Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Postby sunilUpa » 20 Mar 2008 18:24

The earlier report of India-Defence looks like DDM. Going over the report again, it appears that India-Defence just rehashed some old reports.

Posts: 639
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Postby bala » 21 Mar 2008 00:42

This report provides more details on MTA deal

India and Russia will speed up their joint Multi-role Transport Aircraft (MTA) project by one year with the signing of a USD 8.5 million deal next month for starting work on design of the aircraft.

Russian arms exporting monopoly Rosoboronexport (ROE) and India's Hindustan Aeronautical Ltd (HAL) will ink a deal in April for developing a draft design of the MTA, Kommersant daily said, quoting Russian sources.

The deal will accelerate the USD 600 million MTA project by one year, said Viktor Livanov, director of aircraft manufacturer MAK Ilyushin, the Russian partner in the project.

Russia and India signed an intergovernmental agreement on the MTA project in January 2007.

"In February, we agreed with India not to wait for creating a joint venture -- which our and Indian bureaucracy will take exactly a year -- but sign in April a direct intermediate contract of HAL and Rosoboronexport for elaborating the MTA draft design," Livanov was quoted as saying by Kommersant.

"The contract budget is about USD 8.5 million; the draft design is to be detailised in two years. The plans are that the jet takes off in 2013 and is certified in 2015," Livanov said.

Earlier, the initial Russian partner in the 50-50 venture, 'Irkut' corporation walked out of the MTA project, after which Ilyushin was roped in.

Analysts say Ilyushin, which is short on qualified personnel, could be a risky partner although its Il-214 transport plane has been picked as the prototype of the Indo-Russian MTA.

A delegation of HAL is expected in Moscow next week to study the draft design of the Il-214.

Posts: 178
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
Location: new delhi

Postby soutikghosh » 21 Mar 2008 01:37

Tilak wrote:Russia, India to sign 8.5 mln usd contract to design military transport plane
03.20.08, 5:36 AM ET

MOSCOW (Thomson Financial) - Russia and India will sign an 8.5 mln usd contract to start work on the design of a new military transport aircraft in April, MAK Ilyushin general director Viktor Livanov told the Kommersant daily.

He added that it will cost about 600 mln usd to launch serial production of the aircraft, with each side providing half of the projected costs.

Test flights of the plane could begin in 2013, he added.

Now that's a relief. Does this mean that the MRTA will finally get through.

BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 02 Sep 2005 15:44

Postby vikas_pandey » 21 Mar 2008 09:26

For MTA, Irkut is off and Ilyushin is on?

BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 18
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 02:26

Postby brar » 21 Mar 2008 21:25

here is a video offering some info on MTA. the video is quite old but gives some insight on the MTA program.

Posts: 118
Joined: 08 Oct 2007 19:02

Postby gogna » 23 Mar 2008 22:20

Amphib’s condition could sour arms sales
By Vivek Raghuvanshi Sunday Mar 23, 2008 9:38:46 EDT

[quote]NEW DELHI — India is so disappointed with the poor condition of its recently purchased U.S. amphibious ship that other U.S. weapons sales could be in jeopardy, an Indian Defence Ministry official said.

On March 14, the government’s independent audit agency blasted the Indian Navy for buying the USS Trenton for $50.63 million without checking it out first.

“The non-negotiable offer of the foreign Navy was accepted without a rigorous technical evaluation of the actual physical state of the ship and onboard equipment,â€

A Sharma
Posts: 1148
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 27 Mar 2008 20:14

Turkish Army Chief to visit India

The commander of the Turkish land forces General Ilker Basbug will undertake a five-day official visit to India from Monday.

Busbug will hold talks with his Indian counterpart General Deepak Kapoor and would also be briefed on India's security perspective.

The Turkish Army chief will also call on Defence Minister A K Antony. He would also hold wide-ranging talks with the Naval Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta and Air chief Fali Homi Major.

In the course of his visit, the Turkish Army Chief will visit important establishments of the army and the DRDO.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 6847
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 29 Mar 2008 06:56

Under the Foreign Military Sales system, each stage in the negotiating process must be authorized. Client countries also pay a 3% commission on top of the sales price.
Is that true?

BRF Oldie
Posts: 4464
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Postby putnanja » 31 Mar 2008 00:59

Multi-role Transport Aircraft venture not affected: HAL

[quote]BANGALORE: Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has said that the withdrawal of the Russian company Irkutsk Aviation and Industrial Association, one of the partners in the $600 million, joint Indo-Russian Multi-role Transport Aircraft (MTA) venture, will not result in the project falling through.

Speaking to The Hindu on Friday, HAL’s Director, Corporate Planning and Marketing, M. Fakruddin while confirming that Irkutsk will no longer be the nodal agency from the Russian side, stressed that the venture “was very much onâ€

A Sharma
Posts: 1148
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 02 Apr 2008 08:03

'India, Israel developing unmanned helicopter'

JERUSALEM: India and Israel have begun joint development of an unmanned helicopter capable of operating in severe weather conditions, local media has reported.

The chopper will have an automated takeoff and landing systems for use on unprepared fields on land and from aircraft carriers at sea.

Being developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and Israel Aerospace Industries' unmanned air vehicle division, Malat, the helicopter will also have a dual automated sophisticated operating systems for enhanced safety, business daily Globes reported.

The helicopter was unveiled at an air show in India last month, it said.

The unmanned helicopter meant primarily for use by the navy will carry payloads such as day-and-night-imaging systems and various radar systems.

Its main advantage over unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) is its ability to takeoff from and land anywhere, including from ships, the report added.

Posts: 1525
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 02 Apr 2008 11:13

Let DRDO complete its preliminary research, you may soon hear about a JV between DRDO and IAI on a future UCAV.

Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13

Postby Igorr » 02 Apr 2008 15:09

RaviBg wrote:Multi-role Transport Aircraft venture not affected: HAL
Speaking to The Hindu on Friday, HAL’s Director, Corporate Planning and Marketing, M. Fakruddin while confirming that Irkutsk will no longer be the nodal agency from the Russian side

- Irkutsk branch is over loaded with other programs. Till 2012 it's manufacturing capacities are full on 170% . Now they'r already producing much more than even in Soviet time and need some time for prod-line expansion. Some additional programs, like Be-200, they were forced to transfer to other places since it became possible with almost all Russian air-building capacity was consolodated in UAC.

Posts: 191
Joined: 25 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: Mumbai

Postby Himanshu » 02 Apr 2008 15:16

Igorr.. Who's working on the Ilyushin 76 platforms in Russia these days.. any new developments on the civil aviation front?

Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13

Postby Igorr » 02 Apr 2008 15:31

Himanshu wrote:Igorr.. Who's working on the Ilyushin 76 platforms in Russia these days.. any new developments on the civil aviation front?
Ilushin design house makes all tech support to all Il-76 park of course. No change is allowed without their specialists. Also they projected and tested 20t+ Il-76TD-90 and Il-76TF varians with PS-90-76 engines and new pilot cabine for 3 pilots. The further development of Il-96 is the bulk part of their work too. Before a year the first Il-96-400T (transport) entered service, and now they prepear the first planes of passanger variant of Il-96-400 for some customer. In additional, their branch, Ilyushin Finance Company holds like 2/3 of Russian aircraft leasing. Indeed the MTA was born from their Il-212 model, so their main role now is quiet explainable. This is the link, although with some translator mistake about its engine:
Anyway Irkut had to address to them because itself had no proven experience in transport aircrafts. Ilushin agreed to give them its Il-214 design for leasing because Irkut traditionally has good relation with India. Now it's look more like returning the project back to OEM.

Posts: 118
Joined: 08 Oct 2007 19:02

Postby gogna » 03 Apr 2008 19:07

India's HAL in $600 million deal with Russia's Ilyushin for transport aircraft

April 03, 2008: 07:49 AM EST CNN-Money
BANGALORE, Apr. 3, 2008 (Thomson Financial delivered by Newstex) -- India's state-owned military-plane maker Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) said that a joint venture to develop a multi-role transport aircraft is near completion.

HAL is partnering with Russia's Ilyushin Design Bureau in the $600 million project, to which the two companies will contribute equally, HAL Chairman Ashok Baweja told a news conference here.

'The funding is ready and the programme is now on,' Baweja said of talks which dragged on since first conceived in the first half of this decade.

The 60-tonne tactical transport aircraft, meant to serve the armed forces of the two countries, would take six-to-seven years to develop, with the components coming from Ilyushin production facilities in Russia, Baweja said.

To be used both for transport duties and troop deployment, the aircraft is meant to replace the Indian Air Force's ageing Antonov-32s even as the country also seeks transport aircrafts for the US.

Last month, Defence Minister A.K. Antony said India plans to buy six Hercules transport planes, along with ground-support equipment and spares, from Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT) of the US for $962 million.

The four-engine turboprop aircraft will be used as the main tactical aircraft for special operations, officials have said.

Bangalore-based HAL manufactures under license Russian-designed Sukhoi and MiG fighter planes, British Jaguars and locally designed advanced light helicopters.

In about a month, it will deliver to the Indian Air Force the first locally-built Hawk advanced jet trainer to be followed by 14 more over the next year, Baweja said.

The aircraft were among 66 trainer jets ordered by the Indian government in March 2004 from Britain's BAE Systems.

Under the terms of the agreement, 24 Hawk trainers were bought off the shelf, while the other 42 are to be built under licence by HAL.

In the financial year ended March 31, the state-owned company crossed two billion dollars in sales, which have doubled in three years, according to Baweja. Exports rose by a fifth to $81.25 million.

HAL received orders worth 233.15 billion rupees ($5.83 billion) during the year, including 159 advanced light helicopters to be delivered to the Indian armed forces. The company has 451 billion rupees of orders on hand, Baweja said.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Postby srai » 04 Apr 2008 12:12

Juggi G
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Postby Juggi G » 09 Apr 2008 12:17

No Defence for this InAttention
Indian Express
No Defence for this InAttention
Vinay Shankar

Posted online: Saturday, March 08, 2008 at 2359 hrs

The pattern being followed over the last two decades seems to suggest that defence spending is without direction, writes Vinay Shankar

Though the finance minister has announced a 10 per cent increase in the defence budget this year, the allocation is just a little below two per cent of the nation’s GDP. In terms of percentage of GDP that our neighbours are spending, we are not even at half their levels.

So how much should be allocated for defence? Do we have a rationale? Or are defence budgets just a ritual sans clear objectives?

The pattern followed over the last two decades seems to suggest that defence spending is without direction. The method apparently is to take the previous year’s allocation, allow for inflation and maybe add/subtract a little depending on the whimsical math the finance ministry undertakes to finally close figures. Curiously, this has nothing to do with the manifesto of the party in power.

The Kargil war did lead to the much-needed introspection on matters of national security. Some very sound recommendations were made. Regrettably, we have floundered in their execution. Drift has settled in again.

Defence budgets ought to be aimed at developing defined capabilities within specific time lines. The capabilities desired have to be derived from an assessment of possible threats as also the requirement of securing the national interest. For example, we have border issues with Pakistan and China that mandate capabilities to defend our territories. Concurrently, we must always remain poised to protect and dominate our sea lanes of communication. Besides, we must be able to combat terrorism, fight militancy and also be prepared to, if required, aid state governments to quell Naxal movements. We must have ‘on call’ forces that can be projected to protect our emerging interests beyond our borders.

Today we have establishments whose primary task is to study national security and evolve strategies to secure national interests. The headless (no decision yet to appoint a chief of defence staff) Integrated Defence Staff within the ministry of defence and the National Security Advisory Board are adequately staffed for strategic planning, constantly monitoring our security envelope and determining the fund requirements for creating capabilities. The national security adviser has direct access to the PM as also to the cabinet committee on security. Then where is the problem?

There could be some justification for our low levels of expenditure if we have some very secret alliances in place. Otherwise, even a casual look would suggest that our budgets and spending are grossly insufficient.

Comparisons are not necessarily conclusive. Yet a brief glance at China’s defence spending can be instructive. That country, most analysts believe, is spending contrary to its claims on defence. The size of its GDP is more than two and a half times that of ours.

Its focus is on rapid modernisation. If we were to couple this with the fascinating pace of infrastructure development in Tibet and the linking up of mainland China with Tibet by rail, the picture, militarily, is reasonably ominous. The timing of the Chinese posturing over Arunachal in the last couple of years requires no special analysis. If we were stronger, the Chinese would probably have been more subdued. After all, many of us believe that the Kargil adventure by the Pakistanis happened only because our forces were not potent enough to deter. Two years later, our reluctance to take any punitive action after deploying for Operation Parakrama would again suggest that among many reasons, perhaps the most important was the nagging doubt that we were not strong enough.

It should be accepted that we cannot match Chinese spending dollar for dollar; nor should we try. Some very bright people among us can probably figure out smart spending but even this would have its limitations. Though we may not spend six per cent, we should not go below 3-4 per cent. This is the level of spending on defence that is widely believed to be affordable.

Planning for force structuring has to, at a minimum, look at a ten-year time horizon. It takes about 2-3 years to decide the system to be procured and its desired specifications. If all goes well, another three to four years are required to invite offers analyse them, carry out trial evaluation, negotiate contracts and place orders. For major systems, deliveries can commence only after at least one year after the advance is paid. If we were to look at some of the ongoing major procurements like the Medium Range Strike Aircraft, or the helicopters or the artillery guns, the time plot has gone horribly awry.

What most of us tend to forget is that acquisition alone does not mean enhancement of capability. Time has to be allowed for assimilation and absorption of each system. For instance, to train a pilot to be combat ready on a new sophisticated modern aircraft can take as much as one to two years.

All the three services are currently saddled with aging equipment. Replacement programmes are running behind schedule. Weapons replacement in quite a few cases also means ammunition replacement and expenditure on ammunition is invariably many times more than the cost of the weapon. To even maintain the existing capability we need considerably higher allotments.

The defence services have been clamouring for long-term commitment of funds for many years. But planning remains an annual exercise guided by the previous year’s allocation. Five year plans are made by each service headquarters, but since never formally ratified they lack the desired sanctity. It would be revealing to study the last three to four ‘five year plans’ of the three services with a view to establishing the gap between projections and allocations.

Few countries in the world face the kind of security challenges that we do. Yet the irony is that despite a number of wars, including one in which we suffered a humiliating defeat and also lost considerable territory, we do not seem to have learnt many lessons. How else can anyone explain the scant attention to defence?

The writer is former Director General Artillery

BRF Oldie
Posts: 3282
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 09 Apr 2008 21:54

Juggi G wrote:No Defence for this InAttention
Indian Express
No Defence for this InAttention
Vinay Shankar

Posted online: Saturday, March 08, 2008 at 2359 hrs

Though the finance minister has announced a 10 per cent increase in the defence budget this year, the allocation is just a little below two per cent of the nation’s GDP. In terms of percentage of GDP that our neighbours are spending, we are not even at half their levels.

Pathetic :cry:

India of today is like France in 1939.

A divided, pacifist society that thinks it can avoid war by avoiding preparing for war.

Tiger economy, high cultural footprint, Bollywood, and financial dominance of Cricket, are going to be useless in face of military aggression by determined neighbour(s).

And there are no allies that will ride to our rescue, once our territory is occupied.

Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 16 Apr 2008 17:45

Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Postby PaulJI » 16 Apr 2008 18:18

Interesting story, but low-grade journalism. Reckons Embraer is "the only manufacturing firm that makes 120-seater commercial jets". Well, apart from Airbus (A318, A319) and Boeing (737-600). :lol:

A Sharma
Posts: 1148
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 16 Apr 2008 18:57

'Offset clause for Aerospace can fetch big business for India'

With Indian Aerospace and Defence budget expected to touch USD 100 billion mark in the next 10 years, an offset clause warranting foreign defence vendors to source 30 to 50 per cent of contract value within India, is expected to fetch several billion dollars worth of business for local industry.

The Indian offset policy states that any defence contract worth over Rs 3,000 million that India enters into with a foreign vendor will have an industrial offset liability to the extent of 30 to 50 per cent, which presents a huge opportunity for India, said Bejoy George, Vice President, Global Sales, Quest.

Quest is a provider of outsourced engineering services and manufacturing.

"The foreign vendor would therefore have to source his equipment or services from India, which is 30 to 50 percent of the contract value, which means that foreign vendors would now have to look for Indian firms to partner with them to cater to this offset obligation," he said.

"This spells business of around one billion USD annually in three to four years, up from USD 150 million currently", Bejoy said.

The Indian aerospace and defence buying budget is expected to be USD 100 billion in next 10 years - this indicates an offset value of USD 30 to 50 billion (depending on the offset percentange applicable to each order) coming into India, Bejoy said.

India's offset clause in terms of the tender for 126 MMRCA (medium multi-role combat aircraft) states that 50 per cent of this contract value should be invested by the supplier in the country.

This again would mean a business opportunity worth USD five to six billion over a period of 7 to 10 years, starting 2012-2013, he said.

Also the long-range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) patrol aircraft order would be worth around USD two billion, and the offset clauses would generate about USD 700 to 800 million of business to Indian firms, Bejoy said, outlining the huge potential here.

Another military aircraft order, that is expected to be placed, is for high altitude utility helicopters worth around USD 500 to 700 million.

Regarding civilian offset clause, Airbus obligations, due to sale of aircraft to Indian Airlines a couple of years ago, was expected to be to the tune of around USD 800 million.

Also, the Boeing obligation due to the sale to the erstwhile Air India (Now Indian) was expected to be around USD 2.2 billion over a period of five to seven years.

"Hence there is a definite visibility of above USD 10 billion due to military aircraft orders and civilian aircraft orders for India, over the next 7 to 1O years", he said.

The aerospace products and services which include aerospace application software, embedded systems and hardware is around USD 150 million annually as of now.

India has the opportunity to reach at least the USD one billion annually in a span of three to five years, he said.

"This growth is in line with overall engineering services business being outsourced to Indian firms; during 2004-2005, between USD 1.2 billion and USD 1.8 billion worth of engineering services were offshored to India and this figure is expected to reach between USD 45 billion and USD 65 billion by 2020", he said quoting Nasscom-Booze Allen Hamilton report on engineering services outsourcing.

According to Bejoy, another source of aerospace business coming to India would be from some of the big players in the aerospace sector in the US, Europe and Japan.

"There are multiple factors driving this. For example, airframe manufacturers like Boeing, Bombardier, Embraer, are no longer able or willing to fully bear or fund the non-recurring engineering (NRE) cost i.E the cost involved in developing a new aircraft from a scratch and are now shifting part of it to their tier one suppliers", Bejoy said.

The tier one suppliers in turn selecting ESO providers in the low cost regions that offer a labour arbitage along with the right competencies and capabilities in avionics software a nd mechanical components and system development.

"This is one of the most attractive reasons for foreign firms to put Indian aerospace firms on their radar", he said adding that players like Quest who posses the capabilites and experience in collaborating to reduce NRE cost would stand a good chance in bagging orders from foreign firms on this count

Another reason for aerospace work to come to India is the critical manpower crunch in aerospace engineeris sector that countries like US, Europe and Japan are to face. "There are about 635,000 aerospace engineers in the US currently and 25 percent of them will be eligible for retirement this year. There are not enough young engineers to replace them", he said

The engineering teams in companies across developed world are in a bit of a bind "On one hand they are under pressure to improve productivity, cut costs and improve time-to-market and other hand they are facining critical shortage of talent owing to the shapr fall in engineering graduates from the generation after the Baby boomer generation through the seventies, eighties and nineties", said Bejoy.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 23 Apr 2008 02:03

MPs want defence spending to match buildup by Pak, China
This was for the first time in more than 10 years that Lok Sabha took up for voting the Demands for Grants of the Defence Ministry which were earlier guillotined along with most of the Demands for Grants.
"This is a matter of grave concern," T P S Rawat, a retired Lt Gen and a new BJP member, said initiating the debate and demanded that the military expenditure be sustained at three per cent of the GDP for some years to enable India to equip its forces with advanced weapons systems and platforms.

A Sharma
Posts: 1148
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 23 Apr 2008 19:15

No military alliance with any country: Antony

India today ruled out joining any military pact or alliance against any other country but said that it would continue engagement of its armed forces with major countries.

"We will not enter into any military alliance with any country," Defence Minister A K Antony told the Lok Sabha as the House, after a break of almost a decade, discussed and passed the Demands for Grants for the Defence Ministry.

While ruling out joining any military pact or alliance, Antony made it clear that India will not tone down or give up its growing engagements with major powers like the US, Russia and others as these were aimed at increasing the capabilities of the Indian armed forces.

"We are following an independent foreign policy," he said asserting that the government will not take any step that is against the interest of the country's sovereignty.

In the course of his hour-long reply, the Defence Minister said that the country's armament programmes, including building of missiles, modernisation and raising the force levels of the armed forces were going at steady pace.

He said that efforts were on to bring to optimal level, the country's air and naval strenghths.

On the appointment of first ever Chief of Defence Staff, Antony said that no political consensus could be reached as political parties were still to give their response to the proposal.

Overiding criticism that there was slowdown in arms procurements, he said his ministry was clearing all proposals timely, but foul play and CBI investigations in some of the deals like Barak missile had led to delays.

On the controversial Logistics Support Agreement with the US, which has angered the Left parties, Antony said discussions were on but India would not include any clause that will go against the interest of the country's sovereignty.

Elaborating on the country's weapons programme, he said the missile programme -- both short range, long range and ground-to-air -- was on schedule.

He said the Light Combat Aircraft as well as the country's first ever Air Defence Ship would roll out on schedule by 2012.

Similarly, he said other strategic projects like unmanned aerial vehicles and the supersonic Brahmos cruise missile were on course.

Clarifying on INS Jalashwa, the ship landing dock procured from the US, the minister maintained that the warship had a still a life of 10 years.

This, he said, had been verified by a team of experts led by a Vice Chief of Navy, which had submitted a report to the government.

He asserted that INS Jalashwa, previously known as the USS Trenton, was not an abandoned ship.

Antony said that previous governments had not given proper attention to developing infrastructure along the border areas.

"We have decided to develop infrastructure in border states, particularly in Arunachal Pradesh," he said adding that the government had undertaken 72 road projects in such states on a priority basis.

Antony said the UPA government has also set up an Ex-servicemen Welfare Department to look into issues concerning retired military personnel.

Posts: 1277
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 29 Apr 2008 13:25

Locheeds boss answers questions to a Norwegian website. Norwegians are considerng JSF and Gripen.

Bombing or Air superiority?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but is not the F35 primarly a bomber for use AFTER the F/A-22 Raptor has cleared the skies of SU's and MiG's?

Norway (should be) is in the market for an Air superiority fighter, like the F/A-22, EF-Typhoon. Or do you disagree with this? ( i have to say i fully understand that you (US) are not willing to export the F/A-22 )

What is the assumed kill ratio for a plane like the SU-27 Flanker or the SU-35 Flanker-E vs the JSF?
5 JSF for each downed SU-35?

And will the METEOR (BVRAAM) fit inside the weaponsbay of the JSF or will it render its ( limited ) stealth useless in Air to Air combat?

And my final questions.

Will the JSF have the speed required to intercept Russian built fighterplanes and bombers, or will they simply fly circles around them?

Su-35 has an assumed top speed of mach 2.34 or 2500 km/h, and from what i found thru google, the JSF has a top speed of mach 1.6 or 1900 km/h.

And how about Russias next gen fighter, the SU-37?
Will the JSF even stand a chance?

Innsendt av: Aleksander
Speed is one of those capabilities that are not well understood by many people. To be relevant, the tactically relevant speed is a much better comparison. F-35, in its stealth configuration, carries a combat load of weapons internally as well as all of its targeting systems and external fuel. It's speed in this configuration remains as advertised at Mach 1.6. when other airplanes add equivalent external carriage of weapons, targeting pods and external fuel tanks, their speeds are no longer the top speed advertised due to the large amount of aerodynamic drag that results from the requirement to carry those elements externally. So, top speed is an interesting capability but not highly relevant if you put the airplanes in a tactical or combat environment. F-35 will be highly effective against all current and future fighter aircraft.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

Dear sir, I have two questions:
What kind of technology with norwegian origin would be integrated in the original and basis JSF?
In case another supplier is chosen as supplier of fighters to Norway, would any norwegian suppliers of technology be actual suppliers to the JSF?
Innsendt av: Tor Eksom
Norwegian industry already has high technology parts flying today on ur first test airplane. additionally, Norwegian industry, working with Lockheed Martin and our teammates, have developed a comprehensive plan that includes advanced composites manufacturing, new generation air to surface missles, engine components and other high technology projects. The work of F-35 continues throughout the life of the program so it is very long term. Additionally, as Norwegian industry continues to work to be competitive in this program, we expect new "spin off" opportunities in other areas to result.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

Air superiority?

Air superiority fighter is what as far as i know what we need for the defense of Norwegian superiority, witch is what on need for a defense of Norwegian air space. witch of the tree actual plane do you think suit the task best, Eurofighter tyfon, JSF F-35, or JAS gripen?
Innsendt av: stian
The F-35 is a multi-role fighter fully capable of performing the air superiority role which is important for monitoring and securing the High North. Norway also has a requirement to monitor and control the sea area which is important to Norway's economy. The F-35 has very advanced radar, electronic warfare equipment, Electro-Optical and laser targeting systems, all internal to the aircraft which provides the stealth features making it very difficult to be detected. The F-35 is the best aircraft to protect Norway's national air and surface space.

Jim Latham

Why should the Norwegians choose Lockheed Martin ?

Hi,and welcome to Norway !

What is the main reason you think Norway should choose the American Joint strike Fighter ? Test shows that the Swedish planes are substantially faster.That is a very important factor considering that we are neighbors with Russia.And they have increased there activity in the north sea lately.
Innsendt av: Curious norwegian
Speed is a very interesting capability that some people do not fully appreciate. Speed is effected by both power and drag. A stealthy airplane like F-35 is designed to carry a combat load of weapons and additional fuel internally to preserve its stealth features. Current generation airplanes may be faster without any additional fuel or without carrying weapons which is not tactically relevant. Current generation airplanes must add wing pylons, external fuel tanks, external targeting pods and external weapons to have the same capability that F-35 has with all of it's equipment, fuel and weapons internal. That additional external load creates significant additional drag and results in significantly lower speed capability in a combat relevant configuration. As for power, the F-35 airplane is powered by the F-135 or F-136 engine which has nearly twice the thrust of any competitor airplane.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

Is more better?

The wonderful F-22 is so special its built in just a few examples so how does that fit in with the F-35 argument that buying a jet produced for many at the lowest possible price is "better" than a nationally customized product?
Innsendt av: Frode Halvorssen
The F-22 technology is flowed down to the F-35 and has been improved upon since the F-22 was developed. These improvements in the radar, Electronic Warfare and other systems will be flowed back to the F-22 in the future. The F-35 was designed as a multirole fighter which is equally effective in the air-to-air role and air-to-ground roles. Norway is a partner in the program and has representatives in the JSF program office. This allows Norway to have a voice in the development of capabilities for example a drag chute for icy runway operations.

Jim Latham


Good morning!

Last november I had the pleasure to visit the Air & Space Museum outside Dulles airport.
I did get a good look at your excellent fighter,at the exhibition there.
My question: Is this plane a full scale-model, or the real thing?

BTW: I sincerely hope that our government will choose the JSF, as it is the best choice, by far...

Have a nice day.

Erik E
Innsendt av: e
The airplane you saw at the Air and Space museum is the actual concept demonstrator that we flew in early 2001 to prove that our concept of a highly capable family of airplanes could be designed to include a variant capable of SHort Takeoff and Vertical landing. That airplane that you saw performed exceptionally well and was a major contributor to our design being chosen to become the F-35. Thank you, Erik, for your good wishes.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

The right plane?

Mr. Burbage,

Thank you for taking time to answer our questions!

It is my understanding that the JSF is primarily a fighterbomber, to be used in conjunction with the F-22 - a plane I understand the US at this point in time is unwilling to sell. I am concerned that the JSF is the wrong plane when what we need is an interceptor, considering the increased Russian activity in our airspace (and adjacent such).

Unlike the US Airforce (or the Naval equivalent), the Norwegian Airforce is small and cannot afford a huge varity of planes for separate tasks. Are you confident about the multirole capacities of the JSF?

Best regards.
Innsendt av: Jon Berger
Only the US Air Force will operate the F-22. the other US flying services (US Marine Corps and US Navy) and the eight partner nations will operate the F-35 as their front line multi role fighter. The F-35 is designed to be effective in the very challenging Air to Ground environment but is equally capable in the Air to Air environment. the combination of stealth technology (the element of surprise) and fully integrated avionics (exceptional situational awareness) ensures that the F-35 will be highly effective against any adversary airplanes including the most advanced Russian fighters.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom


What is the cost per plane of JSF, to UK, Turkey, Israel etc?
Innsendt av: Enthusiast
There are eight partner countries and two security cooperation participants (Israel and Singapore) in the JSF program. Each country may have its own unique requirements so the unit cost will vary somewhat from country to country. For example Norway may want a drag chute for icy runway operations. If none of the other partners want a drag chute they Norway would have to pay that cost on its own or with any others that want the drag chute. In general the average cost of the Conventional Take Off and Landing variant cost is in the mid to upper $40 Million range using 2002 USD value. The Short Take off and Landing variant (UK, Italy and US Marine Corps) and the Carrier Variant for the USN is about $15M more.

Jim Latham

What sort of JSF?

What kind of the JSF's are The United States and Lookheed Martin willing to give to Norway?

And is it the fully operational JSF platform that will be given, or are the US afraid of giving to much technology to the Norwegians?
Innsendt av: Fighterplane enthusiast
The F-35 Program is developing next generation fighters for the United States and close allies. the apecific requirements for Norway are negotiated between the two governments and Lockheed Martin will deliver airplanes that are fully capable of meeting Norway's requirements. Norway has been a very long partner of the US Air Force and Lockheed Martin with the operation of their F-16 airplanes. F-35 offers the opportunity to continue those relationships.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

Why is F-35 better than the new Russian Sukhoi Su-35?

Norway should buy 48 of F¿22 Raptor instead, or Eurofighter.
Innsendt av: Mikael Tuoplev
The F-22 Raptor is not available for export. the F-35 was designed from the beginning to incorporate much of the advanced technology of the F-22 and to be exported to closest allies of the US. F-35 is the only fifth generation capable airplane available to Norway for future purchase. F-35 is designed to be revolutionary in the multi-role missions (Air to Air and Air to Ground).

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

F35 vs Jas Gripen

Why should Norway buy Lockheed Martins F35 and not SAAB's Jas Gripen?

What benefits will Norway get from going in and buying these aircrafts from you, that they wont get if they buy Jas Gripen?
Innsendt av: Christian
The United States is recapitalizing its flying services with the most advanced fighter technology in the F-35. CLosest allied Nations have been given the opportunity to participate in the development of this sirplane, including participation of the industry. Because of the large scale of the project (numbers of airplanes to be produced)we are able to offer this advanced capability at costs that are comparable to current generation airplanes. if you are going to reequip your Air Force to be effective in the future, it makes sense to invest in technologies that will be effective and capable in the future.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

Air To Air VS Air To Ground

From its specifications it is well known that The F-35 is a better Air to Ground machine then Air to Air. America will not use The F-35 for Air to Air, but are buing F22-Raptors for this, wich is a aircrafte you will not sell to other countrys. Norway biggest need is a good Air To Air craft, why do you still think F35 is the best choice?
Innsendt av: Andre svendsen
Although the primary design driver for F-35 is Air to Ground (which is a tougher design criteria than air to air), the airplane has exceptional air to air capability. The US Navy and US Marine Corps do not operate F-22s and those services intend for the F-35 to be their front line multi role fighter which means exceptional Air to Air and Air to Ground capability. the other eight Nations that are partners on the F-35 program will also employ this airplane as their front line multi role fighter.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom


When the JSF enters into service, it will face the Russian SU-35. Experts claim that only the F-22 and the EF will be able to match this formidable russian fighter. Are we facing the risk of buying an aircraft that is already obsolete?
Innsendt av: Morten
Our next generation fighters are truly revolutionary with the incorporation of stealth and fully fused and integrated avionics. This ensures that the F-35 pilot is fully aware of everything around him while the adversary cannot track the F-35. The combination of exceptional situational awareness and tactical surprise makes the F-22 and F-35 uniquely capable against any current generation airplane, including the SU-30 family of airplanes.

Thanks for the question-best regards, Tom

Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 05 May 2008 04:00

Defence purchase policy: western pressure resisted
The Defence Ministry has decided to resist western pressure by sticking to direct offsets in the revised defence purchase policy. However, it partially conceded to their demands by including two new concepts in the offset clause called banking and transfer of technology, highly placed sources said, adding that they were taking a close look at recent global examples of major offset work, especially the one in Poland involving fighter aircraft.

A Sharma
Posts: 1148
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 05 May 2008 19:26

TAD Kanpur signs export agreement with RUAG

HAL TAD, Kanpur and RUAG Aerospace Services GmbH, Germany, a part of RUAG Aerospace, inked a long term agreement for manufacture and supply of main structural parts for Dornier 228 NG (New Generation) aircraft.
The Dornier 228 NG is an upgraded version of an earlier Dornier 228-212 aircraft. RUAG management decided to re-launch the Dornier 228 production, considering strong market prospects for this class of aircraft.

Dornier 228 production in Germany was discontinued in 2002 while the Indian production line still continues due to the aircraft's proven track record. Do 228-101 and -201 versions are being manufactured by HAL TAD Kanpur since 1983 under licence from erstwhile Dornier GmbH. RUAG will undertake final assembly of the aircraft at its facility in Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, with structural parts like fuselage, wing and empennage (a total of 20 types of assemblies) sourced from HAL. Vast experience in production of Dornier 228 aircraft made HAL a preferred partner for the re-launch programme.
The agreement marks the beginning of a new era of co-operation between HAL and RUAG.

Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 13 May 2008 06:55

From DN
May 12, 2008
[quote]Indian Reluctance Holds Up U.S. Arms Sales


NEW DELHI — The Indian Defence Ministry’s inability to sign the End Use Verification Agreement (EUVA) and other Indo-U.S. pacts may delay U.S. arms sales to India, including the $2 billion purchase of Long Range Reconnaissance Air­craft from Boeing, a senior ministry official said.

He said senior ministry officials are still arguing about whether to ink the EUVA, which would re­quire the ministry to perform end­use inspections, a provision that the military dislikes.

A senior Indian Navy official said no agreement should allow “intrusivenessâ€

Avinash R
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

Postby Avinash R » 13 May 2008 18:38

Israel Aerospace Industries, Tata ink defence production pact
New Delhi, May 13

Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd (IAI) and India's Tata group have inked a framework agreement for cooperation in the development, manufacturing, marketing and support of defence products in India.

IAI president and CEO Itzhak Nissan and Tata group chairperson Ratan N. Tata signed the agreement in Tel Aviv, an IAI statement said Tuesday. This follows a memorandum of agreement that was signed Feb 17 in New Delhi during the Defexpo defence show.

"The cooperation agreement between IAI and Tata Advanced Systems Ltd. (TASL) covers a wide range of defence and aerospace products, including missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), radars, electronic warfare (EW) systems and homeland security (HLS) systems," the statement said.

The two parties will soon sign an agreement for establishing a joint venture company in India that will serve as the main vehicle for establishing indigenous capabilities.

TASL is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Tata group and focuses on providing integrated solutions for the defence and aerospace sectors.

"This agreement reflects IAI's evolving relationship with India and with the Indian industries. India is a leading market for IAI, and partnerships with Indian industries are part of our long-term strategy," Nissan said.

"The JV will further improve IAI's capability to best serve our Indian customers, and will serve as a platform to develop new business opportunities," he added.

A TASL spokesperson described the agreement as "a significant part of our strategy to build capabilities in the defence sphere".

"We look forward to the JV becoming a leading Indian defence company in the future, supporting the needs of our nation's armed forces and defence laboratories," the spokesperson said.

"It is also gives both companies great pleasure that the establishment of this cooperative relationship coincides with the 60th Anniversary celebrations of the state of Israel," the spokesperson added.

IAI, formerly known as Israel Aircraft Industries, is the largest aerospace and defence company in Israel. It is Israel's largest industrial exporter and a globally recognised leader in the defence and aerospace markets.

IAI provides unique solutions for a broad spectrum of needs in the space, air, land, sea and homeland defence segments. It is also a leader in the maintenance and conversion of commercial aircraft, as well as design, development and production of business jets and many other core technologies, products and services.

The Tata group is one of India's largest and most respected business conglomerates, with revenues in 2006-07 of $28.8 billion - 3.2 percent of the country's GDP - and a market capitalisation of $65 billion. Tata companies together employ over 300,000 people.

Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13

Postby Igorr » 15 May 2008 20:19

A book about Il-38 history - Russian with translation to English, pictures. Highly recommended! 38 mb:

BRF Oldie
Posts: 3282
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 16 May 2008 20:16

Any effect on Indian acquisitions?

Defense firm Finmeccanica buys U.S. rival DRS

Finmeccanica SpA joins Airbus parent EADS as a European company pushing into the lucrative U.S. defense and security market. EADS, in a partnership with Northrop Grumman, landed a massive contract to sell mid-air refueling tankers to the Air Force and purchased PlantCML, a California emergency call center company.

To satisfy U.S. regulations for foreign-owned defense companies, DRS, which will retain its name, will keep its own board of directors comprised mostly of American citizens holding high security clearance and a special oversight board. It will maintain its current management and headquarters, located in Parsippany, N.J.

With the plans for making private sector companies take a bigger role in defense production in India, such regulations need to be put in place so that the management roles in these companies are filled by Indian citizens only.

A secure, but not overly restrictive legal foundation needs to be put in place before a large military-industrial complex can be built on it.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 3282
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 30 May 2008 06:56

Aaj ki Taaja khabar!

From Posting in full as the URL is not archived:

India to acquire 22 attack helicopters

PTI | Berlin

Posted online: May 29, 2008

In a bid to strengthen the offensive prowess of its armed forces, Indian Government has issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to acquire 22 attack helicopters.8)

The RFP document, which includes offset clauses, was issued last week to major global helicopter manufacturers who were given three months time to respond, sources said here.

Confirming this, a senior Eurocopter official said: "We have received the RFP and are looking into it. We have to reply by August."

"We will be participating in the bid process and will offer our Tiger helicopter. We are studying the RFP document and preparing our plan of action," Bruno Boulnois, General Manager of Eurocopter (India) said.

Besides Eurocopter which is part of the defence and aviation consortium EADS, the other major contenders for this competition are Boeing's AH-54D, Augusta Westland's AW-129 Mangustu and Russia's MI-28N NightHunters.

Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 30 May 2008 07:13

Why is this required when LCH is about to make first flight??

BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 30 May 2008 08:31

to make money before the LCH appears on the scene.

wartime exp has proved simpler, smaller, cheaper birds like AH-1x have
given more uptime and utility than platinum bullet hanger queens like
AH-64D that are packed to brim with costly stuff.

imo 60 LCH > 28 Tigre on many fronts like local parts and local ability to
fix problems. It is almost 100% guaranteed any phoren import will croak
and die under our conditions needing extra money and time to fix.

in weapons and sensors we can easily integrate local, israeli and french
stuff into LCH as indeed we chose the lahat , giat cannon & mistral for WSI dhruv.

Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 30 May 2008 08:43

Singha wrote:It is almost 100% guaranteed any phoren import will croak and die under our conditions needing extra money and time to fix.

The AH-64D and WAH-64Ds have been operating in A'stan and Iraq regularly for years now. After the initial hiccups, they are logging hundreds of combat hours. Not to mention the Israeli birds. The eastern region might give some problems but the WAH-64Ds are marine rated and that experience might come in handy.

The main reason why the AH-1s are getting so much work is because in a COIN scenario, the heavy hauling capability of the Apaches aren't needed. The IA will not be using these silver bullets for COIN ops. They will be the spear tips for any ingress into the western frontier. For that role, they need to be packed with costly stuff (ECM, MAWS, DIRCM, LWS, RWR, etc). These are the things that people like to call "unnecessary gold plating" but these are also the things that gets the job done and the pilots back.

With the LCH in the pipeline, this tender only makes sense if the Mi-28N or the AH-64D is chosen. The others are too close to the LCH's specs. Sort of a heavy and light categories for the helos. This tender could also be the entry fee to get access to techs that are otherwise unatainable.

BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 09 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Postby Abhisham » 30 May 2008 09:14

Also IA requires a sizable fleet of attack choppers which can only be fulfilled by the LCH. IMO the current fleet of Mi's are grossly inadequate for our requirements. Also I won't be surprised if Mi-28N is the frontrunner as it shares a lot of common spares with the Mi-17's.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 30 May 2008 09:30

Mi28N will need a upg process to replace the russian sensors and weapons
with our mix.

AH64D is imo too costly for us.

so perhaps Tigre is what can be purchased at lower cost and with right
mix of weapons and sensors fitted. maybe just integrate Lahat/Nag extra.

Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Postby rkhanna » 30 May 2008 17:09

The Apache is the only one that has the capability to operate at High Altitude (and the Experience). The Mi-28 ,Tiger , etc cannot operate where the Army primarily wants them now.

Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 30 May 2008 17:24

The HAL LCH is purpose built for high altitude operations. There is simply no need to go in for Ah-64D or Mi-28N. The Mi-35s were only upgraded a couple of years back. I am sure they can last till 2010, by which time LCH will inducted in squadron service. For once I hope the Babus scuttle this attempt by drawing it out like the MRCA :twisted: .

BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Katare » 30 May 2008 23:22

LCH would take minimum 5 more years and conservatively a whole decade before first squadron becomes war ready/worthy. This is a gap filler, till than. Better buy these pups than returning cash back to finmin for subsidies I guess.

Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests