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.
manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 15 Aug 2010 00:28

hey I am not gonna take it further...

I had problems with your first post...now I am not gonna take it further...anyways Happy Independence day to you and all of us...
no hard feelings today...if I am correct here at least...even if it's OT...

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 15 Aug 2010 20:17

Thomas Kolarek wrote:
Henrik wrote:It's not the EU that wants to sell military technology to China, it's France.


Then claim an insurance from France before signing Rafale for MRCA to not supply to India's rivals. France should be able to sign it, when they think about future businesses they will get from other countries once MRCA choses Rafale.


This is one thing which will not be practically be possible. For one thing we have no means of enforcing the compliance or monitoring it. At the best, what we can do is depend on the word of the French. This applies to the Americans also.
Also there will be some PAF pilots who would have got some hands on experience, with rafael and euro fighter typhoon, in the west-asia region.

We need MRCA fighters in numbers to fill in the gaps which have grown into IAF's squadron strength. We will require a fighter which our enemies does not have or will have difficulty in getting access to. A domestic fighter, i.e. LCA and the future MCA, is the best bet. But that still seems to be some way off.

archan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6821
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 21:30
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby archan » 15 Aug 2010 21:05

manum, no more OT here please.

nits
BRFite
Posts: 1003
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nits » 15 Aug 2010 22:38

Well sooner or Later deal will be finalized and one of the impotant thing to look forward is to see which all compained will get work as per Offset Clause as Under the country’s Defence Procurement Procedure, all foreign companies bidding for major Indian defence contracts worth more than Rs300 crore have to invest 30 to 50% of the order in Indian defence sector.

One company which looks promising to me is Mahindra... They recenly acquired 2 aerospace companies in australia. -Link

I am no sure if TATA / L&T have major footprint in this area... Gurus - Please shed more light on it....

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20721
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 16 Aug 2010 15:42

Ha!Ha!Ha! I liked the Boeing/SH's "International road map" offer to us.With almost every US ally already operating this ancient bird,this "road map" leads to a dead end.No amount of "make-up" can hide the wrinkles and warts of this old hag ,the "Still Horny" and her Yanqui sister,the "Feeble Falcon".The IAF have done the nation a great favour by listing their peference according to capability.It is now upto them and the GOI to see how one can capture the "best bird at the best price".

paramyog
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby paramyog » 16 Aug 2010 17:36

IAF seems to have been told to shut up by d' south block post IBN7.

If EF wins, which if (..IAF, South & North Block and..)God willing...
2 things must be done.
1) Reduce the cost of production per Unit by INDI-geN-ising production making it accessible n affordable to RAF n Luftwaffe who had to cancel orders owing to its Over the rooftop pricing.
2) Add the जुगाड tech India is a master of.(remember integrating Israeli n French Avionics into SU-30 makin it MKI which gives an Su-35 a run for its money..!!??). Which means enhancements which more than make up for stealth and stuff EU-EF may not have. So when Chini n Paki pilot engages an Indian जुगाडु EF he realises a Saudi EF is just a BETA Version of this भारतीय युद्ध विमान..!!

Lets do some serious value addition to this European machine...trust me, it will be a true blood छोटा भाई to the Su-30 MKI when they fight the Chinks over the Holy Kailash & Mansarovar in the Tibetan plateau...!!
Let this be the next Enfield Bullet....British by DNA...Indian by upbringing...!!
( By the way, most birds failed in Ladakh..!! This guy didnt..!! )

P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby P Chitkara » 16 Aug 2010 18:12

Teens have had their share of glory but for the requirements that the IAF has, they really are not the long term answer. Solah is past its prime and must be allowed to retire gracefully :wink: Here I am not even talking about the beggars next door getting the same tech. (They recently got the AIM 120C alms to fight taliban AF :evil: )

The other one is basically a naval plane and there is no guarantee it will be supported by USN once the JSF comes on board.

Roadmaps are what the corps like us to believe. Reality is something very different.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Lalmohan » 16 Aug 2010 19:33

dont underestimate the taliban air force, they have lethal kite technology...
er... did that get banned?
oops!

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 16 Aug 2010 20:04

There are very simple reasons why Boeing or LM will not get the contract. We are not about to hand over control of ~10 squadrons of IAF by making them susceptible to sanctions.

There are means less than sanctions that are available - i.e. dragging feet on approving and authorizing supplies. This is not a given, but given the vagaries of administration's political goals, this is an easily used lever.

Also, there is a stark difference between "offensive" weapons and "defensive" weapons. We will be subject to curtailed support and supplies of "offensive" weapons. Look at Taiwan. It is a bigger economic partner than India, richer, and can be a better level than India can. C-130, P-8, etc. by nomenclature are under "defensive" weaponry.

Even Israel has been subject to "sanctions" during war, and irrespective of whether it is against China or Pakistan -- we will also be "sanctioned" temporarily during the war itself. This means no munition supplies, unless like Israel we begin using non-US munitions.

Historically, only two sources have supplied us with spares and munitions during war (i.e. latest example being Kargil) -- i.e. Russians and French. The British sanctions hurt Sea Kings, and Harriers.

MMRCA is an offensive weaponry -- period! and is subject to very different set of rules than any defensive/logistical equipment.

Finally, even if on BR we assign nuclear role to SU-30 MKI -- it would not be prudent to forsake such role for MMRCA. IMHO IAF will not give up such a role just because it has SU-30MKI. More so because IAF does intend to use MMRCA for strike missions (and that is very clear). It would only under the condition that the difference in technology and capabilities is worth doing so.

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 16 Aug 2010 20:11

paramyog wrote:( By the way, most birds failed in Ladakh..!! This guy didnt..!! )


Source? Most being 4 out of 6 or 3 out of 6? So, which 2 or 3 passed?

I am sure that all of us on BR would like to know -- how did they fail? what was the basis for success/failure?

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 16 Aug 2010 20:23

paramyog wrote:IAF seems to have been told to shut up by d' south block post IBN7.

If EF wins, which if (..IAF, South & North Block and..)God willing...
2 things must be done.
1) Reduce the cost of production per Unit by INDI-geN-ising production making it accessible n affordable to RAF n Luftwaffe who had to cancel orders owing to its Over the rooftop pricing.


Similar to the cost reduction for which we had to increase the funding for indigenisation of the scorpene? Production in India implies cost of manufacturing line (not merely assembly line). Think this cost can be amortized over the 126 aircraft and in addition bring about the savings? If not, how much do you think the cost savings will be from assembly? Why would similar cost savings (percentage) not materialize for any of the other contenders?

2) Add the जुगाड tech India is a master of.(remember integrating Israeli n French Avionics into SU-30 makin it MKI which gives an Su-35 a run for its money..!!??).

Do you know how much time was invested in MKI-zing the SU-30? Also, to begin with we were buying more MKI than we are planning on MRCA. The target time frame for induction (beginning and duration both) is far more compressed and urgent for MRCA than it was for SU-30MKI.

Which means enhancements which more than make up for stealth and stuff EU-EF may not have.


None of them have stealth, so we are making up for nothing?

So when Chini n Paki pilot engages an Indian जुगाडु EF he realises a Saudi EF is just a BETA Version of this भारतीय युद्ध विमान..!!


Technically BETA to Release version is working out bugs. Perhaps you meant Version 2.0 to Version 1.0 for Saudi EF. :?:

Lets do some serious value addition to this European machine...trust me, it will be a true blood छोटा भाई to the Su-30 MKI when they fight the Chinks over the Holy Kailash & Mansarovar in the Tibetan plateau...!!


Give us some more information, and we will believe you. BRF-ites are skeptical buggers, they may believe if you provide adequate information but will never trust just because they are asked to.

Let this be the next Enfield Bullet....British by DNA...Indian by upbringing...!!


Seriously not a good example. :mrgreen:

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Surya » 16 Aug 2010 20:33

the "Still Horny" and her Yanqui sister,the "Feeble Falcon".


extremely childish.

So if the Falcon is feeble you should have no issue if the Pakis get 200 of them

right???

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 16 Aug 2010 20:39

Philip wrote:Ha!Ha!Ha! I liked the Boeing/SH's "International road map" offer to us.With almost every US ally already operating this ancient bird,this "road map" leads to a dead end.


Who else is operating this "ancient bird" -- SH?

I believe it is only US and Australia for now.

No amount of "make-up" can hide the wrinkles and warts of this old hag ,the "Still Horny" and her Yanqui sister,the "Feeble Falcon".


I concur with Surya -- somehow I did not expect to see something this from Philip :eek:

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1392
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby munna » 16 Aug 2010 20:45

Surya wrote:
the "Still Horny" and her Yanqui sister,the "Feeble Falcon".


extremely childish.

So if the Falcon is feeble you should have no issue if the Pakis get 200 of them

right???

As long as its not for free and purelanders pay through their nose for it we are fine (Except that we will have to ramp up our numbers too since quatity is also a quality). 200 Tiffy Vs 200 Fal'gones", we all know the denouement.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Surya » 16 Aug 2010 21:01

but munna

if its feeble it should not matter. - right
'if they purchased 200 F7s - would u care the same way as 200 Falcons??

lets rule out the money part.

lets say they had a gazillion dollars having struck oil under their musharraf

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5251
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 16 Aug 2010 21:13

Philip wrote:Ha!Ha!Ha! I liked the Boeing/SH's "International road map" offer to us.With almost every US ally already operating this ancient bird,this "road map" leads to a dead end.No amount of "make-up" can hide the wrinkles and warts of this old hag ,the "Still Horny" and her Yanqui sister,the "Feeble Falcon".


stop this BS talk.."almost every US ally" operates the SHornet ? :roll: ..that kind of statement itself is enough to qualify this as being nothing more than a rant. the rest of your post is the same regurgitated stuff that you've been dishing out for a while now. posts like this have led to this thread being like the garbage can of this forum.

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1392
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby munna » 16 Aug 2010 21:33

Surya wrote:but munna

if its feeble it should not matter. - right
'if they purchased 200 F7s - would u care the same way as 200 Falcons??

lets rule out the money part.

lets say they had a gazillion dollars having struck oil under their musharraf


Ok, let us rule out the money part. Let us also rule out any emotions too, then what gives? Well every weapon system is potent and impotent depending upon the settings. Heck even a hockey stick can be deadly in a one on one situation but a hockey vis a vis a gun is useless. Similarly a 303 can be deadly and cause of worry but not in case you have a decent ranged automatic on your side.
Therefore amongst its peers the falcon sahib is definitely the 303 while Tiffy is a heavy hitter LMG (heavy firepower with less flexibility in role changes) and Rafale is kind of like a decent new age assault rifle that can perform variety of roles and ensure surperior firepower, with scope for future iterations. I emphasize that with better fighters around, 200 Falcons with purelanders are no cause of worry, I just need to have a better system and which by default other two systems are to falcons in this day and age.

PS: It also does not help that the 303 comes with a remote operated kill and system disable switch

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Surya » 16 Aug 2010 21:47

munna

so its not feeble

thats all the point I am making

we are not debating kill switch(a seperate valid issue) but childish rants of feeble and horny

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1392
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby munna » 16 Aug 2010 22:13

Surya wrote:munna

so its not feeble

thats all the point I am making

we are not debating kill switch(a seperate valid issue) but childish rants of feeble and horny


I agree, debate should be devoid of emotionalism.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Surya » 16 Aug 2010 23:50

and of course let me reiterate that I do not like the solah.

I am a Gripen fanboi :D

Deepak_D
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 02:47
Location: PlAnEt EaRtH

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Deepak_D » 17 Aug 2010 02:31

MRCA decision should not be made keeping pitystan in mind. I believe the below aspects should heed the way for winner. By saying winner, I dont mean the vendor who is offering, I mean IAF

1. Technology that comes in and can be absorbed quickly for new development of birds
2. Sheer numbers which can be incorporated quickly.

We should achieve two things there by, Point 1 gives advantage to bridge the gaps in our tech. Point 2 gives advantage in numbers to counter the current deficit of birds. Point 2 will add political advantage too as we revive the economy of the Vendor.

Consider:

$10B is not big for uncle sam and party whose Defense expenses tops $2T. But the current situation (not just the economy) presents US with less choices else than to arm neighbors of Maina (PLAN) who are glaring high to topple US as a big brother in Indian Ocean. Uncle sam will try to sell anytech that comes in to defend the DF21 and its sisters. Now they are ready to Nuke-arm Vietnam to counter Maina.
$10B is big for Britain, and bigger for tiffany because she needs green bills to survive. And EU will give in anything to revive their stressed economy. It will for sure do a big goodie if Tiffany is selected.
$10B for Frenchie is reaaly big. They know it and EU too knows it, but given a choice b/w Rafiq and Tiffany you may want to choose Tiffany as you not only please a bigger audience but get the better of two.
$10B for Rukies is too BIG ... but you already have had long relation with them and you been bled a lot for.
$10B for SAAB is REALLY REALLLY REALLLY BIG. no need of explaination here.

Everyone knows its not $10B that counts for.. its $30B in the next decade that they eye for... In the end I believe the vendor who wins here will also win the engine contract too.

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 787
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Suresh S » 17 Aug 2010 02:48

[quote][/quote]
$10B is not big for uncle sam and party whose Defense expenses tops $2T
The last time I checked the USA defense spending for the fiscal year 2010 was 663.7 billion dollars

Deepak_D
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 02:47
Location: PlAnEt EaRtH

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Deepak_D » 17 Aug 2010 03:55

@snahata : The last time I checked the USA defense spending for the fiscal year 2010 was 663.7 billion dollars


So what is $10B ? 1.5% ?? 10B is not big on orders, what follows $10B is the question ? For US its not money, ( they has enough of it per-se), its what advantage they get out of this deal.

rajeshks
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 22:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby rajeshks » 17 Aug 2010 10:20

snahata wrote:

$10B is not big for uncle sam and party whose Defense expenses tops $2T
The last time I checked the USA defense spending for the fiscal year 2010 was 663.7 billion dollars


Mostly due to Afgan war.. and think about the total expense/damage done by Al-kazhutha & osama.. will be in trillions.. he he.. not even ussr could have caused such a huge damage on khans.. am sure if Al-khazhutha goes for an ipo now, china will be happy to subscribe all the shares for $500B :D

anyway OT here..

{kazhutha in malayalam means donkey}

paramyog
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby paramyog » 17 Aug 2010 11:35

Avid
...take a look...
The officials confided that four of the five aircraft in the MMRCA competition faced problems starting up in the rarefied atmosphere of Leh, and the IAF had to ask the manufacturers to undertake modifications in the aircraft's fuel systems.

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/article267530.ece

As far as fighting over Holy Kailash & Mansarovar go take a look at this..
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=in

Now comes the costing part:
F/A-18 already sources a few composite material from HAL. Come to think of it when we start to manufacture Tiffs for not just IAF but also RAF, Luftwaffe, Italy & Hispania, the cost of production will reduce.
The present valuation of $ 100 million per piece is already come down 25 % post Euro devaluation.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... er/397737/

As the volume of production increases, the cost per unit will decline. We already have labour costs much lesser compared to EU. Boeing sees that and taken a lead, even though its a marginally smaller component.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 222667.cms

And as far as the Royal Enfield Bullet example goes, well, its stil being used by the British Army and Bike enthusiasts the world over.
http://www.royalenfield.com/internation ... assic.aspx

Y should an Indian built Tiffy be not the next best thing..? :lol: :lol:

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20721
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 17 Aug 2010 12:27

.
Last edited by Philip on 17 Aug 2010 12:38, edited 1 time in total.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 17 Aug 2010 12:29

Avid wrote:There are very simple reasons why Boeing or LM will not get the contract. We are not about to hand over control of ~10 squadrons of IAF by making them susceptible to sanctions.

There are means less than sanctions that are available - i.e. dragging feet on approving and authorizing supplies. This is not a given, but given the vagaries of administration's political goals, this is an easily used lever.

Also, there is a stark difference between "offensive" weapons and "defensive" weapons. We will be subject to curtailed support and supplies of "offensive" weapons. Look at Taiwan. It is a bigger economic partner than India, richer, and can be a better level than India can. C-130, P-8, etc. by nomenclature are under "defensive" weaponry.

Even Israel has been subject to "sanctions" during war, and irrespective of whether it is against China or Pakistan -- we will also be "sanctioned" temporarily during the war itself. This means no munition supplies, unless like Israel we begin using non-US munitions.

Historically, only two sources have supplied us with spares and munitions during war (i.e. latest example being Kargil) -- i.e. Russians and French. The British sanctions hurt Sea Kings, and Harriers.

MMRCA is an offensive weaponry -- period! and is subject to very different set of rules than any defensive/logistical equipment.

Finally, even if on BR we assign nuclear role to SU-30 MKI -- it would not be prudent to forsake such role for MMRCA. IMHO IAF will not give up such a role just because it has SU-30MKI. More so because IAF does intend to use MMRCA for strike missions (and that is very clear). It would only under the condition that the difference in technology and capabilities is worth doing so.


No weapon in itself is defensive or offensive. Like beauty, the value of the weapon lies in its possessor. The one who wields the weapon and how he wields it decides whether the weapon is offensive or not.

It is true that the British and Americans have been less than trust worthy regarding supplies. It is due to this fact that F-16/FA-18/Typhoon have to be eliminated, irrespective of the merits of the fighter. We cannot depend on these countries in case of a pressing need. They will peddle their own interests, which may be inimical to that of India.
Post-1962 and prior to 1965 India was under immense pressure from west and US to compromise on kashmir. And based on the pressure, we were ready to make sizable concessions to pakistan. It is different matter that pakistan thought that it could get more than what was on offer. Also the 1962 debacle had sowed some fallacious thoughts into the pakistani heads.

This tender, is more about filling the gaps in the IAF strength, then about anything else. If we can field 125 top of line 4th generation fighter, than china can also field more than 125 fighters. And in the modern war, the one who fields more wins. Hitler learnt it in the steeps of Russia. We learnt it in the Himalayas in 1962.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20721
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 17 Aug 2010 12:37

It IS in bad taste,profound apologies to all including Kartik,but I have deliberately done so as to extract a response from the Webmasters who have been silent for ages .Kartik has personally attacked me for months on this thread instead of countering the points I've raised with reason and logic.I've explained so in the Feedback thread.This is the very first time that I've attacked him and I do not intend to give him the "oxygen of publicity" ever again.
Last edited by Philip on 17 Aug 2010 16:34, edited 1 time in total.

paramyog
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby paramyog » 17 Aug 2010 14:20

Totally in agreement with Christopher....

"Fear not the weapon but the hand that wields it.."

Chinmayanand
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2585
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:01
Location: Mansarovar
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Chinmayanand » 17 Aug 2010 14:46

Which MRCA contender has the best armaments ? Are they taken into consideration ?
Looks like a noobie question :mrgreen:

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 17 Aug 2010 15:43

India selected SU-30K over Mirage-2000-5 due to one reason, cost. So Russia did some tweaks into SU-30K, converted it into SU-30MKI and gave to India a fighter with 1500 kms Combat radius. One of the alleged issues which has been reported for SU-30MKI, is that if the engine develops a fault or has to be repaired, then it is to be detached from the air frame and send to russia. That is a big disadvantage for us.

There is one aircraft which will do the same as regards to MRCA, Grippen NG. Provided Grippen NG has not failed any of the technical rounds carried out by IAF in Leh and other places, Grippen is the lowest cost alternative to all of its competitors. In fact it may be the smart choice, as its engine can in future be replaced by Kaveri. Currently Grippen NG is powered by a GE gas turbine engine. Provided Kaveri is able to provide 90knm thrust, it can be used inside Grippen. Once Kaveri is built to the specifications, a major chunk of the fighter cost is reduced and our dependence on outsiders will be reduced dramatically.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 Aug 2010 16:03

I dont think it was a MKI -vs- M2k contest ever. after IAF purchased MKI they still wanted a non-tender purchase of MRCA around kargil (i.e. 10 yrs ago). M2K option to make 150 more was given up in favour of Mig29A and Mig29S - maybe
you confused with that and a period of low uptime of the Mig29 holdings.

> One of the alleged issues which has been reported for SU-30MKI, is that if the engine develops a fault
> or has to be repaired,

where did you pick this up? no doubt some components are sourced from saturn and some from hal koraput, but
this isnt the a low volume Mi26 or bear to be shipped all the way back. I am sure its a false rumour.
likewise some comps of the bars radar will never be made here and NIIP will supply spares as needed.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 17 Aug 2010 16:52

Singha wrote:I dont think it was a MKI -vs- M2k contest ever. after IAF purchased MKI they still wanted a non-tender purchase of MRCA around kargil (i.e. 10 yrs ago). M2K option to make 150 more was given up in favour of Mig29A and Mig29S - maybe
you confused with that and a period of low uptime of the Mig29 holdings.

> One of the alleged issues which has been reported for SU-30MKI, is that if the engine develops a fault
> or has to be repaired,

where did you pick this up? no doubt some components are sourced from saturn and some from hal koraput, but
this isnt the a low volume Mi26 or bear to be shipped all the way back. I am sure its a false rumour.
likewise some comps of the bars radar will never be made here and NIIP will supply spares as needed.


The point of SU-30MKI was to highlight the fact that COST was a crucial factor. Similarly I wanted to point out that Grippen NG would be the most cost effective of all the alternatives, with is overlap of LCA.

P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby P Chitkara » 17 Aug 2010 17:12

Cost was a crucial factor then. Remember the state of economy in those days. Now compare it with today and see how much we can spend on such big ticket items.

Point I am trying to make is, cost may be an important, but not the crucial factor.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Juggi G » 17 Aug 2010 18:09

Cross-Posting
Russians Showing their True Colours

Aircraft Deals with ‘Friend’ Russia Costing Dear
Daily News & Analysis
Aircraft Deals with ‘Friend’ Russia Costing Dear
DNA / Suman Sharma / Tuesday, August 17, 2010
0:30 IST

With an Astronomical 155% Increase in price in Three Years, the Russian Sukhoi-30 fighter Aircraft Seem to be Going the Gorshkov Way.

The deal for aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov was hammered in 2004 for $974 million (Rs4,560 crore), but it was renegotiated in 2010 at $2.3 billion (Rs10,770 crore).

After the Indian Air Force (IAF) wrote to the ministry of defence expressing concern at its depleting strength and pressing for immediate purchase of 40 Sukhois-30s under the fast-track provision, which does not warrant tendering or open competition, a deal was inked with Russia in 2007 for $1.6 billion (Rs7,490 crore), that is $40 million (Rs190 crore) a piece.

Latest figures tabled in parliament, however, show that another deal for 40 + 2 Sukhois (2 are replacements for aircraft that crashed last year), to be manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautical Limited (HAL) under Licence from the Russian Federation’s Irkutsk, has been struck for $4.3 Billion (Rs20,125 crore), that is $102 Million a Piece (Rs480 crore).

The latest deal will make the IAF inventory 270-strong and India the largest operator of Sukhois by 2018, when HAL is to deliver the aircraft.

But the Escalation in Cost Cannot be Justified, Especially Since the aircraft being manufactured by HAL do not have Enhanced Features, such as the AESA (active electronically scanned array) Radar. Defence Experts, in Fact, are of the View that since the Assembly Line is in Bangalore, where HAL is based, the Latest Deal should have Cost Less.

The deal becomes even more loss-making since American fifth-generation fighter aircraft, F-35, manufactured by Lockheed Martin are priced at $100 Million (Rs470 crore) a piece. F-35, an advanced stealth fighter with features such as supercruise and AESA radar, competes with fourth-generation fighters, such as Eurofighter Typhoon and the French Rafale, in Norway and Denmark for deals.

The American F-16, again made by Lockheed Martin, is competing in India for IAF’s fighter jet deal with Typhoon and Rafale.

IAF already has these four-plus generation fighters, which are awaiting clearance for upgrade in a separate deal involving Irkutsk and HAL.

The “Deep Upgrade” will include enhanced combat features, systems and avionics, which would increase the flight performance and keep the aircraft in service for a longer duration. The biggest feature of the “Deep Upgrade” is the inclusion of the AESA radars replacing the passive radars in IAF Sukhois.

The twin-engine heavy-weight Sukhoi entered IAF service in 2000 after clearance in 1997, but has not undergone any upgrade since.

(All currency conversions are based on current rate and are approximate)

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nrshah » 17 Aug 2010 18:46

Juggi G wrote:Cross-Posting
Russians Showing their True Colours

Aircraft Deals with ‘Friend’ Russia Costing Dear
Daily News & Analysis
Aircraft Deals with ‘Friend’ Russia Costing Dear
DNA / Suman Sharma / Tuesday, August 17, 2010
0:30 IST

With an Astronomical 155% Increase in price in Three Years, the Russian Sukhoi-30 fighter Aircraft Seem to be Going the Gorshkov Way.

The deal for aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov was hammered in 2004 for $974 million (Rs4,560 crore), but it was renegotiated in 2010 at $2.3 billion (Rs10,770 crore).

After the Indian Air Force (IAF) wrote to the ministry of defence expressing concern at its depleting strength and pressing for immediate purchase of 40 Sukhois-30s under the fast-track provision, which does not warrant tendering or open competition, a deal was inked with Russia in 2007 for $1.6 billion (Rs7,490 crore), that is $40 million (Rs190 crore) a piece.

Latest figures tabled in parliament, however, show that another deal for 40 + 2 Sukhois (2 are replacements for aircraft that crashed last year), to be manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautical Limited (HAL) under Licence from the Russian Federation’s Irkutsk, has been struck for $4.3 Billion (Rs20,125 crore), that is $102 Million a Piece (Rs480 crore).

The latest deal will make the IAF inventory 270-strong and India the largest operator of Sukhois by 2018, when HAL is to deliver the aircraft.

But the Escalation in Cost Cannot be Justified, Especially Since the aircraft being manufactured by HAL do not have Enhanced Features, such as the AESA (active electronically scanned array) Radar. Defence Experts, in Fact, are of the View that since the Assembly Line is in Bangalore, where HAL is based, the Latest Deal should have Cost Less.

The deal becomes even more loss-making since American fifth-generation fighter aircraft, F-35, manufactured by Lockheed Martin are priced at $100 Million (Rs470 crore) a piece. F-35, an advanced stealth fighter with features such as supercruise and AESA radar, competes with fourth-generation fighters, such as Eurofighter Typhoon and the French Rafale, in Norway and Denmark for deals.

The American F-16, again made by Lockheed Martin, is competing in India for IAF’s fighter jet deal with Typhoon and Rafale.

IAF already has these four-plus generation fighters, which are awaiting clearance for upgrade in a separate deal involving Irkutsk and HAL.

The “Deep Upgrade” will include enhanced combat features, systems and avionics, which would increase the flight performance and keep the aircraft in service for a longer duration. The biggest feature of the “Deep Upgrade” is the inclusion of the AESA radars replacing the passive radars in IAF Sukhois.

The twin-engine heavy-weight Sukhoi entered IAF service in 2000 after clearance in 1997, but has not undergone any upgrade since.

(All currency conversions are based on current rate and are approximate)


There is some mis reporting... For eg... F 35 priced at 100 Mn USD... I mean is it even available... The writer has quoted as if it is available over phone.. Besides, F 35 dont supercruise??

What made Suman think that 42 planes will come without AESA and all? Especially when report itself mentions deep upgrade with AESA radar, Does not it sound logical to her that new 42 will also come with AESA and all... Also, no official report has come out with mentioning specs for newly contracted 42 aircrafts...

This cannot be compared to Vikramaditya... There cost was raised after agreement... This is not the case here... We have a quote... Depends upon us whether to buy... No body is pushing in our throat....

Not to justify the escalation, but why our reporters dont raise hue and cry when other nations escalate cost? Why they never complained about cost of of M2k upgradation being more than twice of Mig 29 even though it is not as comprehensive? Why dont they raise the issue of price of Helicopters for VVIP, C 10 (582MN USD) when 50 Mns USD plannes are available and Ruslon re start of assembly in pipeline while we dont have as much emergency in logistic planes?

Besides, cost escalation has to be viewed in different prospective...

Till now, we were purchasing all the equipments from SU/RU and the rates where very competitive (sorry low). Now we buys goods from all over the world at the rates that are mind boggling... Now if we are ok to buy tiffy or SH which dont offer any advantage over MKi, why should RU still sell at 50 Mn usd? We are thinking from our angle only...

If you have a friend whom you lend some money in times of need, free of interest.. (U r Money lender) It is ok... but when he consistently takes loans from others also and pay Interest say 24 - 36%, what will you do? Will you continue to give him loan free when he is paying interest to whole world? This is not friendship to me.....

We are free to do whatever, but russians they should be always be good to us... Don't give arms to pak and China, offer us 40 Mn USD plane (when we are ready to pay 100 mn for western plane offering same or even substandard capability)...

.....

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby prabir » 17 Aug 2010 18:48

Cost escalation with same Radar / Avionics ? or will new features. I am sure, no one will approve this based on existing features.

paramyog
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby paramyog » 17 Aug 2010 18:54

Gripen NG is LCA itself. It does not fulfill the role of an MMRCA to be really frank.

The above report about Russian mismanagement of defence ties shows the level of corruption and moral deterioration that has crept inside the Kremlin doors not withstanding capable leaders like Putin.

Its not a bad idea to participate in the JSF program knowing that the PAK FGFA can meet the same fate as Gorshkov/विक्रमादित्य and the Sukhois have met.

Time we actively engaged EADS and Dassault for making EU our partner in the new world order. Even for the Chopper deal, lets not chase the Russian birds, we've seen how good Kamovs are when compared to Eurocopter or Apache. Unfortunately while the Chinese raise border tensions by deploying Missile batteries, there is little in terms of our ability to defend and intercepts threats in our air space that we can mitigate seeing the present state of affairs.

Unfortunately we do not have too many MPs in our opposition who can put pressure on the ruling government to accelerate this process, knowing that MiGs stand no chance in actual air combat situation.

The last thing we want is, PLAF bombing the parliament while the Sukhois become too few in numbers to shield against the Chinese onslaught.

paramyog
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby paramyog » 17 Aug 2010 18:58

nrshah
"We are free to do whatever, but russians they should be always be good to us... Don't give arms to pak and China,"

With all due respect sir, Russians sell loads of arms to the Chinese, MiGs and Sukhois inclusive.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nrshah » 17 Aug 2010 19:21

paramyog wrote:nrshah
"We are free to do whatever, but russians they should be always be good to us... Don't give arms to pak and China,"

With all due respect sir, Russians sell loads of arms to the Chinese, MiGs and Sukhois inclusive.


Yes sir... I knew it will be coming....and it was purposefully i mentioned it....

Ya, russians sell to chinese and we keep shouting on the same... but we invite LM and Boeing which gives freebies to Pak... How about that? Grippen which many is saying frontrunner / Underdog etc... but we dont quote SAAB delivering 6 AWACS to Pak as often......

But what i wrote is what we want russians to do?? Not what they are doing...

It is same as Russians would have wanted us to go for FMS route of Mig 35, look what we are doing?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests