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.
koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby koti » 10 Aug 2010 20:50

The MKI costs less then the EF or Rafale. It can carry heavier payload, it can travel farther, is exceptionally maneuverable and already has its infra built.

The only thing it lacks is a competitive Radar for now.

If we go with Saab, the cheapest among the competitors, who incidentally promised complete transfer of technology, we could save some (say) 40% of the tender cost. And eventually build up a desi and tailor made AESA not only for MKI's but for a wider variety of aircraft.

If the Gripen suits the 'Requirements' without any compromise, it should not be given any disadvantage because of the political importance of the deal.
Although I'd love to see Rafale roar in IAF colors, the beauty breaks down to dollars at the end of the day.

Although one can argue that getting the best in line aircraft will benefit our air force, it can turn counter productive as the money being invested in them is being shaved away from other resources.
Eg: Imagine EF's going on strike mission leaving behind the bases and other installations in the hands of second grade(Or inadequate) SAM-Radar systems. Or the plight of the pilots who had to undergo cost cut training as they were given prettier cockpits.

The requirements state what best suits the interests of a bigger picture then just the aircraft.

The politics that surround are here just for the money involved. The same corporations are definite to turn their backs off when any of their self interest is at stake.
The concept of joint-ventures is the new mantra of Indian defense establishment. These can be implemented with efficient corporations with mutual benefit and hence will not get effected by previous deals.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Aug 2010 20:56

> Why do you say the EF has better a2a specs than the MKI?

someone had posted specs of all mrca competitors + su35bm + f22 in one of the threads. only the su35bm (single seater) was in the range of ef and f22 iirc. lets face it, the MKI is a heavier plane than f22 and has weaker engines - it is not a out and out a2a performer vs stuff like f22/ef t:w (ignore stealth). the airframe design is oriented to good performance in transonic regime than a high supersonic oriented design like f22/f15c/m2k all of which cross mach2.

> Furthermore, isn't MKI primarily there for air superiority with M2Ks for strike?

I think mki is used multirole at the moment. the red flag unit went for night time long range exercises presumably for strike.
we have far too few M2k (barely 50) to handle strike duties even against a small country. if the EF comes then MKI can work more on
strike for which its specs are awesome (2 seater, massive load, internal fuel, range)...same way F15C gave way to raptor and F15E is still around in many variations.

the other problem is missiles - captorE + mica/amraamc7/amraamd + meteor + asraam is better than r77/r73 + unproven irbis-E combo.
MKI will get irbis-E and new models of russian missiles + astra only toward end of decade I think.

there is no need for a ego tussle - hit the panda hard with the best you have got and never let up the beating. :twisted: if that means EF + meteor so be it.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8175
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 10 Aug 2010 21:05

Austin wrote:
You will be surprised that HAL Chairman mentioned "HAL chairman Nalini Ranjan Mohanty has said that the Indian-built Su-30s will cost only about $22.5 million a unit against the current import price of about $37.5 million" link


I am not surprised at all. The quote is actually referenced to: 5. [Financial Express, 10-Dec-2001].

Austin wrote:Even the latest Su-35 sold directly is quoted a price of $65 million.


I would take that price with a pinch of salt now. Anyways they were estimates by experts when the Su-35 BM was first showcased in July 2008. We know how the prices of MKIs have gone up during that period.

Austin wrote:So what is new about these Sukhoi that they are charging $35 million extra ? Perhaps most significant portion will be cost of TOT , R&D involved Brahmos integration and other Western stuff that IAF wants ?

Can't understand this new TOT part!

Austin wrote:My understanding of the reading is these new 42 planes will be direct purchase


All reports have suggested that they will be built at HAL from 2014 onwards to 2018. That makes sense as the current orders from HAL are supposed to be supplied by then.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 10 Aug 2010 21:10

IMO MKI's would not have cost us so low if we were not paying for Boris Yeltsin's elections. I think the dollar value also moved.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8175
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 10 Aug 2010 21:11

Austin wrote:Here is something I found on Sukhoi cost http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?386128

Rapping the Government for huge cost esclation risks in the project, the CAG said the total cost of 140 aircraft projected by the Ministry in 2000 was Rs 22,122.78 crores at the 2000 price level, while a detailed project report prepared by HAL in july 2005, the amount shown was Rs 39,224.9 crores, almost a hundred price rise.


So 140 Sukhoi cost 39,224 crores ? In dollar term how much does that translate to each aircraft ?


It is roughly 9.0 billion, which brings the cost per plane to nearly 65 million per plane.

I think we shouldn't stop there. In five years since, it has further doubled. The new prices now fall in line!

