PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 24 Dec 2010 05:52

^^^
He is saying that Russians are not philanthropists. He are here to take their pound of flesh.
Furthermore, he is saying that FGFA deals although beneficial but not the best we could get.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 24 Dec 2010 05:59

IMHO as of now, the only systems of an aircraft that India cannot make are the engine and radar. Radar part should be taken care of in near future (through tejas Mk2) but there is no information on a fully indigenous engine (even the next kaveri is said to be based on eco core). So, any partnership India goes into should atleast teach DRDO on how to make jet engines. I am not sure if they will learn it from this deal.

On the other hand, I am optimistic that this deal will give us enough leverage to stop any of these 5th gen planes getting in the chinki (and then paki) hands if and when the chinki 5th gen program fails. So, should be worth it.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Dec 2010 08:00

okay, if there is a slight disbelieve he should leak it out if he knows. If he does not know exactly was in the agreement, then he can't assume. Either ask if it can be declassified or do not write like as if he knows it "that it would be like this and that".

time will tell.. as DRDO and ADA graduates, everything will become smoother. As taxpayers, we can always stop external supplies for our armed forces if we think we are ready to be independent without any external supplies even for raw materials.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 24 Dec 2010 13:53

Since AMCA is delayed by 10 yrs and Russians know this, then they could twist for more money per aircraft,.
Also we wo'nt get the 'best version' and this could delay the twin seater Pakfa till 2020., since there is no need to realize prices until Chinese have got it
Maybe ,it could happen that we have to rely on American planes

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 24 Dec 2010 13:55

Samay wrote:Since AMCA is delayed by 10 yrs and Russians know this, then they could twist for more money per aircraft,.

How can a project, which has not even been sanctioned funding, get delayed?

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 24 Dec 2010 13:59

^Thats what I mean. they should have started it 10 yrs earlier , as the chinese did

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 24 Dec 2010 14:07

Samay wrote:^Thats what I mean. they should have started it 10 yrs earlier , as the chinese did

10 years ago? You mean when even LCA's first flight had not taken place?

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 24 Dec 2010 14:17

I believe that work on PFMA started with work on PAKFA. So, We are not yet delayed as far as chineese are concerned...!

I believe that PMFA won't entirely be a new aircraft....so we should have it by defined schedule..!

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 24 Dec 2010 14:26

^^
Sumshyam,
Samay is not talking about FGFA/PMFA. He is suggesting that AMCA project should have started 10 years earlier.

And regarding the Chinese 5 gen a/c, I do not understand why people are getting so worked up because of a few rumours and some badly photoshopped pictures.
These photoshopped pics have been surfacing every year and each time people get worked up.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Dec 2010 14:33

we dont need to get worked up, but be aware that at some point in the future the chinese will have somehow got access to that technology (beg, borrow, steal or make)

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 24 Dec 2010 16:20

I think the author has trivialized the development of a 2 seater variant. The Su-50 development is a program, of which HAL has taken ownership of one whole project. Sure, with a single seater already flying it greatly simplifies the task. But if we take the example of 2 seat LCA and LCA-Navy it is not something we can take for granted.

What interests me is IAF's continued faith in the 2 seater concept. Already we have seen this manifest itself in acquistion of more Su-30MKI, Mirage-2000TH and Jaguar IB.

...the IAF provided requested inputs on platform preference. Our inputs basically fell in four categories, i.e. two-pilot configuration, custom sensors/avionics, options for turbofan engine and weapon systems. Additionally, the IAF was of the view that it would be desirable to have a lower empty weight, a parameter which would to some degree be met with composites, and for which work has already begun by SDB. While the IAF team tasked with studying the platform/programme proposal was quite satisfied with the basic design, the above four parameters were crucial for our own future operations and perspective planning. The requirements were duly endorsed at all levels and met with the concurrence of HAL engineers....

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 24 Dec 2010 16:44

Reading the livefist articles and such other related reports makes me rethink what partnership (strategic/privileged/Others) is all about and are we creating a definition of partnership which blurs with begging...

The mention of wikileaks and all is very poor to me... I mean what do you expect you partner to do? They have sent a nuke submarine to ward off the threat posed by Nuke powered CBG from USN. They have unconditionally helped during times of adversity... Giving us nuke submarine help, leasing us one of the best SSN/SSGN, providing us with fighter (MKI) which was better than anything they had at that point of time and now partnering (the questioned one) with 5th gen ac... What else. looks like we expect Russia to donate their free reserves, offers us everything free or at 50% or else they are not partners and have become businessman... We say it is not SU, but we dont question ourselves that are we the same country? We want to have multi national relations/partnership... We want to buy from US/EU and keep russia as option / Competition.... But we expect russia to keep us as their priority.. offer us everything free/subsidized (oh btw they do offer us... Mirage V/s Fulcrum upgrade)... Strange definition, isn't it? The other guy is good until he does everything for you, the moment if thinks of himself, he becomes selfish businessman....

The article mentions MKI is costly.. So? Dont buy it if you are not satisfied....Are you on gun point to buy it? Do you have any option and if yes at what price? Look at the price of the MMRCA and the capabilities they offer and compare it with MKI and we will know what is costly...

The article criticizes the deal structure as we will not any have anything to contribute, but fails to provide us an alternate solution better than this....

Simply one sided...........

Jamie Boscardin · Post by **Jamie Boscardin** » 24 Dec 2010 19:44

^^
You are simply missing the point which the author is trying to address, which is:
- What is been touted as the biggest landmark deal for the military aviation industry and HAL in particular, in terms of design & development of a technological marvel is not TRUE.
- The T-50 will be the development platform for the twin-seater IAF variant (FGFA) and HAL will be an industrial customization partner. NOT a designer/developer, but a manufacturer, like HAL has always done.

This article is not supposed to be read as if Russia is making a mockery of our partnership by taking our money and giving a paper TOT.

Therefore, if I read through the lines, India will not have a veto power, if Russia decides to sell the probable export version of the single variant T-50 (China specially). The 2 seater variant is what will be sold once you have a joint Indo-Russian agreement.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Dec 2010 22:17

Not much in that article outside of confirming some of our points of view.

Said this way long back, the Russians will NOT part with any thing and every thing, even if India is willing to pay for it. Most specifically the data collected to arrive at conclusions. and, that IMHO is fair. However, it also means that India will have to circle back to Russia for major modifications - as is being done WRT the Brahmos for the MKI. And, that is fine too.

I was hoping that HAL/ADA would get enough information from this "deal" to be able to go alone on the AMCA. It looks to me, right now, that that may not be true. In fact, I suspect it will not be true. Just means that India will have to invest in R&D even more.

I see good news (specially in this article) and so-so news. I do not see any bad news. To either side.

Just one more thought. Time has come to drop this Indo-Soviet partnership. Not because the Russians are not friendly. Just that India is not longer a country that does not have resources any longer. The immense change within India will drive relations in a certain direction and it may seem corny at times, but that is the way things are out there. Such relations are NOT meant to be "friendly" as we define them. (And, no amount of transparency will matter too.)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Dec 2010 22:19

There is a guy, who posted on LiveFist, where he suggests a look at the F-16 vs. Japan's effort to take the F-16 and made the F-2. Worth a look.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_F-2
and:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... andF16.png

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Dec 2010 23:42

Exactly.. if I read NRao sahib correct, we may up the money on LCA++ versions, Kaveri porting, engine testing facilities, new technology for AMCA rather spending too much in PAKFA if there is nothing HAL going to learn. Now, this is where DDM and other people should chase after to get to know more details of the contract.

Again, it is important we setup a responsible entity to monitor DRDO/ADA/HAL progress on home grown products and increase investments there. The $30b for 250-300 A/cs may come down to 100-150 pakfas, and increase the number of LCA versions and AMCA related works.

I don't think our babooze understand this from growing things at home.. w.r.t IAF, they would just not concentrate too much on if it is home or Russkie grown as long as it does the job for them per doctrine.

There is a delicate balance here, and there are lot of things we have to learn. And sure, Russkies will not divulge technologies to India even for $50b.. Somethings we have to invest and learn.. and this is where I see we have no interest yet to invest in larger or bigger project. May be we are not still there yet.. Perhaps LCA FOC can help in that vision.. and soon, those who worked on LCA be engaged in AMCA and give more impetus to them.

We need to see an organic growth driven by ADA/DRDO labs with HAL setup by product maturity model. That would slowly make IAF think they can believe the goods can be available without any external dependencies ever.

Long way to go.

--ps

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=98990
discussing with pics on the inlets.

srai · Post by **srai** » 25 Dec 2010 10:31

Gaur wrote:LIVEFIST COLUMN: An IAF View Of The FGFA Partnership

You can't really fault the Russians on this one. From what I remember, they were offering a joint-venture as far back as the 2002/4. But India kept dragging its feet for 6 years or more to reach the current deal. Obviously, Russians could not wait for the Indian bureaucracy and continued to design and develop its 5th-Gen fighter. Had India moved swifter in obtaining the JV deal, India could have participated in the actual design and development part. (Maybe India wasn't also ready to participate at that technical level earlier.)

Having said that, IMO, India still got something out of this.

It is like an "intern" working with an experienced "mentor" on a project. Through this pairing, the "intern" gains far more than the actual work it does on the project. During this "mentorship", a lot of valuable knowledge (i.e. all the bits of information, design/thinking processes, organizational structures, the "how-tos", etc) is shared by the "mentor", which the "intern" can learn from and apply in future projects. Without this "mentorship", the "intern" has to go through a lot of trial-and-error and other roundabout way to acquire the same level of knowledge in a far greater period of time.
In terms of actual work, it is getting 30% of the work share in the 2-seater FGFA; majority of them being in "customization" pieces such as avionics, communications, ECM, composites, etc ... the parts IAF has requested specifically (as revealed in the article). It will also have the veto power on the 2-seater FGFA, but not on the single-seater PAK-FA (which will remain purely a Russian plane).

manish.rastogi · Post by **manish.rastogi** » 25 Dec 2010 17:54

OT:on a lighter note why not send some smart engineers and scientists there to work with them....and then at night take them to a bar....get a lot of vodka....get them highly drunk....and then extract details and lot of other stuff by smart questions.....lol

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 25 Dec 2010 18:13

manish.rastogi wrote:OT:on a lighter note why not send some smart engineers and scientists there to work with them....and then at night take them to a bar....get a lot of vodka....get them highly drunk....and then extract details and lot of other stuff by smart questions.....lol

We are sending some of our folks over to SDB while some Russian designers will works in India.
Though, I must say that trying to get Russians drunk through "vodka" is not a very smart move.

manish.rastogi · Post by **manish.rastogi** » 25 Dec 2010 18:25

and why not??(just curious)

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 25 Dec 2010 18:33

manish.rastogi wrote:and why not??(just curious)

Just a reference to the Russian stereotype by which they are supposed to have more vodka running down their veins than blood.
But this is getting way OT.

manish.rastogi · Post by **manish.rastogi** » 25 Dec 2010 18:47

OT: last post from me.....i said vodka just for their love for it....anyways we could use tequila or anything else which works for us....haha!!

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 25 Dec 2010 19:02

OT, but couldn't resist the spirited discussion.

In the principle of indeginisation, I would have proposed 'tharra' or 'santra' or 'arrack'. Let's see if the Russians are immune to our desi stuff.

Saurabh_M · Post by **Saurabh_M** » 26 Dec 2010 09:52

Hi
(Posting after a long long time)

As per the livefist article, the FGFA deal is similar to the Su-30MKI deal, and we have done it to success before.

----------------------Su35----------PAKFA
Prototype-------------1993---------2008/09
Deal------------------1996---------2010
Delivery---------------2000-----------?
Full Version------------2004-----------?

If anything, we are doing it quicker and better this time around. We could have been involved in project from 2006, but I think IAF wanted to customize a ready platform. I have read reports saying that we were delayed due to the bureaucratic BS, but those timelines above tell a different story.

Views?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Dec 2010 09:56

I guess IAF wanted to hold off committing any funds UNTIL the 1st prototype really flew and they could crawl all over it and take a detailed look at its potential in classified talks.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 26 Dec 2010 10:26

back in early 2000's not many people actually believed that Russia will be able to make a 5th generation fighter. Perhaps IAF & Indian MoD was one of them. Things have changed a lot now and that explains the difference in our attitude.

That said even today a lot of work needs to be done into making this fighter inventory worthy with a true 5th generation aircraft tag.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Dec 2010 10:29

indeed. its a huge and long term commitment to the program for next 50 yrs (10 yrs to FOC and 40 yrs of service). the planes we get in 2020 will outlive many of us who are in 30s now...

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 26 Dec 2010 10:36

don't worry as Khalsa used to say there will always be Singha Mk1 and Singha Mk2 alive.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Dec 2010 18:57

That attitude of Indian helm of affairs and decision making is actually a double up towards even home grown products. Since its all firang, there is more Santa value in it.

Besides, given the possibilities and capabilities, I guess the decision was right for the time.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 27 Dec 2010 17:07

nrshah wrote: The article criticizes the deal structure as we will not any have anything to contribute, but fails to provide us an alternate solution better than this....

Simply one sided...........

Fully Agree,we expect a lot from Russians but are ready accept crap from others,no doubt that Russians have been true friends there could be some glitches here and there,So what? it happens in the family.

Expecting the Russians to open up all the 5th gen tech to us,just because we are funding 50% is ridiculous.do not forget the stage they achieved today is a result of all the hard work they have done for the past 1/2 century or so.

The positives of this deal is that we will get 5th gen fighters in large numbers with no strings attached,we can manufacture them as many as we want,we can get revenue from all the possible exports,and we will have Tech. experience of partnering a 5th gen plane,which we can use for our home grown birds.

we should stop nitpicking and all the rhona dhona

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 27 Dec 2010 19:44

^^^How about reading that article slowly and try and digest the import of the same?

Where has the officer criticised the Russians? The comment about the hard nosed commercial deal making by the Russians is a known fact for quite some time, so what is the angst? They are here to make money and we need the aircraft. Simple, no. And before you jump on the freindship bandwagon and this and that, can you please tell me which other country can pump in the same amount of money as India into T-50 and which is not a competitor to the Russians? And guarantee life long pumping of money into the project and subsequent upgrades?

And who gives a flying fvck about what Russians have done to reach where they are? How about thinking a bit about how India has earned that money? And how hard and long that process has been?

I'm paying X amount of money and I need goods/knowledge worth the same. Russian defence budget is $36 billion in 2010. You think they can sustain these fancy R&D projects without substantial infusement of funds from India? As for the equal input by the Russians into the project, God only knows how the valuation has been done to arrived at Russian part? Are they actually going to infuse the hard cash like the Indians or has their contribution being valued at X billion USD?

Let us not get carried away by these freindship rhetorics.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 28 Dec 2010 00:04

some of these hi-res pics haven't been posted, i think

http://www.aame.in/2010/12/hi-res-pictu ... fifth.html

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 28 Dec 2010 00:30

Hiten wrote:some of these hi-res pics haven't been posted, i think

http://www.aame.in/2010/12/hi-res-pictu ... fifth.html

Thanks a lot for the pics Hiten. Eagerly awaiting for the pics when the second flying prototype rolls out.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Dec 2010 02:18

nice.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 28 Dec 2010 10:04

rohitvats wrote:, can you please tell me which other country can pump in the same amount of money as India into T-50 and which is not a competitor to the Russians? And guarantee life long pumping of money into the project and subsequent upgrades?

Let us not get carried away by these freindship rhetorics.

in the same sense can you please tell me which other country will give you the tech and planes even if we are ready to pay 100% of the development cost?

regarding putting money in the project,we are not only the country which has this money,if you look at middle east you may know saudi's are spending 60 Billions on defence,UAE is also pumping lots of money,the Chinese are there

if Russia is worried about IPR, how can they offer su-35 to china? what would have stopped them from partnering for 5th gen?

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 28 Dec 2010 14:44

Gaur wrote:
Hiten wrote:some of these hi-res pics haven't been posted, i think

http://www.aame.in/2010/12/hi-res-pictu ... fifth.html
Thanks a lot for the pics Hiten. Eagerly awaiting for the pics when the second flying prototype rolls out.

you are welcome

Every BRFite undoubtedly shares the eagerness

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Dec 2010 00:24

It is a question of graduation and associations, where the more we show a demonstrated capability the more of our friends will try to take that piece of market share. Now, on those capability we have, it is best to utilize it on a joint project like and MKI/Brahmos has shown that aspect, where we did make a wonderful beginning. PAK-FA should be a plus+ in terms of what we can do and learn and what the Russians can advance as well.

If we have all the capabilities like the khans or Russkies, why do we even need any external help. For that matter, let us try to appreciate Russkies for helping us towards nuke subs, kaveri engine test flights, etc. We can only grow if we are not selfish in our thoughts having some give and take.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 29 Dec 2010 05:21

narayana wrote:
rohitvats wrote:, can you please tell me which other country can pump in the same amount of money as India into T-50 and which is not a competitor to the Russians? And guarantee life long pumping of money into the project and subsequent upgrades?

Let us not get carried away by these freindship rhetorics.
in the same sense can you please tell me which other country will give you the tech and planes even if we are ready to pay 100% of the development cost?

regarding putting money in the project,we are not only the country which has this money,if you look at middle east you may know saudi's are spending 60 Billions on defence,UAE is also pumping lots of money,the Chinese are there

if Russia is worried about IPR, how can they offer su-35 to china? what would have stopped them from partnering for 5th gen?

Yes, the name of that country is India. It may take longer, but the long-term dividends are worth it IMO.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 29 Dec 2010 08:56

Gurus I have a question. In the recent agreement, both Russia and India have agreed to sell the PAK-FA on mutual consent. Does it cover even parts like engines, avionics developed specifically for PAK-FA or only whole system. Because, IMO Chinese J-20 seems to be neck to neck race with PAK-FA, but Chinese have no reliable engine. It means it has to borrow from Russia. Will RussIndia permit use of AL-41 engine in J-20 or India has no leverage over this. TIA.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2010 09:17

kmkraoind wrote: Does it cover even parts like engines, avionics developed specifically for PAK-FA or only whole system.

I would expect that any agreement would cover all areas that have a design input from India. Of cpurse there are many who believe that Indian have nothing to give other than money and that all aspects of the design will be Russian. Unfortunately even the IAF officer who wrote an incognito article for shiv aroor has (perhaps inadvertently) fuelled that impression - i.e the money is Indian but the rest is Russian.

I don't believe that to be true. Russia has been incorporating Indian design inputs in aircraft since the 1960s but we Indians are always scathing and derisive of any Indian input and tend to talk as it it is a useless or trivial input. But there are plenty of things that would need to be done for India specifically - particularly in terms of making the avionics and control systems compatible with Indian and non Russian systems. We don't know ho much sharing will be done for control law software - but I am sure we would want to rewrite that for ourselves. Also we would want "Fly-By-Wire engines" with FADEC suited for hot and high conditions - where we can contribute things that the Russians have little experience with.

Since much of this is not in the public domain some people can easily take the attitude that the Indian input is bullshit and that everything can be sold to China. I don't believe it's that simple.