging out on the deck, and before that there were Vigellents and other heavy aircraft. The springboard will not allow this. By the way, from Kuznetsov from close positions Su-33 can not take off with a normal take-off weight. Or reduce the fuel supply, or the mass of weapons. in addition, the springboard imposes additional requirements on the aircraft in terms of handling and thrust. Learn the materiel)
          1. PROXOR 14 February 2020 10: 43 New
            • 4
            • 4
            0
            So you answered why the Hornets do not take off from the springboard. Thrust-weight ratio is small.
        2. Timon2155 14 February 2020 10: 34 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Obviously pick up the same hokai! Without a catapult, he will not take off. And without hoka-like without eyes.
        3. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 10: 35 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          Quote: Amateur
          Well stupid

          and we have such ones ((You justify the nickname. Toglko is a normal amateur who is glad to learn from more knowledgeable comrades, but you don’t. You have only one ambition. You don’t believe knowledgeable people, Google will help you. Nick Dunno would do better)
      2. PROXOR 14 February 2020 10: 42 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        All right, he can. But the question is with what load and amount of fuel. The hornet in your photo is generally without suspensions and probably on half-empty tanks. The Fu-15 uses a downward-facing nozzle. At the cost of the Fu-35, if the hornet could take off from the springboard deck, the striped would build a Hornet with a filling of Fu-35. Only the Hornet is too heavy for take-off from the springboard and engine traction is not enough in isolation from our MIGs and SUSHEK.
        1. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 10: 46 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          Quote: PROXOR
          But the question is with what load and amount of fuel.

          absolutely right. This is exactly what the Americans will test with test flights from an Indian aircraft carrier. By the way, as already mentioned, the Su-33 from Kuznetsov from close positions also can not take off at full load.
        2. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 10: 47 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: PROXOR
          Only the Hornet is too heavy to take off from a springboard

          Su-33 is even heavier, but takes off.

          Quote: PROXOR
          if the hornet could take off from the springboard deck, the striped ones would build the hornets with the Fu-35 filling.

          strange statement. They don’t care if all Americans have catapults with aircraft carriers ???
        3. tomket 14 February 2020 19: 13 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: PROXOR
          without suspensions and probably on half-empty tanks. The Fu-15 uses a downward-facing nozzle.

          I remembered how F-14 at the demonstration shows for Iran did in the flight program f-15go. With the same fueling, the f-15 left to turn the flight first, and the f-14 pilots at that time turned on the engines on the ground and intensely burned the fuel with engines, as a result when the f-15 sat down, Tomket went into the sky with very empty tanks and paid -15 th God as a tortoise, although it would seem ...
      3. Magog 14 February 2020 14: 20 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Any modern fighter can take off from the springboard
        Here it is worth mentioning one more benefit from the use of a springboard. At least with us, we tested a quickly collapsible springboard at a standard airfield, simulating the conditions of a partially destroyed runway. The device will help in the event of an enemy attack on the airfield in a short time to ensure the takeoff of combat aircraft to perform urgent combat missions.
    4. Piramidon 14 February 2020 12: 04 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Amateur
      And where did you find the Boeing springboard?

      You think that they cannot work with reinforced concrete.
  4. g1washntwn 14 February 2020 08: 03 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Here, it is most likely a matter of technologies for aircraft engines. India has long licked onto local production of GE and P&W products. Therefore, this deal (if the Americans agree to share the technology) can give them what they want.
  5. rocket757 14 February 2020 08: 10 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Of course, the indicator - Take the best, performed by India is very conditional, but there is something in it.
    We must definitely do better. Then they will buy.
  6. Maestro Alexander 14 February 2020 08: 10 New
    • 6
    • 4
    +2
    I will not go into politics and trade-economic underhanded fuss, but I will leave technical information for consideration.
    The f-18 range is 3 km. Take-off weight - 300 tons.
    The MiG-29K range is 2 km. Take-off weight - 000 tons.
    Prices "at the bazaar":
    f-18 - about $ 70 million.
    MiG-29K - about $ 16-17 million.
    Question: what will the Indians do?
    1. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 08: 16 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Maestro Alexander
      Question: what will the Indians do?

      Good question like that
      Really interesting
    2. Spambox 14 February 2020 08: 21 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      There is one caveat with f 18 3300 km is with 3 outboard fuel tanks. They are demon PTB, in my opinion, they only fly at an air show. The pluses include the widest range of guided ammunition, but I'm afraid the Indians will not deliver half of them. MiG weakness is just weapons. A decent I / O rocket similar to aim120 s7, I am silent about the 120-D, while it’s just not there, even with us. The rest of the MiGs in terms of price and quality look preferable.
      1. Zhelezyakin 14 February 2020 11: 46 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        The question is also, can eFKs fly without a catapult with 3 PTBs? That's what they want to answer him
        1. Spambox 14 February 2020 20: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          They can’t even without weapons
          1. Zhelezyakin 17 February 2020 09: 58 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            I would not mind what would happen))) But physics is a stubborn aunt ... And practice is completely uncompromising and only it will show the truth
    3. K-612-O 14 February 2020 08: 25 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Only 3300 is the ferry range, with PTB. the combat radius is 600 km, the MiG has about the same, only the combat load is greater.
    4. Magog 14 February 2020 09: 58 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      All the difference is in the details. This take-off weight of the Super Hornet (and, accordingly, the range) is provided by the catapult. I'm not talking about the maneuvering capabilities of the F-18E with a full load. The device on the deck "on the drum" what weight to spit out. Those who carefully watched the Americans take off from the deck of their aircraft carriers could notice a turn right behind the edge of the deck. This is just to ensure that an excessive “spitting out” impulse is spent on keeping in this bend and does not lead to a supercritical angle of attack, which is fraught with getting the device into stall mode. What will happen to the F-18E without a catapult can now only be wondered. For this, testing is in demand. Including, we wish good luck to the Americans and Indians in their Wishlist!
    5. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 10: 12 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: Maestro Alexander
      The f-18 range is 3 km. Take-off weight - 300 tons.
      The MiG-29K range is 2 km. Take-off weight - 000 tons.


      Empty / take-off weight F / A-18E / F Super Hornet - 13 / 400 kg
      Empty / take-off weight MiG-29KUB - 14 / 000 kg
      Range (without PTB) F / A-18E / F Super Hornet - 2 km
      Range (without PTB) MiG-29KUB - 2 000 km
      Suspension units: F / A-18E / F Super Hornet - 11, MiG-29KUB - 9

      As you can see, the data is almost identical, and partly not in favor of MiG.


      Quote: Maestro Alexander
      Prices "at the bazaar"

      prices "at the bazaar" can vary within wide limits. For example, the cost of the Su-35 for the Russian Aerospace Forces and for a foreign customer may differ by 2-3 times (and reach up to $ 80 million per aircraft). In particular, the MiG-29K under the 2004 contract cost the Indian military department $ 55 million apiece.
      1. Magog 14 February 2020 10: 42 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        And why a comparison with the "CUBE"? Is combat training better than combat training?
        1. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 10: 55 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Magog
          And why a comparison with "CUBE

          This is for the MiG-29K
          1. Magog 14 February 2020 10: 58 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            That is, the "CUBE" in the table is a typo?
      2. Spambox 14 February 2020 20: 06 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Let me supplement you with the take-off mass of 29900, provided that you start from the catapult, if the take-off mode is not fastened on the f 18 engines (on Su 33 it is 110% for a short time, I don’t know for a moment) then it is unlikely to take off from a springboard with this weight
        1. Grigory_45 14 February 2020 20: 31 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Spambox
          weight 29900 subject to launch from the catapult

          this is max. take-off weight. Normal - 21-22 tons. The thrust-to-weight ratio in this case approaches 1.
          When taking off from the airfield, max. take-off weight can be over 31 tons.

          MiG, of course, is more “volatile”, higher thrust-weight ratio and lower specific wing load, but Hornet, I am sure, will fly off the springboard without any problems.
  7. Vladimir_2U 14 February 2020 08: 11 New
    • 6
    • 7
    -1
    Do not touch the jumps of the Herods! Trampolines for skiers! Where is Greta Tunberg when she is so needed!
    1. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 08: 18 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Where is Greta Tunberg when she is so needed!

      Run from a springboard? belay lol
      1. Vladimir_2U 14 February 2020 08: 21 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Why are you so running about the girl, and even a little mournful, albeit with angry posters, in defense of the habitat of wild skiers! )))
        1. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 08: 25 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Persuaded, let him have fun laughing
  8. Bashkirkhan 14 February 2020 08: 14 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    The main favorite among the Indians is F / A-18 Block3.
    Boeing (offering F / A-18E / F Super Hornet Block III), Dassault (Rafale F3R), Eurofighter (Typhoon), RSK MiG (MiG-35) and Saab were also invited to participate in the competition for new multi-purpose aircraft for BVS . In the case of the Russian company from the Indian side, it was more likely that a politeness gesture was made, since she no longer considers the MiG proposal seriously after she was delivered with the B.U. airplanes instead of new ones.


    Since February 2010, when the MiG-29K were commissioned, 40 engines were removed from the Indians due to factory defects (this is 62%). The Star Weekly notes that the Indian military spoke of the plane as a machine that was "riddled with problems." At different times, the serviceability of the MiG-29K fleet ranged from 16 to 38%, and the MiG-29KUB fleet ranged from 21 to 47%. https://flot.com/2018/318872/
    By the way, there was an attempt by Russia to enter the Algerian market with a MiG-29СМТ aircraft in the 2006 year, but the customer, having received the first 15 aircraft, returned the fighters to the manufacturer due to the presence of substandard parts.
    1. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 08: 22 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      I never thought that ours could hack.
      In my time, the word "export" was "holy." All the best went there. The control was scary.
      And like the MiG, such a serious company is on you too ... request
    2. Magog 14 February 2020 10: 14 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Repeat yourself. Did you find similar data on American deliveries? It is interesting to compare.
      1. servant. 14 February 2020 12: 17 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Maybe you’ll enlighten, but somehow the Americans did not shine such information and such scandals.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Magog 14 February 2020 13: 17 New
          • 1
          • 4
          -3
          MiG-29K is a fairly new and crude aircraft, because For a long time, the priority of our production and financing among the “decks” was the Su-33. MiG-29K surfaced in connection with export contracts. There are problems - no one here objects. Similarly, the Americans with their new program "F-35". But this does not stop them from selling these aircraft to other countries. Although, there are unpleasant refusals to buy a crude unfinished super plane. And do not imagine everything like that. that Americans can’t "hack." Even the run-in F-18 of all modifications still reveals engine defects, failures of the SUV and flight control systems (see the statistics of catastrophes and accidents of this device). The Americans are pushing for export F-18, not bothering to bring to mind the "land" modification of the aircraft - in a simple way they drive the same Finland, Switzerland, Canada, etc. almost deck version. And maybe the big ones after the export modernization ...
          1. servant. 14 February 2020 15: 12 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            but they did not have a single shameful incident with the return of aircraft ....
            1. Magog 14 February 2020 15: 28 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Try to refuse or refund the purchase to the “global gangster” - you will receive a “bribe of the elites”, a “color revolution”, “sanctions” or the ACG at the nearest channel. Quote all the "charms" of the F-35 does not make sense? Sorry for the paper.
              1. servant. 15 February 2020 07: 48 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Do you want to say that buyers of Amer’s technology? They know that they are stuffed with trash (like Algeria) and they take it all the same?
                1. Magog 15 February 2020 11: 32 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  What else can I say? See how the Americans "twist their hands" to the Turks with the same F-35. Next in line are the Australians. Etc. Then, what is “SHAME” if the manufacturer and seller are responsible for their product? What return and repair at dealerships of thousands of cars of one brand or another around the world "to eliminate identified defects" is an example of "shame" and irresponsibility? In my opinion, the opposite.
                  1. servant. 15 February 2020 13: 25 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    But the defects were not eliminated, the planes were simply abandoned due to poor quality, this only happened with Ukrainian armored personnel carriers.