Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 23 May 2013 17:03

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2045 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 52  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011 08:49 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 1314
FMS prices are prone to manipulations. For instance a equipment “exactly” like US Govt sale would be USD 100 Million, but if India will ask for one bolt less or one bolt more (which is normal), then the nature of equipment has now changed and the price can be anything from US$ 101 to 200 million.

On other side of the coin, the cost of spare parts and stuff make a lot of difference. For instance in Brazilian fighter tender 36 F-18s were priced as US$ 7.6 Billion i.e. around US$ 210 million each as they included around 30 years of spares. Similarly Rafale was around US$ 270 million. The fly away unit price of F-18 is estimated to be around US$ 50 to 70 million only.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011 10:04 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31
Posts: 1005
Gilles wrote:
What I said was that when Germany suggested that NATO rent An-124s, many NATO members and a couple others readily joined the scheme for it made sense and was cost effective.


When you say 'many NATO members', what you really mean is 'the A400M consortium'

SAC & SALIS: Hungary, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden, Finland (7)
SAC only: Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, United States (5)
SALIS only (non-A400M partner): Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, Portugal, Slovakia (6)
SALIS only (A400M partner): Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Germany, United Kingdom (5)

Of the non-aligned countries (not the US and not the A400M consortium), the largest group joined BOTH SAC and SALIS

Gilles wrote:
They then renewed SALIS (the An-124 rental agreement) and SAC (the C-17 purchase scheme) is now running in parallel to it instead of having replaced it.


It was never intended to replace it. Especially considering the WHOLE POINT OF SALIS is to keep any other euro nation from buying/experiencing the C-17.

Gilles wrote:
In order for SAC to be formed, the US, which itself, had no need for SAC, had to join it


In order for SALIS to be formed, the A400M consortium had to join it. Without them (especially the UK, Germany and France) doing the financial heavy lifting, it wouldn't be feasible.

And actually the US does have a need for SAC to exist, because it enables partner countries to have independent access to airlift that doesn't impact the US fleet.

Gilles wrote:
My only point was that the C-17 is very expensive to buy and very expensive to operate, even if operating this aircraft inside a pool of users.


And yet the majority of non-aligned countries signed up for both.

If it was half as horrible as you keep trying to make it sound, this wouldn't be the case.


In any event, let us see what happens to SALIS once the A400M has been delivered. After the A400M consortium has native airlift capability, they won't feel the need to subsidize SALIS and the other countries won't be able to afford to keep it running so it will disappear.

Meanwhile, SAC will still be going strong and likely picking up the SALIS refugees.

What will you say then?


Last edited by GeorgeWelch on 13 Apr 2011 11:22, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011 10:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
they should ask the quote to be split clearly - flyaway unit cost and cost of support for X years with line item breakdowns.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 04:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Nov 2009 08:25
Posts: 512
GeorgeWelch wrote:
When you say 'many NATO members', what you really mean is 'the A400M consortium'

SAC & SALIS: Hungary, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden, Finland (7)
SAC only: Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, United States (5)
SALIS only (non-A400M partner): Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, Portugal, Slovakia (6)
SALIS only (A400M partner): Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Germany, United Kingdom (5)

In any event, let us see what happens to SALIS once the A400M has been delivered. After the A400M consortium has native airlift capability, they won't feel the need to subsidize SALIS and the other countries won't be able to afford to keep it running so it will disappear.

Meanwhile, SAC will still be going strong and likely picking up the SALIS refugees.

What will you say then?


Also note that two SALIS members, one A400M partner and one non, are also C-17 operators: Canada (4 C-17) and the UK (7 C-17).

The Afghan war must also be factored into all of this: needs and requirements will change once all that winds down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 08:29 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 17 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 329
Singha wrote:
they should ask the quote to be split clearly - flyaway unit cost and cost of support for X years with line item breakdowns.


Ha!

Amirkhan meets the frugal desi. If this deal was all set why the sudden price consciousness?

Can't think of a situation where the US has sold to a customer like India. They either gave it away or sold to customers who didn't have the choice to buy but American. India OTOH does not have to buy American, so can perhaps afford to be prudent when spending it's money. Let's just sit back and watch where this goes.

Whatever happens this will not enamour our babus to the US mil-ind complex.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 08:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 8168
Location: Illini Nation
There is a new requirement in town: leak or cable proof.

:mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2011 18:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Nov 2009 08:25
Posts: 512
Another Boeing C-17 commercial disguised as a News article

http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=123560

Quote:
Long Beach-built Boeing C-17 Globemaster jets owned by the United States, Canada and Qatar are playing an increasing role in operations across war-scarred Libya, including the recent airlift of wounded rebel fighters....

.....A Qatari Air Force C-17 was used in early April to ferry 15 seriously injured fighters from outside the eastern harbour town of Brega, where revolutionaries have been clashing with fighters loyal to longtime Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.....

......The C-17 is likely one of the only heavy-lift jets capable of operating in that country right now, largely because of its ability to land and takeoff on unpaved runways as short as 3,500 feet............

.......The main airport in the capital, Tripoli, remains under the control of Gaddafi, and the tiny one-runway airport in the area of Brega, where the Qatari rescue mission occurred, has been the scene of fierce fighting and is believed damaged......


......However, the mostly flat desert around the small town would be ideal for the C-17, which has operated successfully under similar geographical conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan for years.......



Brega, of course has a 7,200 foot asphalt runway, that can handle many large jets, so in order to make this article plausible, the airport "is believed damaged". And no C-17 has ever landed in "mostly flat desert" areas anywhere in the world, let alone in Iraq and Afghanistan (unless you call landing on the desert runway of Edwards Air Force base where the space shuttle lands, a desert area)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2011 06:32 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Nov 2009 08:25
Posts: 512
I know some people here don't care about what goes on in the rest of the world, but here is a picture, taken in Moscow today, of the new Royal Jordanian Air Force IL-76MF on a pre-delivery flight. Its a stretch IL-76 with modern High by-pass PS-90 engines, the same as on the IAF A-50 AWACS. This is the first of an order of two.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2011 07:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21
Posts: 2221
I definitely like the looks of it ... Any idea what they paid for it?

Russians and americans are both making planes for long and both have economies of scale working for them. Yet how come Russian planes less than half the cost. Differential of labour cost can't certainly account for 100s of millions per plane!

What am I missing?

P.S. IAF has serious problems of keeping the 76s in the air. In fact it seems that they havn't had any luck with the newer 78s/50s either. That is why they seem to move away from it for all the deals, be it tankers, AWACs, and of course transport from the looks of it. How can Russia possibly allay that fear that it will not happen with the IL-76MFs? If they can do it, I am sure that we have the requirement and money for 16 C-17s and 16 MFs


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2011 10:17 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
indranilroy wrote:
Russians and americans are both making planes for long and both have economies of scale working for them. Yet how come Russian planes less than half the cost. Differential of labour cost can't certainly account for 100s of millions per plane!


Labour costs hardly account for much higher cost of aircraft be it russia,europe,india or US , the cost accounted for is the cost of equipment and the huge profits that Western contractors and subcontractors make who supply the parts in building these aircraft.

If you strip the IL-76 of all things russians besides the fuselage and add in western engines ,equipment and avionic/sensors to it , the cost Western IL-76 would be comparable to similar Western types.

Infact there is a quite a sum of difference in cost what Russian manufacturer sells to Russian government and Export customer , for the same equipment all things being equal an export variant cost 20-30 % more and manufacturer makes good profit , while the same equipment is sold to russian MOD with paper thin margins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2011 20:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Nov 2009 08:25
Posts: 512
Jordan's IL-76MFs were probably completed with previously built but unsold airframes, originally built in Tashkent in the 90s. So the unsold airframes were built in the immediate post-communist era of cheap labor and parts. It is rumored that they paid about in $50 million for each. It will be the first IL-76MF ever sold and delivered.
It unlikely that new IL-476 built from scratch in Russia will sell for under $100 million.
The six IL-78s that the IAF bought, although also built in the 90s, were purchased with the older generation D-30KP engines, like India's IL-76MDs. Only the three A-50s have the new PS-90 engines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2011 02:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Posts: 1067
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat :)
Cross Post

Spare Parts Situation of the Existing IAF Fleet of
IL-76s
IL-78s
A-50s

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2011 11:09 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
even the russian armed forces are shopping for arms abroad these days. quite clearly the pipeline of new products is inadequate to nonexistent in many areas and the after sales service not upto the mark.

if we have to pay for in dollars anyway, better to get it from non-russian vendors. south korea appears promising prospect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2011 23:23 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
India developing first civilian aircraft

Quote:
India is developing its first civilian aircraft, which would be a 70 to 90-seater plane catering to the regional aviation market, and a feasibility study is currently on, a top scientist said today.

"We are looking at creating a Regional Transport Aircraft (RTA) which would be 70 or a 90-seater. The feasibility study is being carried out now," M R Nayak, Advisor and Chief Scientist at the state-owned National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) said here.

A high-powered committee headed by former Chairman of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) G Madhavan Nair has already been set up to guide the project. He said the aircraft would be developed through the public-private partnership (PPP) mode.

Besides NAL which is the nodal agency for the project, the public sector firms participating in the project are HAL, DRDO, ISRP, BEL and ADA, while those in the private sector included HCL, QUEST, Infosys, Mahindras, L&T and Tata Group.

Nayak was speaking at a meeting of Indo-US aviation manufacturers, where Boeing India President Dinesh Keskar said the growing aviation market in the country had greatly enhanced the opportunities for businesses of both countries to collaborate in such projects.

Keskar said India would require 1,150 civilian planes, worth USD 130 billion, over the next two decades, and another USD 30 billion worth of military aircraft, missiles and other aerospace equipment.

The Regional Transport Aircraft (RTA) is being developed to have a range of 800 kilometres, making it conducive for travel within India due to the close proximity of Tier-I and Tier-II cities.

Reports said as many as 400 RTAs were planned to be manufactured with half of them going to the armed forces. NAL was in discussions with global engine manufacturers including Pratt & Whitney of Canada and General Electric of US, and avionics firms like Rockwell Collins and Diehl Aerospace.

Addressing the meet, Aaron Wilkins, Indian representative of US aviation regulator Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), stressed on joint efforts to enhance quality of Indian aviation sector processes and achieve standardisation of Indian equipment.

He said as many as 21 training programmes were being offered on aviation-related technical issues in the country under the US-India Aviation Cooperation Programme.

With fast-paced developments in aviation technology, DGCA was in the process of upgrading its process of certifying the new technologies, A K Saran, Joint Director General of the DGCA, said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2011 23:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31
Posts: 1005
Decks cleared for $5.8-bn C-17 Globemaster deal

Quote:
The deal to buy 10 C-17 Globemaster-III aircraft from Boeing of the US is a step closer to being clinched. The finance ministry, after initial objections, has sanctioned the money for the acquisition.

According to sources, after this development, the only formality left is the approval by the Cabinet committee on security, which is expected soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Apr 2011 08:22 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
the only other bulk operators of russian made eqpt are probably ukraine and china.

should we import spares from china assuming they have localized somethings which we want?

ukraine has no real need for a high readiness af and is perhaps ok with waiting for months until rus factory gives them a production lot.

to me it seems no option but to source OEM spares from Rus given the scale at which we operate...cannibalizing parts from mothballed a/c in peru or sierra leone might be cheap but the risks are too high

we should retired older kit like SAMs , Kamovs as soon as possible and find our own solns like Akash and Spyder. likewise for Mi17 we should make it end of road and focus asap on a new 10t helicopter in collab with eurocopter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Apr 2011 08:39 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
I dont think its easy to outsource spare or procure it from any where except OEM be it Eastern or Western aircraft or other platforms.

You can get non-essential stuff like tyres or lights or cockpit LCD but when it comes to key or major aircraft component you have to rely on OEM or its designated suppliers.

Lets say if there was a crash or some failure analysis has to be done the OEM would just say the components procured does not belong to it and the possible cause is that specific component failure or that specific component failed because the other components that dependent on it was not the original from OEM hence we cannot do a failure analysis , Please go to the people who have developed those systems.

So this RFI thing to procure components wont fly much , India will have to work with OEM to get support and components , Much like you cant buy F-16 parts from any where than lockmart and M2K components can only be supplied by Dassult , in the same way MKI components and support will come from Sukhoi or its designated suppliers.

Thats really the downside of importing stuff , you are totally dependent on OEM and OEM can make life difficult if they know you are playing games or opting for components thats not sources from OEM or its designated suppliers.

Considering we import 70 % of defence equipment and the way RFI/RFP is going out these days t these problems are here to stay for a long time to come.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Apr 2011 08:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
+1 to that.

what amazes me is how iran has managed to keep some F-4 phantoms operating ... is there a 2nd hand market from operators like germany disposing off their kit to 'brokers' who sell the plane for the value of its dismantled spares?

or does the US have a secret deal to supply iran with spares in exchange for 'good behaviour' on some fronts?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Apr 2011 09:00 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
GeorgeWelch wrote:


At $580 million per aircraft that would be the single most expensive system in the entire defence forces of India (leaving an Aircraft Carrier perhaps ) , Handle With Care :)

Do we have a break down of systems , support and spares being procured for C-17 deal ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Apr 2011 09:05 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
Singha wrote:
+1 to that.

what amazes me is how iran has managed to keep some F-4 phantoms operating ... is there a 2nd hand market from operators like germany disposing off their kit to 'brokers' who sell the plane for the value of its dismantled spares?

or does the US have a secret deal to supply iran with spares in exchange for 'good behaviour' on some fronts?


Iran can keep operating the F-4 or F-14 via mothballed aircraft or components procured from global arms black market ( we can do the same ) but no way Iran can go to United States and ask for warranty/guarantee/support for such systems ( it wont amuse US any ways :rotfl: ) they have nothing much to loose they will use it as long as it last and as long as the black market can supply spares at many times its original cost with no guarantee for spares whats so ever.

Their mantra seems to be lets make best use of it rather then just throw it and in Iran's case it just works.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Apr 2011 20:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Posts: 492
Location: Mumbai
April 28 2011, Long Beach - Daugherty Field, California.

1st & 2nd C17s for Globemaster Operator # 7 - UAE Air Force
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 May 2011 21:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
livefist.blogspot.com

The $4.1-billion deal for 10 Boeing C-17 Globemaster-III strategic transports will shortly be signed between the governments of India and the US. Queries sent by India, asking for clarifications on certain costings (which emerged from the Ministry of Finance) have reportedly been addressed to the satisfaction of the contract team. The final foreign military sales (FMS) contract is expected to come up for final approval at the Indian government's apex Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) before contract signature goes through.

When concluded, the single-source ten aircraft deal will be the largest Indo-US military hardware contract yet signed, surpassing the $962.7-million deal for six Lockheed-Martin C-130Js and the $2.1-billion for eight Boeing P-8I Neptune LRMR/ASW aircraft.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 May 2011 01:06 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Posts: 1469
x-post

chackojoseph wrote:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 May 2011 23:11 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
Model of IL-476 and IL-476 AWACS configuration ( credits Said Aminov/ International Aviation Transport Forum )

IL-476

IL-476/AWACS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 03:52 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 8168
Location: Illini Nation
Austin wrote:
I dont think its easy to outsource spare or procure it from any where except OEM be it Eastern or Western aircraft or other platforms.

......................

Considering we import 70 % of defence equipment and the way RFI/RFP is going out these days t these problems are here to stay for a long time to come.


There are multiple topics here.

Parts. I do not see it as an issue. IF India can supply a part there should be plenty of takers to make very high quality duplicates. This is no longer 1990s. I just do not see an issue with other companies making quality duplicates.

On the issue of support and warranty, etc, that could be an issue. However, I am sure the IAF has thought this through and has a game plan.

I feel it is a great thing for India. I am very glad that the IAF has broken away from the past!!!!!

I do not see this as much as a snub towards Russia as much as freeing India.

The Russians should be happy for India!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What are friends meant for?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 04:40 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 1246
Location: Planet Earth
NRao wrote:
The Russians should be happy for India!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What are friends meant for?


Saar, you know the saying...."There are no friends, only interests."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 05:57 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 8168
Location: Illini Nation
Which, then, is cool.

Why would India be worried about OEM?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 08:22 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 1246
Location: Planet Earth
Because our politicians and babus are naive enough to believe that the term friend, has some intrinsic value in the matters of national security and our relationship with other nations. Remember Nehru's Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai or Krishna Menon who consistently embarrassed himself at the United Nations, as to why other countries are giving China a hard time? The 1962 Indo-Sino War changed all that and if I remember correctly, Nehru's exact words were..."Whatever they see, belongs to them." Alas the realization came a little late and we are still suffering because of it.

Only India honours agreements but the other side does not have to. But that is okay, we will still do business with them. That is the way it has been running all this while.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 09:41 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
Parts that are manufactured or can be manufactured locally are lic built ones , they dont make duplicate but take lic rights from OEM to manufacture it locally along with design document , even those built locally are made from engineering equipment directly imported from OEM.

Its not always feasible to manufacture all the parts locally or the OEM might refuse lic for critical components that has to be directly imported.

This is nothing specific to Russia or any other country , thats how things work thats a BIG pitfall in importing equipment , you are dependent on the OEM through out equipment life time for support and services.

If you use duplicate components or just order from any body other then authorised vendor , the OEM can refuse(legally) to provide any support spares and leaving the entire class of equipment to OEM mercy.

Look at the way how France has been making India dance to its tune for M2K upgrade , its like more then 5 years of negotiation and counting , India has no choice but to opt for OEM which is Dassult , if India refuses to do so the entire M2K fleet spares/support will end up in big trouble.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 11:03 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24
Posts: 319
^^
have a query on the implications of this on Rafale - posted in the Rafale / Typhoon thread.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 19:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 11250
Location: Naaahhhh
Breaking news of CAG report on Air India/Indian airlines.

Massive scam

Requirement of 28 a/c upgraded unilaterally to 68
Planning commission inputs ignored
Forced to buy from Boeing instead of competition with Airbus.

Primarily the Mins doing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2011 22:23 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7527
Yeah I saw that they need some 30 odd aircraft , Minister bought 70 odd ...... they recommended a mixed fleet of Airbus/Boeing , minister went for all Boeing fleet ( wonder how much money minister made as kickback from boeing )

Management recommended 50 odd lease , minister went and purchased 50 odd of it , End result they have a huge debt and probably it will end GOI restructuring it. AI would be a great example of how badly an airline can be managed.

Who was the minister Praful Patel during UPA ? No wonder if he was there NCP would have made huge money.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 May 2011 11:52 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31
Posts: 12092
Singha wrote:
+1 to that.

what amazes me is how iran has managed to keep some F-4 phantoms operating ... is there a 2nd hand market from operators like germany disposing off their kit to 'brokers' who sell the plane for the value of its dismantled spares?

or does the US have a secret deal to supply iran with spares in exchange for 'good behaviour' on some fronts?

Balance of power. Grey market is created by US to make sure that such nations can feed and get spares at high costs

All these aircrafts can be built by India if it has JV with other nations such as Brazil and works on it for 20 years.

with Indian vision being clouded during the last 40 year such things are just dreams


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 May 2011 12:25 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Posts: 1067
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat :)
Boeing Looks To Plug Gaps In C-17 Production
Aviation Week

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 May 2011 20:43 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 21 Jan 2010 19:24
Posts: 352
Location: Pandora
A400 - Gallic-style dramatic! What would a landing such as this do to the engine, propellers, and undercarriage?
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 May 2011 02:49 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 1488
Decks cleared for biggest-ever Indo-US defence deal
Quote:
Defence ministry sources on Thursday said the Globemaster deal, a direct government-to-government contract under the American FMS (foreign military sales) programme, should get the "final nod" from the Cabinet Committee on Security "within this month".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2011 09:55 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Posts: 1067
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat :)
Cross - Post

Peeved IAF Looks Beyond Russia To Revive Ilyushins
Live Fist
Image
Quote:
Seemingly exasperated by low-availability/serviceability for years as a consequence of what it has described unofficially as "unpredictable Russian support" and the country's apparent unwillingness to honour after-sales commitments, the Indian Air Force is looking for the first time beyond Russia for long-term maintenance and product support of its fleet of Ilyushin-76 heavy transports and Ilyushin-78M tanker transports at Agra, Chandigarh, Delhi and Nagpur.

In April this year, the IAF broke with tradition and floated a global tender to provide its Il-76/78 fleet "service support to ensure IAF requirements to maintain present airworthiness standards" for a period of five years, extendable to ten. The IAF has been improvising plenty to keep the heavy jets airworthy, but does not believe it can continue to do so without solid support. The Russian OEM, apparently, cannot be relied upon. The IAF has stipulated that bidders need to have the support of the Ilyushin Design Bureau.

According to the tender document, "The primary requirement of the contract is to ensure a minimum serviceability of 70% of number of [aircraft] included in the contract during the currency of contract. Period of contract shall be five years, further extendable for another five years. The vendor is required to meet this requirement by providing all the required maintenance and product support." It further stipulates that, "on any single day the serviceability of each fleet (IL-76 and IL-78) should not fall below 50% of total number of ac included in the contract."

Interestingly, the IAF has offered to pay the winning bidder an incentive if higher serviceability percentage above the minimum specified is achieved during execution of the contract. And they'll be penalised if they fall short of the required mark.

Nine IAF Ilyushins which will be undergoing overhaul and total life extension at the time the contract is expected to be awarded will not be included. An additional unspecified number of Ilyushins has remained grounded indefinitely "for want of spares/aggregates which have become unserviceable or expired their TBO/TTL".

Here's the Full IAF Request for Information.


Hey, the IAF's Request for Information has the Serial Numbers of the Entire Il-76/78 Fleet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2011 10:00 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
I am thinking maybe Aeroflot or Volga-dniepr aviation(who operate the famous AN124s) if they operates IL76 could have the engineering expertise and 'contacts' back at ilyushin base and moscow to step in as the maintainer.

still its quite clear the IL76 era of IAF is over. for better or worse it will be C17, AN32upg, AN124-mki (I hope!) and A330MRTT/AWACS (my fervent hope!)

scrap the MRA. Embraer is working on a similar jet engine tactical plane. join them and produce as many as we want in India with solid support and future upg. Embraer sounds about 100x more reliable to me as a partner than cash strapped Rus OEMs and their shaky supply chain. Embraer can source from the best parts makers worldwide incl khanate and indeed they do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2011 11:33 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13
Posts: 4436
^^^

The IL MRA may be dead any ways. The only question is will the IAF realise it on time or will they wait another 5 years and then make distress purchase of additional 130s or the EMB jet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2011 13:00 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25530
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
Image

Image

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... anges.html


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2045 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 52  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austin and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group