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.
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 » 01 Feb 2010 21:09

Buy the Mig 1.44 Flatpack design and offer to entirely revive that project as the MCA! I want that beauty with IAF roundels :(( :((

Bhaskar
BRFite
Posts: 202
Joined: 31 Dec 2008 23:46

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Bhaskar » 01 Feb 2010 21:14

shyamd wrote:IMO, India isn't going to go for US aircraft (doesnt want to be arm twisted - Bad history, yep you know the rest).

France: Rafale - (Unlikely. They themselves conceed privately that they dont have a very good chance) But I would have thought we would be able to get a very good deal on Rafale, because the french are desperate to get this out there. We can push em hard so I wouldn't rule them out.

EuroFighter: Very likely. Yes it has US input, but most will probably be european, its a phased approach before completely trusting the US. Decent if you want interoperability with nations that have/will sign security agreements with your country. Some that rely on Indian protection
Russkies: Mig 29K ordered already, Mig-35... mmmmm... naaaah. They will get the FGFA bonanza and other orders anyway, T-90 is the centre of our armored forces. We also have the MKI.

Just my opinions.

You are only looking at the strategic aspect. Aircrafts's performance/cost matters more.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 01 Feb 2010 21:16

French would trash their factories and shut down shop rather than sell theirs for any thing less than they quote. That would be their business model. Don't waste time, if you are not strategically inclined with France.

After selling the MRCA craft, the same or better would be available to China and Pakistan in the very near future.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6908
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shyamd » 01 Feb 2010 21:20

^^You are right, but political considerations will be taken into account.

Just a heads up to all btw, apologies if someone already mentioned this:

In the Brazil tender, Brazilian airforce put:
1st- F-18
2nd - Gripen
3rd -Rafale

based on performance. Will this be the case in our MRCA contract too? Of course every AF need is different.

But govt chose rafale because of political considerations which the air force isnt too happy about.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 01 Feb 2010 21:41

shyamd wrote: In the Brazil tender, Brazilian airforce put:
1st- F-18
2nd - Gripen
3rd -Rafale.


I thought it was
1st - Gripen
2nd - F-18
3rd- Rafale

And most reports suggest that the principal reasons for the ranking were unit and life cycle costs & TOT package for the F-X2, NOT performance.

Rafale was ranked last because of its high purchase price and operating costs. A related technology transfer package - a key element of the F-X2 selection criteria - was also deemed inadequate


Check it out -

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

Anyways, I doubt that it would matter who wins the Brazilian competition (for our MMRCA race). Well Yes, it would definitely give the manufacturer bragging rights.. Given that the Geo-political implications (which would play a significant role in the Indian MMRCA scheme of things) for India are quite different than the great Mr Lula's, I think Brazilian winner would be of little significance.

Though it would be interesting to see who wins that race, simply to see how low the Rafale would go on price & how high it would go on TOT, in turn expressing its desperation to win. And if SAAB or Boeing spring a surprise it would be interesting to see what carrots they would've dangled... As we would expect at least that when it comes to the bargaining table post short listing phase...

Nirmal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 05 Jul 2005 15:51
Location: London, United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Nirmal » 01 Feb 2010 21:48

shiv wrote:
Shameek wrote:Shiv ji, what in the world is that? Secret new HAL aircraft with multiple wings? :!:


I'll be damned if I knew :shock:

Where did that come from? URL please. or is this Panwalla/Chaiwala news broadcast?

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 836
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shameek » 01 Feb 2010 22:20

Nirmal wrote:Where did that come from? URL please. or is this Panwalla/Chaiwala news broadcast?


That is a mural adorning the walls of some DRDO building. Being a secret project, no URLs are available. :twisted:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 01 Feb 2010 22:49

could be paid by EADS. I hope they don't come down to babooiztic levels by raising high cut out banners all around Bangalore.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8164
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 02 Feb 2010 03:36

shiv wrote:
shiv wrote:Let me start a conspiracy theory on page 1 of this renewed thread.

Bangalore's government have actually come up with what I think is a great idea. Instead of allowing walls (of government property) to be painted over by yahoos and covered with free ads and movie posters - the walls are being painted with colorful India/Karnataka themes.

Now on one wall around a DRDO building are paintings of the LCA, Prithvi, Agni I, Arjun and an aircraft that looks like guess what........


Image


Shiv, this is clearly a case of an artist's imagination gone wild. When you had first posted this, you accompanied it with a pic of the real Typhoon leading me to believe that the painting on the DRDO building wall was actually a plain vanilla Tiffy. After seeing this pic we can only conclude that the DRDO employs very creative artists to paint their walls who apparently don't bother with which country a particular aircraft belongs to before turning it into some djinn flying machine and painting it on the wall.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16888
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 02 Feb 2010 04:42

Shameek wrote:Shiv ji, what in the world is that? Secret new HAL aircraft with multiple wings? :!:


A French project with an EF, with three GE engines, wings from the Gripen or is that from the Gnat? Waiting for parts from the PAK-FA (since the US declined an offer to partner with F-22 parts) and a total lack of funds since the Pakis took it all to fight bad Taliban on a new front in Somalia.

India is planning on funding it provided the security team can review details to make sure that the Chinese made parts are replaced from a reliable alternative source.

SShah
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 25
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 11:25
Location: California

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SShah » 02 Feb 2010 05:41

We must learn from China - what kind of tone to use when others try arming Taiwan. Our girlish babus just don't say anything to the US or to the Ruskies when the likes of pukies and lizards are armed. China is threatening to sanction companies (Boeing and Raytheon) involved in this sale. Boeing has already started shivering and sweating as it could loose the most lucrative Chinese commercial airline market. We must learn from this. I hope that so called free new generation media in India makes a case out of this incident and write a lot about it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8490537.stm

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16888
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 02 Feb 2010 05:59

Errrr......

Boeing alone is expected to get some $58 billion from sales to China (in some 30 year period). There are some similar huge numbers that China can use to sway the US. Does India have such leverage? I think India is getting there but is using it to get other things: UNSC, nuke deal, etc.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby amit » 02 Feb 2010 06:49

SShah wrote:We must learn from China - what kind of tone to use when others try arming Taiwan. Our girlish babus just don't say anything to the US or to the Ruskies when the likes of pukies and lizards are armed. China is threatening to sanction companies (Boeing and Raytheon) involved in this sale. Boeing has already started shivering and sweating as it could loose the most lucrative Chinese commercial airline market. We must learn from this. I hope that so called free new generation media in India makes a case out of this incident and write a lot about it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8490537.stm


Boss, do you have some inside track info about Boeing and Raytheon folks actually shivering in their pants? Or is this speculation on your part?

Also China has talked about sanctions against Boeing, does that mean it will stop buying US passenger jets? Give me a break please!.

In case of an actual sanction against Boeing, do you think US of A will take it lying down? If the US retaliates, what happens, for example, to the ARJ21 - China's ambitious regional jet project?

Apart from carrying GE engines, almost every critical sub system is supplied by US-based or US-linked companies. Read this link to find out more

In the real world the Chinese need the US and US-based companies just as much as the latter need access to China's market. It's a two-way street and the CCP bosses may be arrogant but they are no fools.

Also, do read Hillary Madam's directive about Iran which she gave to China, to understand how much shivering the US is actually doing.

And yes it's always easy to bad mouth our babus - after all they don't retaliate. But what to do they come from among us, and we do have a girlish (my apologies to lady members, I use this term in the rhetorical sense) tendency to squeal every time we think the sky is falling on us.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 02 Feb 2010 07:02

nachiket wrote:Shiv, this is clearly a case of an artist's imagination gone wild. When you had first posted this, you accompanied it with a pic of the real Typhoon leading me to believe that the painting on the DRDO building wall was actually a plain vanilla Tiffy. After seeing this pic we can only conclude that the DRDO employs very creative artists to paint their walls who apparently don't bother with which country a particular aircraft belongs to before turning it into some djinn flying machine and painting it on the wall.


Sorry if it was misleading. That mural is painted along a wall that runs next to a road where the traffic almost never stops. I had only got a glimpse of the under-chin intakes earlier - but this time I got my son to click an image as we passed by - and I was blown away by what I saw. It's like nothing on earth. But never mind that - what intrigued me was that the murals have (I will try and video the wall sometime) LCA, Arjun. Prithvi, Agni III, BMPs and a whole lot of other India-genous things and suddenly - in the middle is this weird monstrosity that looks a bit like the Eurofighter.

