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.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20889
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Philip » 03 Nov 2010 15:25

Just a few thoughts.In an issue of VAYU,on the White Tiger get-together,a former CNS aviator remarking about "better being the enemy of good...",wise thoughts when choosing the MMRCA and also that IDR in a 2008(?) issue had a detailed feature on the MIG-35,showing how it was a huge improvement on the MIG-29.Pics of the AESA radar,etc. were featured.The comparison in an above post between the IAF and the Sino-Pak combine,with respect to Flanker inventories is very valid.We need not only quality but more importantly large numbers to deal with the two enemies.It's why in earlier posts I've advocated buying not just a western MMRCA but also a large amount of MIG-35s,easy to induct,operate and maintain,which can complement and then replace out MIG-29s to be upgraded.

Had Mirage-2000s still been in production,and I think that the French have lost out here as upgraded M-2000 with AESA,etc.,could've been a very worthy challenger to the Gripen for a cost-effective multi-role fighter,and would've been an attractive buy for many air forces including India.The US's woes with the delays and cost escalation of the JSF clearly show that it is a ridiculous idea to acquire it for the IAF as we won't get a single bird until about 2020! By then,as said before,the superior 5th-gen fighter,IAF twin-seat version will be in service,making any thought of acquiring a far costlier inferior JSF (which will come only in an "economy" version for India!) passe.

Coming back to that article on the WT reunion,there were several speakers and the "interoperability" of both STOVL and CTOL fighters from our carriers being an IN requirement makes for interesting thoughts on the future IN carrier designs and aircraft operating from their decks.We might even see in the future a STOVL version of the 5th-gen fighter,or if the naval LCA makes rapid progress,taking its development even further.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Christopher Sidor » 03 Nov 2010 19:05

If we were to go for the F-35 it would be expected, approximately, to join IAF somewhere near 2020, give or take 2-3 years. However we need the MRCA fighters now, to seriously stop the depleting strength of our fighter squadrons. It would not be advisable to wait till 2020 for a comparable fighter. In the meantime the MRCA tender cannot be seen as a stop gap till we get a F-35 comparable fighter. The MRCA fighters at 10 Billion USD and counting are not exactly use and discard. They will be in service for atleast 2 decades or more. And if one goes by the operational life of other IAF fighters then it will be even more.

This does not in any way reflect on the capabilities of F-35. It is an extremely capable fighter on its own merits and beats all the present 6 contenders of MRCA by a wide margin in performance. In cost it is a different story all together.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Willy » 03 Nov 2010 20:00

Well reports on news channels today that Obama is not ready to make commitments on a permanent UNSC seat for India nor is he ready to lift Indian entites from their ban list for dual use tech. Hope better sense prevails on the Indian powers to be.The Teens are are a NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO for India.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Singha » 03 Nov 2010 20:15

fear not - I think the two goats are going to go down, the ground has been prepared and Obama's statements have just sealed it.

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 » 03 Nov 2010 22:54

Karan M wrote:
indranilroy wrote:You seem to have a different perspective to it. And a good one I must admit. You are looking at using the MMRCA fighters as top of the line fighters for our AF.

But going by your logic we should get the best planes for everything! We should have the top of line fighter for handing the J-11/Su-30MkM/J-XX and also the J-10, J-17s and J-7s which will be made numerically more abundant if a wartime scenario arrives.


Boss, cant you reason it out? Its not about what I am looking at, its the situation on the ground. We have 30+ squadrons today, out of 42 sanctioned, whereas the PRC has over 200 Flankers 250+ per sources) is adding more, has over 100 J-10s (and is adding more) and has a vast number of J-7, J-8 etc platforms which can easily complicate our mission planning when we attempt to strike into China. So no, we dont have the numbers to rely only on the "elite Su-30s" while the rest of the common fighter pilots make do with simpler platforms! In the worst case two front war scenario, we have to face ~300-400 odd Pakistani platforms and of which at least 100 will be modern, requiring us to dedicate a portion of our Flanker force to that theater! Remember, the Pakistanis are not stupid. They realized they dont have a Su-30 equivalent, so they quickly set up a dense Air Grid of interlocking radars, backed up by AEW &C, and with their fighters hence getting long range awareness! And they have ordered 500 AMRAAMs to wage an expensive BVR battle!

The same things that you have pointed out, I had imagined that the IAF had earmarked our strike aircraft squadrons with it. Aren't the Su-30s/FGFA/MCA ear marked for them.


How can we "earmark" strike squadrons when we face so many threats! Right now, at best we have deterrence capability against the PRC and offensive capability against Pak, problem is Indranil, you are not thinking in larger terms, and hence are looking at only India's strengths but not its limitations! Do you think the PLAAF wants to win an air war against India? No - merely denying the IAF the ability to influence the ground conflict is good enough for them, they have the edge in ballistic missiles (many of which are targeted for conventional strike), artillery (tube rocket and towed) and hence they can afford to have their AF sit out. Can India? How can our strike formations decisively attrit the PRC shield when there are today, only 120 odd Flankers and tomorrow, even when we have 270, the PRC will have similar (or even more numbers) and we have to look at both PRC & Pakistan? The FGFA is a development project!! It does NOT exist as an operational system today, and will start appearing only around 2020 (if we are lucky), till then we have to rely on Su-30s, MMRCAs, upgraded MiG-27s, Jaguars, Mirages and MiG-29s and the problem is many of these types will start retiring by then! So you see how important the MMRCA is? It HAS to do the heavy lifting as well. We cant just rely on Su-30s.


Wasn't MMRCA in place of the delayed LCA's to fill up numbers. If yes, then my logic is good.

If the MMRCA is in place of missing frontline fighters then your logic is good.


The MMRCA exists as a stand alone requirement for a long time. The LCA is an entirely different class of aircraft. The MMRCA was intended to replace (in the IAF), the MiG-23BN and the earlier MiG-27s.

Between, the price of 3 J-10 is the same as 1 EF/RAfale. No matter what you do, in most cases 3 J-10s will get the EF/Rafale. So you are better off with atleast 2 Mig-35/Gripen.


But the PRC will not acquire 3 J-10 just because they are "cheap". Do understand, that they too are aware of combat capability, and are iteratively improving tranches/mks of the J-10, after 100 odd J-10 Mk1, now they are at the MK2 variant..

Then there are the J-11 and J-xx. We have to tackle them with our Su-30s/FGFA/MCA. That's why there are light medium and heavy aircraft! Or am I missing something?


There is no "we tackle their heavy with our heavy and light with light" as in a wrestling/boxing match. Things will NOT be so scripted. They will be all over the place. A Su-30 strike may run into J-7s or it may run into Su-27s or even J-8s. There is no guarantee, and hence you need the best platforms which are modern all the way to 2050, and not cheap is best.

Btw, your being able to convince somebody doesn't make your idea the right one!


What?!?



Great Post..... I was a big MIG 35 supporter but after reading this thread since last 2 weeks or so, I am beginning to doubt MIG 35......

Does any one know if MIG 35 will come with Thrust vectoring like the MIG 29OVT??

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 » 03 Nov 2010 23:15

11 Billion Dollars for MMRCA,

20 Billion Dollars for FGFA,

1 Billion Dollars for MRTA

3.5 Billion dollars for C17


Whereas
LCA program cost : 1.2 Billion dollars
MCA : Not Allocated,
Arjun development : 68.1million + 124 ordered @ 472 million


Is it time for Swadeshi movement???

sourab_c
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 14 Feb 2009 18:07
Location: around

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby sourab_c » 03 Nov 2010 23:25

Sandeep_ghosh wrote:11 Billion Dollars for MMRCA,

20 Billion Dollars for FGFA,

1 Billion Dollars for MRTA

3.5 Billion dollars for C17


Whereas
LCA program cost : 1.2 Billion dollars
MCA : Not Allocated,
Arjun development : 68.1million + 124 ordered @ 472 million


Is it time for Swadeshi movement???


Kickbacks in Videshi deals- $200 million (*)

Kickbacks in Swadeshi deals- $0

I think our swadeshi defence firms need better sales and marketing agents :wink:


* purely speculative

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby ramana » 04 Nov 2010 01:43

Or Swadeshi firms have to have videshi operating arms.

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 » 04 Nov 2010 02:29

I think the main threat from china is not the J11 or the J10 or their SU MKM etc... The main threat is their indigenousness ability to make credible aircrafts and missile systems .
We are still struggling with LCA ... we are always ready to jump into foreign hands for hardware. I wish if government doubled the DRDO budget and started recruiting heavily top tier students for engineering positions at good salaries, i am sure outcomes of AMCA would be different.

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1599
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby andy B » 04 Nov 2010 03:22

Birathers rejoice got some diwali gifts for you "bad a$$ses" :mrgreen:

Update on ze Supher hornet
EF's AESA radar(s) :eek:
Ze Squal's deadly arsenal bit dated article though quite relevant
An interesting article on how the USAF is keeping their F-Solah's at the edge of ze sword
Gripen NG update from Farnborough Air Show

Will put em up over the next two days....

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby SaiK » 04 Nov 2010 05:29

shukla wrote:Rafale crises..
Wonder what fate awaits the Rafale first in Brazilians and Araba and finally Indians. Expect Sarkozy to make some serious concessions to promote sales in desperation..


Only over the death of French ego onlee!.. the last thing they will do is go under and sell something cheap. BTW, Sarkozy will get a divorce notice again for being cheap.

---
But under the EUMA, it seems India's military will have to forgo this functional option to retrofit U.S.-supplied equipment which, for the duration of its service, would exclusively remain the OEM's responsibility.


and more American service problems perhaps would become worse than Russkies..http://www.bharatrakshak.com/NEWS/newsr ... wsid=13726
Washington's initial indulgence, it seems, has slid into obstreperousness and exasperation over India's reluctance to sign blanket agreements to facilitate materiel transfers that govern all American military sales. Considering the volume of defence equipment under negotiation, on offer and under trial, it is only a matter of time before New Delhi buckles and the ubiquitous and highly dependable ‘jugaad' ceases to exist as a force multiplier in the Indian military.


And why does any gullible Indian would accept this? Are we that bad in negotiations and getting the stuffs we want.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 04 Nov 2010 06:08

SaiK wrote:
shukla wrote:Rafale crises..
Wonder what fate awaits the Rafale first in Brazilians and Araba and finally Indians. Expect Sarkozy to make some serious concessions to promote sales in desperation..


Only over the death of French ego onlee!.. the last thing they will do is go under and sell something cheap. BTW, Sarkozy will get a divorce notice again for being cheap.


:rotfl:

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 04 Nov 2010 06:15

Defence at heart of visit, as Europeans lobby hard
Sify news
Significantly, the contract for the 126 Medium, Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) worth a cool $10.6 billion is fast turning into the jewel of the crown of defence acquisitions, and although a decision will not be made over November-December — when America’s Obama, France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev and a PM visit to Brussels in the heart of Europe takes place — fact is, that each of these countries is lobbying heavily for India to buy their fighter jets.

Obama’s administration has made no bones about the fact that it wants a significant chunk of the Indian defence pie, which is why a Joint Task Force on defence cooperation is likely to be set up during the Obama visit, that will not only go into all the procedural issues but also look at imparting strategic value to defence acquisitions.

Clearly, India feels it must offer the US a thanksgiving present in return for its intense lobbying efforts that pushed through the Indo-US nuclear deal, with the result that defence matters have moved to the heart of the strategic dialogue between the two countries.


government sources cautioned Business Standard from jumping to too many conclusions on the MMRCA contract, pointing out that field trials were "only one of the parameters" that would be considered in the final analysis. "Price is another very important consideration, all things being equal, but India must also carefully look at the strategic value that a high-value contract like the MMRCA will impart to India," the government sources said.

They argued that "strategic value" must be defined in terms of how each of these countries can help India expand its sphere of influence, "not limited to South Asia," and especially help engage in complex strategies with China. "We have to ask ourselves, what can each of these countries, or groups of countries, can do for India," the sources said, adding, "such a big decision can never only be made on the basis of performance on technical parameters. National interests are involved."


Europeans, keenly aware of the overwhelming importance of such a "strategic decision," notwithstanding the Eurofighter’s reported lead in the MMRCA battle, sent the Eurofighter supervisory board consisting of CEOs of Eurofighter partner companies — such as Maurizio de Mitri of Alenia Aeronautica of Italy, Enzo Cassolini, CEO of Eurofighter, Christopher Boardman of BAE of Britian, Bernhard Gerwert of EADS’ subsidiary Cassidian Air Systems of Germany and Enrique Barrientos of Cassidian Spain — to lobby for their fighter jet to Delhi this week.

Eurofighter sources conceded to Business Standard that India’s "decision on the MMRCA would will also be a political decision, a very, very important strategic decision, one based on its national interest". They pointed out that Eurofighter wanted to transfer its technology over time so as to help indigenise the fighter jet, so that India could emerge as a "’full-fledged industrial partner in Eurofighter’s global chain."

In comparison, the Eurofighter sources said, US’ Lockheed Martin and Boeing would "never create the conditions for technology transfer to India…Yes, these companies might create thousands of blue-collar jobs when these companies offer licence-production to India, but they will never allow the transfer of sensitive technologies.
"

sohels
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 74
Joined: 15 Oct 2010 15:00

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby sohels » 04 Nov 2010 08:41

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Top-official-confirms-US-to-lift-hi-tech-N-sanctions/H1-Article1-621896.aspx

The discussions are over, and India and the US are ready with the biggest announcement of President Barack Obama’s visit: decontrol of the sale of sensitive equipment to India, and the completion of India’s nuclear rehabilitation. “We will be able to make a significant announcement about the modernisation of export controls systems between the US and India,” secretary of commerce Gary Locke told HT.
He refused to share details, saying: “I am not going to take away from the announcement ... everyone will be pleased by the announcement to be made next week.”

HT was first to report (Hi-tech N-sanctions against India may go, October 21) that the removal of sanctions on the sale of dual use technology to India by the US would be announced during Obama’s visit. Locke’s statement has confirmed this.

The system referred to by Locke is made up of three elements, all related to the fallout of the Pokhran-II nuclear tests in 1998. The US had then reacted swiftly with sanctions.

The first was a blanket ban on sale of dual use tech — equipment with civilian and military use – to India. This was eased subsequently but remained subject to permission.

Second, a number of Indian companies/departments were blacklisted for trade with US firms. Indian space agency ISRO and defence research body DRDO are on that list.

Third, India was excluded from multilateral export control regimes such as the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group and Missile Tehcnology Control Regime. The controls refer to a system of licensing required for any US exporter selling dual use equipment to India.

“We know this was of great importance to India,” Locke said. “We worked hard on it and have made good progress. I look forward to the announcement.”

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3045
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby abhik » 04 Nov 2010 12:07

Clearly, India feels it must offer the US a thanksgiving present in return for its intense lobbying efforts that pushed through the Indo-US nuclear deal, with the result that defence matters have moved to the heart of the strategic dialogue between the two countries.

As far as thanksgiving presents go the scale of the c-17 deal is being constantly underestimated vis a vie the MRCA. Firstly in the case of the C-17 deal, Boeing will be required to give back only 30% to Indian co. as apposed to the MRCA where it is 50%. Also the time frames would be completely different(4-5 years at the most compared with 12-15 years). Now assuming all options for extra aircraft are exercised(which is highly likely)
Aircraft(C-17 , MRCA) -> numbers including options( 20 , ~200 ) -> time frame(4-5years , ~12-15years) -> total deal value( ~9B$,~20B$) -> offset value(~3B$,~10B$) -> effective vendor earnings(~6B$,~10B$ ) -> per year earnings( 1.2-1.5B$,~1.3-1.6B$)
Last edited by abhik on 04 Nov 2010 13:51, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20889
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Philip » 04 Nov 2010 13:30

There are four chief factors which will impinge upon the MOD/GOI's decision.The first being the aircraft's peformance,its capability in the Indian environment and room for further upgradation of the design into a 4+++ gen fighter just as the SU-30MKIs are being upgraded before the 5th-gen fighter arrives.Clearly,the IAF will have a ranking for this part of the evaluation.

The second point is the cost of the aircraft .Unit cost,lifespan,maintenance costs,
training and weaponry (very important, especially BVR missile capability) and even estimates of upgradation potential.The cost factor becomes vital when viewing the MMRCA as an interim acquisition to bef up rapidly declining numbers,especially if the intended numbers to be acquired is actually 200 and not 126+

The third is TOT.How genuine is the TOT offer of the contenders? Does it include AESA radars,weapon systems,etc.? Which aircraft will have the greatest effect in assisting the Indian aerospace industry to evolve further and which will be the easiest and fastest to produce?

The fourth is totally political.The contours of so-called strategic relationships.How dependable is the manufacturer in providing full TOT,ensuring a continuous supply of aircraft,spares and weaponry during a conflict/crisis, or even if India conducts further N-tests? Will this deal also be part of a much larger package of defence eqpt. and even political support for ex. an Indian seat on the UNSC? In this third factor,the Russians would be on top with the Europeans second and US third.Multi-national EADS have far more political influence than the Swedes.The US with all its attached strings definitely last.

The aircraft that comes out on top of most of these factors will eventually win.The political hardsell by the three major leaders will in my opinion,almost cancel each other out and give costs and capability factors the edge.

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1599
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby andy B » 04 Nov 2010 16:01

Biraders, in the spirit of Diwali some gifts for joo abduls...enjoi onlee :mrgreen:

Super Hornet
http://ifile.it/o8b6sl5/Super%20Hornet.zip

Valuable Vipers - How the USAF is updating its Vipers
http://ifile.it/s1umt5g/VAL%20VIPERS.zip

Awesome arsenal of ze Rafale
http://ifile.it/yt52x9w/RAFALE.zip

Combined zip file with articles on ze Gripen NG, EF Aesa, Boeing Future Prospect and Super Hornet Intl being offered to India
http://ifile.it/q4wto1z/Super%20Hornet% ... 20Aesa.zip

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby nishu » 04 Nov 2010 16:51

Giri giri bijli giri http://idrw.org/?p=1164 shooklaw pe giri :rotfl: :rotfl:

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 04 Nov 2010 17:37

Lockheed reassures India over F-16 fighter
UPI

Lockheed Martin said it improved its version of the F16IN Super Viper on offer to India under the country's largest ever combat aircraft tender. The corporation's tailor-made advanced F-16IN aircraft for the Indian air force has improved electronic scanned array radar, enhanced high-thrust engine and larger weapons inventory.

"The F-16 has a long history of operations around the world," Michael R. Griswold, director of advance development program at Lockheed Martin, told reporters. "The F-16 that we are offering here to India is by no means the end of the line of F-16s. In fact, it represents the beginning of what we think is great future for F-16 in India."


Air trials in India have finished for the most part and Lockheed also has shown additional features to the Indian air force during laboratory testing. "We had to provide new capability beyond what the F-16 block has," said Griswold.


Orville Prins, Lockheed's vice president of business development in India, praised the F-16IN version of the F-16 "I can assure you, the Super Viper is much more advanced in all aspects than the F-16s being given to Pakistan," he said

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Lalmohan » 04 Nov 2010 17:42

^^^ nice freudian slip: "F16's being given to pakistan"

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 04 Nov 2010 17:59

UPDATE from Indo-UK exercise:

Financial times reports, quoting sources close to the British forces, that the Indians were really impressed with the EF in the exercises and these exercises will help them "seal the deal" in the MMRCA race. Also, they were keenly waiting to welcome India to be a "MAJOR PLAYER" in the consortium.. In a British Vice Marshals discussions with P.V. Naik, he stated that the winner will have to enable India to absorb all prominent 4th gen fighter technology. The V. Marshal observed that EADS was in the best position to do that as the EF was still a fighter in evolution..

(Refer to article in FT as does not allow reposting articles either in part or full)

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Surya » 04 Nov 2010 18:22

lifafa flying left and right


:)

But after Ombaba's nonsense regarding dual use and UNSC membership - throw out the teens

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 » 05 Nov 2010 00:12

Eurofighter Keen to Open Alliance to India
Image
Eurofighter Keen to Open Alliance to India
By James Lamont in New Delhi
Published: November 3 2010 18:18

The Eurofighter consortium – the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy – is considering inviting India as the fifth partner in its defence alliance should it opt for the Typhoon multirole combat aircraft as part of the modernisation of its air force.

The Typhoon is vying against jet fighters from the US, Russia, Sweden and France to supply the Indian Air Force with 126 aircraft, worth an estimated $11bn. The competition is expected to be decided in the first half of next year.

A bold move to open the consortium to India, a nation seeking to build its indigenous supply of weaponry, is a sweetener for New Delhi to buy the Typhoon, which is viewed as more expensive than rivals.


Discussion of bringing India into Eurofighter coincides with a top-level military exercise between the UK’s Royal Air Force Typhoons and the IAF’s Sukhoi and Mirage jets in West Bengal, where Senior Indian Officers said They were Highly Impressed with the Typhoon’s Capabilities. :D

“That Kind of Debate will probably Seal the Deal,” said an official Close to the Fighter Jet Competition who Held Up the Prospect of India as a “Major Player” within the Eurofighter ­Consortium.

Eurofighter is Pulling Out the Stops
ahead of visits to New Delhi by presidents Barack Obama of the US, Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Dmitry Medvedev of Russia, all of whom will press India to buy their military hardware.

A UK official said India had the Potential to Become the Largest User of Typhoon :D and could Take Part in Industrial Defence co-operation at a time when “The Plane still has the Potential to Evolve Technologically”.

But, some senior British defence officials are wary of offering any more than a simple partnership arrangement to India, which would leave the core consortium intact while allowing India a role in developing some software and electronics.


Greg Bagwell, air vice-marshal in the RAF, cautioned that Indian participation would have to avoid disrupting sensitive “workshare” agreements between European partners upon which valuable high-tech jobs depended. But he said India had to be “a player around the table” if it bought Typhoon in large numbers.

P.V. Naik, the Head of the IAF, said that One of his Priorities was Studying India’s “Ability to Absorb the Technology” of Fourth-Generation Fighters.

India, one of the world’s fastest growing arms buyers, is already expected to agree to co-produce a fifth-generation stealth fighter with Russia.

A defence industry alliance with four European nations would have broader implications for what senior Nato commanders describe as “A New Strategic Deal with India”. It also reflects the importance of the Indian order to the future of Typhoon and its order book beyond the stressed military budgets in Europe.

BAE Systems, Europe’s largest defence contractor, which builds the Typhoon with European partners, already produces the Hawk Trainer with Hindustan Aeronautics in Bangalore. Other UK companies are involved in the selection of weapons systems for the IAF.

Additional reporting by Alex Barker in London

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby prabir » 05 Nov 2010 01:02

Surya wrote:lifafa flying left and right


:)

But after Ombaba's nonsense regarding dual use and UNSC membership - throw out the teens


The way to go is with EADS and buy Typhoon. Americans are getting transport aircraft deals and that is more than enough for them. We don't want to sign agreements with them as one can never trust them

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19661
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Karan M » 05 Nov 2010 03:00

Sandeep_ghosh wrote:11 Billion Dollars for MMRCA,

20 Billion Dollars for FGFA,

1 Billion Dollars for MRTA

3.5 Billion dollars for C17

Whereas
LCA program cost : 1.2 Billion dollars
MCA : Not Allocated,
Arjun development : 68.1million + 124 ordered @ 472 million

Is it time for Swadeshi movement???


Fair point.

It is always amusing and also instructive of the "mindset" of many of our worthies, including those rtd and now engaging in penmanship, about how they slander and attack local programs on the basis of "cost overruns". The average Indian program is almost always underfunded, and even with cost revisions, comes in at a fraction of the cost of foreign alternatives.

India is one of the few countries that tacitly allows such gentlemen and their views are carried by our so called independent media. Well, then again, Angana Chatterji also visits India for "tourism" and Ms Roy is our national conscience, and we have "intelocutors" for a special Indian state. Govt. ki jai ho

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19661
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Karan M » 05 Nov 2010 03:21

The F/A-18 data above places the Captor-M as the leader or equal in radar performance along with the AN/APG-79, and AN/APG-80. It seems doubtful that the AN/APG-80 can offer the same 200 km range class against a standard 5Sq Mtr fighter target, but thats been reported in the past. It does seem that all these MRCA types will have performance in the same category (~200 Km) except the Captor-E on the Eurofighter, which should significantly boost performance over the current radar which is already in that range class

tejas
BRFite
Posts: 768
Joined: 31 Mar 2008 04:47

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby tejas » 05 Nov 2010 06:48

Greg Bagwell, air vice-marshal in the RAF, cautioned that Indian participation would have to avoid disrupting sensitive “workshare” agreements between European partners upon which valuable high-tech jobs depended. But he said India had to be “a player around the table” if it bought Typhoon in large numbers.


So the germans state India will be a full partner in the Typhoon program but the UQ flunkie says even if India buys more EFs than anyone else it will get a few crumbs which fall off the table. Maybe the UQ could buy a few more EFs and place them on their second carier. OOPS forgot that carrier is to be a floating museum before it ever leaves port :mrgreen:

I think we have both the EF consortium and the French desperate for this order. Umrikah should be told to shove it where the sun don't shine as its technology sharing is likely to be as close to zero. The Gripen is essentially a Tejas mk II and we're in bed with Russians for enough other projects. I think SCB and Blisk tech. should be the price of admission for this 200 fighter purchase and I bet we can get it.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2010 06:57

dont you know it will be the worlds largest and most powerful helicopter carrier - with 10 helis embarked but room for 60 more :rotfl:

yantra
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 03:46

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby yantra » 05 Nov 2010 07:12

Tejas Wrote:
I think we have both the EF consortium and the French desperate for this order. Umrikah should be told to shove it where the sun don't shine as its technology sharing is likely to be as close to zero. The Gripen is essentially a Tejas mk II and we're in bed with Russians for enough other projects. I think SCB and Blisk tech. should be the price of admission for this 200 fighter purchase and I bet we can get it.


I agree, especially since India have decided on GE engines for the Tejas-MkII. Going with EF gives us an option to switch to EF engines if Unkil sanctions again. AND India will have the technology to indigenously develop our own Kaveri-2+

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Katare » 05 Nov 2010 07:33

Sandeep_ghosh wrote:11 Billion Dollars for MMRCA,

20 Billion Dollars for FGFA,

1 Billion Dollars for MRTA

3.5 Billion dollars for C17


Whereas
LCA program cost : 1.2 Billion dollars
MCA : Not Allocated,
Arjun development : 68.1million + 124 ordered @ 472 million


Is it time for Swadeshi movement???


I see your spirit and heart is at right place but facts and logic needs little checking -

India has spent grand total of zero $ on MRCA+MRTA and C17 yet.

$2billions have been sanctioned for LCA development until 2017. GoI has funded 10x budget escalation and decades of delays for all major defense deals with little accountability for DRDO bosses. Infact most ended there career with Padam xyz and distinguished abc with plum after retirement postings in public or private sector for there great contributions. At least jingos can give some credit to those crooks that some call politicians, where it is over due. Almost every year DRDO and armed forces return allocated money, they are not short of money. Only time they were short of money was when India was bankrupt in early 90s.

I would love to have a project like this where you get an open checkbook and unlimited time to complete for a captive customer. When you support me you are a jingo and if you criticise me you are either lifafa or traitor. :mrgreen:


200LCA induction is planned (28 already ordered 5 produced) using your own method of calculating cost, program cost will come to $6-10billions in production cost ($30-50MM/aircraft) and 2 billion in development cost.

MRTA is 50:50 project, so I don't kbnow what is the issue there

C17- No one in the world except USA has capability and need to develop such planes so choice is between buying them or not buying them. Has nothing to do with any of the DRDO programs.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby shukla » 05 Nov 2010 18:21



@ Juggi

Matey, your posts have been invaluable to the forum but please refrain from copy pasting articles, especially from FT as it is a serious violation of their copyright agreements.. You might not just get yourself but BR into trouble as well..

Copyright :The Financial Times Limited 2010. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Lalmohan » 05 Nov 2010 18:40

the workshare issue is a major political hot potato. for years, spain has essentially bought itself into these european programmes to build up and boost its high tech sector. for years, the british, french and germans (and to a lesser extent italians) have fobbed them off with crumbs and screw driver roles - spain's high tech ability is therefore very debatable. the immediate workshare crunch is going to come with taking things out of spain and making them cheaper in india - which is what would make economic sense to the senior partners. all the really fancy stuff is still in UK and germany.
ofcourse, if india is able to deploy software engineering skills advantages into defence (and its by no means a copy paste exercise) then there is some real opportunity here

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19661
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Karan M » 05 Nov 2010 20:21

katare wrote:I see your spirit and heart is at right place but facts and logic needs little checking -

India has spent grand total of zero $ on MRCA+MRTA and C17 yet.


Which doesnt mean anything, as the money will still be spent, as these are pretty much done programs, especially the MRCA.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 876157.cms

$2billions have been sanctioned for LCA development until 2017. GoI has funded 10x budget escalation and decades of delays for all major defense deals with little accountability for DRDO bosses. Infact most ended there career with Padam xyz and distinguished abc with plum after retirement postings in public or private sector for there great contributions.


Hilarious reasoning. How many of these delays have been due to underfunding and deliberate delays induced in the projects as such?
viewtopic.php?p=616494

The above (scroll down for post on Kaveri engine) has a perfect example of how lack of infrastructure in India contributed to delays in the Kaveri development, and India has to still look abroad for tests and lacks proper funding.

He pointed out the major factor in delays being them not being given enough infrastructure and testing facilities - Govt has not given funds, babus have sat on them. Instead, they have had to go to CIAM in Russia and Anecom in Germany for tests.

He mentioned that this was the biggest problem - one of the issues they have was in engine strain and the blade throws - they tried to isolate all the causes for 3 yrs, but only when they took it to CIAM for the Non Intrusive Strain Measurement (NSMS) tests did they realize that there were excess vibrations of the 3rd order of engine frequency being developed.... imagine if the facility was there in india.

Then, the compressor tests also, it was only at the Anecom that they could see that the 1st 2 stages were surged by 20%, while the rest were "as dead as government servants" (his quote - shows how low on confidence they are i guess). He pointed out that that would have saved a lot of time and money if that facility was in india. They have since fixed the issue.

Then, the afterburner tests, (the much highlighted high altitude failure) at CIAM - the reqt is for 50% thrust boost over dry thrust at 88% efficiency. The K5 prototype failed in 2003, after working perfectly in the GTRE. They realized that they could not achieve lightup at high altitudes (Dry thrust worked ok).

They took anothe new engine block and the afterburner worked perfectly and has been certified to 15 km.


The Kaveri was started with some Rs 382 crore, which is peanuts, and obviously the project cost would be many many times more. Now when that happens, its easy to call for accountability and ignore GOIs failings. Where is the accountability for GOI, as needed by people living in India for its countless failures in decision making and the decades of delay thanks to such silly decisions.


At least jingos can give some credit to those crooks that some call politicians, where it is over due. Almost every year DRDO and armed forces return allocated money, they are not short of money. Only time they were short of money was when India was bankrupt in early 90s.


And how much of that return of allocated money is due to deals being scuttled due to political pressure, and all sorts of GOI stupidity in acquisitions? Artillery saga, cough cough!

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/02/ ... -halo.html

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/11/ ... isted.html

So the GOI is stupid enough that it cannot even have a coordinated policy to minimize corruption, goes around blacklisting vendors, canceling trials or holding farcical trial after trial without result, and its Defense Minister wont take decisions. And you talk about return of allocated money. :D

I would love to have a project like this where you get an open checkbook and unlimited time to complete for a captive customer. When you support me you are a jingo and if you criticise me you are either lifafa or traitor. :mrgreen:


You'd love it, but the average Indian citizen living in India, would wish the project was funded well to begin with, and hence did not suffer from delays, and had to ask for funds midway

200LCA induction is planned (28 already ordered 5 produced) using your own method of calculating cost, program cost will come to $6-10billions in production cost ($30-50MM/aircraft) and 2 billion in development cost.


At $26M per aircraft for 200 aircraft (source: Vice Admiral Raman Puri), the LCA cost comes to around $5.2B, and $7.2 B including R&D costs, which is still a fraction of that of the projected $10-12 B MMRCA costs for 126 MMRCA. Plus MMRCA costs are also likely to rise, thanks to the usual last moment additions and renegotiations. Take the Scorpene case or Gorshkov.

More examples of GOI brilliance:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_mi ... el_1357844

2000 crore cost escalation, just like that, thanks to improper cost allocation to begin with!
Where is the accountability, talk of giving a blank check to foreign vendors, and best of all, as usual project is delayed and most of money is going abroad!

In contrast, here is what happens when a delayed Indian project comes good. AWST is fairly reputable source.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... y%20OK%27d

The India military services’ combined orders of the Defense Research and Development Organization-developed Akash, including two radars, have a total worth of Rs 23,300 crore...The DAC had earlier approved Rs 2,800 crore worth of 3-D Surveillance-cum-Acquisition Radars, independent of the missiles, for all three services...In addition, the Indian Army has ordered Rs 1,500 crore of Weapon-Locating Radar, each costing Rs 50 crore....


“The R&;D cost of Rs 1,000 crore, including the project sanction of Rs 600 crore, is 8-10 times lower than the cost of similar system developments in advanced countries,” the official said. “Akash, which is considered as Indian ‘poor man’s Patriot,’ has certain unique characteristics like mobility, all-the-way-powered flight till target interception, multiple target handling, digitally-coded command guidance and fully automatic operation.”


So for all the talk of delay and so on, local development has clear advantages, with an order book of 24 times cost of product (25 times, if that 1500 crore order for radar is separate from akash orders of 23000 crore), and how much of the delay is due to the fact that the cost allocated for project was 8-10 times lower than in developed countries..

Now this underfunding may be either due to real reasons (lack of money), sheer incompetence or just plain politics (need more money for dynasty named yojanas or political social justice programs), but either ways it is a serious issue.

In above engine example, it is clear that the lack of local infrastructure cost 3 years of delays, whereas the continued lack of such infrastructure, continues to add months, as each time around, the entire logistics has to be coordinated and the host nation/service provider has to have available facilities to begin with.

But the underfunding, lack of proper planning is a big problem and the original posters contention, that India sees no issues in agreeing to big ticket procurements which are much more expensive, has a valid point. India originally purchased Sukhoi 30's which were at $30Million level, then at $40Million and now are at $60Million level. They are much required, useful planes but apart from CAG, there is no squeak about such cost escalations and the amount is paid gladly, but similar substantial amounts have not been budgeted in past, upfront/or as required for domestic programs. Only now things appear to be changing, with budgeting made available for such "JVs"

http://defense-update.com/products/b/barak8.htm

But still domestic programs (Kaveri) continue to be underfunded with critical dependence on infrastructure abroad. This is a recipe for time delays and raising hidden costs (delays risk obsolescence and replacement by imports).

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 » 05 Nov 2010 23:46

Katare wrote:
Sandeep_ghosh wrote:11 Billion Dollars for MMRCA,

20 Billion Dollars for FGFA,

1 Billion Dollars for MRTA

3.5 Billion dollars for C17


Whereas
LCA program cost : 1.2 Billion dollars
MCA : Not Allocated,
Arjun development : 68.1million + 124 ordered @ 472 million


Is it time for Swadeshi movement???


I see your spirit and heart is at right place but facts and logic needs little checking -
.


Katare sir,

I am fully aware of operational capabilities of DRDO and HAL. I am not asking for open checkbook and unlimited time to complete for a captive customer.

United states of america did not develop a world class aviation industry by procurement and joint production. They backed their companies. Lets get private parties involved and see what happens. Remember we are still making Ambassadors and maruti 800's like the 80's with the state run industry in avaition complex. Competition always gets better products for the user.

HF24 Marut was first flew in 1964, and lca was concieved in 1983.... thats a 19 year gap based on russian handouts. Even now when LCA is getting into production there is no seriousness for AMCA. Right now we havent even thought of a medium range heavy bomber.

This is primarily due to lack of funding in DRDO. USA hands out large sums of money to private companies like grumann, lockheed and boeing just for research without expecting any returns on that money. That leads to projects like the B1 lancer, u2 and Sr71 projects. Indian government will not even consider putting money in to any top university if they came up with a project studying thrust vectoring optimization. Whereas DOD in US will consider every interesting project submitted by universities to them, so just imagine how much money they allot to defense companies.

HAL R & D is so tied up in translating and re engineering russian drawings, they barely have any time to come up with any substantial new design . Low recruitment in HAL and DRDO is a big cause of concern for any new projects.

I am not asking for providing a blank cheque:

Substantial Funding to:

Raise salaries for engineers and scientists (avoid brain drain)

Recruit larger amount of engineers for better operational capabilty

Establishment of higher number of subsidiary research units with better funding

Better training for young engineers and technicians

Implementation of Total Quality Systems

Higher participation of private sector.

Emphasis on developing local defense sector growth ... just like we emphasize on IT sector.

An engineer in HAL makes around 3 lakhs on average, same engineer in recruited by L&T for a salary of 8 lakhs... dont even get me started on what lockheed and northrop grumann pays....

China had the worst aircraft designs which they worked on and promoted, to build a wordclass aviation complex. We can go on rebuting their a/c by our fancy mmrca and russian hardware. But in the long run these decisions are going to haunt us...

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby srai » 06 Nov 2010 06:16

Juggi G wrote:Eurofighter Keen to Open Alliance to India
Eurofighter Keen to Open Alliance to India
By James Lamont in New Delhi
Published: November 3 2010 18:18

The Eurofighter consortium – the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy – is considering inviting India as the fifth partner in its defence alliance should it opt for the Typhoon multirole combat aircraft as part of the modernisation of its air force.

...

A bold move to open the consortium to India, a nation seeking to build its indigenous supply of weaponry, is a sweetener for New Delhi to buy the Typhoon, which is viewed as more expensive than rivals.

...

A UK official said India had the Potential to Become the Largest User of Typhoon :D and could Take Part in Industrial Defence co-operation at a time when “The Plane still has the Potential to Evolve Technologically”.

...

A defence industry alliance with four European nations would have broader implications for what senior Nato commanders describe as [b]“A New Strategic Deal with India”
. It also reflects the importance of the Indian order to the future of Typhoon and its order book beyond the stressed military budgets in Europe.

...


From the view of industrial integration with another "first-world" economy, Eurofighter's offer is a hands-down winner! European and Indian aerospace industries will "merge" opening the way for many future JV co-operations, both in the military and civilian arena, involving Private/Public sectors. This has a far greater long-term economic benefit than just the TOT license production deal (offered by others in various degrees). But will the IAF, MoD and MoF babus understand this long-term implication and be ready to pay a bit more now?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby SaiK » 06 Nov 2010 06:29

I still don't understand why Euros lost to GE for Tejas Mk2 engines, if they were that serious about India. BTW, the resubmit of quotation was tad late and was cheaper than GE altogether too late.

It would be a double shame if they lose again.

sohels
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 74
Joined: 15 Oct 2010 15:00

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby sohels » 06 Nov 2010 12:58

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/McCainPreparedRemarks.pdf

For much the same reason, we view the enhancement of India’s defense capabilities and its increasing interoperability with U.S. forces as similarly positive. Now, I realize that many in India are skeptical of such a proposal, viewing it as limiting India’s autonomy and eroding its sovereignty. In fact, the opposite is true. The decision about whether to cooperate with the United States will always rest with India’s democratic leaders; greater interoperability simply creates more options for how to cooperate if India chooses to do so.

With political will on both sides, there is no reason why we cannot develop a joint U.S.-Indian concept of operations for both the Indian and Pacific Oceans. There is no reason why we cannot construct a network of intelligence sharing that creates a common picture of our common strategic challenges—on land, at sea, in space, and in cyberspace. There is no reason why India cannot post more officers at higher levels within PACOM and CENTCOM, with corresponding increases in representation for U.S. officers at India’s commands. And there is no reason why we cannot work to facilitate India’s deployment of advanced defense capabilities, such as nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, missile defense architecture, as well as India’s inclusion in the development of the Joint Strike Fighter.


Coming from Senator McCain, seems there is more to the 'JSF for India' push than I originally suspected.

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Nihat » 06 Nov 2010 13:09

Can we please keep jsf talk out of this thread. We're starting to sound more and more like ajay shukla

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

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Singha » 06 Nov 2010 13:30

I suspect some of the EF and JSF talk is driven by the realization (already happened) that EF sales to members will be weak going fwd (people backing out , reducing orders) and there aint much money to drive EF++ efforts / 5th gen stuff to match what USA can do; and for the JSF the same realization that european and japanese orders would end up weaker than expected from the vast numbers initially projected.

if India goes EF way, I expect feelers would be sent out if we'd be interested in investing into EU 5th gen project (with UKstan as usual trying to downsize us and keep some H&D)

the french govt is already having to give dassault a $700mil bailout package and their weak state is showing up clearly. unless they get major orders and/or govt funding the independent french aerospace empire will shrink a lot over next decade.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20889
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Postby Philip » 06 Nov 2010 13:49

The sudden "pimping"-pardon my language, of the JSF,is becuase after first flight tests and prelim. evaluation,it appears that the EF outperforms the F-18SH considerably,as it should,being a much later gen. fighter with oodles of room for development,including TVC engines.At the last Aero-India,an EF pavilion pilot claimed that the EF's cockpit was the most userfriendly of all the contestants,even though he admitted that "nothing flies like the MIG-35".If we wish to acquire western TOT for this deal,so as to give us the best of east (5th-gen programme) and west,the EF has a very strong case,far better than either of the two US contenders.

Now,even if the JSF is being touted to us as a comely wench,equipped with a variety of erotic,sorry...exotic "tricks",the earliest that we can exoect it is in 2020,and even the UK media are now wondering at the logic of how just "14" JSFs will equip one QE carrier,coming in at 130m pounds,that too a CATOBAR version whoich will make the carriers even more expensive by equipping it with cats, which will by 2020 escalate into a price of 200m pounds each (not dollars)! This is why the US is desperate to save the JSF from becoming the most horrendously expensive aircraft programme ever,one that is still much delayed and making the US's allies think hard about the numbers that they can affod to acquire in future driving the price per aircraft even higher! So a "sucker" has to be found and the US is desperately trying hard to sabotage the Indo-Russian 5th-gen deal,for which several years of talks and negotitations have been held and shgould see a formal signing of the deal during Pres.Medvedev's visit.

Pres.Obama will make a huge pitch for the F-18SH to Dr.Singh.Left to himself he would award everything to the US,but there appear to be a lot of resistance within the MOD/services to go "all the way" with the US because of its lust for Pak and open determination to continue arms and aid to the terrorist state that keeps on attacking India.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests