MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

[Austin]

Well we do not know what will be volume discount offered by each vendor. Unless they open the bid and make it open prices will be highly speculative.

Eurofighter folks told me each eurofighter will cost less then $70 million for mmrca.

[kmc_chacko]

If IAF interested in retaining same type of aircrafts present in its inventory then why we are going for new type Unkils aircrafts. Except Mig-35s & Rafael none of them are having similarity with older aircrafts in IAF inventory, let alone how advanced they are EF, F-18, F-16 & Gripen and all of them need Unkills permission to use during the conflict and they are also new to IAF & it will bring additional financial burden on IAF.

I am repeatedly saying since IAF looking for 126 aircrafts and to upgrading its older aircrafts to make up for its depleting force level. Therefore I question is why they are not keen on getting exchanged with newer versions of existing planes. IAF can exchanging 62 Mig-29 with 126 brand new Mig-35 MKI & 51 Mirage-2000 to 90 Rafael’s (since France had offered 40 Rafael’s) through which we will be not only replace the old verity of aircrafts but at also get additional 102 nos of new aircrafts with minimal changes in existing facilities and without further delay.

Since Mig & Rafael are almost same type of aircraft which IAF presently having the economical burden of adding up of new facilities and maintenance cost will decrease. By that way we can save the total project cost by minimum of 10%-20%. With addition to time saving i.e., take example of F-18 if we were offered the model with nearly $80 Million per plane and other fittings & equipments extra will surely cost around $100 Million to $ 110 Million total project will be approx $ 14 billion addition to that training, construction of new facilities and other hidden cost will be another $3-5 billion total project will be of approx $20 billion. Instead of that if we go for 126 Mig-35 of $55 Million swapping with Mig-29s & 90 Rafael of $ 110 Million swapping with Mirage-2000 it will be approx $16-17 billions i.e., costing us $3-4 billion lesser than others.

If I am wrong please correct me.

[Juggi G]

Fighter Deal Bigger : 126 Will Rise to 260

Fighter Deal Bigger : 126 Will Rise to 260
February 13th, 2011
DC Correspondent

Feb. 12: It is already known as the world’s biggest defence import deal in a long time. Now, it transpires, it is even bigger than that. The Indian Air Force is in the market to buy 126 Medium Multi-role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) from one of six foreign vendors bidding for the contract.

Over time, however, the IAF plans to buy 260 of them, Deccan Chronicle has learnt. That means, what has been talked about as a $10-12 billion deal will eventually fetch the winner of the contract close to $25 billion.

While the IAF floated a request for proposal (RFP) for only 126 fighters, sources privy to the armed forces’ Long-Term Integrated Perspective Plan said that that document puts the number of medium fighter jets the IAF needs at is 260. Ministry of defence officials, however, refused to confirm that there was any plan beyond the current RFP.

The sources also said that the eventual number of the frontline air superiority Sukhoi-30 MKIs from Russia in the IAF's fleet would also go up to 280.

The IAF would need these higher numbers of combat jets of different classes considering that it has to plan for threats coming from two fronts.

[nachiket]

Ok. I would take that 260 number with a large bucket of salt. Most likely it is usual DDM misunderstanding/speculation/pulling figures out of musharraf.
On the other hand, in the highly unlikely event that the news is true, it can only mean two things.

1. The IAF will by the Mig-35/Gripen OR
2. The order will be split between Mig-35/Gripen and one of the larger birds.

There is no way in hell that we can afford 260 Rafale's/Typhoons or SHs.

[Drishyaman]

MRCA is not about Russian technology...Its about very modern technology(which Russia cant give us).

Heard of TVC !! None of the MMCRA contenders is have TVC other than Mig – 35. Now, how much advantageous TVC is ? Ask the SU – 30 MKI pilots. Su – 30 MKI is having 2D TVC and Mig – 35 would have 3D TVC. TVC will be a very important technology to implement in our AMCA. TVC would make the aircraft more agile. Mig – 35 can devour any of its competitors in a dog-fight.

Some of the Advantages of having TVC are as follows :
-An aircraft can perform the yaw turn and the tail slide, or do a vertical climb at 80 degrees and prepare for an angle of attack.
-An aircraft would have the capacity to slow down, turn around immediately in any direction and shoot. Most other aircraft will have to do a big circle
-An aircraft can virtually stops midair and then begins to fly reverse at zero or even negative speed.

"Phazotron Zhuk AE AESA" which Mig – 35 is having. Don’t you think that is a Modern Technology ?

[nachiket]

or do a vertical climb at 80 degrees and prepare for an angle of attack.

Um..what does the bolded part even mean? And you don't need TVC to do a vertical climb.

[Drishyaman]

Um..what does the bolded part even mean? And you don't need TVC to do a vertical climb.

Who said you will need TVC for vertical climb ?
Most of fighters in MMRCA Competition can do a vertical climb, "Koi shaaq"?
Read the sentence in entirety I am sure you will understand. Spliting the sentence into parts will change the thought.

[nachiket]

Please educate me on what ""prepare for an angle of attack"" means. Maybe I'm stupid, but from what little I know regarding aerodynamics that phrase of yours makes absolutely no sense.

[rajanb]

Phew! With 260 a/c the biggest bang for the buck would be MIG35/Gripen NG! Unless, ofcourse, the other vendors slash their prices like anything.

I think the Gorshov deal would make our mandarins more educated in ensuring the legalese. And if the Russians did make a mistake in the cost calculations to refit the long awaited Admiral, they would not be in a position to make the same mistake. Otherwise we would hear a few gunshots in Siberia!

Having siad that, negotiations can throw up some surprises!

[Drishyaman]

Please educate me on what ""prepare for an angle of attack"" means. Maybe I'm stupid, but from what little I know regarding aerodynamics that phrase of yours makes absolutely no sense.

Apologies ! I must have picked up an argument with an aerodynamic guru. I just have patshala knowledge of fluid dynamics and aerodynamics would be beyond my reach.
What I understood from the above sentence is that the aircraft rises straight up at an angle of 80 degrees and then maneuvers itself to a high angle of attack say more than 45 degrees with the help of TVC.
I was merely quoting the IAF pilots. May be you can try and teach Su – 30 MKI pilots (Ashu and Parag Lall) to speak aerodynamically correct sentences when they talk about Su – 30 MKI maneuvers.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 473452.cms

[NRao]

The MiG-35 has no real supply chain in place - unlike the others. And, for that reason alone India should expect an increase in the cost. How much, that will be difficult for us to say - perhaps GoI people would have a better idea.

[NRao]

I was merely quoting the IAF pilots. May be you can try and teach Su – 30 MKI pilots (Ashu and Parag Lall) to speak aerodynamically correct sentences when they talk about Su – 30 MKI maneuvers.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 473452.cms

Nope.

Not in your first post.

Your first post implies you know what you are talking about. You should have included the URL you included in this last post in the first post.

added l8r:

And, just BTW:

Yet another wonder of the aircraft is the angle of attack. “The Su-30 can climb and attain an angle of attack of 80 degrees alpha, something which is never easy. And it does so comfortably ,” pilots Jeetu Yadav and Rahul Chauhan add.

[Drishyaman]

Not in your first post.

Your first post implies you know what you are talking about. You should have included the URL you included in this last post in the first post.

Sirji that was not my first post from yesterday. If you can refer to my earlier posts from yesterday also, you will find reference of that URL. I will never dare to say something of this level on my own without any reference considering the fact there are lot many people here who are experienced pilots, engineers, scientists and professors.
It doesn't make sense to quote the same URL multiple times in my posts.

[NRao]

It doesn't make sense to quote the same URL multiple times in my posts.

Sure, that is understandable.

However, not everyone reads all posts either (my post is an example of it) and on such topics it is better (I would think) to include URLs as much as possible. BR has always emphasized URLs (and encouraged not to use emoticons - unless absolutely needed). I agree with you that it is judgmental, but it would be nice to direct a person to the source of such an important piece of information.

[rajanb]

@nachiket Not an airforce type alas, but an engineer with a dad who was in aviation.

Hope this helps. http://insideracingtechnology.com/tech103anglattack.htm

what happens is that when the wing goes up, the lift increases. (E.g. An aircraft taking off from a runway). However, if the angle between the wing and the direction of airflow increases, then drag increases to the point that it overcomes lift and hence the a/c either stalls, or the jet engine flames out. So, for a fighter aircraft, the higher the angle of attack it can sustain without stalling means the a/c has the manouverability to avoid incoming missiles, or shake the enemy a/c from his tail, without losing control. Stalling or flameouts would mean going into a spin or losing control of the a/c with serious consequences in a battle situation.

The Americans diswcovered this in 1973 when they were mystified that MIG-21F of Egyptian could out manouevre the F-4. THE MIG-21F can turn at 250knots and lose speed, going down to 70 knots and still recover!

An example of an a/c with high AoA and TVC is as below.

Angle of attackThe Su-30MK's aerodynamic configuration is an unstable-in-longitude triplane. To increase lifting effectiveness and enhance maneuverability of the aircraft, canards are installed. They are deflected automatically to ensure controlled flight at high angles-of-attack. Canards, however, are installed only in some Su-30 variants like the Su-30MKI.

The integrated aerodynamic configuration, combined with the thrust vectoring control ability, results in unprecedented maneuverability and unique takeoff and landing characteristics. Equipped with a digital fly-by-wire system, the Su-30MK is able to perform some very advanced maneuvers. They include the well-known Pugachev’s Cobra and the Bell. This allows the aircraft to rapidly strip airspeed, causing a pursuing fighter to overshoot. While performing a somersault maneuver the aircraft makes 360-degree turn in the pitch plane without any loss of altitude. In the Controlled Flat Spin maneuver the aircraft performs several full turns in the horizontal plane, with zero forward speed, virtually on the spot.

Hope I didn't confuse you further!

Cheers

[Singha]

any of gripenNG, F18, Rafale, Ef will clear the skies and wipe the floor with jf17, j10, j8, j7, su27, su30 ..... the twin engined three will give a margin of extra oomph.

about the j20 which some people are shivering about, I dont see how its any more stealthy than a grand piano - it has a copied raptor nose as its main claim to fame , a obese belly, a jumble of edges, no decent domestic engine or proven weapons/radar. it has to go a long long way before being even considered on par with the current 4.5 gen ac let alone pakfa/raptor types.

the chinese put things in 'service' without intending for any serious use and work on the next iteration. the J-10 its been in 'service' for a decade now. would anyone care to pick it over F-solah-52 ? ask the pakis pakis will GUBO anyway you want if you guarantee them few more squadrons of F-solah their national icon.

the j20 is not a "game changer". its a H&D play rolled out much before work is completed to make it a credible design. a desire to send a message thats all. in that it has served its purpose going by the wailing and moaning around the world.

[ashish raval]

My pics A)F-18 Rafale C) EF D) Mig-35. Gut feeling says EF will be eventual winner with configuration superior to offered to House of Sauds.

[Kakarat]

I has a chat with the EF Test pilot who was part of the EF Typhoon evaluation in India
When I asked him about Its Performance in Leh, he said EF passed the test with ease

[ashish raval]

You mean picks.

Apologies Typo. My bad. Well spot.

[Gagan]

Vikramaditya is not a good source to compare the price increases.
That was a old and rusting piece of equipment, the russians were trying to sell it off for free and do as less a job on that as they could.
The IN was trying to get as best a carrier as they could.

Didn't the contract say that the Carrier was free and that the IN will pay for whatever refurbishments + the flight wing?

Here we have brand new Mig-35s to be freshly built. Not much scope of underestimating the cabling on this one.

[Baldev]

any of gripenNG, F18, Rafale, Ef will clear the skies and wipe the floor with jf17, j10, j8, j7, su27, su30 ..... the twin engined three will give a margin of extra oomph.

this is true only when chinese not going to upgrade their su27 and su30

[Henrik]

Seriously? Any decent source, with a description of what is included at given price? IIRC the $ 85 mil figure was bandied about in the official dutch/norway eval and that was a few years ago. I understand obsolete, but it is hard to believe that a fighter gets cheaper with time, ordinarily it is the other war around - hardware just keeps getting more pricey!

CM

This is what I wrote on the topic on another forum:

But what I mean with different components is that the radar proposed for India isn't the same as the one proposed for Norway. Also, it's been a couple of years since the Norway proposal, the NG-demo platform has evolved and everything is starting to fall into place. There has also been fluctuations in the Dollar, SEK and the Pound. All this makes that price a bit "obsolete" since it's from 2008. I expect the price have gone down since then.

Also, if you compare prices with the Brazilian competition (I know this might be like comparing apples and oranges, but bear with me) the difference in price between Rafale and Gripen is quite large.

Gripen NG $4,5 billion + $1,5 billion maintenance.
SH $5,7 billion + $1,9 billion maintenance.
Rafale $8,2 billion + $4 billion maintenance.

Now in case of Rafale, there are unconfirmed sources that claim France was offering a discount, to $6,2 billion + $4 billion maintenance. As you see, even with the discount, the difference between the Rafale and Gripen NG is almost $2 billion.

Now, noone knows for sure what's included in theese deals (that's what I mean by apples and oranges), but either the price of Rafale in that article is to low or the price of Gripen NG is too high.

I've seen articles where SAAB claimes that the cost per plane for brazil is $70 million.

Now consider that the deal with Brazil is for 36 planes, while the MMRCA is way bigger. I expect the price for Gripen for India is less than $70 million since the deal is for far more planes and the dollar and pound has lost value.

[Singha]

um but what are they going to upgrade it with to match the radars and missiles of the mrca pack ? russia is going to have the comparable radar/missile thing for the Pakfa towards later half of this decade and backport to Su35BM too. I dont think after getting burnt by the J-11 episode they would be too keen to burn themselves again by selling their best kit off.

the local chinese kit have paper claims and zero reliable proof of how good they are. in the west and india, deficiencies get reported, discussed and made known, in china we get some web forum fanboy reports that XYZ missile goes 100km and abc goes 200km.

let us see...

[anirban_aim]

Fighter Deal Bigger : 126 Will Rise to 260

Fighter Deal Bigger : 126 Will Rise to 260
February 13th, 2011
DC Correspondent

Feb. 12: It is already known as the world’s biggest defence import deal in a long time. Now, it transpires, it is even bigger than that. The Indian Air Force is in the market to buy 126 Medium Multi-role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) from one of six foreign vendors bidding for the contract.

Over time, however, the IAF plans to buy 260 of them, Deccan Chronicle has learnt. That means, what has been talked about as a $10-12 billion deal will eventually fetch the winner of the contract close to $25 billion.

While the IAF floated a request for proposal (RFP) for only 126 fighters, sources privy to the armed forces’ Long-Term Integrated Perspective Plan said that that document puts the number of medium fighter jets the IAF needs at is 260. Ministry of defence officials, however, refused to confirm that there was any plan beyond the current RFP.

The sources also said that the eventual number of the frontline air superiority Sukhoi-30 MKIs from Russia in the IAF's fleet would also go up to 280.

The IAF would need these higher numbers of combat jets of different classes considering that it has to plan for threats coming from two fronts.

I think, The deal should be divided between two vendors. That should increase the rate induction and we also may get alternate technologies.

The above are the exactly 2 things I have been saying since long (at least a year now).

Only yesterday I was amusing as to when will the first test balloons of expanding the deal will be let out.

My view of the thing is:

1) The deal will be expanded.

2) The downlist will have atleast one single engine, one American plane and one plane which probably will be most aspirational for the IAF.

The single engined plane will be used as a bargaining chip to bring down prices. All shortlisted vendors will revise prices downwards to get a bigger slice.

The final order will be split between the American contender and the other twin engined shortlisted candidate.

All the above and the final price negotiations will take more than a year or so and the final deal with suppliers will be signed in the last days of the incumbent govt.

Though, if things don't turn out this way, I will sit quitely in a corner and eat fried crow with humble pie, but I'm willing to stick this out. Lets see..

[Sancho]

Some simple mathematics ->
IAF Mig – 29 has already proved to be a better fight than IAF Mirage 2000. So, when it comes to upgrading both, following are the figures :

Mig – 29 upg : For 62 aircraft upgradation, the cost is $960 million (Rs 3840 crore), so unit cost of upgrading is $15.48 million per unit
Mirage 2000 upg : For 52 aircraft upgadation, the cost is $39 million per unit.

Which is a better deal ? Was there cost escalation for Mig – 29 upgradation ?

It's not as simple as it seems, because the $960 millions are not the full costs of the Mig upgrade! We made a deal with the Russian in 2007 for 120 x engines that costs $275 millions, which are not included (M2K which was inducted at the same time, don't need new engines!), we also will add western parts in the upgrade, like the Thales IFF transponder and these costs are not included either.
The Mirage deal will still be costlier at the end, but the it will be more capable as well (just look at the variety of weapons on offer for it) and you can't compare them based on older dogfights anymore, because M2K is BVR capable and offers HMS + a good WVR missile now as well.

I has a chat with the EF Test pilot who was part of the EF Typhoon evaluation in India
When I asked him about Its Performance in Leh, he said EF passed the test with ease

More interesting would be how it performed at the strike trials and what weapons were tested, because that is were it lacks behind and what makes it not a good choice for us so far. Weapon and tech integration are not equal to the costs of the fighter, while the power and A2A performance in general is possibly the best of the lot.

[Cain Marko]

But what I mean with different components is that the radar proposed for India isn't the same as the one proposed for Norway. Also, it's been a couple of years since the Norway proposal, the NG-demo platform has evolved and everything is starting to fall into place. There has also been fluctuations in the Dollar, SEK and the Pound. All this makes that price a bit "obsolete" since it's from 2008. I expect the price have gone down since then.

This is rather fuzzy. You mean the two radars (norway vs. india) are different? OK, but why is the Indian one cheaper? Normally higher costs tend to imply better gizmos - what were the Nords getting that India is not?

Also, if you compare prices with the Brazilian competition (I know this might be like comparing apples and oranges, but bear with me) the difference in price between Rafale and Gripen is quite large.

Gripen NG $4,5 billion + $1,5 billion maintenance.
SH $5,7 billion + $1,9 billion maintenance.
Rafale $8,2 billion + $4 billion maintenance.

Now in case of Rafale, there are unconfirmed sources that claim France was offering a discount, to $6,2 billion + $4 billion maintenance. As you see, even with the discount, the difference between the Rafale and Gripen NG is almost $2 billion.

The Brazillian competition is such a mess that even the MRCA circus looks like a well organized marching parade in comparison! There were actually comments saying that the Rafale was not the most expensive of the lot, supposedly the Shornet was! The only really confirmed prices I got from that competition was the DSCA document on the Super HOrnet's offering.

Now, noone knows for sure what's included in theese deals (that's what I mean by apples and oranges), but either the price of Rafale in that article is to low or the price of Gripen NG is too high.

Precisely, which makes it logical to go via the Nor/Dutch prices because these were for two different countries and the price was corroborated giving it a far greater validity than vague figures being bandied about by n number of commentators.

Also the $ 85 million price stands to reason when compared to similar jets from the West (F-16 and Mirage 2000). In any case, the idea that the Gripen NG is half the cost of the others is a fallacy, there is nothing to prove this.

CM

[Singha]

imo the Gripen-NG is a better fighter than F-16 in any incarnation, so doubt the costs incl weapons and new AESA radar will be anything less. the engine maybe a bit cheaper than F-16 bigger engine but F-16 atleast has a cost amortization and common parts carried over from 1000s built in earlier blocks.

one thing is sure - the F16-70 has no place at the MRCA high table and should be kicked out - its dead last among the five card players...and not because the paf has it.

looking at its hurried and lacklustre performance perhaps that is quite unofficially known by now.

[NRao]

PS: I hope we only pick 20 Growlers....

Ah. Nice pick. Would be better to get about 60.

But then I still feel that PakiLand needs to be divided. That should solve a lot more problems.

[kit]

If PK is to be divided , India should take the rest of Kashmir and the eastern parts of Baluchistan and Sindh including the ports.The mullahs can take the rest.Just my 2 cents

[tushar_m]

there are many benefit if we divide the MRCA between two fighters

1) single engine will bring down the price & twin engine could be air superiority (or costly tech like EF )

2) since if MRCA is to be upgraded to 260 there will be say 130/130 fighters so no problem in maintaining different types as enough fighters are available

3) most imp as per MRCA before 2015 18(single) + 18 (twin ) then 36+ fighters per year

i.e enough squadrons in IAF for the two front war scenario

also this comes after the new news that IAF has proposed to increase the sanctioned strength from 39.5 to 45

i think its the best scenario for IAF

[shiv]

If our baabus don't want single engine aircraft to fly over their musharrafs in Dehli, what chance do Gripen and F-16 have?

[Henrik]

This is rather fuzzy. You mean the two radars (norway vs. india) are different? OK, but why is the Indian one cheaper? Normally higher costs tend to imply better gizmos - what were the Nords getting that India is not?

The radar for Norway was a Raytheon radar. After that whole fars SAAB turned to Selex for a joint-development instead.

The Brazillian competition is such a mess that even the MRCA circus looks like a well organized marching parade in comparison! There were actually comments saying that the Rafale was not the most expensive of the lot, supposedly the Shornet was! The only really confirmed prices I got from that competition was the DSCA document on the Super HOrnet's offering.

I agree that the Brazilian deal is messy, but there's no chance in hell that Rafale costs the same as Gripen. And according to http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/bra ... ram-04179/ my figures are correct.

Precisely, which makes it logical to go via the Nor/Dutch prices because these were for two different countries and the price was corroborated giving it a far greater validity than vague figures being bandied about by n number of commentators.

The dutch figures are based on the norwegian numbers. I'm not going to debate the Norwegian deal because I'm sick of it. It's so full of lies and foul-play it makes you want to vomit.

Also the $ 85 million price stands to reason when compared to similar jets from the West (F-16 and Mirage 2000). In any case, the idea that the Gripen NG is half the cost of the others is a fallacy, there is nothing to prove this.

What do you mean by "costs"? Cost per plane to buy? Not half the others but way less. Operating costs? Probably half or less than half compared to Rafale.

Edit: And by the way, the Netherlands offer was for 85 planes for €4,8 billion ($6,5 billion) (http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/Saab ... 170409.pdf). That divides into $76 million per aircraft, and that supposedly included 30 year maintenance and training of pilots. According to a dutch newspaper SAAB lowered the price by €1 billion in 2009.

[kit]

Wont it be a bit more expensive to fly mostly twin engined fighters ? Did India get really rich that much ?! My estimate is it is better economically but certainly not that rich enough.And i would like to win wars with what i have or can really afford to.
Most of us do get carried away by all that super duper tech ., but if a puny Gnat could prevail against the F86 Sabres of pakistan then our babus and netas should get some lessons from history.I think the MRCA deal will definitely split into two, one a twin engined and the other single.I leave out the guessing part.

[SaiK]

see, IAF chief has already said that losers will go to CAG and further cause delays. If we have any decision power left, we should cancel the MRCA, and do not go for any open tender, rather chose the aircraft, and deal for ToT direct with that company. Solves this going to CAG business.

[NRao]

Did India get really rich that much ?

Consider:
- $100 Billion for roads
- $100+ Billion for civil aviation - granted this has not come to pass yet.

I do not think the MMRCA is a real air craft deal. It is more, perhaps a lot more, about what these planes bring other than themselves.

[SaiK]

.*$%#$ds.. I used to root for gripen before but now I will start a dharna in front of MOD office if Gripen wins. Earlier only the jingoistic feelings were at work but now SAAB has made it personal.

for your ears:
http://www.hindu.com/2011/02/14/stories ... 580200.htm

[Gaur]

.*$%#$ds.. I used to root for gripen before but now I will start a dharna in front of MOD office if Gripen wins. Earlier only the jingoistic feelings were at work but now SAAB has made it personal.

for your ears:
http://www.hindu.com/2011/02/14/stories ... 580200.htm

Yeah! Rub some more salt on the wound, won't you!

[Karan M]

The Gripen NG will still have more hardpoints and a greater payload than the Mk2.

How many more - is there even a single full up, developed Gripen NG flying today, to exactly determine what is what, bar paper claims and statements? Are the increases in capability so many that it justifies the acquisition of a fighter inferior to several peers, as India's frontline MMRCA,? Whats the point of buying a Gripen if we can MK3 the LCA if need be?

I don't see why one should cancel out the other.

Yeah, the same way many "didnt see" why the T-90 would cancel out the Arjun, as they were entirely different classes of equipment. Now tell me, how many T-90s were ordered & what hurdles the Arjun has had to pass just to overcome the entrenched opposition from the first mover... Have you considered that any vendor will try to expand his products chances of a repeat order at the cost of any other market which it sees as attractive? Or did all those articles criticizing the LCA and praising Gripen appear in a vacuum The Gripen is a program struggling for a future, Sweden at best can order a few dozen more, and with the JSF, EF, Rafale and others etc around, the international market for fighters is very competitive. India in contrast, offers a lucrative market for such products, as it has a long history of placing repeat orders & the LCA is a direct threat for today and tomorrow. Sweeten the deal by offering cooperation in some "future program" as well

India should be buying LCAs and making them into newer variants a la the NG, not acquiring aircraft barely superior in 1-2 criteria for such a critical issue

Besides, the MoF will have the last say in this matter, just like the refuelers tender and the Rafale and Typhoon might be nearly twice as expensive.

That is an entirely different matter. The MOFs decision to debar the refuellers flew in the face of military evaluation but it doesnt make the decision any more valid.

That is why I'm putting my money on the Gripen.

You can do that, even though its acquisition is not at all in Indias interest, either from the capability point of view (inferior to 3 of the heavies) or from a strategic point of view (developing the LCA & more variants)

[Rahul M]

.*$%#$ds.. I used to root for gripen before but now I will start a dharna in front of MOD office if Gripen wins. Earlier only the jingoistic feelings were at work but now SAAB has made it personal.

Yeah! Rub some more salt on the wound, won't you!

in case you missed seeing what he is holding in his hands.

[Rahul M]

the gripen NG is a nice plane but choosing it for MRCA would kill the LCA, as simple as that. the signs are everywhere.