MRCA News and Discussion

prabir · Post by **prabir** » 11 Sep 2010 18:29

Of the current lot, only MMS is a die hard supporter of going with US for the MRCA deal. AK Antony and Sonia will prefer from Europe (EADS or France) based on the political package as well as offsets for LCA program. This will be a very good way of conveying to US the right message. They cannot do "serious" business with us and arm Pakistan at the same time. Any way, the bargaining power of US in global matters continue to decline owing to their huge deficit as well as financial mess.

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 11 Sep 2010 21:55

There should only be one criteria subject when it comes to buying American arms. That is the issue of American arms sales and gifts to Pak-IS-Satan. Yes, all major arms exporters do sell to India and Pakistan. So why should Indians be prckly about the USA? Well....all these exporters don't sit on a high horse like the USA and preach about effing virtues of arms control, security, democracy, human rights and other horse $hit but have no second thoughts about giving arms to Pak Is Satan. India does not need to subsidise Pakistan's arms purchase.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 13 Sep 2010 07:36

Shiv Aroor reports..

Russian Air Force Chief Inquires About MiG-35 Biting Dust In MMRCA

Russian Air Force chief Colonel-General Alexander Zelin, who was in India last week on a five day official visit, is understood to have asked his Indian counterpart, Air Chief Marshal PV Naik, on a personal level about reports, many of these in Russia, that the MiG-35 was out of contention in India's MMRCA fighter competition. Air Chief Naik is said to have assured the Russian general that there had been no eliminations in the competition so far, and that there was no question of the MiG-35 being "eliminated" at this stage. The Russian general is understood to have conveyed that he was concerned about the reports since it showed that there was a concerted negative campaign to oust the MiG-35 from the competition. The general was assured that the trial team from RAC-MiG had been given an extensive brief on their aircraft's performance in the field evaluation trials, and that there was no question of opacity in the matter.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 13 Sep 2010 12:01

^^^
The unknown is how did Mig-35 perform relative to Grippen and Typhoon? The article is silent on that.

sarkar · Post by **sarkar** » 13 Sep 2010 19:09

http://www.ptinews.com/news/948672_IAF- ... afts-soon-

"We are in the final stages of placing orders to acquire 126 multi-fighter aircrafts from US, France or Sweden within a year," Air Marshal Anil Chopra told reporters during his visit to the Sainik School here.

Every month we get a report which contradicts the earlier one.
According to Air Marshal, now F18(or f16), Gripen and Rafale are in.
EF and Mig out of the race !!

I thought it would be EF vs Rafale at the end, but guess competition is still open.

manum · Post by **manum** » 13 Sep 2010 20:18

oh, he forgot to mention for his convenience, the Europe....as eurofighter isn't owned by one nation, don't worry...

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 14 Sep 2010 06:23

Gripen

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 14 Sep 2010 07:22

^^ you beauty..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Sep 2010 09:45

the black cockpit camo treatment below the fuselage is interesting..confuses people in a turning fight which side is 'up'

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 14 Sep 2010 11:27

Singha wrote:the black cockpit camo treatment below the fuselage is interesting..confuses people in a turning fight which side is 'up'

infact I got duped by it

. Do all the regular in-service Gripens sport the same black cockpit camo below the fuselage?
I haven't seen one till yet.

Udayan pathak · Post by **Udayan pathak** » 14 Sep 2010 17:23

IAF to acquire 126 multi-fighter aircraft soon

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ia ... on_1437393

The article mentions only US, France or Sweden ??

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Sep 2010 17:51

Singha wrote:the black cockpit camo treatment below the fuselage is interesting..confuses people in a turning fight which side is 'up'

also seen in US fighters in think

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Sep 2010 17:54

A veteran well-known scribe remarked not too long ago that it would surprise many as to the number of media publications that were under "Uncle Sam's influence"! Those of us who are "long in the tooth" and remember the great suspense when the DPSA (deep penetration strike aircraft) contest was on,featuring the Viggen,Mirage F-1 and the Jaguar,know how the media was manipulated then.We had headlines saying that "Mirage has won",etc.,weeks before the result was announced.The same game is being played now by vested interests,with one intriguing Q.Who was it that leaked the shortlist where Typhoon and Rafale were favourites? I suspect that this leak if it is true,came right from the MOD/IAF,as there is a great fear that MMS will sell the country dow the drain and try and twist the deal in favour of the Yanquis in the same manner that he has dealt with the N-deal and bill.There is still a great amount of pressure that the Russians can bring to bear upon the GOI given the large number of critical JVs in hand (Hyper-B'Mos,MTA,and 5th-gen fighter,plus naval sub N-tech,etc.).
While acquiring a western bird and western TOT is a v.attractive option-so that we can get the best of both worlds,we could still see "more of the same" being acquired-that is more Russian aircraft ,perhaps even 40 SU-34s for the nuclear command and extra MIG-29/35s to add to the inventory apart from another western bird being acquired.

The hard truth is that the US will never aabandon their Paki rent-boy because they know the character of the Paki military so well,a species who will sell their souls for filthy lucre.That they know is not possible with the greater body of the Indian armed forces and which is why they will NOT give us an assurance that they will curtail supply of lethal arms that Pak can use against us.Therefore,let's not reward the US for its "forked-tongue" friendship.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 14 Sep 2010 17:56

Lalmohan wrote:
Singha wrote:the black cockpit camo treatment below the fuselage is interesting..confuses people in a turning fight which side is 'up'
also seen in US fighters in think

This trick's been in use since the cold war I think.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 14 Sep 2010 19:17

asprinzl wrote:There should only be one criteria subject when it comes to buying American arms. That is the issue of American arms sales and gifts to Pak-IS-Satan. Yes, all major arms exporters do sell to India and Pakistan. So why should Indians be prckly about the USA? Well....all these exporters don't sit on a high horse like the USA and preach about effing virtues of arms control, security, democracy, human rights and other horse $hit but have no second thoughts about giving arms to Pak Is Satan. India does not need to subsidise Pakistan's arms purchase.

Others do not give away freebies to pukes in the pretext of fighting the taliban AF or taliban navy. They demand hard cash.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Sep 2010 02:07

Henrik wrote:Oh please, take a deep breath and get over yourself. You claimed that Rafale was superior to Gripen NG in A2A.. That I claim to be complete rubbish.

I dont need to get over myself, but you perhaps do need to examine how rubbish your own arguments are.

Yes, the Rafale is superior to the Gripen NG in air to air, as any sensible person would infer, given that the Rafale has a much more mature, well funded, designed in from day one, integrated EW suite, has a wider range of air to air armament, including Mica IR for passive BVR intercepts, and has a fully demonstrated OSF, whereas your beloved Gripen NG exists on internet slideshows and publicity brochures.

Lastly, I'd even take the Thales AESA in development for the Rafale, over the one on the Gripen NG, as 3 sets already exist and the set is on track for deployment in 2011. Plus Thales has a good working knowledge of fighter ESA with the RBE-2, as compared to the hybrid Selex-SAAB version your lot are jury rigging up for the Gripen.

What are the stated performance metrics of the Gripen NG btw? Oh no, there are none, except what the demonstrator may "demonstrate", indicative only! At least for the Rafale, the baseline specifications are pretty well established.

Furthermore, the Rafale can carry more payload, and comes from an aircraft designer with a far better record of battle worthy aircraft to its credit, including one which the IAF itself used in 1999. If that were not enough, twin engines confer more survivability.

All in all, in air to air, the Rafale is anyday better than a paper Gripen NG.

And the Rafale is far more sanction proof than the Gripen NG, which is more of a "assemble as you will" product, using whatever the US was willing to export, and whatever European partners like Selex etc are willing to provide.

Hope you feel better now, since you dont have anymore one-two liners to hide behind.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 15 Sep 2010 02:44

^^

Furthermore, the Rafale can carry more payload, and comes from an aircraft designer with a far better record of battle worthy aircraft to its credit

Even though I am partial towards the Rafale myself, I would like to strongly disagree with your statement regarding Sweden's aircraft designing record. Swedes produced the first fighters with ejection seats. They were the first to produce fighters with data links. They were also the first to take the load of the fighter pilot by giving him computer assistance. The design of Draken was revolutionary at the time to say the least and Viggen is one of the best fighters ever produced.
IMO, the Swedes were leaders of West till Viggen. They simply could not compete after that due to the lack of $$$.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Sep 2010 03:14

With due respect, note what I said - battle worthy record. The French Mirage won its spurs in 1967 Arab-Israel war. Thereafter, French designed/made aircraft took part in African wars, when operated by France, and also in the Indo-Pak conflct in 71 and the Yom Kippur War. In the 80's, the Iraqis flew Mirage F1s, even shooting down the F-14. In 1999, we used the Mirage 2000, it was our best performer.

Now tell me, where is SAABs battle worthy record? Their first or was it second fighter took part in some peacekeeping conflict.

A handful of technological innovations does not really account for much. If you start this way, you will never end, because the Americans, the Russians, the French, the British, will have lists that do not end.

Furthermore, a lot of it is hype spread by those who either like the Swedes (underdog factor) or the Gripen fanboys themselves. The bit about datalinks. Today, everyone has datalinks. The advantages conferred by that on the Gripen are at best marginal and not something that others cannot compete against. During the Cold War itself, both the Russians and Americans fielded datalinks. The Russians in fact had datalinks on many of their frontline fighters, linked back to ground control equipment. India when it got its Sukhois also got datalinks with them. The Russians datalinked MiG-31s to chase down cruise missile attacks.

The US had datalinks for its E-2s and F-14s. Now they have Link-16. The stealth fighters are getting stealthy datalinks.

Today, a bunch of companies will offer you datalinks, but the manner in which the Gripens supporters tout its datalinks, one would think the idea began and ended with Sweden. Guess why? Good publicity

Coming to computer assistance and what not, what exactly did this assistance contribute and to what level, where were Swedens FBW fighter when there was the F-16 or the Mirage 2000 or even the Su-27 from the Russians later? It took them the Gripen to introduce the same. And here, the aircraft took the assistance of pretty much the whole western aerospace industry to develop, and unlike India they did not face sanctions either.

And how is Viggen one of the best fighters ever produced? If i compare it to fighters like the F-16 and the F-15, it has disadvantages. At best, it was an airshow and exercise marvel, fielded by one AF.

SAAB has a good record, for sure, but compared to Dassault or the Russian heavies or the American firms , there is little comparison.

If India wants a first class fighter to fight wars with, it needs something like the Rafale or EF. The Gripen NG does not have enough punch and the LCA MK2 can do the light fighter role, well enough when it comes about.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 15 Sep 2010 03:48

UAE May Ditch Rafale
Defense News
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet a Surprise Competitor for $10B Deal

Abu Dhabi is being asked to pay to upgrade the Rafale, while the F-18 is already at the desired technological level.

The Gulf source said, "The Super Hornet has everything we need. We don't need to co-develop or modify it."

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 15 Sep 2010 03:50

EU Remains Torn On Lifting China Arms Embargo
Defense News

We discussed delivering arms to China but did not advance at all towards a solution or joint position", French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said at the close of two days of informal talks with his 26 EU counterparts.

"France has Long been Favorable to Ending the Embargo", He said. "But We Need a Joint Stand."

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Sep 2010 04:05

Either the History or Military channel has a one hour documentary on Swedish contribution to air crafts. Bottom line: The Swedes, after WWII, were promised everything to fill their requirements, if they did not pursue (and also handed over) most (critical?) technologies.

My feel was, after I watched that show, that the Swedes got sold out. That they should have gone on their won and not relied on what I consider to be empty promises.

The current situation was never dreamt of then, which is why I feel that such discussions really lead to nothing.

This might be it (documentary).

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 15 Sep 2010 05:48

Karan M wrote:
Henrik wrote:Oh please, take a deep breath and get over yourself. You claimed that Rafale was superior to Gripen NG in A2A.. That I claim to be complete rubbish.
I dont need to get over myself, but you perhaps do need to examine how rubbish your own arguments are.

Yes, the Rafale is superior to the Gripen NG in air to air, as any sensible person would infer, given that the Rafale has a much more mature, well funded, designed in from day one, integrated EW suite, has a wider range of air to air armament, including Mica IR for passive BVR intercepts, and has a fully demonstrated OSF, whereas your beloved Gripen NG exists on internet slideshows and publicity brochures.

Lastly, I'd even take the Thales AESA in development for the Rafale, over the one on the Gripen NG, as 3 sets already exist and the set is on track for deployment in 2011. Plus Thales has a good working knowledge of fighter ESA with the RBE-2, as compared to the hybrid Selex-SAAB version your lot are jury rigging up for the Gripen.

What are the stated performance metrics of the Gripen NG btw? Oh no, there are none, except what the demonstrator may "demonstrate", indicative only! At least for the Rafale, the baseline specifications are pretty well established.

Furthermore, the Rafale can carry more payload, and comes from an aircraft designer with a far better record of battle worthy aircraft to its credit, including one which the IAF itself used in 1999. If that were not enough, twin engines confer more survivability.

All in all, in air to air, the Rafale is anyday better than a paper Gripen NG.

And the Rafale is far more sanction proof than the Gripen NG, which is more of a "assemble as you will" product, using whatever the US was willing to export, and whatever European partners like Selex etc are willing to provide.

Hope you feel better now, since you dont have anymore one-two liners to hide behind.

Like I said, get over yourself.

* In what way can you prove the RBE-2 on Rafale to be better then the Gripen AESA?
* MICA is garbage, rubbish, call it whatever you want. It's a bad compromise due to budget constrains.
* Rafale CAN'T supercruise.
* SPECTRA, an EW suite with a fancy name?
* Meteor integration with Gripen is way ahead of Rafale's.
* "Jury rigging", jeez.. Is that your best argument?
* Gripen also has a "from day one EW suite"
* Give me one good hard fact that Rafale would be "superior" to Gripen in A2A!

Finally, Gripen NG is still in development. All aircraft undergoes DEVELOPMENT, or do you think they just grow on trees? You are more stupid then I thought.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 15 Sep 2010 05:50

Juggi G wrote:EU Remains Torn On Lifting China Arms Embargo
Defense News
We discussed delivering arms to China but did not advance at all towards a solution or joint position", French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said at the close of two days of informal talks with his 26 EU counterparts.

"France has Long been Favorable to Ending the Embargo", He said. "But We Need a Joint Stand."

Typical frenchies.. They'll sell you their mother if the price is right and then they'll stab you in the back..

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 15 Sep 2010 15:06

Juggi G wrote:EU Remains Torn On Lifting China Arms Embargo
Defense News
We discussed delivering arms to China but did not advance at all towards a solution or joint position", French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said at the close of two days of informal talks with his 26 EU counterparts.

"France has Long been Favorable to Ending the Embargo", He said. "But We Need a Joint Stand."

This is precisely the reason why the French cannot be trusted. If IAF goes for Rafale, then one fine day IAF will wake up to find that its entire fleet of Rafale is useless against China, because of French mercenary tendencies. Frankly Rafale due to high cost, acquisition and running, should have been out of the race from Day1.

With grippen, due to the scale of the order 10 USD Billion and counting, we can get a lock on the fighter aircraft. Something which will be denied to us with Rafale and EFT.

manum · Post by **manum** » 15 Sep 2010 19:17

rankly Rafale due to high cost, acquisition and running, should have been out of the race from Day1.

Because of French being philosophically all out businessmen, they are also beneficial in other terms...all one must do is bargain the terms and conditions more appropriately...and aircraft kind of thing doesn't go out of race because of simple things of French being flexible in their moral stand...
Our experience with Mirage was not that bad...and totally, we must go with the best deal we are getting, and I think because of French being of businessman nature, we are also having possibility of extracting a very flexible deal as well...

I am not defending Rafale...but Rafale looks like an open source thing, due to french attitude, like russia, we can get it the way we want...but all in all, we can test out European consortium as well, in case of EF...in that term Gripen is also a good bet with Ej-200...
Sorry Mig...good horse but old horse...

koti · Post by **koti** » 15 Sep 2010 19:56

Sorry Mig...good horse but old horse..

Well age is not much of a differentiating factor.
Irrespective of the MRCA, IMO the AESA of Thales or Saab or the Russian one should be available for us.
The bus is not a differentiating factor either.

If we can negotiate well, the Mig's complete future could be made ours. From exports to maintenance to enhancements.
This would be at no disadvantage compared to the future prospects of the Gripen or the Rafale.(??)
We can get a sanction proof aircraft with very good Aerodynamic performance and cheap capital investments.

This will fill in the Medium weight requirement pretty well. Maybe not as well as the ready made F-18 or EF, but sufficient to complement the roles of Mirages, Mig-27's and Jags effectively.

MKI and FGFA IMHO should be sufficient for the heavier roles.

Later: Can anyone point me to the pronounced disadvantages the Mig's smoky engines have.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 15 Sep 2010 20:15

But I thought smokey engines problem was rectified. Is it not?

koti · Post by **koti** » 15 Sep 2010 20:25

Narayana Rao wrote:But I thought smokey engines problem was rectified. Is it not?

It is said so. But it is always good to have one with no problem then one with a fixed problem.
I did not find any material here or elsewhere stating the exact disadvantages the older smoky engines had.
Maybe like lower fuel burning efficiency, increased IR homing threat, reduced engine life time etc if at all.

If these are not so important or profound, the TVC enabled engines are good enough to go as long as they offer comparative lifetimes and fuel efficiencies.

Just because someone smokes doesn't mean he is bad...

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 15 Sep 2010 20:33

French may be interested in China but since they are desperate to sell this birdie we can probably extract all sorts of concessions and maybe we can join in the project as a partner.

manum · Post by **manum** » 15 Sep 2010 20:41

but still, as per my rational view...why would we go for it...or even would like to own Mig which is a liability...there should be more on table, to take it, if it's a rectified design all over...from Engine to frame...
but then this discussion will coil back to the start of it all...anyways...whatever it goes...
but leaving all the technicality and politics aside...except Migs i'll be excited to see even F-16 in Indian colours, just for a change of taste, its been too much of vodka...there is port wine, Beer and whiskey...with finger chips...

but no offence to Mig, dad must understand, Kid gotta smoke...

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 15 Sep 2010 22:48

manum wrote: Because of French being philosophically all out businessmen, they are also beneficial in other terms...all one must do is bargain the terms and conditions more appropriately...and aircraft kind of thing doesn't go out of race because of simple things of French being flexible in their moral stand...
Our experience with Mirage was not that bad...and totally, we must go with the best deal we are getting, and I think because of French being of businessman nature, we are also having possibility of extracting a very flexible deal as well...

Playing both sides is not "business man" nature, it is arms dealer/gun runner culture-where you sell weapons that destroy innocent lives to anybody with money. Any half-decent businessman knows that in business, relationships with their clients/customers are the MOST important thing they have. Once there is no "relationship" and it is purely a mercenary operation-where the best offer always wins, it merely neo-capitalistic imperialism by an European nation on the third world once again.
In matters of national security of 1 billion "free" people, it would be ridiculous to put our stock in the good word of a mercenary operator like the French. Even the Russians, who run an international arms bazaar of sorts have more rectitude and customer loyalty. This is partly the reason the Rafale is treated like a leper despite its impressive performance technically- it is made by the French!

manum wrote: I am not defending Rafale...but Rafale looks like an open source thing, due to french attitude, like russia, we can get it the way we want...but all in all, we can test out European consortium as well, in case of EF...in that term Gripen is also a good bet with Ej-200...

The French know exactly well what technologies India needs and by providing what technologies the Indians will be self-reliant. Preventing this from happening is essential to their continued business operations. What price can India offer them, however high that will outweigh the profits they could make by having India continue to be dependent on foreign suppliers ?
Spending $10 or $12 billion on the French will only bring India a few technologies and a good fighter plane (how long will that last ?), while spending that money on the Americans will build us a diplomatic relationship that is worth more than short term technological goals of gas turbine technology or fighter design experience etc IMO.

The Mirage series has been good to India, but we should also remember, that its upgrades have cost India dearly!

manum · Post by **manum** » 16 Sep 2010 00:16

Playing both sides is not "business man" nature, it is arms dealer/gun runner culture-where you sell weapons that destroy innocent lives to anybody with money.

what was that brando...why so serious?...we are not buying water guns, anyways to remind you, its adults game...such high handedness don't work, best policy is to remain negotiable till the last...everything is design...anyways I think you still live in a high handed modern word of Rambo, waky waky...

t merely neo-capitalistic imperialism by an European nation on the third world once again.

the 3rd world...I am surprised at this "neo-capitalistic imperialism"...well whatever you say...

This is partly the reason the Rafale is treated like a leper despite its impressive performance technically- it is made by the French!

you know the best, I think...you know it performed technically well and you also know their is lukewarm response to it...i wont even ask for any postscript for it...anyways you know, thats enough...

What price can India offer them, however high that will outweigh the profits they could make by having India continue to be dependent on foreign suppliers ?

well french really are evil arnt they...they are really plotting something...can you please enlighten me more on it...its written in bit hurry seems...skipping thoughts...

Spending $10 or $12 billion on the French will only bring India a few technologies and a good fighter plane (how long will that last ?), while spending that money on the Americans will build us a diplomatic relationship that is worth more than short term technological goals of gas turbine technology or fighter design experience etc IMO.

well you must be sitting somewhere in foreign office too handling IAF babu's personal doubts...how easily you can complicate simple things...or you got a crack somewhere, and world looks complicated altogether...

The Mirage series has been good to India, but we should also remember, that its upgrades have cost India dearly!

who didn't cost India dearly...and why won't foreign buys won't cost India dearly...anyways i still assume you must be knowing better...

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 16 Sep 2010 01:21

^^ Well one thing I do know is you don't know anything and I have just wasted my time.

The end.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Sep 2010 01:45

karanm wrote:
With due respect, note what I said - battle worthy record. The French Mirage won its spurs in 1967 Arab-Israel war. Thereafter, French designed/made aircraft took part in African wars, when operated by France, and also in the Indo-Pak conflct in 71 and the Yom Kippur War. In the 80's, the Iraqis flew Mirage F1s, even shooting down the F-14. In 1999, we used the Mirage 2000, it was our best performer.

Now tell me, where is SAABs battle worthy record? Their first or was it second fighter took part in some peacekeeping conflict.

A handful of technological innovations does not really account for much. If you start this way, you will never end, because the Americans, the Russians, the French, the British, will have lists that do not end.

Furthermore, a lot of it is hype spread by those who either like the Swedes (underdog factor) or the Gripen fanboys themselves. The bit about datalinks. Today, everyone has datalinks. The advantages conferred by that on the Gripen are at best marginal and not something that others cannot compete against. During the Cold War itself, both the Russians and Americans fielded datalinks. The Russians in fact had datalinks on many of their frontline fighters, linked back to ground control equipment. India when it got its Sukhois also got datalinks with them. The Russians datalinked MiG-31s to chase down cruise missile attacks.

The US had datalinks for its E-2s and F-14s. Now they have Link-16. The stealth fighters are getting stealthy datalinks.

Today, a bunch of companies will offer you datalinks, but the manner in which the Gripens supporters tout its datalinks, one would think the idea began and ended with Sweden. Guess why? Good publicity

And how is Viggen one of the best fighters ever produced? If i compare it to fighters like the F-16 and the F-15, it has disadvantages. At best, it was an airshow and exercise marvel, fielded by one AF.

SAAB has a good record, for sure, but compared to Dassault or the Russian heavies or the American firms , there is little comparison.

If India wants a first class fighter to fight wars with, it needs something like the Rafale or EF. The Gripen NG does not have enough punch and the LCA MK2 can do the light fighter role, well enough when it comes about.

Karan, I agree with some of your points (especially the underdog factor which makes many sympathise with Saab and the Gripen). But credit ought to be given where it’s due, although the bluster and attitude that some Swedes on this and other forums show does get very tiring indeed.

The Viggen had different variants (strike variant AJ, recon SF, maritime recon SH, strike and interceptor AJS, and interceptor JA Viggen) and not all were the same performance wise, and a Viggen/Gripen pilot interview on Milavia.net basically sorts out the facts regarding the Viggen’s variants and how they performed. It’s a superb frank interview and the guy doesn’t boast but is very honest about the advantages and issues. It does back up what you said about the Viggen not being “one of the best fighters ever”. The pilot himself said that in a dogfight with an F-15 or MiG-29, the JaktViggen (which is quite simply the best of the Viggen variants in a dogfight situation) stood little real chance..but the MiG-29 is a product of the late 1970s to early 1980s and the Viggen predates it by at least 10-15 years having made its first flight in 1967 with the program having started around 1962. Its contemporaries are the Jaguar, Mirage-3/5, Mirage-F1, etc. I would imagine that a Mirage F1 pilot wouldn’t fancy taking on an F-15, F-16 or MiG-29 in a dogfight either.

The Swedes had their own geopolitical compulsions that drove them to develop their own fighters (opting to stay neutral and not join NATO) and for a country that size to try and be independent of the US and Soviet bloc in those days and working hard to preserve that is indeed praiseworthy, that too when the threat of war was considered very real in those days. And it was this fact that drove the Viggen’s design- the fact that it was tailor-made for the unique Swedish sparsely equipped road based dispersed operation requirements that were in many ways impediments to performance, such as the short field take off capability in icy conditions that required canards that acted as airbrakes upon landing as well as reduced landing speed, the large thrust reversers with their weight penalty that no other fighter used (except the Tornado) and the huge brakes on the landing gear.

And what must always be taken into account is that quite a bit of fighter design is about compromises in one way or another- one feature added due to one requirement may affect some other feature that may impede performance. The French fighters didn’t need to account for such requirements and consequently were able to keep things simpler when it came to their designs. Not the fault of the French of course, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Dassault was better than SAAB. Both had quite different factors driving their designs, right? I do believe that Dassault and SAAB both have proud histories of having developed (with the French and Dassault being more independent and prolific, but with access to a far larger market and technology base) some of the great fighters and trainers of the cold war era. By no stretch were any of their designs fault free or perfect, but designs are never so. People just don’t know the issues and unless one goes into the depth of reading about the aircraft, their issues are not highlighted. And of course, Discovery Wings or such programs will NEVER mention those issues, far less highlight them, which makes people not involved in such programs think that they didn’t have any major issues at all or that they were fault free from the very beginning..

It is the continued support from the govt. and the will to sustain an industry that can continue to produce fighters that allows one to slowly perfect one’s skills and overcome problems that might totally stump one particular variant..the Draken and Viggen illustrates that- as the interview says, the Draken was very susceptible to a super stall and a very challenging fighter to fly, but the Viggen improved on that- and yet, the RM-8A engine put serious restrictions on the AJ Viggen and it couldn’t go past 6Gs, was prone to engine stalls at high AoA and high altitudes, but with the RM-8B engine, most of these issues were solved. Or for instance the issue with Controlled Flight Into Terrain in AJ-37s, SH-37s and the SF-37s which was resolved on the JA-37. Obviously, knowledge gained from the continuous fine-tuning of these variants and their issues would’ve been invaluable when it came to the reduction in the time taken and issues faced during design of the Gripen.

It was India’s misfortune that the HF-24 Marut never found an engine with the required thrust and that the IAF and GoI didn’t support it’s follow-on variants or newer designs such as the HF-73. As a strike fighter, the HF-24 was said to be quite good, and capable of taking major punishment and returning. It had few vices while flying and as an airframe had a lot of potential. Instead, they went in for the Jaguar and killed off the indigenous design knowledge base. And then they expected that jumping to the 4th gen fighter would be a simple step, which they found out to their dismay to be totally false. The Swedes stuck to it and even if they received engines from the US, certain avionics from other western sources and licence produced weapons, it still took political and national will to want to be able to nurture such a high tech industry and produce such expensive and laborious things as your own fighter. This particular paragraph from the interview totally illustrates how important it is that we continue with Tejas variants, (Mk2, Naval, Trainer, etc.) and the AMCA so that the knowledge and experience gained from the 2 decades spent on the Tejas are not lost once again. For that one reason alone, I am not so enthusiastic about the Gripen NG because if it is affordable and already billions are invested in it, the IAF will be very tempted to abandon or not seriously pursue the Tejas Mk2 program.

In every other way though, I believe that the Gripen NG will be a very nifty 4.5 gen fighter. I really do hope it does find a large buyer, but if it throttles the Tejas Mk2 then it shouldn’t be the MRCA winner.

The big thing with the Gripen is that the aircraft itself is very easy to fly, so you have maybe 90 percent of your capacity to handle the tactical situation! In the Fighterviggen you had 80 percent, in the recce/attack 50 percent while the old 35 Draken pilot had no capacity at all to think about his tactics, while struggling with an aircraft that just loved to be in a superstall!
My own experience is that I had a lot to do sitting in the recce Viggen, just handling the system, while the fighter version was just an immaculate man-machine integration! You were totally focused on the mission, and never worried about the aircraft itself. The Gripen is close to, if not better than the Fighterviggen regarding these matters.

See how things changed from the Draken to the AJ-37 Viggen to the JA-37 Viggen to the Gripen? It’s a lesson that most development is iterative and doesn’t just suddenly spring like a fountain from an underground reservoir that was long abandoned. If we let it go dry, we might as well forget having a serious aerospace industry of our own for the foreseeable future.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 16 Sep 2010 02:40

Brando wrote:....while spending that money on the Americans will build us a diplomatic relationship that is worth more than short term technological goals of gas turbine technology or fighter design experience etc

So now tangible technical gains are being compared with water vapour

Way to insult intelligence.

And jet engine technology ... short term goal

It is a technology good until long term until its substitute is invented for fighters.

manum · Post by **manum** » 16 Sep 2010 08:19

^^ Well one thing I do know is you don't know anything and I have just wasted my time.

I don't know how to explain you normal ways of thinking...well I know TOT (LINKS) wont help you, and transfer of know how will require me to sit with you and teach you ABCD of simple adult ways of thinking...
you seem to rely on high moral, binary stuff, good bad...

50% of your time will be anyways wasted...either things will be good or bad for you...there is no middle ground for rigidity...

reply you got for me is because...let me show you, how you construct an argument...

Playing both sides is not "business man" nature, it is arms dealer/gun runner culture-where you sell weapons that destroy innocent lives to anybody with money. Any half-decent businessman knows that in business, relationships with their clients/customers are the MOST important thing they have. Once there is no "relationship" and it is purely a mercenary operation-where the best offer always wins, it merely neo-capitalistic imperialism by an European nation on the third world once again.

what do you mean by playing with both sides, That is why clause's are made so that whenever you deal with clients, you try to fulfill their own specific demands thats it, or else India would own Dessault, I don't know, some of us are misjudging the hoopla around those few billions, and think thats it, that will make life of others and we'll be king makers...
and please a nation is to big and varied to apply your policies, you seem to see man multiplied into many as nation, so you simply apply your theory, rather than re-inventing....what was so novel about your approach here, to get a special reply from anyone...this all above is hollywood moral bullshit...

The French know exactly well what technologies India needs and by providing what technologies the Indians will be self-reliant. Preventing this from happening is essential to their continued business operations. What price can India offer them, however high that will outweigh the profits they could make by having India continue to be dependent on foreign suppliers ?
Spending $10 or $12 billion on the Fren ... at last ?), while spending that money on the Americans will build us a diplomatic relationship that is worth more than short term technological goals of gas turbine technology or fighter design experience etc IMO.

Man this all out a conspiracy theory, thats all...i thought the things you making evil, are exactly we quoted in our tender, that we want a good modest fighter, to fill in the ranks, why you complicating stuff so much...
Americans, Russsians....the way you even you use words, this all looks like a hollywood flick....deleted personal attack

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 Sep 2010 09:07

Someone one wants to buy ju ro pean bumb must read this

They are asking for Europe wide consultation before selling and of course, inspite of French Roma butt kicking, rest of the wold should comply with human rights. They still don't want to sell it to conflict states and not want to be used in conflicts.

Krishnakg · Post by **Krishnakg** » 16 Sep 2010 11:18

An Interesting and informative discussion is on at strategypage.com, relevant to this forum. The discussion is already at 7 pages length and minus the usual derailing and potshots at each other, gives an insight into UAE evaluation/requirements for Rafale and comparison with other peers in the contest.

http://www.strategypage.com/militaryfor ... page1.aspx

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Sep 2010 13:32

well knowing that rbe2 aesa doesnt match up to even the small apg80 on f-solah doesnt give a warm and fuzzy feeling facing 100s of late model chinese fighters without pervasive awacs backup on a front of 1000s of km. UAE's problem is ours also...fighter units must be able to operate without awacs. france and us have luxury of choosing when and where to fight - we do not.

ef/f18/gripen better have something better under the nose than apg80 which pakis are sure to cajole and threaten their way into in a decade's time.

more and more I tend to support either the ef or f-18 though the f-18 loses points heavily in wvr a2a which is sure to happen
because pk in bvr or enormous numerical advantage to browbeat and drive away enemy is not in our hand.

praksam · Post by **praksam** » 17 Sep 2010 00:25

I hope this is still relevant to this thread

Germany Suspends Eurofighter Operations

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... um=twitter