'Make in India' Single engined fighter

barath_s
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 03 Apr 2017 10:40

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby barath_s » 15 Feb 2018 18:15

Austin wrote: Who the hell are they...

This looks like a blackmail either you cancel FGFA or we wont let you buy F-35


They are the guys who have sweated blood, toil , years and $$$$$$ to create their technology.

You can't force someone to sell you their stuff.

And technology can easily leak into another program. Someone in maintenance can look at ram, dismantling the plane etc and then go to work on fgfa development. That would lose the crown jewels.

In any case , this is a floater from the AF and 3rd parties. The navy has already got the classified briefing the air force is just thinking about. And most of the journey to a deal is well after that.

The air force has been bad mouthing everyone except their flavor of the hour. If they feel the fgfa is a bad deal, then they could quit it. Shit or get off the pot

They need to work constructively for a clear procurement vision and backup plans along with the other stakeholders

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 15 Feb 2018 18:35

The navy has already got the classified briefing the air force is just thinking about.


Where did you get that from?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby NRao » 15 Feb 2018 19:09

brar_w wrote:
The navy has already got the classified briefing the air force is just thinking about.


Where did you get that from?


Does not say "classified" ...........................

http://smartinvestor.business-standard. ... oWNjKjwaQA


The Indian Navy, which has never ruled out operating the F-35 off Indian aircraft carriers, has received a briefing on the F-35 as far back as 2010, Lockheed Martin official Orville Prins told this correspondent.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 15 Feb 2018 19:13

I bet there have been more briefings since then but not the classified briefings which requires that a perspective customer communicate interest and that the vendor or PO formally apply for clearances to make it happen. Back in the day, potential partners and interested parties were given the ability to participate in the virtual air-air and air-ground analysis of concept and performance as they decided upon their participation. A lot of the current partners, requested and received a lot of time at the Wright Patterson AFB's Simulation and Analysis facility to further test capability (requirements at the time) and tactics against a spectrum of represented threats. One would assume that since then, a lot of these classified presentations would focus on actual FTD and capabilities that are not publicly shared.
Last edited by brar_w on 15 Feb 2018 19:19, edited 2 times in total.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5251
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 15 Feb 2018 19:17

Austin wrote:To believe in Ajai Shukla and his unnamed IAF sources is a Leap of Faith , All his recent write up is against the current Gobermant.

Except that the same has also been reported by Saurabh Joshi.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby NRao » 15 Feb 2018 19:27

I agree.

A "classified" briefing *has to be* OKed by both the DoD and the SD. At the highest levels, I would say. That can happen only if a country requests it through the official channels, not a service or a vendor. So, I very much doubt that this 2010 IN-LM "briefing" is actually "classified". What was it - I have no clue.


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 15 Feb 2018 19:38

Unlassified briefings to potential suppliers (offset partners), customers and even the media are quite routine and happen all the time on the sideline of trade shows, and various other events where there is interaction between a potential operator/customer, supplier etc. They may even be requested directly as many do while they are doing a market survey in support of a future program. It is only a serious interest which goes through G2G channels that leads to the vendor or the program office obtaining a clearance to begin providing classified briefings and answering questions, answers to which may not be possible without proper clearance.

Anyway, if any of this is true, those working on the USDOD or SD beat would likely pick it up and report what they get from their sources. We'll know soon enough if such a request has actually gone out or the unnamed officials cited by BS/AS were just making stuff up.
Last edited by brar_w on 15 Feb 2018 21:43, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21824
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Austin » 15 Feb 2018 20:15

Viv S wrote:
Austin wrote:To believe in Ajai Shukla and his unnamed IAF sources is a Leap of Faith , All his recent write up is against the current Gobermant.

Except that the same has also been reported by Saurabh Joshi.


Means nothing when both quote unnamed source , for all you know their unnamed sources may be the same person who is clueless or their own desire to push something as unnamed sources , to give credbility to their own story it is better they quote some one and generally speaking for any defence reporting after all we have all heard off how our Jurnos unnamed sources leads to.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21824
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Austin » 15 Feb 2018 20:17

Just end of last month we got this news not sure how credible this too is

Calm down everyone, there’s no plan to put an F-35 production line in India

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5251
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 15 Feb 2018 20:29

Austin wrote:Means nothing when both quote unnamed source , for all you know their unnamed sources may be the same person who is clueless or their own desire to push something as unnamed sources , to give credbility to their own story it is better they quote some one and generally speaking for any defence reporting after all we have all heard off how our Jurnos unnamed sources leads to.

It is common practice for reporters to quoted unnamed sources - that doesn't mean most of the media's reporting is made up. Maintaining the anonymity of your source is one of the core tenets of journalism - especially when your sources may not be authorized to speak to the media on the record.

Aside from the fact that there are two journalists who have reported the story, its credibility is further bolstered by the fact that there are no obvious beneficiaries of a 'plant' here. LM has been trying to downplay the F-35 option and its competitors obviously have no interest in introducing this new angle. Cui bono?

Besides, many of us saw this coming. The GoI wants a US type for geopolitical reasons, the IAF wants an increment in its numbers for strategic reasons and the SEF/F-16 is an unsuitable option for obvious reasons.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5251
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 15 Feb 2018 20:35

Austin wrote:Just end of last month we got this news not sure how credible this too is

Calm down everyone, there’s no plan to put an F-35 production line in India

That was with regard to a poorly drafted PTI report that quoted LM advertising the existence of F-35-derived tech on the F-16. Many outlets misquoted that report leading to LM issuing a clarification.

Entirely different situation here. The articles by Ajai Shukla & Saurabh Joshi, in contrast, are very unambiguous; they aren't going to 'clarify' their pieces when called on it. I don't think the IAF is likely to issue a rebuttal either.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35823
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby SaiK » 15 Feb 2018 22:48

I support and vote for Tejas platform/team as the NEXT GEN SEF. This is a gradual tech sharing process & methodology to integrate many LRUs with multiple product assets we are moving into. IAF has a history of asks that meets Russian Eco of Scales to Western technology and standards. Interop is the market area for India. Clean example is Brahmos. But then that was a small venture.

Core areas - Engines, Sensors, Radars, Stealth, Weapons integrn. These core tech can come from any country. It is much more worth investment for both our defence and external defense market needs.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2018 02:35

For all the talk that BRF's import lobby claims that the IAF will induct 250 - 300 Tejas aircraft in total (in addition to 200 F-16s and 100 F-18s), this is the actual reality. Almost two year old article, but still very relevant today. This is always the end goal of the American MIC.

Troubles, They Come in Battalions: The Manifold Travails of the Indian Air Force
http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/03/28 ... -pub-63123

by Ashley J Tellis

The IAF should revisit some aspects of its current approach. It should be CAUTIOUS about expanding the Tejas acquisition beyond SIX squadrons and consider enlarging the MMRCA component with the cheapest fourth-generation-plus Western fighter available. India should also REASSESS the decision to develop the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft indigenously and avoid weakening the collaboration with Russia on the PAK-FA program.


India should expand its investments in advanced munitions, combat support aircraft, electronic warfare, physical infrastructure, and pilot proficiency—all current strengths—while being realistic about its domestic capacity to produce sophisticated combat aircraft. Indian policymakers must especially guard against the TEMPTATION to prioritize indigenous design and manufacture over the imperative of providing the IAF’s able pilots with the best fighters available.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2018 02:42

Viv S wrote:
Rakesh wrote:The IAF cannot afford 126 F-35As. It will break the bank. Expect nothing more than 2 - 3 squadrons. And that too, if they successfully hammer a deal. And that is a big IF.

Well it also depends on the context and time-frame. What we're contemplating on the fighter front right now is -

- Tejas Mk1A: 4 squadrons
- Su-30MKI: 2 squadrons
- Rafale: 1-2 squadrons
- SEF: 6 squadrons
- Su-57: 6 squadrons

Plus a $6 bn upfront contribution to the PAK FA-reimbursement fund FGFA program.

Take the Su-57 out of the equation and the IAF's receipts register is clear post-2025 all the way to 2035 (when the AMCA may enter the picture). Maybe the Tejas Mk2 (though the prognosis for that program isn't good), but that's unlikely to be very expensive.

Over the short term (upto 2025) yes, not more than 2-3 squadrons of the F-35 are feasible.

I would take the last two out of the equation. There are unknown variables. SEF is teetering and PAK-FA is an enigma. Rafale is a confirmed two squadrons at 36 aircraft. IF they successfully hammer out a deal, they can get two squadrons for the IAF and two squadrons for the IN in the short term. Around 80 aircraft in all. G2G deal. Non-FACO line, off the shelf. Station the two F-35A squadrons at an airbase in the Eastern theatre. That will be a F-35 airbase which the Amreekis can inspect every square inch of the bird, 24-7 x 365, to remove any doubts of hanky-panky from our side. And station the F-35Bs in Goa (when not out at sea).

Despite the Navy's wish to get 57 new naval fighters (basically Western aircraft), budgetary constraints will force the Navy to curtail that number. If the MoD turned down the Navy's request for a nuclear powered aircraft carrier, you can be sure the MoD Babu will get an asthma attack when he sees the cost of 57 brand-new, Western fighters.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2018 08:07

barath_s wrote:They are the guys who have sweated blood, toil , years and $$$$$$ to create their technology.

You can't force someone to sell you their stuff.

And technology can easily leak into another program. Someone in maintenance can look at ram, dismantling the plane etc and then go to work on fgfa development. That would lose the crown jewels.

In any case , this is a floater from the AF and 3rd parties. The navy has already got the classified briefing the air force is just thinking about. And most of the journey to a deal is well after that.

The air force has been bad mouthing everyone except their flavor of the hour. If they feel the fgfa is a bad deal, then they could quit it. Shit or get off the pot

They need to work constructively for a clear procurement vision and backup plans along with the other stakeholders

Assuming we do not get Su-57 and go in for F-35 onlee.

1) What stops India from getting Su-57, after all F-35 deliveries are complete? To honour that, would mean there has to be something in a F-35 contract that would bar India from getting any Russian stealth technology. Would India agree to such a thing?

2) What stops someone in maintenance - using your own scenario - to look at the plane and then go gleefully telling the Russians about the F-35?

I believe Shulka Saar has come up with his own version of events to fill up words in an article. Journalists do that at times. As I said earlier, artistic journalism and India is famous for that.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5251
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 16 Feb 2018 08:35

The F-16 Block 70 has been termed as old technology that LM is pushing hard for the IAF — what do you plan to do to take the discussions forward, especially as the IAF, to mitigate the shortfall of fighters, is acquiring the indigenous ‘Tejas’ Light Combat Aircraft (LCA)?

The F-16 Block 70 being offered specifically to India is uniquely the best state-of-the-art fighter. No other advanced fourth-generation platform even comes close to matching the record of real-world combat experience and proven operational effectiveness. The India-specific state-of-the-art fighter on offer and its programme’s size, scope and success enables Indian industry to take advantage of unprecedented manufacturing, upgrade and sustainment opportunities well into the future. As you are aware, the IAF is keen on the F-35 and is also not keen on single-engine aircraft… Many of the systems used on the India-specific platform are derived from key lessons learned and technologies from Lockheed Martin’s F-22 and the F-35, the world’s only operational fifth-generation fighters. It is important to note that all three variants of the F-35 are single-engine aircraft.

- Vivek Lall, VP, Lockheed Martin

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2018 08:43

Good find Viv Saar!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ramana » 16 Feb 2018 08:52

Rakesh wrote:For all the talk that BRF's import lobby claims that the IAF will induct 250 - 300 Tejas aircraft in total (in addition to 200 F-16s and 100 F-18s), this is the actual reality. Almost two year old article, but still very relevant today. This is always the end goal of the American MIC.

Troubles, They Come in Battalions: The Manifold Travails of the Indian Air Force
http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/03/28 ... -pub-63123

by Ashley J Tellis

The IAF should revisit some aspects of its current approach. It should be CAUTIOUS about expanding the Tejas acquisition beyond SIX squadrons and consider enlarging the MMRCA component with the cheapest fourth-generation-plus Western fighter available. India should also REASSESS the decision to develop the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft indigenously and avoid weakening the collaboration with Russia on the PAK-FA program.


India should expand its investments in advanced munitions, combat support aircraft, electronic warfare, physical infrastructure, and pilot proficiency—all current strengths—while being realistic about its domestic capacity to produce sophisticated combat aircraft. Indian policymakers must especially guard against the TEMPTATION to prioritize indigenous design and manufacture over the imperative of providing the IAF’s able pilots with the best fighters available.




Reminds me of Raj Kumar dialogue in Waqt and equally facetious.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19532
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 16 Feb 2018 09:31

Wonders will never cease.Ashley Tell-US saying we should not weaken the FGFA JV with Russia and reassess the AMCA programme!

Wise advice as the difficulties we're having putting into production and service the LCA MK-1, nightmares can be expected on the AMCA as despite 30 yrs of LCA dev., still such a huge qty. of it is imported. This may be becos of the fact that the Chinese are operationalising their stealth birds despite their incomplete full performance parameters and capability in much the same way we're doing with the LCA MK-1.The IAF too he well know is a very long shot into the future for reasons that can be discussed elsewhere.

Where he is spot on is acquiring ( western) medium fighters at reasonable cost.But that's just the problem! The Rafale is vastly overpriced, M2K upgrades stalled now over Labour costs, without the extra costs demanded by HAL,are $50M a pop at base rate! That's at least $10M more than a new MIG-35 with almost equivalent capability and in some respects like dogfighting with its TVC engines superior.Depending upon the most optimistic pricing a Rafale will come in at around $100M.whereas an upgraded MIG-29 would be 1/3rd the cost!

He has not mentioned the Gripen anywhere.If it comes in at around $60-70M a pop, it stands a better chance to make its debut in Indian skies.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 16 Feb 2018 11:24

Rakesh wrote: 1) What stops India from getting Su-57, after all F-35 deliveries are complete? To honour that, would mean there has to be something in a F-35 contract that would bar India from getting any Russian stealth technology. Would India agree to such a thing?

2) What stops someone in maintenance - using your own scenario - to look at the plane and then go gleefully telling the Russians about the F-35?

I believe Shulka Saar has come up with his own version of events to fill up words in an article. Journalists do that at times. As I said earlier, artistic journalism and India is famous for that.
If that is correct, it could be because India is CO-DEVELOPING a stealth fighter with the Russians. Experience with the F-35 could influence decisions.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 16 Feb 2018 11:29

Rakesh wrote:For all the talk that BRF's import lobby claims that the IAF will induct 250 - 300 Tejas aircraft in total (in addition to 200 F-16s and 100 F-18s), this is the actual reality. Almost two year old article, but still very relevant today. This is always the end goal of the American MIC.

Troubles, They Come in Battalions: The Manifold Travails of the Indian Air Force
http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/03/28 ... -pub-63123

by Ashley J Tellis

The IAF should revisit some aspects of its current approach. It should be CAUTIOUS about expanding the Tejas acquisition beyond SIX squadrons and consider enlarging the MMRCA component with the cheapest fourth-generation-plus Western fighter available. India should also REASSESS the decision to develop the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft indigenously and avoid weakening the collaboration with Russia on the PAK-FA program.


India should expand its investments in advanced munitions, combat support aircraft, electronic warfare, physical infrastructure, and pilot proficiency—all current strengths—while being realistic about its domestic capacity to produce sophisticated combat aircraft. Indian policymakers must especially guard against the TEMPTATION to prioritize indigenous design and manufacture over the imperative of providing the IAF’s able pilots with the best fighters available.
Ashley's also advocating not abandoning the PAKFA - is he lobbying for the Russian MIC as well ?

Will
BRFite
Posts: 609
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Will » 16 Feb 2018 14:13

Viv S wrote:
Austin wrote:Looks more like carrot dangling not sure if the news is even if the news is reliable because MOD and IAF has not responded to it.

The source acc. to the article is not LM, its the IAF. LM would much rather shut down this F-35 talk, so that it doesn't affect the prospects of the F-16 in India (which is a much more lucrative deal for them).


Its high time India went and made it clear to LM that India is not interested in an antique. If the US wants to build its relations with India and LM wants a share of the Indian defence market they should stop trying to sell us products that are end of life and will be considered junk in half a decade with the emerging scenario filled with stealth fighters in the neighbourhood.

As most posters in here aside have been advocating India really needs to step up on R&D and build its own products. Rope in private players for the AMCA like they did for the ATAGS. Its true that no private player has experience in building aircraft in India but what a private player can bring in is the ability to go beyond the rules and salary caps in govt organisations and higher the best brains in the business from around the world. Another example is L&T and the nuclear submarine project. For the moment the public-private partnership route seems the best way of getting results. The govt should throw its full weight behind forging such partnerships and finance them.

Till we start building our own products there will always be countries trying to take advantage of us and put us in a straight jacket.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 16 Feb 2018 15:48

Its high time India went and made it clear to LM that India is not interested in an antique. If the US wants to build its relations with India and LM wants a share of the Indian defence market they should stop trying to sell us products that are end of life and will be considered junk in half a decade with the emerging scenario filled with stealth fighters in the neighbourhood


Any OEM will sell, and push the product which best matches to the information they are receiving from the customer. Around the world in tenders where it is clearly stipulated that higher capability is requisite and that the customer is willing to pay for it, Lockheed has gone out and offered the F-35 instead. In this case, if there was explicit requirement for low observables or higher capability lockheed would have done the same. But in the backdrop of a failed MMRCA, which failed due to ballooning cost of TOT and local manufacturers (if media reports are to be believed), I wouldn't blame them for offering which is likely a cheaper MII deal amongst the aircraft in their portfolio. Similarly, SAAB is offering the Gripen-E and not another paper project that the keeps doing the rounds on the internet (their stealth aircraft). Most of us think that this is a redundant purchase and a complete waste of time and resources..but the answer isn't for OEMs to stop offering (they will throw their hat in if they think there is money to be made) but for the MOD/IAF to look into what it is asking for and whether that is reasonable. With Higher LCA production now a virtual guarantee, and more capable variant down the road, the RFP for the SEF should be scrapped. If they need more foreign fighters, let them make a case for it and demand based on identified capability gaps after factoring in capability which can fielded, now with good confidence, by domestic systems.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2018 18:08

KrishnaK wrote:If that is correct, it could be because India is CO-DEVELOPING a stealth fighter with the Russians. Experience with the F-35 could influence decisions.

Welcome Back :)

We are NOT co-developing anything, despite what the Russians claim in the media. The Russians are not allowing us anywhere near that plane. They want OUR money to 'assist' in developing the bird themselves and then they will give us a model like the Su-30MKI assembly. We will learn nothing from PAK-FA assembly, just like we learnt nothing from Rambha assembly.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2018 18:17

KrishnaK wrote:Ashley's also advocating not abandoning the PAKFA - is he lobbying for the Russian MIC as well ?

Read what he is saying again. But for ease, I will reproduce it...

India should also REASSESS the decision to develop the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft indigenously and avoid weakening the collaboration with Russia on the PAK-FA program.

So he is asking India to re-think the decision on developing AMCA indigeniously, because he believes the collaboration with Russia on PAK-FA has value.

Some on this forum believe AMCA is the next big deal, due to the F414 "next-gen" engine tech :roll:

How will India learn anything if the Russians are not allowing us anywhere near the development of the plane? The author is sorely mistaken, if he thinks India will get help from anyone - of VALUE - on AMCA development. Sensors, Radar, Carbon Fibre, Composites, Design, Engine....we will be doing it all by ourselves onlee.

After Sukhoi 'mistake', India to go for Russian 5th-generation fighter only on full-tech transfer pact
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 546519.cms

"Though bulk of the 272 Sukhois (240 inducted till now) contracted from Russia have been made by Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL), they have been basically assembled here with imported knocked-down kits. HAL still cannot manufacture the Sukhois on its own," said a source. A HAL-made Sukhoi (around Rs 450 crore) also costs Rs 100 crore more than the price of the same jet imported from Russia.

India has now laid down two essential prerequisites for the FGFA project, apart from examining its entire cost-effectiveness. One, there should be extensive technology transfer, including the "source codes", to ensure India can in the future upgrade the fighter with integration of new weapons on its own. Two, it should directly help the indigenous FGFA project called the advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA), the preliminary design work for which is now under way, as was earlier reported by TOI

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 17 Feb 2018 02:18

This is exactly what is frustrating Tellis Saar....

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/964399518153232385 ---> Neither America nor Russia can really afford to throw an 'either with us or with them' tantrum when dealing with India. New Delhi will always maintain diversified strategic industrial interactions, claims by some 'think-tankers' notwithstanding.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 17 Feb 2018 02:54

Rakesh wrote:
KrishnaK wrote:Ashley's also advocating not abandoning the PAKFA - is he lobbying for the Russian MIC as well ?

Read what he is saying again. But for ease, I will reproduce it...

India should also REASSESS the decision to develop the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft indigenously and avoid weakening the collaboration with Russia on the PAK-FA program.

So he is asking India to re-think the decision on developing AMCA indigeniously, because he believes the collaboration with Russia on PAK-FA has value.

Some on this forum believe AMCA is the next big deal, due to the F414 "next-gen" engine tech :roll:

How will India learn anything if the Russians are not allowing us anywhere near the development of the plane? The author is sorely mistaken, if he thinks India will get help from anyone - of VALUE - on AMCA development. Sensors, Radar, Carbon Fibre, Composites, Design, Engine....we will be doing it all by ourselves onlee.


Thanks for reproducing it, I read it the first time around. Let me attempt to explain better - He's saying don't bet on the AMCA because India's capacity to make it is limited. It's a matter of evaluating risk. Saying we can do it, all we need is the will power is about as dumb as it gets. Singing hum honge kamiyaab is not going to reduce the risk, cost or time required to develop new technology. Neither is accusing somebody, whether it's ashley tellis or forum members, of being American MIC agints. Our behaviour is pretty close to our cousins the Pakis, no ?

Incidentally Ashley was right when he said India should've chosen the teens for the MMRCA.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 17 Feb 2018 02:57

This is why India *MUST* develop her own weapon platforms and systems. The price of your own wares is invaluable.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7625&p=2252125#p2252125

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 17 Feb 2018 03:08

Rakesh wrote:This is exactly what is frustrating Tellis Saar....

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/964399518153232385 ---> Neither America nor Russia can really afford to throw an 'either with us or with them' tantrum when dealing with India. New Delhi will always maintain diversified strategic industrial interactions, claims by some 'think-tankers' notwithstanding.


Here's Ashley's analysis and his line of thinking from India as a Leading Power

While this desire is laudable, it appears that India’s climb to great power status will take time. Although contemporary projections of global growth out to 2050 suggest that India will become a true pole by then, they also conclude that it will remain the weakest of the principal entities—China, the United States, the European Union, and India—dominating the international system at that time.6 A detailed analysis from 2012 suggested that India, representing only 7 percent of the global product in 2050, will remain well behind China at 20 percent and the United States and the European Union at 17 percent each, though it will be somewhat ahead of Japan at 5 percent and comfortably lead Russia and Brazil at 3 and 2 percent, respectively. Assuming that current U.S. alliances survive until then, the Western democracies and Japan will still reign supreme with 39 percent of the global product, almost double that of China’s and similarly close to double China’s and Russia’s gross domestic products (GDPs) combined.7

It is in the greater Asia-Pacific region, however, that India can make a dramatic difference to the continental balance. If India allies with the United States and Japan, the resulting 29 percent of the global product will easily exceed China’s 20 percent in contrast to only the marginal advantage that the two democracies will enjoy if India sits out. Against China and Russia together (a total of 23 percent), India’s contribution will become even more valuable because it will erase the slight inferiority that will otherwise mark the collective U.S.-Japanese product.


And you really think he's frustrated with India not throwing its lot with the US over what ? fighters ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ramana » 17 Feb 2018 03:20

Long ago Pannikar wrote that there are only four natural big powers: US, Russia, China, and India.
So all the diplomacy and machinations are to prevent these from colluding.

Let me give example.
In Cold War the line up was the US vs Russia and China and keep India non-aligned. This last was the British thinking to support Nehruji's space.
Nixon's gambit was to pry China away from USSR. This ended the Cold War with FSu collapse.
China was still not developed and in that chaos US supported China to gain an advantage over Russia the FSU successor state. india was in doldrums anyway and PVNR launched the economic reforms to get back to Post Cold War importance.
Meantime US got involved in Middle East wars and the financial crisis and China has gained upper hand now. And with the Ukranian caper has Russia in its side.
So the traditional strategists are all pushing for India to fall in line with US plans.
Here is Tellis frustration: Why does not India fall in line and support the US?

And they think Indians were born yesterday.
This competition is not our making. It's a Western Greco Roman Imperium objective to which we don't subscribe.

And the Western domination of Asia is not over yet.
Last vestiges of colonialism are still there.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 17 Feb 2018 03:33

KrishnaK wrote:Thanks for reproducing it, I read it the first time around. Let me attempt to explain better....

Did I touch a raw nerve? I was just following from our last discussion, in which you requested things to be dumbed down for you. Just continuing on that path.

KrishnaK wrote:He's saying don't bet on the AMCA because India's capacity to make it is limited. It's a matter of evaluating risk. Saying we can do it, all we need is the will power is about as dumb as it gets. Singing hum honge kamiyaab is not going to reduce the risk, cost or time required to develop new technology. Neither is accusing somebody, whether it's ashley tellis or forum members, of being American MIC agints. Our behaviour is pretty close to our cousins the Pakis, no ?

How did you come to the conclusion that India's capacity to make AMCA is limited? In fact, by going down that line of argument, you are playing right into the hands of the anti-import lobby. Think very carefully about what you are saying. I will give you another chance. Take it.

I am not accusing anyone of being a MIC agent. There is nothing like that in the first place. All I said was that, this is the end goal of the American MIC. Who said anything about being an agent? :)

American President Eisenhower said, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”

KrishnaK wrote:Incidentally Ashley was right when he said India should've chosen the teens for the MMRCA.

The Indian Air Force thought otherwise. They are the ones who made the technical downselect. They are the customer.

KrishnaK wrote:Here's Ashley's analysis and his line of thinking from India as a Leading Power

And you really think he's frustrated with India not throwing its lot with the US over what? fighters ?

Your link is from April 2016. In January 2018, he said this. ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7261&start=5280#p2251671

That is clear frustration and you are correct, over fighters onlee.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 17 Feb 2018 03:42

ramana wrote:Long ago Pannikar wrote that there are only four natural big powers: US, Russia, China, and India.
So all the diplomacy and machinations are to prevent these from colluding.

Let me give example.
In Cold War the line up was the US vs Russia and China and keep India non-aligned. This last was the British thinking to support Nehruji's space.
Nixon's gambit was to pry China away from USSR. This ended the Cold War with FSu collapse.
China was still not developed and in that chaos US supported China to gain an advantage over Russia the FSU successor state. india was in doldrums anyway and PVNR launched the economic reforms to get back to Post Cold War importance.
Meantime US got involved in Middle East wars and the financial crisis and China has gained upper hand now. And with the Ukranian caper has Russia in its side.
So the traditional strategists are all pushing for India to fall in line with US plans.
Here is Tellis frustration: Why does not India fall in line and support the US?

And they think Indians were born yesterday.
This competition is not our making. It's a Western Greco Roman Imperium objective to which we don't subscribe.

And the Western domination of Asia is not over yet.
Last vestiges of colonialism are still there.

Aiyoo Ramana-ji, you are talking of concepts far beyond their level of comprehension. Keep it simple for intelligent folk :)

To know where you are going, you must know where you came from. You cannot deny who you are, to be someone whom you cannot be.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 17 Feb 2018 07:05

Rakesh wrote:
KrishnaK wrote:Thanks for reproducing it, I read it the first time around. Let me attempt to explain better....

Did I touch a raw nerve? I was just following from our last discussion, in which you requested things to be dumbed down for you. Just continuing on that path.
I had asked for cost vs capacity as numbers. brar_w said costs are for US fighters available along with "reasonable risk" for the LCA MK2 and cleanly forgot to respond about capacity. What's reasonable in numbers ? The only path you're continuing down is being pretentious.

KrishnaK wrote:He's saying don't bet on the AMCA because India's capacity to make it is limited. It's a matter of evaluating risk. Saying we can do it, all we need is the will power is about as dumb as it gets. Singing hum honge kamiyaab is not going to reduce the risk, cost or time required to develop new technology. Neither is accusing somebody, whether it's ashley tellis or forum members, of being American MIC agints. Our behaviour is pretty close to our cousins the Pakis, no ?

How did you come to the conclusion that India's capacity to make AMCA is limited?
Experience with the LCA not to mention how hard it's turning out for the Russian to build their 5th Gen. Even if we were to assume Indian capacity at building fighters to be the same as Russia's, which it is not, it's still going to be a slog. This is excluding the simple fact, the IAF doesn't fancy Russian class equipment as much anymore. India needs a 5th gen bird BESIDES the AMCA.

In fact, by going down that line of argument, you are playing right into the hands of the anti-import lobby. Think very carefully about what you are saying. I will give you another chance. Take it.
Thank you, but no. I've no time for silly, pretentious games.

I am not accusing anyone of being a MIC agent. There is nothing like that in the first place. All I said was that, this is the end goal of the American MIC. Who said anything about being an agent? :)
The end goal of the American MIC :mrgreen: I'd suggest looking at their revenues vs Indian purchases.

American President Eisenhower said, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”
Trotting out what Eisenhower said in 1961 is about as trite as it gets. The biggest, most profitable and consequently most influential companies today anywhere in the world sell phones, software, services and now organic tarkari. The MIC is strictly second tier.

KrishnaK wrote:Incidentally Ashley was right when he said India should've chosen the teens for the MMRCA.

The Indian Air Force thought otherwise. They are the ones who made the technical downselect. They are the customer.
Yes, they have placed an order 36 planes in 2015 after having projected a requirement for 126 planes in 2001.

Your link is from April 2016. In January 2018, he said this. ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7261&start=5280#p2251671

That is clear frustration and you are correct, over fighters onlee.
Let me repeat, the MMRCA procurement saga has resulted in 36 planes, which itself looks shaky now, after projecting a requirement for 126 in 2001. Which part of what Ashley Tellis says is wrong ?

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 17 Feb 2018 07:48

ramana wrote:Long ago Pannikar wrote that there are only four natural big powers: US, Russia, China, and India.
So all the diplomacy and machinations are to prevent these from colluding.

Let me give example.
In Cold War the line up was the US vs Russia and China and keep India non-aligned. This last was the British thinking to support Nehruji's space.
Nixon's gambit was to pry China away from USSR. This ended the Cold War with FSu collapse.
China was still not developed and in that chaos US supported China to gain an advantage over Russia the FSU successor state. india was in doldrums anyway and PVNR launched the economic reforms to get back to Post Cold War importance.
Meantime US got involved in Middle East wars and the financial crisis and China has gained upper hand now. And with the Ukranian caper has Russia in its side.
So the traditional strategists are all pushing for India to fall in line with US plans.
Here is Tellis frustration: Why does not India fall in line and support the US?

And they think Indians were born yesterday.
This competition is not our making.
Polio or the plague wasn't your making either.

It's a Western Greco Roman Imperium objective to which we don't subscribe.
Plenty of Indians, including those in the establishment, seem to subscribe to it just fine. If India, the weakest of the natural big powers, wishes to stay untangled in such objectives, then it should have no problems when a lack of leverage results in it being not able to influence the behaviour of the most powerful one.
Last edited by KrishnaK on 17 Feb 2018 07:51, edited 1 time in total.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 945
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby KrishnaK » 17 Feb 2018 07:50

Rakesh wrote:To know where you are going, you must know where you came from. You cannot deny who you are, to be someone whom you cannot be.
Typical desi dialogue-baazi - superficially profound and meaningless at the same time.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 17 Feb 2018 08:07

KrishnaK wrote:I had asked for cost vs capacity as numbers. brar_w said costs are for US fighters available along with "reasonable risk" for the LCA MK2 and cleanly forgot to respond about capacity. What's reasonable in numbers? The only path you're continuing down is being pretentious.

You said you wanted it dumbed down. And brar clearly replied to every question you asked. You have blinders on. Nobody can help you. But for the sake of others following the thread, here it is....

KrishnaK wrote:To really discuss this issue, I think we need to come up with some estimate of cost of buying and then running it for their life - a rough estimate and put some number on capacity - range, payload, readiness, avionics etc.

Paging brar_w & other forum experts - I know this question is super complicated, but can be it dumbed down?

brar_w wrote:I don't think this is very complicated. The bare bone non labor costs to operate the US aircraft are published once every few years (it is the manpower cost that adds up and is variable but this is not relevant to India). However this is all besides the point. The SEF is redundant and does not add anything different qualitatively especially when the cost is taken into account. The ship for this has sailed. Had this been the original MMRCA bid a decade ago and included only the lowest cost (life cycle) offers out of the lot, then it would have made some sense but in 2018 you aren't going to derive a whole lot of value producing these aircraft when you have the LCA MK1A and MK2 on the horizon which can be delivered in roughly equivalent timelines with reasonable risk. I mean you can buy MK1As and retire them after a decade and replace them with MK2s and still save money compared to buying the same number of F-16's or Gripens.


KrishnaK wrote:Experience with the LCA not to mention how hard it's turning out for the Russian to build their 5th Gen. Even if we were to assume Indian capacity at building fighters to be the same as Russia's, which it is not, it's still going to be a slog. This is excluding the simple fact, the IAF doesn't fancy Russian class equipment as much anymore.

What experience with the Tejas? On the contrary, everything is going smoothly. Mk1 production is humming along, No 45 Sqn has sufficient pilots to fly the birds, we are giving joyrides to ministers and foreign air chiefs, No 18 Sqn is the next to be raised, our pilots who fly it love the plane, build times are reducing, FOC will be coming in 2018, etc. We are having a wonderful time with the Tejas - both on BRF and in Bangalore.

How is Russia's experience with their fifth gen platform, got anything to do with AMCA? India is doing AMCA all on her own. Nothing of VALUE will be provided to India on AMCA. Failure or Victory, AMCA will be Indian onlee. Just like Tejas.

KrishnaK wrote:India needs a 5th gen bird BESIDES the AMCA.

Which 5th gen bird would that be? Su-57? Good luck with that!

KrishnaK wrote:Thank you, but no. I've no time for silly, pretentious games.

Come on man! ;) You don't like how this is turning out? :)

KrishnaK wrote:The end goal of the American MIC :mrgreen: I'd suggest looking at their revenues vs Indian purchases.

I look at Indian products vs Phoren products :)

Brar put it best, "The SEF is redundant and does not add anything different qualitatively especially when the cost is taken into account.....but in 2018 you aren't going to derive a whole lot of value producing these aircraft when you have the LCA MK1A and MK2 on the horizon which can be delivered in roughly equivalent timelines with reasonable risk."

Looking at revenues of an American company matters little to the GoI or the Indian Air Force. Nice try ;)

KrishnaK wrote:Trotting out what Eisenhower said in 1961 is about as trite as it gets. The biggest, most profitable and consequently most influential companies today anywhere in the world sell phones, software, services and now organic tarkari. The MIC is strictly second tier.

I was just repeating what American President Eisenhower said about the MIC. Why you gotta feel so hurt and use words like trite? :lol:

Just like your bright encashed bank guarentees idea, perhaps we can fight the PAF and PLAAF with organic tarkari. That idea is even better, than the previous one. There is veg and non-veg tarkari. Which one do you think would be most effective against the enemy?

Yes, they have placed an order 36 planes in 2015 after having projected a requirement for 126 planes in 2001.

That 36 is incomplete, without the words Rafales coming right after ;) And that order was placed in 2016. And that original 126 number now stands at 50 aircraft, as 40 more Su-30MKIs have been ordered.

KrishnaK wrote:Let me repeat, the MMRCA procurement saga has resulted in 36 planes, which itself looks shaky now, after projecting a requirement for 126 in 2001. Which part of what Ashley Tellis says is wrong ?

I was just highlighting the fact that how frustration is setting in - because of the archaic bureaucratic processes in India - among US policy influencers. I even gave a link stating that. At no point, am I saying Ashley Tellis is wrong. I am saying that frustration is setting in. But you are taking this a bit too personally. An American SEF is likely coming. It just will not be the F-16.

KrishnaK wrote:Typical desi dialogue-baazi - superficially profound and meaningless at the same time.

:lol: That is what we do to Amreekis to keep them happy. We are very good at dialogue-baazi. Stroke the ego.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21824
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Austin » 17 Feb 2018 09:04

ramana wrote:Long ago Pannikar wrote that there are only four natural big powers: US, Russia, China, and India.
So all the diplomacy and machinations are to prevent these from colluding.

Let me give example.
In Cold War the line up was the US vs Russia and China and keep India non-aligned. This last was the British thinking to support Nehruji's space.
Nixon's gambit was to pry China away from USSR. This ended the Cold War with FSu collapse.
China was still not developed and in that chaos US supported China to gain an advantage over Russia the FSU successor state. india was in doldrums anyway and PVNR launched the economic reforms to get back to Post Cold War importance.
Meantime US got involved in Middle East wars and the financial crisis and China has gained upper hand now. And with the Ukranian caper has Russia in its side.
So the traditional strategists are all pushing for India to fall in line with US plans.
Here is Tellis frustration: Why does not India fall in line and support the US?

And they think Indians were born yesterday.
This competition is not our making. It's a Western Greco Roman Imperium objective to which we don't subscribe.

And the Western domination of Asia is not over yet.
Last vestiges of colonialism are still there.


Well put Ramana , Exactly the case it is

The entire Cold War era and post that US spent billions in military and aid to Pakistan to give it superficial equal equal to india

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_P » 17 Feb 2018 09:55

KrishnaK wrote:
Rakesh wrote:The Indian Air Force thought otherwise. They are the ones who made the technical downselect. They are the customer.


Yes, they have placed an order 36 planes in 2015 after having projected a requirement for 126 planes in 2001.


The IAF is not the one who reduced/placed the order for 36 planes.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_P » 17 Feb 2018 10:05

Austin wrote:
ramana wrote:Long ago Pannikar wrote that there are only four natural big powers: US, Russia, China, and India.
So all the diplomacy and machinations are to prevent these from colluding.

Let me give example.
In Cold War the line up was the US vs Russia and China and keep India non-aligned. This last was the British thinking to support Nehruji's space.
Nixon's gambit was to pry China away from USSR. This ended the Cold War with FSu collapse.
China was still not developed and in that chaos US supported China to gain an advantage over Russia the FSU successor state. india was in doldrums anyway and PVNR launched the economic reforms to get back to Post Cold War importance.
Meantime US got involved in Middle East wars and the financial crisis and China has gained upper hand now. And with the Ukranian caper has Russia in its side.
So the traditional strategists are all pushing for India to fall in line with US plans.
Here is Tellis frustration: Why does not India fall in line and support the US?

And they think Indians were born yesterday.
This competition is not our making. It's a Western Greco Roman Imperium objective to which we don't subscribe.

And the Western domination of Asia is not over yet.
Last vestiges of colonialism are still there.


Well put Ramana , Exactly the case it is

The entire Cold War era and post that US spent billions in military and aid to Pakistan to give it superficial equal equal to india


+1

Say for the now new cool war with China, shouldn't the US should consider giving us, it's new major strategic partner, at least buy 1 get 1 free offers (buy a JSF get a F18 free, buy a F18 get a Reaper free) :mrgreen: Perhaps Mr. Tellis could tell this to Mr. Trump. I am sure the businessman that he is, Mr. Trump will be willing to go the extra mile to clinch the deal :P


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests