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.
Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 26 Mar 2010 00:14

PrithviRajChauhan wrote:
Then who else this has to do with ? I do not have any issue what US thinks best for itself but if its act/interest harms India's interest there my problem starts.
Now you arm India's eternal enemy to the teeth and expect India to buy your stuff simply makes me outrageously angry. And I totally agree with Philip and Austin statement, more than US its present Indian political establishment that makes me sick.

B Hussein Obama isn't there to make Indians feel better. I don't know why you expect him to do so. The US expects India to buy American precisely because they can.

If the US can completely marginalize India and still manage to sell billions of dollars in equipment, it's our fault. I think we should do another shortlist and eliminate the US fighters so Unkil won't try to kill the Gripen.
Last edited by Carl_T on 26 Mar 2010 01:14, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Devesh Rawal » 26 Mar 2010 01:09

Hi guys, from where I'm sitting, the Pak request is not in the same light as a guaranteed delivery by the US. Listening to National Public Radio program yesterday, it did not sound like Clinton caved in to anything yet, other than a). Thanks for all the cooperation of the past few months. We've actually made progress on capturing some terrorists; and b). The US has a complex relationship with Pak and we need to have more confidence building going on before we accomodate the requests.

The general transcript is here now, if you want to read it:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125153658

IMHO the summary is this:
O'Hanlon said he doesn't believe relations between Pakistan and the U.S. have turned a corner, but he added that the strategic dialogue, even if it doesn't produce any sweeping results, is important.

Perkovich said the meetings are symbolic because both sides are willing to publicly show they're interested in talking.

"It's the public presentation of it and the sense of a little bit of grandiosity of it, reflects that the Pakistan leadership is now saying, 'It's not bad to be seen with the U.S,' " Perkovich said. "And similarly, the U.S. is saying, 'We have enough confidence that Pakistan is being cooperative and not entirely duplicitous.' "


India represents a much larger strategic alliance at the end of the day for the US (geo-political and consumer/defence market).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Karan M » 26 Mar 2010 01:40

IMHO, 100% FDI is a grave mistake by the GOI, if allowed and is thanks to the lobbying by certain pressure groups. Even with 49% FDI, there were concerns by groups that
- Local Indian firms would reap huge windfall from aerospace and defence offsets
- Firms would have to share critical technology with local indian firms to bring them into the supply chain
- There would be no control over where technology flowed in India as Indian firms could allocate engineers as they wished

The 100% FDI would allow these groups to keep a tight control over all their technology and totally defeats the purpose of the Indian offsets program. IMHO, this is a trial balloon by the MMS Govt. to see how the wind is blowing. I would request the current Hon. GOI that India's interests come first, and there is no need to bend over backwards

PrithviRajChauhan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Sep 2009 00:59

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby PrithviRajChauhan » 26 Mar 2010 01:46

Carl_T wrote: B Hussein Obama isn't there to make Indians feel better. I don't know why you expect him to do so. The US expects India to buy American precisely because they can.

Where on Earth I have said that BO has to make Indians happy and I dont understand from where you got the impression that I expect him to do so. But if his or his administration policy is detrimental to India's interest, there should be some repercussion from indian side. Giving state of the art weaponary as free aid to Pukes is one such policy which is detrimental to our security and we should be absolutely apparent in expressing our displeasure.
In the past 2 years, there has been substantial change in US foreign policy towards India. The policy of Bush administration was comparatively better than Obama's and therefore sarcastically I added the remark "B Hussein Obama at his best." in my previous post.

Carl_T wrote:If the US can completely marginalize India and still manage to sell billions of dollars in equipment, it's our fault
.
And that is what I have said in my post mate when I say that I am unhappy with the current political establishment.

Carl_T wrote:I think we should do another shortlist and eliminate the US fighters so Unkil won't try to kill the Gripen.
And that is what I am saying. Chill dude, we are on same page. Altough Gripen is one of my favorite but the GE Engine in it makes me feel little uncomfortable and that's why I said that now Mig 35 also make sense.

Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 26 Mar 2010 02:03

My bad then, I agree we shouldn't invest too much in US equipment, but there is no point complaining about BHO. I don't think it is fair to draw a direct comparison to Bush's doctrine either, the US domestic political situation has changed so much and Obama is the product of that.


If we take the Americans off the shortlist in retaliation, the US position on the Gripen will probably be clearer. Just IMO.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Mar 2010 03:09

PrithviRajChauhan wrote:And that is what I am saying. Chill dude, we are on same page. Altough Gripen is one of my favorite but the GE Engine in it makes me feel little uncomfortable and that's why I said that now Mig 35 also make sense.


I know it really does´nt matter what I say cause I have said it many times before and no one seems to care. But, once again, SAAB has air tight contracts with it´s foreign sources in the Gripen when it comes to exports, especially USA. When it comes to the GE F414, it derives from the RB12 which contains 50% Volvo Aero designed and produced parts. The GE F414 is actually a combined project between GE and Volvo Aero. So there is no chance in hell USA would stop a possible Indian Gripen buy cause of the engine, even if the Boeing lobby off course would tell you the opposite...

(Now, I don´t think India will ever buy the Gripen but that is for entirely different reasons..)

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7987
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 26 Mar 2010 03:12

Wickberg wrote:
PrithviRajChauhan wrote:And that is what I am saying. Chill dude, we are on same page. Altough Gripen is one of my favorite but the GE Engine in it makes me feel little uncomfortable and that's why I said that now Mig 35 also make sense.


I know it really does´nt matter what I say cause I have said it many times before and no one seems to care. But, once again, SAAB has air tight contracts with it´s foreign sources in the Gripen when it comes to exports, especially USA. When it comes to the GE F414, it derives from the RB12 which contains 50% Volvo Aero designed and produced parts. The GE F414 is actually a combined project between GE and Volvo Aero. So there is no chance in hell USA would stop a possible Indian Gripen buy cause of the engine, even if the Boeing lobby off course would tell you the opposite...

(Now, I don´t think India will ever buy the Gripen but that is for entirely different reasons..)


Wickberg, nobody thinks that the US can stop India from buying the Gripen. What they are jittery about is the effect that any sanctions that the US puts on India might have on the Gripens being used by the IAF (if they buy them). Similar concerns are voiced about the two American contenders.

Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 26 Mar 2010 03:14

Wickberg wrote:
(Now, I don´t think India will ever buy the Gripen but that is for entirely different reasons..)

Which are?

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Mar 2010 03:23

nachiket wrote:Wickberg, nobody thinks that the US can stop India from buying the Gripen. What they are jittery about is the effect that any sanctions that the US puts on India might have on the Gripens being used by the IAF (if they buy them). Similar concerns are voiced about the two American contenders.


But what would India have to do to make USA put sanctions on you? New nuclear tests? Why would you have to do that. You know they work and today they are being done in computer simulations. What else can India do to provoke sanctions? Send a taskforce to Kuwait and invade it? Please enlighten me.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4493
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Mar 2010 03:30

Wickberg wrote:
nachiket wrote:Wickberg, nobody thinks that the US can stop India from buying the Gripen. What they are jittery about is the effect that any sanctions that the US puts on India might have on the Gripens being used by the IAF (if they buy them). Similar concerns are voiced about the two American contenders.


But what would India have to do to make USA put sanctions on you? New nuclear tests? Why would you have to do that. You know they work and today they are being done in computer simulations. What else can India do to provoke sanctions? Send a taskforce to Kuwait and invade it? Please enlighten me.


During the 1965 war, the US imposed sanctions on both India and Pakistan.

New nuclear tests may be required in future, given the controversy surrounding the 1998 tests. This is a not a far fetched scenario, and most likely to occur if there is too much pressure to sign CTBT.

US might impost sanctions if war does take place between India and pakistan, citing escalation to nuclear conflict, to help its ally pakistan.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Mar 2010 03:32

Carl_T wrote:
Wickberg wrote:
(Now, I don´t think India will ever buy the Gripen but that is for entirely different reasons..)

Which are?


Sweden just have nothing to say in worlds political arena. It´s a small, non-alliance country with no seat in the security council. India, which strive to become a major player in the world, economically, political as military, still is´nt there until it becomes more or less self sufficient. So today I think they have to play the political cards to make friends trough military purchases, and in that game Sweden will off course have the weakest hand...

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Mar 2010 03:42

putnanja wrote:During the 1965 war, the US imposed sanctions on both India and Pakistan.

New nuclear tests may be required in future, given the controversy surrounding the 1998 tests. This is a not a far fetched scenario, and most likely to occur if there is too much pressure to sign CTBT.

US might impost sanctions if war does take place between India and pakistan, citing escalation to nuclear conflict, to help its ally pakistan.


Well, I don´t know why you would have to do more nuclear tests when you know it can be done in computers. Out of spite?

So in the 1965 war USA put sanctions on both Pakistan and India, but in a future war you think USA would only put sanctions on India? I think the world would put sanctions on both your countries...
But really, a war between India and Pakistan with sanctions put on you. How long do you think such a war would last for? And don´t you think that the Indian armed forces have planned for such an event disregarding any fighter they buy and have spare parts so they can keep fighting til the war is over? (Unless it becomes some WWI war alá Iran-Iraq but that would hardly be the case considering Indias superiority)

astal
BRFite
Posts: 165
Joined: 07 Jul 2005 03:06
Location: virtual back bench

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby astal » 26 Mar 2010 03:49

Re. Politics in the MRCA.

I believe that introducing a political angle to the MRCA has been the worst thing that happened to the deal. There is always a degree of politics involved in foreign weapons deals but for the MRCA we harp about it. The only reason I can think of is the successful conclusion of the nuclear deal that allows us to import fuel from NSG countries.

Since the nuke deal is done and there is a new dispensation in power in the US, it is time to leave the MRCA deal to the IAF. Let them choose what best suits their budget and requirements. No more odious political interference or at a minimum, keep the influence under wraps.

The one condition I would put if I chose the Gripen would be to start co-development of an MCA-AMCA with SAAB. A fifty fifty partnership similar to Pak-FA, would keep Sweden at the cutting edge of fighter technology and reduce the risks of a solely Indian venture. It could eventually be made stealthy in tranches. (I know this is a jingo dream)

By the way several years ago I got to see the Gripen in action at Linkoping. It was a thrilling experience.
Last edited by astal on 26 Mar 2010 04:25, edited 1 time in total.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4493
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Mar 2010 03:52

Wickberg wrote:
Well, I don´t know why you would have to do more nuclear tests when you know it can be done in computers. Out of spite?

So in the 1965 war USA put sanctions on both Pakistan and India, but in a future war you think USA would only put sanctions on India? I think the world would put sanctions on both your countries...
But really, a war between India and Pakistan with sanctions put on you. How long do you think such a war would last for? And don´t you think that the Indian armed forces have planned for such an event disregarding any fighter they buy and have spare parts so they can keep fighting til the war is over? (Unless it becomes some WWI war alá Iran-Iraq but that would hardly be the case considering Indias superiority)


We need to spend millions of dollars to build up our labs to simulate it virtually. And we don't have the vast data that other countries have accumulated with their numerous tests to validate various parameters. Hence, for now, a real test is the only way out.

Even if they put sanctions on both countries, we don't want the war to end in a stalemate and perpetuate the pak problem. And last time during Kargil war, Israel and USSR helped us out by supplying us items out of their war reserve. We don't want "friends" like US imposing sanctions during that time.

There might be items which are past their shelf life, or for whatever reasons weren't procured in required numbers, which is entirely possible in Indian scenario given the Indian procurement policy and long delays. There might also be items which though in sufficient quantities run out faster than expected etc.

You buy arms so that it helps you when required. You don't buy it if there is no guarantee of performance when required in actual scenario. Buying from US is like that, you are constantly watching your back!

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 26 Mar 2010 04:03

Pentagon eyes multiyear Boeing F-18 fighter deal
* Gates says Boeing has made "interesting proposals"

* F-18 purchase would help plug Navy fighter shortfall

* Gates confident in revised plan for Lockheed's F-35 (Adds quotes, background, byline)

By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON, March 24 (Reuters) - The Pentagon is weighing "interesting proposals" for a possible multiyear purchase of Boeing Co's (BA.N) F-18 fighter aircraft, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Congress on Wednesday, amid lawmakers' concerns about a U.S. combat aircraft shortfall.

"We are now looking at a multiyear contract with respect to the F-18s," he said.

Such a step could help offset a projected 100-jet U.S. Navy shortfall over the next decade amid delays in Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) multiservice F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

Boeing, in response, said it had offered the Navy cost savings of 10 percent under a multi-year contract.

"Boeing is committed to delivering the advanced, combat-proven Block II Super Hornet and new EA-18G Growler to the U.S. Navy through the procurement option that offers the best value for our nation and its warfighters," Paul Guse, a spokesman, said in an emailed statement.

CQ Today, a publication that covers Congress, reported last week that Boeing had offered the Navy a discount that would add up to more than $500 million for a multiyear purchase of F-18s to guarantee that its production line in St. Louis will remain open beyond 2013.

It cited unnamed congressional aides and industry sources for its information.

CQ said the Navy planned to buy 124 carrier-based versions of the F-18, divided between F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, which are standard fighters, and EA-18G Growlers, which are for electronic warfare.

Gates told the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee that initial Boeing pitches did not offer enough savings to justify a multiyear commitment by the Pentagon.

Since then, "the contractor has come back to us with some interesting proposals," he said, without elaborating.

Gates said he was confident that a restructuring of the F-35 program he announced in February -- including adding 13 months and $2.8 billion to the development phase and slowing the rampup to full production -- would keep the program on its revised schedule.

Gates fired the Pentagon's F-35 program manager and withheld $615 million in potential fee awards from Lockheed Martin as part of the restructuring.

"I think we got their attention," he said, apparently referring to both Lockheed and the program office, which he faulted for having provided "overly rosy" forecasts.

The Navy and the Air Force now expect to begin fully operating their radar-evading F-35 fighters in 2016. The Marine Corps plans to start operating its version in December 2012.

Under the last multiyear deal in 2006, the Navy paid Boeing about $49.9 million per F-18, which would be about $54 million per plane today, adjusting for inflation, CQ said in its March 19 report.

It is unclear what the per-plane cost would be under the latest proposed deal, it said.

Some U.S. lawmakers have said the Navy fighter shortfall could top 200 aircraft and recommended the Navy buy 150 F-18s over five years. (Reporting by Jim Wolf; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Richard Chang)

This is turning out to be quite a Circus indeed!
Last edited by Rahul M on 26 Mar 2010 07:04, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fluorescent green ??!! kuch to rehm karo bhai ! have mercy !

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4493
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Mar 2010 04:31

India lets US know: F-16s for Pak could cloud IAF’s 126-plane dea

While Pakistan may have pitched hard with the US for early transfer of F-16 fighter aircraft and other sophisticated military equipment, a concerned India is learnt to have raised the stakes by indicating to the US that such a transfer may not go down well at a time when two US companies are bidding for the 126 multi-role combat aircraft tender floated by India.
...
...
In this context, India has been concerned over reports that Washington is now making way for F-16 supplies along with laser-guided bomb kits besides other sophisticated equipment. It’s learnt that the matter came up for detailed discussion during Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao’s recent visit to Washington, which was meant to carry forward the conversation on high technology trade.
...
...
While the US assured India that it was not contemplating to move forward with a Pakistan-specific nuclear deal which would only accentuate proliferation concerns in the region, there has been lesser clarity on military sales and transfers. India, sources said, has told the US that the intention of the Pakistan government seems to be to only build its military profile against India using American aid. Weapon systems such as the F-16 aircraft are a clear pointer to this, added sources.

By linking this with the 126-aircraft MMRCA deal, India is not ruling out the possibility of such a transfer to Pakistan becoming a factor in its ultimate selection process.
...
...

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Mar 2010 04:51

putnanja wrote:
We need to spend millions of dollars to build up our labs to simulate it virtually. And we don't have the vast data that other countries have accumulated with their numerous tests to validate various parameters. Hence, for now, a real test is the only way out.

Even if they put sanctions on both countries, we don't want the war to end in a stalemate and perpetuate the pak problem. And last time during Kargil war, Israel and USSR helped us out by supplying us items out of their war reserve. We don't want "friends" like US imposing sanctions during that time.

There might be items which are past their shelf life, or for whatever reasons weren't procured in required numbers, which is entirely possible in Indian scenario given the Indian procurement policy and long delays. There might also be items which though in sufficient quantities run out faster than expected etc.

You buy arms so that it helps you when required. You don't buy it if there is no guarantee of performance when required in actual scenario. Buying from US is like that, you are constantly watching your back!


I´ll guess India has to make a choice. Spend millions of dollars to build up that lab to simulate nuclear devices or spend millions (and perhaps billions) of dollars to blow up a real one and risk a global sanction campaign.

The Kargil war lasted for less then 3 month, and it was not a full out war. Did´nt the Indian armed forces even planned to
have reserve armaments and ammo to last for such a limited conflict in such a short time? If that is the case India should really reconsider its entire defense strategy. Do like Sweden did during the cold war, prepare for war in peace time. Just make sure your country has everything it needs to fight and be totally isolated for a long period of time...

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21172
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Prem » 26 Mar 2010 06:02

As it has been claimed that MRCA will be a political decision and now BHO has already made his choice not to extend "political" support to Desi Desh and favour the Daasi Desh. Guess , does this make the fight between French and Russian as we know both Brytish bark , bite and bad teeth are fake . If Europe 's real leader German take lead in selling Eurofighter, there exist the possibilty of coming to economic understanding like they have with Russians. Mix both Sub and Fighter deal together and get the best of both in techonology as well Political patronage.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 26 Mar 2010 07:00

EF's effort is lead by the germans, not the brits.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby JimmyJ » 26 Mar 2010 12:09

X post from Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Army ready to forgo hardware: Kayani

“I told Senator John Kerry and Senator Richard Lugar that in order to make sure that Pakistan’s economy and energy needs are met, we are willing to forgo the military equipment that we have asked for,”


US-Pak dialogue should not be judged only on civil N-deal: Pak


"It would be unfair to see this (strategic) dialogue process only in context of a civil nuclear cooperation...To judge the success or failure of our relations with the US or this particular dialogue in that narrow context is not appropriate," Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said.


F-16s for Pak could cloud IAF's 126-plane deal: India to US

While Pakistan may have pitched hard with the US for early transfer of F-16 fighter aircraft and other sophisticated military equipment, a concerned India is learnt to have raised the stakes by indicating to the US that such a transfer may not go down well at a time when two US companies are bidding for the 126 multi-role combat aircraft tender floated by India.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4039
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby kit » 26 Mar 2010 12:51

What prevents the Americans from playing along with India now., getting the MRCA deal and then arming Pak with later generation F16 s and JSF down the road ? They could arm pakis with offensive AAMs like AIM9X etc for now and keep the "balance" .What will India do then ?

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4039
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby kit » 26 Mar 2010 13:03

I feel Indian American relationship is more on the back swing nowadays and quite possible that the entire Bush administrations work of engaging India strategically is essentially being reverted by the Obama administration.There seems only talk of strategic relationship and even that is becoming less frequent and less likely.American restrictions on high tech is only going to increase given its paranoid behaviour these days.Hyphenating India with Pakistan is the most glaring example of decoupling the budding strategic relationship with vs the Chinese.Personally would you like a friend whose behavior towards you totally changes once in four years ? Would you depend on him and would you trust him .."strategically" or not ? India has to pick and choose wisely ., it has a destiny of ts own .. better the leaders realised it sooner ! There are just no permanent friends or enemies .. strategically speaking of course ! Better to delink the strategic decision nonsense from the MRCA deal

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 26 Mar 2010 13:18

the mrca is a such a mess, i am really curious what will win. I hope we just make up our minds and order something by end this year instead of wasting time wondering which one to go for. EF still seems good, A quick EF tranche 3 order with a higher thrust EJ engine, the Swashplate or even the EL-2052 AESA and mix of EU, US and Israeli avionics should be good. Either way we'll have to deal with US for weapons if we buy any one of the EU jets. EU weapons are often much more expensive and less capable. Kit bhai they have already given the Aim-120C-5 to the Pukis, we simply get the Aim-120 C-7 or even D if we push for it.

Weapons like aim-9x block 2 are also capable of A2G missions, Paveway-4, Dual guided (gps/ laser) kits, jdam-er, Cbu-97/105 sfw armor killers with Wind corrected munition tail kit, Slam/er, jsow, Small diameter bombs, Delilah, popeye-2, aagrm, Harpoon block 2 can be very deadly when fired from EF while super cruising. the speed of release would turn even a simply sdb into a real nasty killer. Ef T-3 though expensive would be real game changer i think.

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Atri » 26 Mar 2010 17:07

Never know.. it might be good old Mig 35 onlee. rest all ij maya. :mrgreen: :rotfl:

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 26 Mar 2010 19:01

Vendors May Get To Revise Indian Fighter Bids

NEW DELHI — As field trials for India’s 126-aircraft Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) draw to a close, vendors vying for the program could get the opportunity to revise their pricing.

The Saab Gripen is completing its final field trials in Leh, while the Eurofighter is due to start weapons and other equipment tests as part of the third phase of trials in the U.K. and Germany next month. Those trials are scheduled to be completed on April 29.

However, this would mean that India will have officially missed the April 28 decision deadline set for the competition. Effectively, this means that vendors can now reprice and revise their bids, since the request for proposals says commercial offers are valid for two years from the date of submission (which was March 28, 2008), and after that date bidding can be reopened for those vendors shortlisted after technical trials and evaluation.

The six bidders are Sukhoi’s MiG-35, Dassault’s Rafale, Eurofighter, Saab’s Gripen, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F and Lockheed Martin’s F-16.

Once all trials are completed, it will take two months of tabulation and then submission to the Defense Ministry, an air force spokesman told Aviation Week. One original equipment manufacturer (OEM) says it is likely the procedure would take place only in September.

Some vendors have expressed concern that the MMRCA project will be dependent on the political and economical situation, and may take more time for clearance, barring unforeseen circumstances like a security challenge.

“We do hope the process moves faster,” one OEM executive said. “However, we feel it might take time until India’s economy starts on a growth track of approximately 10 percent [gross domestic product], so that politicians can justify the expenditure to their political counterparts.

While the Ministry has not yet commented on the possibility of repricing, vendors’ opinions on the prospect vary.

“We will redefine our bid, which will be cheaper than the one we submitted two years ago, as we were not as smart then as we are now,” one vendor said, declining to be identified. “We are more competitive and stronger now.”

Another commented, “Technical evaluation is an air force matter. We will try and ensure we hit all wickets. We haven’t made a decision on repricing.” “This, of course, presupposes that the repricing will be called for,” another vendor noted.


And another OEM added that currency fluctuation over the past two years will be another factor to consider.

jaladipc
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 20:51
Location: i CAN ADA

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby jaladipc » 26 Mar 2010 23:04

Four MMRCA Contenders Fail Leh Trials!
It's the latest tidbit on India's $12-billion Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition that's doing the rounds (and it was first reported by The Hindu on Tuesday). Four of the six contenders that underwent cold-weather evaluation trials at Leh didn't meet performance requirements. OK, major understatement. Four of the contenders bit dust in Leh. Read that again: four aircraft. That's huge. It's still unclear which part of the Leh test the four aircraft types failed at, though it is quite clear that it was either the switch off/on after landing, or the take-off with meaningful combat load at that altitude. The only thing that appears true is that four aircraft failed the trial -- it is totally anyone's guess which these are. Any want to hazard a try?

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/03/fo ... rials.html

Sayak
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 14 Oct 2009 06:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Sayak » 26 Mar 2010 23:33

It is about time someone from the Indian side commented on the F-16's in the MRCA, this can be viewed as F-16's being out. :lol:

Sayak
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 14 Oct 2009 06:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Sayak » 26 Mar 2010 23:37

kit wrote:What prevents the Americans from playing along with India now., getting the MRCA deal and then arming Pak with later generation F16 s and JSF down the road ? They could arm pakis with offensive AAMs like AIM9X etc for now and keep the "balance" .What will India do then ?


Good questions, If USA can give Pak a nuclear deal they can do all of the above easily.

sathyaC
BRFite
Posts: 124
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 19:34

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby sathyaC » 26 Mar 2010 23:38

Euro fighter may not be cost as much as teens (18) it will work out around 80-90 million $ going by the Saudi sale as we buy it in large numbers say 126 may be 200 with more export contracts for the EF it will be lot cheaper that the Rafale , SH if we also look in 2 the ops cost it better the Mig 35 also in overall cost
It ease some logistic as we can buy the Ej200 for LCA with ToT as LCA will not require any major changes in the air frame with EJ 200

Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 27 Mar 2010 00:08

Wickberg wrote:
Sweden just have nothing to say in worlds political arena. It´s a small, non-alliance country with no seat in the security council. India, which strive to become a major player in the world, economically, political as military, still is´nt there until it becomes more or less self sufficient. So today I think they have to play the political cards to make friends trough military purchases, and in that game Sweden will off course have the weakest hand...

I think that strategic partnerships based on mutual interests have to be present before the deals are struck in order to make the deals mutually beneficial, and I'm not so sure that friends can be made by the deals themselves. For example, will the US suddenly become India's strategic friend if we buy the SH? I'm not so confident. These weapons deals have a role in foreign policy, but are we overstating it? Do they overrule all of the other interests that nations pursue?



Sweden may be small and not give us any political advantages on the global stage, but won't that only incentivize them to be a more reliable supplier to us if we are a big chunk of their export market? If it indeed is a reliable supplier and makes us stronger as a nation, would that not in itself give us more political power on the global stage? I think the EU will keep approaching us for arms deals the more powerful we are.

Just IMO. idk if the Gripen is any good.

jaladipc
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 20:51
Location: i CAN ADA

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby jaladipc » 27 Mar 2010 00:47

Sayak wrote:
kit wrote:What prevents the Americans from playing along with India now., getting the MRCA deal and then arming Pak with later generation F16 s and JSF down the road ? They could arm pakis with offensive AAMs like AIM9X etc for now and keep the "balance" .What will India do then ?


Good questions, If USA can give Pak a nuclear deal they can do all of the above easily.


If thats the scenario,chanakya has to come out and play the next big game.
Its like sorting out issues with china and foster the relations and forming the Asian block of RIC.this only happens when all doors closed.

Or

India kicking pakis butt with a full scale attack.Premptive strikes on its nuclear sites followed by continious bombing missions for 1 week while closing ears when west is speaking loud.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7987
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 27 Mar 2010 01:40




“We will redefine our bid, which will be cheaper than the one we submitted two years ago, as we were not as smart then as we are now,” one vendor said, declining to be identified. “We are more competitive and stronger now.”

This is good news even though the delay might be greater now.

Another commented, “Technical evaluation is an air force matter. [b]We will try and ensure we hit all wickets. We haven’t made a decision on repricing.” “This, of course, presupposes that the repricing will be called for,” another vendor noted.[/b]

The cricket reference probably betrays that this particular source was an englishman from the EF consortium. :mrgreen:

And another OEM added that currency fluctuation over the past two years will be another factor to consider.

This one's also from one of the Eurocanards. Euro fluctuation has been more than the dollar I reckon.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 27 Mar 2010 04:34

Boeing vice-president, F/A-18 and EA-18 programs, Mr Gower says the Super Hornet is competing in nine countries. He was most confident about the Super Hornet's potential in India, which has five other competitors for the country's Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft tender for 126 aircraft.

"We just completed field trials in India and I think we did very well," Gower says. He explains that Boeing showed off the Super Hornet's integration of the sensor suite and also performed a landing at 10,000ft (3,000m) above sea level. "We have the best handling qualities of any aircraft out there right now."


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... ralia.html

Is he talking about the Leh trails?? Does that mean that the SH was the only aircraft so far to meet the high altitude Leh trials?? (await Gripen results) Wow that would be huge plus for Boeing Co. if that was the case. (He also goes on to express that he wasn't optimistic about a Brazilian victory.)

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4493
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 27 Mar 2010 04:36

Nope, if i recall right, someone mentioned that SH had problems at Jaisalmer or Leh, in one of those places. Each manufacturer toots their own horn, no surprises there

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 27 Mar 2010 04:44

putnanja wrote:Nope, if i recall right, someone mentioned that SH had problems at Jaisalmer or Leh, in one of those places. Each manufacturer toots their own horn, no surprises there


I think it might have been Kartik giving us an update on Jaisalmer trails.. I don't think anyones made any comments on performance results of the Leh trials so far but I take your point! Probably blowing his own trumpet..
Last edited by shukla on 27 Mar 2010 04:52, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 27 Mar 2010 04:50

I think India's concerns on Paki weapon sales & relating them to the MMRCA competition, have hit the right notes.. Especially concerned in Lockheed Martin. From their point of view, they are stuck b/w F-16: India Vs Pak... LM's running for cover..trying its best to keep its chances up..

In a reaction that is bound to raise the hackles in Islamabad, one of the US makers of F-16 fighter jets, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics has made an open attempt to mollify India after concerns were raised by New Delhi.

Over the F-16 deal with Pakistan, Lockheed Martin has told TIMES NOW that New Delhi's concerns are unwarranted because the F-16s being provided to India are far superior to the ones being given to Pakistan.

Speaking to TIMES NOW, Orville Prins, Vice President, Business Development-India, "Lockheed Martin Aeronautics said India has no need for concern. The super viper for India is the most advanced version of the F16s and that it meets and exceeds all of India's Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft requirements."

The assurance from the US makers comes after a similar one was given by the US Ambasador to India, Timothy Romer.


http://www.timesnow.tv/Indo-Pak-row-ove ... 341521.cms

Sayak
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 14 Oct 2009 06:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Sayak » 27 Mar 2010 06:57

This can be translated as we will gift Pakistan the good planes but we will sell Indians the better plane, what a lame reply from a corporation competing in a bid it had slim chance in from the start.

sawant
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Sep 2009 23:04
Location: Sunshine state

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby sawant » 27 Mar 2010 07:22

jaladipc wrote:Four MMRCA Contenders Fail Leh Trials!
It's the latest tidbit on India's $12-billion Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition that's doing the rounds (and it was first reported by The Hindu on Tuesday). Four of the six contenders that underwent cold-weather evaluation trials at Leh didn't meet performance requirements. OK, major understatement. Four of the contenders bit dust in Leh. Read that again: four aircraft. That's huge. It's still unclear which part of the Leh test the four aircraft types failed at, though it is quite clear that it was either the switch off/on after landing, or the take-off with meaningful combat load at that altitude. The only thing that appears true is that four aircraft failed the trial -- it is totally anyone's guess which these are. Any want to hazard a try?

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/03/fo ... rials.html


Comes as a big surprise ... hasnt the 'delay' in this process given the manufacturers enough time to deal with the climate situation.... and solve the problems... or is it that they think they cud easily shove whatever they have down our throat.... or worse is it that none of the bidders are going to satisfy this requirement... effectively giving us to choose from not-so-upto-the-mark aircraft ... as if all the bidders sayin $10B... well this is all u can have india :-(

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7987
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 27 Mar 2010 07:26

Sayak wrote:This can be translated as we will gift Pakistan the good planes but we will sell Indians the better plane, what a lame reply from a corporation competing in a bid it had slim chance in from the start.


Well, LM is not donating any aircraft to pakistan, the US government is. No point in blaming the company. They just have to make these statements now and again to try and keep themselves in the race.
Last edited by nachiket on 27 Mar 2010 09:20, edited 1 time in total.

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 27 Mar 2010 09:16

x-posted from Mil aviation thread

Bala Vignesh wrote:Just in from Shiv's Blog
4 MMRCA contenders fail Leh trials...

Don't count anybody out just yet. As opposed to the desert and hot&humid climate, fighter aircrafts flying Leh is a rare thing. Not so with the transport aircrafts though. So I wonder what sort of weightage the Leh trials carry.

And is it also one of the reasons the aircraft manufacturers are being allowed to revise their bids? So that the fighters who have been dealt a moral blow in Leh can at least make up for it by lowering their prices?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests