MRCA News and Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jun 2009 17:42

Sumeet wrote:
Austin wrote:Only Eurofighter has demonstrated sustained supercruise capability with 2 drop tanks and all A2A missile , it did a Mach 1.2 on dry thrust.

Supercurise is a good to have requirement , not a death wish , among the many that IAF has for MMRCA
for how long did it supercruise at that speed with that load ? i want to know if it can really super cruise for long enough to make it operationally useful.

Well the EF guys claimed that this bird has demonstrated SC capability with that load which is 2 Drop Tanks and the rest A2A missile , what they term as useful load for that mission

Considering A2A capability is advertised as its main USP , the supercruise capability should do a lot good to its capability in that mode.

How long I dont know , but its a function of the engine dry thrust , the EJ200 has been advertised with those capability and being a very modern engine with an excellent T/W ratio , how long should not be a issue at all , as long as it has the fuel to sustain it.

The final goal being M 1.3 supercruise with usefull load perhaps with 1-2 LGB.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Jun 2009 18:39

Brazil is also going to order fighter aircraft. Wouldn't it be a good idea to combine MRCA and Brazil's F-X2 future fighter program.

Very bad idea.

Outside of getting an off-the-shelf plane, Brazil is rather/very close to China economically. Indian MRCA will have a liberal sprinkling of Indian, Israeli and French - perhaps others too - components. Not worth dealing with another set of complexities with Brazil in the picture. Go it alone.

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 30 Jun 2009 04:26

Drevin wrote:
shameekg wrote:^^ Why in the MRCA thread?

If I could, I would remove it buddy. So like you I will indulge in some unnecessary rolling on the floor laughing as well.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 30 Jun 2009 04:59

Shiv Aroors features on ze F-Solah and ze Gripen.....

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/06/mm ... erdog.html

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/06/mmrca.html

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Jun 2009 07:11

^^livefist link

At under $30-million a piece, the IAF views the F-16 as a highly capable fighter at a highly competitive purchase price.

enough to floor mig-35 in the one and only thing migs are known for. cheap for apg80++ and all that it says.. in addition to the new interface standards.

but but but... here is the catch: that would kill mig 35, if nothing they have to offer for fgfa.

Picking up early on this, Lockheed has managed to convincingly drive home the point that the F-16 is the logical bridge to the F-35 Lightning II, though this is viewed by the IAF as too crafty. It's almost a fake pledge, considering the gargantual clearances and procedures that would be necessary for India to be considered a buyer of a fifth generation fighter plane. Lockheed's pitch about the F-35 has therefore backfired in parts. A senior IAF officer, recently retired, says "While we were initially only doubtful, the F-35 pitch proved beyond doubt that Lockheed is trying to squeeze the last few drops out of its F-16 production lines, and the Indian requirement is too mouth-watering for them to ignore." The fact that the aircraft is operated by a lot of other countries, ironically, has a minor backlash effect as well on the IAF -- some of the top brass feel that an ambitious new purchase like the MMRCA contract, should be for a unique and exclusive aircraft, not one that is owned and operated by a huge number of other countries (including Pakistan -- the radar signature debate holds credence, incidentally), even though they do reluctantly agree that under the bonnet, the F-16IN is hardly comparable to previous variants of the same type. Finally, relations with the Obama administration have cooled considerably compared to the phonecall-a-minute diplomacy with Bush Jr, and this itself has somewhat blunted the throbbing needle pointing to Washington, even though the President has made it clear that he plans to keep up the evolving strategic dialogue with India.

unique and exclusive aircraft!!!
lets see:
Rafale tops #1 here, and EF2K, the second, but we need to know about its GaN AESA module status for being unique and exclusive.

BTW, on the same note, the sledging angle could be, from the paper world, Mig 35 is unique and exclusive enough to be competing.. it can win at least a few hearts in this thread.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 30 Jun 2009 08:06

SaiK wrote:Rafale tops #1 here,

The French got a few engineers bumped off by the Pakis. We are going to be paying big bucks and probably will rescue Rafale if we choose to buy it. French economy is not doing stellar either. The French are building subs for the Pakis.

The bargain must not be just for the aircraft if we choose the Rafale.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 30 Jun 2009 11:09

SaiK wrote: Rafale tops #1 here, and EF2K, the second

Not that I think this is an important consideration, but if it were, the SH would be above EF here as only the US and Australia operate it as opposed to UK, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Austria and Spain

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Jun 2009 12:33

sure.. relative speak is what i was meaning, that rafale had never seen a customer outside france.. quite unique indeed.

if one goes by putting new tech in old design, yes SH, and perhaps the falcons are much more appropriate to buy, since mig35 is struggling to keep pace with the khan technologies, at least lagging by 20 years.

in the tech sense, EF2K and Rafale are fairly new entities in the manufacturing sector of fighters., of these the eads ads punch if the get it right in the right time and at the right price.. may be unique enough.

they may also reduce the price for mmrca, and jack up to serve LCA with EJ200s. a billion here and there.

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 30 Jun 2009 23:25

SaiK wrote:^^livefist link
At under $30-million a piece, the IAF views the F-16 as a highly capable fighter at a highly competitive purchase price.
enough to floor mig-35 in the one and only thing migs are known for. cheap for apg80++ and all that it says.. in addition to the new interface standards.

but but but... here is the catch: that would kill mig 35, if nothing they have to offer for fgfa.
Picking up early on this, Lockheed has managed to convincingly drive home the point that the F-16 is the logical bridge to the F-35 Lightning II, though this is viewed by the IAF as too crafty. It's almost a fake pledge, considering the gargantual clearances and procedures that would be necessary for India to be considered a buyer of a fifth generation fighter plane. Lockheed's pitch about the F-35 has therefore backfired in parts. A senior IAF officer, recently retired, says "While we were initially only doubtful, the F-35 pitch proved beyond doubt that Lockheed is trying to squeeze the last few drops out of its F-16 production lines, and the Indian requirement is too mouth-watering for them to ignore." The fact that the aircraft is operated by a lot of other countries, ironically, has a minor backlash effect as well on the IAF -- some of the top brass feel that an ambitious new purchase like the MMRCA contract, should be for a unique and exclusive aircraft, not one that is owned and operated by a huge number of other countries (including Pakistan -- the radar signature debate holds credence, incidentally), even though they do reluctantly agree that under the bonnet, the F-16IN is hardly comparable to previous variants of the same type. Finally, relations with the Obama administration have cooled considerably compared to the phonecall-a-minute diplomacy with Bush Jr, and this itself has somewhat blunted the throbbing needle pointing to Washington, even though the President has made it clear that he plans to keep up the evolving strategic dialogue with India.
unique and exclusive aircraft!!!
lets see:
Rafale tops #1 here, and EF2K, the second, but we need to know about its GaN AESA module status for being unique and exclusive.

BTW, on the same note, the sledging angle could be, from the paper world, Mig 35 is unique and exclusive enough to be competing.. it can win at least a few hearts in this thread.

As everyone on this board would agree that a contract of this size is a good opportunity for babus and politicians to make big bucks. With the story of paki sub scandal in the background and the french law which forbade to give commissions how may of you folks think that Rafale would make it???

except may be if the frech allow us to include Israeli components into the aircraft may be that way babus and politicians can get their piece of the contract as commissions.

p_saggu · Post by **p_saggu** » 01 Jul 2009 00:10

The babus are going to make money either way (Just see that 1600 crore bridge they made in mumbai - with cost escalation of 3.5 times.) The ouiropeans are right that MRCA is not going to be signed and inducted any time soon. There will be arduous price negotiations for long, ostensibly to bring a 'reasonable' price, with the nation ultimately settling for a higher price.

This one is going to pay for the next general elections.

wrt the Mig-35,
If IAF upgrades its Mig-29 fleet to as close to the 35 standard as possible, we can safely leave the Mig out of this one, without "upsetting" the russians so-to-say.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Jul 2009 08:56

Nothing t do with MRCA, but a good very short read on Russia (and America too):

DNA :: The US should buy the best brains

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Jul 2009 19:24

well, is the die cast?

MMRCA Part 3 - The Future Fulcrum

The way the Russians have been behaving over a multiplicity of ongoing defence contracts, it would seem as though they had no real interest in the MMRCA deal. The complexion in ties has changed so deeply since the 1980s, that there is a very palpable degree of acrimony in pretty much every dealing with the Russians these days. They'll release photos of smiling Indian MoD bureaucrafts with their bureau officials, but behind the scenes, things are almost always ugly. Yet, Russia has gargantuan leverage with India, based entirely of course on the huge number of deals yet to be completed. The MiG-35 comes across as not convincing enough, and Russia has still to prove that it is a reliable after-sales supplier. The one thing that the Russians have managed to pull off, is to convince the IAF that the MiG-35 isn't just any old Fulcrum. It's the Fulcrum.

This is even worse than I expected. I would have thought only the AESA was premature, but it seems there are quite a few other components in the same boat:

The MiG-35 programme has a single prototype (the ubiquitous No. 154 -- I flew in this at MAKS 07) and that too one without a full complement of the avionics/sensor package listed in the offered configuration. As a result, the IAF is of the view that a lot of the MiG-35's capabilities, as articulated by its engineers and pilots, are still theoretical, even though they may be perfectly real once the full package is integrated and available.

Politically, the government feels there is little that can be politically gained from Russia, considering that strategic ties are already mature, even at a saturation level. Secondly, Russia's position in international politics has plummetted relentlessly since the 1990s, and the country offers no strategic advantages anymore. Third, buying from Russia would be a full-frontal on the US, which -- like it or not -- is India's principal foreign policy holy grail.

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 02 Jul 2009 00:34

p_saggu wrote:The babus are going to make money either way (Just see that 1600 crore bridge they made in mumbai - with cost escalation of 3.5 times.) The ouiropeans are right that MRCA is not going to be signed and inducted any time soon. There will be arduous price negotiations for long, ostensibly to bring a 'reasonable' price, with the nation ultimately settling for a higher price.

This one is going to pay for the next general elections.

wrt the Mig-35,
If IAF upgrades its Mig-29 fleet to as close to the 35 standard as possible, we can safely leave the Mig out of this one, without "upsetting" the russians so-to-say.

The sealink bridge i believe is based on build operate transfer model where in the company bidding it would build the bridge with its money then operate it(charge tolls for using it) and at the end of a pre determined period give the control of bridge to the govt. So any increase in the amount spent to build the bridge would be inconsequential.

Now coming to the MRCA, our babus have great expertise in messing the contracts(eg: the fighter trainer HAWK aircraft) at the same time we have had successful ones like SU-30 MKI ( I think it all depends on the person who is leading the team) Anyways hope that the babus would do what is needed to be done even if they take a % of money as baksish.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 05 Jul 2009 07:51

Folks:

On this MRCA thread we have been going around in circles in umpteen versions of this thread. Lately, poster GeorgeWelch has posted some very cogent arguments in favour of the F-18 Super Hornet as the best deal in terms of availability, capability, upgradability, and cost. It almost has me convinced. However, past memories of American sanctions against India still make me feel uneasy about making such a vital component of India’s defense dependent upon the whims of GOTUS/ COTUS.

GeorgeWelch says that India must ensure that it signs a watertight, sanction-proof contract for the F-18s. But the problem is that it does not matter how tight a contract you sign with the US, the US Congress can nullify any contract post-facto and nobody can enforce contract performance on the US.

Here is what Kakkaji’s ‘moti buddhi’ thinks:

The US will not permit US weapons in Indian inventory to be used against Pakistan. Not unless the US itself is ready to go to war with Pakistan. I don’t know if any esoteric means such as ‘disabling weapons through software’ will be employed, but the supply of spares will certainly be stopped at the first hint of impending hostilities, and from that point on, these weapons will have limited use.

Unless the Pakis screw up so royally that the US completely ditches them, and I don’t foresee that happening since the Pakis are skilled GUBO-masters, the best stance that India can hope for during a future Indo-Pak war is that the US will apply sanctions on both sides, as they did in 1965. In this case neither the Indian F-18s, nor the Paki F-16s will fly in combat. So the playing field will be level.

However, I see definite utility in buying the F-18s for use against China. That would support US goal of containing China. Seven squadrons of Super Hornets deployed on our northern and northeastern bases would come in handy for pounding PLA bases in Tibet. The US will not skimp on technology or spares support in this case. Heck, we may even get some freebies in this situation, courtesy Unkil Sam.

So, perhaps it is a good idea to order the Super Hornet under the MRCA contract, start filling out depleted numbers, and build a deterrent force against China. A few squadrons of MKIs for air superiority, when added to the Super Hornets, should be sufficient to take care of that front.

Against Pakistan, the job will have to be done by the MKIs, LCAs, M2Ks, Mig-29s etc. Perhaps some topping up of inventory will need to be done by ordering a few squadrons of Mig-35s or Rafales.

I somehow cannot envision IAF Super Hornets bombing Sargodha, and I am sure neither does GOTUS.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 05 Jul 2009 09:31

Kakkaji, what of the economic and financial interdependence a.k.a umbilical cord between the USA and China? I can understand the Americans being willing to suffer a weakening of their economy for their battle with China. I can't imagine America taking a financial hit for India.

The US even recently convinced India to start "talking" with Pakistan post 26/11. I can't imagine there being much American political support for India against China. If the US is truly thinking of India as a future counter-balance for China then the nature of the Indo-US political discourse today would be quite different, I imagine.

The Americans cannot trust successive Indian governments to further a common agenda and vice versa.

To repeat what I have said in earlier posts, I can very well imagine the US, Russia, France, UK and Sweden, i.e. all MRCA contenders, holding back spares in the event of a war between India and China. There is no strategic alliance on offer here. All the vendor nations stand to lose more financially when supporting India instead of China, and everyone cares about their back pocket at the end of the day.

The best thing India could do is heavily stockpile those spares that it cannot manufacture, like engine parts and onboard computers, and immediately begin reverse engineering those spares that it can manufacture after the arrival of the first few MRCAs.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 05 Jul 2009 13:02

Israel aerospace industries forced out of Indian fighter jet bid
yet another example of how desperate the yankies are for winning mmrca deal

Under pressure from the Pentagon, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has been forced to back out of a joint partnership with a Swedish aerospace company to compete in a multi-billion dollar tender to sell new multi-role fighter jets to the Indian Air Force.

The deal, estimated at a whopping $12 billion for over 120 new aircraft, is being fought over by Lockheed Martin's F-16, Boeing's F-18/Hornet, Russia's MiG-35 and BAE's Eurofighter. IAI was asked by Saab, manufacturer of the Gripen, to jointly develop an advanced model which would compete for the deal.

The Defense Ministry ordered IAI to back out of the deal after the Pentagon expressed concern that American technology, used by Israel, would be integrated into the Gripen offered to the Indians.

"The stated concern was that Western technology in Israeli hands would make its way to the Indians," one Israeli official said.

What was strange with the American request was that Boeing and Lockheed Martin - the two largest US defense contractors - are also competing for the Indian deal. For this reason, Israeli officials said it was more likely that the Americans were concerned that if IAI competed for the deal with Saab, it would force the American companies to lower their prices.

A multi-role fighter, the Gripen is in service in Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary and South Africa. IAI was supposed to provide the electronic systems - radar, communications and electronic-warfare - for the plane.

This is not the first time that an Israeli company has been forced out of a deal due to concerns that competing with American companies would endanger Israeli-US relations.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? ... 2FShowFull

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 05 Jul 2009 13:04

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/mm ... o-bug.html

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/mm ... quall.html

shiv aroor's report on rafale and super hornet

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 05 Jul 2009 18:36

GeorgeWelch wrote:
SaiK wrote: Rafale tops #1 here, and EF2K, the second
Not that I think this is an important consideration, but if it were, the SH would be above EF here as only the US and Australia operate it as opposed to UK, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Austria and Spain

But lot of other fellas operate the Hornet, e.g. Switzerland, Spain, Canada, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia etc.

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 05 Jul 2009 18:51

IAI forced out of Indian fighter jet bid
By YAAKOV KATZ
Jul 5, 2009 5:50 | Updated Jul 5, 2009 11:17

Under pressure from the Pentagon, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has been forced to back out of a joint partnership with a Swedish aerospace company to compete in a multi-billion dollar tender to sell new multi-role fighter jets to the Indian Air Force.
A SWEDISH Air Force JAS 39...

The deal, estimated at a whopping $12 billion for over 120 new aircraft, is being fought over by Lockheed Martin's F-16, Boeing's F-18/Hornet, Russia's MiG-35 and BAE's Eurofighter. IAI was asked by Saab, manufacturer of the Gripen, to jointly develop an advanced model which would compete for the deal.

The Defense Ministry ordered IAI to back out of the deal after the Pentagon expressed concern that American technology, used by Israel, would be integrated into the Gripen offered to the Indians.

"The stated concern was that Western technology in Israeli hands would make its way to the Indians," one Israeli official said.

What was strange with the American request was that Boeing and Lockheed Martin - the two largest US defense contractors - are also competing for the Indian deal. For this reason, Israeli officials said it was more likely that the Americans were concerned that if IAI competed for the deal with Saab, it would force the American companies to lower their prices.

A multi-role fighter, the Gripen is in service in Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary and South Africa. IAI was supposed to provide the electronic systems - radar, communications and electronic-warfare - for the plane.

This is not the first time that an Israeli company has been forced out of a deal due to concerns that competing with American companies would endanger Israeli-US relations.

Last summer, the MoD ordered Israel Military Industries (IMI) to back down from submitting a bid for a half-a-billion dollar deal to develop and manufacture a new tank for the Turkish Armed Forces.

At the time, Turkey had informed the MoD of its interest in developing a new tank and asked if IMI would want to submit a bid. SIBAT - the MOD's Foreign Defense Assistance and Defense Export Organization - decided not to submit an Israeli offer so not to compete with the Americans and endanger Israeli-US defense relations.

'US forces Israeli firm to back out of IAF jet bid'

Jerusalem, July 05: The United States has forced an Israeli defence firm to back out of a multi-billion dollar tender to sell new multi-role fighter planes to the Indian Air Force, a newspaper has claimed.

Under pressure from the Pentagon, the Israeli Defense Ministry has ordered Israel Aerospace Industries to back out of the deal as America expressed concern that its technology, used by Israel, would be integrated into the Gripen jets to be offered to India, 'The Jerusalem Post' reported.

"The stated concern was that Western technology in Israeli hands would make its way to the Indians," an unnamed Israeli official was quoted as saying.

But, what was strange with the American request was that Boeing and Lockheed Martin -- the two largest US defense contractors -- are also competing for the 120 aircraft deal, which is estimated at a whopping USD 12 billion.

For this reason, Israeli officials said it was more likely that the Americans were concerned that if IAI competed for the deal with Swedish aerospace company, Saab, it would force the American companies to lower their prices.

A multi-role fighter, the Gripen, is in service in Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary and South Africa. IAI was supposed to provide the electronic systems -- communications, radar and electronic-warfare -- for the plane.

This is not the first time that an Israeli company has been forced out of a deal because of US pressure. Last summer, the Israel Military Industries was ordered to back of a bid for a half-a-billion dollar deal to develop a new tank for the Turkish Armed Forces.

Ajay K · Post by **Ajay K** » 05 Jul 2009 21:09

Kersi D
But lot of other fellas operate the Hornet, e.g. Switzerland, Spain, Canada, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia etc.

But SH is a different airplane altogether.

Tilak
Post subject: Re: MRCA News and Discussion
IAI forced out of Indian fighter jet bid
By YAAKOV KATZ

Uncle Sam seems to be toeing our good neighbours line in forcing IAF to make a hard choice.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 05 Jul 2009 21:25

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.as ... &nid=19127
one more indication that super bugs are coming,
so, tot compromised, blasting pockets , future demand due to undeveloped aerospace technology ,eula,unkil sam permission for every sortie, what else........

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 05 Jul 2009 23:57

Unkil has right and power to do this. But Guys think seriously even in prior instances they have played with jugular vein whenever they have could. Not blaming them any smart man would do that if he had the power. But from national security perspective we should make sure we are not at mercy of someone.Think this GPS signals go blind, we are not allowed to use maritime reconnaissance aircraft, Transport aircrafts and finally basic fighters which are first line of defence and MMRCA would be used as primary strike role as well.I only pray god gives our babus and Officers wisdom to make a choice that would give us power to use as and when we like and not like a remote control robots from a different country.Gurus any thoughts or info on how government will make sure this would not happen ?

wesley · Post by **wesley** » 06 Jul 2009 03:16

Tilak wrote:IAI forced out of Indian fighter jet bid
By YAAKOV KATZ
Jul 5, 2009 5:50 | Updated Jul 5, 2009 11:17

Disappointing, but perhaps not unexpected. The US government has historically pressured its allies to help ensure a US win (although usually they placed pressure on the nation buying the weapons system, rather than on the potential competitors to US arms).

This does not, however, mean that Israeli firms will not have other opportunities to win a piece of the MMRCA contract. It has been reported for some time now that Israeli electronics would find an important role in the MMRCA - most notably under Lockheed's F-16 offering:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... -sale.html

I would expect to see Israeli participation, regardless of who wins the eventual contract. And perhaps . . . if the Indian government has the nerve . . . they might even insist on an Israeli AESA radar as part of the bid. Not only have the Israelis shown a willingness to share more of the underlying EL/M-2052 technology than the US would ever be willing to share from the AN/APG-80 or AN/APG-79, but the Israelis would be willing to provide the kind of ECCM capabilities to counter the US-supplied Block 52 F-16's in Pakistan's inventory that the US is unlikely to share.

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 06 Jul 2009 04:07

Here is a silly question

, with the Phalcon around , do we really need AESA-teens from US? IAF has to fight China and bakistan , unkil will blackmail India in war time.Like George Welch pointed in one of his posts , buy the SH but don't use it against bakistan.

If the teens can't be used against bakistan or China, why buy them ? A Typhoon or Rafale or Gripen should do.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 06 Jul 2009 04:11

It is only natural that US would not want Swedish competitior to win over US companies with the help of US technology sourced indirectly from Isreal. I would be concerned if US restricts Isreal from selling anything to India where US commercial interests are not involved.

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 06 Jul 2009 04:22

Saab signed up Selex in March for the radar and the rest is also European that otherwise could have been Israeli if the IAF later would have requested that com and EW systems... now of course they can request them later on if Gripen would be picked so this news is not really changing anything. Maybe it just says something about how the US is looking at every possible way to influence politics.

Still Saab has been doing this for a long time now and knows all about the US methods... if the US get desperate like they got in Europe a few times next you will see their US ambassador speak out about the importance to buy their jets "or else".

The Gripen NG is being offered to both India and Brazil for their current fighter competitions, both bids including the [Vixen 1000ES] Raven AESA and Meteor missile capability.

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... -year-end/

Bob Mason, Selex Galileo's executive vice-president, radar and advanced targeting, says the Vixen 1000E's advantage comes from the use of a swashplate mounting, which enables the active array to be rotated by +/-100°. This beats a fixed AESA during beyond visual-range and off-boresight missile firings, and while acquiring synthetic aperture radar imagery, he says. "We will be delivering a prototype this year for them to fly, and then will upgrade it over the next 18 months."

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

Developed in Edinburgh, Scotland, the new system will be demonstrated to India, and Saab says the UK government has already approved it for export.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... ripen.html

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 06 Jul 2009 04:33

krishna_krishna wrote:I only pray god gives our babus and Officers wisdom to make a choice that would give us power ...

sorry my friend...wisdom of our babus was never "not for sale"..

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 06 Jul 2009 04:50

You guys realize how desperate Boeing and LM are for this deal right. They are doing whatever it takes to secure this deal.
If you guys don't want US aircraft EF and Rafale are the way to go preferably the EF. They are the closest India is going to get to sanction proof aircraft (I don't include the Mig-35 b/c its a joke compared to the others).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Jul 2009 06:53

b_patel,

Do not think the others are not doing the same. After all the UK did it in Saudi Arabia and the French seem to be doing it in UAE(?). Just part of the game.

Having said that, based on the gist provided by livefist, IMHO, Rafale is perhaps the best option. I did not realize that their AESA was maturing relatively fast.

EF I do not trust because there is too much cracks within the group itself. Furthermore, I am not sure if India will get ToT for the entire AC.

Mukund · Post by **Mukund** » 06 Jul 2009 10:54

The IAF seems to be awestruck with AESA, given that we could buy 2052 anytime we want and also that we are developing an indigenous one, an AESA radar seems within our reach. The case with engines are completely different, we seem to be really struggling. Hence for MRCA we need to re-orient from an AESA focus to an engine focus. Whoever, gives the most ToT for engine or agrees for a JV to make a Kaveri derivative with a 100KN thrust (with complete ToT) should get the MRCA. In my limited knowledge, the Europeans with the EJ200 seems the best fit for this (given that IAF has already rejected Snecma's offer).

The only sanction proof aircraft is MCA, i.e., if we can build an engine for it. If we end up importing an engine for it the cycle of sanctions and blackmails will continue.
Bottom line: Use MRCA to make MCA and LCA sanction proof.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 06 Jul 2009 11:35

Kakkaji wrote:However, I see definite utility in buying the F-18s for use against China. That would support US goal of containing China. Seven squadrons of Super Hornets deployed on our northern and northeastern bases would come in handy for pounding PLA bases in Tibet. The US will not skimp on technology or spares support in this case. Heck, we may even get some freebies in this situation, courtesy Unkil Sam.

US will never confront China directly. Taiwan, Japan, SKorea, Australia (and possibly India) are all proxies of US, fighting the war for them. China is the not as easy the Taliban or Iraq.

It would be interesting to see the US resonse to a double offensive by Pakis and Chinks. This is a remote possibility though - US establishes the Russian routes into Afghanistan, exits slowly out of Pak, flushes the bad guys from Afghan into Pak, then Pakis may join hands with Chinks in long term.

arun · Post by **arun** » 06 Jul 2009 14:23

Tilak wrote:IAI forced out of Indian fighter jet bid
By YAAKOV KATZ
Jul 5, 2009 5:50 | Updated Jul 5, 2009 11:17

Was just about to X Post the article here. Nice to know that there are many eagle eyed individuals on the forum

.

Cut-throat competetion seems to be the order of the day with regard to our MRCA deal with the US muscling out Israel in an attempt to nobble Sweden's bid and price gouge India

.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 06 Jul 2009 15:44

katare,nrao,arun..
The full tot dream is purely a babu invention, getting what you cant develop by other means, .
Unkil is not interested in every detail of the contract and they have already committed that they will not provide tot

The way things are moving shows that rafale,gripen the possible winners are slowly sidelined , too costly eurofighter cant win , mig35 cant offer what we want and it comes with additional problems, so the options left are amriki jets.

Unkil is going round about manner to secure the deal,i.e India's advantage was multiple options, they are cutting it one by one, but why this is so important ? is it about a dozen billions only?

A secure guess would be that it is more about control than commercial interests.

If they control the demand and then they control how to provide it, a country's is in their hands,controlled by them.

I guess israel and amrikis are the top most beneficiaries of pakistan having nukes which they permitted them to have.

I guess after mrca committal or during it we can witness ABM/aegis also being inducted.

The future is sold out.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jul 2009 18:11

Since the Israelis have offered us the 2052 for the LCA,the fat would be in the fire if they offered their radar and other EW tech. to the Russians for the MIG-35,now that the US is driving them out of the Gripen,as they have earlier collaborated with Russia on the avionics for the Su-30MKI! The US is desperate to dump its obsolete F-16 and F-18 production lines onto someone,as there are hardly any future buyers for these aircraft around,with most of their allies all wanting the JSF or in the case of Japan the F-22.In fact Japan has just said that if they do not get the F-22 they will NOT buy a US aircraft for their future needs and will most probably buy the Eurofighter.India has been identified as the "fall guy" ,who can be bamboozled into buying at heavy cost a US aircraft which if acquired will give the US immense opportunity for armtwisting India at any future date with the threat of sanctions.

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 06 Jul 2009 20:40

Just what I thought. The idea of a JV is likely just Israel trying to look important in front of the US when negotiating for F-35 deals... and for Saab it was only about looking at the options on the market after the US pulled the plug on a Raytheon AESA for Gripen.

While the USA has claimed that the Gripen has only a "very limited" chance of being selected, the possible inclusion of an Israeli radar would have allowed New Delhi to push down the price of rival offers to supply either the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or the Lockheed Martin F-16, the sources add.

Other contenders for the MMRCA contract are the Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and RSK MiG-35.

The Israeli defence ministry and IAI have refused to comment on the report, but Saab-led Gripen International confirms that "Israel was one of several options" assessed for the radar element of its bid for the Indian requirement. The Swedish manufacturer has already confirmed its intention to allow India to conduct a flight evaluation of its Gripen Demo airframe equipped with a Vixen 1000E/ES05 Raven active electronically scanned array radar from Finmeccanica company Selex Galileo, and has approvals in place to export the system to India, and other potential Gripen buyers Brazil and Switzerland.

Washington's pressure is not the first example of it forcing the Israeli defence industry to back away from major contracts. IAI several years ago had to cancel a deal to supply China with Phalcon-type airborne early warning systems.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... n-bid.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Jul 2009 21:32

The full tot dream is purely a babu invention, getting what you cant develop by other means, .
Unkil is not interested in every detail of the contract and they have already committed that they will not provide tot

Sigh ........................

ToT = Full ToT = What is in the RFP, which should be an IAF invention. Perhaps some Babu has hijacked it?

Some vendors have stated that they will give entire AESA - hardware + software. BUT, beware, these guys could be 10-25% of the most mature AESA environment out there. Some Indian entity will be left with the task of making it mature (the remaining 75-90%).

To me the US is WAY ahead in the AESA "race", followed a few years down the road by Israel. The rest are all bunched, Russia IMHO being way behind.
____________________________________________________________

Also, I am not convinced that India is close to an AESA - they may be, and I hope I am absolutely wrong (miss JCage here).
____________________________________________________________

Now, as I see it, I would like the IAF to use the AESA ASAP.

To snoop on the bad guys WITHIN India. And, perhaps even use it to fry a few electronics of these guys in the process. Jihadis in Kashmir, Maoists all over, BDians along the NE, and, even perhaps my fav the D-Company. Granted this wish list may make the IAF - an armed forces entity - cross into civilian areas, But .................. hey we have an AESA to use. Use it.

You see I really do not think Pakistan will figure too much in the MRCA plan/s. Specially IF India has the means to squash them in India itself.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Jul 2009 21:53

As stated:

While the USA has claimed that the Gripen has only a "very limited" chance of being selected, the possible inclusion of an Israeli radar would have allowed New Delhi to push down the price of rival offers to supply either the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or the Lockheed Martin F-16, the sources add.

The US is no afraid of others winning based on the AESA. They are afraid of India negotiating a lower price with the US.

They clearly are not and cannot be afraid even of an Israeli AESA - as a technology.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Jul 2009 22:08

On the topic of Grippen + IAI, India still can ask for that combo. Nothing to prevent that.

negi · Post by **negi** » 06 Jul 2009 23:24

They clearly are not and cannot be afraid even of an Israeli AESA - as a technology.
Well there is a plausible difference between Israeli AESA and Amriki, i.e. level of TOT and END user agreement and other chutzpah .All this besides warm and extremely successful Indo-Israeli defense cooperation which South Block and the three services as of now seem very happy with.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Jul 2009 00:37

negi wrote: Well there is a plausible difference between Israeli AESA and Amriki, i.e. level of TOT and END user agreement and other chutzpah .All this besides warm and extremely successful Indo-Israeli defense cooperation which South Block and the three services as of now seem very happy with.

Seem to be going in circles.

No one is arguing about ToT and End User Agreements (you forgot to add US Congress) - that is a given.

But, even with complete ToT of any vendor, my argument is, is that India will still have to do something to catch up with what the US CAN provide (CAN, because I am not sure what the US is willing to give to India). Even with Israeli AESA India will have to "catch up" (I am fairly confident that even the Israeli AESA is not as capable as the US one - it is a "version" or two lower) (besides the US has so much more experience in real-time that the others are truly a joke - for what that is worth - just as a fact, not a knock on the others either).

Up to Indian techies as to what they can and cannot do to "catch up" with the US.

The question I have is how close are the others to what the US is willing (NOT capable) to provide.

I have always been of the opinion that give India the hardware and India has enough software power to "catch up". Which is why I preferred the US stuff. IMHO, IF India can get FULL ToT of hardware, that should be good enough. India can build the sofwtare part - in fact let me go out on a limb and state that the final product will be better than the vendors.