Incidentally these are not DRDO artists - but they are painting all government walls in Bangalore with heritage themes - generally more pleasing to the eye than painted political slogans or movie posters.

Here are the two pics for comparison
http://www.procyon-design.co.uk/Images/defence5.jpg
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a11/cy ... o-wall.jpg

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 836
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shameek » 02 Feb 2010 07:26

NRao wrote:
Shameek wrote:Shiv ji, what in the world is that? Secret new HAL aircraft with multiple wings? :!:


A French project with an EF, with three GE engines, wings from the Gripen or is that from the Gnat? Waiting for parts from the PAK-FA (since the US declined an offer to partner with F-22 parts) and a total lack of funds since the Pakis took it all to fight bad Taliban on a new front in Somalia.

India is planning on funding it provided the security team can review details to make sure that the Chinese made parts are replaced from a reliable alternative source.


They also have taken styling cues from the Su-47. Just like it had different sized tail booms, this has different sized wings. Will stump and evil enemy of our country.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 02 Feb 2010 07:38

Eurofigter upgrades GPWS to enhance air-ground targeting.

The upgraded TERPROM will use its terrain database and proprietary ranging functionality to provide the Typhoon's attack computer with accurate position, height and range data for ground targets selected by the pilot. This data will then be used to refine the firing solution, increasing the accuracy of weapons delivery. The system supports the enhanced ground attack role of the Typhoon and the ongoing desire to reduce collateral damage without the need for additional sensors or weapon enhancements.


Here goes..

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/art ... L45461.htm

Another one, in the long list of EF goodies... Still waiting a decision on AESA radar though!

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Klaus » 02 Feb 2010 08:00

To me the spinoffs from the MRCA can actually be used to expand the Navy's air arm considerably. With the FGFA expected in a decade or so, we could leverage the MRCA deal to indigenously design, manufacture and produce naval versions of the EF Typhoon. Given that EADS has got a footing in India, we could create a HAL-EADS consortium to create this plane which is right now only on paper.

A naval version of EF would in no way hamper the LCA in any way, I feel that enough space has to be given for both projects if the navy is serious on expansion and wants to make good on its 'proponent of indigenisation' tag. Also, any naval EF would entirely be an Indian product which could then be marketed by EADS (give them the marketing responsibility for LCA naval version as well) and eventually exported. This would be using phoren leverage to fertilize the indigenous industry and would be the ultimate indicator that the Indian indigenous industry has arrived (a foreign paper plane made entirely in India!)

This would give the naval air-arm 4 prime carrier planes (Mig 29K, LCA, EF and FGFA) at 2025 timeline (Viraat and sea harrier definitely retired).

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Klaus » 02 Feb 2010 09:00

Its a well known fact that the Mirage2K has got a better build quality and aesthetic appearance than any Russian plane (dont know the PAK-Fa fares on this count, will have to wait and see). Somebody on this forum earlier remarked that the difference in build quality was striking when you have a Mirage 2K and a Mig 29 side by side.

Could we expect the same (or even better) from the Rafale?

Also the other aspects of the Mirage, such as the high fatigue resistance of the frame, high endurance despite bieng maxed out having flown maximum number of hours etc. Will this good design tradition continue with the Rafale and if it does, will it be reason enough for India to purchase it?

I mean, the Mirage has been such a superlative performer (one of the reason we are going for and should go for its upgrade) that it would be demeaning of us not to expect the same (or better) from Dassault Rafale and the French isnt it?

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 02 Feb 2010 09:08

That link about going in for more than 126...does that mean Mirage upgrade deal is off? Ajai Shukla once mentioned on his blog, the toss up is between 200 MRCAs and 126 MRCAs + 51 upgraded Mirages.

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1907
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby wig » 03 Feb 2010 15:21

http:It arrived five years behind schedule and £13 billion over its original projected cost. Each Typhoon hour in the sky works out at £85,000 for fuel, training and maintenance costs.

//www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7012792.ece

this article mentions the operational cost of teh Eurofighter Typhoon to the British RAF.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 03 Feb 2010 16:00

wig wrote:Each Typhoon hour in the sky works out at £85,000 for fuel, training and maintenance costs.


Thats absolutely insane... Compared to say, the Gripen which has flying cost as low as $3000 per hour (wonder if that includes fuel & training as well)... http://www.stratpost.com/gripen-hardsel ... -for-mmrca

Adding to the EF's woes is the exceptionally high per unit cost.... Gosh..

If it boils down only to just the cost factor in the end (and it might..going by what happened with mid-air refueler competition where the IAF's choice was brushed aside citing solely cost issues...) it doesn't bode well for the EF & Rafale!

If the Gripen and Mig make the eventual shortlist, its going to take a monumental bargain (akin a rabbit out of a hat) for the EF & Rafale to come close...

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 03 Feb 2010 16:05

Gripen-NG looks like a good bet now , mashallah, with the higher end handled by more MKI (50 more), Tejas2 and FPFA/Pakfa mix.

time to cut short this circus and go with the cheap/chankian soln and
save $$ for the big sticks.

vcsekhar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 100
Joined: 01 Aug 2009 13:27
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vcsekhar » 03 Feb 2010 16:46

wig wrote:
Each Typhoon hour in the sky works out at £85,000 for fuel, training and maintenance costs.

There is no way this is the operating cost of the EF, this has got to the fully loaded cost per hour of the aircraft inclusive of the cost of development, purchase as flyaway cost and then the cost of flying, maintenance, training and support. The F22 also does not cost so much per hour as operating cost, I remember a figure of $44K per hour inclusive of the consumable stealth coating cost.
Here is the info from wiki....
"In July 2009, the Air Force reported that the F-22 requires more than 30 hours of maintenance for every flight hour, with the total cost per flight hour of $44,000.[144] The Office of the Secretary of Defense puts that figure at 34 hours of maintenance per single hour of flight at a cost of $49,808 per hour of flight.[144] However, a Lockheed spokesman says that the variable cost per flight hour is only $19,000,[143] with a direct maintenance man hours per flight hour of 18.10 in 2008 and 20.48 in 2009.[143] The Pentagon requirement is for 12 hours of maintenance per flight hour.[143]

The F-22 had required maintenance every 0.97 flight hours in 2004. This improved to 3.22 flight hours per maintenance event in production Lot 6 aircraft.[143]"

So I would take this number with a very large pinch of salt.

chandrasekhar
Last edited by vcsekhar on 03 Feb 2010 16:59, edited 1 time in total.

bart
BRFite
Posts: 712
Joined: 04 Jan 2008 21:33

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby bart » 03 Feb 2010 16:47

I think the real main reason for MRCA is western tech, especially the radar and missiles. Russians have fallen way behind in the stakes since end of cold war and AMRAAM etc are much ahead. That is one aspect that buying more MKIs will not cover. Say Pakistan gets the latest missiles and we are stuck with old Russian ones, they will have an edge in that area, hence it is important to have some Western aircraft in the inventory as well.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21165
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 03 Feb 2010 18:50

The Gripen loooks more attractive by the day,if one goes by the fact that the heavy twin-engined role will be carried out by the Flanker and PAK-FA and the light end of ths stick the LCA and the MMRCA.Its swashplate AESA radar is touted by the Gripen crowd as being superior to that of the Rafale.The Swedes also have no problem reg/ TOT,source codes,etc.,in comparison to the Yanqui birds,of which the F-18SH is the better option of the two as there will be a longer support life yet for the last avatar of the Horny one.One estimate is that a few thousand engines will be required still for those already in service.Pricewise,the Gripen should easily beat its US rivals.The only snag for it is that if it and the MIG-35 are close pricewise and the MIG-35 proves to be a significantly more capable bird,Natasha will be difficult to reject.The Eurofarter and French Ruffian simply price themselves out of the equation in the Indian context,unlike several other contests,where the buyer does not have in the inventory the equivalent of the Flanker.Even the F-15 (partially stealthy) upgrades being touted as an interin alternative instead of the Raptor is just too expensive.With the arrival of the PAK-FA and the decision to buy another 20 more LCAs the game has changed.

One depressing fact though.The US plans to build "one JSF F-35 every working day",an astonishing production rate,while we are officlaly talking about producing between 8-12 LCAs a year! It is why the Gripen looks good as the Swedes can immediately offer us for the interim their first avatars of the Gripen (in service right now) not the AESA NG versions to equip depleting numbers and numberplated squadrons,as they plan to have for the future only the newer NG/AESA ones.This could be similar to the method by which the Flanker was inducted into IAF service,with the initial SU-30s being progressively replaced by the MKIs.

Chanu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 01 Feb 2010 19:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Chanu » 03 Feb 2010 19:11

bart wrote:I think the real main reason for MRCA is western tech, especially the radar and missiles. Russians have fallen way behind in the stakes since end of cold war and AMRAAM etc are much ahead. That is one aspect that buying more MKIs will not cover. Say Pakistan gets the latest missiles and we are stuck with old Russian ones, they will have an edge in that area, hence it is important to have some Western aircraft in the inventory as well.

:shock:
I dont think russian missiles are way behind the curve.it is the westren missiles which are trying to keep up with russians since 1990.it is the reasone why germany moved away from development amraam and started there own program after they examined russian missile are far more superior.:twisted:

After cold war era they might have catched up with russian but not beat it.there missiles arnt superior in range,payload or homing.

If pakistan can get any missile india can get the same there isnt any need for mmrca on this issue. :wink:
Last edited by Chanu on 03 Feb 2010 20:08, edited 1 time in total.

bart
BRFite
Posts: 712
Joined: 04 Jan 2008 21:33

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby bart » 03 Feb 2010 20:03

Chanu wrote:
bart wrote:I think the real main reason for MRCA is western tech, especially the radar and missiles. Russians have fallen way behind in the stakes since end of cold war and AMRAAM etc are much ahead. That is one aspect that buying more MKIs will not cover. Say Pakistan gets the latest missiles and we are stuck with old Russian ones, they will have an edge in that area, hence it is important to have some Western aircraft in the inventory as well.
I dont think russian missiles are way behind the curve.it is the westren missiles which are trying to keep up with russians since 1990.it is the reasone why germany moved away from development amraam and started there own program after they examined russian missile are far more superior.

After cold war era they might have catched up with russian but not beat it.there missiles arnt superior in range or payload.

If pakistan can get any missile india can get the same there isnt any need for mmrca on this issue.


I dont know what sources of information you have been following, but the only area where Russian missiles are competitive is the physical dynamics i.e the aerodynamics and the rocket motor. They have always been way behind the west in the electronics, seeker and other components. Not only are the western missiles advanced in that sense, but also the ECM to tackle Russian missiles is also pretty advanced and by now well tuned from different wars and conflicts that America has fought. How many western aircraft kills did the Serbians or Iraqis manage with their Russian missiles?

And that is not even talking about the fighter's radar where there is a no-contest.

If pakistan can get any missile india can get the same there isnt any need for mmrca on this issue.


Again you are ignorant. America will not allow it's Radar and Missiles to be used on Russian platforms, nor will Russia allow it. So the only way to get western tech in those areas is to buy a western aircraft or get them deployed on our own product (LCA). The weapons, radar and avionics are closely integrated and packaged with any fighter jet, its not like buying an ice cream cone and adding whatever toppings you like. Unless you are buying a fighter jet to use in Airshows rather than in War, it is only as good as it's radar and weapons package, no matter what spectacular stunts it can pull in the air.

Chanu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 01 Feb 2010 19:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Chanu » 03 Feb 2010 20:44

i confused AMRAAM with ASRAAM so my post about germany and other.in 1990s russian ir seeker is far better than americans.altough russian made there first ir seeker by copying american they evolved its technolagy where as americans didnt increase much.

Dont underestimate russian radar tech
How many western aircraft kills did the Serbians or Iraqis manage with their Russian missiles?

it depends on the training of pilots we cant compare the effectiveness of a missile by number of kills.it isnt the russian or indian pilots.
If pakistan can get any missile india can get the same there isnt any need for mmrca on this issue.

i had been comparing to europeans anyway when we have a missile in same class why to have an american missile.
----------------
it isnt ignorance a little bit confusion between AMRAAM and ASRAAM
Last edited by Chanu on 03 Feb 2010 21:18, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 03 Feb 2010 20:56

F-16 to get flashy High Res cockpit display....

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/j ... _1_n.shtml

suraj p
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 43
Joined: 23 Oct 2009 08:10

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby suraj p » 03 Feb 2010 21:21

Is SH really short-listed????????????


http://news.in.msn.com/gallery.aspx?cp- ... id=3597321

Chanu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 01 Feb 2010 19:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Chanu » 03 Feb 2010 21:37

suraj p wrote:Is SH really short-listed????????????


http://news.in.msn.com/gallery.aspx?cp- ... id=3597321

there isnt any reference to f-18 being short listed.it only states it is hoping to win the deal

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 03 Feb 2010 22:15

Re MRCA order being 200, Boeing is now publicly stating what privately was being mentioned over a year back by both LM and Boeing. For many reasons the 200 odd order makes a lot of sense:

1. IAF strategic goals: maintaining minimum strength, increasing number of squadrons, technological leap

2. IAF operational goals: simplify logistics and interoperability

Immediate retirements at hand -- Mig-21, Mig-27, and beginning in 10 to 15 years retirement will begin for M2K (if no MLU), Mig-29, and Jaguars

Consider the retirement rate; and the replenishments required starting today just to maintain the strength -

SU-30 MKI, acquisition at rate of 20 (max)/yr
LCA, acquisition rate of 20 (max)/yr; realistically 12-14/yr initially
MRCA -- remaining
For the FFGA supporters, the acquisition is unlikely to begin anytime before 2017; and considering the uncertainties hard to put any apples in that basket for that plan. Also, best to put FFGA acquisition in form of increasing strength.

From any one contender for MRCA, acquisition rate will not be greater than 15 to 20/yr For any capacity building, it would require a second line which in itself will take a lot of time.

So, if the attrition has to be stemmed, there is a need for increasing the acquisition rate. Only way to do that is 126 with one; and remaining 70-80 odd with another contender.

Consequently, the acquisition will look something like:
SU-30 MKI -- about 120 remaining additional acquisitions over the next 7 years (finish acquisition around the time FFGA is to begin production)

LCA acquisitions -- about 70 acquisitions over the next 5 years till MK-II is ready

MRCA -- beginning 2012 at rate of 14/yr. All these will end up replacing the Mig-27 and some other at first. Unlikely these will replace the Mig-21 at the beginning.

MRCA-2 -- second contender with order of 70-80, will provide 14/yr to begin replenishing the Mig-21 retirements along with the LCA.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8164
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 03 Feb 2010 22:53

Avid wrote:So, if the attrition has to be stemmed, there is a need for increasing the acquisition rate. Only way to do that is 126 with one; and remaining 70-80 odd with another contender.


There have been several statements from concerned individuals in the IAF stating that the MRCA winner will be a single vendor.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 04 Feb 2010 02:01

I think, what they are talking about is the option to buy another 75 a/cs after the initial purchase of 126 (18+118), and at the same terms.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 04 Feb 2010 03:10

suraj p wrote:Is SH really short-listed????????????


http://news.in.msn.com/gallery.aspx?cp- ... id=3597321


Shortlisting can't and won't start before all evaluations are complete.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 04 Feb 2010 10:34

Update on Asia-pacific fighter competitions with stress on Indian MMRCA tussle being the BIG one...

U.S. bidders are optimistic that Washington’s improving military relationship with New Delhi will help. India already is buying Boeing P-8I maritime patrol aircraft and is finalizing a foreign military sales deal for 10 C-17s. Nevertheless, if India wants to spread around its largesse in procuring defense equipment, these purchases could actually prove to be a counterweight to further U.S. acquisitions.


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... r%20Fleets

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 04 Feb 2010 17:12

Further details on EF Vs F-15c (Just bragging to earn brownie points??)

In an interview on the exercise, Major Juan Balesta, the 41-year old Commander of the 111 Squadron stressed that a two-ship formation of Eurofighters involved in a dogfight simulation "against" the F-15s enjoyed full control of the engagement. The Typhoons managed to smash a formation of eight F-15s which had the role of the attacker with the first Eurofighter jet managing to "shoot down" four F-15 fighter jets. The second Eurofighter managed to disable three F-15 jets. Eventually the pilots were using the Eurofighter Typhoon to full capacity and taking advantage of its enormous capabilities.


http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-68079.aspx

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... -15-k.html
(+ spanish video link)

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 04 Feb 2010 19:30

nachiket wrote:
Avid wrote:So, if the attrition has to be stemmed, there is a need for increasing the acquisition rate. Only way to do that is 126 with one; and remaining 70-80 odd with another contender.


There have been several statements from concerned individuals in the IAF stating that the MRCA winner will be a single vendor.


Absolutely correct. There is no doubt about that.

As with all statements that emanate from indian defense establishment, this needs parsed carefully. Single Vendor for the stated order - i.e. 126. There is no mention of option for additional, or that the same vendor would be selected if the order is to be increased (or legally it can be framed as a second order).

126 will be ordered from a single vendor; big question is what form the remaining 70-80 will take?

a) Option to buy more
b) Increased order from 126 to 200 odd
c) A second vendor supplying 70-80

Given the replenishment rate required currently, it is highly unlikely that option (a) or (b) will be suffice. Accelerated induction of same aircraft is not feasible since the number of manufacturing lines cannot be increased to double unless the entire order is at least doubled.

The assessment I had heard over a year back - i.e. the order of 70-80 will go to either SH or LM. The argument was that an order of 70-80 will be a signal of GoI starting small with the american supply of strategic offensive weaponry.

Some events make this order of 200 odd much more likely than since MRCA process of formally inviting the bids was initiated more than a year back:

- Increased thrust to increase acquisition of modern aircraft (including additional orders for 30MKI)

- Turning down the Dassault bid for M2K upgrade. The haggling continues but is unlikely to go anywhere. IAF is more likely to decide to run them to logical conclusion of their lives (another 10 years?) than spend $40 million+ upgrading and continuing the logistical nightmare.

- Every indication of inducting 70 odd LCA MK1

- renewed emphasis on operationalizing the airfields near the chinese border and assigning modern a/c to this theater

Given the current situation, and the trends, it is very likely we will see IAF inducting at the rate of 60-80 a/c yr starting 2011/2012 for at least 5 years. Where will these numbers come from? Only potential is the SU-30 MKI, LCA, MRCA. This necessitates that MRCA order be MRCA-1, and MRCA-2; MRCA-1 constituting of 126 aircrafts; and MRCA-2 constituting 70-80 aircrafts, both inducted in parallel. Only in such a scenario do we get to the induction of 60-80 aircraft/yr, and get to the magical 45 squadron number by 2020 through additional induction of LCA-MK2, and FFGA.

Besides, if indeed it comes out to be MRCA-1, and MRCA-2; then look to commonalities between the two orders in terms of avionics, ECM, radar, and other parts. While many are quick to shoot down the chances of F-16; the single big thing in favor of F-16 is the extent of Israeli experience with it - both operationally as well as the equipment and armaments. This plays very heavily in favor of the F-16 because it reduces dependence on LM as well as the vagaries of the american government. SH puts IAF hostage to single supplier scenario.

sumshyam
BRFite
Posts: 552
Joined: 23 Sep 2009 19:30
Location: Ganga ki dharti.
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby sumshyam » 04 Feb 2010 19:48

If we are really ? going to order around 200 birds...we must order it from atleast two different sources [at-most three -- each getting order for 70 birds]...This would increase the rate of induction....and perhaps...would keep everyone happy with the gain of their shares..!

I am just saying.... :roll: .

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16888
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 04 Feb 2010 19:55

Avid wrote:Absolutely correct. There is no doubt about that.


and

c) A second vendor supplying 70-80


Seem to be contradictory. Are we missing something?

Given the replenishment rate required currently, it is highly unlikely that option (a) or (b) will be suffice. Accelerated induction of same aircraft is not feasible since the number of manufacturing lines cannot be increased to double unless the entire order is at least doubled.


The host nation could pitch in with a dedicated line, specially if it were the MiG-35, F-16 or the Gripen?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests