'Make in India' Single engined fighter

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 02 Sep 2017 21:32

Manufacturing the Tejas in numbers will result in high end R&D jobs in next generation technologies, while others, I am afraid will be limited to riveting aluminum. I havent heard any aircraft major, including Boeing say they are going to develop mission critical software in India.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Sep 2017 22:56

Prasad wrote:To amortise costs and sustain the line to keep the jobs created you need fresh orders. Be it F16 or Gripen where is the export market for a 100 fighters? There is none.

Prasad remember there are three parties here - the GOI (which is not constant) and the IAF (which is constant) and the IAS (which is equally constant).

Job creation is the purview of the GOI. But the GOI is never constant. Elections are held. The government in power today could become the opposition tomorrow. All the schemes that the government in power worked on, gets revamped (or changed or even shut down) when another government comes in. And that is so true & real in India. So what the BJP Govt envisions job creation to be (i.e. Make in India), is not what a potential Congress Govt will envision job creation to be. Policy / Governing Philosophy changes the course. While the Modi Govt is willing to explore the possibility of selling the BrahMos to Vietnam, can anyone really foresee a Rahul Gandhi led government doing the same?

If you look at the doctrine of the IAF, you will not find anything about exporting fighters to other countries. You will not find a single page about job creation. That is not the IAF's job or its mandate. Self explanatory, but the IAF has one goal - defend India's airspace. That can involve taking the fight to the enemy or protecting your home turf, but in a nutshell the IAF's sole job is to protect India. Period. That is constant. That mission never changes, no matter what. No Air Chief sits in his office, wondering oh my, India's unemployment rate is so dismal...let's come up with a scheme to export fighters to other countries.

And now to the third party - IMVHO the most important - the IAS. Policies, Governing Philosophy, IAF doctrine, Meteor vs AMRAAM, Gripen vs F-16 all come to an unbreakable titanium wall in the face of IAS bureaucracy. The PMO can play all the right geopolitical cards it wants and the IAF can choose what it thinks is the best plane, but both parties have to follow the rules stipulated by the IAS. That is constant. The first MMRCA contest proved that beyond a doubt. The teens were anyday a better platform from a geopolitical angle, but the contest had to be conducted as per the IAS rules. I read a dated news article (from 2011) recently in which it was asked if any of the rejected candidates in the MMRCA contest could re-enter the competition after the downselect on 27 April 2011 and the IAS officer who replied to that put it best - not going to happen (I paraphrase). And the proof was in the pudding. The GOI signed a deal for 36 Rafales. Do not be deceived into thinking that the Modi Govt can bend the rules of babudom for geopolitical gains.

When you look at the offers from both companies, it appears that Saab has understood the IAF requirement quite well and has promised the moon. That is quite ironic (and laughable) coming from Saab, because the heart (engine) of the Gripen E is American. But nevertheless, Saab has played a great marketing game and has beat LM in that aspect. At virtually every stage, Saab waited to see what LM offered and did one better. Just one example - LM is offering AESA radar tech from the F-35? Okay, then we will give you GaN technology and source codes. Hillarious, but that is the offer on the table from Saab.

LM has focused more towards the GOI view, than the IAF view. They believe the technical aspects of the plane (while fantastic), play second fiddle to the GOI's vision. One keeps seeing every executive in LM - from the CEO down - talking about exports, job creation, 4500 planes made to date, 28 countries, etc, etc, etc. Because that has been their experience with their own government on military purchases. Democrat or Republican - both parties believe in American exceptionalism and work towards that goal. Is that true in India? Boeing & Lockheed Martin were left clueless (and scratching their heads) on 27 April 2011 wondering what went wrong. And it appears they still have not learnt from that lesson.

They are forgetting who the real customer is. And make no mistake about it, the customer knows what it wants. The customer also realises that the party who is bank rolling this purchase will not be around forever, but they know the party who is controlling every aspect of this purchase will be. The customer is a smart player (70+ years of experience of dealing with IAS bureaucracy) and they will play the system. They will run the gamut of technical tests required, show the IAS that they are playing by the rules, salute and stand at attention to all the important players, but the actual requirements will be set by the IAF onlee. And no one knows the technical aspects other than the IAF. The GOI or the IAS do not have that luxury, while the IAF has the luxury of knowing how the GOI and the IAS work.

The export, job creation aspect is inconsequential to the IAF. When the downselect happens, even the Modi Govt will be able to do anything. If the IAF wants the F-16 Block 70, it will get it. And if they want the Gripen E, it will get it. The IAS will ensure that happens.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 02 Sep 2017 23:01

Austin wrote:The prices will go down once we Lic Manuf in India and build its MRO Facilities here.

Err.. no. Locally manufactured Rafale isn't going get cheaper. The $110 mil that the OEM charges of the shelf is the very best price that you get the aircraft for. A RDEL-delivered unit may go for around $120 mil flyaway, no less. Plus the upfront costs associated with a Rafale assembly line are substantial (the tooling, jigs, fixtures, etc for the Merignac was produced two decades ago).

Rafale has a better upgrade path over its 30 years life cycle compared to F-16 which was already end of life and dead end of its design nothing much to offer in either technology and US unwillingless to share it that meets MOD needs.

Try 40 year life-cycle (7,000 hrs @ 180 hrs/annum). You could have bought a refurbished F-16V with say... 3,500 hrs of residual airframe life, used it and retired it in 20 years, with the AMCA coming in to replace it.

The Rafale's 'upgrade path' takes it past 2060, (with a pricey MLU along the way) at which point 7th gen concepts might be entering the picture.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Sep 2017 23:02

Carrier aircraft muddle - Bharat Karnad

(1) A personal mountain of a reason — bad blood between the lead test pilot in the naval LCA program, Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar, and Rear Admiral Surendra Ahuja, Assistant Controller Carrier Project and Assistant Controller Warship Production and Acquisition at NHQ. By all accounts, Maolankar is a top rate flier dedicated to the Tejas but Ahuja, with no flying experience, is nearer the seat of power and who, perhaps, to spite Maolankar, a batch mate, whose failure to make it to the next rank — however that was managed — was the talk in naval circles, convinced the naval brass that the LCA was no-go, and that its prospects are bleak, whence the Navy’s formal rejection of the Tejas. On such personal rivalries hang the fate of nations striving to be self-sufficient in armaments! And (2) It would mean giving up on a chance to import another foreign aircraft and forego all the goodies in train. Easier then for the Indian Navy to give up on the Tejas. Having desperately hunted for excuses to reject it, Ahuja finally found it in the aircraft’s excess weight and, rather than proposing remedial measures and doubling in on the navy’s commitment and investment in an Indian designed and developed carrier aircraft, recommended ditching the naval LCA.

But SAAB will reconfigure the Sea Gripen because of the big IAF order it hopes to bag. Because then it makes economic sense. Boeing would be interested too if the IAF picked the F-18 for its fleet, except the Boeing is unlikely to onpass source codes and other ‘black box’ technologies to any Indian private sector company or public sector firm, like HAL. Besides, it will be the 2-engined oddity in a single-engined aircraft buy by the IAF.

Except, here’s how Washington will turn the tourniquet to prevent the Swedes from bagging the IAF deal. Ashley Tellis, of Carnegie Washington, the prime mover of American aircraft to Indian armed services, Indian MOD and the only foreigner (albeit of Mumbai origin) — as I revealed in a piece I wrote last year and on this blog (look up!) to have the readiest access imaginable to Prime Minister Modi, has made this plain. In a recent article, he mentioned the fact that between 40% and 60% of the Gripen is composed of components, sub-assemblies and assemblies, including the power plant, sourced from America, that will need US government clearance! Does anybody in Stockholm or in Delhi really believe Gripen has an easy run into the IAF fleet, leave alone the Vikrant deck?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Sep 2017 23:10

It is amazing how the author makes an insinuation between Commodore Jaydeep Maolankar and Rear Admiral Surendra Ahuja, with no evidence to back it up. Just malign people, ruin their reputation.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 03 Sep 2017 00:06

The Amazing Fighter Jet Race | Documentary On India's Single Engine Fighter Jet Procurement Program

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 03 Sep 2017 00:25

Rakesh wrote:It is amazing how the author makes an insinuation between Commodore Jaydeep Maolankar and Rear Admiral Surendra Ahuja, with no evidence to back it up. Just malign people, ruin their reputation.

Sir,
I think even if he's malicious, he's for a cause that is more important. He may be right and he may NOT be right, but the fact that he's put his weight wholeheartedly behind Tejas is all I care. It is high time we have Tejas crusaders in MSM that use saam daam dand bheda to put Tejas in our forces.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 03 Sep 2017 00:28

I have already wondered before, that IN's rejection of Tejas has been very very sudden.

samirdiw · Post by **samirdiw** » 03 Sep 2017 02:14

Has the IAF just put out this tender by consulting GoI? How can the GoI allow this debacle to take place?

Seriously a separate Defense Procurement and Manufacturing Ministry must be set up. The armed forces provides them the specifications (within range) and criteria why and the new ministry consisting of experts, ex personal etc goes and gets - mostly from local. The armed forces fight with what they are provided.

Given to themselves all formula 1 drivers will only choose Ferrari.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Sep 2017 02:51

In that video posted above HAL seems to be quite gung ho about the SEF based on Former Chairman, RK Tyagi's statements, which btw seem rather strange. He claims that currently the IAF operates 32 sqds and has a sanctioned approval of 42 sqds, which leaves it 10 short. So far so good. But then he mentions IAF retiring another 12 sqds of Mig21s

He goes on to say that MiG-27s will also retire. Altogether he adds it up to a shortage of16 sqds.

Please explain the math to me. Current strength = 32 sqds (12 MKI + 6 Bison + 6 Jag + 2 27 + 6 M2k/M29), which makes sense but other than that I'm totally confused.

Where is he getting 12 Mig 21 sqds from? IAF only operates 6 as of now. To confuse it even more, the man goes on to say that all in all there will be a shortage of 16 sqds? How? Shortage projections assuming current strength at 32sqds and sanctioned strength of 42, seem to be:
18 sqds in 10 years (Withdrawal of 6 X Bisons + 2 X Floggers).

These will be replaced by 2 X Rafale + 6 Tejas + 2 MKI. Net shortage = 8 sqds to reach the 42 mark. Question is - does the GOI intend to reach 42 sqds in the next 10 years? 15 years? WHat is the timeframe?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 03 Sep 2017 02:56

Cain-ji, I believe the M variant of the MiG-21 is still in service. ACM Dhanoa flew one earlier this year. I am not sure how many squadrons are there of the MiG-21M though. I do not think it is close to 12 squadrons.

I do not understand his math either, but the MiG-21M is due for retirement fairly soon. And the same is true with the MiG-27.

This 42 squadron number is a dated one. What capabilities do 42 squadrons bring vs let's say 60 squadrons? Or swing the pendulum the other way...32 squadrons?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Sep 2017 03:24

Rakesh garu, I think there is a lot of smoke and confusion even with the folks who are supposed to be in the know. Take for example what the junior minister Mr. Bhamre was saying - we will have 42 sqds in the next 3-4 years! Kamaal key log hai. I'm assuming they will sign the deal in the next 3-4 years. Tyagi becomes a lot more clear towards the end of the program and proposes 3 scenarios, with the middle one as the best:

1) HAL continues at 8 Tejas a year, which is obviously unworkable. So, SEF is brought in.
2) HAL expands capability to 16 per year, which is better but not enough so either it does a JV with a private partner and produces another 16 per year and thereby meets the AF requirement. This option can later also materialize in exports of the Tejas OR
3) Hal continues @ 16 per year and another 16 will be produced p.a. via the SEF deal.

Ideally, #3 is the best perhaps with additional MKIs, M2ks and M29s bought for the short term as capacity is slowly inreased.

BUT my guess is option 3 is what is likeliest. The shortage of 18 sqds will be met by 12sqds of Tejas @ 16 per year and another 6 via SEF. All in all, done by 2028-30 timeframe. In any case, it is looking better for the Tejas - 12 sqds.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 03 Sep 2017 05:06

Cain Marko wrote:... Mr. Bhamre was saying - we will have 42 sqds in the next 3-4 years! Kamaal key log hai. ...

Bhamre's office was deemed untrustworthy by MP. Google

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 03 Sep 2017 08:15

Rakesh
Focusing on just defence by the IAF would be incredibly short sighted. Given their experience I've the post decades i hope they don't think we can always import and we'll have support and money for that. I'm also due they realise making our own ensures future defence products and hence it's not just about today but tomorrow also. Pining for F16/Gripen for today's fight and ignoring it's impact on tomorrow will, as i said, nee incredibly short sighted. But hey who's asking me.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Sep 2017 09:26

I think if Hal can deliver tejas on time, the iaf will certainly buy more. Seems like the PSU is moving in the right direction but the IAF will need to see results not just intent.

samirdiw · Post by **samirdiw** » 03 Sep 2017 09:31

How many Tejas IAF wants in a year?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Sep 2017 15:10

samirdiw wrote:How many Tejas IAF wants in a year?

As per the chief, as many as they can deliver.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 03 Sep 2017 18:55

Prasad wrote:Rakesh
Focusing on just defence by the IAF would be incredibly short sighted. Given their experience I've the post decades i hope they don't think we can always import and we'll have support and money for that. I'm also due they realise making our own ensures future defence products and hence it's not just about today but tomorrow also. Pining for F16/Gripen for today's fight and ignoring it's impact on tomorrow will, as i said, nee incredibly short sighted. But hey who's asking me.

Prasad, the IAF's mandate is to focus on defence. Everything else comes secondary. And that umbrella covers a lot. But solving India's unemployment woes does not come under that umbrella. Improving other sectors of the economy does not either

There is no 5th generation platform available to us right now for a fight for tomorrow. Gripen and F-16 is what we have and what we must choose. Otherwise we must go back to square one and start all over again.

The IAF knows there is no other alternative but to import. Tejas production cannot change overnight. It is improving and as per Col Shukla's recent article (http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2017/08/t ... ieves.html) the program will achieve the target goals as per schedule. But squadrons need to be replenished quicker and thus the reason for this import. However the **importance** of replenishing those squadrons will be realized when which aircraft is chosen.

The F-16 is the clear winner in a quicker and rapid induction of fighters. There is no doubt about that. The F-16 is a fantastic plane as well, for now. The future upgradability / survivability of the plane is in doubt. From an export perspective, if tomorrow India wants to export the plane to lets say Burma or Vietnam, would the US agree? The same is true for the Gripen, considering the plane flies with an American engine. So all this talk of exporting fighters is gold dust sprinkled on horseshit to make the shit look good. Exports will be decided on final approval from America. Nothing evil about it, but that is the reality.

The Gripen is equally capable as the competition for the Indian scenario and doctrine, but will take longer to induct. If the latter is chosen, all this talk of rapid squadron depletion would have been untrue. In a technical selection, the IAF will select what it believes is the best fighter. That is what happened in the first MMRCA selection. The decision to move forward with the Rafale and Eurofighter on 27 April 2011 was solely based on technical merits and that is the way it should be. Any professional air force will do that. The USAF does that - YF-16 vs YF 17, YF-22 vs YF-23, one can go on. The decision to go with the Rafale on 31 January 2012 was based on L1, but that was a MoD decision.

So it will be interesting to see which aircraft the IAF chooses. No point in rhona-dhona on BRF, when the downselect occurs, like it did on 27 April 2011. All this talk of India being short-sighted has no significance at that stage. This is the bed the IAF is making for itself and thus the IAF has to lie in it. As I said earlier...if the IAF wants the F-16 Block 70, it will get it. And if they want the Gripen E, it will get it. The IAS will ensure that happens. And if the Americans throw a spanner in the works for the F414 engine, then the GOI will know the value America places on India as a strategic defence partner.

Cain-ji: Minister Bhamre is just repeating talking points that he has been asked to say. Don't worry about it.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 03 Sep 2017 19:39

The tea shop talk I heard kind of seconds the notion of split between Mao Saab and his colleagues. Just saying.....

samirdiw · Post by **samirdiw** » 03 Sep 2017 20:16

Cain Marko wrote:
samirdiw wrote:How many Tejas IAF wants in a year?
As per the chief, as many as they can deliver.

So apparently HAL can go to 16 per year. Maybe with more funds, they can do more like somebody else mentioned in partnership. HAL not understanding speedy delivery for a long time is their own fault of course. Only with high volume output will even export ever open up else the timeline will always close the window of opportunity.

Having said that just when after all these decades when they have started rolling out the planes what is the necessity for this move to imported stuff?

Perhaps one of the most short sighted decisions in the history of defense self-reliance ever. Really will it take a long term war with the Chinese where they relentlessly prolong the war and drive our forces to the ground through attrition for our defense forces (who are used to and only expect this 10-day war where imported stuff will work real fine ) to learn self-reliance? Amazing that the IAF (and now looks like the IN also) is so tactically oriented and not strategic. Do they think China will fight the way we want when they decide to its the right time- a short quick skirmish?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2017 20:25

Rakesh wrote:It is amazing how the author makes an insinuation between Commodore Jaydeep Maolankar and Rear Admiral Surendra Ahuja, with no evidence to back it up. Just malign people, ruin their reputation.

Karnad does have his own sources though.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Sep 2017 20:26

So apparently HAL can go to 16 per year. Maybe with more funds, they can do more like somebody else mentioned in partnership. HAL not understanding speedy delivery for a long time is their own fault of course. Only with high volume output will even export ever open up else the timeline will always close the window of opportunity

Only if scaling up was as easy as placing large orders supported by unlimited funds. Check out Tesla (automotive). And, here we are talking of aerospace.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2017 20:46

Indranil wrote:I also have a question for those who say this single engine fighter program is about job creation. How come manufacturing F-16s/Gripens generates jobs and manufacturing Teja's don't?

In fact, at current price, it can be 1.5-2 times the jobs and aircrafts.

This MII farce was entirely of Manohar Parrikars making as he sought to balance the high price of the Rafale with some ostensible MII program. Instead he created entirely 3 fighter requirements which could have been consolidated around 2, the Rafale and the Tejas and also for a notional 123 aircraft Tejas run (the 83 MK1A order has not been placed yet) ended up saddling our budget with an expensive vaporware fighter (the Gripen) and a long in the tooth one (the F-16) both of which impact the future prospects of the Tejas or will end up stopping it at 123 units, now the Naval Tejas is also gone. And at the end of it all, after all his talk, he ended up hot-footing it back to Goa. I wish he had stayed through at the MOD, instead of keeping his personal political choices as the primary choices.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Sep 2017 21:51

As per my understanding, as of AI17. This for the IAF:

Light:
* 200-300 LCAs (my expectation: mostly Mk1As)
*100-200 SE (to me it meant F-16)

Medium:
* 36 Rafale
* 100-200 F-18 (This does NOT include the naval recs)(check out what MP stated during AI17 - there is a vid out there)

Heavy:
* 300(?) Su-30 MKIs

5th Gen:
* whatever number of AMCA
* #TBD FGFA (I think India is looking for a good engine and will rebuild, based on the planeform of the PAK-FA, to her own specs)

IN:

* 57 F-18 (again, my expectations)

5th Gen:
* #TBD Naval AMCA

kit · Post by **kit** » 03 Sep 2017 22:16

Karan M wrote:
Indranil wrote:I also have a question for those who say this single engine fighter program is about job creation. How come manufacturing F-16s/Gripens generates jobs and manufacturing Teja's don't?

In fact, at current price, it can be 1.5-2 times the jobs and aircrafts.
This MII farce was entirely of Manohar Parrikars making as he sought to balance the high price of the Rafale with some ostensible MII program. Instead he created entirely 3 fighter requirements which could have been consolidated around 2, the Rafale and the Tejas and also for a notional 123 aircraft Tejas run (the 83 MK1A order has not been placed yet) ended up saddling our budget with an expensive vaporware fighter (the Gripen) and a long in the tooth one (the F-16) both of which impact the future prospects of the Tejas or will end up stopping it at 123 units, now the Naval Tejas is also gone. And at the end of it all, after all his talk, he ended up hot-footing it back to Goa. I wish he had stayed through at the MOD, instead of keeping his personal political choices as the primary choices.

i suppose the problem was Dassault not playing the ball not bringing down the unit prices ??

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2017 22:50

Yes, Dassault gamed us perfectly. They didnt want to provide TOT at the price we wanted. We should have figured out ways to address that instead of this yet another new fighter stuff. We are buying 4.5 G fighters at extortionate prices at a time, when ROW is investing in 5G. Of what use are our "touted" TOT for yesterday's aircraft of which we get next to nothing of their real tech the AESA radars, the engines, the EW all of which will remain black boxes? It may have been cheaper and more sensible to buy more Rafales build up local spares supplies, indigenize some parts (regular consumables) and buy more LCAs plus accelerate Su-30 upgrades and spares for rest of IAF fleet! Take the savings and invest in FGFA and AMCA! Or F-35 and AMCA.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2017 23:39

Karan M wrote:Yes, Dassault gamed us perfectly. They didnt want to provide TOT at the price we wanted. We should have figured out ways to address that instead of this yet another new fighter stuff. We are buying 4.5 G fighters at extortionate prices at a time, when ROW is investing in 5G. Of what use are our "touted" TOT for yesterday's aircraft of which we get next to nothing of their real tech the AESA radars, the engines, the EW all of which will remain black boxes? It may have been cheaper and more sensible to buy more Rafales build up local spares supplies, indigenize some parts (regular consumables) and buy more LCAs plus accelerate Su-30 upgrades and spares for rest of IAF fleet! Take the savings and invest in FGFA and AMCA! Or F-35 and AMCA.

That's our fault only the MMRCA competition went for a decade and every one competed and you can't expect the players to give you a price which stood 8 year back , add to that post Rafale selection in 2011 it took 5 years to sign the deal and two governments.

Let's fix our procurement system first make it time bound and be precise what we need in what time line in what numbers and what price at realistic level , MMRCA is perfect example on how MOD should not run a big defence deal.

We can't have a completion that runs for eternity at 2005 price and expect in 2020 we would get the same deal

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Sep 2017 23:52

I think a US buy is on the cards. Instead of 100 f16, they should do a g2g deal like rafale and buy another 36 f35 as silver bullets. Let the tejas make up the numbers over the next 15 years supported by additional second hand fulcrum or mirage purchases in the very short term.

But obviously that's not happening. Not is the additional rafale imvho.

Samir,

What Tyagi said is the way forward. The need is for 320 fighters in about 10 years. Hal makes 16 tejas p.a. from 2020 with another 120 via sef program. My guess is 200 LCA in total by 2030 for iaf.

I don't think Hal has the resources to scale up to 32 and therefore suggests a JV, and that might take too long.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Sep 2017 00:06

Well at least now there is an exclusive defence minister. Dunno much about Madam Sir though.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Sep 2017 00:13

Rakesh wrote:
Prasad wrote:Rakesh
Focusing on just defence by the IAF would be incredibly short sighted. Given their experience I've the post decades i hope they don't think we can always import and we'll have support and money for that. I'm also due they realise making our own ensures future defence products and hence it's not just about today but tomorrow also. Pining for F16/Gripen for today's fight and ignoring it's impact on tomorrow will, as i said, nee incredibly short sighted. But hey who's asking me.
Prasad, the IAF's mandate is to focus on defence. Everything else comes secondary. And that umbrella covers a lot. But solving India's unemployment woes does not come under that umbrella. Improving other sectors of the economy does not either

There is no 5th generation platform available to us right now for a fight for tomorrow. Gripen and F-16 is what we have and what we must choose. Otherwise we must go back to square one and start all over again.

The IAF knows there is no other alternative but to import. Tejas production cannot change overnight. It is improving and as per Col Shukla's recent article (http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2017/08/t ... ieves.html) the program will achieve the target goals as per schedule. But squadrons need to be replenished quicker and thus the reason for this import. However the **importance** of replenishing those squadrons will be realized when which aircraft is chosen.

The F-16 is the clear winner in a quicker and rapid induction of fighters. There is no doubt about that. The F-16 is a fantastic plane as well, for now. The future upgradability / survivability of the plane is in doubt. From an export perspective, if tomorrow India wants to export the plane to lets say Burma or Vietnam, would the US agree? The same is true for the Gripen, considering the plane flies with an American engine. So all this talk of exporting fighters is gold dust sprinkled on horseshit to make the shit look good. Exports will be decided on final approval from America. Nothing evil about it, but that is the reality.

The Gripen is equally capable as the competition for the Indian scenario and doctrine, but will take longer to induct. If the latter is chosen, all this talk of rapid squadron depletion would have been untrue. In a technical selection, the IAF will select what it believes is the best fighter. That is what happened in the first MMRCA selection. The decision to move forward with the Rafale and Eurofighter on 27 April 2011 was solely based on technical merits and that is the way it should be. Any professional air force will do that. The USAF does that - YF-16 vs YF 17, YF-22 vs YF-23, one can go on. The decision to go with the Rafale on 31 January 2012 was based on L1, but that was a MoD decision.

So it will be interesting to see which aircraft the IAF chooses. No point in rhona-dhona on BRF, when the downselect occurs, like it did on 27 April 2011. All this talk of India being short-sighted has no significance at that stage. This is the bed the IAF is making for itself and thus the IAF has to lie in it. As I said earlier...if the IAF wants the F-16 Block 70, it will get it. And if they want the Gripen E, it will get it. The IAS will ensure that happens. And if the Americans throw a spanner in the works for the F414 engine, then the GOI will know the value America places on India as a strategic defence partner.

Cain-ji: Minister Bhamre is just repeating talking points that he has been asked to say. Don't worry about it.

Just a couple of things to consider...
A gripen induction might be just as fast if the mki model is filled in that a couple of upgraded C version sqds are brought in from swedish stocks not unlike the early su30s that were later sold off to Belarus.

Why can't they push for an f35 as a direct purchase? Not unlike the rafale deal...Perhaps fewer numbers but rather more potent.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Sep 2017 02:39

Cain Marko wrote:Just a couple of things to consider...
A gripen induction might be just as fast if the mki model is filled in that a couple of upgraded C version sqds are brought in from swedish stocks not unlike the early su-30s that were later sold off to Belarus.

Why can't they push for an f35 as a direct purchase? Not unlike the rafale deal...Perhaps fewer numbers but rather more potent.

As per wiki chacha, the Swedes have a grand total of 72 Gripens. You take a couple of squadrons (lets say two...at 36 aircraft), the Swedes are left with only 36. I don't think the Swedish Air Force would be generous to that proposal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_A ... e#Aircraft

A G2G direct purchase makes perfect sense, but Unkil has to offer a generous reduction in cost (for that the relationship has to move beyond the buyer-seller mode it is in now) and therefore it is hard to foresee how the F-35 will join the IAF.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Sep 2017 02:51

The difference between F-Solah and Gripen E is like the difference between Hema Malini and Alia Bhatt. Hemaji is still a stunner at 68, but how much longer can that act work? Alia, on the other hand, is an unknown quantity. She makes all the right moves but whether she will mature with age still remains to be seen. Same is true with F-Solah and Gripen E.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Sep 2017 07:26

Well with make in india and madam sitaraman as the new DM. I am certainly getting my hopes up for scraping this stupid project and focusing entirely on LCA. The termination of dassault buy will be an icing on the cake.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2017 07:39

The biggest challenges Nirmala Sitharaman will face as India’s new Defence Minister

Executing mega private sector contracts

Jaitely, while in charge of the defence and finance ministries, managed to unlock the long-stalled strategic partnership model to give the Indian private sector mega projects to manufacture military equipment.

Now, two major projects are set to be rolled out that will require a close eye to be kept on the selection process since they’re being executed for the first time.

The biggest project is a contract worth over $15 billion to produce new single-engine fighter jets in India. The contest for the contract is between two consortiums: Lockheed Martin and Tata that is offering the American F 16, and the Adani-Saab partnership for the Swedish Gripen.

The new defence minister is expected to work closely with Arun Jaitley, who held additional charge of the defence ministry.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 04 Sep 2017 07:45

Rakesh wrote:The difference between F-Solah and Gripen E is like the difference between Hema Malini and Alia Bhatt. Hemaji is still a stunner at 68, but how much longer can that act work? Alia, on the other hand, is an unknown quantity. She makes all the right moves but whether she will mature with age still remains to be seen. Same is true with F-Solah and Gripen E.

One thing I am clear about is that Alia Bhatt will mature with age just like the uncorked bottle of wine sitting on my desk will mature with age.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 04 Sep 2017 07:49

Pratyush wrote:Well with make in india and madam sitaraman as the new DM. I am certainly getting my hopes up for scraping this stupid project and focusing entirely on LCA. The termination of dassault buy will be an icing on the cake.

As MoS for Commerce, Nirmalaji was "pushing on a string" - providing policies, facilities and incentives to make the industry build stuff. As RM she will be able to bull her way through since it's her money and she has lots of it. I think the first few years of her leadership will be focussed on defence production baring the occasional surgical strike, pay/personnel issue and standoff.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2017 07:49

NS and AJ have worked very closely, representing commerce and finance.

She is not equipped to lead MoD. She will have to rely heavily on AJ and the die was cast in the MP era. She is there to execute that game plane.

Both single and dual engine planes are coming. MII is a big deal. Trump has tripped the process a wee bit. But, in the longer run, both sides will make it work.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Sep 2017 08:04

^ after his afpak speech it seems like the initial hiccup maybe over, if it ever was anything more than that. The modi Trump bonhomie was a surprise to most.

Yes, the cards might be falling into place for massive purchases from the US in lieu of long term strategic Independence.

India should combine the needs of the Navy and airforce to bring in the JSF. If rather see 126 f35 than 200 f16 + 18. They can have Tata build small components or act as an mro along with some other deals to satisfy the MII need.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2017 08:22

Trump cannot spell "India" even if his life depended on it.

It is the NSA and Mattis, along with some powerful Senators that are making the difference. The Afpac speech was one from the 2/3 Generals around Trump. Trump can never script such a speech.

But, Trump with his Made in US and job protection has thrown a wrench in the SE project.

I do not see the F35 as MII, in any form.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Sep 2017 08:23

Rakesh wrote:From an export perspective, if tomorrow India wants to export the plane to lets say Burma or Vietnam, would the US agree? The same is true for the Gripen, considering the plane flies with an American engine. So all this talk of exporting fighters is gold dust sprinkled on horseshit to make the shit look good. Exports will be decided on final approval from America. Nothing evil about it, but that is the reality.

And reality just hit home for the Turkish Air Force...

US prevents sending of F-16 training pilots to Turkey
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/us-ref ... sCatID=510

The government, which has been focused on measures that would increase the number of jet pilots, is searching for F-16 trainers abroad. Pakistan was the only country to accept Turkey’s request. However, the U.S. objected to Pakistan sending F-16 jet pilot trainers to Turkey, based on the agreement that U.S.-origin equipment’s purchase, sale, maintenance and training between third countries needed approval from Washington.

Anyone still think this SE tamasha is a good idea? The same is true for Gripen. What a mess this is.

I am writing down names of countries that we can export F-Solah or Gripen to