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.
nishu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 19:49

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby nishu » 28 Oct 2010 20:40

rohitvats wrote:
nishu wrote:what do the symbols on the flags represent in this image
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/10/ia ... -what.html


Insignias of various Air Commands. The first on the left is Western Air Command.




what is the flag from right side second ?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4510
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Cain Marko » 29 Oct 2010 00:20

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Re. its capability, there is little to doubt that it'll meet IAF needs quite well.


Except for the whole part about it being ready anytime soon.


That is beside the point that I was making. However, taking the bait, I'd argue that this is hardly an issue -
First the bird as it currently stands is complete. The Zhuk A 680 TRM version has finished development. Its performance is decent. All other components are pretty much in service via the MiG-29K.

Second, it is similar to the Gripen in a sense. So if they can settle for the NG, the 35 should be alright.

Third, none of the candidates are completely ready - I doubt the IAF is just going to take them in the way they currently exist. It is very likely that some components would be different for a variety of reasons. The US birds are particularly prone to modification requirements thanks largely due to issues with CISMOA (the 130s are a good example). Is the APG-79 ready (approved by Congress and GOTUS) for sale to the IAF with the requised TOT? If not, what alternatives do they propose?

To some degree, all the contenders leave questions unanswered. And then there is the example of the MKI. What state was the MKI in when the first deal was inked (1996)? It was accepted in batchwise improvements. The base configuration for the MiG-35 could be easily regarded as acceptable considering that all components are ready - as of today there is nobody in the neighborhood that sports such technology. And the price will definitely be closest to India's liking.

The only thing stopping this deal is the predominant position of Russki hardware in IAF inventory, something that the IAF wants to understandably get away from. I doubt that it is for any other reason that the IAF is reluctant to buy this bird. All other issues re. the 35 such as its range/payload handicap or smoky engines or lack of sensor fusion and supply chain difficulties have been addressed.

CM.

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1257
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Nihat » 29 Oct 2010 01:10

if russia itself has not shown any great intrest in the 35. Then i fail to see the point of us being the first user of a phoren plane.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7919
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby nachiket » 29 Oct 2010 01:11

Nihat wrote:if russia itself has not shown any great intrest in the 35. Then i fail to see the point of us being the first user of a phoren plane.

They don't use the Su-30MKI either.

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1257
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Nihat » 29 Oct 2010 01:24

thats because they cant use the MKI , it involves israeli and the french components which RuAFmight have a problem with.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4510
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Cain Marko » 29 Oct 2010 01:27

For that matter, how much interest is the US showing in the F-16blk60?

Nihat wrote:thats because they cant use the MKI , it involves israeli and the french components which RuAFmight have a problem with.


They are showing a strong interest in the MiG-29K - it does use some israeli/french components including the HMS. Ditto with the Mistral class ship and Israeli UAVs. The could always replace such components if they really wanted

Anyway, irrespective of why the VVS won't/will use certain hardware, it has little bearing on what India does as seen from the MKI.

CM.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 29 Oct 2010 01:50

Cain Marko wrote:First the bird as it currently stands is complete.


Physically perhaps, but that's the easy part.

The F-35 was physically complete and all major components were ready a couple years ago.

Getting everything to work together is the hard part.

Cain Marko wrote:Second, it is similar to the Gripen in a sense. So if they can settle for the NG, the 35 should be alright.


I don't think either will be ready in an acceptable timeframe.

Cain Marko wrote:Third, none of the candidates are completely ready


Do not confuse minor tweaks with completely redoing a plane's avionics.

Cain Marko wrote:For that matter, how much interest is the US showing in the F-16blk60?


Which is why I recommend the SH :D

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54689
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby ramana » 29 Oct 2010 02:12

So many worry warts comments in Aroor's blog. How can they be so clueless when the IAF chief is saying he doesnt want the CISMOA as there is no plan of joint operations with the US.And how sensational of Aroor(oaf) to make big show of this.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4510
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Cain Marko » 29 Oct 2010 02:18

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:First the bird as it currently stands is complete.


Physically perhaps, but that's the easy part.

The F-35 was physically complete and all major components were ready a couple years ago.

Getting everything to work together is the hard part. ....Do not confuse minor tweaks with completely redoing a plane's avionics.


What exactly do they have to "get together" to make it work? The avionics are all ready and working - including the FBW, the Mil std 1553 bus integration, and the sensor fusion. It shares complete commonality with the MiG-29K, which has been inducted by the IN. The only difference in terms of the airframe is in the tailhook, which can be/was dropped. The other difference is in the radar, which is based on the same backend, and has finished testing. The last difference iirc, is in the active Italian jammer, which too has been incorporated for over 3 years now. What more does it require for the a/c to be ready?

I don't think either will be ready in an acceptable timeframe.

Apparently, the IAF thinks differently.

Which is why I recommend the SH :D

Ya, well some things will never change! Don't ever go to George if you have a problem, be it cancer, relationships, car trouble or whatever, it is likely you will be offered the only one solution readily available - Super Hornet. :P

CM

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby GeorgeWelch » 29 Oct 2010 02:34

Cain Marko wrote:It shares complete commonality with the MiG-29K


Didn't the MiG-35 sales pitch used to be how it was so much more advanced than the K and how it was practically a brand new plane?

:P

Cain Marko wrote:Ya, well some things will never change! Don't ever go to George if you have a problem, be it cancer, relationships, car trouble or whatever, it is likely you will be offered the only one solution readily available - Super Hornet. :P


Nah, if you have car trouble you obviously need a C-17 to get it to the shop.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4510
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Cain Marko » 29 Oct 2010 02:58

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:It shares complete commonality with the MiG-29K


Didn't the MiG-35 sales pitch used to be how it was so much more advanced than the K and how it was practically a brand new plane?

:P


No, actually MiG is pretty smart about it, ya the 35 is more advanced (thanks to the AESA in p'cular 4++ gen they call it ), however, the thing they emphasize the most is the 90%+ commonality with the K - "unified family" and all.

Cain Marko wrote:Ya, well some things will never change! Don't ever go to George if you have a problem, be it cancer, relationships, car trouble or whatever, it is likely you will be offered the only one solution readily available - Super Hornet. :P


Nah, if you have car trouble you obviously need a C-17 to get it to the shop.[/quote]

CM

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 29 Oct 2010 03:47

If India picks Eurofighter, it will create thousands of jobs here
Aman Malik - LiveMint

Interview..

Q: By when do you see a shortlist coming, if at all? By when do you see the final MMRCA deal being signed?

Gerwert: What we know is that the flight evaluation is over and that the Indian Air Force (IAF) has submitted the report to the ministry of defence. The offset offers are being discussed. I expect the commercial envelopes to be opened soon, in the next few weeks or months.

Q There is talk of cuts to defence programmes in Europe. Italy reduced its order of Eurofighter jets by 25 and several European countries grounded their fleet, citing security concerns. Does this affect how the aircraft is perceived?

Casolini: Officially, there is no document that suggests that Italy has reduced its order for the Eurofighter. We have a total commitment of 620 aircraft, under the so-called four-nation “umbrella contract”, and we’re sticking to that till someone officially comes to us and tells us they don’t have the money and so have to reduce or cancel the contract. As for your other question, the fleet was grounded in all the countries due to a problem related to the ejection system, which was solved within a week.

Boardman: The UK has had to make some tough decisions in the current economic climate, but it’s chosen to retire its older aircraft, the Harrier, and has reaffirmed its investment commitment into Eurofighter.

QYou have reportedly said that if you win the MMRCA contract, you will move avionics operations and a few thousand jobs from Europe to India. In the light of the above situation, isn’t that a bit too far fetched?

Gerwert: We already have an EADS engineering centre in Bangalore, which was started three years ago for Airbus. In the beginning of this year, we have also opened our military engineering centre in Bangalore. We have hired 20 engineers there, but our intention is to ramp up our strength to 250-300 people by 2012. This programme is independent from the Eurofighter. So, for the moment, we are not talking of moving thousands of jobs to India. If, however, the Eurofighter is selected, then we would be contractually bound to effect a 60% technology transfer. So, if India decides for the Eurofighter, the technology transfer clause would mean that we would create thousands of jobs in India.

Q: There have, however, been several cost over-runs in the Eurofighter programme. What do you have to say about that?

Boardman: You can take up any big defence programme in the world, and they have all had cost over-runs at some point or the other. In Europe, national audits have found that almost all our programmes have met their targets. The contractors in Europe will tell you that we deliver within the set cost parameters.

Gerwert: On the production contract for the Eurofighter, we do not have any cost over-runs. We signed the contract in 1998, and we have exactly been within our cost parameters.


He also added that he doesn't expect the failure of the EJ200 to win the LCA contract to affect EF's bid..or so he hopes!

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 29 Oct 2010 03:53

X-post

Defence Secretary Interacts with IAF Commanders
Ministry of Defence: Press release

The ongoing Air Force Commanders Conference entered into its penultimate day. Discussions on various operational philosophies and IAF’s roadmap for Maritime Air Operations were discussed during the day. Commanders from the IAF’s Operational Commands presented their operational plans and discussions on various new concepts took place.

Among the other highlights of today’s meeting included an interaction with MoD officials led by Defence Secretary Shri Pradeep Kumar. The Air Chief and Defence Secretary emphasised the necessity to have greater synergy between MoD and the IAF HQ to achieve IAF’s transformational plan within the laid down time frames. Critical issues related to acquisition, infrastructural development and budget support were discussed during the interaction.

The IAF is poised for a large scale transformation in the years ahead. Significant among them will be the acquisition of MMRCA, which will address IAF’s long-outstanding demand of replenishing its combat aircraft inventory. Also in the pipeline are new jet trainers, combat helicopters, various missile systems and radars which will significantly enhance the strategic capabilities of the IAF.
The concluding day will have discussions on various maintenance and HR issues.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 29 Oct 2010 11:38

Shiv Aroor reports..

EF boasts of being in the same league as the F-22

Image

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 29 Oct 2010 11:39

^^^ Add on..

Image

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby vic » 29 Oct 2010 12:30

If we compare the Saudi Contract for EFs and Australian contracts for F-18s, My guess is that F-18 will have lifecycle and unit cost which is just 40% of EF. Europeans will have to do very heavy lifting in case they want to qulaify on the basis of L1

Sandeep_ghosh
BRFite
Posts: 113
Joined: 27 Oct 2010 07:19
Location: Unkel Sam's pot garden

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Sandeep_ghosh » 29 Oct 2010 12:41

what about R77 RVV sd and RVV MD being offered with the mig 35... does that bring any advantage? is eurofighter or teen series offering any substantial BVR missile, Is there any scope for integration of Astra with Teen series, Rafale or the typhoon?
Is Data link with existing MKI's possible? I am not aware of the following. Are these concerns legitimate ?

From internet sources i hear that R77 RVV MD out-ranges AIM 120 D and MBDA MICA.


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Austin » 29 Oct 2010 12:57



F-16IN is a good fighter and its strike capability in phenomenal , it may not be a great dog fighter but its a single engine fighter with lower operating cost and Lockmart would offer the most TOT for this.

I think if we opt for F-16IN with most TOT and good offset its not a bad deal. There is the long israel experience with F-16 that would be helpful.

I would be happy if we opt for any one between Gripen-IN,F-16IN and Mig-35.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Neshant » 29 Oct 2010 13:01

If India picks Eurofighter, it will create thousands of jobs here


... turning screw drivers.

face it, nothing is going to be gained purchasing a fighter researched & developed overseas relative to the amount paid for it.

At the end of the day, the 'technology transfer' is a load of bunk as the machines to build the plane and its entire assembly are just shipped over for screw driver level assembly. There's no way to download the brains of the foreign scientists who were involved in the R&D of the plane.

That being the case, negotiate for the lowest possible lifecycle cost of the plane rather than falling for the technology transfer gimmick.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Henrik » 29 Oct 2010 13:06

Austin wrote:


F-16IN is a good fighter and its strike capability in phenomenal , it may not be a great dog fighter but its a single engine fighter with lower operating cost and Lockmart would offer the most TOT for this.

I think if we opt for F-16IN with most TOT and good offset its not a bad deal. There is the long israel experience with F-16 that would be helpful.

I would be happy if we opt for any one between Gripen-IN,F-16IN and Mig-35.

An honest question.

What do the Indian public and leadership think about operating the same plane as Pakistan (well it's not exactly the same but the same series)?. Could the Indian leaders chose the F-16 without walking into some bad public opinion?

I'm really just asking.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Austin » 29 Oct 2010 13:14

Henrik wrote:An honest question.

What do the Indian public and leadership think about operating the same plane as Pakistan (well it's not exactly the same but the same series)?. Could the Indian leaders chose the F-16 without walking into some bad public opinion? I

'm really just asking.


The IAF has already said that this is not a problem. So pakistan operating F-16 and IAF operating the same really does not matter , because AirForce is as much about Tactics,Training , Morale and Weapons/Sensors ,as it is about aircraft.

I am sure we dont stop using the Mig-21 just because Pakistan is using a chinese copy of the same.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Singha » 29 Oct 2010 13:18

we need to go for the best A2A bird in the pack, to relieve the MKI for deep strike and Tejas/M2K/Jag for tactical strike.

the EF can with captor-e match the F18 apg79, meteor should perform equal or better at long range than amraam-latest , python5 can be integrated and it has none of the F18's flabby shuffles in the acceleration and wvr regimes.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Austin » 29 Oct 2010 13:41

The best will only come with astronomical amount , loads of black boxes and least TOT.

Indrajit
BRFite
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 Feb 2004 12:31
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Indrajit » 29 Oct 2010 13:53

arya wrote:
shukla wrote:MMRCA fighter buzz: US, EU step up heat
IBNlive reports..


:eek:
DDm again its best according to him Russia's President is Putin not Medvedev :rotfl:



Sorry Arya but DDM is actually right here,President is Medveyev while Putin is the PM. :wink:

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Lalmohan » 29 Oct 2010 13:57

easy mistake to make, medvedev is just keeping the chair warm :)

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 29 Oct 2010 19:59

Arms companies raise the pitch for $12bn order
Iftikhar Gilani for Tehelka news

Ahead of US President Barack Obama’s November 6-8 visit, representatives of various global arms companies are engaged in intensive lobbying to bag the biggest ever military contract worth $12 billion for 126 multi-role fighter jets for the Indian Air Force (IAF).

American aerospace giant Lockheed Martin Corporation arranged a press briefing here to hardsell its F-16 Super Viper single-engine fighter. Meanwhile, the entire board of its competitor, the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company NV (EADS), manufacturers of the Eurofighter, is in India to stem any chances of American companies that they feel may have a political edge on the eve of their president’s visit.

The F/A-18 Super Hornet from the military arm of Boeing Company is also in the race and it too is leaving no stone unturned to procure the contract.

Analysts in the capital agree that the deal has now attained political overtones and predict it may go the US way if Obama announces, or indicates, some major concessions to India, say, by offering support to India’s bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and removing some snags in the India-US defence purchases deal.

Batting for US arm companies recently, US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Robert Blake estimated that 27,000 jobs would be created in the US if they clinch this deal. Addressing India’s concerns vis-à-vis Pakistan, Lockheed Martin Director Michael R Griswold said his company would provide more advanced F-16IN Super Viper fighters to India. “It is a unique fourth-generation fighter and is ready for integration into India’s military force,” he said.

Referring to the plane’s radar system, his associates claimed that it can detect a plane even as it takes off from a Pakistani airbase. Pushing their case further, they said the single engine that generates 32,000 pounds of thrust also gives greater manoeuvrability during dog fights, unlike the twin-engine aircraft.

As a deal sweetener, EADS on its part has offered to shift the manufacture of some of its components to India, which is estimated to generate 20,000 jobs. “We will transfer some of our development projects, which are now based in Europe for Eurofighter or other military aircraft, to India. We have already set up a military research and development (R&D) centre in Bangalore,” EADS Chief Executive (Defence & Security) Stefan Zoller had recently told Indian journalists in Bonn.

The European defence giant, however, has been quick to deny that its plan to shift operations to India was in any way linked to its bid for the multi-billion contract, saying it was only interested in procuring cheap manpower. But analysts say the move was aimed at putting indirect pressure on the government to award this contract and others in the future.

The race to win the massive contract had several other contenders, including the MiG-35 from Russia, the Rafale from Dassault Aviation of France, and the JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden. But it is now a toss-up between the American and EADS, with most of the other contenders having more or less lost hope of bagging the contract either due to snags during the technical evaluation stage or due to the absence of political clout.


Snags in tech eval stage? Whats he smoking???

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 Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Juggi G » 29 Oct 2010 20:05

Eurofighter AESA Radar Full-Op By 2015

Clicky
Image

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 Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Juggi G » 29 Oct 2010 20:12


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 Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Juggi G » 29 Oct 2010 20:13


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54689
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby ramana » 29 Oct 2010 20:33

They really are on overdrive before the visit!

arya
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 82
Joined: 29 Oct 2009 17:48
Location: Kanyakubj Nagre

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby arya » 29 Oct 2010 23:20

Sorry Arya but DDM is actually right here,President is Medveyev while Putin is the PM. :wink:
:oops:

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8186
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Indranil » 30 Oct 2010 00:07

Hmmm.

Eurofighter's pitch as best in class

I wouldn't just go by how a company magazine is ranking itself, but even if I go the Eurofighter is not making the best case for itself.

I know that the MMRCA has changed a lot from the original requirement, but I still believe that we need medium fighters which can protect itself while carrying out strike roles. Am I wrong here? They wanted more Mirages in roles like Kargil, right? So we are not looking for the most elite A2A platform, apparently even more superior to the Su-27 airframe. According to our requirement and their own evaluation Rafale is the best fit! Very decent A2A platform (put above the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-35) while have very good strike capabilities.

It would be great is one reporters would go to IAF and ask, "Sir, what is the goal of the MMRCA aircraft?" Vishnu, are your listening?

MadhuG
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 32
Joined: 27 Dec 2009 15:36

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby MadhuG » 30 Oct 2010 11:52

That's why I am pegging it on Rafale. We have carriers being built. Although we have Mig-29Ks on order, having more ground-based carrier-capable increases our strategic strike capability if required. Our Air Force is acquainted with French Avionics (Mirage, SU-30MKI, etc) and our politicos can be comfortable dealing with the neutral French.

Its bad economics but good insurance - a deal we won't regret.

Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Willy » 30 Oct 2010 12:11

And how are the yanks who are trumpeting the electronics/avionics on their aircraft going to supply the same without India signing that Cimosamimosa crap...... Another shell we dont need.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8186
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Indranil » 30 Oct 2010 12:13

I wouldn't couple the AF with the Navy. That is not how they work in this country.

And I don't believe the French are anymore believable than any other NATO country. Every deal with them, no matter how small, has always seen huge escalations and delays. EVERYONE!!!

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1257
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Nihat » 30 Oct 2010 12:33

indranilroy wrote:Hmmm.

Eurofighter's pitch as best in class

I wouldn't just go by how a company magazine is ranking itself, but even if I go the Eurofighter is not making the best case for itself.

I know that the MMRCA has changed a lot from the original requirement, but I still believe that we need medium fighters which can protect itself while carrying out strike roles. Am I wrong here? They wanted more Mirages in roles like Kargil, right? So we are not looking for the most elite A2A platform, apparently even more superior to the Su-27 airframe. According to our requirement and their own evaluation Rafale is the best fit! Very decent A2A platform (put above the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-35) while have very good strike capabilities.

It would be great is one reporters would go to IAF and ask, "Sir, what is the goal of the MMRCA aircraft?" Vishnu, are your listening?



I suppose there are plenty of air superiority fighters in the IAF or will be in the future with the induction MKI, FGFA and to an extent LCA which are all good at A2A roles. With MMRCA the IAF may be looking at a ground pounder to replace its Mig-27 and Jag Fleet. Superhornet and Rafale then appear to be favourites , can't say how good the Gripen IN is in A2G role.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8186
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Indranil » 30 Oct 2010 12:43

If you ask me frankly ... I wouldn't go for a top of the line fighter. I would rather have 2 fighters for the price of one. I don't think the Gripen-IN or the Mig-35 are mud movers. I have am sure many have seen the Mig-35 in the air. If you think thats not an agile plane, then I have nothing more to say. I also don't believe in the end-of-the-line argument. All fighters evolve over time. If the requirement arises the Mig-35 and the Gripen will also evolve.

Call me thrifty but are we looking for the best fighter for our AF (unlike the French/Uk/german). If we are looking for the middle of the pyramid, it should rather be as large as it can be for the amount of money we are doling out :)

vardhank
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 17 Feb 2007 15:16
Location: Mumbai

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby vardhank » 30 Oct 2010 12:52

Something to ponder over (perhaps someone else has already brought this up)... but what about the CISMOA re the US fighters? If we aren't planning to sign it, there's no point whatsoever in looking at the SH or SV. If we ARE planning to sign it, how does it affect our deals on the C-130, Poseidon and C-17?

Also (OT, sorry), have we paid the full price for the C-130s and had equipment dropped due to the CISMOA problem? Or have we paid less, knowing that we wouldn't get some kit? If we've been denied stuff that we've paid for, nuts to the US, and forget any more purchases. Let's give Ombaba a nice sightseeing trip and say "Goom-bye, and take McDonald's with you. The burgers are crap anyway."

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby koti » 30 Oct 2010 12:57

Nihat wrote:I suppose there are plenty of air superiority fighters in the IAF or will be in the future with the induction MKI, FGFA and to an extent LCA which are all good at A2A roles. With MMRCA the IAF may be looking at a ground pounder to replace its Mig-27 and Jag Fleet. Superhornet and Rafale then appear to be favourites , can't say how good the Gripen IN is in A2G role.


I differ sir.

The IAF is seriously lacking numbers. It faces a threat from decent 4th gen aircraft in overwhelming numbers from two nations.

All the aircraft you specified also are multi-role(not Mig29 ofcourse). They will have good enough attack capability as well. So, our primary concern should be to secure our skies and any-day EF would be a better choice to SH, NG, Viper or Rafale. Not involving budgets course.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 63 guests