MRCA News and Discussion

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 23 Feb 2010 03:55

Cain Marko wrote:
$ 10 billion for 36 a/c ....collapses After ahem (having been duly refreshed, all I can say is that Dassault better come up with some kind of fiscal wizardry to bag this one. Even if they sold a mixed bag of Rafales and UAE Mirage 2000-5/9s, it wouldn't make it below the $ 11 billion deal. Boeing/Saab too better come up with something more reasonable or the old trusty (or is it not so trusty) fulcrum will take it all.

CM

And that is after Dassult reduced the price with 40%. I´m not surprised why Rafale is having a hard time on the export market....

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 04:05

Wickberg wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:
What are the three rounds? Flight evals and tech review in India plus weapons trials outside?

When did the Gripen complete its flight trials? Don't tell me the NG actually flew in Bangalore and aam BR junta missed it?

CM
I have not read that any Gripen D have started its flight trials in India. And I find it quite improbable that the only NG Demo aircraft in the world would be sent to India to do trials.

They would have to wouldn't they. Otherwise how is the IAF supposed to evaluate the NG since it is quite different from the C/D versions?

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 23 Feb 2010 04:12

nachiket wrote: They would have to wouldn't they. Otherwise how is the IAF supposed to evaluate the NG since it is quite different from the C/D versions?

How about F-16IN, does it even exist besides on blueprints? Will Russia send its only MiG-35 to India? The same with Rafale and Typhoon, the version India wants is not what´s in service today...

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 04:16

Cain Marko wrote:

$ 10 billion for 36 a/c ....collapses After ahem (having been duly refreshed, all I can say is that Dassault better come up with some kind of fiscal wizardry to bag this one. Even if they sold a mixed bag of Rafales and UAE Mirage 2000-5/9s, it wouldn't make it below the $ 11 billion deal. Boeing/Saab too better come up with something more reasonable or the old trusty (or is it not so trusty) fulcrum will take it all.

CM

I don't think any amount of fiscal wizardry will enable Dassault to basically offer 126 aircraft for the price of 36. That's probably the reason why they are so quiet about this deal unlike the others.

The worst case scenario for us would be if the IAF disqualifies the Fulcrum and the Viper on technical grounds. Then when the MoF realizes that we can't possibly afford any of the remaining fighters we'll have a situation similar to the A330 MRTT fiasco. That is why I think the IAF wouldn't dare to disqualify both the Mig-35 and F-16 out of sheer fear of being left with nothing eventually even if they don't satisfy some technical parameter. (unlikely for the Mig at least but you never know).

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 04:19

Wickberg wrote:
And that is after Dassult reduced the price with 40%. I´m not surprised why Rafale is having a hard time on the export market....

Check this link: http://tinyurl.com/ydjxcbk

Maybe this explains their claimed "low" price!

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 04:23

Wickberg wrote:
nachiket wrote: They would have to wouldn't they. Otherwise how is the IAF supposed to evaluate the NG since it is quite different from the C/D versions?
How about F-16IN, does it even exist besides on blueprints? Will Russia send its only MiG-35 to India? The same with Rafale and Typhoon, the version India wants is not what´s in service today...

The NG has different engines and a modified Air frame with extra fuel and hard points AFAIK. The differences between the C/D versions and the NG are too many. Almost similar to diff between F-18A/B and F-18 E/F. The F-16IN would be nearly the same as the UAE Block 60 which was here for the trials. The Mig-35 again is very similar to the Mig-29K and Mig-29M2 (Russians have adopted their famous technique of changing the numbers to make it look as if they are marketing a new aircraft). The Typhoon Tranche 3 and Rafale F3 may have some different radar and avionics but that's about it. Again no airframe and engine changes.

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 23 Feb 2010 04:34

nitinm wrote:
Check this link: http://tinyurl.com/ydjxcbk

Maybe this explains their claimed "low" price!

Stilll, having a diversed market is a must be for air craft makers today. It´s nothing special to Dassault, SAAB builds parts for commercial jets, space ships you name it, from all over the the world. Over 80% of the western commercial jets have parts in their engines built by Volvo Aero. It is how the world looks today, you outsource to take advantage of the best best quality for the lowest cost. Neither SAAB AB or Dassault would survive if they would have to rely on building fighters alone....

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 23 Feb 2010 04:41

nachiket wrote: How about F-16IN, does it even exist besides on blueprints? Will Russia send its only MiG-35 to India? The same with Rafale and Typhoon, the version India wants is not what´s in service today...

The NG has different engines and a modified Air frame with extra fuel and hard points AFAIK. The differences between the C/D versions and the NG are too many. Almost similar to diff between F-18A/B and F-18 E/F. The F-16IN would be nearly the same as the UAE Block 60 which was here for the trials. The Mig-35 again is very similar to the Mig-29K and Mig-29M2 (Russians have adopted their famous technique of changing the numbers to make it look as if they are marketing a new aircraft). The Typhoon Tranche 3 and Rafale F3 may have some different radar and avionics but that's about it. Again no airframe and engine changes.[/quote]

Perhaps SAAB will send the NG down to India. But I have´nt read anything about neither the D-version nor the NG making some trials in India yet (which the original poster claims),.
(I still think SAAB will send a Gripen D to India).

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 04:44

Wickberg wrote:
Perhaps SAAB will send the NG down to India. But I have´nt read anything about neither the D-version nor the NG making some trials in India yet (which the original poster claims),.
(I still think SAAB will send a Gripen D to India).

The claim wasn't made by the poster. India's Air Chief Marshall himself that the Gripen has completed 2 stages of trials. We can assume that first stage was Technical evaluation and 2nd was flight trials. Third stage of weapons trials is left.

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 23 Feb 2010 05:04

nachiket wrote: The claim wasn't made by the poster. India's Air Chief Marshall himself that the Gripen has completed 2 stages of trials. We can assume that first stage was Technical evaluation and 2nd was flight trials. Third stage of weapons trials is left.

Sorry, mea culpa.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 23 Feb 2010 07:09

Yes.. It was all a bit baffling.. When I read the news report and posted it, wasn't sure if there is an error in the report or if the chief was misquoted or if the Gripen actually did finish 2 phases of trials..

Heres some clarification that will hopefully will put the discussion to rest- (I hope this helps

)

SAAB from Sweden has fielded Grippen which will bring its aircraft to India next month for second phase of trials. It completed the third phase earlier.

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 111750.ece

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 23 Feb 2010 08:15

India, France to finalise upgrade of Mirage jets in Rs 10,000 cr project

"It (the project finalisation) should happen shortly,'' IAF chief Air Chief Marshal P V Naik told TOI on Monday. "The scope of Mirage upgrade will be much larger than the MiG-29 one...it will be more high-end. It will cost half of the fighter's worth. After the upgrade, the Mirages will serve us for another 15-20 years,'' said another officer.

The multi-role fighters will be `souped-up' with new avionics, radars, mission computers, glass cockpits, helmet-mounted displays, electronic warfare suites, jam-proof communication with data links, weapon delivery and precision-targeting systems, including the all-weather, fire-and-forget MICA (interception and aerial combat missiles) systems.

"A French team will be coming again in early-March to finalise the details. The CNC (contract negotiation committee) should conclude in another two months. The Cabinet Committee on Security's approval will then be sought,'' he added.

I don't think this is going to be a big boost for France and the Rafale's chances but it certainly wont be a big dent. After protracted negotiations, price disputes, France suggesting to tone down the level of upgrades for the price India was willing to pay, India threatening to go with Israel for the upgrades, almost even possibly increasing the MMRCA order rather than go for the super expensive upgrades........ If this deal had ended in Israeli laps it would have been a huge blow for the Rafale. End seems near, looks like Sorkozy doesn't want to come to India without a deal on the table to sign.

The Rafales still hanging in there...only just!

ovein · Post by **ovein** » 23 Feb 2010 11:24

Don’t delay fighter deal

http://www.asianage.com/index.php?optio ... &Itemid=65

Article by General Shankar Roychowdhury

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 14:09

Another angle to the story! Going back 5 years!

I tend to be a big fan of standardization! I have seen in so many industrial cases, it brings down costs dramatically!

We should have expedited the MRCA and tried to standardize on a carrier capable aircraft like the Rafale rather than buy the 45 units of Mig-29. Also, rather than upgrading the Mirage for something as crazy as $40m/aircraft (which is still pending), only make minor upgrades and replace it sooner.

With 126 of MRCA, I would say 200, and another 40 for the Navy, this is would have been the No 1 & No 2 biggest fighter aircraft deal in the world. Imagine the negotiation leverage and the consistency in platform. It would have made so much sense over starting a new engine line for the existing RD33 engines. Ofcourse, we need the engines for the upgrade of the existing Migs but this move will keep the line open longer and these aircrafts are going to around for decades, increasing future maintenance costs. While everyone is replacing their aging fleet of Mig-29s with Rafale, we continue to buy them anew!

If the Indian Air Force was not happy with the Tejas, it would have made sense to finalize the MRCA 5 years ago and divert HAL's resources to development of UAVs and Helicopters, we have learned a lot, nothing wrong. I think Helicopters are going to play a very critical role in the future of Indian armed forces. If we have air superiority and after the air defense is suppressed, the helicopter is an ideal machine. Especially given the highly rugged terrain that borders India. You need to fly low and slow! Hunt down the rats!

I am not completely sure about the role of Tejas in the IAF here, help me! Some people compare it to the Mirage but its not in the same category, for one the payload is much smaller! Is the IAF going to use it like some sort of trainer or what? It is not that cheap!

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 23 Feb 2010 14:21

nitinm wrote: rather than upgrading the Mirage for something as crazy as $40m/aircraft (which is still pending), only make minor upgrades and replace it sooner.

Its not the final price. That was the original price quoted, which DOD were unwilling to pay.

The package - new avionics, radars, mission computers, glass cockpits, helmet-mounted displays, electronic warfare suites, jam-proof communication with data links, weapon delivery and precision-targeting systems, including the all-weather, fire-and-forget MICA (interception and aerial combat missiles) systems, seems to be to the IAF's liking, as quoted by IAF chief. It would be harsh to call it 'minor'. (And if it comes at a price to India's liking..why not?)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Feb 2010 14:22

** ALERT ALERT **

a grey typhoon just made 2 chukkars over HAL-ORR. clearly a delta wing and canards. looks too big for gripen.

very quiet engine and refined tone compared to the rasping GE404...its almost noiseless though it passed
over my colony.

my kid ran and told me - he was watching the typhoon -vs- su35 on youtube thing so he knows.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 14:29

nitinm wrote:Another angle to the story! Going back 5 years!

I tend to be a big fan of standardization! I have seen in so many industrial cases, it brings down costs dramatically!

We should have expedited the MRCA and tried to standardize on a carrier capable aircraft like the Rafale rather than buy the 45 units of Mig-29. Also, rather than upgrading the Mirage for something as crazy as $40m/aircraft (which is still pending), only make minor upgrades and replace it sooner.

Did you read the posts made above about the cost of the rafale?

With 126 of MRCA, I would say 200, and another 40 for the Navy, this is would have been the No 1 & No 2 biggest fighter aircraft deal in the world. Imagine the negotiation leverage and the consistency in platform. It would have made so much sense over starting a new engine line for the existing RD33 engines. Ofcourse, we need the engines for the upgrade of the existing Migs but this move will keep the line open longer and these aircrafts are going to around for decades, increasing future maintenance costs. While everyone is replacing their aging fleet of Mig-29s with Rafale, we continue to buy them anew!

You sir are talking through your hat! The Rafale has zero export orders till now. As for the comment about the RD-33 engines I did not get what you are trying to say. You accepted that we need the RD-33 engines for the Mig upgrade. So why should we not open the production line. Unless you want to scrap the Migs altogether.

If the Indian Air Force was not happy with the Tejas, it would have made sense to finalize the MRCA 5 years ago and divert HAL's resources to development of UAVs and Helicopters, we have learned a lot, nothing wrong. I think Helicopters are going to play a very critical role in the future of Indian armed forces. If we have air superiority and after the air defense is suppressed, the helicopter is an ideal machine. Especially given the highly rugged terrain that borders India. You need to fly low and slow! Hunt down the rats!

And who said that we are not developing these? Read up about the Dhruv, LCH programs and the new LUH proposal.

I am not completely sure about the role of Tejas in the IAF here, help me! Some people compare it to the Mirage but its not in the same category, for one the payload is much smaller! Is the IAF going to use it like some sort of trainer or what? It is not that cheap!

What are you proposing to replace the large numbers of Mig-21s in the IAF inventory with? We can't replace them 1 for 1 with Su-30s. Large twin engined fighters like the Su-30 are expensive to maintain and operate. We need a light single engined fighter that is cheap to procure and operate and can hold its own against any fighter operated by our neighbors in addition to fulfilling the CAS role done by the Mig-21Ms. The LCA is the only option.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 14:38

nitinm wrote: We should have expedited the MRCA and tried to standardize on a carrier capable aircraft like the Rafale rather than buy the 45 units of Mig-29.

One more thing. The Rafale-M (carrier version) currently operates off the Charles DeGaulle which is a CATOBAR carrier. We don't even know if the rafale can operate off IN's STOBAR carriers.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Feb 2010 16:06

The MIG-29K came along with the Gorshkov integral part of the same deal,and what some sources have hinted at,also part of the lease of the arriving Chakra 2.

Any rumours of a new/second production facility for the LCA?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 23 Feb 2010 16:08

NitinM-> I think the LCA role will mainly be what the Mig-21 has been doing in the IAF. It definately has a role to play. Numbers do matter, it can provide CAP, air defence and limited strike. 4tonne payload- although in combat it will carry less may not not be much for A to G missions but will do for Air to Air missions, if IAF is able to manage with the 1.5 - 2 tonne payload of the Mig-21 BIS, surely the LCA load is more than adequate.

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 19:24

shukla wrote:
nitinm wrote: rather than upgrading the Mirage for something as crazy as $40m/aircraft (which is still pending), only make minor upgrades and replace it sooner.
Its not the final price. That was the original price quoted, which DOD were unwilling to pay.

The package - new avionics, radars, mission computers, glass cockpits, helmet-mounted displays, electronic warfare suites, jam-proof communication with data links, weapon delivery and precision-targeting systems, including the all-weather, fire-and-forget MICA (interception and aerial combat missiles) systems, seems to be to the IAF's liking, as quoted by IAF chief. It would be harsh to call it 'minor'. (And if it comes at a price to India's liking..why not?)

skukla, I meant rather than making such large changes, we should make minor changes for the time being and then replace the aircrafts early! This would bring platform commonality!

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 19:30

nachiket wrote: One more thing. The Rafale-M (carrier version) currently operates off the Charles DeGaulle which is a CATOBAR carrier. We don't even know if the rafale can operate off IN's STOBAR carriers.

I didn't know this, thanks!

No offense, but regarding the other post, it wouldn't hurt if you took a few lessons from others here like Aditya_V & Philip on how to respond! Aggressive posting discourages people from communicating freely!

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 23 Feb 2010 19:49

nitinm wrote:skukla, I meant rather than making such large changes, we should make minor changes for the time being and then replace the aircrafts early! This would bring platform commonality!

Point taken mate!

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 23 Feb 2010 20:10

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=12437

..............
The second is the maiden flight early this year of the Sukhoi-T50 (Pakfa), a fifth-generation fighter aircraft being jointly developed by India and Russia under an agreement between the two countries. The aircraft has been in the making since the early 1990s and is scheduled for production and induction into both air forces around 2015-2017. India is funding a percentage of the costs involved (between 25 to 50 per cent, according to different sources), and will also develop some of the integral software and hardware components.
.............
The overall process is undoubtedly complex, but evaluation of the actual equipment against finite parameters and criteria set out in the Air Staff Requirements is perhaps the most objective part of it all. However, military and technical performances of the contending aircraft and financial terms and conditions of the contract only provide concrete inputs into the selection process. A critical part of the final decision has to be evolved in the more amorphous realm of India’s own geopolitical compulsions and strategic national interests, particularly with regard to the countries and blocs whose aircraft are being evaluated. These environments are necessarily unquantifiable and to that extent subjective, but nonetheless cannot be wished away.
In this broader geopolitical context, the ultimate selection of the aircraft will have to take into account the long-term relationships India wishes to maintain and develop with the vendor countries, in particular the United States and Russia, who are contesting the MRCA sweepstakes through their representative proxies — America’s F-16 and F-18 and Russia’s MiG-35. For these two countries, the contract has acquired the overtones of a prestige issue, and could even become a touchstone for future relationships with India, which at present is widely perceived as tilting towards the United States. Russia, on the other hand, is a valued and time-tested ally of long standing, though somewhat shaky on its feet after the end of the Cold War, but nevertheless a putative superpower and a potentially useful anchor for India in the context of the Sino-Pakistan axis.
Historical compulsions have created a strong Russian connection for the Indian Air Force, notwithstanding long-standing complaints at working levels in this country about difficult commercial negotiations with Russian partners. However, the government has nevertheless opted to link the overall future equipment profile of the Air Force with the Indo-Russian Sukhoi T-50 FGFA. This is where the evaluation trials of the MRCA interconnect with the development flights of the T-50 FGFA.
The Indian Air Force has traditionally suffered from excessive multiplicity of equipment and its associated problems. The same mistake should not be repeated in the case of the new MRCA. Logically speaking, therefore, the large fleet of the newly-acquired MRCA should not be inducted independent of future plans, but rather utilised as a lead-in series for the Sukhoi T-50 FGFA. This narrows down the field considerably, and there are some who suggest that instead of trials, India might as well have purchased the required additional numbers of Sukhoi-30 MKI, another outstanding aircraft from the same stable, already in squadron service with the Indian Air Force. The question that now arises is: Is the Russian fifth-generation aircraft, for which India has already committed financially, indeed the final choice for future aircraft for the Indian Air Force?
India has also to contend against itself and its institutionalised phobias of hyper-sanctimoniousness regarding defence transactions. The government has a record of abrupt and impromptu cancellations at the slightest of suspicions, no matter how grievous is the resultant self-inflicted injury on defence preparedness in terms of lost time and opportunities. While no right-thinking person can ever condone corruption, nevertheless a stage has also been reached when the country can no longer afford to throw out the baby with the bathwater by indiscriminately terminating entire series of trials of weapons under acquisition every time there is a suspicion of alleged wrongdoing, whether actual or imaginary. As these exceedingly complex trials of fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force get under way, it is to be sincerely hoped that they are not interrupted for any reason.
The country must evolve a more rational system of investigation and fact-finding, to target specific parties within the process found to be directly or indirectly involved in any wrongdoing without halting the entire process and delaying weapons acquisition. The ghosts of Bofors have created enough havoc with the country’s defence preparedness. The time has come to finally exorcise them for the greater good of the nation.

Gen. Shankar Roychowdhury is a former Chief of Army Staff and a former Member of Parliament

Is he favouring Mig35 for mrca?
Which aircraft would be most suitable for us keeping in mind that we will be operating Pakfa in future and it has to compliment it best .
Notice that he never mentioned mig29,mirage,LCA..

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 20:45

Samay wrote: Is he favouring Mig35 for mrca?
Which aircraft would be most suitable for us keeping in mind that we will be operating Pakfa in future and it has to compliment it best .
Notice that he never mentioned mig29,mirage,LCA..

I am really beginning to like this MRCA thing!

I don't think the author is favoring anyone here! I think the main synergies that he is talking about are in terms of weapons. For example, if India bought Rafale it will probably use MICA over Russian missiles while the FGFA will again use Russian missiles and other weapon systems. Imagine having two sets of weapon systems for the two or three different platforms that are not interchangeable.

The other thing is communication systems. This issue is going to be greatly exacerbated by network centric warfare where ever equipment across your air force, army and navy has to be integrated. Relatively this is manageable because India has very good skills here and we anyways use custom communications hardware. This is not optimal though!

Inconsistency is BAD, VERY BAD! These are the invisible costs that don't reflect in visible procurement costs but really hurt your finances and your operational readiness. The cost of missiles alone that India has today will be in 10s of billions of USD. Trained personnel and equipment also cost 10s of billions of USD! Duplication and inconsistency is BAD!

US offered India the F-35 if India bought F-16 or F-18. This is possibly to counter the FGFA benefit. If India were to get 250 units of FGFA at $100m each, it comes to a massive $25bn. India might have already invested, lets say, $2bn in the project but that is not much to forgo considering the overall long-term benefits of a consistent procurement. Besides we can get sub-system level technologies that will benefit us in other projects. US is playing India here, which is not a bad thing per se but then we have to weigh our options.

Like I said before, we need platform consistency and standardization. We shouldn't make these mini-geopolitical deals now! Strategic tie-up with Israel, another with France and another with Russia, and on and on..... We pay and get what we want for sub-systems or we develop them ourselves, finish! Geopolitics should only play into large futuristic projects like fifth generation fighters (FGFA or F-35). Geopolitics should not screw your long-term procurement plans. That is a very pertinent danger today!

This is the whole point of the issue. US and Russia are competing here. My personal belief is that US is not big on technology transfer, they even denied it to the UK! India has to weigh its options, considering everything including price.

(I know this is a badly written post but I am only getting used to this topic)

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 23 Feb 2010 21:45

nachiket wrote:
What are you proposing to replace the large numbers of Mig-21s in the IAF inventory with? We can't replace them 1 for 1 with Su-30s. Large twin engined fighters like the Su-30 are expensive to maintain and operate. We need a light single engined fighter that is cheap to procure and operate and can hold its own against any fighter operated by our neighbors in addition to fulfilling the CAS role done by the Mig-21Ms. The LCA is the only option.

Why not the Gripen then? Isn't the NG going to have the AESA unlike Tejas?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Feb 2010 22:38

Carl_T wrote:
nachiket wrote:
What are you proposing to replace the large numbers of Mig-21s in the IAF inventory with? We can't replace them 1 for 1 with Su-30s. Large twin engined fighters like the Su-30 are expensive to maintain and operate. We need a light single engined fighter that is cheap to procure and operate and can hold its own against any fighter operated by our neighbors in addition to fulfilling the CAS role done by the Mig-21Ms. The LCA is the only option.
Why not the Gripen then? Isn't the NG going to have the AESA unlike Tejas?

Why would you want to import the Gripen when the indigenously designed and produced LCA satisfies the IAF's requirements? Had the IAF asked for an AESA originally for the LCA? No. Anyway, the LCA MkII is going to have an AESA. And no fighter operated by our neighbours currently has an AESA either BTW.
If you scrap the LCA in favor of an import all the taxpayer money spent on it goes down the drain. It would have been necessary had the LCA not been up to the mark. But that is not the case.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 23 Feb 2010 22:48

I thought the AESA was what this MMRCA was all about along with getting a western fighter.

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 23:16

nachiket wrote:
Carl_T wrote: Why not the Gripen then? Isn't the NG going to have the AESA unlike Tejas?
Why would you want to import the Gripen when the indigenously designed and produced LCA satisfies the IAF's requirements? Had the IAF asked for an AESA originally for the LCA? No. Anyway, the LCA MkII is going to have an AESA. And no fighter operated by our neighbours currently has an AESA either BTW.
If you scrap the LCA in favor of an import all the taxpayer money spent on it goes down the drain. It would have been necessary had the LCA not been up to the mark. But that is not the case.

Tejas will get a AESA eventually but not now, only when the technology becomes more affordable! Now AESA is very expensive, my guess is $5m+ a piece. That has to be complemented with BVR missiles like the Astra, which makes it even more expensive. It makes no sense to put something so expensive on a Tejas. This is a bad mix! This is what I don't like. No clarity on the operational goal of the Tejas!

Gripen is a far more potent platform (I am not a Paki, I am just stating the fact). It makes sense to put AESA + BVR missiles on a Gripen, but just enough! It makes hell lot of sense to put AESA on MKIs so that it can act like a mini-AWACS and engage in BVR warfare. MRCA or Tejas will be escorted by MKIs and they don't badly need AESA. Why are we then asking for AESA? Because we need the technology! See, western countries are not going to give up something as radical as AESA just like that, they need a big carrot and that carrot is MRCA!

Tejas will mostly come along if things go well (remember we don't have a good engine yet), but we shouldn't be too obsessed with it. We have learned a lot and we can use those things in other projects. Emotional decisions are not in our best interest. If it makes sense, great, if it does not, lets move on! Lets get the MRCA going and start working on something else which will leverage our learning! In any case, I think ~100 units of Tejas is not a bad idea because you need to get your pilots used to fighters and Tejas is low initial and operational cost. Sorry, but I still am not still clear about the role of Tejas in combat. The cliché of 'replacing the Mig-21' is flawed because technology has changed a lot and one shouldn't get stuck with the 'interceptor mentality'. Interceptors are dead! Lets start with a clean slate and optimise our decisions based on what will give us the most lethal weapon per INR spent!

It is possible that IAF might have though about a role for the Tejas, but I don't know what that is! In any case, I would like to see more clarity before we invest serious money in this! Do let me know, if I am missing something on the Tejas!

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 23 Feb 2010 23:19

Dudes just had a thought. Maybe a European aircraft will be chosen for the MMRCA. The thought process being that the AF wants a western aircraft . At the same time India does not want to piss of Russia to much. Going for an American aircraft would surely do that. So maybe India will take the middle path and choose a European one and that way the Ruskies wont be pissed of to much

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 23:24

Aditya_V wrote:NitinM-> I think the LCA role will mainly be what the Mig-21 has been doing in the IAF. It definately has a role to play. Numbers do matter, it can provide CAP, air defence and limited strike. 4tonne payload- although in combat it will carry less may not not be much for A to G missions but will do for Air to Air missions, if IAF is able to manage with the 1.5 - 2 tonne payload of the Mig-21 BIS, surely the LCA load is more than adequate.

I missed this post!

For A2A, you need AESA and stuff, please refer my previous post for this! A2G needs payload!

Numbers may count for some type of operations but then you have to understand that increasing variety increases cost a lot! This is a fine balance. As I said, it has a role as a initial fighter because of the low cost and also for some non-critical operations like shooting down a Paki reconnaissance aircraft!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Feb 2010 23:30

US offered India the F-35

Is that right? LM has "offered". That "offer" has yet to make it through the corridors of SD, etc, IIRC.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 23 Feb 2010 23:47

LM will offer Iran the F-22 if they could.

nitinm · Post by **nitinm** » 23 Feb 2010 23:52

Carl_T wrote:LM will offer Iran the F-22 if they could.

That is so true! But the thing about F-35 is true. If India makes this MRCA deal with a US company, then we get to buy the F-35 next! You should be able to get that from some news source!

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 23 Feb 2010 23:52

Carl_T wrote:LM will offer Iran the F-22 if they could.

It would Just be Business...nothing else...!

NOTE :: EVERY THING IS RIGHT IN LOVE, WAR AND RECENTLY BUSINESS.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 23 Feb 2010 23:57

nitinm wrote:If India makes this MRCA deal with a US company, then we get to buy the F-35 next! You should be able to get that from some news source!

Ya...better we may get to buy F-35s.....!

at the cost of some 175 million each craft/crap and some strings attached and.........no one knows...and the best thing would be that auspicious time will come before 2020....by that time we would be flying PAK FA....if dates goes right...don't we...!

sharma.abhinav · Post by **sharma.abhinav** » 24 Feb 2010 00:00

nitinm wrote: Tejas will get a AESA eventually but not now, only when the technology becomes more affordable! Now AESA is very expensive, my guess is $5m+ a piece. That has to be complemented with BVR missiles like the Astra, which makes it even more expensive. It makes no sense to put something so expensive on a Tejas. This is a bad mix! This is what I don't like. No clarity on the operational goal of the Tejas!

Gripen is a far more potent platform (I am not a Paki, I am just stating the fact). It makes sense to put AESA + BVR missiles on a Gripen, but just enough! It makes hell lot of sense to put AESA on MKIs so that it can act like a mini-AWACS and engage in BVR warfare. MRCA or Tejas will be escorted by MKIs and they don't badly need AESA. Why are we then asking for AESA? Because we need the technology! See, western countries are not going to give up something as radical as AESA just like that, they need a big carrot and that carrot is MRCA!

Tejas will mostly come along if things go well (remember we don't have a good engine yet), but we shouldn't be too obsessed with it. We have learned a lot and we can use those things in other projects. Emotional decisions are not in our best interest. If it makes sense, great, if it does not, lets move on! Lets get the MRCA going and start working on something else which will leverage our learning! In any case, I think ~100 units of Tejas is not a bad idea because you need to get your pilots used to fighters and Tejas is low initial and operational cost. Sorry, but I still am not still clear about the role of Tejas in combat. The cliché of 'replacing the Mig-21' is flawed because technology has changed a lot and one shouldn't get stuck with the 'interceptor mentality'. Interceptors are dead! Lets start with a clean slate and optimise our decisions based on what will give us the most lethal weapon per INR spent!

It is possible that IAF might have though about a role for the Tejas, but I don't know what that is! In any case, I would like to see more clarity before we invest serious money in this! Do let me know, if I am missing something on the Tejas!

Well mate you are not just missing something, you are missing the entire point. LCA Tejas is not just meant to be a replacement of Migs. The idea behind Tejas was to build design capability to build a world class 4th generation fighter aircraft in-house. Besides this Tejas will replace:

Mig 21: In Point Air Defence, CAS and CAP
Mig 27: In CAS and Air Interdiction

Besides this Tejas will be used in:

SEAD using precision guided munition and LGB's
Maritime strike using Anti Ship missiles and Fleet Air Defence aboard IAC 1.

Apart from these roles Tejas will be the primary mover in increasing number squadrons in IAF service. So as I see it Tejas connot afford to be a failure. And we cannot do all this by buying out an air force.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Feb 2010 00:03

sumshyam wrote:
Carl_T wrote:LM will offer Iran the F-22 if they could.

It would Just be Business...nothing else...!

NOTE :: EVERY THING IS RIGHT IN LOVE, WAR AND RECENTLY BUSINESS.

Cool.

No more fanboy stuff and fear of US Congress I guess.

Progress after some 15 years of BR fear.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Feb 2010 00:08

nitinm wrote:
Carl_T wrote:LM will offer Iran the F-22 if they could.

That is so true! But the thing about F-35 is true. If India makes this MRCA deal with a US company, then we get to buy the F-35 next! You should be able to get that from some news source!

Nope.

The news sources just state what LM has stated. "India" (read LM) will still have to go through the proper channels to actually sell them. Just like any other deal (outside of FMS I guess).

Which is my point. LM offering India OR Iran is the same.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Feb 2010 00:09

Even LM offer to introduce 5th gen techs in MRCA F-16IN will have to go through the wringer in DC!!!!!

Which is why India will get an AESA from the US but not the code.

Old stuff guys ....................... these things have been posted some 5 years ago - even the news reports.

And, just BTW, IF India did go the F-35 route, that India would get the first F-35 in some 2025-30 time frame. There was talk of a "line" in India too. even that would still mean a F-35 in about 2020+.