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

56

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.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    56 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. 0
      14 February 2020 07: 53
      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. +3
        14 February 2020 08: 10
        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. +7
        14 February 2020 08: 24
        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. -1
      14 February 2020 07: 59
      It’s easier for them to buy Rafal-M, otherwise the fleet is already too colorful. I think the Hornet will fly by ...
      1. 0
        14 February 2020 19: 09
        What about the price? For the same money, you can buy MiGs twice as much.
        1. 0
          14 February 2020 21: 54
          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. 0
            14 February 2020 22: 19
            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. -9
      14 February 2020 08: 02
      Where did you find the Boeing springboard? Moreover, it is suitable in terms of steepness and trajectory. Or in the Crimea on the "Thread" will be tested? recourse
      1. +6
        14 February 2020 08: 22
        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. -4
          14 February 2020 09: 08
          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 Boeing modifies it for a "Soviet" springboard.
          1. 0
            14 February 2020 09: 50
            Quote: Amateur
            If Boeing modifies it for a "Soviet" springboard.

            what for? Hornet and so take off from it, without any modifications.
            1. +2
              14 February 2020 10: 39
              But this is a question. What is the load? So far, only our cars have a coefficient. more than 1 take-off thrust.
        2. +2
          14 February 2020 11: 11
          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. 0
        14 February 2020 09: 41
        News from 2013: "The Russian analogue of the Soviet Nitka flight training complex under construction in the Kuban, where Russian deck aviation pilots train, will be ready for operation this fall."
      3. +10
        14 February 2020 09: 49
        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. -4
          14 February 2020 10: 04
          Any modern fighter will be able to take off from the springboard, be it MiG-29, Su-33, F-18, F-16 or Rafal

          Why, then, the "stupid" Americans are building aircraft carriers with sophisticated steam catapults, and now they are trying to make an electromagnetic one.
          Well stupid (M.Zadornov)
          In do not read.
          ps In your photo number 2 just Lysine F-35B.
          1. +3
            14 February 2020 10: 18
            Quote: Amateur
            Why then are the "stupid" Americans building aircraft carriers with sophisticated 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. 0
              14 February 2020 10: 43
              So you answered why the Hornets do not take off from the springboard. Thrust-weight ratio is small.
          2. +4
            14 February 2020 10: 34
            Obviously pick up the same hokai! Without a catapult, he will not take off. And without hoka-like without eyes.
          3. -2
            14 February 2020 10: 35
            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. +2
          14 February 2020 10: 42
          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. +7
            14 February 2020 10: 46
            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. -1
            14 February 2020 10: 47
            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. 0
            14 February 2020 19: 13
            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. 0
          14 February 2020 14: 20
          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. +2
        14 February 2020 12: 04
        Quote: Amateur
        And where did you find the Boeing springboard?

        You think that they cannot work with reinforced concrete.
    4. +5
      14 February 2020 08: 03
      It is rather a matter of technologies for aircraft engines. India has long licked its lips on local production of GE and P&W products. Therefore, this deal (if the Americans agree to share technology) can give them what they want.
    5. +1
      14 February 2020 08: 10
      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. +2
      14 February 2020 08: 10
      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. 0
        14 February 2020 08: 16
        Quote: Maestro Alexander
        Question: what will the Indians do?

        Good question like that
        Really interesting
      2. +2
        14 February 2020 08: 21
        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. +2
          14 February 2020 11: 46
          The question is also, can eFKs fly without a catapult with 3 PTBs? That's what they want to answer him
          1. 0
            14 February 2020 20: 01
            They can’t even without weapons
            1. +1
              17 February 2020 09: 58
              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. +1
        14 February 2020 08: 25
        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. -1
        14 February 2020 09: 58
        The difference is in the details. Such a takeoff weight of the Super Hornet (and thus the range) is provided by a catapult. I'm not talking about the maneuverability of the F-18E when fully loaded. The device on the deck "on the drum" how much weight to spit out. Those who carefully watched the takeoff of the Americans from the deck of their aircraft carriers might have noticed the laying of a bend just behind the edge of the deck. This is just so that the excessive "spitting out" impulse is spent on holding in this bend and does not lead to a supercritical angle of attack, which is fraught with the vehicle falling into stall mode. What will happen to the F-18E without a catapult is anyone's guess now. For this, testing is in demand. Including, we wish good luck to the Americans and Indians in their Wishlist!
      5. +7
        14 February 2020 10: 12
        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 "in the bazaar"

        prices "in the bazaar" can vary widely. For example, the cost of the Su-35 for the RF Aerospace Forces and for a foreign customer may differ 2-3 times (and reach $ 80 million per plane). In particular, the MiG-29K under the 2004 contract cost the Indian military department $ 55 million apiece.
        1. +1
          14 February 2020 10: 42
          Why comparison with "CUBE"? Is the combat training better than the combatant?
          1. 0
            14 February 2020 10: 55
            Quote: Magog
            Why comparison with "CUBE

            This is for the MiG-29K
            1. 0
              14 February 2020 10: 58
              Ie, "CUBE" in the table is a typo?
        2. 0
          14 February 2020 20: 06
          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. 0
            14 February 2020 20: 31
            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.

            The MiG, of course, is more "flying", the thrust-to-weight ratio is higher and the specific load on the wing is lower, but Hornet, I am sure, will take off from the springboard without any problems.
    7. -1
      14 February 2020 08: 11
      Do not touch the jumps of the Herods! Trampolines for skiers! Where is Greta Tunberg when she is so needed!
      1. 0
        14 February 2020 08: 18
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Where is Greta Tunberg when she is so needed!

        Run from a springboard? belay lol
        1. +3
          14 February 2020 08: 21
          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. 0
            14 February 2020 08: 25
            Persuaded, let him have fun laughing
    8. +4
      14 February 2020 08: 14
      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-29Ks were put into operation, 40 engines were withdrawn from the Indians due to factory defects (this is 62%). Zvezda weekly notes that the Indian military spoke of the plane as "riddled with problems." At various times, the serviceability of the MiG-29K fleet ranged from 16 to 38%, and the MiG-29KUB fleet - 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. -2
        14 February 2020 08: 22
        I never thought that ours could hack.
        In my day, the word "export" was "holy". All the best things went there. The control was terrible.
        And like the MiG, such a serious company is on you too ... request
      2. +1
        14 February 2020 10: 14
        Repeat yourself. Did you find similar data on American deliveries? It is interesting to compare.
        1. +1
          14 February 2020 12: 17
          Maybe you’ll enlighten, but somehow the Americans did not shine such information and such scandals.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. -3
            14 February 2020 13: 17
            MiG-29K is a fairly new and raw aircraft, because For a long time, the priority of our production and financing among the "palubniks" were the Su-33. MiG-29K surfaced in connection with export contracts. There are problems - no one here objects. Likewise, the Americans with their new program "F-35". But this does not prevent them from selling these aircraft to other countries. Although, here too there are unpleasant refusals to buy a crude, unfinished super plane. And you don't have to imagine everything like that. that Americans can’t "tinker". Even a run-in F-18 of all modifications still reveals defects with engines, failures of VCS and flight control systems (see the statistics of accidents and accidents of this device). The Americans are pushing the export of the F-18, without bothering to bring to mind the "land" modification of the aircraft - in a simple way, they drive the same Finland, Switzerland, Canada, etc., practically the deck version. And, maybe, and big ones after export modernization ...
            1. +1
              14 February 2020 15: 12
              but they did not have a single shameful incident with the return of aircraft ....
              1. 0
                14 February 2020 15: 28
                Try to refuse or return the purchase to the "global bandit" - you will get "bribery of the elites", "color revolution", "sanctions" or AUG-and on the nearest fairway. There is no point in quoting all the "charms" of the F-35? Sorry for the paper.
                1. +1
                  15 February 2020 07: 48
                  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. -1
                    15 February 2020 11: 32
                    And what else can you say? Look how the Americans "twist the arms" of the Turks with the same F-35. The Australians are next. Etc. Then, what is the "SHAME" if the manufacturer and the seller are responsible for their goods? That the return and repair in dealerships of thousands of cars of one brand or another around the world "to eliminate the identified defects" is an example of "shame" and irresponsibility? In my opinion, the opposite.
                    1. 0
                      15 February 2020 13: 25
                      But the defects were not eliminated, the planes were simply abandoned due to poor quality, this only happened with Ukrainian armored personnel carriers.

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"