'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 13 Oct 2017 13:14

Jay can you provide some more details/reports of the same.I do not have blind faith in pvt. entities either as far as the aircraft industry is concerned,why I've said that HAL can hand-hold them in a JV first.The goal is to get more LCA prod. any which way.If HAL can't deliver (more than a handful each yr.) then we have to think of alternatives. If pvt. entities were not forthcoming,why was the idea of using IAF BRDs as prod. centres shot down? It is no secret that HAL wants to hog the max. it can.It has so much on its plate,decisions taken or almost there,reg. upgrades of over 200 MKIs,120 Jags,,120+ LCAs,some orders of BTs definitely,and even for the IJT if it can one day perfect that turkey.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4313
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 13 Oct 2017 14:07

Philip wrote:Jay can you provide some more details/reports of the same.I do not have blind faith in pvt. entities either as far as the aircraft industry is concerned,why I've said that HAL can hand-hold them in a JV first.The goal is to get more LCA prod. any which way.If HAL can't deliver (more than a handful each yr.) then we have to think of alternatives. If pvt. entities were not forthcoming,why was the idea of using IAF BRDs as prod. centres shot down? It is no secret that HAL wants to hog the max. it can.It has so much on its plate,decisions taken or almost there,reg. upgrades of over 200 MKIs,120 Jags,,120+ LCAs,some orders of BTs definitely,and even for the IJT if it can one day perfect that turkey.


While there have been some articles on the GOI's plan from 2014-15, I am not able to find now. But it was discussed on LCA thread. I had one link which is dead. But I found it quoted on DFI. which I posted a few pages back on this thread while replying Indranil. You can have a look. I'll post link again when I get some time to find it.

First of all, there is no evidence that HAL cannot expand LCA production rate in reasonable time frame given funds and orders. In fact HAL is well on its way to achieve 24/yr rate in next 3 years or so. Even if we want to go beyond that with new line elsewhere, IMO BRD's should not do such work. It will be highly inefficient. There are companies which can do better work that bean-counters like Ambanis and Adanis. I would rather give the work to one of the Tier-1 supplier company for LCA with 0% loan for initial setup. They would be definitely willing. But remember the precondition is GOI gives assurance that there will be enough orders to make it viable preposition. 200+ orders both IAF and imports needs to be there. With 40 order, what HAL has done, no private company would have ever done.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Will » 13 Oct 2017 16:50

Rakesh wrote:
Will wrote:I think SAAB shot itself in the foot with the tie up with Adani. With the reported closeness to the ruling dispensation just opens up the govt to attack which I don't think will be risked.

The same reported closeness exists between Reliance and the Govt, but that did not stop Dassault Reliance Aerospace Limited (DRAL) to come about. The BJP is in a majority government now and will have a majority government in 2019 as well. What is the opposition going to do? Shout corruption? Do it, but they better have the evidence to back it up. The ghost of Bofors is well alive. Every i will be dotted and every t will be crossed in this deal. But the opposition cannot bring the government down, otherwise they will have to do a vote of no confidence in the Parliament and convince a good chunk of BJP MPs to do the same. How many BJP MPs are willing to go against the Prime Minister? All the Govt has to do it is admit the closeness, but state that the IAF ran the technical show and they chose the Gripen E over the F-16. Is it the Govt's fault that Saab chose Adani as its partner? Or is there evidence to prove that the Govt convinced Saab to pick Adani?

Uh huh.. Reliance is close to all parties and it can be argued that the MRCA tender was cancelled to get in Reliance through the back door but no one raised a hue and cry as Reliance has good relations with everyone. Don't be surprised if the Rafale nos go up to the MMRCA tender quantity which will only bring more screwdriver tech to the nation unlike the real tech transfer it was supposed to.

With Adani its different. At least there's a perception that there's closeness only to the ruling dispensation and the opposition will have a field day.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Pratyush » 13 Oct 2017 16:52

The only way to escape shouts of curruption is to have a tender for the second line of Tejas to be built by the pvt sector and orders to be split between HAL and the pvt sector vendors.

The numbers I foresee exceed 500 in this case.

Else which ever foreign fighter is chosen, it will be shouted of as Bofors of this govt.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Will » 13 Oct 2017 17:09

+1000 to that.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 13 Oct 2017 17:18

Tx for the clarifications.New tenders will have to run the gauntlet like the MMRCA take years and ultimately may end up as a damp squib like the mini-Rafale buy. This is why I've said "more of the same in service" upgraded variants much easier to get passed by the MOD/CCS. In the IAF's inventory realistically only MKIs,MIG-29s/35 variant,Jags and LCAs qualify.M2Ks not in prod.,v.v.expensive to upgrade costing more than a new MIG-35 and Rafales which have been ordered.If the Rafale prices dramatically come down,it then we should buy more,but will get nothing in terms of TOT. Why the FGFA deal should be pursued as it must also assist the AMCA.In any comparative cost comparison both acquisition and support costs,it would be twice or even thrice (LCA) the cost of alternatives.

Secondly , most of the weaponry is going to be the same! The same Russian,French and Israeli missiles (AAMs) will feature on all types .It is in the strike role that the larger fighters with their greater payload capability ,like MKIs which can carry BMos,etc.,score over the SE crowd. The inventory mix to possess a balanced cost-effective fleet is what should be ascertained ,keeping in mind budget limitations and the need for force multipliers,also major expenditure items like tankers/transports,AWACS & AEW aircraft,helos,etc.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7824
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 16 Oct 2017 01:05

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918435077905715201 --> The Indian pvt sector can gain much more by producing DRDO developed products rather than some fake JV-ing in the name of whatever.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918437175003308032 --> That's one way to climb the value chain in a world characterized by tech-denial. Not some boogey-woogey talk about 'strategic partnership'.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918436751416246272 --> Technology transfer can only work if you concurrently invest in R&D yourself & then squeeze foreign OEMs on the basis of market access.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918434430888243200 --> There is just no two ways about it. The Indian pvt sector will have to take to spending more on R&D and create domestic IP.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918434755531567104 --> The matter is simple. Allow DRDO to select production partners for projects with co-sharing of some IP.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918439163464007680 --> This is a world of IP rent, tech-denials, attempts at standards universalization & hegemony bonus. The meek shall not inherit the economy.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918436984229543936 --> People forget, that Japan was a pioneer in the use of offsets & its MITI ran the finest industrial intel operation ever seen simultaneously.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918437706257989632 --> Indigenize seriously and then just watch how the second-order effects increase purchasing power in your economy & draw in service jobs.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918437936634372096 --> Increase defence spending to over 2% of GDP & procure indigenous equipment with that hike. Watch the multiplier subsequently.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918438190641328129 --> I think the peak multiplier for a hike in defence capital outlay with overwhelming emphasis on indigenous equipment could be 4-5.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Pratyush » 16 Oct 2017 08:29

All the above tweets are fine but are the powers that be even paying attention.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby shiv » 16 Oct 2017 09:05

Rakesh wrote:
https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918434755531567104 --> The matter is simple. Allow DRDO to select production partners for projects with co-sharing of some IP.

DRDO IP has always been open to the private sector. For example CFTRI food tech has been passed on to many food packaging industries. MDNL has Titanium sponge - and the tech for that is freely advertised as being available to private industry at every Aero India. But private industry cannot invest unless there is profit at the end. They cannot keep employees on their payroll if they are making losses, unlike PSUs. Only the government invests in non-profit making social ventures.

There is an exact analogy in healthcare. Private healthcare will offer excellence but is expensive. Government healthcare is nominally free but woefully inadequate. How to make defence production attractive to private companies? Give them an option to make money. Allow a foreign investor to set up a plant that will supply to any country including India. Once the plants/tooling/machinery/manpower (also land) are set up in private hands they will be capable of taking on anything the DRDO can hand to them. That is why foreign involvement is needed now to set up the plants to make their stuff now and which will later serve as the seed for private defence manufacture in future.

People do not seen to understand this IMO

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Pratyush » 16 Oct 2017 09:16

Alternatively there is a concept of economic order quantity. Below which no production will take place. Let the MOD understand that and you will see that the pvt sector will start taking interest in producing defence goods.

Added bonus, if an item is used by indian armed forces it will have a good international market as well.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby shiv » 16 Oct 2017 09:29

Pratyush wrote:Alternatively there is a concept of economic order quantity. Below which no production will take place.

If new land, plants and tooling are required small orders will never be economical. Sadly the tooling, land and plants are already present with PSUs but they are inefficient entities because they have to do everything. It is not a matter of pride that Su-30s are built from raw material - although it is an achievement. The initial production of components from raw material should be done by some private unit/s - but over the decades - PSUs have set up the plants for doing all that, making PSUs a jack of all trades.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 16 Oct 2017 10:56

Shiv,"jack-ass of all trades"? :rotfl:

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4313
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2017 11:52

shiv wrote:Allow a foreign investor to set up a plant that will supply to any country including India. Once the plants/tooling/machinery/manpower (also land) are set up in private hands they will be capable of taking on anything the DRDO can hand to them. That is why foreign involvement is needed now to set up the plants to make their stuff now and which will later serve as the seed for private defence manufacture in future.

People do not seen to understand this IMO


Shiv, GOI has not put any restrictions on setting up facilities in India. In fact a 100% foreign owned defense related subsidiary can be set up directly. Even for relatively low tech facilities, GOI can allow 100% owned subsidiary on case-to-case basis, going around that 49% FDI limit. The problem is that the pre-conditions GOI set for interested parties and the preconditions foreign OEMs set for GOI are not compatible. While GOI wants to extract technology in return of favorable terms and orders it would give to such facilities, the OEMs want everything from GOI with no strings attached. One example is setting up of any half-decent RnD facility (GE center is BLR doesn't count, its just a glorified cheap engineering off-shore center) which will actually generate technological break-through and IPs. A foreign OEM would want GOI to fund the facility (at least 50% setting up and operational cost along with other soft terms such as tax breaks, cheaper lands and all), but would not want to keep the IP in India. The IP would belong to their native country (whereas any such venture in US or Europe will never let the IP go outside the country, government of which is funding the research). Obviously, why would GOI fund any such venture when we do not retain the IP..? We can rather give the money to Indian companies and perhaps generate the same IP and have full control of it. Another issue is with Export control laws of dual use technology. These is some of the main reasons why we do not see anyone up for setting up 100% owned facilities in India even though that path is open.

For manufacturing of even not so high tech stuff, the problem is economical viability of such facility in India, when GOI is the only and a very unreliable customer. The procurement process is terrible, orders when come are in bits and pieces and there is no guarantee of future. GOI first have to ensure that there is business case to establish such facilities in India. High tech manufacturing has smaller component of manpower cost so India doesn't really hold any significant benefit as low-cost country to set up plants, that someone would take manufacturing from Europe and bring in India and import out from here for cost benefit. In fact its might prove more costly because India doesn't have the infrastructure and kind of matured basic industry that is needed to sustain top level high tech industry (for example if a special machine breaks down its often have to be sent abroad for repairs). So it might actually prove to be costly to set up similar plant in India compared to Europe or US. That's why we have not seen any real investment in defense manufacturing despite recent hike in FDI limits. Thing is no one (or very few at best) is gonna come here to set up manufacturing for import. It has to be with GOI assurances. There are other factors as well, such as political considerations on jobs, government funding for RnD etc.

So what is essential is overhaul of procurement processes, stable outlook on Future in terms of orders and massive government funding in the sector. But if we can do this for foreigners, why can't we do this for Desi industrialists..? After all their main issue is also this. There are many SMEs who would be willing to invest own money and come up with excellent quality high-tech IP across the spectrum, if only they have a stable business environment. We do not even try our best, give up and say only gora can save us now. Then we go on to spread red carpet for goras (which we never did for our own people to help them succeed) and beg for things. In such situation our own private sector will never get a fair chance and will always laggard the other countries. Today HAL is trying to build an MIC in true sense through outsourcing of LCA work. But where is the government support for that..? Did the GOI offer soft loans, cheaper lands or tax breaks to those suppliers who are willing to take up work..? Did GOI ensured them business viability through sustained order book in long term..? Did GOI give free hand and autonomy to HAL to go beyond bureaucracy to expedite the work with the suppliers..? While the desi greenfield ventures gets orphan-like treatment, the precondition for relocating of a fully depreciated F-16 assembly line is minimum 100+ order. We set-up our own people for failure and then cry aloud that we can't do this only. Only goras can help us in this.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 16 Oct 2017 13:08

Case in point.What about the BMos Corp. JV? It has succeeded spectacularly.It's HQ is in Delhi. Can't understand why that model hasn't been replicated.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4313
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2017 13:26

Philip wrote:Case in point.What about the BMos Corp. JV? It has succeeded spectacularly.It's HQ is in Delhi. Can't understand why that model hasn't been replicated.


I wouldn't say spectacularly. Though it has given us quite a bit of more freedom in developing kickass missile for our use. We still are dependent on Russia for key technologies. Spectacular would be when we acquire the ability to produce complete Brahmos with our own rocket motor and seeker. The problem with such model is we always remain a minority partner with less cards in our hand for negotiations. While they can be good models to acquire weapons system quickly and relative freedom for supply to our AFs, they do not give full strategic freedom. So I wouldn't endorse using this model everywhere. That is JV with foreigners. Obviously not for something like 4th Gen fighter production. Good if we are offered co-design/development of latest tech in areas where we lack (and not those examples where the partnership is offered more to kill domestic success).

Anyway, I have been advocating a 50-50 JV between HAL and Pvt company for quite a while. LCA was a good opportunity for that. Still can be done for MK2 if only GOI-IAF decide to fund and buy 150-200 of those birds. The boat for MK1A has sailed already. I would prefer any one of the current Tier-1 companies for LCA for this, with GOI fully financing the private company's part with zero interest loan against their equity share, which they can repay slowly, in turn earning equity in the venture over time. This basically means the private company only needs an intent and passion to get into the business and do the hard work for years to gain enough expertise that they can run the show later on their own. The venture can be promised guaranteed production for AMCA. HAL's equity can be off-loaded to the partner eventually.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4290
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 16 Oct 2017 18:42

+1 JayS

...
For manufacturing of even not so high tech stuff, the problem is economical viability of such facility in India, when GOI is the only and a very unreliable customer. The procurement process is terrible, orders when come are in bits and pieces and there is no guarantee of future.
...

That is the main problem in the Indian military procurement practices of indigenous products.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7824
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 19 Oct 2017 08:02

and this thread goes up again.... :)

Read the whole thing, as Economic Times does not permit you to copy the entire text. But I post an interesting snippet. Lockheed Martin and the US Govt are NERVOUS.

Prior approval for sale of F-16 and F-18 in place: Keith Webster
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 138040.cms

Q. What if India doesn’t choose the F-16?
A. It would be a significant disappointment. Just to develop these Make in India proposals took two years of intense work, to demonstrate DTTI and move beyond MMRCA, to demonstrate this is a new relationship... It would begin fatigue in our prime industries, not only in Boeing and Lockheed. But that is speculation. We have had successes – Apache helicopters and M777 howitzers – but the programmes were extended 12 or 13 times. I don’t fully understand the decision-making process but I know there is incredible anxiety within the bureaucracy on making a deal.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7824
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 19 Oct 2017 08:04

An Indian F-16 Enterprise: Understanding the Strategic Opportunity for the Indian Air Force
http://www.sldinfo.com/an-indian-f-16-e ... air-force/

Being part of a global F-16 force has many other advantages. There are many F-16 pilots worldwide; there are a variety of training centers; and if the IAF needed more aircraft in a crisis they could go to an F-16 partner and find ways to lease aircraft as needed as well.

