'Make in India' Single engined fighter

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby vina » 10 Oct 2016 22:12

F-16 Block 70:

Gripen E:

F16 BLK 70 and Gripen E are similar in price and performance. The F16 has a far stronger industrial base, political support and benefits. Gripen brings nothing in terms of tech or little in terms of performance.

F-35A (dark horse):

If India finds the Rafale unaffordable, this will surely break the bank. This one is close to 300 mil a pop. You are looking at a $40B acquistion for 100 airframes + attrition reserves.
Last edited by vina on 10 Oct 2016 22:14, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 10 Oct 2016 22:14

vina wrote:That was Mr Modi himself and the much ballyhooed "Make In India" program. This is just that. Make in India! This idea has been bounced off Modi during his America visit and has got purchase from him.

Like Shiv said, it is going to be like this. Full FDI, Furrin Managers/Overseers/Engineers, Indian Workmen, Gated Community, a full "Aero Park" with the major components guys clustered together (think Auto Industry and their vendors brought along with them and clustered together), some 5000 to 10000 jobs, can even promise to be ForEx / 60% offset neutral like auto industry with this model (think Ford, VW, Hyundai,Nissan etc.. exports lot more than domestic sales by value). Same here. Produce F16s at $50m a pop with all bells and whistles (costs come down with cheaper Indian labor, if you move the entire production line and tooling and component vendors along with you to India. Auto industry showed that) , and you can continue flogging it in the global market for another 20 years. Not bad.

So, it is like this. LM & Saab proposes to make their planes in India and export them out of India and support global customers IFF (if and only if, like in math theorem proofs), we agree to take some 100 airframes. That is all there is to it.

Someone asks how will HAL benefit with ToT . Indeed what did they do from 60 years of screwdrivergiri. HAL gets cash flow, low risk and that is all they care about. What will they do with technology ? Are they going to design and build anything at all by themselves ? Nope. So why bother. HAL != India.

If the thought was to open a second line to make the LCA in India in the private sector, why there were tons of guys from Northrop Grumman, to Eurofigher to BAE with tons of experience who would have willingly partnered with Tata or L&T etc or whoever to make it here. That is not the intent.

The intent is purely make in India and possibly export and support from India. For that , you need to share the domestic market like in the auto industry and that is the trade. In addition you possibly kiss up to Unkil for strategic and other benefit, including possibly engine and getting a fab for GaAs /GaN and Infrared seekers / Radar seekers etc..


LOL. If its Modi then consider it a done deal. I hope GOI will just do a FMS deal, and wont get into the tender tamasha. Single vendor didn't hinder Rafale, it shouldn't hinder F16 as well. You are not the first one to tell me this MII thing, some one else told me similar thing, someone who hear things from chaiwallas. I just refused to believe it back then.

RIP Tejas..!! It was a good dream until it lasted.

We can kiss goodbye to AMCA as well. Offer for F-35 will surely come by 2035.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 10 Oct 2016 22:22

vina wrote:
F-35A (dark horse):

If India finds the Rafale unaffordable, this will surely break the bank. This one is close to 300 mil a pop. You are looking at a $40B acquistion for 100 airframes + attrition reserves.


I don't think IAF is ready for F35. The central theme of the philosophy behind F35 is net-centric warfare. It is deeply integrated with the US military echo-system. It will be very challenging for us to integrate F35 with our systems in the same way as our forces are a cocktail of myriads of systems from around the world. We will not be able to exploit full potential of F35 ust now. It will just be a shiny toy for us. May be if IAF plans for it, in 2035 or so we might be able to have proper net-centric systems wherein F35 will fit nicely.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5225
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ShauryaT » 10 Oct 2016 22:42

We need to better understanding why a 2nd production line for the Tejas is not possible, with private participation. Understand the challenges in building en eco system that can deliver to the same capacities, the lack of trained work force, etc. But somewhere along the line HAL will have to off load its knowledge to a private entity. An eco-system is more viable, if there is more demand. Many private entities will refuse to do anything with the government, While some others love it. A private MIC is the only way I see of India getting a meaningful MIC, and let us admit the government controlled one has failed to deliver. Somewhere along the line, there is a suspicion that HAL wants to retain its monopoly and this monopoly needs to be broken. Remember there is an entire gravy train of DPSU's, MoD and Services that is deeply intertwined and will resist this change citing real and imagined bottlenecks. Praikkar's job number one is to brake this gravy train. Maybe in his judgment the best way to kick start this is NOT to fight with the establishment but work with foreign investors to build this parallel private MIC to the government controlled now. But in this process, the native product in question looses its preeminence by being on a slow track, if not entirely threatened.

Best thing to do is at least ask Parikkar on social media to better explain this need. He may not respond to any one of us but if a 1000 people as the same question, the message will be received?

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby vina » 10 Oct 2016 22:45

Lockheed Martin India Page

F-16 Fighting Falcon
Lockheed Martin is committed to strengthening and expanding our partnerships with India. We have partnered with India for over 25 years and remain committed to a long-term partnership in technology development, manufacturing and strategic collaboration. Enter the Block 70 F-16, the newest, most advanced F-16 ever.
Exclusive F-16 production in India, for the Indian Air Force and global export, would make India home to the world’s only F-16 production facility.
This unique F-16 opportunity delivers advanced defence capabilities, supports Indian industry, creates high-technology jobs in India and strengthens the growing strategic partnership between the U.S. and India.
Lockheed Martin is the pre-eminent designer, developer, and manufacturer of the world’s most advanced fighter aircraft. We are confident in our unmatched ability to create an F-16 production line in India, together, with Indian industry. Our partnership and joint venture company with Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL) has proven that Indian industry can manufacture airframe components for the C-130J airlifter and the S-92 helicopter. We hope to build on that success with the F-16, the world’s most successful, combat-proven multi-role fighter.

HYDERABAD, India, Sept. 19, 2016 – The 50th C-130J Super Hercules empennage assembly was delivered by Tata Lockheed Martin Aerostructures Limited (TLMAL) on Sept. 16. TLMAL is a joint venture between Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL) and Lockheed Martin Aeroframe Corporation located here.
TLMAL was established in 2010, with production of C-130J Super Hercules airframe components beginning in late 2011. TLMAL not only exemplifies the Government of India’s “Make in India” objectives, but it has the distinction of being the single global source of C-130J empennage assemblies included on all new Super Hercules aircraft produced in Marietta, Georgia, in the United States of America

So there. The full transfer of the assembly line and supporting vendors is on.. Looks like it is going to be Tata and not Mota/Choa Bhais in on it.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 10 Oct 2016 22:52

^^ This C130J empennage, is the contract under offset obligations??

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby vina » 10 Oct 2016 23:05

JayS wrote:^^ This C130J empennage, is the contract under offset obligations??


Yes, I would assume so. But dont worry. The F16 seems to be a done deal . In all fairness, the F16 BLK70 is a 9 ton empty and a 21 ton MTOW fighter. If LM had offered that instead of teh UAE derived offering and the padded R&D costs which UAE paid, it could have well won it.

The deal has been reported all over the media. Check it out in India to get most advanced F16 in 2019-20 , from Hindu Businessline
Lockheed Martin is currently scouting for land to set up its manufacturing unit. According to sources, it is looking to set up the plant in a State that will have a runway near a port.

NEW DELHI, JULY 11:
US defence major Lockheed Martin has firmed up its plans to produce the latest version of its iconic F-16 fighter jets only in India under the ‘Make in India’ programme.

The multi-billion dollar deal was “finalised” during the recent visit of Lockheed Martin’s Chairman, President and CEO Marillyn Hewson here last week, a top official, involved in the talks, told BusinessLine.

‘Exclusively’ in India
Under the deal, the company will be manufacturing the latest version of the jets – F-16 Block 70/72 – that will be produced “exclusively” in India.

This will be the “most advanced” version and will not be built anywhere else in the world. Lockheed Martin also plans to export them from the India plant at a later stage, the official said. The F-16 project is a government-to-government deal that will be conducted through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route.

However, it seems Lockheed Martin has no plans to take the 100 per cent foreign direct investment route for the programme. It is likely to co-produce the F-16s in collaboration with the Tata Advanced Systems Ltd., which has been its partner for other defence and aerospace programmes such as the C-130 cargo plane.

The Maryland-based firm is currently scouting for land to set up its manufacturing unit. According to sources, it is looking to set up the plant in a State that will have a runway near a port.

India had long been demanding that the F-16s it buys will have to be more advanced than what is sold to neighbouring Pakistan.

However, with the recent push on India-US defence ties, talks on setting up the F-16 plant in India have steadily progressed. The deal was “almost finalised” when Prime Minister Narendra Modi had visited Washington last month.

During this visit, Modi finalised the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) with the US, which is one of the three crucial foundational agreements that strengthened India-US defence ties.

India is also negotiating the remaining two foundational pacts with US.

As a result, the F-16 programme of Lockheed Martin received a major thrust due to this strengthening of ties. Indian Air Force is in desperate need of modern fighter aircraft as it grapples with an ageing fleet.

(This article was published on July 11, 2016)

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby kmkraoind » 10 Oct 2016 23:29

Can US let India to manufacture GE-F110 engine and its variants (LM2500 marine engine). Then we can build our own HCA around GE-F110 and its future variants.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Viv S » 10 Oct 2016 23:34

vina wrote:F-16 Block 70:

Gripen E:

F16 BLK 70 and Gripen E are similar in price and performance. The F16 has a far stronger industrial base, political support and benefits. Gripen brings nothing in terms of tech or little in terms of performance.

The Gripen E is, or rather will be a Rafale class fighter. AESA, GaN based EW system, sensor fusion, BriteCloud, LW-IRST, Striker II imaging helmet, directional data-links.. the works. Plus some limited supercruise capability.

F-35A (dark horse):

If India finds the Rafale unaffordable, this will surely break the bank. This one is close to 300 mil a pop. You are looking at a $40B acquistion for 100 airframes + attrition reserves.

That would be the tabloid figure. It would be inadvisable to take it at face value.

The Rafale's flyaway cost as per the recently signed agreement is $105 mil (€94 mil). The F-35's flyaway cost (2017 SAR)... $98 mil. By 2019 (with the first multi-year buy), that figure will be $80-85 mil. Frankly, the Gripen E & F-16 Blk 70 won't be too far off that, though their operational cost will of course be lower (25-30% lower in the F-16's case).

Its still an expensive aircraft, but relative to its capability, given the pace of PLAAF modernization and the fact that realistically the FGFA isn't coming before 2025, the IAF would probably give it a very serious look if it has any concerns vis a vis the F-16.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Viv S » 10 Oct 2016 23:39

kmkraoind wrote:Can US let India to manufacture GE-F110 engine and its variants (LM2500 marine engine). Then we can build our own HCA around GE-F110 and its future variants.

HAL carries out local assembly and testing for the LM2500. Also, if we were to scale up the AMCA into an AHCA, which I think is a good idea, the powerplant of choice would be the P&W F119.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby NRao » 10 Oct 2016 23:48

What is AHCA?



BTW, IF the F-16 is coming - which I think it is - then the Jet Engine deal and therefore the AMCA (from an Indian PoV) is a done deal. The two are tied at the hip. Good - about the AMCA (the first true Indian air craft).

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 10 Oct 2016 23:51

kmkraoind wrote:Can US let India to manufacture GE-F110 engine and its variants (LM2500 marine engine). Then we can build our own HCA around GE-F110 and its future variants.


Why would you want to use F110 engine in a jet designed in 2020's?? Its T/W 7.5 class engine and that it its absolute upper limit. Even Kaveri has same T/W ratio. OTOH, F414 in base version itself has 8.5-9 T/W, and if they make a 110kN engine that would be 9.5 T/W ratio.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby deejay » 10 Oct 2016 23:52

NRao wrote:What is AHCA?



...


Advanced Heavy Combat Aircraft

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby NRao » 10 Oct 2016 23:56

deejay wrote:
NRao wrote:What is AHCA?

...


Advanced Heavy Combat Aircraft


Real project? However, great to hear that.

But, what about the FGFA>

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 10 Oct 2016 23:57

^ With FGFA, Su30 and AHCA IAF will become too top-heavy.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Viv S » 10 Oct 2016 23:59

NRao wrote:Real project? However, great to hear that.

But, what about the FGFA>

Entirely theoretical. After all, we wouldn't want to deprive ourselves of the joy of trying to figure out how to pack a cartload of electronics into as small a jet as possible, all so we can save the extra gas consumed by a larger aircraft.
Last edited by Viv S on 10 Oct 2016 23:59, edited 1 time in total.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby deejay » 10 Oct 2016 23:59

NRao wrote:
deejay wrote:
Advanced Heavy Combat Aircraft


Real project? However, great to hear that.

But, what about the FGFA>


It just an expansion of acronym Sir. There is no such project.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 00:00

The only other competitor to France and Russia for supplying fighter is US. US involvement will help us negotiate better terms with other players as well.

There is a need for numbers, cost is a major factor, between LCA 30M and Rafale 100M, the new fighter cost has to be near LCA cost, that is why single engine.

LCA will never be killed, it is home grown fighter, it will be taken to its logical conclusion, this is the instrument to build Indian aero Industry and create export potential. It will be allowed to mature at this own pace and also build faith in Indigenous products, so no one can touch LCA, unless someone is trying to do harakiri, or the product completely fails, LCA is good enough, but needs time to mature and production issues sorted out.

Technology transfer, MIC, economy are other factors that will play a factor in selection process of new fighter.

US involvement will provide easier access to technology and products, that will expedite the product development and ease learning curve.

India is trying to catch up with 50 years of technology development, so acquisition is the only way out at this stage. lot has been achieved with LCA, and it is to the credit of LCA that so many offers are made including latest versions and even those on the drawing board.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 00:07

FGFA will take while to come, it is for something beyond 2025/2030.... replacement for SU30MKI.
How about putting F110 in FGFA? If India is paying for development cost, India should have right to replace component of its choice.

In 15-20 years IAF type will start reducing to only few types

Su-30MKI - FGFA..
MCA/Rafale
LCA/?

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 00:13

Saab will be rewarded for all their involvement since MMRCA. they will get business in terms of components and products, not necessarily the complete fighter. They might as well be involved in setting up second LCA production facility in next 3-5years.

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Bhaskar_T » 11 Oct 2016 00:15

Which company makes the weapons onboard F-16?

Can we make the F-16 weapons in India also if F-16 deal goes ahead or it has sensitive technologies which cannot be shared with India?

What is big game-changing difference between Pakistani F-16 Block52/60 versus F-16 Block 70?

When MMRCA technical evaluation was going on, which F-16 block was evaluated? And under which technical parameters it failed? (Couldn't take-off from Leh under full weapon load? If yes, then F-16 is debarred from Leh?)

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 00:26

I think the offer was for F-16IN, but it was a paper plane. I do not think any F-1X came to India, but it was evaluated by IAF in friendly country. Only technical evaluation done and rejected. Not 100% sure.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 01:01

Here is the list of upgrades, since APG-80 production may be ending by 2016, it would be likely SABR.

https://tacairnet.com/2015/08/15/the-f- ... air-force/
===
The integration of fifth-generation technology into the fourth-generation platform is pretty much what makes an already-potent fighter an even more potent air-to-air and air-to-ground killer. Using the Block 60 configuration as the base to work off of, Lockheed Martin added a number of upgrades to beef up the Fighting Falcon into the Super Viper. The most powerful upgrade comes in the form of the AN/APG-80 AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar system, which is already in service with the United Arab Emirates’ Block 60 Desert Falcons. The AN/APG-80 gives the pilot incredible situational awareness and the ability to target and track in any weather/atmospheric condition with stunning precision. An infrared search and track (IRST) system, the ability to integrate the Indian Air Force’s Operational Data Link (which allows for interoperability with other Indian fighter/attack/AWACS/support units), an onboard electronic warfare suite from Raytheon, and an upgraded modular mission computer add to the F-16IN’s sizable resume. The cockpit has been redeveloped to an extent, with three color high-definition MFDs (multi-function flight displays) feeding the pilot everything he needs to know, as well as the ability to integrate the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS). An updated General Electric F110-132A functions as the sole powerplant, able to output over 32,000 pounds of thrust, and the Super Viper also carries conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) with a built-in fuel probe, designed to mate with the basket/drogue refueling system used by Indian aerial tankers, instead of the boom/receptacle system commonly used by American F-16s.

Vashishtha
BRFite
Posts: 268
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 23:06
Location: look behind you

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Vashishtha » 11 Oct 2016 01:07

Kindly explain why you make this claim - Where has IAF abandoned Tejas?


With only 100 firm orders for what was supposed to be replacing over 200 Mig 21's. It sure looks abandoned to me.

Don't get me wrong mate, I love the airplane and been following its development over almost a decade. I'm disheartened at the lack of firm orders from its primary customer after everything its been through. And if that wasn't enough, IAF seems to prefer a similar sized aircraft from a videshi supplier. Now that's "Jale Pe Namak Chidakna" :( .

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 01:09

I guess, a better evaluation will be done during

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Israe ... ilots-7732

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

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Oct 2016 01:11

ragupta wrote:...
How about putting F110 in FGFA? If India is paying for development cost, India should have right to replace component of its choice.


Sukhoi refused even to help with Brahmos integration. Getting the Israeli/DRDO stuff into MKIs was like pulling teeth. The Russians won't share anything crucial (just like everybody else) regardless of whether you paid for the development cost.

They just want us to spend the money for their R&D so they can sell it to China.

Besides, I think the cost of fitting the F110 into an ac not designed for it is going to make the integration of the F414 look like child's play.

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

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Oct 2016 01:13

ragupta wrote:I guess, a better evaluation will be done during

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Israe ... ilots-7732


The Israelis have really been pushing the F-16 deal saying it's a fantastic value. Google has somewhere.

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

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Oct 2016 01:27

NRao wrote:What is AHCA?



BTW, IF the F-16 is coming - which I think it is - then the Jet Engine deal and therefore the AMCA (from an Indian PoV) is a done deal. The two are tied at the hip. Good - about the AMCA (the first true Indian air craft).


Advanced Heavy Combat Aircraft which is the precursor to the AOCA

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 11 Oct 2016 01:29

ragupta wrote:How about putting F110 in FGFA? If India is paying for development cost, India should have right to replace component of its choice.


Again, Why would anybody want to use F110 engine in a newly designed jet in 2020's?? Its at least 1 full generation behind (And If Russians put up their best show with PAKFA engine, 2 generations behind the intended final engine) the 117S which is currently in PAK-FA. Slightly higher thrust than F110-132 with almost 500kg less dry weight..!! On top of it, it has TVC, F110 doesn't.

As such PAKFA is suppose to have a much more powerful engine later with 5th gen 170+kN thrust. We would get same thing as PAKFA. Why redesign FGFA for new engine and waste efforts, when those efforts can be focused on something else??

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5038
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Surya » 11 Oct 2016 01:42

why are people ruling F 16 out simply because the Pakis have them?

Its not deterred either the Israelis or the Egyptians from using it or the Greeks and Turks

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

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Oct 2016 01:44

^^^"Why redesign FGFA for new engine and waste efforts, when those efforts can be focused on something else??"

Because reinventing the wheel is in our DNA. We must MKIze everything for hot & humid & heavy (sounds like Trump) conditions. Always reminded me of the US Hispanic penchant for late model Honda Civics with 20 inch tires that cost more than the car.

Jesting aside, Russian engines tended to have low MTBO compared to western ones. We'll have to see if the 117S keeps up the tradition.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 01:53

JayS wrote:
ragupta wrote:How about putting F110 in FGFA? If India is paying for development cost, India should have right to replace component of its choice.


Again, Why would anybody want to use F110 engine in a newly designed jet in 2020's?? Its at least 1 full generation behind (And If Russians put up their best show with PAKFA engine, 2 generations behind the intended final engine) the 117S which is currently in PAK-FA. Slightly higher thrust than F110-132 with almost 500kg less dry weight..!! On top of it, it has TVC, F110 doesn't.

As such PAKFA is suppose to have a much more powerful engine later with 5th gen 170+kN thrust. We would get same thing as PAKFA. Why redesign FGFA for new engine and waste efforts, when those efforts can be focused on something else??


Ok, make sense.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby JayS » 11 Oct 2016 02:03

^^ @Cosmo_R
Still does not justify the redesign effort of changing engine. And what about TVC??

If at all we are hell bent on American engine we should see if we can buy F119 as suggested by VivS. If PW can supply it, it would be a good option.

117s suppose to have 4000hr life with 1000hr MTBO. The 1000hr number is most probably due to its prototype stage. I would expect it to be around 2000hr in serial production for life of 4000hr. And we can always de-rate it slightly to increase life significantly. That is far better option than changing engine.

Forget about F110. It will be very inefficient design with F110 - loss of almost 1000kg payload based on the engine weight itself. Add few hundred kg weight creep component of the aircraft empty weight due to heavier engines. That's a significant number.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17952
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Karan M » 11 Oct 2016 03:08

Surya wrote:why are people ruling F 16 out simply because the Pakis have them?

Its not deterred either the Israelis or the Egyptians from using it or the Greeks and Turks


IAF has an ego too. plus the saab is a newer more maneuverable design and will offer more customization, fbw codes bla bla

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

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Oct 2016 03:47

JayS wrote:^^ @Cosmo_R
Still does not justify the redesign effort of changing engine. And what about TVC??

..

Sorry, I was being sarcastic here. We buy PAK/FA, we are stuck with 117S or whatever. There is no mix and match.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2016 06:19

Vashishtha wrote:
Kindly explain why you make this claim - Where has IAF abandoned Tejas?


With only 100 firm orders for what was supposed to be replacing over 200 Mig 21's. It sure looks abandoned to me.

Don't get me wrong mate, I love the airplane and been following its development over almost a decade. I'm disheartened at the lack of firm orders from its primary customer after everything its been through. And if that wasn't enough, IAF seems to prefer a similar sized aircraft from a videshi supplier. Now that's "Jale Pe Namak Chidakna" :( .

IAF has abandoned Rafale also by the same argument.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2016 06:55

Slow morning - my dog woke me up at 4-30 AM

We are dealing with 2 different streams of information here
1. Verifiable facts/information
2. Conclusions/statements based on what people believe to be true which are not verifiable

This is actually a fantastic mix for either massive misinformation or a soap opera. We regularly accuse the media of doing this but we do it routinely ourselves.

Let give some examples of verifiable information based on reports and statements over the years
1. Tejas is being inducted into the Air Force
2. By most accounts about 120 are expected to join the IAF
3. The CAS is on record confirming this as well as being positive about his flight in the Tejas
4. The IAF was impressed with the Rafale, and the CAS is on record (as per media reports quoting him) that more would be nice if needed
5. The Rafale is a different class of aircraft from Tejas
6. There is news doing the rounds that a second line of fighters will be set up. This has been stated by Parikkar and the CAS. No details available
7. Throughout the Rafale negotiation saga neither SAAB nor LM stated that they were out of the race
8. There were many scams during the UPA regime


Here is a list of a few personal impressions and unverifiable claims made by people (which I can recall off hand). Ideally these should not be mixed up with verifiable facts - but we do mix them up leading to conclusions that are part verifiable and part fiction/unverifiable
1. IAF has abandoned Tejas
2. IAF is against Tejas
3. IAF loves only imports
4. CAS is old guard left over from UPA regime
5. India is looking to kill all indigenous programs
6. Government is looking to hand over things to Reliance


When you mix up verifiable fact and unverifiable conclusions you get something like this:
"Burhan Wani was killed in army action" is a verifiable fact.
"Buhan Wani was the son of a school headmaster" - maybe verifiable fact
Putting the two together implies: "Burhan Wani, killed by the Indian army was the son of a cultured educated family and hardly the type who could be accused of being violent. the Indian Army's violence speaks for itself


On this note we can mix up verifiable fact and reach Barkha like conclusions which can easily be denied
Facts:
4. The IAF was impressed with the Rafale, and the CAS is on record (as per media reports quoting him) that more would be nice if needed
5. The Rafale is a different class of aircraft from Tejas
8. There were many scams during the UPA regime


Conclusions:
2. IAF is against Tejas
3. IAF loves only imports
4. CAS is old guard left over from UPA regime


Just sayin..

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8070
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Pratyush » 11 Oct 2016 07:22

Shiv thank you.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby vina » 11 Oct 2016 07:24

Guys. Foggedabout any R&D (ie. Rhona & Dhona)

It IS in all probability going to be F-16 Blk 70. If Gripen wins this, I will be gob smacked and left shaking my head in disbelief.

So what has happened is essentially this.
1. The IAF needs 126 Medium Class aircraft with sufficient legs for a 500 NM range , to replace the Jaguar and Mig 27 and other mud movers. This should also be fully multirole. The age of dedicated aircraft went the way of the Dodo.

2. The original MMRCA contest was about that.

3. The MMRCA contest has turned out to be NOT winner takes all. The French got a "consolation" price of 36 airframes. That I think will be for the nuclear strike role for the IAF which it doesnt want to give up. The Rafale is fine for that, it can self deploy and protect itself in deep strike missions.

4. The remaining part of the 126 odd MRCA has gone to the F16 . This is a single engine, low cost, fully mature fighter. Perfect for multi role deep strikes and A2A roles. This will be cheap to maintain and run and with the advanced logistics, maintenance and support practices it will approach unprecedented availability and reliability in IAF. In fact, it might turn out to be the most reliable and available fighter in IAF service ever . (think of availability like a civil commercial airliner).

5. Remember, the F16 is a MEDIUM category aircraft . The BLK 70 will weigh in at 9 to 9.5 tons empty, 13 tons Loaded and MTOW of 21 Tons. For perspective, the Tejas weighs in at around 6 tons empty , 9 tons loaded and a MTOW of around 13.5 tons. The Gripen E /NG is a 7 ton empty wt fighter.

6. The LCA MK2 could have been a match for the F16 (similar range, but still lesser payload), but the IAF has decided that the Mk2 is something they dont want, and cannot wait for . They decided to load up the Mk1 with cutting edge radar and avionics and called it MK1A. The airforce is NOT interested in MK2.

7. The MK2 will be a totally IN baby, which is perfect. They can concentrate on making a plane the want, without the Air Force interfering. In fact the IN badly NEEDS it. The Mig 29K by all accounts is an endangered species and will soon be extinct. The Navy needs a fighter that is single engine and cheap. The only other alternative is F-35 and the carrier borne versions and VTOL versions are above $300m per pop and simply unaffordable.

8. Expect the following. Engine order goes to GE. You will see GE engines for F110 and F404 series being assembled in India, with hand holding to develop the engine for the AMCA. Also I would expect negotiation for a fab for GaAs/GaN , IR seeker kind of thing to take place as part of offsets . The critical gaps in tech the LCA program hasn't been able to fill is in engines and seekers . It filled in everything else (structures, FCS ,avionics)

9. So it is all falling together. Saves the ADA a lot of trouble with the Mk2 program. The Navy is a far more rational and mature customer than the IAF. The IAF and IA can only go shopping in the international arms bazaar given a budget. That is all they are good at. They cant develop a screw. So Go NAVY!
Last edited by vina on 11 Oct 2016 07:27, edited 3 times in total.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Single Engined Multi Role Fighter with Transfer of Manufacturing Technology

Postby Viv S » 11 Oct 2016 07:25

JayS wrote:I don't think IAF is ready for F35. The central theme of the philosophy behind F35 is net-centric warfare. It is deeply integrated with the US military echo-system. It will be very challenging for us to integrate F35 with our systems in the same way as our forces are a cocktail of myriads of systems from around the world. We will not be able to exploit full potential of F35 ust now. It will just be a shiny toy for us. May be if IAF plans for it, in 2035 or so we might be able to have proper net-centric systems wherein F35 will fit nicely.

It doesn't work like. While we can't it exploit it to the extent that the USN can (through its NIFC-CA project), that doesn't change the aircraft's core capability in a 'conventional' role. Its a bit like saying that you're not ready for the new Iphone 7 because you don't have 4G service in your area.

We're in the same shoes as the Israelis who're configuring the aircraft to mesh with their C4I system using their own datalinks & radios. Basically, they're substituting the Link 16 with a local alternative for comms with rest of the fighter fleet, while the MADL continues to be used for short range LPI comms with other F-35s. The aircraft will still be able to function unimpeded. To use a cellphone analogy again.. its like switching service providers; same data is transferred in either case.

U.S., Lockheed reach deal on Israeli F-35s
The Pentagon has reached an agreement with Lockheed Martin Corp on a $450 million program to enhance electronic warfare equipment on the F-35 fighter jet, and integrate Israeli-unique systems beginning in 2016, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.
.
.
Agreement on development of the new Israeli version of the F-35 will allow Israel to install its own radio and datalink systems, as well as other equipment, on the jets it is buying.



BTW the IAF's Operational Data Link... developed by IAI. Contract for new Software Defined Radios... awarded to Rafael.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest