johnny_m wrote:F 16 IN is not the end of F 16 but the start he says.
The problem is none of the solution will help and it is only fire fighting that is left...This is because of some very short sighted(rather closed eye decisions) taken by GOI in the past... Getting 2 squadrons of each of the available aircraft will not lead you anywhere... Rather, it will be better to decide the optimum and go for the increased numbers. We can, instead have 2 assembly lines instead of one if we want numbers faster or we can go for mix of buy and make options where we buy half and balance is ordered directly from the OEM. we are already doing it for MKI... Although costly, it still be cheap than negotiating and paying for couple of aircraft types in quantity of 30 or 40 and not to mention logistic nightmare associated with it.Philip wrote:If the LCA was in production I would plump for more LCAs,but from all available info,govt. statements too,the max number that will be produced per year will be 8-10 at the very most and this only after the MK-2 is perfected,a task which now involves the redesign of the fuselage,etc.,making the aircraft different from the prototypes/MK-1 .In that case all we can expect is 120-if we build one per month,by 2020.This a number woefully short of what we require.Similarly,we cannot expect whichever bird is chosen as the MMRCA to build 200-300 in just 5 years,as the IAF itself expects the MMRCA to arrive only by 2015,giving us just 5 years of production,to produce more than the 126+ even if the rate is 2 per month! Add LCA production to MMRCA acquisitions,and the number is about 250 aircraft,keeping in mind that the bulk of MMRCA production will also be done in India and we know how delays have beset every project! These new -build numbers (250) will just manage to replace the MIG-21s being pensioned off.It sill keeps the IAF's sqd. strength below 40,when amin. of 50-55 is rqd. to deal with Pak and China simultaneously.
The "danger period of 7 years" is now,not 2020 when by then the FGFA will also be in service along with the full complement of SU-30s,many upgraded with some 5th-gen eqpt.So where do we obtain the extra 15-200 aircraft that we sorely need apartf rom the LCAs,etc.and what types? Ideally,acquiring more of a type in service is best instead of acquiring a new type,which is why I've suggsted also acquiring 120+ MIG-35s to also in course of time replace the older MIG-29s.The MIG-35 and Gripen are the cheapest solutions.They might be 2-3 times as much as a JF-17,but will be significantly superior.I think that 2 sqds. of both Gripen and Rafale can be acquired immediately fom Swedish and French forcesif either aircraft is chosen.The MMRCA alone will not be able top make up the shortfall in the IAF in the crucial years ahead.
In India, for example, he says much too little is being done to advertise the "Eurofighter," the European designed-and-built fighter plane. The Indians are currently interested in buying 126 fighter jets, a contract worth more than €10 billion. The European plane manufacturer EADS is competing with the Americans, Russians, French and Swedish for the contract. Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle offered assurances during his visit to India in October that Germany has the "best and most reliable technology."
The way the F 35 program is going they may have to settle for something like that. I think LM thinks the F 16IN as a stepping stone to F 35 C/D sales in the future.nrshah wrote:What else he would have said? The problem is no one questions, why US is not buying the rejuvenated and the very capable F16 with claimed generous sprinkle of 5th Gen technologies at half the price rather than expensive JSF....johnny_m wrote:F 16 IN is not the end of F 16 but the start he says. I wonder what more they can put into that airframe
Of course he said that, he's german.shukla wrote:Germany Considers Loosening Arms Export Controls
In India, for example, he says much too little is being done to advertise the "Eurofighter," the European designed-and-built fighter plane. The Indians are currently interested in buying 126 fighter jets, a contract worth more than €10 billion. The European plane manufacturer EADS is competing with the Americans, Russians, French and Swedish for the contract. Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle offered assurances during his visit to India in October that Germany has the "best and most reliable technology."
A Canadian Forces CF-18 fighter jet crashed overnight while trying to land at CFB Cold Lake, Alberta.
Capt. Keith Hoey, at CFB Trenton, said the jet was returning to the base from a mission just before midnight when something went wrong.
"At approximately seven miles [11 kilometres] from landing, something happened and the pilot was forced to eject out of the aircraft." Hoey said. "We're not sure what it was, at this time it would be purely speculative."
Hoey said the pilot was found safe following a 90-minute search. The jet was destroyed on impact.
Likewise.Hi, good to see you again!
How do you know the Praetorian can't? The SPECTRA features the same set of sensors as the DASS. And even older RWR/EWS systems on legacy aircraft have been able to perform basic ranging on electromagnetic emissions. Compared to them, the Rafale undoubtable is better, using multiple sensors and more sophisticated algorithms. But, its discrimination and range (esp. versus AESAs) is still an open question vis-a-vis IRST and radar.Sancho wrote:It's not only the sensors, its the capability of the EWS itself, because it is not used in defensiv only, but can be used in offensive too. EF at the moment does not have comparable capabilities and DASS/Pretorian can't be used to guide weapons (PIRATE = FSO, DASS = SPECTRA, so in this case the EWS is the important system that makes use of the IRST).
The F18SH will get most of the features that Rafale offers only after the Block 3 upgrade, like integrated IRST, speherical MAWS, latest cockpit design...however, this discussion might fit better in the MMRCA thread I guess. I just pointed out that the Rafale, or better SPECTRA offers even now capabilities that are comparable to those in F35 and that we need such capabilities for FGFA too, to make it really capable.
It actually says 10 billion Euros which would be about 13.5 billion USD. Not all that much higher than the 12 billion that other sources are claiming.nrshah wrote:The link above says the cost of MMRCA is 10 billion pounds... Which going by current forex rate is 16 Bn USD...
The point is?johnny_m wrote:Those are Legacy Hornets. And even the most advanced Aircraft crash, an F 22 was lost yesterday.
On the technical side, Brazil has placed technology transfer as its biggest priority in entertaining these offers so that its burgeoning aviation industry could eventually develop combat aircraft to sell to other markets. France has responded positively to Brazilian demands for a comprehensive transfer of expertise and local assembly. Moreover, the Rafale is 100 percent French-made, while the Gripen and, of course, the F/A-18 contain U.S. parts that are subjected to U.S. export restrictions and could create later difficulties when Brazil intends to sell derivations of these jets.
Both Saab and Boeing upped their offers with promises of shared production and technology transfers and even slashed the price of their original offers to compete more effectively with Rafale. The Brazilian military, however, made it known that its top brass was heavily leaning toward the Swedish Gripen when the Brazilian Air Force released an evaluation report in early 2010 that ranked the Gripen first, the F/A-18 second and the Rafale last. Despite the military’s preference for the Swedish fighter jet and the more costly French package, the Brazilian government appears more interested in using this defense deal for reasons that transcend technical or financial considerations.
But Paris also has broader interests in mind in courting Brasilia. France is locked into a complex geopolitical game with Germany, which has long outpaced France economically and has more recently overtaken France in playing a primary leadership role in Europe. France is thus in a fight to retain relevancy, and its most competitive asset is its defense industry and overall military, with which Germany does not currently compete. France presently follows the United States, United Kingdom and Russia as the world’s fourth-largest arms exporter, with Brazil as its biggest defense client. As France attempts to balance itself against a strengthening Germany, it has a strategic interest in using arms sales to build ties with emerging powers, such as Brazil, so that it can retain its role as the go-to European state for emerging powers. This way, France both builds options for itself beyond its current partnership with Germany and also makes its links with emerging powers around the world an asset that Berlin cannot ignore.
Meanwhile, Brazil is looking to assert its regional leadership role, a task that involves distancing itself from the dominant power of the Americas, the United States. While Sweden’s Gripen may be better suited for Brazil’s conditions, perform better and come at a lower cost in the Brazilian military’s eyes, France’s Rafales come without U.S. parts and thus without American strings attached from the viewpoint of Brazil’s political leadership.
Brazil also sees the utility in developing a stronger strategic partnership with a European heavyweight like France. The more Brazil attempts to extend itself overseas, involving itself in everything from global currency battles to U.S. entanglements in the Middle East, the more it will be looking for supporters who sit in high places and who are not easily wedded to the United States. France thus far appears willing to play the role of Brazil’s cheerleader, as evidenced by its vocal support for Brazil’s bid for a U.N. Security Council seat. Moreover, Brazil can take comfort in knowing that France, thousands of kilometers away across the Atlantic and with little vested interest in Brazil’s immediate periphery, will not be asking for much in return for this strategic partnership.
The point is that since the Vietnam war ended the foremost cause of aircraft losses is peacetime attrition. Like Champion F1 driver being knocked down while crossing a road.SaiK wrote:The point is?johnny_m wrote:Those are Legacy Hornets. And even the most advanced Aircraft crash, an F 22 was lost yesterday.
Guddu wrote:The Brazilian military, however, made it known that its top brass was heavily leaning toward the Swedish Gripen when the Brazilian Air Force released an evaluation report in early 2010 that ranked the Gripen first, the F/A-18 second and the Rafale last. Despite the military’s preference for the Swedish fighter jet and the more costly French package, the Brazilian government appears more interested in using this defense deal for reasons that transcend technical or financial considerations.
The Meteor still has quite a while to go before it enters production. A Gripen with a Meteor isn't going to changing the balance of power anywhere. India can opt for it in 2012 when it enters service along with any of the three European aircraft.Philip wrote:A recent AWST report says that of all the European fighters,the Gripen is the first to have successfulluy integrated the Meteor AAM BVR missile,whch outclasses Pak's AMRAAMs.The Meteor meant even for the Typhoon,has yet to be tested aboard that aircraft.There is a boast from a Gripen exec. that he can send a Gripen with a Meteor over the Baltic and immediately "change the balance of power" there.This is a significant development as the Typhoon is somewhat backward as of now integrating not just the Meteor BVR AAM but also its AESA radar.The posts of Brazil's evaluation are also quite interesting and couldgive us an insight into the MMRCA race.
Jobim made FAB go back and change the report so it came out the way he wanted it to, and that is not a rumour. If I remeber it correctly they even had a hearing in the senate about it. Jobim has more or less been the Dassault spokesman, taking it so far that his judgement has been openly questioned.Danell wrote:Guddu wrote:The Brazilian military, however, made it known that its top brass was heavily leaning toward the Swedish Gripen when the Brazilian Air Force released an evaluation report in early 2010 that ranked the Gripen first, the F/A-18 second and the Rafale last. Despite the military’s preference for the Swedish fighter jet and the more costly French package, the Brazilian government appears more interested in using this defense deal for reasons that transcend technical or financial considerations.
There was only one official document released by the Brazilian Air Force (FAB), it's a letter in which the high command of the air force say that the three aircraft meet the operational and logistical requirements. But in the letter, the high-command also added that considering the national defense strategy (which aims technological autonomy), the French aircraft represents the most consistent proposal.
http://www.correiobraziliense.com.br/ap ... ndex.shtml
The rumour about Gripen NG ranked first by FAB was launched by a well known pro-Saab journalist in a conservative newspaper called Fohla de Sao paulo (opposed to Lula's government). This rumor was then echoed by others conservative medias, which are the majority in Brazil.
In fact, it seems the Gripen NG is rather seen as an high-risk project:
http://www.administradores.com.br/infor ... nte/45865/
google translation:
http://translate.google.fr/translate?js ... 2F45865%2F
Brazilians are guilty, not meKartik wrote:Thanks Danell. Now I'd advise that you take shelter somewhere since if Wickberg sees what you wrote, you'll get a good bit of rather nasty stuff written in return for daring to say that the Gripen NG is a high risk project.
It's riskier than ordering a ready-made Rafale yes, but I wouldn't call it a "high-risk project". I'm glad they didn't join up with Ef2k, I've read somewhere that the thing costs $14 000 / hour to operate (anyone have a different figure?)..SaiK wrote:Gripen NG -is a- high risk project. They should have joined hands with Ef2k- and made a real multi/switch role a/c.
For a small country like Sweden to keep 100 Ef2k in the air, it's a little to much. This is why they've done everything they can to keep the costs of the Gripen down, even though some of you are sceptical to their claims.Henrik, if thats true then the EF will go for a toss. I am sure operation costs is surely being considered i.e. in the "L1" condition of the IAF. May be "GURUS" can give us some-heads-up on this.Henrik wrote: I'm glad they didn't join up with Ef2k, I've read somewhere that the thing costs $14 000 / hour to operate (anyone have a different figure?)..
The reason for why I'm asking if someone here has other figures is that there seem to be a lot of different figures out.B_Ambuj wrote:Henrik, if thats true then the EF will go for a toss. I am sure operation costs is surely being considered i.e. in the "L1" condition of the IAF. May be "GURUS" can give us some-heads-up on this.Henrik wrote: I'm glad they didn't join up with Ef2k, I've read somewhere that the thing costs $14 000 / hour to operate (anyone have a different figure?)..
What are the figures for the competition ?
http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affa ... &id=101871On the operations front, the Austrian Defense Ministry has allocated €32 million per annum for the deployment and maintenance of the jets, even though a calculation by the Rechnungshof (Court of Audit) has estimated operations for 1500 flight hours to cost €50 million a year, later even climbing to over €100 million a year after 2013. If those projections prove accurate, and without the implementation of financial adjustments, the Austrian armed forces would have to cover the additional Eurofighter operations costs with funds originally earmarked for other purposes.
http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-in-t ... -aircraft/Paul Beaver, former editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly and a former army helicopter pilot, said: “What David Richards is saying is that the airframe does not need to be superb — you just need to put high-tech sensors and the defensive aids on there. In Afghanistan, there is a reasonably small threat level for aircraft. It is not a replacement for Apache helicopters but it is a complementary capability.” Richard North, a defence analyst and another advocate of the aircraft, said: “The right kit for the sort of wars we are fighting today is a lot cheaper than the high-end kit.”
The Brazilian two-seater Tucano can fly from airstrips and loiter for six and a half hours over the battlefield without refuelling, although it cannot refuel in mid-air. It can carry 1.5 tonnes and uses only £500 of fuel an hour. The Eurofighter Typhoon costs nearly £85,000 an hour to fly. The trainer version is in service with the RAF.
.^^^ Prof Das is not alone in thinking that high end gadgetry is often not the mantra to success.Henrik wrote:Paul Beaver, former editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly and a former army helicopter pilot, said: “What David Richards is saying is that the airframe does not need to be superb — you just need to put high-tech sensors and the defensive aids on there. In Afghanistan, there is a reasonably small threat level for aircraft. It is not a replacement for Apache helicopters but it is a complementary capability.” Richard North, a defence analyst and another advocate of the aircraft, said: “The right kit for the sort of wars we are fighting today is a lot cheaper than the high-end kit.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... calreportsShortlisting, Shortly
Prospects are increasing that India will sustain four offerings in its $12-billion Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) program but soon eliminate the MiG-35 and F‑16IN from the field.
The downselect, which industry officials had widely expected would not take place until after February’s Aero India show in Bangalore, could become official as early as next month, program watchers indicate. The actual announcement of the decision, however, is still not expected until after the air show. Remaining in the battle to build at least 126 fighters would be the Saab Gripen, the only single-engine offering, along with the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.
It has appeared likely for some time that the MiG-35 would be dropped from the running, and in recent days the F-16I’s elimination has also begun to seem inevitable. A drawback of the F-16, according to Indian air force officials, is that Pakistan also operates a version of the fighter. The Indian government has consistently expressed its frustration and irritation at Washington’s continued supply of weapons—most notably more F-16s—to Islamabad, weapons India believes only serve to close the conventional military gap between the two countries.
U.S. industry officials insist, however, that while India publicly expresses misgivings about the U.S.-Pakistani relationship, it is quietly less opposed because it sees Washington’s involvement as a stabilizing force.
Furthermore, a Lockheed Martin official insists, “we have heard nothing that would suggest the Indian government would eliminate either U.S. competitor from the competition because of U.S. engagement with Pakistan. On the contrary, we are very confident, based on the results of the field evaluation trials, that the F-16IN Super Viper is fully compliant with India’s requirements.”
Industry observers note that recent opinion pieces in the Indian press, which suggest that the MMRCA competition be scrapped and replaced with a purchase of 200 Lockheed Martin F-35As, could indicate that the company is already looking beyond the competition. The F-35 is not in play for the air force requirement, although both the F-35C and the F-35B are officially on offer to the Indian navy.
Speculation in India has put the Eurofighter and Rafale ahead in the bidding, but Indian air force officials dismiss that. Moreover, the Gripen and F/A-18E/F have an edge in terms of price, which may be gaining greater weight in the selection process.
The Gripen appears to have found indirect support from the government. The director of the Indian government’s official air power think tank says the Gripen suits the service’s requirements best. In a recent column, Air Commo.Jasjit Singh writes: “The choice that comes closest to the ‘medium’ multirole aircraft that the [Indian air force] has been seeking since a decade ago is the [Indian version of the Gripen NG].”
A great deal of political diplomacy to push through a deal—as well as furious back-channel lobbying—will undoubtedly occur in the next few months. Following the visit by U.S. President Barack Obama last week, the heads of state of Russia and France are scheduled to be hosted by New Delhi soon. Indian air force chief Air Chief Marshal PV Naik has indicated that the government will make a type selection by July, although a decision could come closer to the end of 2011.
The British defence secretary is set to kick off a series of high-profile military exchanges with India beginning next week even as the defence ministry heads towards a “downselect” of combat aircraft for a $12-billion order.
Sweden’s defence minister is expected in December, to prop up Swedish firm SAAB’s bid with its Gripen fighter aircraft. Sweden’s defence minister is expected in December, to prop up Swedish firm SAAB’s bid with its Gripen fighter aircraft. French President Nicholas Sarkozy and Russian President Dimitry Medvedev are also slated to visit India in the same month.
He will also visit Cassidian’s Delhi office to discuss and promote the Eurofighter Typhoon’s bid. Cassidian is the new name of the defence and security division of EADS. EADS has been promoting the Typhoon as not only a state-of-the-art aircraft but also suggesting a “partnership” that will bolster India’s diplomatic ties with the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy.The statement said that together with Indian defence minister A.K. Antony, Fox “will provide senior political leadership to the bilateral defence relationship. This will ensure that the defence aspects of the new UK-India enhanced partnership play their rightful, central role”.
Eurofighter closes in on £7bn Indian dealThe Eurofighter Typhoon consortium will offer India the technical blueprint of the jet in a bid to land a 7 billion pound ($11 billion) contract to supply 126 aircraft to the country’s air force, the London-based Sunday Times reported. U.K. Defense Secretary Liam Fox will visit India this week to bolster the bid, the newspaper said.
The Eurofighter Typhoon consortium is to offer India the technological blueprint of its jets to secure a £7 billion contract to sell 126 combat aircraft to the Indian Air Force.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
London: The Eurofighter Typhoon consortium is to offer India the technological blueprint of its jets in a bid to secure a whopping 7.1-billion-pound contract to sell 126 combat aircraft to the Indian Air Force.
Fox's visit, the first of a British defence secretary in six years, has been described as "pivotal" as the debate on the jet deal shifts from a technical to a more political phase.
The Typhoon received a boost in the race for the biggest defence deal in India's history after it was ranked in the top two of the Indian Air Force's technical trials of all six bidding aircraft, which included America's F-16 and F-18 and Sweden's Gripen, the paper said.
The report quoted Andrew Gallagher, chief executive of BAE Systems India, as saying that the deal being offered to India would bring New Delhi in as a full "fifth partner", including the transfer of full technical sovereignty, access to computer source codes and the objective of making the entire aircraft in Indian factories.
Viv S wrote: How do you know the Praetorian can't? The SPECTRA features the same set of sensors as the DASS. And even older RWR/EWS systems on legacy aircraft have been able to perform basic ranging on electromagnetic emissions. Compared to them, the Rafale undoubtable is better, using multiple sensors and more sophisticated algorithms. But, its discrimination and range (esp. versus AESAs) is still an open question vis-a-vis IRST and radar.
I will still remain there mainly, just wanted to get more infos on FGFA and the C17 procurement, that's why I registered here too, so sorry for the late reply.