MRCA News and Discussion

munna · Post by **munna** » 19 May 2010 18:56

shiv wrote:Buy the Gripen and kill the paki AWACS by squeezing the Swedes on this...The US gets a big engine order to boot. It won't kill LCA IMO

I support this line of thinking! LCA is here for the long run and Gripen NG is a different fighter with lots of scope for 'knowledge proliferation" for our indigenous fighters. IMO both would thrive in a symbiotic structure.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 May 2010 19:11

shiv wrote:Buy the Gripen and kill the paki AWACS by squeezing the Swedes on this...The US gets a big engine order to boot. It won't kill LCA IMO

But they already got two out of 4 ordered. The first one was received last dec' and now Apr' they got second one:

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-ne ... rom-sweden

The first such aircraft of the originally four contracted by Pakistan was acquired in December last year, while the second aircraft yesterday landed safely at an Operational Base of the PAF.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 19 May 2010 19:17

I don't see how this will "kill" the Tejas. The PLAAF has about 300 more fighter planes than we do. We have big numbers to fill AFAIK.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 May 2010 19:34

Manish_Sharma wrote: But they already got two out of 4 ordered. The first one was received last dec' and now Apr' they got second one:

They will get support and spares from Somalia. OT

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 19 May 2010 19:36

shukla wrote:MMRCA: A difficult choice for the IAF

it seems that the political factor is likely to influence the choice of the MMRCA more heavily than just the performance parameters. As an old fighter pilot, however, I would always pitch for a light, easily manoeuvrable, agile and relatively inexpensive fighter that delivers every time, generates high sortie rates and is easy to maintain and train on a day to day peace time schedule. What counts in war is the number of fighters one can launch every hour, every day, day after day, with full confidence and ease of operation.
Gripens the way to go..if that would be the thought process..

Yes, looks like the rank and file in the IAF still want a Mirage 2000 replacement!

But there are some glaring errors made by the author above in an effort to push the single engined birds, esp. the F-16.

For one, it is hardly light compared to the twin engined birds except for the Shornet. It weighs a good 10tons empty equaling or exceeding the twin engined Rafale, and just about a ton lower than the TIffy and fulcrum.

Two, based on prices quoted for the UAE deal, it is anything but cheap.

The NG though has quite a few things going in its favor over the other contenders -
Supposedly has exceptional turnaround times and operating costs. Has low enough upfront costs as well - should fit in the current budget. Saab has shown the willingness to integrate 3rd party hardware without much drama. Overall, almost a perfect replacement of the M2k - only a little less payload. PLus the offer to work on a gen 5 JV.

Just a tad low on the TWR imho - I'd like to see the 12.5 ton engine

certainly think an MLU could increase payload, add CFTs, and get the 12.5 ton engine.

Of course, what the presence of US engines means in terms of end user restrictions is another concern.

As far as "killing" the Tejas goes, it depends on what they aim for in the MkII. The current bird is certainly lighter (empty and MTOW) and has a lower capacity in terms of fuel carriage/range and payload.

CM.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 May 2010 19:39

What is the real reason for MRCA:
1.'cause Tejas is late?
[This doesn't make sense as Tejas gets FOC by 2012 and that's the time MRCAs start arriving].
2. To make up the numbers? [Again order 300 Mk I Tejas and thats it]
3. Medium weight category is needed as Su 30s are too heavy and expensive to operate and Tejas is too light.
[Then why SH, Gripen are invited only Typhoon, Rafale and hated F16 should fit the bill].
4. New Tech needs to be infused. [Can't we just spend 5-6 billion dollars on buying AESA + GaN Chips producing tech and EJ 200 engines] and spread them all over LCA MkII, AMCA etc. instead of having to put up new assembly lines for the production of new fighter jet].

These reasons (for buying MRCA) have been dished out separately on myriad pages of MRCA.

To catch up the numbers with Chinese best would be to start investing in setting up big production line of Tejas where 40 Mk I Tejas are produced annually until Mk II comes along.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 May 2010 19:41

shiv wrote: They will get support and spares from Somalia. OT

But can the Swedes go back on the contract and stop the support/spares legally?

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 19 May 2010 19:48

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/05/ ... e-sam.html

Some relevant parts for the MRCA.

India’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) likes to believe that its big arms purchases place it in the driving seat while tendering and contracting. In buying from non-US companies, this is indeed true. But, in buying from the US, New Delhi’s leverage is hardly impressive.

Take, for example, India’s proposed purchase of ten C-17 transport aircraft. The Boeing plant in Long Beach, California, has already delivered 200 C-17s to the US military and more are in the pipeline.

Or consider India’s procurement of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA), a deal that has generated so much hype that South Block might believe that this is the biggest fighter purchase ever. In fact Boeing, which is offering India the F/A-18 Super Hornet, has already sold the US Navy and Marine Corps over 900 F/A-18s (Hornets and Super Hornets); another 320 have been sold abroad. A single US Navy base at Oceana is home to 170 F/A-18s.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 May 2010 19:54

Manish_Sharma wrote:
shiv wrote: They will get support and spares from Somalia. OT
But can the Swedes go back on the contract and stop the support/spares legally?

The smell of money can do interesting things.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 May 2010 20:18

shiv wrote: The smell of money can do interesting things.

That's actually true, if they want any terror attack or exposure of such attack in india or elsewhere can give Swedes enough excuse to get indignant and for the sake of humanity...... mmmm well "kaput porki awacs...."

kit · Post by **kit** » 19 May 2010 20:45

Why cant Gripen NG and its stealthy follow on complement the LCA / MCA .Does India need to keep on reinventing everything., i am pretty sure that a lot of technologies derived from the Gripen can be used in either . could do wonders for upgrading the quality and production quantity

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 May 2010 23:39

The confidential assessment of the LCAs progress will determine whether a light or medium weight fighter is chosen.I for one still cannot understand the delay in accelerating dev. of LCA MK-2 as 40 plus MK1s have been ordered.Given the numbers as Shiv has said,a Gripen buy will not kill off the LCA MK-2 as with our stated production rates,about 12-18 per year max,by 2012 we will be able to produce only about 120.150 LCAs simply not enough to replace older fighters like the MIg-21s and increase our inventory sorely needed thanks to the PAfs increasing strength and that of the PLAF too.The PAK-FA to masintain our qualititative superiority is the only bright spot on the horizon as we could see this aircraft inducted in reasonable numbers before 2020.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 May 2010 00:19

shiv wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote: But can the Swedes go back on the contract and stop the support/spares legally?
The smell of money can do interesting things.

The Swedes are known for good after-sales support. I don't see any reason why they'd renege on a legal contract to support the Erieye- the French may have done that but not unless we were able to fill their kitty with more moolah than they could count (they did it to Taiwan). Those Erieyese are after all being sold to them as a non-lethal weapon.

They actually turned down Musharraf when he had publicly stated that the PAF was interested in purchasing the Gripen C/D. IMO, it is good for us that they didn't get those Gripens instead of F-16 Block 52s. They would'nt have applied the kind of operational restrictions that the US has applied on the F-16 sale to the PAF. on-site inspectors who will inspect the F-16s to see that no tampering is done and no parts are pilfered secretly to China to allow for reverse engineering. Plus they could have bought more, used the datalink between the Erieye and Gripen more effectively, and would've had lower operating and life-cycle costs than the F-16s.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 May 2010 06:05

Kartik wrote:
The Swedes are known for good after-sales support. I don't see any reason why they'd renege on a legal contract.

No need to renege on any contract. I don't think the Swedes are angels. They are businessmen. I know of no Paki deal that has not been done without kickbacks and in fact kickbacks are probably the rule for most deals with turd world nations a fact that India is struggling with. I would really like to see the contracts that Pakistan signs - seeing the hurry in which they are carried through by the people in power at the time. I am certain a lot of "out of contract" things happen. Sweden loses nothing. The money Pakistan pays via an over-invoiced deal is recycled back to corrupt Paki officials.

If we buy Swedish, India needs to apply pressure on Sweden and Sweden should easily be able to start reneging on the unofficial, unwritten parts of a contract. Even a minor leak of some detail can be converted to a court case in Sweden that will stop supplies until the case ("kickbacks") is resolved.

On the other hand, Sweden might be an angel as you imply in which case I think any of the other contenders will be fine. Either way the idea that I would support is to obtain a quid pro quo from suppliers.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 20 May 2010 06:24

shiv wrote:Either way the idea that I would support is to obtain a quid pro quo from suppliers.

Last year EADS officials did say that Euro partners will give some kind of political support as part of the package. which was being interpreted as support of Kashmir etc.

Shatack · Post by **Shatack** » 20 May 2010 16:09

Henrik wrote: Yeah, sure, doing stuff that can be done with a Super Tucano...

at least a super tucano can do what a "paper" fantasy gripen can't!

Shatack · Post by **Shatack** » 20 May 2010 16:13

Wickberg wrote:
Nihat wrote:Any clue on the combat radius of the Gripen NG, if I recall correctly it was 800 Km for Gripen D.
A few numbers;

Combat radius: 1,300 Km + 30 minutes on station with A2A weapons.
Range (one-way): 2,500 Km on internal fuel
Ferry range (one-way): 4,075 Km with external fuel
Combat Radius estimate: 1,800 km with A2A weapons

http://i41.tinypic.com/29pvtd4.jpg

3000$ a fly hour? it can't even pay the gas

Swedish lives in a world elfic where wizzards are master minders!

Shatack · Post by **Shatack** » 20 May 2010 16:31

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Shatack wrote:....
Shatack I would be grateful if you can provide the cost of Rafale per plane with following:
1. Upgraded M88 with 60KN drythurst.
2. RBE2 AESA [Please let me know what %age of TOT French would be willing to impart and at what price]
3. Can we have our own RWR Tarang instead of Spectra? and what would be tentative price for Spectra 5T upgradation for Rafale fleet?
4. Would it be possible for India to make last 70 Rafales out of 126 indigineously let's say 80%. With GaN Chips + AESA Software and the engines 100% here? Add the additional cost of TOT here too...

Please understand Rafale was never my favourite, but just for my education I would like to know, how much TOT and for what price we can expect it.

all this are already included into actual devlopement upgrades for next batch in 2012 for adla, price of UAe contract will tell the truth, just wait and see! http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Securi ... 273671422/

no paper plane here,

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 May 2010 17:14

Shatack wrote:
Henrik wrote: Yeah, sure, doing stuff that can be done with a Super Tucano...
at least a super tucano can do what a "paper" fantasy gripen can't!

A Gripen C could do what Rafale does in Afghanistan with no problems at all.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 May 2010 17:15

Shatack wrote: all this are already included into actual devlopement upgrades for next batch in 2012 for adla, price of UAe contract will tell the truth, just wait and see! http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Securi ... 273671422/

no paper plane here,

Yes it is.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 May 2010 17:20

Shatack wrote:

3000$ a fly hour? it can't even pay the gas

Swedish lives in a world elfic where wizzards are master minders!

No, and at least the swedes aren't land-burning communists like you guys. A country with the healthiest finances in the EU are also certainly better at economic calculations than France with huge deficits.

Btw, we have already settled this with the $3000/hour costs in earlier posts, but I guess you have troubles with reading?

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 20 May 2010 17:23

Shatack wrote:
3000$ a fly hour? it can't even pay the gas

Swedish lives in a world elfic where wizzards are master minders!

Tell that to the Swedish Airforce who have been operating the Gripen for almost 15 years, or the air forces of the Czech Republic or Hungary. I´m sorry reality does´nt make any sense to someone who is used to overpaid french toys. Just ask the Indians what they thought of the pricetag Dassualt demanded to upgrade those old Mirage 2000, they could almost buy one brand new Gripen for the cost of upgrading one Mirage. Compared to the French almost everyone (Swedes in particular) are wizzard masters when it comes to cost-reduction and efficiency...

Done trollin´?

Danell · Post by **Danell** » 20 May 2010 17:40

Unbelievable , BR was an interesting INDIAN forum which is now becoming a ridiculous nationalistic fight between a small bunch of french and swedish fanboys ...
As a foreigner , when i come here , im interested to read smart and informed comments from indians posters like Kartik (or others) ... not idiotic french or swedish comments ...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 May 2010 17:48

people, if you are responding to trolls, you are trolling yourself. I'm going to ignore this round of exchange but that's it. next time please report the post and DO NOT respond.
Rahul.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 20 May 2010 22:05

- Henrik/Shatak - Do you guys work for some of these firms in question?

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 20 May 2010 22:10

I recall reading about Eurojet being considered as an engine replacement for gripen. I wonder if this option would boost its chances especially if eurojet wins the LCA engine contract.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 May 2010 22:43

Carl_T wrote:- Henrik/Shatak - Do you guys work for some of these firms in question?

Nope, not me.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 21 May 2010 04:15

shiv wrote:Buy the Gripen and kill the paki AWACS by squeezing the Swedes on this...The US gets a big engine order to boot. It won't kill LCA IMO

The U.S will get a big engine order anyway. With a Shornet, they get an even bigger engine order

Engines hold the key (as the wise Enqyoob argued) - it will be interesting to see the timing of the LCA engine selection vis-a-vis MRCA winner announcement. IMVHO, the following should be our options with the best one on top (assuming that by now its really a toss-up between Gripen & Shornet or a combo of the two):

a) Gripen & EJ200 (for LCA)
b) Shornet & EJ200 (for LCA)
c) Gripen & GE (for LCA)
d) Shornet & GE (for LCA)

Maybe (b) and (c) above can be switched - but the best and worst options are clear

Added later: after reading RoyG's comment - if Gripen fitted with EJ200 is an option, its the best (alongwith EJ200 for LCA). Squeeze as much TOT as possible out of this for Kaveri & keep Khan out of engines altogether.

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 21 May 2010 04:46

RoyG wrote:I recall reading about Eurojet being considered as an engine replacement for gripen. I wonder if this option would boost its chances especially if eurojet wins the LCA engine contract.

Not as a replacement but as an option if the customer desires it. SAAB have been investigating the EJ200 engine in the Gripen for years and says it would cause no problems integrating it. The only downside would be less business for Volvo Aero.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 21 May 2010 07:20

Wow if the EJ2000 is an option it would be perfect! More commonality with Tejas...

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 21 May 2010 08:28

If EJ200 is selected than how much difference it will cause considering it is almost 10kN weaker than F414 ?

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 21 May 2010 08:38

IMO Gripen with EJ2000 is a winning combo if the engine is also fitted into the LCA. I agree with Prem.

avinash.rd · Post by **avinash.rd** » 21 May 2010 16:04

Dassault-UAE may team up on Rafale bid
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Securi ... 273671422/

If the whole world think that Rafale is overpriced, then I wonder why UAE wants to invest in the Rafale? May be for ToT!!

Also, The F4 model would be a true "fifth-generation" aircraft and would be available for delivery from 2014 onwards!!!
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =EUR&s=AIR

very good pdf on Rafale
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source ... PXpw04TS9g

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 May 2010 17:37

If the whole world think that Rafale is overpriced, then I wonder why UAE wants to invest in the Rafale?

Ehhh.. coz they can afford it!?!

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 21 May 2010 17:56

Dassault-UAE may team up on Rafale bid

Did we miss the bus here?
i mean if we had selected Rafale for MMRCA,we may have ended up with Rafale in numbers,Adv.4++ gen aircraft(F4),engine tech which could be used for tejas Mk-2,and possibilty of exchange of mirage 2ks for addl Rafale's,May be Naval version also

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 21 May 2010 18:00

UAE is not not know for lowest bidder wins kind of tenders, they basically approach a particular manufacturer and get them self a good deal in terms of quality by paying good. They did the same thing with LM and managed to get a F-16 which is better than the ones with the USAF and also managed to hold royalties.

How will the F4 become a "true 5th Gen Fighter"? AFAIK the French are not going to change the airframe and without doing that how will it become stealthy ?

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 21 May 2010 18:18

avinash.rd wrote:Dassault-UAE may team up on Rafale bid
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Securi ... 273671422/ If the whole world think that Rafale is overpriced, then I wonder why UAE wants to invest in the Rafale? May be for ToT!!

Of course the UAE can afford it, this is all just politics my friend.

Also, The F4 model would be a true "fifth-generation" aircraft and would be available for delivery from 2014 onwards!!!
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =EUR&s=AIR

No it won't be a true 5th gen. Just take a look at the F-35, PAK-FA and F-22, no easy, simple "make-overs" here. A cow is still a cow, even if you put it in a tracksuit.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 May 2010 18:23

if EJ200 < F414 in thrust, it may not meet the IAFs performance parameters for both Gripen-demo and Tejas-mk2.

I am sure eurojet can come up with a higher thrust version but in what timeframe and what cost and will other customers take it ?

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 21 May 2010 18:26

narayana wrote: Did we miss the bus here?
i mean if we had selected Rafale for MMRCA,we may have ended up with Rafale in numbers,Adv.4++ gen aircraft(F4),engine tech which could be used for tejas Mk-2,and possibilty of exchange of mirage 2ks for addl Rafale's,May be Naval version also

AFAIK Rafale is in the MRCA race and probably one of the favorites to win. How can India have "missed the bus"?
But how does a Snecma engine fit into the Tejas? (considering only the EJ200 and GE F414 seems to be the ones shortlisted)

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 21 May 2010 18:54

A few more Gripen Demo details ...

She landed in Leh. Switched off. Restarted 2 hours later as required after the team had a light lunch.

She took off with 2 Iris T, and 1600 kgs in the centre drop tank plus full internal fuel.

Performance tests were conducted in Adampur. No problems.

Indian Air Force pilots flew rear seat.

Gripen team basically said they would do whatever they were asked to do by the Indian Air Force.

The flight down from Sweden also worked flawlessly.

Remember ... this is a highly evolved prototype ... but a prototype nonetheless so there were clear risks for the Gripen team to be willing to fly this down. Whats been achieved is truly impressive.

Not sure if she supercruised in India though IAF pilots did supercruise in Sweden where they flew her quite extensively.

Cheers
Vishnu Som
Associate Editor and Senior Anchor
NDTV