:rotfl:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7824
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 19 Oct 2017 08:10

India just lost the opportunity to make $2 billion in upgrading Greece's F-16s. And how many more we will lose, till the MoD gives the Red Rose to Lockheed Martin sometime in the next decade :)

Greece Plans to Spend Billions Upgrading Its F-16 Fighter Jet Fleet
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/15 ... -jet-fleet

The United States has approved the possible sale of more than 120 upgrade kits from Lockheed Martin to the Greeks for their F-16 fighter jet fleet. The deal, worth more than $2 billion, highlights the continued importance of advanced 4th generation fighter jets, especially for countries such as Greece that don’t necessarily have the need for or the resources to procure expensive, stealthy 5th generation aircraft.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Austin » 19 Oct 2017 10:58

Rakesh wrote:and this thread goes up again.... :)

Read the whole thing, as Economic Times does not permit you to copy the entire text. But I post an interesting snippet. Lockheed Martin and the US Govt are NERVOUS.

Prior approval for sale of F-16 and F-18 in place: Keith Webster
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 138040.cms

Q. What if India doesn’t choose the F-16?
A. It would be a significant disappointment. Just to develop these Make in India proposals took two years of intense work, to demonstrate DTTI and move beyond MMRCA, to demonstrate this is a new relationship... It would begin fatigue in our prime industries, not only in Boeing and Lockheed. But that is speculation. We have had successes – Apache helicopters and M777 howitzers – but the programmes were extended 12 or 13 times. I don’t fully understand the decision-making process but I know there is incredible anxiety within the bureaucracy on making a deal.


So he would be dissapointed if he cannot sell the IAF a 70's designed Old Hag that just got heavier with every design and was no where in top 3 MMRCA race.

While Tejas a progressive made in India design is suppose to compete with SE types or just be satisified being built in less numbers.

Reason after 70 years of Independence IAF still operates 90 % foreign made or designed aircraft and Touches the Sky with Glory

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby arvin » 19 Oct 2017 11:48

The pessimistic tone of the article and mention of approvals ready and ityadi, seems to imply some rethinking in the corridors of power.

I don’t fully understand the decision-making process but I know there is incredible anxiety within the bureaucracy on making a deal.


:mrgreen: Golden words. I am sure he is not alone. Most people cant make sense of the SE policy.
Assuming this turns out to be another Screwdrivergiri Project(SP) and not Strategic Partner(SP) as was hallucinated earlier it looks as if better to keep producing mig 21 bison as the single engine fighter until Tejas arrives in numbers.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 19 Oct 2017 11:59

That's what Shiv and I advocated about 15 yrs ago ,(sorry for the earlier error!)(reopening the MIG-21 Bison line!).The simplest task would be for the IAF buying the cheapest 4+ aircraft in the inventory which does the biz.The lust for (expensive) firang toys is strongest in the IAF though. They are also being urged on by certain pvt. entities who stand to benefit hugely (not the taxpayer) in the upcoming deals.These will be sealed before the next election .
Last edited by Philip on 19 Oct 2017 14:57, edited 1 time in total.

Sanjiv
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 16
Joined: 19 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Sanjiv » 19 Oct 2017 13:54

Hi Philip it was in 1999 you wanted to restart the Bison line and wanted to send Sea Harriers to Kargil
I used to participate by the name Hans those days
I told you Russia was a failed state and we should get their scientists to help in specific projects
I felt that funding the Mako / or a 12% scaled M-346 was the way forward
I also said that if the LCA was flying in squadron service by 2015 with Kaveri
I would eat my hat did not have to buy one
Did not have to buy one
I did not agree with Light aircraft in any case
It was a Mig 21 replacement which was the best we could get in the 60s
A country the size of India needs a trainer size of Mako,M346
A midsize aircraft like Rafale, Eurofighter and a midsize long range bomber
Having studied Indian efforts since 1967 I gave up and returned to my long term interest
in German aircraft design of WW 2 and tank battles in southern Russia and Ukraine.
What is your of idea of buying second hand carriers old aircraft catamarans any way how does it help the future
If the IAF was a futuristic force they would not have bought the Jaguar but funded ALR Piranha or Gripen with an interim buy of Mirage F1
I will return back to my historic studies and may be check in another 17 -18 years
If the AMCA or Ghatak is in Squadron service I will eat one of collection of word war 1 Prussian Helmets dentures permitting

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 19 Oct 2017 14:34

Austin wrote:So he would be dissapointed if he cannot sell the IAF a 70's designed Old Hag that just got heavier with every design and was no where in top 3 MMRCA race.

You know this how?

The Rafale & EF were on top obviously. The Gripen & MiG-35 would have been at the bottom - the Gripen because Saab brought a C/D to the trials (the E existing only on paper) and the MiG-35 because it was basically a MiG-29K with TVC and a first gen AESA.

The difference b/w the SH & F-16E/F however was unlikely to have been that stark. Comparable avionics (more or less). Somewhat lower RCS for the former against considerably higher performance for the latter. (The F-16E's T/W ratio is pretty close to the Rafale F3 - similar weight ~9.8-10 tons; 145 kN max thrust vs 150 kN.)

Sanjiv
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 16
Joined: 19 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Sanjiv » 19 Oct 2017 15:00

What was needed in 2007 was to develop the F 16U that would have been a match for the rest
And to have taken P&W offer to develop the Kaveri
But as I said before we have not been able to get a howitzer in service in 33 years the same for the LCA
It is like trying to get the Spitfire or Me 109 in service in 1965 and still debating upgrades
Sorry for the rant but the whole process is so depressing .
My last post I will put my blinkers back on
I congratulate the comtinued interest of some of the old timers
But the real greats Salman, Badr , Nitin , Sukumar are also gone or in hibernation

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 393
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby pandyan » 19 Oct 2017 15:41

Rakesh wrote:An Indian F-16 Enterprise: Understanding the Strategic Opportunity for the Indian Air Force
http://www.sldinfo.com/an-indian-f-16-e ... air-force/

Being part of a global F-16 force has many other advantages. There are many F-16 pilots worldwide; there are a variety of training centers; and if the IAF needed more aircraft in a crisis they could go to an F-16 partner and find ways to lease aircraft as needed as well.

:rotfl:



It is possible that their prediction model has figured out a probability of India selecting f16. May be the probability does not promising...given how leaky the cauldron is

Even if grippen is selected, it will be a big win for the usa and big loss for lca

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4290
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 19 Oct 2017 16:53

Rakesh wrote:After 36 jets, Rafale to push for Make In India
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 76772.html

...
IAF at present operating with 32 squadrons and on the verge of losing out more squadrons as MiG 21 and MiG 27 fleeting is ageing and the Air Force would achieve its sanctioned strength of 42 fighter squadrons by 2032. IAF will have 83 indigenous Light Combat Aircaft Tejas, 36 Rafale and 36 additional Sukhoi fighter jets by end of 2019. Though, IAF was keen on a follow-on order of 36 additional Rafales to bridge the gap of it depleting combat fleet, but, they are now settling for lighter single engine warplanes. For this, the IAF is will start the process this month to acquire a fleet of single engine fighter jets which are expected to significantly enhance its overall strike capability. But, IAF has already maintained that requirement of twin engine is very much there. IAF chief Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa, on the occasion of IAF Raising day has made it clear that there is absolutely a need for twin-engine fighter jets. And Rafaje is a twin engine jet.


Double dipping. Above shows that the single-engine import was always on the cards even if all the MMRCA came about. Doesn't look good for the LCA in the mid-to-long run if this SE MII gets inducted.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby shiv » 19 Oct 2017 20:06

srai wrote:Double dipping. Above shows that the single-engine import was always on the cards even if all the MMRCA came about. Doesn't look good for the LCA in the mid-to-long run if this SE MII gets inducted.

If we can get even ONE private fighter production line outside of HAL it will benefit the country a great deal. The tooling, the infra structure investments are needed to make India an Industrial economy.

China has grabbed all the low tech industry and is gradually working its way up the tech ladder. We cannot compete with China in low tech. But we can take a short cut by providing opportunities to high tech western companies who are going to lose business to China and keep them competitive. We can support a sinking west and let it benefit us.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4313
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 19 Oct 2017 21:48

srai wrote:
Rakesh wrote:After 36 jets, Rafale to push for Make In India
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 76772.html

...
IAF at present operating with 32 squadrons and on the verge of losing out more squadrons as MiG 21 and MiG 27 fleeting is ageing and the Air Force would achieve its sanctioned strength of 42 fighter squadrons by 2032. IAF will have 83 indigenous Light Combat Aircaft Tejas, 36 Rafale and 36 additional Sukhoi fighter jets by end of 2019. Though, IAF was keen on a follow-on order of 36 additional Rafales to bridge the gap of it depleting combat fleet, but, they are now settling for lighter single engine warplanes. For this, the IAF is will start the process this month to acquire a fleet of single engine fighter jets which are expected to significantly enhance its overall strike capability. But, IAF has already maintained that requirement of twin engine is very much there. IAF chief Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa, on the occasion of IAF Raising day has made it clear that there is absolutely a need for twin-engine fighter jets. And Rafaje is a twin engine jet.


Double dipping. Above shows that the single-engine import was always on the cards even if all the MMRCA came about. Doesn't look good for the LCA in the mid-to-long run if this SE MII gets inducted.


From all the evidence, at least I have concluded quite a while ago, and have said so on this thread as well a couole of times - 126 Rafale deal was broken i to two parts - 36 Rafales as strategic N delivery platform, and rest numbers to be filled from another cheaper western fighter. SE is basically to keep Russians out becuase they have none in that class and they cant complain either now (Though they have been trying hard to get in somehow). IAF doesnt want Russian maal anymore. This way IAF gets its western fighters. Requirements are satisfied. GOI can afford and and can play some geo-politics with it. MII is also glorified. Private industries get some thing to chew on. Everyone is happy.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby NRao » 19 Oct 2017 21:54

Absence of Parrikar is causing this rudderless behavior.

He had a game plan. If he were around he could have at the very least pushed the deal. The chances were better with him around.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 19 Oct 2017 22:29

JayS wrote:SE is basically to keep Russians out becuase they have none in that class and they cant complain either now (Though they have been trying hard to get in somehow). IAF doesnt want Russian maal anymore. This way IAF gets its western fighters. Requirements are satisfied. GOI can afford and and can play some geo-politics with it. MII is also glorified. Private industries get some thing to chew on. Everyone is happy.

The obvious SE fighter to pursue in that case is the F-35. Especially with the PAK FA/FGFA project in the doldrums.

“[The Americans] embarked on something very ambitious in its capabilities. We already see what this plane has. Not everything is perfect. There are things you learn along the way. That’s been the case with every plane we acquired. But when you take off in this plane from Nevatim [base], you can’t believe it. At 5,000 feet, the whole Middle East is there for you in the cockpit. You see things, it’s inconceivable. American pilots who visit us haven’t seen anything like it, because they fly over Arizona or Florida, and here they suddenly see the [entire] Middle East as a combat zone – the threats, the different players, at both close range and long range. Only then do you grasp the enormous potential of this machine. We’re already seeing it with our eyes.”

- Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel, Israeli AF chief

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2427
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cybaru » 19 Oct 2017 23:53

I wish they finish the dual engine thing first before embarking on the single engine. That will give LCA more room to breathe and will add the most important missing elements to our force!

If Thales wins the RBE2 tender than the radar TOT will be inked separately.
If Kaveri really takes off then perhaps it may even power the Indian Rafales.
This will keep pricing very competitive and allow the french to fulfill both IAF and IN demands of 96 + 57 units locally built.

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 393
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby pandyan » 20 Oct 2017 00:07

NRao wrote:Absence of Parrikar is causing this rudderless behavior.

He had a game plan. If he were around he could have at the very least pushed the deal. The chances were better with him around.

He should be consulted and nothing says he should be kept out...

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Viv S » 20 Oct 2017 00:10

Cybaru wrote:I wish they finish the dual engine thing first before embarking on the single engine. That will give LCA more room to breathe and will add the most important missing elements to our force!

If Thales wins the RBE2 tender than the radar TOT will be inked separately.
If Kaveri really takes off then perhaps it may even power the Indian Rafales.
This will keep pricing very competitive and allow the french to fulfill both IAF and IN demands of 96 + 57 units locally built.

- Its just local assembly - substantial radar ToT isn't envisioned (else DARE and/or BEL would be involved). Although given that the RBE-2 is already being integrated with the Astra, its prospects are fairly strong for the Tejas Mk1A contract.
- Even a rejuvenated Kaveri will take at least a decade for an operationally rated unit to be delivered i.e. after the last Rafale is delivered to the IAF.
- The Rafale M isn't going to cut it for the 57 aircraft IN contract - the Vikrant's lifts are too small and the VikAd of course is a total non-starter.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7824
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 20 Oct 2017 02:02

guess who makes a key component of the IAF's favourite new air-to-air missile. Cough....Cough...Saab...Cough...Cough :)

Saab supplying fuze systems for Meteor missile
https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2017/1 ... 508420879/

Saab has been contracted by European missile-maker MBDA to produce proximity fuzes for Meteor missiles.

Saab to supply Meteor BVR missile subsystem to MBDA
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/21014/ ... em_to_MBDA

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2427
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cybaru » 20 Oct 2017 02:28

Viv S wrote:
Cybaru wrote:I wish they finish the dual engine thing first before embarking on the single engine. That will give LCA more room to breathe and will add the most important missing elements to our force!

If Thales wins the RBE2 tender than the radar TOT will be inked separately.
If Kaveri really takes off then perhaps it may even power the Indian Rafales.
This will keep pricing very competitive and allow the french to fulfill both IAF and IN demands of 96 + 57 units locally built.

- Its just local assembly - substantial radar ToT isn't envisioned (else DARE and/or BEL would be involved). Although given that the RBE-2 is already being integrated with the Astra, its prospects are fairly strong for the Tejas Mk1A contract.
- Even a rejuvenated Kaveri will take at least a decade for an operationally rated unit to be delivered i.e. after the last Rafale is delivered to the IAF.
- The Rafale M isn't going to cut it for the 57 aircraft IN contract - the Vikrant's lifts are too small and the VikAd of course is a total non-starter.


Viv..

There are too many assumptions here. If the assumptions are correct you could be right.

But to assume that Rafale won't fit on the elevator by ballparking elevator size of vikrant by using google may be discounting something important.

If Kaveri flies in LCA by 2019 then the prospects of it being tested and available in the next few years after that increases quite substantially. Given that IMRH engine needs to be chosen and Safran can supply atleast 300+ (100 lca and 200 AMCA engines) cores which account for 40% of the cost of the engine is a lot of money left at the table if they don't help.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7701
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 20 Oct 2017 02:40

In my very very limited understanding, IAF its feet in too many boats.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4290
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 20 Oct 2017 03:50

^^^
Agree.

The way I see it these $15 billion+ import acquisitions will keep getting punted to the next administration, who can't say no to the armed forces even though we all know that the defense capital budget is very limited and will be for the foreseeable future. So what the politicians resort to is add layers of delaying tactics in the form of bureaucracy to avoid having to sign the deal while in their term in office.

After some 10+ years, this MII SE will be used for purchasing some F-35s, IMO.
Last edited by srai on 20 Oct 2017 03:53, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18499
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Karan M » 20 Oct 2017 03:53

With Astra Mk1 in user trials, expect DRDL to take the MR/LRSAM/ARM dual pulse motor and put it in the Mk2 as well. In short, the Meteor will not be the only long range game in town for the IAF. We will not need to wait for the SFDR either. The Astra Mk1 is basically a modernized missile with the kinematics (roughly) of the R77. The MK2 will be the real deal, but hopefully IAF has the common sense to not wait for the Mk2 but use the Mk1 to build up BVR stocks for Su-30, MiG-29.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3789
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 20 Oct 2017 06:10

Karan M wrote:In short, the Meteor will not be the only long range game in town for the IAF.

Shhh, not so loud or they'll do another piecemeal order of 50 test rounds.. For user trials onlee


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests