MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

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.
GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 01 Feb 2011 19:34

jai wrote:What are the basis for this statement ?


AESA availability:
SH: 2005
EF: 2015 (planned)

10 years, assuming everything goes according to plan

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 01 Feb 2011 20:00

GeorgeWelch wrote:Because they never expect to use them.

Any weapon is good enough in peace time.

Their own approach to AESA clearly demonstrates this. If they weren't trying to win the MMRCA, there would still be no plan to ever put AESA on the EF. What does that tell you?


The MRCA argument has been to expedite the process. The CAESAR demonstrator started flight testing in 2007. Not the kind of thing that happens if there was no plan to put an AESA on it.

And while Italy and Spain have been wishy washy about it, the bulk of the RAF and Luftwaffe inventories will comprise of the EF by 2015 and they are both very much committed to a good upgrade program.

There's a consortium of four countries involved, with India getting a (presumably equal) say in the future upgrade path.


The only 'say' India is going to have is what upgrades it's going to fund itself.


That's a subjective statement you're making. If India does join the consortium, that will mean a share in Eurofighter Gmbh expressed in very numerical and tangible terms.

Sure it wouldn't at par with the JSF (neither is the SH for that matter) but 'obsolete'?


Avionics is a very unforgiving world. Either they're better than your opponents or they aren't. And if they aren't, it's going to be a very tough road. And with the EF falling further and further behind, it's going to become and more likely that you're on the short end of the stick.


Its the F-35C that's at the cutting edge of avionics. Yes the US has and will continue to be ahead of the rest as far as technology goes. But the F-18E/F isn't at the high end of its inventory. Been technically superior can only go so far, to compensate for the fact that the Captor-E will be larger more powerful than AN/APG-79.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Singha » 01 Feb 2011 20:08

also its a lot more likely we will get a neutered APG79 compared to a neutered Captor-E since not a dime of indian money was used for the APG79.

for example the P8A != P8I because good number of classified systems are not for export to India.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 01 Feb 2011 20:08

GeorgeWelch wrote:AESA availability:
SH: 2005
EF: 2015 (planned)

10 years, assuming everything goes according to plan


If the IAF expected deliveries last year, that would probably have settled the argument. If it was between the F-35A and the EF, the former's avionics would make it far superior choice, to say nothing of stealth. Unfortunately, the SH's advantage at avionics is marginal at best, and the same argument doesn't hold.

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Drishyaman » 01 Feb 2011 20:18

Henrik wrote:You really have an issue with the Gripen don't you?

Yes, I am not a Grippen FAN. Grippen has so many vendors what if at some point of time Unkil buys out any of the vendor. We will end up hunting for parts. Unkil had brought out aircaft related companies earlier also. :)

Henrik wrote:Are you some Rafale salesman perhaps?

No, I am a common Indian man. Do I need to show you my passport or my birth certificate ? :-o

Henrik wrote:Why would the Gripen crash in the hands of indian pilots?

So you have already assumed India is buying Grippen. How ? :rotfl:

Henrik wrote:What do you know about the technology transfer?

Is that another assumption of yours ? :mrgreen:

Henrik wrote:Have you read all the documents from all the vendors?

No, I don’t have the time, mostly the ones from Sweden. :rotfl:

Henrik wrote:You must have since you seem to have extensive knowledge on the issue.

No, I am here to learn, why don’t you teach me something about the Grippen, like what all things we will gain in terms of technology buying the Grippen ? :mrgreen:

Henrik wrote:And by the way, that price is way to high.

You used the word “price” that proves you are the vendor and I used the word “cost” that proves I am an Indian (belong to the community of customer ).

Wickberg wrote:Just don´t bother replaying to idiots. The common bharat reader is smarter then that. It´s just that simple....

I am probably not as good in abusing as the Swedes. So, I think I will loose out to you here. I would rather use logic to win a debate. Would you prefer to stick to logic rather than abuses ? :mrgreen:

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 01 Feb 2011 20:37

Viv S wrote:Unfortunately, the SH's advantage at avionics is marginal at best, and the same argument doesn't hold.


Not true, the SH's avionics are top-notch. It is already 10 years ahead of the EF and the USN has committed to funding upgrades for the next 25 years at least.

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Drishyaman » 01 Feb 2011 20:51

Boreas wrote:But News is MiG-35 is not packing their bag to come to Aero India 2011.
If you think a little you can figure out why they are doing so. When everybody else is sending two aircraft each.

Boreas, you stand corrected ;)


SriSri
BRFite
Posts: 545
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 15:25

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby SriSri » 01 Feb 2011 20:54

^^ Not sure.. there is a PTI input that MiG 35's won't be there.. There isn't enough clarity, waiting for a direct response from MiG.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Avid » 01 Feb 2011 21:11

Singha wrote:also its a lot more likely we will get a neutered APG79 compared to a neutered Captor-E since not a dime of indian money was used for the APG79.

for example the P8A != P8I because good number of classified systems are not for export to India.


This has been the case with other acquisitions also. We have received one-gen older or slightly degraded performance items on defense purchases in the past. Recall when we received Mig-29 they were one block (if one might call it that) older. Some of the weaponry available to us also was older. Do we have access skhval from the Russians? How about the Sea Dragon suite for the IL-38?

I bring up the varied examples about the Russian weaponry and defense items because we supposedly have "unfettered and complete access" according to many here.

What about the Mirage purchases, did we get top of the line items on it?

This is the nature of the beast. Yes, we will attempt to always get the best and least diluted.

Using the term "neutered" means dysfunctional. Is it going to be reduced functionality -- possibly. But that is going to be true for all. Those who claim the Euro will give us the whole-hog are living in dreamland. Perception does not equal claim, it is just that perception.

We would be foolish to trust any of the vendors based on perception rather than evidence. Evidence from past suggests that no vendor has provided us top-of-line goodies without diluting the prized jewels to some degree.

1998 onwards at least, to my knowledge it has not happened that we have been under sanctions regime from US and not from UK. US sanctions = UK sanctions. So all arguments about EF being more sanctions proof is dubious and without evidence.

Also, BAE is subject to following up on US sanctions. Thereby, if you would like to go with source of components/systems and the sanctions vulnerability, then it is identical for:

EF = SH = F-16 = Gripen

From sanctions regime pov, only two stand distinctly apart:
Rafale and Mig-35

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 01 Feb 2011 21:23

Viv S wrote:And while Italy and Spain have been wishy washy about it, the bulk of the RAF and Luftwaffe inventories will comprise of the EF by 2015 and they are both very much committed to a good upgrade program.


if they were so committed, why was there no actual decision about an upgrade program till this year?

their own behavior condemns them

and in case you haven't noticed, the UK is trying to weasel out of the EF program as fast as it can. It had to be dragged kicking and screaming into T3A and it now planning to scrap all it's early EFs. If they're your example of an EF 'leader', well then . . . :D

Viv S wrote:But the F-18E/F isn't at the high end of its inventory.


It is for the USN.

Viv S wrote:Been technically superior can only go so far, to compensate for the fact that the Captor-E will be larger more powerful than AN/APG-79.


unknown and unknowable at this point, not to mention the SH's radar will evolve too

not to mention just getting the physical device is the easy part. The code to actually take advantage is the tough part.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10018
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby sum » 01 Feb 2011 21:28

SriSri wrote:^^ Not sure.. there is a PTI input that MiG 35's won't be there.. There isn't enough clarity, waiting for a direct response from MiG.


Russian MiG-35 to skip Bangalore airshow

The Russian MiG-35, one of the six fighter planes competing with American and European rivals for a $10.2 billion (Rs 45,900 crore) Indian Air Force contract, will not be putting in an appearance at Aero India-2011 in Bangalore next week. Befuddled by the move, the defence ministry is making
last-ditch efforts to get the Russians onboard.
RK Singh, secretary (defence production), said on Tuesday, “We don’t know why the MiG-35 is not coming. We want them to participate and have asked our embassy in Moscow to take up the matter.” Russia, however, is among the 45 official delegations expected.

The biennial airshow, to be held from February 9-13, offers international exhibitors a prestigious platform to showcase newest aerospace equipment and technology. More than 675 exhibitors from 60 countries will attend the eighth edition of the airshow, compared to 592 exhibitors from 25 countries in 2009. The exhibitors include 380 Indian firms compared to 303 two years back.

China, Pakistan and Iran have not been invited. Beijing turned down an invite in 2009. Singh said participating countries were short-listed by the ministry of external affairs. Chinese journalists have also been kept out. The US presence will be the biggest with 250 official delegations.

kmc_chacko
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 10:10
Location: Shivamogga, Karnataka

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby kmc_chacko » 01 Feb 2011 21:39

IAF better think of swaping existing Mig-29s to 126 Mig-35s and Mirages replaced by 126 rafales all problems are solved we will have modern fighters and upgrading cost will be saved and can be invested for Tejas Mk2

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Lalmohan » 01 Feb 2011 21:45

the reason UK and germany are dragging their heels over EF is because they dont have enough in the defence budget to pay for boots on teh ground in afghanistan AND aircraft that are designed to fight Russians - who they are unlikely to be fighting for teh next few decades
besides, they have large banks and poor european cousins to bail out for the next few years...

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby chackojoseph » 01 Feb 2011 22:03

sum wrote:China, Pakistan and Iran have not been invited. Beijing turned down an invite in 2009. Singh said participating countries were short-listed by the ministry of external affairs. Chinese journalists have also been kept out. The US presence will be the biggest with 250 official delegations.


There goes the reverse engineer and the beneficiaries.

IIRC, in 2005, rep from one of know aviation mag from India was so animated "hey the chinese general is coming and you "must" give him good coverage as chinese had given good coverage on Indian generals visit to their airshow.. blah blah blah..." I told him, "wait till he sees everything , reverse engineers everything and lob it at us." He told me "they are not the enemies, its US, you will see it in coming years." I said "Yawn!"

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Drishyaman » 01 Feb 2011 22:14

Avid wrote:
Also, BAE is subject to following up on US sanctions. Thereby, if you would like to go with source of components/systems and the sanctions vulnerability, then it is identical for:

EF = SH = F-16 = Gripen

From sanctions regime pov, only two stand distinctly apart:
Rafale and Mig-35

This actually makes more sense.
Rafale has the Technology advantage and probably if they win the MMRCA deal, they might share something more i.e. without hesitation in the Kaveri-Snecma deal.

On the other Mig - 35, can will have commonality with Mig - 29 and Mig - 29K and cost of establishing manufacturing base for Mig - 35 in India will be less. Mig - 35 has the thrust vectoring engine advantage apart from the cost advantage.
Also, why don't make a deal like Su - 30 MKI deal ? A Mig - 35 MKI, where we get the best of Russian, Israelly, French or Indian Technology. It will be best of all world some what like the Su - 30 MKI is better then the original Su - 30.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Henrik » 01 Feb 2011 22:29

B_Ambuj wrote:
Henrik wrote:You really have an issue with the Gripen don't you?

Yes, I am not a Grippen FAN. Grippen has so many vendors what if at some point of time Unkil buys out any of the vendor. We will end up hunting for parts. Unkil had brought out aircaft related companies earlier also. :)

Henrik wrote:Are you some Rafale salesman perhaps?

No, I am a common Indian man. Do I need to show you my passport or my birth certificate ? :-o

Henrik wrote:Why would the Gripen crash in the hands of indian pilots?

So you have already assumed India is buying Grippen. How ? :rotfl:

Henrik wrote:What do you know about the technology transfer?

Is that another assumption of yours ? :mrgreen:

Henrik wrote:Have you read all the documents from all the vendors?

No, I don’t have the time, mostly the ones from Sweden. :rotfl:

Henrik wrote:You must have since you seem to have extensive knowledge on the issue.

No, I am here to learn, why don’t you teach me something about the Grippen, like what all things we will gain in terms of technology buying the Grippen ? :mrgreen:

Henrik wrote:And by the way, that price is way to high.

You used the word “price” that proves you are the vendor and I used the word “cost” that proves I am an Indian (belong to the community of customer ).

Wickberg wrote:Just don´t bother replaying to idiots. The common bharat reader is smarter then that. It´s just that simple....

I am probably not as good in abusing as the Swedes. So, I think I will loose out to you here. I would rather use logic to win a debate. Would you prefer to stick to logic rather than abuses ? :mrgreen:

Oh my god, why even bother... :shock:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby SaiK » 02 Feb 2011 01:01

The European planes may be 20 years behind the khans in terms of Avionics and NCW, but most of these advancements are not for sale. So, one is comparing Eu fighters with say SH, please consider this angle. For example if Euro fighters are allowing to partner with say EADS, the 120 million a pop, as a partner means x% profit divided by all partners. India's share of profit must be reduced in the offer. So, they have to throw open their balance sheet, and Indian offsets could include that profit margin.

I have not heard anyone else sharing profits other than EADS and Migs here in this race. BTW, there is no point asking for 29->Mig35s. DRDO has plans to upgrade 29s avionics, engines (kaveri) in the future, and enhanced AESA-MMR that is being built for LCA/amca. So no worries about Migs. They are covered in the pak-fa deal.

So, the 120 million EF should be considered like 100 million or less considering the profit sharing aspect, and joint ownership. In addition to ToT and other aspects.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 02 Feb 2011 01:05

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Viv S wrote:Unfortunately, the SH's advantage at avionics is marginal at best, and the same argument doesn't hold.


Not true, the SH's avionics are top-notch. It is already 10 years ahead of the EF and the USN has committed to funding upgrades for the next 25 years at least.


Boeing isn't a marketing a futuristic variant of the SH to the IAF. What they have on offer is 5 years old, due to be ten years old by the time domestic manufacture begins. Also, I specifically mentioned the fact that the IAF's aircraft will through just about 2 upgrade cycles. So even if the SH's avionics are constantly a few years ahead of the EF, it wouldn't make any real difference to the IAF's capability.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 02 Feb 2011 01:40

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Viv S wrote:And while Italy and Spain have been wishy washy about it, the bulk of the RAF and Luftwaffe inventories will comprise of the EF by 2015 and they are both very much committed to a good upgrade program.


if they were so committed, why was there no actual decision about an upgrade program till this year?

their own behavior condemns them


The MRCA contract came out six years back. I could repeat the same question and ask why no actual decision was taken till this year.

and in case you haven't noticed, the UK is trying to weasel out of the EF program as fast as it can. It had to be dragged kicking and screaming into T3A and it now planning to scrap all it's early EFs. If they're your example of an EF 'leader', well then . . . :D


Weasel out of the EF program and into ... ? Unless they plan to decommission the RAF altogether, they have to be committed to the EF, which will comprise the bulk of its strength in a few years time, when the Tornados start retiring.

Also cutting of the orders doesn't imply that upgrades will be sacrificed and that's amply borne out by the F-22 program. Despite numbers being cut from 750 to 350 to 187 with the entire production line due to be mothballed, regular upgrades are still a priority.

Viv S wrote:But the F-18E/F isn't at the high end of its inventory.


It is for the USN.


Not once the F-35C enters service.

unknown and unknowable at this point, not to mention the SH's radar will evolve too


The size limitation still persists. Until the F-22's AN/APG-77 entered service, the most powerful fighter radar was the NIIP N011M Bars, a Russian product, and primarily because of its massive size. Its a pity the F-15SE isn't a participant in the MRCA competition.

not to mention just getting the physical device is the easy part. The code to actually take advantage is the tough part.


I don't think getting the physical device can be described as the 'easy part'. And with regard to the software, the Euroradar folks will take less time to get there (pioneers always have it the hardest).

And fortunately a software upgrade is easy to implement, unlike a hardware upgrade which will only take place a couple times in the aircraft's lifetime.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 02 Feb 2011 03:48

Viv S wrote:Boeing isn't a marketing a futuristic variant of the SH to the IAF. What they have on offer is 5 years old, due to be ten years old by the time domestic manufacture begins.


Again not true. The 'international variant' on offer includes additional goodies like the EPE engine, integrated IRST and conformal tanks.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 02 Feb 2011 04:02

Viv S wrote:The MRCA contract came out six years back. I could repeat the same question and ask why no actual decision was taken till this year.


That's a very good question. If they've known for 6 years that it would need AESA to compete and they STILL drag their feet, well I think that says everything you need to know about their willingness to fund upgrades when a 126 plane order isn't on the line.

Viv S wrote:
and in case you haven't noticed, the UK is trying to weasel out of the EF program as fast as it can. It had to be dragged kicking and screaming into T3A and it now planning to scrap all it's early EFs. If they're your example of an EF 'leader', well then . . . :D


Weasel out of the EF program and into ... ?


Nothing. They're broke and are dramatically scaling back their forces. Which is the point. Don't look to them to be leading a new upgrade efforts.

Viv S wrote:Unless they plan to decommission the RAF altogether, they have to be committed to the EF, which will comprise the bulk of its strength in a few years time, when the Tornados start retiring.


The only 'committment' they're going to demonstrate is not scrapping the planes they just bought. Beyond that . . .

Viv S wrote:Also cutting of the orders doesn't imply that upgrades will be sacrificed and that's amply borne out by the F-22 program.


Different situation. Gates wanted to kill F-22 to bolster the F-35 program by leaving no alternatives. Funding per se wasn't the problem. The UK on the other hand is broke and simply doesn't have any money to do anything except fly a few token training missions with its shiny new jets.

>>> But the F-18E/F isn't at the high end of its inventory.
>> It is for the USN.
> Not once the F-35C enters service.

And? No plane remains at the high end forever.

Your argument was that the SH is currently behind (or at least not ahead of) the EF because it's not at the 'high end'. This is false.

Viv S wrote:
unknown and unknowable at this point, not to mention the SH's radar will evolve too


The size limitation still persists.


Um, how much size difference is there between the nose of the SH and EF? The SH is a big plane, we're not talking the F-16 here.

Viv S wrote:
not to mention just getting the physical device is the easy part. The code to actually take advantage is the tough part.


I don't think getting the physical device can be described as the 'easy part'.


That's because you don't understand modern radar.

Viv S wrote:And with regard to the software, the Euroradar folks will take less time to get there (pioneers always have it the hardest).


We'll see, but for now I shall categorize this as more wishful thinking ;)

Viv S wrote:And fortunately a software upgrade is easy to implement, unlike a hardware upgrade which will only take place a couple times in the aircraft's lifetime.


It's easy to INSTALL, but never confuse that with easy to CREATE.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 02 Feb 2011 04:20

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Viv S wrote:Boeing isn't a marketing a futuristic variant of the SH to the IAF. What they have on offer is 5 years old, due to be ten years old by the time domestic manufacture begins.


Again not true. The 'international variant' on offer includes additional goodies like the EPE engine, integrated IRST and conformal tanks.


Only, the IRST comes under the category of avionics and again... its not something that's futuristic or even ahead of the pack.
Last edited by Viv S on 02 Feb 2011 05:35, edited 2 times in total.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 02 Feb 2011 05:34

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Viv S wrote:The MRCA contract came out six years back. I could repeat the same question and ask why no actual decision was taken till this year.


That's a very good question. If they've known for 6 years that it would need AESA to compete and they STILL drag their feet, well I think that says everything you need to know about their willingness to fund upgrades when a 126 plane order isn't on the line.


Or maybe the AESA was going to happen in any case. When the Tranche 3 was sanctioned, the AESA was ordered as well. In addition, 'they' will include India and the IAF isn't going to be dependant on their goodwill to chart out upgrades.

Nothing. They're broke and are dramatically scaling back their forces. Which is the point. Don't look to them to be leading a new upgrade efforts.


Umm... things aren't quite that rosy in the US either. Its going through a second spending cycle to spur the economy but it has to end at some stage. Public debt has increased to over 96% of the GDP and defence spending was a whopping 4.7% of the GDP for 2010. I'm just as optimistic (or pessimistic) about the collective fortunes of the UK and Germany as I am about the US.

The only 'committment' they're going to demonstrate is not scrapping the planes they just bought. Beyond that . . .


That's very subjective statement you're making. Plenty of contempt expressed but no real illuminating facts.

Viv S wrote:Also cutting of the orders doesn't imply that upgrades will be sacrificed and that's amply borne out by the F-22 program.

Different situation. Gates wanted to kill F-22 to bolster the F-35 program by leaving no alternatives. Funding per se wasn't the problem. The UK on the other hand is broke and simply doesn't have any money to do anything except fly a few token training missions with its shiny new jets.



Hardly a different situation. If the money was flowing in abundance, why not have heaps of both the F-22 and F-35? It was always about spending priorities.

Just because the UK isn't interested in buying more aircraft than its contractually obligated to, doesn't mean the aircraft is due to be scrapped or upgrades are being cut as well. They still have more units on order than Germany, but no one's claiming the Germans are interested in scrapping it.

Fact is UK's military spending was unsustainable (just as US' today) as well as poorly prioritized, and is now shifting more rational levels. India's involvement in the EF will exceed Spain and Italy and maybe even equal Germany's. Between them a very decent upgrade program can be charted.

And? No plane remains at the high end forever.

Your argument was that the SH is currently behind (or at least not ahead of) the EF because it's not at the 'high end'. This is false.


My point was the SH's importance within the USN will wane with time, and its very optimistic to expect its avionics fit to remain far ahead of the rest.

Um, how much size difference is there between the nose of the SH and EF? The SH is a big plane, we're not talking the F-16 here.


Well the AN/APG-79 is believed to field around 1100 t/r modules (not a lot higher than the APG-80's 1000) compared to the Captor-E which will come with about 1425. The detection range would be only somewhat higher but with much greater degree of versatility available. And the steerable antenna will impart a greater field of view.

That's because you don't understand modern radar.


Please explain modern radar to me.

We'll see, but for now I shall categorize this as more wishful thinking

It's easy to INSTALL, but never confuse that with easy to CREATE.


Maintaining a technological lead always costs a premium and catching up is usually easier than staying ahead. And that applies to all industries not just military aviation.

Also, there is a ceiling to what can achieved with newer software modes on a radar. Eventually, the Euroradar will catch up. And then it'll require a hardware upgrade like employing GaN modules to gain a significant edge. Unfortunately, while the IAF's aircraft can get a quick software upgrade, replacing the radar isn't going to be an option until the aircraft has seen 10-15 years of service. Point being the SH will be delivered to the IAF with the same avionics as it had in 2007 (plus IRST), and any big stride in R&D in the US isn't going to get implemented until an MLU takes place.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 02 Feb 2011 06:22

Viv S wrote:Or maybe the AESA was going to happen in any case.


Except there is zero evidence to support such a position.

AESA was NOT guaranteed for EF until this year, and even at this point, it's going to be 10 years late at best.

One simply cannot deny that they have been VERY reluctant to actually commit to any sort of AESA plan.

Viv S wrote:When the Tranche 3 was sanctioned, the AESA was ordered as well.


Tranche 3A: July 2009
AESA: July 2010

Viv S wrote:In addition, 'they' will include India and the IAF isn't going to be dependant on their goodwill to chart out upgrades.


Which is exactly what I said. The only 'say' India has over EF upgrades is what it's willing to pay for itself.

Viv S wrote:Umm... things aren't quite that rosy in the US either.


Far rosier than the situation in the UK and Germany.

Even the 'cut' in defense budget is not a true cut, but a stoppage of growth.

UK is undergoing real and significant defense budget cuts.


Viv S wrote:
The only 'committment' they're going to demonstrate is not scrapping the planes they just bought. Beyond that . . .


That's very subjective statement you're making. Plenty of contempt expressed but no real illuminating facts.


fact: they're planning to retire their new C-130Js when the A400M arrives since they can't afford to operate both
fact: they're planning to mothball one of their CVFs as soon as it is delivered
fact: they're scrapping their entire Harrier fleet
fact: they're cancelling their order of F-35B and replacing it with a smaller order of F-35C
fact: they've scrapped their brand new $6 billion Nimrod MRA4 fleet before it even enters service
fact: they're cutting the Tornado fleet from 134 to 60
fact: they're planning to retire 55 Tranche 1 Eurofighters


Viv S wrote:Hardly a different situation. If the money was flowing in abundance, why not have heaps of both the F-22 and F-35? It was always about spending priorities.


The US military isn't not under the same monetary pressure that the UK military is. In fact, there is such a huge difference that to in any way equate the situation is just laughable.

Viv S wrote:Between them a very decent upgrade program can be charted.


The only upgrade program that can be charted is the one India is willing to foot the bill for.

Viv S wrote:My point was the SH's importance within the USN will wane with time, and its very optimistic to expect its avionics fit to remain far ahead of the rest.


Even after the full F-35C buy, the SH will still make up the majority of the USN fleet. It will remain critically important for decades to come.

Viv S wrote:Well the AN/APG-79 is believed to field around 1100 t/r modules (not a lot higher than the APG-80's 1000) compared to the Captor-E which will come with about 1425.


You can't equate size with number of modules as different modules are different size. It's even less rational to equate module count with capability unless both radars use the same modules, which is not the case here.

Viv S wrote:
That's because you don't understand modern radar.


Please explain modern radar to me.


AESA allows a quantum leap in capability, but only if the software takes advantage of it. Anyone can just replace a traditional radar antenna with an AESA array, but to truly take advantage of its capabilities requires a ton of effort. Now more work goes into the software to control the radar than in the actual physical radar design. Enabling features like simultaneous air and ground mode and putting SAR capability and jamming and anti-jamming capability becomes incredibly sophisticated and difficult.

Viv S wrote:Maintaining a technological lead always costs a premium and catching up is usually easier than staying ahead.


In war, the most expensive weapon is the one that's second best.

However, that doesn't apply so much to software as it does hardware. With hardware, often the difficulty is in knowing how something can be done or if it can be done at all. With software, the how usually isn't the question. It's simply a matter of actually doing it and doing it reliably and on time and on budget. I would compare it to the several failed efforts to rewrite the FAA's flight management system. There was no great secret of how to get it to work, but it was so complicated they still failed miserably.


Viv S wrote:Also, there is a ceiling to what can achieved with newer software modes on a radar. Eventually, the Euroradar will catch up.


And no one thinks that all fighter technology will remain static and thus allow the EF team to eventually 'catch up.'

They might catch up in one area, but by then they will have fallen behind in something else. It is INEVITABLE because they simply cannot afford to spend the money it takes to keep up.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Singha » 02 Feb 2011 08:57

if RAF is planning to retire 55 EF and if we go for EF maybe we can reduce the order and get these EF uprated to latest std at lesser cost? the airframes will be same I suppose but internal eqpt and sw will vary.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 02 Feb 2011 09:33

Absence of Mig-35 marks exit from race?

This top-of-the-line multi-role aircraft will not pitch itself against other competitors next week, marking its exit from the race. Sources in the ministry of defence said Russia's focus would be on major deals such as the aerial tanker aircraft for mid-air refuelling of IAF's fighters, heavy-lift helicopters and radars during the five-day airshow beginning February.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/bengalur ... l-show-449

And then there were 5.............

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby jai » 02 Feb 2011 10:24

[quote="GeorgeWelch"]AESA was NOT guaranteed for EF until this year, and even at this point, it's going to be 10 years late at best.

Which is exactly what I said. The only 'say' India has over EF upgrades is what it's willing to pay for itself.
[quote="Viv S"]


In the end its all about having the money to buy what you want. I Believe the EF is a good opportunity for India - in fact better than SU 30 MKI as the circumstances are similar - manufacturing countries need our investment and will give us the product we specify - AESA, 3 D TVC etc etc.

We are getting a chance to be a member country to this program and share the profits and technology. Now who will need more and more hi tech planes in the coming decades, has the money for it now and is willing to spend money ? Its the Chinese and us - and if we were to buy more EF, we share the profits - so our own procurement cost is reduced, and our investment can fund the required upgrades. We also want to kick start the local aviation industry, well, what better than to participate in what is a true hi tech program outside of the US. Once we have made a a significant investment in this program, it will not be easy to sanction us from it - specially as we will be able to exert our leadership and money to keep the program going. We are better off doing this program with Europe than with US as we do not want any sanctions. We already have a program with Russia (FGFA) and if we can do one with Europe imagine the tremendous leverage we get - with US...I am sure they will invite us for their next hi tech program if we leave them out this time and partner with EF !! This is how US works !

Its not new for a buyer to get higher technology than the host country - we got MKI even before the Russians did !!

All European nations are as wary of sanctions as we are and that's exactly why they all invested in this program in the first place. Once the economy recovers, you can be sure that even UK will come back to the EF very strongly. They may have ordered JSF but the humiliation of not getting the source codes for it despite being the most loyal ally for over a century certainly has not gone well with them. It would be wise to invest in EF right now. It may not have an active AESA right now, but will have one eventually, which will close the gap with the likes of SH. Once it has the AESA, it will be better than anything the Dragon has - which is what I would worry about - if we can bulk the IAF with it, we are quite set actually as we also have MKI's now, and the FGFA in the pipeline. It will also give us technology across the board with all suppliers of EF which can be a very good thing in terms of the AMCA project and would also place us in a better position to pressurize them to deny supplying the dragon and the TSPAF. Another great possibility than can arise is that the AMCA can become a next gen fighter program with the same member nations with India in the lead - positioned to complement / replace EF 30 - 40 years from now... :wink:

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Viv S » 02 Feb 2011 12:35

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Except there is zero evidence to support such a position.

AESA was NOT guaranteed for EF until this year, and even at this point, it's going to be 10 years late at best.

One simply cannot deny that they have been VERY reluctant to actually commit to any sort of AESA plan.

Tranche 3A: July 2009
AESA: July 2010


The Tranche 3 was always supposed to have an AESA. Italy and Spain did drag their feet over it, but it did get sanctioned without any additional export orders actually being placed.

Which is exactly what I said. The only 'say' India has over EF upgrades is what it's willing to pay for itself.


India's investment in upgrades (as well as workshare) will be proportional to its alloted share in EF Gmbh and no more. Unless all four countries are set against further upgrades, they ARE going to happen. And India will recover its sunk cost once the upgrades are implemented.

Far rosier than the situation in the UK and Germany.

Even the 'cut' in defense budget is not a true cut, but a stoppage of growth.

UK is undergoing real and significant defense budget cuts.


You're missing the point - the rosiness is due a second round of monetary injections by the Fed which is debt financed. The US economy isn't really in much better shape than the Germany or UK. A defence spending amounting to 4.7% of the GDP is NOT sustainable for a near-stagnant economy. Bottom-line is, cuts (real cuts not spending freezes) are inevitable.

If they were to leverage themselves further, the UK could still continue its current rate of defence spending and Germany could increase its share. But, they've both opted for a cautious approach instead of further deficit spending.

Viv S wrote:

fact: they're planning to retire their new C-130Js when the A400M arrives since they can't afford to operate both
fact: they're planning to mothball one of their CVFs as soon as it is delivered
fact: they're scrapping their entire Harrier fleet
fact: they're cancelling their order of F-35B and replacing it with a smaller order of F-35C
fact: they've scrapped their brand new $6 billion Nimrod MRA4 fleet before it even enters service
fact: they're cutting the Tornado fleet from 134 to 60
fact: they're planning to retire 55 Tranche 1 Eurofighters


The last two are still far from certain. But, that aside none of these cuts imply nor has been stated anywhere that upgrades to the EF will be scrapped.


The US military isn't not under the same monetary pressure that the UK military is. In fact, there is such a huge difference that to in any way equate the situation is just laughable.


You've ignored the point altogether. This wasn't a comparison. I was using the F-22 as example to prove that a shrinking of the original fleet size does NOT imply that upgrades have been or are to be compromised on. If 381 F-22's were on order today instead of 187, the aircraft would remain just as capable as it is today and no more (maybe even less).

Viv S wrote:My point was the SH's importance within the USN will wane with time, and its very optimistic to expect its avionics fit to remain far ahead of the rest.


Even after the full F-35C buy, the SH will still make up the majority of the USN fleet. It will remain critically important for decades to come.


The SH is of far more critical importance today. The Rafale will field an AESA by 2012, the Gripen and EF by 2014. In Asia its very much possible that the Sukhoi family, J-10B and Tejas Mk2 will be equipped with AESA radars as well. What upgrades are planned for the SH in that time frame to enable it to far outstrip the rest?

Viv S wrote:Well the AN/APG-79 is believed to field around 1100 t/r modules (not a lot higher than the APG-80's 1000) compared to the Captor-E which will come with about 1425.


You can't equate size with number of modules as different modules are different size. It's even less rational to equate module count with capability unless both radars use the same modules, which is not the case here.


I'll try to dig up the source - the peak power output of a Captor-E module is about 10W.

AESA allows a quantum leap in capability, but only if the software takes advantage of it. Anyone can just replace a traditional radar antenna with an AESA array, but to truly take advantage of its capabilities requires a ton of effort. Now more work goes into the software to control the radar than in the actual physical radar design. Enabling features like simultaneous air and ground mode and putting SAR capability and jamming and anti-jamming capability becomes incredibly sophisticated and difficult.


We're assuming that research on software modes hasn't been ongoing since the CAESAR began flight testing in 2007. Its jamming capability aside how does the APG-79 see-and-shoot the EF first? And how long do YOU reckon it'll be before the RBE-2 and Captor-E reach achieve their maximum software potential?

In war, the most expensive weapon is the one that's second best.


The best (that would be the F-22 and F-35) aren't competing for the MRCA contract. The EF is just the best among the rest.

However, that doesn't apply so much to software as it does hardware. With hardware, often the difficulty is in knowing how something can be done or if it can be done at all. With software, the how usually isn't the question. It's simply a matter of actually doing it and doing it reliably and on time and on budget. I would compare it to the several failed efforts to rewrite the FAA's flight management system. There was no great secret of how to get it to work, but it was so complicated they still failed miserably.


To sum up, the SH will field far superior avionics than the EF and Rafale because of better software on similar hardware?

And no one thinks that all fighter technology will remain static and thus allow the EF team to eventually 'catch up.'

They might catch up in one area, but by then they will have fallen behind in something else.


That's why I stressed on the fact that the technology to be delivered to the IAF will be essentially a decade old. And it will probably be ten years before any hardware upgrades can be carried out. If for example, the SH has a GaN based radar available in 2018, the Europeans will have one available by 2022. Without the gap making a lot of difference to an IAF MLU program beginning in say... 2024-25.

It is INEVITABLE because they simply cannot afford to spend the money it takes to keep up.


Individually yes. Collectively - I'm not sure I agree. Between them the consortium has a budget of over $150 billion, and that of the EU countries in excess of $400 billion, without any global bases, naval carrier battle groups, trans-national missile defences, Egypt-like authoritarian states, Israel-like democratic states etc. to expend money and resources supporting. And they are increasingly pooling their resources. The basic GaAs module technology for all European AESA radars came from the AMSAR program. That for the GaN radars will come from the Korrigan program. European defence spending is not sufficient to keep pace with the US across the board. They don't for example have any fifth generation fighters in development or production, but in key critical areas they can keep up. And keeping the EF upgraded is very important to regional AFs and will become even more so if and when India enters the consortium.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 252
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Wickberg » 02 Feb 2011 13:29

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tlCx_FTpgI

Specially 1:41 in the video. Shows some of the agility. When will we see the LCA do maneuvers like that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03uOXGny7sI

Just for awesomeness.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Boreas » 02 Feb 2011 13:32

B_Ambuj wrote:
Boreas wrote:But News is MiG-35 is not packing their bag to come to Aero India 2011.
If you think a little you can figure out why they are doing so. When everybody else is sending two aircraft each.

Boreas, you stand corrected ;)




Hindustan Times wrote:Russian MiG-35 to skip Bangalore airshow

The Russian MiG-35, one of the six fighter planes competing with American and European rivals for a $10.2 billion (Rs 45,900 crore) Indian Air Force contract, will not be putting in an appearance at Aero India-2011 in Bangalore next week. Befuddled by the move, the defence ministry is making last-ditch efforts to get the Russians onboard.
RK Singh, secretary (defence production), said on Tuesday, “We don’t know why the MiG-35 is not coming. We want them to participate and have asked our embassy in Moscow to take up the matter.” Russia, however, is among the 45 official delegations expected.

Deccan Chronicle wrote:Russian MiG-35 to skip biz deal, show?

Feb. 1: Is Russia backing out of the battle for Indian Air Force's $ 12 billion medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) contract? MiG-35, the Russian contender for IAF's cash-guzzling deal, will give Aero India 2011 a skip.

This top-of-the-line multi-role aircraft will not pitch itself against other competitors next week, marking its exit from the race. Sources in the ministry of defence said Russia's focus would be on major deals such as the aerial tanker aircraft for mid-air refuelling of IAF's fighters, heavy-lift helicopters and radars during the five-day airshow beginning


Dear Ambuj, My facts are not based on newspaper reports :)
However if you wait till time comes you can confirm everything i said, from news reports.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Boreas » 02 Feb 2011 13:39

kmc_chacko wrote:IAF better think of swaping existing Mig-29s to 126 Mig-35s and Mirages replaced by 126 rafales all problems are solved we will have modern fighters and upgrading cost will be saved and can be invested for Tejas Mk2


Although its not going to happen, but its good to see an innovative option.

However I wonder who will take our 29s and Mirages!

SriSri
BRFite
Posts: 545
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 15:25

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby SriSri » 02 Feb 2011 14:08

Has MoD convinced the Russians?

Contenders for Indian fighter deal to show in force at Aero India 2011
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20110202/162414414.html


All six participants of a tender to supply 126 light fighter jets to the Indian air force will showcase full flight displays at Aero India 2011 air show, the organizers said.
Six major aircraft makers — Lockheed and Boeing from the United States, Russia's MiG, France's Dassault, Sweden's Saab and the EADS consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian companies — are in contention to win the $11 billion tender.
Each company is expected to bring along at least two competing aircraft as well as competent teams and flight simulators for display.
Russia's contender, the MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, is an export version of the MiG-29M OVT fighter jet. It is a highly maneuverable air superiority fighter, which has already won high acclaim among aircraft industry and military experts.
The fighter is powered by RD-33 OVT thrust vectoring engines. The RD-33 OVT engines provide superior maneuverability and enhance the fighter's performance in close air engagements.
India is expected to make its choice in July this year.
Moscow earlier said if MiG-35 wins the tender, Russia is ready to transfer all key technology to India's Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. and provide assistance for the production of the aircraft in the country.
Aero India-2011, which will be held in the southern city of Bangalore on February 11-15, is most likely to attract the record number of leading manufacturers, vendors and suppliers from 63 countries.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Boreas » 02 Feb 2011 14:12

SriSri wrote:Has MoD convinced the Russians?

Contenders for Indian fighter deal to show in force at Aero India 2011
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20110202/162414414.html


All six participants of a tender to supply 126 light fighter jets to the Indian air force will showcase full flight displays at Aero India 2011 air show, the organizers said.
.
.
Aero India-2011, which will be held in the southern city of Bangalore on February 11-15, is most likely to attract the record number of leading manufacturers, vendors and suppliers from 63 countries.


Yup, convinved them that not to have any hopes for Mig-35 :mrgreen:
No Mig-35 in Aero India 2011.

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Samay » 02 Feb 2011 14:30

Kangress Inc. is bound to give orders to the american firms . There's no need exercising our brains ,We have no such voting rights to tell MoD to select the best one.

Lets hope we get f18 e/f usn/usaf standard and not something degraded ,
and lets hope HAL-boeing/lm jv(if any) gets license to manufacture the 108 (+74 ).

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Henrik » 02 Feb 2011 17:01

Wickberg wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tlCx_FTpgI

Specially 1:41 in the video. Shows some of the agility. When will we see the LCA do maneuvers like that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03uOXGny7sI

Just for awesomeness.

Don't know who made it, but it has some great footage that apparently are from a swedish television documentary about Gripen fighter pilots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmJxI7VYOEg

Edit: Some footage with Gripen firing the Meteor at 2:56.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby chackojoseph » 02 Feb 2011 19:16

The French, the Russians and Now Americans are strategically important for us. Grippen is a me too product which has foreign parts. Sweden has always been anti-India and hardly matters. Its best to forgo Grippen even if it comes planted in gold.

(category 5 storm predicted)

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby RKumar » 02 Feb 2011 19:25

Singha wrote:if RAF is planning to retire 55 EF and if we go for EF maybe we can reduce the order and get these EF uprated to latest std at lesser cost? the airframes will be same I suppose but internal eqpt and sw will vary.


Viv S wrote:ust because the UK isn't interested in buying more aircraft than its contractually obligated to, doesn't mean the aircraft is due to be scrapped or upgrades are being cut as well. They still have more units on order than Germany, but no one's claiming the Germans are interested in scrapping it.


Based on my chaiwala ... EU is going with unmanned drones ... no more manned fighter jets. So everyone is trying to suck last penny by exporting its stuff.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 02 Feb 2011 19:32

Viv S wrote:The Tranche 3 was always supposed to have an AESA. Italy and Spain did drag their feet over it


But I thought you said the UK and Germany wanted it? So if they wanted it, what's the holdup with Italy and Spain? Do you have to have unanimous consent before upgrades go through?

Viv S wrote:but it did get sanctioned without any additional export orders actually being placed.


Right, because it was required to get additional export orders in the first place. Rest assured if AESA wasn't important for the MRCA competition, the EF would still be in AESA limbo.

Viv S wrote:India's investment in upgrades (as well as workshare) will be proportional to its alloted share in EF Gmbh and no more.


So you're saying India's need for upgrades can be held hostage when Italy and Spain drag their feet in the future?

You can't force other countries to spend money, so if you're only going to do upgrades where the other member countries fund their 'fair share', you're going to be waiting a long, long time

Viv S wrote:Unless all four countries are set against further upgrades, they ARE going to happen.


Only if India funds it all.

Viv S wrote:And India will recover its sunk cost once the upgrades are implemented.


You assume the other countries will buy the upgrades you fund. I wouldn't assume any such thing.

Viv S wrote:You're missing the point - the rosiness is due a second round of monetary injections by the Fed which is debt financed. The US economy isn't really in much better shape than the Germany or UK.


The real point is the US has a much stronger commitment to defense than the UK or Germany.

Viv S wrote:A defence spending amounting to 4.7% of the GDP is NOT sustainable for a near-stagnant economy.


Sure it is, it's just a matter of priorities.

Viv S wrote:The last two are still far from certain. But, that aside none of these cuts imply nor has been stated anywhere that upgrades to the EF will be scrapped.


WHAT UPGRADES?

It's hard to scrap updates you were never planning on doing in the first place . . .


Viv S wrote:
The US military isn't not under the same monetary pressure that the UK military is. In fact, there is such a huge difference that to in any way equate the situation is just laughable.


You've ignored the point altogether. This wasn't a comparison. I was using the F-22 as example to prove that a shrinking of the original fleet size does NOT imply that upgrades have been or are to be compromised on.


A shrinking fleet by itself no, you have to look at the full picture.

The US just ordered over a 100 new SHs, they're about to award a contract (hopefully) for 179 new tankers, they just dual sourced an award for the LCS, they're starting an initiative for a new bomber. There is money to go around for things that need it

In the UK everything is being gutted, there is no money period.

If you can't see the difference, I'm sorry, I just can't help you.

Viv S wrote:The SH is of far more critical importance today. The Rafale will field an AESA by 2012, the Gripen and EF by 2014. In Asia its very much possible that the Sukhoi family, J-10B and Tejas Mk2 will be equipped with AESA radars as well. What upgrades are planned for the SH in that time frame to enable it to far outstrip the rest?


So your position is that once everyone has AESA that all development on fighters will cease and all planes will be on equal footing? Sorry I don't buy that. I don't know what the future holds, but I do know that it will be advanced beyond today.


Viv S wrote:We're assuming that research on software modes hasn't been ongoing since the CAESAR began flight testing in 2007.


I'm assuming nothing beyond the fact that even they recognize it won't be ready for at least another 4 years.

Viv S wrote:And how long do YOU reckon it'll be before the RBE-2 and Captor-E reach achieve their maximum software potential?


I'm not sure there is such a thing. If Microsoft has taught us anything, it's that there are always new features to add :)

Viv S wrote:The best (that would be the F-22 and F-35) aren't competing for the MRCA contract. The EF is just the best among the rest.


Proof?

Viv S wrote:To sum up, the SH will field far superior avionics than the EF and Rafale because of better software on similar hardware?


That's a big part of it, but certainly not all.

Viv S wrote:That's why I stressed on the fact that the technology to be delivered to the IAF will be essentially a decade old. And it will probably be ten years before any hardware upgrades can be carried out. If for example, the SH has a GaN based radar available in 2018, the Europeans will have one available by 2022. Without the gap making a lot of difference to an IAF MLU program beginning in say... 2024-25.


You're just looking at one component. Maybe they will catch up in one area, maybe not, but they will always be behind in something, so whenever your hypothetical MLU program happens, the SH will still have the edge.

Viv S wrote:
It is INEVITABLE because they simply cannot afford to spend the money it takes to keep up.


Individually yes. Collectively - I'm not sure I agree.


I am. The US has the will to spend on the military and Europe doesn't.

Viv S wrote:And keeping the EF upgraded is very important to regional AFs


But it's not. They don't forsee any threats and thus there is no pressing need to keep them upgraded.


Interesting little article about the Wedgetail

It discusses the difficulties getting it operational, and while there were hardware issues, the majority of time, by far, was devoted to software.

A second, longer-lasting problem was refining the software for the baseline Wedgetail missions and capabilities that were constantly evolving as electronically scanned array radar technology matured.

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Drishyaman » 02 Feb 2011 20:17

Wickberg wrote:When will we see the LCA do maneuvers like that?


After FOC and you will much better things when Tejas MK - II will be arround. :)
By the way, when can we see a swedish heart ( a swedish engine ) in Grippen ? Any thing on paper ? :rotfl:

Some amazing Grippen Videos :mrgreen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVr6QJzW094

What a Grippen video !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkgShfxTzmo

Some nice manuvers by Grippen at 2.23

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP-QMmzGL5I

Wow !! what a landing by Grippen at 0.15

When will Grippen learn how to fly or land safely ? :mrgreen:

Never saw any such Videos on Tejas ever :rotfl:

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 252
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Wickberg » 02 Feb 2011 20:31

Henrik wrote:
Wickberg wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tlCx_FTpgI

Specially 1:41 in the video. Shows some of the agility. When will we see the LCA do maneuvers like that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03uOXGny7sI

Just for awesomeness.

Don't know who made it, but it has some great footage that apparently are from a swedish television documentary about Gripen fighter pilots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmJxI7VYOEg

Edit: Some footage with Gripen firing the Meteor at 2:56.


Yeah, but I´m old and prefer the electric guitar in front of some "euro pop trash". Some good old Black Sabbath, Dio o or what ever will do it for me. And as I said, ignore responding to retards cause....well, they are retards ((B Ambij))


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests