PAK-FA and FGFA: News & Discussion - June 2014

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Feb 2016 14:18

Su-35 and PAK-FA

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Mar 2016 04:24

NRao wrote:If PAKFA is nearly ready, why then spend $7.5 billion in the next 6 years to get a FGFA?

It is nowhere close to being ready. Unless you/someone has more details.

They have already tested many weapon systems including the internal weapons bay. Now the engines and radars may be a big question. More so on the radar and avionics.. This is where we have to look at our hands getting dirtied too. Afterall, we need to put some indigenous components in it. Let it be radar and stores, apart from other avionics we are mastering for AMCA.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Mar 2016 06:07

Hmmm.....................

IF they have made that much progress and so little work needs to be done on the Indian version, what is the problem with the Russian version? Why is the RuAF ordering only 12 (or so) (and on top of that ordering some 40 Su-35s)?

Furthermore, Russia is spending some $3.75 billion to produce, what, 11 PAK-FAs - along with 3 FGFAs for India?

I am betting that what work has gone into the T-50 (NOT PAK-FA) is Sukhoi's version to make some glossies. Nothing wrong with that - part of the game. But one that India has not rightly bought. Those weapons tests have not even convinced the RuAF, forget the IAF.

??????

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 05 Mar 2016 07:27

On the subject of avionics, the building blocks for local avionics is well under way

1. Not sure if the group has been following the Indian processor development efforts, but we are making some progress.
See my EE Times interview
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1328790&page_number=2

A few other private sector companies are also doing their own embedded level processors based on RISC-V.
UC Berekeley which originated the RISC-V ISA and Cambridge have also open source cores for this
ISA. So this eco-system is building up nicely.

The goal is that India will start standardization on RISC-V for both commercial and strategic needs.
We also have working fault tolerant cores for safety critical applications and high security cores.
naturally these will not be open source nor will I talk in any detail about them in public !
Just reiterating that wrt processor designs, we have no external dependencies.
As seen from the article, we are also fairly well along in developing next gen processors like
brain inspired architectures. And this is not just theory, there is working code. In this program,
we prefer to focus on working code rather than merely publishing papers.

2. As part of this effort, IITM also has an ongoing program on high speed optical interconnects based on the
Serial RapidIO standard. Again just like the processor, we have started releasing open source code for our protos
so nothing opaque about the program. You do not have to file an RTI, check the code and see if it is mature !
SRIO is interesting since it is probably the first standard that Indian entities are part of the standards committee.
In fact we are also part of the Part S sub-group which qualifies it for space and aerospace applications.
It is kind of fun having guys from BAE, JPL, Lockheed Martin and the US Air Force in a tech discussion !
The level of technical scrutiny that every design nuance is subjected to has to be seen to be believed.
In effect the next generation avionics bus is being specified with Indian participation and so we do not
have to go around buying technology. In fact I am asking BAE to use our IP !

3. We are also specifying a next gen flash storage standard called lightstor (first standard of any kind that has
originated solely from India) that has found traction in the Linux and storage communities. We work with pretty
much anyone who matters in storage on this effort. This takes of any high speed storage needs for any defence system
including flight data recorder and CVRs. Need to work on the ruggedization aspects though.

4. SCL in Chandigarh has now come under ISRO and so now has the same engineering discipline and focus of its
parent organization. They are still on 180nm but are moving towards 130/90nm. Before you laugh it off,
most of the world still runs on these geometries. Before getting to 14 nm Xeons, we need to get
the simpler ICs done locally. But even there, we should be getting to 16 core processors in
about 2 years, fab would be outside India initially for such a complex design. More importantly, ISRO launch vehicles now have started
using locally developed and fabricated processors from SCL. And very sensibly, instead of going gung-ho
on 22 and 14 nm, they are making sure the rest of the eco-system is supported in the SCL fab. This includes
GaN modules (for AESA), Analog/RF , III-V semiconductors, silicon photonics, MEMS and power electronics. And home
grown FPGAs too. This means other than cutting edge processors, DRAM and NAND flash, by 2025 most of our defence
semiconductors will have strategic independence. I frankly have found the new SCL way more professional
and responsive than any private sector organization.

4. If the new LCD fab actually comes about, another import dependency is removed leaving pretty much
DRAM, NAND and high density silicon packaging (TSVs et all) as foreign sources. Typically these have never
been embargoed and multiple Asian sources are available. Of course I should not forget mundane things like
optical modules, connectors and cutting edge PCB materials. Very important but usually ignored
in the localization debate.
When we finally get a 28 nm fab (more than enough for defence apps), we will have total autonomy.
Of course the semicon equipment is still imported (and can be embargoed) !

To conclude, all the building blocks for next gen avionics is starting to be available locally.
I am hoping by the 2025/2030 time frame, we stop using foreign avionics completely and start
exporting.

to let PAK-FA mature quite a bit

What needs to mature ?

How many systems need to mature ?

Well

Engine is one sure, radars ?

India is expected to choose Israeli / french / western avionics so count them out

Other smaller systems India us expected to fit Indian systems so count them out too

[/quote]

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Mar 2016 09:07

macaque wrote: In this program, we prefer to focus on working code rather than merely publishing papers.

Responded:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1988960

Thanks, good post.

A Nandy · Post by **A Nandy** » 11 Mar 2016 20:48

Thanks for the awesome post macaque. Really opened my eyes.

Of course the semicon equipment is still imported (and can be embargoed) !

Any effort to indigenize these?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 18 Mar 2016 20:46

Fantastic video on the PAK FA. Maneuvers include the Kulbit and Pugachev Cobra. Pity the resolution isn't too good. (Its probably been posted before, but still worth it, for those who haven't seen it yet.)

While the video only exhibits the aircraft performance at low speed high AoA conditions, there's still little doubt that, at least in terms of pure flying qualities, the PAK FA will be a superlative machine.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 20:57

Macaque, brilliant post. One of the ones that makes BR totally worth it. How would you rate the progress on GaN devices and would 130/90 nm devices even for GaAs meet our defence forces current requirements for compact systems? Look forward to your thoughts. A couple of firms abroad have started churning out (super expensive) GaN radars - ups the ante for us to keep pace over time. Also appreciate your patient replies to some of the hectoring posts on the EE times article. Shame that references to caste etc invariably prop up in our wannabe overlords brains whenever an Indian makes a substantial and reasoned contribution which they can't counter logically. Insecure twits. I used to subscribe and always wished for the day that I'd see Indian contributions emerge in the space, finally happened!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 21:02

A Nandy wrote:Thanks for the awesome post macaque. Really opened my eyes.

Of course the semicon equipment is still imported (and can be embargoed) !
Any effort to indigenize these?

Macaque can answer but one can only do so much. Semicon kit is more or less a cartel with a handful of suppliers dominating the space and funded by USG, developed economy grants to the top of the pile. Even ASML has Intel funding.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 21:10

I never back down in a technical or an intellectual debate ! Have a family clan history of 1000 + years of scholarship in vishitatdvaita, so I am fairly well prepared for any debate. Coming to GaN, the Sitar fab was active a while ago on gas but not sure now . SCL is looking at GaN and next gen Semiconductors inn general. Non reason they cannot make progress. But I would focus on the TR modules using 3rd party GaN devices and the associated computing infrastructure first. I keep pushing for home grown systems first, home grown components can come later. Once we have our systems, component substitution is easy.
Materials science research and nano devices in particular is promising in India now. Actually govt funds are there, we have good faculty, sufficient student interest in pure science but a bit of focus is lacking. That is why I partly quit my private sector career to help drive some strategic programs at IIT. Still continue to run a startup on the side, so I hope I bring focus to these programs.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 21:15

Thanks again. Completely agree about owning the designing and then doing import substitution! So GaN device availability is not seen as an issue? Somehow I had the mindset we'd have to rush to the west again for the same.. and sanctions would bite or some restriction or the other.

So how has SITAR progress been. From your posts I gather, its SCL where the real push is at. Is SITAR just acting like a center for ISRO now or is there an effort to collab across national programs?

Kudos for your contribution to national programs. May you have a lot of success and may your tribe increase (plus the Govt gives you the right support to drive these programs).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 21:16

Oops wasn't SITAR DRDO's lab or rather a program for ICs and with GAETEC merged into it?

Edit: Checked - program SITAR and also the lab with Gaetec part of it since 2004.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 21:17

http://www.cense.iisc.ernet.in/pelectronics.html , GaN lab at iisc. They are also mlooking to set up a small fab.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 21:19

Karan M wrote:Oops wasn't SITAR DRDO's lab or rather a program for ICs and with GAETEC merged into it?

Yes, not sure what the current state is. I can ask, but then I will get dragged into yet another project ! Prefer to maintain my focus on Shakti.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 21:21

^^

The right people always get pulled into everything!

Thanks for the link. Very interesting and what an advancement.

I remember visiting Aero India in early 2000s and gnashing my teeth at the amount of avionics we had to import for the Su-30 etc and then turning the corner into the LCA pavilion and seeing hope arise that indigenous programs would counter that.

Now thanks to folks like you, its coming around. Good going.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 21:23

Karan M wrote:Thanks again. Completely agree about owning the designing and then doing import substitution! So GaN device availability is not seen as an issue? Somehow I had the mindset we'd have to rush to the west again for the same.. and sanctions would bite or some restriction or the other.

So how has SITAR progress been. From your posts I gather, its SCL where the real push is at. Is SITAR just acting like a center for ISRO now or is there an effort to collab across national programs?

Kudos for your contribution to national programs. May you have a lot of success and may your tribe increase (plus the Govt gives you the right support to drive these programs).

Some collaboration is there. Do not know to what extent. More needs to happen. Too many meetings in the govt. !

I do not think getting GaN devices is an issue but milgrade stuff may have issues, do not know. I used to run a well known HW and IC design startup out of Singapore, getting GaN parts for India even in the 2000s was not an issue. But these were low power.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 21:28

I see. From time to time some US based firms have been advertising their RF and even components/devices to local industry, advertorials etc, but I always have had this perception that its 1 step ahead, 2 steps back. Many idiosyncratic decisions to deny us consultancy on LCA, actuators etc - which we all end up overcoming. Good to hear of device availability.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 21:30

Another GaN lab, in Trichy

http://www.bdu.ac.in/centers/nanoscienc ... search.php

IIT M has good faci!ities for wireless research, the correct system was conceived here. I think our labs
now work on LTE. So I am pretty sure they evaluate GaN power amps.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 21:34

Karan M wrote:I see. From time to time some US based firms have been advertising their RF and even components/devices to local industry, advertorials etc, but I always have had this perception that its 1 step ahead, 2 steps back. Many idiosyncratic decisions to deny us consultancy on LCA, actuators etc - which we all end up overcoming. Good to hear of device availability.

One of the guys who does the lca flight control jigs is doing his mtech project under me. Said we are evaluating local actuators now.
Even in UAVs for example, we have been asked to chart out a plan for 100 per cent localization. I think a few will launched under the PMO's IMPRINT program.

All in completed by me is in public domain by the way, you just need to know where to search !

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 18 Mar 2016 22:02

macaque wrote:But I would focus on the TR modules using 3rd party GaN devices and the associated computing infrastructure first. I keep pushing for home grown systems first, home grown components can come later.

That's a sensible idea. But on that topic, are Triquint & Cree marketing their GaN-based HEMTs in India?

[As I recall, the French DRAA program (demonstrator program leading to the RBE-2AA) employed TR modules of US-origin, so the units themselves ought to be 'exportable' (even if the technology isn't).]

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 22:06

macaque wrote:
Karan M wrote:I see. From time to time some US based firms have been advertising their RF and even components/devices to local industry, advertorials etc, but I always have had this perception that its 1 step ahead, 2 steps back. Many idiosyncratic decisions to deny us consultancy on LCA, actuators etc - which we all end up overcoming. Good to hear of device availability.
One of the guys who does the lca flight control jigs is doing his mtech project under me. Said we are evaluating local actuators now.
Even in UAVs for example, we have been asked to chart out a plan for 100 per cent localization. I think a few will launched under the PMO's IMPRINT program.

All in completed by me is in public domain by the way, you just need to know where to search !

The last part is key - and hence the info you posted is much appreciated.

A western actuator guy was scathing about the denial to India. He said WIPRO and another bunch were making actuators locally anyhow so he didn't see what purpose the dont sell thing served.

ISRO had a program running with HAL for the LCA actuators. Hopefully this year they'll enter trials.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 22:10

Marketing no, available yes for triquint . But defence would be the wrong focus, vehicle radars and mobile basecstaion PA s would probably drive usage in India. Defense would be a spin-off. Unfortunately I do not see much activity here. I am trying to setup a center for autonomous vehicles and have started working with auto component OEMs on this. Hope to drive GaN through this route.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 18 Mar 2016 22:19

A western actuator guy was scathing about the denial to India. He said WIPRO and another bunch were making actuators locally anyhow so he didn't see what purpose the dont sell thing served.

ISRO had a program running with HAL for the LCA actuators. Hopefully this year they'll enter trials.

I am still unable to fathom what the big deal on actuators is, presumably due to low demand for high precision actuators, local suppliers are unavailable. In general, I see more of a confidence issue rather than capability issues in local engineers and engineering firms. A!so a lack of guidance on steady capability building is an issue. We have this idiotic focus on 100% localization and ignoring system design capabilities. In that respect working at IIT is useful, the is no lack of confidence in the people!e you work with. Subservience is an unknown quality !

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 22:37

I heard it was a question of precision engineering to compact specs and reliability, plus then the materials issues and all sorts of stuff comes in. LCA I am told is a pain to work for, because of the size issue. Everything is small, light and has to be ultra reliable. Most suppliers give it a pass because of that and the certification from CEMILAC plus documentation and everything is a challenge and why bother. Per se, if we can do this http://www.thehindu.com/business/compan ... 382233.ece then the issue is of focused effort.

Good thing is the current actuators are also supposedly very reliable, we swapped them around in the test program from the Iron bird to the flying protos bypassing the sanctions. So the need to replace them urgently may not be as high as perceived.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2016 22:42

From the military POV, the local move to AESA will have huge ramifications, once we get all the testing etc done and they can source/modify/upgrade locally. The AESA radars will be much more available than the earlier gen radars which require carefully hoarded high power parts imported and hoarded. Hope we see that move in EW and all associated fields and we have indigenous processors & switch tying the whole thing together.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 19 Mar 2016 05:53

Karan M wrote:I heard it was a question of precision engineering to compact specs and reliability, plus then the materials issues and all sorts of stuff comes in. LCA I am told is a pain to work for, because of the size issue. Everything is small, light and has to be ultra reliable. Most suppliers give it a pass because of that and the certification from CEMILAC plus documentation and everything is a challenge and why bother. Per se, if we can do this http://www.thehindu.com/business/compan ... 382233.ece then the issue is of focused effort.

Good thing is the current actuators are also supposedly very reliable, we swapped them around in the test program from the Iron bird to the flying protos bypassing the sanctions. So the need to replace them urgently may not be as high as perceived.

The issue is one of culture ! We lack a desire for quality , except in some rare cases like marble craftsmen and this reflects in the cost of designing high precision components since companies end up doing twice the work since they simp!y do not have the systems in place. A German kitchen equipment manufacturer said they saw no point in selling in India because quality was not appreciated or valued , people only paid high prices paid for brand value. Forget LCA components, we do not get high quality Indian stainless steel utensils ! Only one or two brands now pay attention to detail. I reject code if the grammar in the comment is not correct ! Have to, my operating system and processor will be used in fly by wire systems. So perfection is mandatory. 90% of folks will not survive such scrutiny.

member_28437 · Post by **member_28437** » 19 Mar 2016 08:31

Viv S wrote:
macaque wrote:But I would focus on the TR modules using 3rd party GaN devices and the associated computing infrastructure first. I keep pushing for home grown systems first, home grown components can come later.
That's a sensible idea. But on that topic, are Triquint & Cree marketing their GaN-based HEMTs in India?

[As I recall, the French DRAA program (demonstrator program leading to the RBE-2AA) employed TR modules of US-origin, so the units themselves ought to be 'exportable' (even if the technology isn't).]

Looks like IIT Kh does GaN hemt work and even has filed for a patent for a hemt device.

http://www.iitkgp.ac.in/fac-profiles/sh ... code=bYmYS

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Mar 2016 17:34

One point about GaN radars, or GaN upgrades in general, depending upon the supplier, and the team doing the integration there may or may not a be a significant extra added cost to switching over to GaN (to the customer). Lockheed switched its TPS-77MRR Dart over and haven't really increased the price (Janes 360 intel) and Raytheon have begun incorporating GaN into the THAAD antenna under the same long lead contract (for GaA units) without any significant modifications on price. If the infrastructure needs to be built up or if the radar OEM is sourcing from expensive sources, then it may make a difference which could be the case for some european suppliers. With higher upfront cost reduced considerably through volume production, the applications seeing no significant change in cost are the ones where the OEM's offering are also supporting through the life-cycle since they recover the money over the lifetime. The GaN THAAD antenna has already been delivered and that program has already completely switched over (significant since its X-band)

For higher performance GaN components particularly in the L and S band in the US for example, there is unlikely to be another serious GaA contender ever for DOD work since the industrial base supporting the DOD is pretty much at par with or larger than GaA kitted radars on order. X band is still largely dominated by GaA components but that is also changing particularly for applications where there is a clear performance advantage with space limitations (EW on the F-15 for example) and where reliability is the most important factor (such as the AN/TPY-2). The day isn't really far where most of the top radar suppliers completely switch over to GaN for most RF applications, in fact strategically the 2 big primes that have high %ages of in-house rf component production are well on that path to reach majority GaN by mid 2017. Others in the US such as Lockheed are now completely over to GaN for almost their entire portfolio and in areas where they are still offering GaA as an option they also have GaN as an alternative..TRL and MRL levels are now sufficiently high that most of the serious OEM's that compete aren't penalized for offering GaN solutions and again depending upon the type of sensor, and rf components there may GaN solutions at the same MRL level as GaA solutions. GaN for all practical purposes is mainstream and no longer something that involves high levels of development, manufacture or support risk.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Mar 2016 18:41

macaque wrote:
Karan M wrote:I heard it was a question of precision engineering to compact specs and reliability, plus then the materials issues and all sorts of stuff comes in. LCA I am told is a pain to work for, because of the size issue. Everything is small, light and has to be ultra reliable. Most suppliers give it a pass because of that and the certification from CEMILAC plus documentation and everything is a challenge and why bother. Per se, if we can do this http://www.thehindu.com/business/compan ... 382233.ece then the issue is of focused effort.

Good thing is the current actuators are also supposedly very reliable, we swapped them around in the test program from the Iron bird to the flying protos bypassing the sanctions. So the need to replace them urgently may not be as high as perceived.
The issue is one of culture ! We lack a desire for quality , except in some rare cases like marble craftsmen and this reflects in the cost of designing high precision components since companies end up doing twice the work since they simp!y do not have the systems in place. A German kitchen equipment manufacturer said they saw no point in selling in India because quality was not appreciated or valued , people only paid high prices paid for brand value. Forget LCA components, we do not get high quality Indian stainless steel utensils ! Only one or two brands now pay attention to detail. I reject code if the grammar in the comment is not correct ! Have to, my operating system and processor will be used in fly by wire systems. So perfection is mandatory. 90% of folks will not survive such scrutiny.

Very true and most firms don't bother with this because they don't see the value.. even to this date i only see a handful of top firms and SMEs in the business.. but have a lot of hope for MSMEs and SMEs.. they may be driven to succeed.
Coming to your point about culture, if we see the way the Arjun's painting was done.. it was like a man with a bucket.. decided to slop paint.. DRDO can't crib openly but it's no surprise they wanted manufacturing to be beyond OFB.. the Tata made stuff looks absolutely different. Small things but they do add up

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Mar 2016 17:40

http://in.rbth.com/news/2016/03/28/russ ... les_579605

FGFA may be armed with BrahMos cruise missiles
28 March 2016 Sputnik
Developers of the FGFA asked to adjust the size of the BrahMos missile, so it can be placed on board the aircraft, Brahmos Aerospace chief said on Monday.

Source:Alexey Filippov/RIA Novosti

A supersonic BrahMos cruise missile may be installed on a Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) jointly developed by Russia and India, head of the Russian-Indian BrahMos Aerospace enterprise, Sudhir Mishra, said Monday.

The FGFA has stealth capabilities and is based on the Russian T-50 prototype jet. The FGFA project came about following the signing of a Russian-Indian cooperation agreement on October 18, 2007.

"We are presenting BrahMos to many Indian public and private defense companies, from some of them we get a technical job. We presented it also to developers of the FGFA — they asked to adjust the size of the missile, so it can be placed on board the aircraft. Such work is ongoing," Mishra told RIA Novosti during the exhibition Defexpo India 2016.

He also said that four nations are negotiating the purchase of the supersonic BrahMos cruise missiles.

"Defense export is a very sensitive subject, we cannot say much without permission of our governments. However, I can say that currently consultations are being held with four foreign countries," Mishra told RIA Novosti.

He did not specify which nations are interested in buying the missiles.

BrahMos is a short-range supersonic missile, which has been used by the Indian Navy since 2005. The missile has a range of 180 miles and can carry a conventional warhead of up to 660 pounds.

BrahMos Aerospace was formed by India’s Defense Research and Development Organization and Russia’s NPO Mashinostroyenia. It produces weapons systems using Russian and Indian technology.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Mar 2016 10:10

India's New Stealth Fighter to Get Mach 3 Super Missile?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Apr 2016 03:10

Nothing new (has been there since day one), but a consolidated response, that until the Russians prove otherwise will haunt the FGFA project. <eanwhile all Russian news outlets are pretty positive about the project - this contrast, between Indian and Russian publications/news outlets, has also existed for a very long time.

Why India should dump FGFA project?

Like most other Russian projects the FGFA or the PAK-FA is one which is high on promise but low on delivery. The specs for this aircraft promises a lot in terms of technology where the Russians are known to be lacking in capability and even they are unsure about their capacity to deliver. Lets look at specs of the T-50 aircraft which is available in Wikipedia.

The FGFA is a derivative from the PAK-FA {T-50, the Russians themselves will help with the FGFA and produce their PAK-FA, based on the T-50 which is flying around} wherein the India specific customizations are sought to be done on the T-50 platform as per IAF’s requirement. So there is no joint development as such.

Length: 19.8 m (65.0 ft)
Wingspan: 13.95 m (45.8 ft)
Height: 4.74 m (15.6 ft)
Wing area: 78.8 m2 (848.1 ft2)
Empty weight: 18,000 kg (39,680 lb)
Loaded weight: 25,000 kg (55,115 lb) typical mission weight, 29,270 kg (64,530 lb) at full load
Max. takeoff weight: 35,000 kg (77,160 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × NPO Saturn izdeliye 117 (AL-41F1)or initial production, izdeliye 30 for later production thrust vectoring turbofan
Dry thrust: 93.1 kN / 110 kN (21,000 lbf / 24,300 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 147 kN / 176 kN (33,067 lbf / 39,600 lbf) each
Fuel capacity: 10,300 kg (22,700 lb)

Engine

The T-50 uses the NPO Saturn AL-41F1 engine with a dry thrust of 93kN.This is quite inadequate. Typically a 5th Generation aircraft with Supercruise as one of the main features should have a engine with a dry thrust of 110 – 120 kN.Such aircraft should not use afterburners because use of afterburners would give away the stealth. The Russians do not possess any proven design for such an engine and even if they come out with one, the result could be similar to that of Su – 30 MKI which has a track record of frequent burn-outs.

Stealth Badly Engineered

There is no clear vision as to how stealth will be achieved, neither does it make heavy use of sloped angles as in F-22 Raptor nor does it make use of composites. The air frame contains a lot of joins which is symbolic of poor construction techniques. Out of 12 weapon hard points 6 are internal and 6 are on the wings. The hard points on the wings give away the stealthiness of an aircraft, thus it leaves no in doubt about the fact that stealth is poorly engineered.

India will get a badly engineered base model which cannot be called a 5th Generation fighter with or without India specific features. This will not satisfy the IAF’s requirement.

Avionics

The avionics suite as known in public domain is:

Sh121 multi-functional integrated radio electronic system (MIRES)

N079 AESA radar
L402 Himalayas ECM suite built by KNIRTI institute
101KS Atoll electro-optical suite
101KS-O: Laser-based counter-measures against infrared missiles
101KS-V: IRST for airborne targets
101KS-U: Ultraviolet warning sensors
101KS-N: Targeting pod

This looks pretty ordinary and there is nothing which stands out as being uncommon or not available in aircraft of similar nature.

AESA Radar

The N079 is based on the N036 Byelka model, different versions of which were displayed at the MAKS airshow in 2009 and 2013.The radar system developed by Tikhomirov NIIP Institute consists of both X-band and L-band arrays but its performance against leading US models, especially the APG-77(V)2 of F-22A Raptor is unknown and kept secret for obvious reasons.

Russian Trial & Error at India’s Cost

The T-50 is the prototype developed for the Russian Air Force under the PAK-FA project. The FGFA is a derivative from the PAK-FA wherein the India specific customizations are sought to be done on the T-50 platform as per IAF’s requirement. So there is no joint development as such.

On 25 January 2016, it was reported that Russia and India have agreed to develop FGFA and lower investment cost to $4 billion for each nation, down from $5.5 billion earlier.

Russia has been very hesitant in transferring technology to India. It took about 8 years to transfer the barrel technology of T-90 tanks…

Should it cost $4 billion to make some customizations? Informed sources say that it is the cost of development of the entire model and Russia will not invest a single rubble.

In other words Russia is fooling India to fund the development of its 5th Generation fighter aircraft base model i.e.T-50 which will be further developed by them as per their needs.

What will India get?

India will get a badly engineered base model which cannot be called a 5th Generation fighter with or without India specific features. This will not satisfy the IAF’s requirement.

Transfer of Technology problems

If we were to assume that Russia would develop a new powerful engine for this aircraft, re-engineer stealth and do every other thing to make it a world-class 5th Generation fighter jet one question still remains. Would it transfer technology to India?

Russia has been very hesitant in transferring technology to India. It took about 8 years to transfer the barrel technology of T-90 tanks even though India purchased those in large numbers. In the case of Su -30 India placed the first order in 1996 for 50 Russian made Su-30′s.Thereafter several upgrades happened till 2012. On 24 December 2012, India ordered assembly kits for 42 Su-30MKIs by signing a deal during President Putin’s visit to India. This increases India’s order total to 272 Su-30MKIs. Russia didn’t transfer the Engine technology and HAL is dependent on Russia for components to assemble the engine and some spare parts. All this after India paid a whopping $15 Billion to Russia for design, development, CKD’s and SKD’s.

At a time when various indigenous fighter jet programs like LCA Mark 2, AMCA are struggling to get fund allocated from the Finance ministry, spending a huge amount of this magnitude on some junk fighter jet of foreign design is pure wastage of money.

So it is likely that Russia won’t transfer crucial technology of the new fighter jet making India ever dependent on it for components, spares etc even after spending a hefty $4 Billion on so called” design and development”.

In short the Russians plan is to milk India for the next 30 years, knowing fully well that she needs a 5th Generation fighter jet. The offer of “joint design and development” is just the entry point in their diabolical gameplan.

Conclusion

Recent news suggest that the talks between India and Russia failed to decide on the S-400 surface-to-air missile system. India has stated that it wants to buy the next-generation air and missiles defense system but Russia wants to link the potential purchase to the PAK-FA deal.

This suggests that Russia is aware that its bear hug with respect to the PAK-FA deal may not work, so it is trying to coerce India into it using another deal.

According to India Today, New Delhi has lost confidence in the Russian T-50 PAK-FA effort after Moscow truncated its buy to about a squadron’s worth of jets. The prevailing view within the Indian air force is that if Russia—which is the senior partner—is backing out of the program, then it will be left as the sole operator of an aircraft that largely fails to meet its requirements. Instead of buying PAK-FA, Russia is planning to continue production of advanced Su-30 and Su-35 Flanker variants.

India’s own Fifth Generation Fighter project – AMCA has far better design and specifications compared to PAK-FA.

In other words, the above is a Russian no-confidence vote against their own product.

If the Russians are not confident about their own product should we repose confidence in it.The answer is a simple no.

At a time when various indigenous fighter jet programs like LCA Mark 2, AMCA are struggling to get fund allocated from the Finance ministry, spending a huge amount of this magnitude on some junk fighter jet of foreign design is pure wastage of money.

India’s own Fifth Generation Fighter project – AMCA has far better design and specifications compared to PAK-FA.

Its always better that we spend billions of dollars in training our own scientists and engineers in developing 5th Generation stealth fighter jet technology as it will not only strengthen our defence but also provide jobs to millions of our countrymen.

Quite rightly the Indian MoD, IAF has expressed reservations over this deal and they should now go one step further to dump it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Apr 2016 09:34

^^ Who write such crap

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Apr 2016 10:54

I agree about "quality" being a dirty word in the Indian context.We experience it every day of our lives,where even the best of Indian cos. for ex. in the auto sector,produce products that are inferior in finishing to firang auto cos.
Poor welding seen on IN warships in the past,and the apparent ad-hoc detailing seen n the A-2 in comparison with the neat integrated hulls/armour/sensors, etc. seen on the latest gen of MBTs.
Services' complaints about DPSU quality has been legion over decades .

Coming back to the FGFA/T-50.The hard truth is that China,through espionage mainly,stealing US ssecrets even JSF stealth tech,has developed its own 5th-gen fighter. India cannot be left behind with inferior tech when China already has a huge numerical superiority. The FGFA JV envisaged left the station a long time ago.India did not get aboard,but "threw" some of its "goods and chattels" aboard.We are now trying to catch up with the train at a station far down the line as it nears its destination. True,we've missed out on some stunning views of development along the way,as the train took a different route while we scratched our heads on the platform,but there does exist the possibility of rejoining the same train up the line.

Catching an "Amtrak",the F-35 special is fanciful.For one,this worthy was meant to be a companion of the more capable F-22 and in dogfighting,is no better than a legacy F-16. Getting a tkt on the F-35 would also require some heavy negotiating with the pentagon on security,etc. on tech issue.To keep up with the Chens,and the Pakis who will eventually get the Chen bird,plus save inordinate time,the best way is to push hard for a cost-effective bargain on the FGFA,as some media reports say is already being done. Reduce cost for our share of the JV,prototypes given to us so that we can tailor a future version closest to our needs,while operating a few sqds of the std. version.
We've done this before with the SU-30,turned the MKI ito a grand success,there is no need why the FGFA too should not replicate the success of the Flanker.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 07 Apr 2016 23:29

If PAK-FA is going to have engine izdeliye 30 replacing AL-41F1 post 2020, how is that going to be different than say incremental upgrade of F/A-18 engines? In fact, izdeliye 30 can have probably better performance through its life as it is more of a next gen of an engine than just an upgrade of AL-31/AL-41.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 08 Apr 2016 03:59

The FGFA is another Viky. The Russians won't even show/share anything with the IAF. Just trust us is the refrain. I'd like to know of one instance where the Russians (vs the USSR), have exceeded expectations. They can't afford it, they can't build it and they just want us to fund it for them on the basis of some aerobatics and long distance views. Nobody would buy a car on this value proposition let alone a 5G a/c.

I am not surprised that the IAF is not willing to blow its CAPEX for the next 10 years on a science project that will arrive in the 2030s when what they need is modern fighters that can come on stream in the next 3-4 years (100s of LCA) plus a stopgap medium 4.5 Gen that can transition us not only to the AMCA in the 2020s as a platform but also more critically to build the supply chain for it.

'Make in India' begins with a supply chain of many SMEs that make small things and collectively grow people, product and potential.

PAK/FA/FAK/PA/FGFA is 'Make in Russia'

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 08 Apr 2016 04:13

vishvak wrote:If PAK-FA is going to have engine izdeliye 30 replacing AL-41F1 post 2020, how is that going to be different than say incremental upgrade of F/A-18 engines? In fact, izdeliye 30 can have probably better performance through its life as it is more of a next gen of an engine than just an upgrade of AL-31/AL-41.

The izdeliye 30 by virtue of being a clean sheet design will enter service only after 2025.

Why test the new PAK FA in 2018?

The new engine of the PAK FA will only be tested as late as 2018 because there are difficulties in conducting the bench testing. However, the country’s defence capability will not be affected by this delay, say analysts.

The second stage of testing the engine for the newest front-line fighter, the PAK FA, has been delayed by a year. The aircraft will now fly with the new engine only in 2018, and not in 2017 as originally planned.

The technical complexity of this project requires a long bench-testing period for the new engine, further delaying final completion date of the fifth generation fighter programme. Vladimir Prokhvatilov, expert at the Russian Academy of Military Sciences, said the engines “will be brought to a fully operational state no earlier than 2025”.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 08 Apr 2016 21:20

I say dump PAKFA, re-design AMCA as a heavier aircraft which can accept AL-31 series engines. By the time heavy AMCA enters production, we would have developed and indigenised advanced versions of AL-31. Something like J-20 programme of China.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 08 Apr 2016 21:31

IAF doesnt seem too excited about fgfa. The main reason for this, I doubt is the inadequate stealthiness of the aircraft. All the talk and gripe about engines/avionics is good but the key distinguishing feature of 5th gen aircraft is stealth. Otherwise IAF can just continue to order more su 30 mkis.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Apr 2016 17:05

The IAF is yet again repeating its mistake here as it has done with the MMRCA capability-wise ,goalpost shifting everytime,upping the ante whenever a new development takes place. In demanding "nothing but the best and latest",the IAF is in deep crisis,unable to afford the chosen bride,the Rafale.Even the desi bride is unavailable for the moment as the "dowry" details haven't yet been finalised! If it keeps demanding the sky,it will continue to be grounded while other less ambitious nations like Pak,carry on with production of their modest JF-17 ,which in a few years time will be available in significant numbers aimed at us, while we would've retired all our legacy MIGs and China would've inducted its first 5th-gen fighters.