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Lalmohan » 10 Aug 2010 21:12

i understood Su30MKI to be close to the F15E Strike Eagle, therefore should be fairly good multi-role
if the scenario is sweeping plaaf from the skies then a2a bias makes more sense for mrca

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5290
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 10 Aug 2010 23:11

Austin wrote:
Igorr wrote:Russian press published the answer from UAC: "There was no any letter from the Indian tender committee about a 'shortlist'. UAC is preparing its cost proposition according to what was scheduled by the tender conditions.'


Igorr it is now highly unlikely that Mig-35 can come through MMRCA considering IAF is looking for a Western fighter does not matter which Western fighter comes in.

The Mig-35 though could come in via separate purchase as few media reports indicated 60 numbers as part of separate deal , could be a hot gas as well.


Austin that is being rather simplistic. Even if the mandate wasn't to go for a Western fighter, the MiG-35 stood less chance than the rest.

Anyway, Russian media sources indicate that it was the MTBO and total engine life that caused the RD-33MK to have issues.

Cristina Iliescu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 06 Jun 2010 23:55

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Cristina Iliescu » 10 Aug 2010 23:13

Xclusive : Air Chief Complains To Antony, MMRCA, Other Deals Delayed Due To Inefficient DOFA, New Body Likely For Offsets !!!



http://chhindits.blogspot.com/2010/08/a ... mmrca.html

ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby ShivaS » 10 Aug 2010 23:17

Ok now we have devil in the details :mrgreen:

Cristina Iliescu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 06 Jun 2010 23:55

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Cristina Iliescu » 10 Aug 2010 23:21

ShivaS wrote:Ok now we have devil in the details :mrgreen:


:rotfl:

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 11 Aug 2010 01:04

a great publicity video for the typhoon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvEDSI1nf3E

masha-allah typhoon is like a arranged marriage wife...kinda grows on you :E

MarcH
BRFite
Posts: 122
Joined: 22 Feb 2009 10:32

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby MarcH » 11 Aug 2010 01:56

People here always declare the Tiffy was not designed with a2g in mind. That is wrong. It was not designed with deep strike in mind. It is perfectly viable a CAS aircraft.
It replaced Jaguars in British service- hardly known for their great a2a capabilities.
Rafale on the other hand was designed from the outset as carrier of French nukes.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 11 Aug 2010 02:04

can you explain what aspects of the rafale favour it for deep strike over the typhoon?
both look similar in shape and size to me, with rafale being the more compact chassis and heavy carrier ops undercarriage but smaller nosecone and engines.

someone was even showing data of the rafale as being more efficient at hi-alt than T.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 11 Aug 2010 02:21

Seriously? Propaganda for EF has gotten that far to insist that it was designed with deep strike in mind? Perhaps air superiority escort for deep strikes, but by itself deep-strike -- definitely not.

There are way too many indicators that it was conceived and planned for primarily (not solely) air defense role, with strike capabilities to be integrated later.

From trusted Wiki :-D
"A more comprehensive air-to-ground attack capability including Paveway IV, EGBU-16 bombs and a higher degree of automation will be achieved for all partner nations with the Phase 1 Enhancements currently in development"
....
Tranche 1
Block 1 : Initial Operational Capability and basic Air Defence Capability.
Block 2 : Initial air-to-air capabilities.
Block 2B : Full air-to-air capabilities.
Block 5 : Full Operational Capability (FOC) by combining existing air-to-air role with air-to-ground capabilities.


Follow the design and development of the same.

It is not people on this forum, but all around it has been a well-known element that EF is a product of cold-war era requirement of air-defense and superiority (while strike missions were carried out by F-15, F-14, F-18, Jag,...)

It does not mean it does not have strike capability. But then even Mig-21Bis has strike capability :-)

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 11 Aug 2010 02:31

One factor that many seem to have overlooked are the EF in possession of Saudi AF (which are defacto flown by PAF pilots).

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 11 Aug 2010 02:41

How do you know PAF pilots will fly the EF? Assuming they do, so what?

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Avid » 11 Aug 2010 02:48

Carl_T wrote:How do you know PAF pilots will fly the EF? Assuming they do, so what?


I suppose because you are not familiar with Saudi AF and the deputation of PAF pilots to Saudi AF?

Would do well to do a little study on your own before emphatically questioning:

From Brookings 2008
"Pakistan has provided military aid and expertise to the kingdom for decades. It began with help to the Royal Saudi Air Force to build and pilot its first jet fighters in the 1960s. Pakistani Air Force pilots flew RSAF Lightnings that repulsed a South Yemeni incursion into the kingdom’s southern border in 1969. In the 1970s and 1980s up to 15,000 Pakistani troops were stationed in the kingdom, some in a brigade combat force near the Israeli-Jordanian-Saudi border. The close ties continue between the militaries today."


Please do not ask what the authenticity of Brookings is :-)

All else nearly equal, there is always significant advantage to be had in uncertain information and lack of familiarity -- i.e. if Rafale and EF is nearly similar, and PAF is more familiar with EF, then advantage is to be had by having Rafale.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8175
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 11 Aug 2010 02:52

Carl_T wrote:How do you know PAF pilots will fly the EF? Assuming they do, so what?


I don't know if PAF pilots get chances of regularly flying the EF. But if they do, that has a very significant impact in A2A fights. In dog fights, knowing what your opponent can do and what he can't can be a game changer.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 11 Aug 2010 03:14

- Avid

I wasn't "emphatically questioning" anything. Pak-KSA relations are not new knowledge. Specifically I was asking how do you know they fly EFs there?

Now let's assume PAF has had extensive training on the EF, what advantage would it give to Pakistan? If some Paki pilots fly the F-15, will it give them some sort of advantage while in a JF-17?

Now if we assume that it makes a significant difference, is that enough to override all the strengths of the EF and drop it for another plane? Sounds fishy.

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Arya Sumantra » 11 Aug 2010 03:14

Avid wrote:One factor that many seem to have overlooked are the EF in possession of Saudi AF (which are defacto flown by PAF pilots).


As I said before in my prior post, such problems can come with any plane, it's only a matter of time.
Arya Sumantra wrote:That reasoning of losing our hidden cards applies to each and every foreign aircraft.
UAE can give training to PAF pilots on Rafale. India can only ask french not to sell Rafale to Barkistan but other sheikhdoms can definitely buy it and could have paf pilots in their ranks or have exercises with them. Similarly PAF can be trained against Superbugs too by usaf at any time in any exercise or redflag for "war against terror". India can cry foul as much as it wants.
Even for MKI, there were talks about atleast one paf pilot getting trained and familiarized with MKM's capabilities by Malaysia due to brotherhood by religion not to mention that paf should have exercised with dragon against MKKs at least.

With foreign planes there is a limit as to how far and how long India can prevent its rivals from getting trained and familiarized. The only true unfamiliar hidden cards can come from a homegrown solution. But an institution(IAF) that went to the extent of reportedly punishing the pilots who chose to be the test-pilots of Tejas, in terms of promotions, among other forms of discouragement can only pay for its Karma. Sigh !

vishnu.nv
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 19:32

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vishnu.nv » 11 Aug 2010 03:16

In that case UAE is also going to buy Rafale. Again another country which is having closer military ties with pakistan.
China is having Su-30, so we should not purchase SU-3 also...f-16 block 60 is currently flown by UAE Air force. May be deputed from PAF.

we should have to compromise somewhere or other unless we have our own ingeniousness fighter.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7759
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 11 Aug 2010 04:10

Avid wrote:Seriously? Propaganda for EF has gotten that far to insist that it was designed with deep strike in mind? Perhaps air superiority escort for deep strikes, but by itself deep-strike -- definitely not.


You should read more carefully..

MarcH wrote:People here always declare the Tiffy was not designed with a2g in mind. That is wrong. It was not designed with deep strike in mind. It is perfectly viable a CAS aircraft.
It replaced Jaguars in British service- hardly known for their great a2a capabilities.
Rafale on the other hand was designed from the outset as carrier of French nukes.


Is that what you were referring to? :roll:

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21161
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Prem » 11 Aug 2010 04:16

In case Sheikhdom/s try to extend material help to Paki in war with India , would not a threat of strategic counter be suffice to keep them in their palaces?

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 » 11 Aug 2010 05:58

Prem wrote:In case Sheikhdom/s try to extend material help to Paki in war with India , would not a threat of strategic counter be suffice to keep them in their palaces?

That would be a very dire and far fetched scenario, nevertheless something to be planned for in detail.

If indeed we are leaning towards the Euro birds and that too with an eye on China, why are we perturbed regarding access to these machines by Purelanders? Are we not supposed to have a different mix of aircrafts for the western theatre (eg Light & Medium) instead of (Medium-Heavy & Heavy) that we are positioning on Eastern front?

From a purelanders perspective we need to bother about getting the Low-Medium mixture of fighters eg LCA Tejas and other assorted Upg medium birds right. Tiffy and MKI in tandem would be an overkill for Dung fighters of Tarbela, we should not kill a fly with a sword.

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 196
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Luxtor » 11 Aug 2010 06:24

Carl_T wrote:- Avid

I wasn't "emphatically questioning" anything. Pak-KSA relations are not new knowledge. Specifically I was asking how do you know they fly EFs there?

Now let's assume PAF has had extensive training on the EF, what advantage would it give to Pakistan? If some Paki pilots fly the F-15, will it give them some sort of advantage while in a JF-17?

Now if we assume that it makes a significant difference, is that enough to override all the strengths of the EF and drop it for another plane? Sounds fishy.


I think that having flown a fighter and being familiar with its handling, electronics and weapons system would give a pilot some insight into how to deal with it when opposing it, no matter what fighter he happens to be flying in. So you can't totally discount such knowledge.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1525
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Sumeet » 11 Aug 2010 08:35

Future strike platform will be PAK-FA. Once it has sanitized air space others [Super MKI, EF/Rafale, LCA & M2k-9] can move in backed by AWACS do remainder of destruction.

So neither MKI or MRCA will be IAF's strike platform and given the rate of our progress with MRCA contract the difference between induction date of MRCA and FGFA will be around 5-7 years at the most.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Juggi G » 11 Aug 2010 08:46


Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Arya Sumantra » 11 Aug 2010 09:26

^^^^^ Then who flies UAE's fighters ?

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2609
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Cybaru » 11 Aug 2010 09:33

The uae folks or american contractors...

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1525
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Sumeet » 11 Aug 2010 09:53

eads is also has a GaN t/r module. caesar has 1500 t/r module aesa. more details later.
Last edited by Sumeet on 11 Aug 2010 10:01, edited 1 time in total.

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Arya Sumantra » 11 Aug 2010 10:00

Cybaru wrote:The uae folks or american contractors...


uae is said to have paf pilots in its ranks.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 11 Aug 2010 10:07

onlee problem with pakfa is our version is 10 yrs away from IOC and needs the new 'proper' aesa radar from niip and the totally new 5th gen engine saturn is working on . not sure if it will be 1-seater or 2-seater and what its focus will be.

anyway even to build up a strength of 100 such fighters will take 5 yrs i,e, 2025. so the decade between 2015-2025 will have to be managed solely by MKI and MRCA as air superiority roles.

even after Pakfa 100 mark, we need 100s of mki/tejas/mrca to deal with the 100s of fighters PLAAF will put up.

not unless we can magically get 200 pakfa by 2015, is it a parallel course with mrca.

mrca deliveries will likely start around 2014 assuming contract in 2012 and span upto 2025 with 15-20 per yr.
Pakfa deliveries will likely commence in 2020 and run upto 2030 for 300 airframes.

ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby ShivaS » 11 Aug 2010 10:51

so the directive based on gurujis here is

Loosen Grippen
Dump Russian (MiG)
Defy American (F-18)
Buy French Fly Raffle (and make money)

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 11 Aug 2010 11:07

Even with the PAK FA in service I expect the Su 30s and MRCA to do most of the dirty work and more peace time sorties. This is because stealth Aircraft are notoriously hard to maintain and operate because of the RAM coatings and all that, the 4.5 gens are bound to have higher availability rates. So we better get an MRCA with high availability rates.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 11 Aug 2010 11:10

Avid wrote:One factor that many seem to have overlooked are the EF in possession of Saudi AF (which are defacto flown by PAF pilots).


But arabs are also going for Rafale soon, even might fund more powerful M-88 engines, just like they did RDY 2 for M2k.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4607739


I think it makes perfect sense to let M2ks, jags to do strike, while Tiffy and Tejas and Mig 29 blowing away all the chinese/porki birds in the sky. While Su 30 doing both the roles with its awesome fuel capacity + huge payload.
Last edited by Manish_Sharma on 11 Aug 2010 11:17, edited 1 time in total.

ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby ShivaS » 11 Aug 2010 11:15

All said and done this is golden opportunity to get component level tech transfer like SCB for engine critical components.
The economic recessions in Khan land, oiropean lands and Ivans bastion should be exploited. Hope babus are burning midnight oil on this.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 11 Aug 2010 12:15

The shortfall anticipated is why there is the general upgrades of all aircraft in service,given that acquiring a new bird takes so long.The only aircraft in service other than the Su-30s where "extras" can be obtained is the MIG-35,a considerable development of the "29",as the IN is obtaining around 48 MIG-29Ks for its carriers.So if any "extras" are required at reasonable cost to make up numbers,this is the way the IAF should go and what has been hinted at.The difficulties in developing the LCA after 2+ decades has shown the IAF/GOI that relying entirely upon the DRDO to deliver the goods is fraught with danger,Hence the desire through the MMRCA deal,to increase numbers of cutting-edge quality aircraft to eal with Pak and China and to obtain enough TOT so that we can design and build our own aircraft in the future after the LCA programme is over.The Europeans are the most easy to deal with on this front.The Americans the worst.Why,the've refused to even give closest ally Britain tech for the JSF,when Britain gave the US full details about the Harrier which they produced in the hundreds for the USMC.Any deal with the US will carry so much of hidden baggage and miles of string attached,that will entangle us for decades and turn us into another US puppet state.

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Lisa » 11 Aug 2010 12:37



If I remember correctly this was stipulated as a requirement in the contract
of sale, Pukies not allowed to fly or service the aircraft. Situation let to
issues as not enough pilots were available to fly the new acquisitions!
Crash program of training was subsequently launched.

MarcH
BRFite
Posts: 122
Joined: 22 Feb 2009 10:32

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby MarcH » 11 Aug 2010 12:45

Singha wrote:can you explain what aspects of the rafale favour it for deep strike over the typhoon?
both look similar in shape and size to me, with rafale being the more compact chassis and heavy carrier ops undercarriage but smaller nosecone and engines.

someone was even showing data of the rafale as being more efficient at hi-alt than T.


Biggest advantage for Rafale are two heavy and wet pylons per wing as opposed to one per wing on Tiffy. In most cases this means you can't carry say, two cruise missiles and two wing drop tanks at the same time with an Eurofighter.
Then there are design decisions like the active MAW on Typhoon. Superior in detection range and less weather dependend then the passive system on Rafale. But, if you go over enemy territory you really don't want an active system.
That is not to say it is a bad aircraft for strike. Compared to the typical loadout of an F-16 in desert storm (2-4 Mk 84, 2 AIM-9L 2-3 Droptanks + ECM PODs.)
Tiffy carries the same -ECM Pods (they are build-in) + 4 AMRAAM over a longer distance.

In the end it boils down to what the IAF really want's. An aircraft that hunts for air and land targets over the battlefield with strongers sensors or the little bit sneakier aircraft that can carry out deep strike thanks to it's passive sensors, ECM suite and the better external fuel capacity.

Therefore I would pick Rafale or F-18 (if the Americans offer a fullspec Growler) over the Tiffy. With a bit of upgrading the MKI will be more as capable as sensor platform, und further down the road the T-50/FGFA will be just as capable as launch platform for BVR missiles.

prastor
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 11:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby prastor » 11 Aug 2010 13:10

Singha wrote:onlee problem with pakfa is our version is 10 yrs away from IOC and needs the new 'proper' aesa radar from niip and the totally new 5th gen engine saturn is working on . not sure if it will be 1-seater or 2-seater and what its focus will be.

anyway even to build up a strength of 100 such fighters will take 5 yrs i,e, 2025. so the decade between 2015-2025 will have to be managed solely by MKI and MRCA as air superiority roles.

even after Pakfa 100 mark, we need 100s of mki/tejas/mrca to deal with the 100s of fighters PLAAF will put up.

not unless we can magically get 200 pakfa by 2015, is it a parallel course with mrca.

mrca deliveries will likely start around 2014 assuming contract in 2012 and span upto 2025 with 15-20 per yr.
Pakfa deliveries will likely commence in 2020 and run upto 2030 for 300 airframes.


I think the expected delay in FGFA induction is the reason why 50 PAK FA are being bought off the shelf while the FGFA reaches FoC. Thought I read some time back in a news article that FGFA is expected to be inducted in 2018, I would rather bet on 2020 like you did, given HAL's track record in meeting deadlines.

In the mean time, let us not forget the Chinese J-XX program that they claim to yield results by 2018-20 as well. Theirs would be a completely local product (apart from all the copying and reverse engineering). Though, I am pretty sure it will be a carbon copy of the F22 or F35 on the outside.

By 2020, we will have a whole lot of MKIs, LCA Mk1 and Mk2 in our squadrons (in very good numbers) and our AMCA will probably be in flight testing while our 50 PAK FA will be delivered, waiting for FGFA to start rolling too. We will still have few of our MiGs and Jags, not to forget the M2K-9s. So, what exactly are we buying the MMRCA for? It looks to me that this time MoD is inclined more to ToT, rather than the numbers of planes themselves. So, even if the plane is expensive, if the deal promises India complete transfer of AESA and engine tech, I am damn sure they will go for it. I am sure the AMCA program is banking on the outcome of this competition.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests