'Make in India' Single engined fighter

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby NRao » 18 Jul 2017 17:42

UlanBatori wrote: Objective here is to improve the fighter production line, and the engine quality and quantities. Hence relevance to single-injin fighter.


Ah. I see, sorry I missed that part of the narrative.

I am afraid, the UCAV will not help that cause. IMHO, build the UA(C)V on the expertise developed for the manned programs and not the other way around. Unmanned programs can take liberty in areas that manned cannot and therefore one will be compelled to develop higher standards anyways, so just build those higher standards from the start. Else ambies all over again.

A few fleeting comments:

* Composites for 4th Gen and 5th Gen are two diff animals

* UCAV = UAC + missiles and associated HW/SW. Most UCAVs are based on UAVs (India is getting one from Israel as we post). They are pretty good at A2G and plenty ways to go for A2A

* UCAV based PC or asymmetrical warfare NEEDS HUMINIT, else success rate is extremely low (yes, the US gets a LOT of HUMINT help)

* In the case of India they will need techs that no one else may use: forest penetrating radar, as an example

* No matter which type (UAV or UCAV) the need for great sensors will always exist (IMHO of course)




* Under BTW file: PMO has tied, at the hips, the AMCA and Ghatak programs. I would suggest that it is *much better* to go from manned to unmanned. Although it may seem it is easier to go the other way - it is not

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Jul 2017 18:40

For anyone who wants to be piloting a fighter plane in future:

NRaoji, you have hit the target with more precision than a laser pointer. The Indian babooncracy starts with
no no no no no yaaar, that will not work onlee. All eej Maya. Bhavitavyam bhaveteva. (burp!) whiyar eej the whisky bottle?


Then tries to think up mumbo-jumbo to explain the sheer expertise behind that pre-set conclusion.
Thanks for all these objections! Can be better prepared to bat them away now.

1. Do you seriously believe that a UCAV will come out of ppl used to designing manned fighters? er... HOW MANY ppl does India have, that have designed a manned fighter, still not retired? (I mean the ppl, not the fighter).

So let's scratch that.

2. The first thing to do in thinking of a UCAV is to diss "air superiority", just as the ancient kings should have discarded Upturned Nose superiority and focused on ground superiority and got off their elephants and hired a horde of donkeys instead. There is no human at risk here. The advantages of that simple fact have to be built into the thinking.

3. "India is getting one from Israel as we post".
India is getting 5000 from Israel WarMalt. No wonder they gave PM a red carpet welcome (Nut&yahoo and entire cabinet apparently greeted him at the foot of the stairs and stayed with him until he left. Unprecedented welcome like Biggest Sucker In The World Coming With Open Purse).

4."Most UCAVs are designed from UAVs". Very true. All 0 of them to-date. This why people suggest High Altitude Sensor difficulties (to see down from 50K feet - see your post above) as obstacles for terrain-following UCAVs.

5. Fundamental difference: UCAVs have to be designed to operate as one of a horde, not a prima donna. Dog-pack, not Lion. The UCAVs that you see from NASA etc are TDs, so they try to pack everything into one system. The "Ghatak" Artist's conception is a weak imitation of the Boeing UCAV etc, which are just imitations of B-2 (which came from the Akila RPV. I remember accurately predicting at lunch the shape of the New SuperSecret Bomber way back, saying that explains why the Akila has such a huge Cost Overrun.

6. You are never going to get anywhere in manufacturing with the present directions in India. Tech Transfer and Licensed Production have not taught HAL to manufacture LCAs despite some 60 years of building MiG21s, Janguars, Mirage 2000s, Su-27s and Su-30s. Why do you think F-16, which comes completed except for assembling out of a box, is going to magically transform Indian manufacturing competence? The Russian planes I bet came with a lot of sheet metal and rivet work still needed - are those plants now robotic after all these years? HAL engine factory has been operating off blueprints since 1970s...

7.
Under BTW file: PMO has tied, at the hips, the AMCA and Ghatak programs.

Ghatak seems to be as serious as Avatar and the ElectroMagnetic Gun. And of course the Kaveri Engine. It is exactly 40 years today since I first saw the gleaming Kaveri injun in a glass case in GTRE. National pride. AXIAL compressor engine. AFTERBURNER!!!

We can revisit that in 40 years if India is still around (I won't be).

Old Chinese plovelb:
If u keep doing things the way u did them yesteldin, y do u expect diffelent lesurts tomollow?

I suggest more thinking. The objections cited above can be batted out of the field in an instant. Please bring better ones. Thx

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Jul 2017 19:23

BTW, this just in:

Unable to Buy U.S. Military Drones, Allies Place Orders With China
Several countries in the Mideast and Africa have deployed weapons in conflicts after buying from Beijing—at lower cost.
By Jeremy Page in Beijing and
Paul Sonne in Washington
Updated July 17, 2017 11:21 a.m. ET
Last October, satellite images captured the distinctive outlines of some powerful new weaponry at a Saudi runway used for military strikes in Yemen. Three Wing Loong drones had appeared, Chinese-made replicas of the U.S. Predator with a similar ability to ...

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23584
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chetak » 18 Jul 2017 19:41

UlanBatori wrote:BTW, this just in:

Unable to Buy U.S. Military Drones, Allies Place Orders With China
Several countries in the Mideast and Africa have deployed weapons in conflicts after buying from Beijing—at lower cost.
By Jeremy Page in Beijing and
Paul Sonne in Washington
Updated July 17, 2017 11:21 a.m. ET
Last October, satellite images captured the distinctive outlines of some powerful new weaponry at a Saudi runway used for military strikes in Yemen. Three Wing Loong drones had appeared, Chinese-made replicas of the U.S. Predator with a similar ability to ...


that is why the hans offer top dollar for crashed or stolen US weaponry from the conflict zones and consequently, the pakis and their tallibunnies have made a lot of money by selling such salvaged/stolen US military stuff to the hans

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Jul 2017 22:38

Man! They don't even bother to make the external shape look any different. Straight Xeroxgiri. Parkar Pen Co. of Usa, near Andheri, Maharashtra would be proud of them.
Last edited by UlanBatori on 19 Jul 2017 01:07, edited 1 time in total.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9781
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 19 Jul 2017 00:45

UlanBatori wrote:Man! They don't even bother to make the external shape look any different. Straight Xeroxgiri. Pakar Pen Co. of Usa, near Andheri, Maharashtra would be proud of them.

You mean like this? :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-fzcVVFQ-Y

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9781
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 20 Jul 2017 07:02

India won't ink a single-engine fighter deal before 2019
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ana ... efore-2019

Some analysts even say the F-16 will never be bought by the Indian Air Force, or IAF. "There isn't now even the slightest IAF interest in the F-16 Block 70 or any other variant," said Bharat Karnad, professor of national security studies at Centre for Policy Research. When asked about the outcome of the flight trials the IAF will conduct, Karnad said, "Nothing, it will take time and delay any decision to beyond the 2019 election. Thereafter, the medium multirole combat aircraft, or MMRCA, metrics will still apply, and the F-16 will be rejected."

Lends credence to the theory that the IAF does not like the F-16. Only the GoI does. The ball is not in LM's court, but in the GoI's court. And from the above article, the GoI has pushed the final decision to beyond 2019 and to the IAF. And guess which the IAF will choose?

"In my opinion, in the current scenario with home-grown light combat aircraft, or LCA, getting produced and with LCA Mark-1A and an order of 83 cleared by the government already, I do not foresee an immediate decision on any other single-engine fighter aircraft soon," the IAF official added.

- So much for squadron shortage.
- So much for a couple of F-Solah / Gripen squadrons joining the IAF right away.
- And what a downer that Tata-LM agreement in June 2017 was.
- Saab played this game better than LM. They did not jump to sign an agreement with the Adani Group after the Tata-LM annoncement.

Now look at the timeline. Assume it is 2020, when a final agreement is signed. Assume Gripen E (please no!) wins. It usually takes 3 years from signing of agreement to the first aircraft being delivered. Now we will be in 2023. FOC for vaporware is 2025. Babus will stretch the timeline for sure.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9781
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 20 Jul 2017 07:25

Gripen E: Beyond hype, reality is much stormier, much murkier, much scarier
http://indiandefencenews.in/gripen-e-be ... h-scarier/

if Indian Air Force which repeatedly refused to accept and allow mass production of IOC-II certified LCA-Tejas MK-1 aircraft in past, will have a difficult time explaining why it will be open to acquiring Gripen-E with limited capabilities when it has curtailed orders for Tejas MK-1 which will achieve its FOC by March 2017 and upgraded Tejas MK-1A could have already entered production by the time Swedes could have rolled out first Gripen-E for India.

March 2017 has come and gone. Just sayin'

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9781
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 20 Jul 2017 07:27

ldev wrote:Just one question:

If this same offer is made to China, what will China do? I can bet you they will offer to manufacture and buy 500 of whichever aircraft is chosen i.e. F16/Grippen with none of the endless debate and prevarication we seem to possess. Because their primary objective will be to see what they can learn from this aircraft and its manufacturing process. Why cant India do the same?

This is for you Saar:

Why India Can't make Copies?
http://indiandefencenews.in/why-india-cant-make-copies/

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9781
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 20 Jul 2017 07:30

Did French govt made a secret offer on Mirage-2000 to India?
http://idrw.org/did-french-govt-made-a- ... -to-india/

Speculation is also there that retired Mirage-2000 offered could be made of aircraft which were retired by Qatar and Brazil air force along with French air force.

12 Qatari M2Ks anyone? :D

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 20 Jul 2017 07:37

That guy is an EDITOR? :eek:
Is Chinese Shengyang etc, really "illegal copies" or just repainted, renamed, license-produced craft, same as the original? For example, was the HAL Ajeet an Illegal Low-level Copy of the De Havilland Gnat? If the made-in-India Su-30MKI is given an Indian name such as "AppuKutty30" does it become an Illegal Copy?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9781
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 20 Jul 2017 07:39

UB, the copy is so amazing...even the editor has a hard time figuring it out :D

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_Sharma » 20 Jul 2017 13:08

Cross posting from China thread:

BharataTalwar wrote:Does anyone else feel that Western msm are completely ignoring this opportunity to expose China for what they are? Why are they quiet about this? I have yet to find any major Western media or columnist cover this standoff in any meaningful way. It seems to indicate that they might stay neutral in the event of things kicking off between India and China. Its irking me how something so major can be ignored.



So much for "joined at hip" theory. They just want to sell us their outdated $hit

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_Sharma » 22 Jul 2017 02:21

Mort Walker wrote:What we are seeing now is the cost of strategic neglect by successive governments. If today there an additional 400 LCA, 1000 extra pieces of 155mm guns, and 500 additional Arjuns - it would have made this situation much easier to handle.

My guess is that eventually the IA will withdraw from Dok La given the strategic constraints. The argument will be made to fight another day and then everyone goes back to sleep dreaming of the next 5th gen. fighter aircraft.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4066
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby kit » 22 Jul 2017 04:25

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:What we are seeing now is the cost of strategic neglect by successive governments. If today there an additional 400 LCA, 1000 extra pieces of 155mm guns, and 500 additional Arjuns - it would have made this situation much easier to handle.

My guess is that eventually the IA will withdraw from Dok La given the strategic constraints. The argument will be made to fight another day and then everyone goes back to sleep dreaming of the next 5th gen. fighter aircraft.


No . . this will be another mini Siachen . IA is gonna be there for a looong time :mrgreen:

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 378
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby arvin » 22 Jul 2017 09:32

kit wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:


No . . this will be another mini Siachen . IA is gonna be there for a looong time :mrgreen:


If this happens chumbi valley and tri-junction will be even more secure than before doklam??

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_Sharma » 23 Jul 2017 05:13

Cross posting from cheeni thread:

Bade wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:What this whole episode teaches is that import purchases of offensive weapon systems must come to a halt. Weapon systems must be Made in India, albeit with imported engines and sensors. The Rafale contract needs to be cancelled and the Russian FGFA contract needs to be cancelled, and all plans to import another single engine aircraft needs to stop as well. Ramp up domestic production of the LCA-Tejas and Su-30MKI to 1000 in the next 3-5 years, and begin production work on the AMCA to something like a 4.5 Gen combat aircraft.


So absolutely true, as domestic production and its acceptance brings a confidence in self like no other can. The average public who sees the govt doing import after import of weapon systems, and the forces approving only of the same would naturally begin to question its self worth as a nation which can fight long wars...except in slow burn mode like insurgencies.

Sometimes even a hammer is useful to swat a fly, even if excessive. The best is to build in larger quantities what we know how to do already even if not an optimal solution. Nothing is optimal in war, it is not always a planned operation which goes 100% as envisioned at the start.


Mort Walker wrote:
fanne wrote:LCA is not yet ready, however we wish it was


It is more ready than the 300+ IAF Mig-21 and -27 which have reached the end of their useful life. We need 400 LCA Tejas now today! If there were 100 Tejas available to the IAF Eastern Air Command, on top of what there is now, the Chinese would not be spewing such vitriol.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3045
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Vips » 23 Jul 2017 18:20

Natasha lobby trying to sell MIG-35 to India as a light plane.


Director of Russia's Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation Dmitry Shugayev also said that Russia is ready to take part in India's tender for the supply of light fighter jets with its MiG-35 plane. :rotfl: :rotfl:



"I would like to note the demand for this aircraft for our own air force, as well as our foreign partners. The plane is light, multi-functional and has high manoeuvrability," Tarasenko said, adding that the MiG was also offering special commercial terms to its partners (lots of free supply of Vodka).


The MiG-35 is Russia's most advanced 4++ generation multipurpose fighter jet developed on the basis of the serial-produced MiG-29K/KUB and MiG-29M/M2 combat aircraft.


Just like the MIG 29K that was sold to Indian Navy was supposed to be an improved version of the old legacy aircraft. the same BS is being made of MIG 35 being an improved aircraft.

Finally look at the outright lies and bombastic claims.

Highlighting the main features of the MiG-35, Tarasenko said its technical specifications were close to a fifth generation aircraft, namely its flight capabilities, its new weapon range and defence systems, including stealth.


Stealth close to fifth generation aircraft,Guess they have finally figured out on how to make non-smoky engines. :rotfl: :rotfl: .
They are also setting expectations of the level of "stealth" we can expect from the FGFA should we go that route.


Director General of Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG Ilya Tarasenko said the MiG-35 was "the best"+ and definitely better than Lockheed Martin's fifth-generation combat aircraft F-35. He claimed that the MiG-35 would beat the American jet in air to air combat.


:rotfl: :rotfl:
Last edited by Vips on 23 Jul 2017 19:10, edited 3 times in total.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9869
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Yagnasri » 23 Jul 2017 18:27

MiG35 may be a good offer cost wise. But with the 29k maintenance mess, I do not see we are going for it.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 23 Jul 2017 18:41

Poojya desi ppl: Please spend some time on General Singha's Syria thread b4 u sneer at General Vodkov and Air Marshall Smirnoff. You lose a little credibility with ppl like me who have been spending a lot of time there.

The times have changed and maybe you entirely missed that if you were too busy praising Euro-American hardware here.

Let me just toss a gentle IED mubarak: Why are Russians, understaffed, under constant threat, thousands of miles from home in a hot, dusty desert with practically no facilities, able to keep up a fleet of about 60 planes for round-the-clock combat operations for over a year, with hardly any failures... And they have delivered a weapon load that is mind-boggling, compared to what the MUCH LARGER deployment of NATO/US air and sea-based air forces have been able to deliver, in a much longer time.

..but Indian AF wizards based on established home bases or aircraft carriers in peace-time, Aphsar Mess stocked with Johnny Walker and Kingfisher, with access to the entire Indian establishment, unable to maintain/operate the same types of aircraft without all this ro-dho? Something smells. Mostly like green currency.

To me it seems like a "duh" that the best route to combat-proven, hardy, rugged, leading-edge equipment, if the price is right, is to go with the Russian line. i.e. IF the objective is to protect your country and provide deterrence. I may be entirely wrong on that.

As for smoky engines, let's hold off sneering on that until the Kaveri is able to replace them, hain? Like the year 2065?

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3045
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Vips » 23 Jul 2017 19:18

Yagnasri wrote:MiG35 may be a good offer cost wise. But with the 29k maintenance mess, I do not see we are going for it.


Cost wise they are now claiming to be 20% cheaper (compared to the earlier time when they were 50% cheaper). Also cost wise 20% less compared to which other aircraft? Gripen E or F-16 Block 70 or F-35 with which the Director General of MIG was comparing his MIG 35 (aka old wine in new bottle).

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4891
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 23 Jul 2017 19:23

UlanBatori wrote:That guy is an EDITOR? :eek:
Is Chinese Shengyang etc, really "illegal copies" or just repainted, renamed, license-produced craft, same as the original? For example, was the HAL Ajeet an Illegal Low-level Copy of the De Havilland Gnat? If the made-in-India Su-30MKI is given an Indian name such as "AppuKutty30" does it become an Illegal Copy?



I wrote at length about this.

You can copy a document, a toy or a refrigerator.

But I firmly doubt that even Cheen can copy the thousands of moving parts in a Flanker each with their exact tolerances and material proportions (alloys and ceramics) and actually have something that can actually flies. Without direct help from the OEMs all you get from copying insanely sophisticated modern machines like fighter jets is a giant paperweight.

The Flanker as well as the EuroCopter variants that form the bulk of their air power are nothing but licenced production.

I posted the endless list of variants they built off their base purchase of the SU-27, the Dauphin and the Super Frelon. The fact that the Russians continue to supply engines for the Chini JF-17, J-20 and J-31 programs and the French continue to collaborate on the projects like the Z-11 and Z-15 means the original makers were and are in cahoots with these copies.

The ONLY difference between us and them is the terms of contract. They manage to leverage and negotiate full control of what they bought so they can build variants and numbers without issue.

We negotiate single run screwdriver giri that doesn't allow us to deviate a single screw from the contract.

We SHOULD be building all sorts of MKI flanker variants including a SU-33 navalized one.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9869
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Yagnasri » 23 Jul 2017 20:07

Vips wrote:
Yagnasri wrote:MiG35 may be a good offer cost wise. But with the 29k maintenance mess, I do not see we are going for it.


Cost wise they are now claiming to be 20% cheaper (compared to the earlier time when they were 50% cheaper). Also cost wise 20% less compared to which other aircraft? Gripen E or F-16 Block 70 or F-35 with which the Director General of MIG was comparing his MIG 35 (aka old wine in new bottle).


They have a great brochure no doubt. :D Great range. Thrust Vectoring and so on. But the maintenance availability will be very bad going by their past record on 29k and others. Unless they address that issue I am sure it will not get a look in. If it comes with its commonalities to Mig29s of IAF it may be a good buy.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 23 Jul 2017 20:18

See again about difference in record of IAF/IN maintaining MiGs/Sus vs. Russians maintaining them. Why is it so?

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8931
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Mort Walker » 23 Jul 2017 20:21

Let me just toss a gentle IED mubarak: Why are Russians, understaffed, under constant threat, thousands of miles from home in a hot, dusty desert with practically no facilities, able to keep up a fleet of about 60 planes for round-the-clock combat operations for over a year, with hardly any failures... And they have delivered a weapon load that is mind-boggling, compared to what the MUCH LARGER deployment of NATO/US air and sea-based air forces have been able to deliver, in a much longer time.


Yak herder-ji,

Any actual figures about number of sorties and hours of flying time by Ivan in Syria? There is also the question of what sort of logistical chain do they have. Ru-Af may be cannibalizing other aircraft at home for parts.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9255
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 23 Jul 2017 20:25

There is literally no data out there for comparison in the open source in terms of mission reliability rates, logistical footprint etc on that deployment. Also no clear comparison of the US/Allied vs Russian engagements in terms of Air Power in the region. Russia has been using a mix of quite modern kit (S400s for defense, ALCMs, Su-30s and Su-35s and even quite recently delivered Su-34s) and older equipment (Su 24's and 25s) in theater.
Last edited by brar_w on 23 Jul 2017 20:38, edited 1 time in total.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8931
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Mort Walker » 23 Jul 2017 20:30

Yagnasri wrote:They have a great brochure no doubt. :D Great range. Thrust Vectoring and so on. But the maintenance availability will be very bad going by their past record on 29k and others. Unless they address that issue I am sure it will not get a look in. If it comes with its commonalities to Mig29s of IAF it may be a good buy.


IFF India is going to be a world class power, then it must have a domestic military industrial complex. The IAF and IN Mig-29s must be phased out for the LCA, again albeit with imported engines from GE and imported sensors. The only other combat aircraft that should be there is the Su-30MKI which should increase in license production to 500+ over the next 5-7 years. This nonsense of the Mig-35 must stop.

<off-topic>
Today in India the best and brightest kids want to do medicine and software. Rather if we had a military industrial complex of state and private companies, they can offer jobs and scholarships to the best and brightest kids, so that a culture of advanced engineering manufacturing can be established. It is the only way for India to be a world class power. Look at the lessons from the US from the 1950s on wards to see how the military industrial complex became so established.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9869
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Yagnasri » 23 Jul 2017 21:02

Increasing SU30mki numbers will happen. It is only matter of time. But unfortunately investing in large scale production of LCA is not happening. Unless there are a large order and significant investment in production capability is made immediately LCA will go in the may of Marut. Increased production of all versions of LCA can be good for offering the same to other nations like Vietnam for sale.

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby VKumar » 23 Jul 2017 21:36

I see follow on orders to Rafale. Expect at least 2 more squadrons, maybe 5 more. Decision will be made after IAF sees performance of the first arrivals.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 23 Jul 2017 21:51

Point is that Russians are fighting and winning a war thousands of miles away from home. If they are cannibalizing, whatever, at least they are able to do it.

And Indians are sitting at home and :(( about inability to even keep the same types of planes flying in peacetime. If India has no cannibals, well, maybe there are a few open positions in the IAF for the Nicobar Sentinels? (sorry!! No insult intended to those gentle ppl) And the NATO/US basically proved to be incompetent (or worse) and lazy morons after 5 years of "fighting ISIS" and not being able to find a single convoy carrying millions of gallons of fuel hundreds of miles through open desert. :roll: Dumbasss city!

For actual figures, sortie rates etc one can look at the shrinking map of ISIS-infested Syria. And the complete non-contribution of NATO/USA to that in any positive manner (sure, some air strikes in SUPPORT of terrorists, and on civilians/kitten shelters, five successful takeoffs of Les Rafales from Le Gros Tub Vieux de Champagne, all done with beautiful prima donna precision and bombastic PR, but as for anything positive, they don't count a fa*t in a thunderstorm.

IMO, the point of these gizmos is to prevent or win wars, hain?

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ldev » 23 Jul 2017 22:18

^^
If the problem is IAF maintenance for Russian aircraft then how does the IAF's Mirage 2000 fleet have much better availability? It's the same IAF maintenance crew looking after both sets of aircraft. And that is why the IAF is in love with French aircraft..... it look's like, irrespective of the cost.....

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3045
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Vips » 23 Jul 2017 23:49

Fact is that MIG29's have a horrendous rate of availability and does it's job of occupying hangar space very effectively. Reason those birds were available for less then half the cost of a comparable Euro fighter was because their MTBO was even less.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 24 Jul 2017 02:42

Vips: You are repeating the same thing over and over again. India is not able to get good use from the MiG-29. So I will repeat the question: Why are Russians in Syria able to conduct the war as well as they have, with the same equipment, under much worse conditions? Has no one in IAF/IN asked this question yet? Why not?

About France, reason for happiness may be more Training Courses in Paris in Summer vs. Murmansk in Winter. I don't know. Or maybe because Mirage 2000 is a lot older than MiG-29 and hence less sophisticated. The French are not able to get much use from their Rafales over Syria. Does Mirage 2000 fly off ships? Operate in salty environments? Survive repeated carrier landings?

So the evidence is before your eyes: The Russians have turned the war in Syria around, using this equipment. OK, I don't know the role of MiG-29s per se over Syria, but their Su-24s, Su-25s, Su-30s have really been amazingly productive. Obviously the engine quality and overall manufacturing quality cannot be that much worse unless India bought MiG-29 not from Mikoyan but from Mohammed-Iqbal-Gurumurthy of Ummah Aircraft and Cattle.

As of 2013, the MiG-29 is in production by Mikoyan, a subsidiary of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) since 2006.Obyedinyonnaya Aviastroitelnaya Korporatsiya (OAK))


From seeing people repeat same answer without any sign of thinking, I must say that the problem is that in India people do whatever they do without thinking. Evidence-based conclusion.

Per Wikipedia, RD-33 engines for MiG29 are built under license in India...

Maybe the right answer is that the Russian manuals have not been properly understood. Maybe they teach Russians much more than they teach Indians. Maybe Russian factory mechanics are sent to the front along with the Air Force. Maybe India did not order nearly enough spare parts. But if there is no thinking on this, Indians are spending twice as much money getting systems that in war, are inferior. And that can be truly fatal.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 Jul 2017 03:54

^^^MiG 29s
"Algeria is returning 12 RSK MiG-29SMT single-seat fighters and UBT-model trainers to Russia, after refusing to accept the aircraft amid allegations of poor manufacturing quality.

The aircraft are part of a package for 34 MiG-29SMT/UBTs worth $1.3 billion, with an additional $500 million for the modernisation of 36 early-model MiG-29s acquired for $18 million each from Belarus and Ukraine.

These should have been upgraded to the SMT/UBT standard, but following shipment of the first batch last year, the Algerian air force found that some "new" equipment actually dated back to the early 1990s, when the aircraft had been manufactured.

RSK MiG says all avionics and targeting equipment supplied with the aircraft is new, and reflects its current production variants. :)

Algeria also took delivery of its first three of 28 Sukhoi Su-30MKA two-seat multirole fighters between December 2007 and January, and is now negotiating with Russia's Rosoboronexport arms agency for a further batch of the aircraft to replace its unwanted MiGs. [They are coming our way] :)

Sources say Algeria also wants to use some of the money from the abandoned deal to buy additional Yakovlev Yak-130A trainers, with these to join 16 aircraft ordered with the MiG and Sukhoi fighters as part of a wider arms package worth $8 billion signed with Russia in 2006.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 9s-221771/

Your mileage will vary. I'm sure IAF MiG29s would make mince meat of the opposition in Syria. But as luck has it, the Syrians are are not on our dance card so we won't know.

BTW, fresh on the heels of their success on the MiG29K, the Russians are intent on selling us a '6G' a/c

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 721830.cms
Last edited by Cosmo_R on 24 Jul 2017 04:07, edited 2 times in total.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 Jul 2017 04:05

The 9 (Nazgul) Qatari M2Ks and the French offer of 'retired' Jaguars

Lightly used Jaguar single owner. Low mileage
http://www.urbanghostsmedia.com/wp-cont ... wall-2.jpg

The nine Qs are here somewhere. But hey! look at these other bargains just $1.50 on the dollar :)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/galle ... boneyards/

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_Sharma » 24 Jul 2017 05:39

UlanBatori wrote:Poojya desi ppl: Please spend some time on General Singha's Syria thread b4 u sneer at General Vodkov and Air Marshall Smirnoff. You lose a little credibility with ppl like me who have been spending a lot of time there.

The times have changed and maybe you entirely missed that if you were too busy praising Euro-American hardware here.

Let me just toss a gentle IED mubarak: Why are Russians, understaffed, under constant threat, thousands of miles from home in a hot, dusty desert with practically no facilities, able to keep up a fleet of about 60 planes for round-the-clock combat operations for over a year, with hardly any failures... And they have delivered a weapon load that is mind-boggling, compared to what the MUCH LARGER deployment of NATO/US air and sea-based air forces have been able to deliver, in a much longer time.

..but Indian AF wizards based on established home bases or aircraft carriers in peace-time, Aphsar Mess stocked with Johnny Walker and Kingfisher, with access to the entire Indian establishment, unable to maintain/operate the same types of aircraft without all this ro-dho? Something smells. Mostly like green currency.

To me it seems like a "duh" that the best route to combat-proven, hardy, rugged, leading-edge equipment, if the price is right, is to go with the Russian line. i.e. IF the objective is to protect your country and provide deterrence. I may be entirely wrong on that.

As for smoky engines, let's hold off sneering on that until the Kaveri is able to replace them, hain? Like the year 2065?


Ulan jee I had similar thoughts last year, then Karan M explained to me:

. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7029&p=2045831&hilit=Manish#p2045831
Manish wrote:
When Russians started their air campaign in Syria, my heart went out to them. Tchhh! I thought now their aircrafts are going to fall out of sky due to the inferiority of their tech. They don't have any air to air adversery and still their aircrafts will go down, the western media will mock them.

But as the campaign continued, day after day, week after week & month after month no russian aircraft fell out of sky.

Strange thing happened what was a sympathy for russians turned into anger for them slowly, how come our migs and sukhois keep crashing while russian ones don't?

The answer is simple, they supply 3rd rate stuff to us, don't respect the contracts, supply of parts is inadequate.

It can't be that IAF ground staff or HAL manufacturing is so inferior as to have that much of efficiency gap as "IAF crashes" vs "No Syrian campaign crash" with russians. Though a certain russia loving poster indicates in that direction indirectly many times.

Spanking new Mig 29k continue to show the great advances of russian technology in patheticness of sea wasp engines and fuel tanks falling of the fighter.

It seems IAF was ok to have a super expensive m2k upgrade + equally expensive weapons package from france.

Now all the reports are indicating that weapons package of Rafale is included in the price of 7.87 billions euros. Though why meteor is bought is a mystery as it was indicated before here that Rafale can't make use of full benefits from meteor like ef2k can as it has two way communication with meteor, while Rafale is single side.



Karan M explained:


Manish, being the manufacturer they can stockpile more parts and probably spend more on spares.

If you see the revenue and capital budgets - under congress govt, both were declining constantly. The usual trick is to announce a great budget (spare come under revenue) and then return the money to finmin using pliant bureaucrats in MOD who hinder acquisition. And also use leverage on certain services, acquisition folks to announce and push for grandiose capital expenditure even while revenue budget is a mess.
Some platforms which were "first time" for russia end up being full of bugs which india ended up debugging. Su-30 is an example. Albeit successful to a degree. It can attain 70% plus rates, current is 60% (up from 50% when Parrikar came).

MiG-29K, T-90 are somewhat unsuccessful ones. T-90 can still be fixed if India manages the TI sight issue.

Regarding Su-30, the last holdout is its EW fit. The simpler answer there is to bypass DARE/complex multi-vendor fits and just take whatever works on that planform from Russia.

For those who asked what the answer for R77 non availability is - its Astra. That has to be the long term answer and even the short one, from next year.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 24 Jul 2017 06:01

Manish, being the manufacturer they can stockpile more parts and probably spend more on spares.


Thx. I didn't want to post the way Wikipedia expressed the reason for Indian (and other) unhappiness about Mig29:
Gen IV fighters need more (sophisticated) maintenance...
meaning more parts need to be removed and replaced and refurbished faster. That does not (necessarily) mean that Chalta Hai Maintenance Ltd is not going to work here. But it does mean large spare parts bijnej. Meaning lots of post-sales revenue.

Many saal pehle, I was a 1.5yr PIGS sitting in a aiaa yaks conpherenj. The lunch speech was given by a DupleeCity Aerospace Lawyer, of South African origin.
He started:
On the first day of any war, American combat airplanes are the Best In The World!

Wild applause from the yak crowd there. But I knew where he was going, he had an evil grin and I used to read aiaa astronautics& aeronautics cover to cover in those dins (no PeeAref then).
On the second day they don't take off

Pindrop silence except for one PIGS laughing and the rest of the yak herd glaring at him. :eek:
That was the guy (I mean the South African) who taught me the Legend of Kezunga. But we'll keep that for another time.
At the time those were Gen IV fighters hitting operational realities for the first time, and the lawyer was pointing to the gross underbudgeting of maintenance and spares.
This is something for us to mull. If these Gen 5 fighters need not only spares, but sophisticated robotic facilities to repair them, v r ********. On the first day those facilities are going to become rubble, from the shower of mijjiles/UCAVs coming over. How the pakistan do we get those fancy Gen 5/ Gen 6s back in the air after that, hain?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 24 Jul 2017 06:07

The corollary to the above, is that Gen. Vodkov and Air Marshal Smirnoff did not lie to Putin about the extent of spares and maintenance needed to conduct Syria operations. They took all those along. So why are desi Air Fauj jarnails not facing up to reality?

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby negi » 24 Jul 2017 08:24

I think we have to look inwards that is what UB is saying getting defensive and trying to argue based on the premise that suppliers are making a chootiy@ out of us is pointless for that is a given for all those who import such stuff . The point being raised is not about why we cannot make a fourth or fifth generation fighter the question is why we cannot even maintain those for which we actually signed a deal for local manufacture .

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 200
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Luxtor » 24 Jul 2017 08:51

UlanBatori wrote:That guy is an EDITOR? :eek:
Is Chinese Shengyang etc, really "illegal copies" or just repainted, renamed, license-produced craft, same as the original? For example, was the HAL Ajeet an Illegal Low-level Copy of the De Havilland Gnat? If the made-in-India Su-30MKI is given an Indian name such as "AppuKutty30" does it become an Illegal Copy?


LOL, If it was up to me I'd call it "AmmuKutty30" after my daughter, which is what I call her. The word "kutty" means the little one in an endearing way but there is nothing little about the MKI 30; it is a huge beast.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests