Given that their Mig 29K sucks as much as ours and consequently no new orders have been placed maybe they should try a western aircraft.
Can you provide evidence of the MiG-29K sucking?
Last time I read that sort of thing there was a message from MiG to state the claims of problems were lies or were because of the way the Indians did things which led to aircraft waiting for spares instead of having a spares pool of items they could draw from as some clever management way to fudge the operational costs of the aircraft.
AFAIK the Egyptians are happy with the MiG-29Ms.
Most of the aircraft India operates are upgraded old model MiG-29UPGs which is essentially MiG-29SMT and not a MiG-29K or MiG-29M or MiG-35.
Seems to me that India is bagging the MiG and sabotaging its performance potential so as to make room for Tejas because from what I have read the MiG has very low operating costs that would probably make a lighter fighter a bit redundant because it likely would not be any cheaper to operate but being smaller and lighter likely would be less useful.
They don't really care about biggest customer anymore it seems as they aren't really busy trying to sell to India in recent years it seems.
They continue to offer products to India and India continues to pick a range of different products appearing to want different providers no matter what the product being offered.
The MMRCA programme was for 10 billion... the Rafale should never have been allowed to enter because they would never have been able to sell 50 for 10 billion let alone the 126 they wanted... they ended up buying 36 Rafales for 8.4 billion...
The point of the programme was to get some modern capable fighters into service in numbers to make up for the aircraft being retired at the time and they dragged it out... ended up paying too much for the aircraft they got and didn't get the terms they wanted either... no technology transfer.
What they should have done was split the programme up... if they wanted a numbers plane then MiG-29Ms would have been the best choice.... they probably could have been built in India... for 10 billion you probably could have built 200 of them for that price.
Just that those problems with Mig 29K never got addressed.
Russia operates the aircraft herself... they are hardly going to ignore problems... unless the problems are made up crap from western journalists who think India should buy second hand US carriers and operate US fighters from them instead... then you will understand what expensive means.
This is what you are saying - since the F-35 is a terrible product we will sell you a product a notch above terrible - mediocre.
Not at all. The concept of the F-35 is OK, but VSTOL aircraft are overrated crap... all of them... there is no good VSTOL fighter yet because the design compromises penalise the design and make it heavy and big and trying to make it a 5th gen fighter with all internal weapons and fuel just compounds that to make it even worse.
Their problem is that they spend more time and energy making the aircraft cancel proof than they did making it a good aircraft.
The sale of the dud Admiral Groshkov/INS Vikramaditya along with the most ordinary aircraft Mig 29K exposes the skullduggery involved in several deals involving Russia despite the fact that India has been the largest purchaser of russian military H/W for more than 3 decades.
2.5 billion for aircraft carrier and air wing including Ka-31 AEW helicopters and 24 MiG-29Ks and a ship... yeah... India got screwed... it is nowhere near as good as their other carriers like ummmm... and ummm...
Apart from costing more than was first expected what exactly makes it a dud in your eyes?
Even if you double the price again it is still cheaper than 18 Rafales which would be 4.2 billion.
There are shortcomings with the Mig 29Ks airframe, the RD-33MK engine, fly by wire system; in short, the entire fighter. The Mig 29K suffers repeated engine failure. Of the 65 RD-33MK turbofan engines received from manufacturer Klimov, the Indian Navy had to withdraw 40 of them.
Yet the Russians operate them too and the Pakistanis buy modified RD-33s for the aircraft they buy from China... you would think repeated engine failure in a single engine fighter would be a deal breaker and they would look for another engine... but they don't.
Can I ask the source of information about these complaints?
Mig 29K is unable to deliver their weapons payload to their stated range with a full fuel load.
The Gorshkov is smaller than the Kuznetsov, that is bound to effect performance... assuming it is actually a real problem that is not made up too.
This fighter was never ruggedised for carrier operation. Every single deck landing severely damages many of the fighters on board components. It's operational availability is between 15% - 37%.
Actually all three of the new models the K and M and 35 were all designed to be carrier capable because they share the same aircraft structure which requires improved undercarriage and strengthened rear for the tail hook. The reasoning was that even if not being used on an aircraft carrier being able to take off and land from short stretches of motorway makes them easier to deploy and they have a vehicle based cable landing system to allow them to operate from very short stretches of road too.
Since 2018 four MiG-29K/KUB fighters and trainers have already crashed in the sea. This despite the fact that the Indian Navy had hired Mig 29 UPG pilots from the Indian Air Force who had at least 2000 hrs of flying experience on the Mig 29 UPG.
Experience flying an aircraft from land is not much of an advantage for landing on a ship... the British have also lost at least one F-35 soon after getting them... and according to the myth and legend the F-35 is supposed to be a very easy plane to fly in the hover for landing and taking off.
Learning new skills is dangerous... otherwise everyone would be doing it.