MRCA News and Discussion

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.
abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 13 Jan 2010 23:54

johnny_m wrote::eek:

When the IN floated out the RFI I always knew it was to test the F 35 waters. LM are being very wise offering the F 35, contrary to people here think I think it will be the C-Conventional Take Off variant than the STOVL B that will interest the IN because its most likely for IAC 2 which will have CATS/EMALS.

Lockheed offering the F 35 is also likely to change the MRCA dynamics. F 16 IN is hot again folks :).


30-40 odd JSF would be a good addition. Once naval LCA is inducted we can deploy JSF along with FGFA :wink:
this decade is going to be very very busy for us.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4489
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 13 Jan 2010 23:55

del...
Last edited by putnanja on 14 Jan 2010 00:07, edited 1 time in total.

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 14 Jan 2010 00:05

RaviBg wrote:Damn, I wish the UPA govt had continued with signing the agreement with Dassault for Mirage-2k line!! Going with the US for MRCA means that there will always be a sword of sanctions hanging overhead, and for such a big part of the fleet too! This is especially worrying given the Pokhran-II debate and the CTBT looming ahead.

JSF is too expensive for India. I don't realistically think there is any chance of India buying JSF in the foreseeable future.


I am sincerely hoping Rafale for MRCA.
We can definitely afford 40 odd JSFs. My main worry is if we have so many different platforms then there would be no MCA in near foreseeable future (may be after 2030?). I think the military already appreciate this fact.

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brando » 14 Jan 2010 00:35

Philip wrote:Those who think that the USA is a-ready-and-a-willing to sell us its latest tech,dream on.If he US is so unwilling even to share JSF tech with its poodle,the UK,leading to much heartburn between the "cousins,imagine what pain-in-the-butt India (as described by US analysts) will get! India is not even ranked on the same scale as Pakistan,a "non-NATO ally".Therefore,unless we abdicate our entire foreign and defence policy and subjugate ourselves to Uncle Sam,by singing on every kind of agreement that the US wants-in other words becoming US catamites or "converts", in every sense of the word,we will be at the receiving end of sanctions,irritants,delays,etc.At the same time,Pakistan will also be provided with enhanced weaponry to deal with India! So if we get F-18Shs,don't think that the US will not sell Pak F-15 Super-Eagles or even the JSF at later date to please its faourite rent-boy for performing tricks on the Af-Pak frontier.

This is the political price that the GOI should carefully think about before considering buying major US weapon systems which are force multipliers.Buying a few transports,etc. is enough to keep the hungry US manufacturers happy,provided that they are cost-effective.The Hercules is an excellent medium transport-the best,but I'm not so sure about the C-17s.WE do not need so many of them unless we plan to invade Oz!

Catamites !? :roll:
I dont think its fair to characterize the US with such derision !!

"Non-NATO ally" etc are all phrases that mean little. India is referred to as an "ally" also without even signing a document or treaty to that effect. Do you presently feel like a vassal of Uncle Sam ? Ranking is meaningless. India is not a child competing for affection from its father to be "ranked" !

The US is willing to sell India the F18 SH and transfer some of its tech, which even by today's standards is a very advanced piece of technology in the world and would greatly add value to the Indian Air Force and Indian Aviation industry. And do this despite not signing the NPT, the CTBT and having tested nuclear weapons. Name another nation that the US has allowed so much leeway in supplying such high end technology ? Even the mutual defense agreements have been tailored to meet India's specific needs in many cases. This demonstrates the level of trust that exists between the two nations.

The sale of military equipment to the Pakistanis is a strategic consideration of US policy rather than an economic consideration. Also, I doubt the US has ever sold the Pakistanis ANY military equipment that has altered the balance of power in the subcontinent in their favor. If the US were to sell the Pakis JSF's or Tomahawk cruise missiles or give them some other strategic ability then some of this criticism would be warranted but for selling them a dozen or so Blk 52's, this makes no sense! If the US were to abandon Pakistan, the situation would only exacerbate problems for the US and India also. As it is, due to the relations between the US and India, the Pakistanis have sought more and more Chinese equipment, negating the US hold on the Pakistani ability to wage war.

The C17s may not appear to be a prudent buy but I doubt you can point out an aircraft with similar capabilities that would serve the Indian Air force just as well in the future. US equipment may be pricey and come with a few strings attached but nobody can deny that they by far the best tools for the job they perform. I think 10 aircraft is actually too little considering that the Indian military has close to a 1.5 million men, 5000 tanks etc spread out over nearly 3 million square kilometers with dismal roadways and rail infrastructure. An reasonable order for the Indian Air Force would be no less than 25 C17s to actually come close to getting the kind of logistical flexibility a modern military in the 21st century truly needs.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 14 Jan 2010 00:40

Brando wrote:Name another nation that the US has allowed so much leeway in supplying such high end technology ?

Israel :idea:

Devesh Rawal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 35
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 09:01
Location: USA

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Devesh Rawal » 14 Jan 2010 00:41

IMHO, I see a tactical shift towards strike platforms. The US primary force projection is the Navy - its not that they fly AF jets offshore for postering - they position a battle group in high seas. I believe that GOI/DOD wants to emulate this. In this case then, a carrier groups with JSF for strike and the Mig-29Ks for CAP would be quite a deadly force to reckon with.

So, then moving onto to MRCA, if the essence is on strike, perhaps Rafale moves to the top (keep Europeans happy as well). Can't wait to see such a projected force from India! :D

Like others have pointed out, the biggest challenge will be to maintain so many different platforms, but I'm sure if anyone can do it, the IAF/IN can. Emulate the Israelis, learn and mod the best tech from the US, Europe and Russia. Don't think there's a shortage of engineers last time I checked :rotfl:

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4489
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 14 Jan 2010 00:56

Brando wrote:Catamites !? :roll:
I dont think its fair to characterize the US with such derision !!

The US is willing to sell India the F18 SH and transfer some of its tech, which even by today's standards is a very advanced piece of technology in the world and would greatly add value to the Indian Air Force and Indian Aviation industry. And do this despite not signing the NPT, the CTBT and having tested nuclear weapons. Name another nation that the US has allowed so much leeway in supplying such high end technology ? Even the mutual defense agreements have been tailored to meet India's specific needs in many cases. This demonstrates the level of trust that exists between the two nations.



The key USP of the SH is its AESA radar. Other than that, there isn't anything that other contenders aren't willing to provide. And as reported earlier, US isn't willing to sell its AESA technology and was looking at offering a dumbed down version. To think that the US will offer us top-grade technology is living in a fool's world. They will probably use the offset to give orders to Indian companies for low-tech items, not for high-tech ones. Please list out all the technology that the US has transferred so far, and then we can talk! India has already ordered the P8I from Boeing and WLR radars from US. What advanced technology has been offered to India so far??

Russia has offered us help in nuclear-sub building, Brahmos etc. Will US even consider it?? no way! Please don't even compare US to Russia and/or EU in offering high technology.

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1260
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Nihat » 14 Jan 2010 01:03

Lets forget TOT for a while (frankly , DRDO and HAL's ability to properly use TOT is in serious doubt). What if we decide to test our unproven thermonuclear Bomb , I can pretty much gurantee that those fancy SH would be nothing more than Hanger queens for the better part of the decde.

Also , consider a limited conflict with China or TSP (while US is still in Af-Pak). China is the biggest holder of US debt and surely must enjoy certain leaverage over US , probably enough to enforce a temp. limited supply period to India. What then.

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 14 Jan 2010 01:47

So, then moving onto to MRCA, if the essence is on strike, perhaps Rafale moves to the top (keep Europeans happy as well). Can't wait to see such a projected force from India!


Even the F 16IN is more capable (let alone the Super Hornet) than Rafale at this point in time when it comes to strike. Rafale cannot yet use LGBs (unless another aircraft paints the target for it) and is using AASM (far more expensive than any LGB) in Afghanistan.

Some of the fears about the U.S are overstretched and there is little or no chance of us testing a Nuke or treading on American toes in the near distant future.

But saying that we need not take a dumbed down AESA fitted Super Hornet or Falcon while other options are available. :)

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brando » 14 Jan 2010 03:43

Craig Alpert wrote:
Brando wrote:Name another nation that the US has allowed so much leeway in supplying such high end technology ?

Israel :idea:


:wink: I knew somebody would say that!

So basically the answer proves my point.

Thanks for playing!

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brando » 14 Jan 2010 04:17

putnanja wrote:Please list out all the technology that the US has transferred so far, and then we can talk! India has already ordered the P8I from Boeing and WLR radars from US. What advanced technology has been offered to India so far??

Russia has offered us help in nuclear-sub building, Brahmos etc. Will US even consider it?? no way! Please don't even compare US to Russia and/or EU in offering high technology.


Why should I list out all the technology the US has transferred ? What are the technologies India transferred when it sells weapons to Nepal ? or Bhutan ? or Sri Lanka ? There is no relevance in asking questions like this. The US is today offering the SH bar a few advanced technologies on good faith despite the numerous contentions it has with India's policies . That is the trust developed today. What happened in the past is of no significance at all because the US has never had this level of comfort with India for many decades . You can only estimate the rate of relations progressing in the future. Further, the only reason India is eyeballing the SH is because it offers capabilities others do not. Its not like the competition is a fair playing field and everybody is offering the same package and you are asking why should I pick the US product. The US companies offer technologies that others do not and India wants that capability.

What Russia does is in no way a bar or an example the US would follow. The US has a code of behavior and you can judge its behavior with other nations vis-a-vis India, not what XYZ did and what the USA is offering. Further, the India and Russia have shared strong relations between their militaries for many decades while the relationship with the US is still nascent and developing. In time the US would offer to share AESA and other advanced technologies with India as trust is developed and mutual understanding is reached, just like Russia does today. I doubt the Russians would have helped India build a nuclear submarine in the 60s or collaborated on building the Bramhos .

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Virupaksha » 14 Jan 2010 04:47

Who would have cared about hypothetical MuNNA status if it was all hot air?
http://www.ciponline.org/facts/mnna.htm
Major non-NATO allies are eligible for:

Priority delivery of excess defense articles (EDA);
Stockpiling of U.S. defense articles;

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4489
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 14 Jan 2010 05:01

Brando wrote:Why should I list out all the technology the US has transferred ? What are the technologies India transferred when it sells weapons to Nepal ? or Bhutan ? or Sri Lanka ? There is no relevance in asking questions like this. The US is today offering the SH bar a few advanced technologies on good faith despite the numerous contentions it has with India's policies . That is the trust developed today. What happened in the past is of no significance at all because the US has never had this level of comfort with India for many decades . You can only estimate the rate of relations progressing in the future. Further, the only reason India is eyeballing the SH is because it offers capabilities others do not. Its not like the competition is a fair playing field and everybody is offering the same package and you are asking why should I pick the US product. The US companies offer technologies that others do not and India wants that capability.


The relationship between India and Srilanka/Nepal/Bhutan is quite different from that of US-India. And the US has had a very bad reputation of being fickle-minded and sanction prone. The case in point being the Obama administration trying to roll back some of the changes in the Indo-US nuclear agreement by bringing in extraneous stuff. Hence the reason for Indo-US reprocessing agreement still being held up. The point I am making is India-US relationship hasn't matured enough to bet one-third of our airforce on US whims and fancies.

Just because the US is offering a few items for sale doesn't indicate any good intention of US. US sells to countries like Saudi arabia and UAE too. US refused to share key F-35 technologies with UK, its poodle and ally since WW-I, and a partner in F35 development.

Like I said, the only big thing that the US MRCA contenders are bringing to the table is the AESA technology. The SH airframe or even the F16 isn't top of line, and we can get better from other countries. In fact, the EU and Russia are willing to offer more technologies compared to US. If the US offers a dumbed down AESA technology, there is no reason to go for it when the competitors offer something equal or better, but without the US sanctions threat!

Our threats are current, we can't hope to wait for 50 years till Indo-US relationship matures and expect help at that time. Russia , Israel and France has stood by us through thick and thin, and helped us when we required it the most. It is for US to prove that it is a reliable partner, given its past behavior.

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Luxtor » 14 Jan 2010 06:34

putnanja wrote:
Brando wrote:Why should I list out all the technology the US has transferred ? What are the technologies India transferred when it sells weapons to Nepal ? or Bhutan ? or Sri Lanka ? There is no relevance in asking questions like this. The US is today offering the SH bar a few advanced technologies on good faith despite the numerous contentions it has with India's policies . That is the trust developed today. What happened in the past is of no significance at all because the US has never had this level of comfort with India for many decades . You can only estimate the rate of relations progressing in the future. Further, the only reason India is eyeballing the SH is because it offers capabilities others do not. Its not like the competition is a fair playing field and everybody is offering the same package and you are asking why should I pick the US product. The US companies offer technologies that others do not and India wants that capability.


The relationship between India and Srilanka/Nepal/Bhutan is quite different from that of US-India. And the US has had a very bad reputation of being fickle-minded and sanction prone. The case in point being the Obama administration trying to roll back some of the changes in the Indo-US nuclear agreement by bringing in extraneous stuff. Hence the reason for Indo-US reprocessing agreement still being held up. The point I am making is India-US relationship hasn't matured enough to bet one-third of our airforce on US whims and fancies.

Just because the US is offering a few items for sale doesn't indicate any good intention of US. US sells to countries like Saudi arabia and UAE too. US refused to share key F-35 technologies with UK, its poodle and ally since WW-I, and a partner in F35 development.

Like I said, the only big thing that the US MRCA contenders are bringing to the table is the AESA technology. The SH airframe or even the F16 isn't top of line, and we can get better from other countries. In fact, the EU and Russia are willing to offer more technologies compared to US. If the US offers a dumbed down AESA technology, there is no reason to go for it when the competitors offer something equal or better, but without the US sanctions threat!

Our threats are current, we can't hope to wait for 50 years till Indo-US relationship matures and expect help at that time. Russia , Israel and France has stood by us through thick and thin, and helped us when we required it the most. It is for US to prove that it is a reliable partner, given its past behavior.


Only significant technology that the U.S. is offering is AESA with SH and F-16. There is nothing else stands out with either one of these two fighters. Other manufacturers are also offering or one the verge of completing their respective AESA systems but their fighters are significantly more capable in terms of performance but without the dangling axe of sanctions. Mr. Brando, you shouldn't dismiss Indians' apprehension and mistrust of the U.S. albeit both countries are responsible for that mistrust to some or great extent. But this is India's survival and national security we're talking about and we don't want to be in a war and find out the U.S. doesn't like that fact that we're at war with their favorite dictatorship of the month and imposes sanctions on us and cripples our air force during critical times. I hope you appreciate this sentiment.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 14 Jan 2010 07:10

It is all about strategic equations.. if bhutan or nepal is ready to setup an industry, and willing to pay the ToT, I am pretty sure India will do the needful.

On the contrary, if pakis are ready to invest outta terror money, I am sure no sane country will part knowledge or knowhow for any monies except perhaps like minded nations like China, and few others who are helping pakistan.

It depends on the allies and strategies., in addtion to capability, desire, finance, business and long term relationships.

I hope khan craft supporters are not already feeling an "L" on their foreheads on the MRCA since C17 is taken.. and it is like, leave others alone in this battle to win the order.

Indic-mindset is settling in.. and it might turn out to be true, that Europeans are heading the list.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20905
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 14 Jan 2010 14:11

How would you describe the relationship Pak is enjoying right now? The US is turning the screw and Pak is screaming louder each day in torment.My remarks are based upon the US's track record.We are far down on the list of close pals-as one commentator put it in today's papers (MKB?) regarding the forthcoming international meet on Afghanistan ,the US will prevent us from ever sending our troops to Aghanistan (he says we should never go there) for fear of upsetting Pak.To enjoy the "full pleasure" of the US's munificence,we must bend a lot more just as Pak is doing!

I was re-reading AM Harish Masand's fine article in a VAYU issue of last year about how a MIG-29 vs Mirage-2000 contest was held by the IAF some years ago in the '80s and how the MIG-29 easily scored over the M-2000 in every dept.His latest glowing remarks too on the MG-35 after flying it at the last Aero-India making it a hard bird to beat.I came across in another piece in the same issue,on the Typhoon,how EADS have offered to market the LCA (if it flies with an EJ engine) along with the Typhoon as a "light-heavy" mix worldwide.Along with full TOT (swashplate AESA radar, etc.,etc.),this is an intriguing offer,very tempting (but for the price of the aircraft) which will give us the benefit of obtaining European aero tech just as we are obtaining the best of Russian with the 5th-gen fighter.Returning from Aero-India and dicussing the same with one of the VAYU crowd,the scribe felt that the Typhoon guys seemed to have something "up their sleeve".Was TVC engines and the offer of marketing the LCA the carrot?

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 14 Jan 2010 14:32

These days Air Combat is much different than it was in the late eighties. It is more about your radar, missiles and electronics than your AoA and Sustained and instant turn rate. Hence the Mig vs Mirage exercise held way back then has little relevance when it comes to MRCA.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nrshah » 14 Jan 2010 19:36

I think we should select the one which satisfy the requirement of Air force and is cheapest.

There is no point in going for all fancy expensive stuff beyond the requirement for no matter what is level of sophistication they are all 4.5 gen aircraft and 5th gen is on already on radar on two fronts.

Pak Fa can take off any day and DRDO is already working on NGFA(MCA). Surprisingly, FGFA is claimed to be cheaper than most of the birds in the competition. And kind of support IAF is giving now(as from livefist) and with a proper base of infra and experience of first hand technology, NGFA will not be delayed and I am sure we will not choose American engines for this time in the interim period nor we will need of LM in FBW.

It is better to have what is required and invest the money in both the project above rather than go for all expensive tech which is again not a domain of a single in sense each contender has some.

And to all those believe that days of dog fighting are gone, please consider two aircrafts move towards each other at a speed of around 1000Kms/hr. However distance is reduced by speed of 2000Kms per hour. Now most long range missiles are around 125Kms. By the time you end up your first BVR shot, you already are in dog fighting regime. My views are dog fighting is still here to stay for atleast 2 decades. Feel free to differ

By the way than, why do F 22 need to have TVC, it has the best radar developed till date and American stuff incl radar, missiles, EW/ECM are supposed to gen ahead of any other?

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 14 Jan 2010 20:04

I think we should select the one which satisfy the requirement of Air force and is cheapest.


In which case, the Gripen should walk away a clear winner.

The force structure would then comprise of a mixture of Gripens, LCA, Mig's, Mirages as the base followed by Sukhoi's and the FGFA's at the top in 5-8 years.

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 14 Jan 2010 20:27

By the way than, why do F 22 need to have TVC, it has the best radar developed till date and American stuff incl radar, missiles, EW/ECM are supposed to gen ahead of any other?


The same reason why the F 22 got cancelled. It was designed to fight the USSR. A total Air Superiority fighter which covered all aspects of air combat.

Look at the F 35 a more practical approach at stealth and Air Superiority. It has superior EW/ECM than even the raptor and with DAS and HOBS missiles (and 360 degree sensors) it does not need to have TVC, because the modern HOBS missiles render nose pointing irrelevant.
8) The F 35 can even attack fighters on its 6'o clock. :mrgreen:

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nrshah » 14 Jan 2010 20:55

[quote="johnny_m"]he same reason why the F 22 got cancelled. It was designed to fight the USSR. A total Air Superiority fighter which covered all aspects of air combat.

Look at the F 35 a more practical approach at stealth and Air Superiority. It has superior EW/ECM than even the raptor and with DAS and HOBS missiles (and 360 degree sensors) it does not need to have TVC, because the modern HOBS missiles render nose pointing irrelevant.
8) The F 35 can even attack fighters on its 6'o clock. :mrgreen:
[quote]

I thought the prohibitive cost of raptor that was the reason. By the way, then why Raptor is not put on sale whereas F 35 with its superior EW/ECM, DAS and HOBS missiles coupled with 360 degree sensors is to be sold to more than a dozen countries?

Cost was the reason which made the them switch to F 35, nothing related to performance neither in sensors nor in aerodynamics.

It is a separate thing that by the times F 35 enter its cost will also make it a silver bullet. remember f 22 requirement was projected to be 750 and ended up with 187. Same can happen to F 35 also if cost is not controlled.. It was OT and m sorry but could not resist.
Last edited by nrshah on 14 Jan 2010 21:13, edited 1 time in total.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nrshah » 14 Jan 2010 21:13

shukla wrote:
I think we should select the one which satisfy the requirement of Air force and is cheapest.


In which case, the Gripen should walk away a clear winner.


I think there can be a tie between Mig 35 and Gripen. Now comes geo politics and other factors like logistic etc

Clearly Mig 35 is winner on both the grounds as below

Logistic - MIG 35 will be logistically simple to maintain and induct considering IAF already operates mig 29 and IN has also gone for MIG 29K (16+29). A lot of weapons to be used on Mig 35 are already with us and we only need to purchase new which are available for the first time. Gripen on the other hand will use a altogether a separate set of weapons and maintaining two different versions of same weapon may prove nightmare

Polictial - Russians are time tested friends. They stood with us no matter what. They supported us in nuke program (Some will debate on reasons, but than what holded others from doing so) are helping us in ATV, Leasing of Akula II (Most silent among all Russian SSN and having status in RN comparable to Loss Angeles/Sea wolf in USN), joint PAk Fa, MTA, Chandrayaan 2, Space flight using Soyuz with Russian commander, Brahmos, Platoon based launch of INS Kochi few days back where russians were helping us, MKIzation of SU 30, Civil nuke agreement which provides much more than those entered with france or under negotiation with US which allows for enrichment and reprocessing right and guaranteed life supply for all reactors already made even if further relations are canceled (Not unlikely, rather impossible).

Can we think of any other country which can do 50% of above or even have willingness to do so?

Of course we paid for the same as many of my esteemed friends will say, but than what comes free? Are we getting anything free from any other contenders? Why LM cannot make an unconditional offer of F35 to IAF without relating with F 16? We are getting top notch of russian tec. But can we even dream of leasing Sea wolf even paying 5Bn USD?

As one advertisement says, there is something money can't buy...

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Jan 2010 21:17

unless someone delivers a 1000km Mach5 A2A missile in the form factor of amraam, the need for superior speed, acceleration, climb rates and high ceiling will remain. all essential to the interceptor/fighter sweep tactics.

between two stealth platforms, the one with above attributes is superior both for A2A and A2G as it can attain superior fighting positions, escape quicker ...

F22 >> JSF :mrgreen: I am sure once JSF protos are out in numbers and well equipped, they will do mock exercises with the F22. expect nothing short of a mauling in favour of the 22.

JimmyJ
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 07 Dec 2007 03:36
Location: Bangalore

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby JimmyJ » 14 Jan 2010 21:34

Speculation alert on....

The week was marked with two events related to F35
1. News confirming reducing the procurement of F-35 by 50%, 70 numbers doubts emerging on operating a second carrier by Britain and a possible option for the sale of the carrier (rumours right now).
2. LM showing IN a presentation on F35.

The the Eurofighter program is any indicator then partner nations would have to pay a penalty for any purchase below the commited numbers, which could be avoided if sales order from a non partner nation is secured for the program.

Doesn't both the events coincide at the same time. Rather than F-35 offer has anything to do about MMRCA, it possibly has everything to do with the above events.

JMT

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 14 Jan 2010 22:13

I thought the prohibitive cost of raptor that was the reason. By the way, then why Raptor is not put on sale whereas F 35 with its superior EW/ECM, DAS and HOBS missiles coupled with 360 degree sensors is to be sold to more than a dozen countries?

Cost was the reason which made the them switch to F 35, nothing related to performance neither in sensors nor in aerodynamics.

It is a separate thing that by the times F 35 enter its cost will also make it a silver bullet. remember f 22 requirement was projected to be 750 and ended up with 187. Same can happen to F 35 also if cost is not controlled.. It was OT and m sorry but could not resist.


Because the raptor is the superior A2A platform. That has nothing to do with TVC, it has more to do with the T:W ratio super-cruise and better stealth.

I was only saying in close combat F 35 with its DAS is just as good even without TVC or fancy maneuvering. You have to understand that Raptor in electronics wise is a bit behind the tech curve.

between two stealth platforms, the one with above attributes is superior both for A2A and A2G as it can attain superior fighting positions, escape quicker


Not even F 35s harshest critics will say that its an inferior A2G platform to the Raptor, it is not. A2A Raptor clearly has the edge.


The offer of the F 35 to IN will shift some favour to F 16 IN in MRCA. For me it remains a strong contender.

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 15 Jan 2010 05:07

Good news for all you Rafale fans-
Rafale to be equipped with ACMI (Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation).


http://www.defpro.com/news/details/12484/

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 15 Jan 2010 05:17

It is just astounding and unbelievable how successful the F-16's have been over the decades and the even more astonishing bit is that it continues to be as lucrative as it used to be.. Morocco orders 24 F-16 Block 52's.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?o ... Itemid=107

And it continues to get upgrades.. It gets upgraded radio capabilities,

"The push to make a direct conversation possible between an F-16 pilot and a ground troop began in earnest in late January 2009. The commander of U.S. Forces Central Command sent out a message identifying an "urgent operational need" for a Beyond Line-of-Sight, or BLOS, radio capability for all F-16s deploying to Air Force CENTCOM's area of responsibility, which includes Afghanistan and Iraq.

That capability, according to Matt Regan, Hill's F-16 BLOS program manager, allows an F-16 pilot to:

-Talk with ground troops -- be they U.S. military or other coalition forces -- even in remote mountainous locations
-Talk to command and control centers located "over the horizon" or great distances away
-Talk with other aircraft that might be commanding the skies

The work to add the radio and antenna to the F-16 will continue into 2012!!!

http://www.standard.net/topics/hafb/201 ... pabilities

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nrshah » 15 Jan 2010 10:12

Because the raptor is the superior A2A platform. That has nothing to do with TVC, it has more to do with the T:W ratio super-cruise and better stealth.


But still the question is if TVC did not play any significant role, USAF could have avoided the same and convert saved cost into ordering more raptors which definitely are the best Air Superiority fighters as you also said.

And all these benefits are only against a non stealth fighter. In a fight with a stealth aircraft say for eg pak fa, by the time they detect each other it would be dog fighting regime where acceleration, sustained turn rates, agility and such attributes will dominate

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 15 Jan 2010 11:34

INDIAN Navy keen on JSF.

This is interesting, from the horses mouth-

Indian Navy is willing to procure F-35 advanced fighters from US, but it is not interested in F-18 fighter planes as they are not "compatible" with the aircraft carriers of the naval force, Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Arun Prakash said here today.

"Yes. Given an offer, we will be much interested in having the F-35 fighters," Admiral Prakash told reporters when asked if the Navy would be willing to procure the advanced fighters from the US.

He was speaking to reporters after the commissioning of warship INS Beas at the Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Ltd. Admiral Prakash said that the F-18 aircraft, being offered by the US to Indian armed forces, would not be relevant for the Navy. "F-18 is a carrier-borne aircraft, but needs steam catapult (for take-off). It is not compatible to ski-jump and therefore, not suitable for our type of aircraft carriers," he said. On the other hand the F-35 aircraft were of the ski-jump type and would be suitable for the Navy's aircraft carriers, he explained.

The Navy was also looking for acquisition of "reconnoisseur aircraft but not of AWACS type," Admiral Prakash said, but hastened to add that plans were underway to replace the Sea Harrier fighter aircraft with MiG 29-K and light combat aircraft (LCA). "We have one squadron of fighter aircraft Sea Harrier with INS Virat, but it will be replaced by Mig 29-K or LCA," he said.


http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?309785

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 15 Jan 2010 14:52

Thats old recycled news first appeared in 2005.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... ver-F-A-18

But still the question is if TVC did not play any significant role, USAF could have avoided the same and convert saved cost into ordering more raptors which definitely are the best Air Superiority fighters as you also said.

And all these benefits are only against a non stealth fighter. In a fight with a stealth aircraft say for eg pak fa, by the time they detect each other it would be dog fighting regime where acceleration, sustained turn rates, agility and such attributes will dominate


Because many of the electronic technologies incorporated in the F 35 were not available back when designing F 22. They designed it as a silver bullet and left no performance parameters wanting, the downside is the incredible production and maintenance cost and eventual reduction in numbers.

No the close in combat benefits appear against a stealth fighter too, most of it is based on passive detection and firing of weapons which has nothing to do with radar evading stealth. The F 35 would see a PAK FA on its rear (during close combat) using DAS just as well as a flanker.

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shankar » 15 Jan 2010 17:19

He was speaking to reporters after the commissioning of warship INS Beas at the Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Ltd. Admiral Prakash said that the F-18 aircraft, being offered by the US to Indian armed forces, would not be relevant for the Navy. "F-18 is a carrier-borne aircraft, but needs steam catapult (for take-off). It is not compatible to ski-jump and therefore, not suitable for our type of aircraft carriers," he said. On the other hand the F-35 aircraft were of the ski-jump type and would be suitable for the Navy's aircraft carriers, he explained.

The Navy was also looking for acquisition of "reconnoisseur aircraft but not of AWACS type," Admiral Prakash said, but hastened to add that
plans were underway to replace the Sea Harrier fighter aircraft with MiG 29-K and light combat aircraft (LCA). "We have one squadron of fighter aircraft Sea Harrier with INS Virat, but it will be replaced by Mig 29-K or LCA,"
he said.


this statement does not make much sense - Virat as we know does not have arrestor wire system for on deck recovery so nither NLCA nor Mig29K can use the carrier

unless during mid life upgrade such facility was installed

you can still launch the aircraft from Virat but recover on shore bases or in Vikramaditya niether of whcih option make much sense

so the million dollar question what was the long mid life upgrade after all

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby GeorgeWelch » 15 Jan 2010 21:01

shukla wrote:"F-18 is a carrier-borne aircraft, but needs steam catapult (for take-off). It is not compatible to ski-jump


That's strange, Boeing personnel have made several statements saying that it is compatible with ski-jumps

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby negi » 15 Jan 2010 21:14

^ George would be interesting if you could post a link the key thing to note would be what would be the minimum length of a ski jump which would allow a SH take off with a meaningful load out . The high wing loading of the SH and a pretty average T/W ratio don't look promising as far as unassisted take off from small/medium sized carriers is concerned.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 15 Jan 2010 21:45

GeorgeWelch wrote:
shukla wrote:"F-18 is a carrier-borne aircraft, but needs steam catapult (for take-off). It is not compatible to ski-jump


That's strange, Boeing personnel have made several statements saying that it is compatible with ski-jumps


I do recall the same. However, till the relevant source is found here is a report for older F-18s to takeoff from ramps in a runway denial situation. This report is from 1991.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5325
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Jan 2010 22:39

Shankar wrote:this statement does not make much sense - Virat as we know does not have arrestor wire system for on deck recovery so nither NLCA nor Mig29K can use the carrier

unless during mid life upgrade such facility was installed



Viraat will retire with its complement of Sea Harriers. the MiG-29K can't fly off it and land without arrestor wires and the N-LCA won't likely be available before INS Viraat itself retires.

you can still launch the aircraft from Virat but recover on shore bases or in Vikramaditya niether of whcih option make much sense

so the million dollar question what was the long mid life upgrade after all


and how do you get the aircraft onto the carrier if it cannot land on it ? use cranes to lift it from a dock and place it on the carrier on the condition that it flies back to land base whenever it takes off ? disassemble it and re-assemble it on the carrier ? both won't work.

the mid-life update was simply to keep it usable till 2014-2015 after which it will if the INS Vikramaditya arrives. there would've been no need for a mid-life update for the INS Viraat or the Shars and it could've retired in peace had the INS Vikram been delivered on time or even with an acceptable delay.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby GeorgeWelch » 15 Jan 2010 23:22

negi wrote:^ George would be interesting if you could post a link the key thing to note would be what would be the minimum length of a ski jump which would allow a SH take off with a meaningful load out . The high wing loading of the SH and a pretty average T/W ratio don't look promising as far as unassisted take off from small/medium sized carriers is concerned.



http://beta.thehindu.com/business/article53220.ece

But Boeing IDS' Head for India, Dr Vivek Lall, told India Strategic that Boeing had done a computer simulation to verify that the Super Hornet could operate from Gorshkov and Indian carriers as and when they are commissioned.


http://www.informationdissemination.net ... craft.html

Rietz told reporters at Lemoore, which holds half of the US Navy’s striking power in the Pacific, “In our simulation, we discovered that not only could the Super Hornet take-off from a ski-jump, but could do so with a significant weapons load.” Landing the Super Hornet on the Gorshkov would pose no problem since the warship comes equipped with an arrester cable

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 16 Jan 2010 09:04

NRao wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:
That's strange, Boeing personnel have made several statements saying that it is compatible with ski-jumps


I do recall the same. However, till the relevant source is found here is a report for older F-18s to takeoff from ramps in a runway denial situation. This report is from 1991.


Please following F-18-ski-jump in India Navy thread.

Xposting here, MRCA stuff too:

US-India ties boost Boeing’s prospects

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20905
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 16 Jan 2010 12:06

I've just posted in the IN thread a detailed analysis why the F-18SH is unsuitable for the IN in the future.Kartik has pointed out in brief the fact that there will be no carriers until 2018/20 for another type as the In has already ordered the MIG-29K (48+) and the naval LCA.Plus the existing and any future Sea Harriers we acquire from the UK will serve out the Viraat's last years until 2020 max.,before another carrier appears.by that time the F-18SH will be from the first versions a 50 year old design,totally obsolete and unable to face the challenge from 5th-gen fighters like the JSF (which will first be delivered to US allies with the IN getting them last),F-22-already in service,and even our own 5th-gen/PAK-FA Sukhoi being developed which will be in service by that time.If we need a new type for 2020,a naval CTOL/STOVL version of that would be the best.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Klaus » 16 Jan 2010 17:37

Marten wrote: India is unlikely to be able to wrangle a deal over DG as long as the US requires a base in the Indian Ocean. DG is a critical listening post as well. We'd fare better working with Mauritius or Madagascar (perhaps a short base for a carrier group).


For purely geopolitical reasons, it would send out a big message to the world in general and a certain nation in particular if we could knock the USN off this post, I'm not saying its easy, with all the babudom in this country it might as well be a paper dream for years to come! An issue with Mauritius or Madagascar is we will have to spend the average Indian's taxpayer money and this will definitely not sit well with South Block! IMVHO its better to occupy a listening post which is already developed for its purpose rather than going into new land deals or leases with African governments.

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 17 Jan 2010 01:57

I think its going to significantly boost the chances of SH & F-16 if the CISMOA is signed before the competition concludes. Robert Gates's, US defense secretary, who has been pivotal in boosting Ind-US relations (one of the few retained from the bush term) is going to be in India to do just that. After the EUMA the CISMOA & LSA seem to be the logical steps from the US point of view, as its expects those pacts a prerequisite for transfer of sensitive US tech and prevent its misuse. I think India will end up signing the CISMOA, only a matter of when and what clauses it decides to exclude from the pact. Especially since its already signed up to the P-8i, C-130J's, etc.. It would be a moral victory for Gates if he managed to get it over n done with on his visit, given the longstanding Indian reluctance.

The BIG questions are -

Will signing the CISMOA, especially before the competition concludes, have a significant bearing on the outcome? Will the f-16 & SH benefit from such a scenario (I admit its hypothetical but not improbable).

And the million dollar question - Will they actually oblige on transfer of tech if the pact is signed?? (I have my doubts)

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed ... 98324.aspx


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests