MRCA News and Discussion - March 2011

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 19 Mar 2011 05:40

Old thread locked

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 19 Mar 2011 09:25

US hopes geopolitics can help land India jet deal

"It is not the price," explained Ron Somers, president of the US-India Business Council, "the $11 billion is great, but this is geopolitical."

India, after 50 years of depending on Russian fighter technology, is casting around for a new partner.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 19 Mar 2011 09:27

And a partner which is going to balance India by feeding to Pakistan. Fine.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 19 Mar 2011 12:45

^^ There is no point in blaming America for doing what is in its best interest today.

We just need to develop ourselves to show them that India is indispensable and they have to choose India. We can do this by strengthening the Indian Community in America into a vocal and powerful minority and we need to do the same with our economy.

There is a saying, "you don't bell an elephant". We should become the elephant, so we don't need to "compete" for the favor of other countries instead of getting bitter about America's dealings with Pakistan.

Gurinder P · Post by **Gurinder P** » 19 Mar 2011 16:19

^^ The feeling is that America does what's in it's best interest, like in 2001 when America invaded Afghanistan and need Pak bases to launch assaults, and Musharraf asked for cash Aid and clearance for f16's. And indeed we cannot blame for that, they must do what is in their best interest and India must do what it is in its best interest. Though, I tend to prefer European fighters since I think they have far superior performances to what America has on plate; I was about to say that the Europeans tend to be more neutral too, but send enough money and you can corrupt a priest.

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 19 Mar 2011 21:02

^^^

$11 billion is nothing for the Americans in the over all scheme of things. But in this bad economy of theirs it is still a lot of money which would put a lot of Americans to work and they need that desperately. The real reason that the Americans maybe pursuing this MMRCA deal is to try to take India out of the Russian orbit completely and into theirs. Also the Americans would like to keep their cake and eat it too... meaning they would like to recruit India into their camp and at the same time stroke the Pukis and keep them as their errand boys. That may not be palatable to India in the long run. India maybe playing a game where we are giving a little taste of the riches that the Americans could get from India and get them addicted to us and then down the road give them the option of choosing us or the Pukis. What would make that choice easier for the Americans is if the land of the impure ceases to exist, as the moronic entity that it has been and still is, which they seem to be well on their way to.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2011 21:52

Of the MRCA candidates which has the best air superiority role? I think the strike can be handled by the many planes in IAF inventory.

The way TSP is in downward spiral India needs to ensure air strike from TSP is negated. The DRDO efforts(PAD/AAD/etc) in ABM show that the TSP mizziles will be fizzles.

So while the requirement is for multi-role, what is needed is an air superiority fighter.

just my thoughts.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Mar 2011 22:00

There are certain things the khans have to cross a barrier that is mellower yellower than the red sea. The yellow sea tactics and game plans are entirely different, and largely driven by bilateral agreements.

Now, it is extremely difficult for India to give away what Europeans will allow us for the same billions of $ amount. There is no doubt in anybody's mind that the khans have effective system to cross the barrier, but their paper based democratic setup would not allow technology transfer just because few billions needs to be made. For example, they can make billions by selling more weapons to their middle-eastern oil friends than India.

W.r.t, they have a different barrier to cross, is what I am saying., and that will be soon be seen after MoD reviews and come up to price negotiation point, who are all the top three contenders.

Till then, it is all natak one hear from ddm et al.
---

Rafale with AESA or SH with AESA or EF with AESA makes the ideal air superiority fighter. The rest comes second onlee.., of course gets subdued by "other superior features and packages" (tailor made for India/read Antony's lips) it comes with.IMHO

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 19 Mar 2011 22:44

Of the MRCA candidates which has the best air superiority role? I think the strike can be handled by the many planes in IAF inventory.

Nahi Ramana sir,
I think its the other way round..we have 290+ MKI which are one of the best air superiority fighters...
So we will need more planes that are good at air to ground operations...Other than Mirages I dont think we have too many of them...
And why should we be defensive..

IMHO.
Happy Holi
Regards

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Mar 2011 04:20

ramana wrote:Of the MRCA candidates which has the best air superiority role? I think the strike can be handled by the many planes in IAF inventory.

The way TSP is in downward spiral India needs to ensure air strike from TSP is negated. The DRDO efforts(PAD/AAD/etc) in ABM show that the TSP mizziles will be fizzles.

So while the requirement is for multi-role, what is needed is an air superiority fighter.

just my thoughts.

You have hit the nail on the head. Air superiority is what is needed, with precision strike playing an important second role. For that you need something truly world class (i.e. Rafale or Eurofighter). But "world class" has a different connotation to the IAF who will fly the plane and to the GOI/MoD who has to buy the plane.

Son wants a BMW or Ferrari because he wants reliability and speed, but Daddy is only willing to buy an Ambassador because it is cheap and does the job.

RSoami wrote:I think its the other way round..we have 290+ MKI which are one of the best air superiority fighters...
So we will need more planes that are good at air to ground operations...Other than Mirages I dont think we have too many of them...
And why should we be defensive.

The MKI is an air dominance fighter which surely involves air superiority, however size does make a difference in a WVR dogfight.

As much as the IAF and the PAF both have potent BVR missiles, they are expensive and are fewer in number when compared to the stockpiles of AIM-9s, R-73s, Magic-IIs that each air force possess in their arsenal and thus they have to use them very carefully. Secondly, both air forces still focus very much on WVR combat with BVR combat playing an important, but secondary role. The MKI can more than handle its own against a Block 52 F-Solah or anything else the PAF can throw at us. In a strike mission you can have the Su-30MKI performing the role of precision strike with the Typhoon/Rafale providing air defense. Now that is a combination that is quite hard to beat for the PAF.

There is a video on youtube of a USN pilot talking about his Shornet and how it's potent radar/missiles are more than a match against other modern fighters out there in BVR combat. I would not dispute that as he knows more about air combat than me.

I think it was one of the first Garuda exercises that one Indian AF pilot mentioned, "They got the edge in BVR combat, but when it is WVR combat it is balle, balle."

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Mar 2011 06:40

Rakesh, Thanks for understanding my point of view. To me air superiority also needs ery good radar and a missile to go with it. So either Euro Fighter, Rafale or F-18 have good AESA radar. Of these lack of F-18 codes are a problem as IAF has to fine tune for their targets of interest.

Corps commanders most likely will have subsonic Baburs which also need to be taken out.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Mar 2011 07:41

Secondly, both air forces still focus very much on WVR combat with BVR combat playing an important, but secondary role.

Not for too much longer. With a network centric AF that thinking better vanish. Else the network is not worth it.

And, whatever happened to:

* Sensor source codes for all AN/APG

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Mar 2011 08:48

Any thoughts on what air superiority aspects against J20/Su30MK? very much a plausible aspect to consider for MMRCA.

Pogula · Post by **Pogula** » 20 Mar 2011 09:24

Looks like the French are desperate to find buyers for the Rafale.
This video is a clear sign of 2 things...

1. France will sell anything to anyone with money (China surely has a lot of that)
2. France's alliance is not something you want to bet on in times of geo-political unrest (US might pressure them when India faces off with Pak)

Not a good sign... What if Saudi or UAE is sold some of them in the future, given this revelation? That is an indirect ToCI (Transfer of Critical Info) to Pak...

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Mar 2011 09:37

It would be important to understand, that the fact we are asking for source code mean integration of home grown stores, and equipments so that which ever MRCA is selected, it is unique just like MKI. So, even if Rafale or Ef2K gets to pakis, there would be huge difference in terms of electronics and avionics, perhaps now including home grown weapons.

Pogula · Post by **Pogula** » 20 Mar 2011 10:00

@ RahulM... Thanks for that correction. Will remember that from here on

SaiK wrote:Any thoughts on what air superiority aspects against J20/Su30MK? very much a plausible aspect to consider for MMRCA.

The J-20 is a huge bird. I really doubt its effectiveness in air-to-air combat with any of the MMRCA contenders. Given its huge and elongated internal weapons bay, the J-20 is clearly a bomber with anti-ship & A2G mission priority given in its design. Not good news for Indian & US aircraft carriers, though.

Su-30MK that China was offered was a watered-down version with lower specifications for the radar, avionics and other critical parameters as compared to the Su-30MKI. The selected MMRCA should be pretty close to Su-30MKI in performance, if not same or better; hence, being better than the Chinese Su-30MKs.

Our LCA and older fighters can easily take care of the rest of the cheap 3rd gen Su & MiG knock-offs that they fill their squadrons with.

Don't forget that the J-20 is just a Tech Demo, as per an article I recently read that cited an anonymous source within PLAAF. Which means, they still have at least a decade from now before IOC (and that is being very optimistic). Even then, I would not really bet on its stealth & avionics being truly 5th gen. Also, by then, AMCA would at least be a prototype

fingers crossed!

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 20 Mar 2011 10:38

The US considers the Super Hornet to be a 4.75 gen multirole fighter that will eventually be replaced by a 6th gen, not 5th gen plane. The International Roadmap being offered to us includes a stealthy centerline conformal weapons pod that can carry 2 AMRAAMs and 2 JDAMs.

Key for India are Boeing's plans to build aerospace infra and plug companies like Tata, HAL and Larsen & Toubro, all of which already have agreements signed, into its own international civil and defense export effort. If we are going to build up our aerospace manpower and infra, we need this kind of depth in order to attract the right kind and quantity of talent.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 20 Mar 2011 13:36

Rakesh wrote: You have hit the nail on the head. Air superiority is what is needed, with precision strike playing an important second role. For that you need something truly world class (i.e. Rafale or Eurofighter). But "world class" has a different connotation to the IAF who will fly the plane and to the GOI/MoD who has to buy the plane.

Why do we need another Air-superiority fighter? Looking at the future say 10 years down the road, India is going to being inducting the PAK-FA, have a few squadrons of LCAs, have nearly 300 Su-30mkis plus the rest of the old warhorses. Now the Su-30mki and the PAK-FA would be more than enough to achieve air-superiority over anything the Pakis can afford or the PLAAF in Tibet can throw the Indian AF's way. Plus, with the induction of the Astra missile we would have a cheaper BVR missile that the IAF can use more liberally. How would a further contingent of Eurofighters or Rafale's add value or unique capabilities to the stable the IAF would have 10 years down the road ??

IMO, what the IAF really needs is an electronic attack/ground attack fighter that can penetrate enemy air-defenses and carry out SEAD missions because the ability to suppress the enemy's air-defenses (which are pretty substantial and modern on both our borders! ) is a key part in obtaining air-superiority over a battle-space and the IAF doesn't really have too many choices in standoff range anti-radiation/land-attack munitions. Also, the IAF would need the ability to provide real CAS to the troops on the ground especially in those difficult mountain terrains. The Eurofighter is just not cut out right now for these kinds of missions and the Rafale isn't really too much better in the ground attack role.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 20 Mar 2011 17:35

FWIW, yesterday, French Rafales penetrated Libyan airspace and knocked-out at least four tanks.
From what I understand, they flew through largely intact Libyan air defenses, and engaged targets with LGBs (TV pics clearly show LGBs under the wings).

The Rafale has made its A2G debut.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Mar 2011 17:36

My feel is that ANY air craft - given the time + funds - can be made into something anyone desires.

However, what is key is: "anyone desires". Basing our analysis on yesterdays experiences has some value, but the value is clearly diluted when tomorrow's desires have moved/changed by some exponential factor.

Do not know, but I would expect that WVR is not something anyone would desire. They would keep it in the back pocket for sure, train, etc and if the opportunity does arise then do balle, balle. But, in the current scheme of things it would be a travesty to some extent if BWR does not play a huge role to either prevent or keep WVR to a bare minimum.

Same with A2G, with loitering munitions, stand-off munition, Brahmos being tuned for mountainous areas, we should see a declining need for even A2G recs - not that there would be no need, just that the future should have a reduced need.

With recent tech introductions, in India, I have this strange feeling that the "MMRCA" envisioned even in 2005, does not exist today. What to talk of 2020 and beyond.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 Mar 2011 18:10

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:FWIW, yesterday, French Rafales penetrated Libyan airspace and knocked-out at least four tanks.
From what I understand, they flew through largely intact Libyan air defenses, and engaged targets with LGBs (TV pics clearly show LGBs under the wings).

The Rafale has made its A2G debut.

There were no air defences where Rafale operated in the first wave of attacks, and Benghazi was in rebel hands. That is why the US together with the UK and France launched hundreds of cruise-missiles on the western parts of the country where the air defences were situated.

Rafale made its A2G debut in Afghanistan btw.

Drishyaman · Post by **Drishyaman** » 20 Mar 2011 18:19

Henrik wrote:Rafale made its A2G debut in Afghanistan btw.

And, where did Gripen debut ? Or did it not debut at all ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Mar 2011 19:58

RahulM, Tell me more about Eurofighter?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Mar 2011 20:19

There were no air defences where Rafale operated in the first wave of attacks, and Benghazi was in rebel hands. That is why the US together with the UK and France launched hundreds of cruise-missiles on the western parts of the country where the air defences were situated.

Henrick,

You are simply wrong,
If kadafi tanks were deployed the most likely is that there were some air defenses...Especially knowing that a mig 23 was downed by air defenses...Don't try to downplay the performance

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 20 Mar 2011 21:03

Libya has the following "air-defenses" according to Wikipedia:

Lavochkin SA-2 88
Isayev SA-3 10
SA-6 ` 43

How many of these are "functional" and how many were near Bengazi is yet another debate altogether. This is primitive even by any standards. I think it is safe to say the successful attack on Libyan tanks through these "air-defenses" is not really a demonstration of Rafale's prowess.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 Mar 2011 21:51

arthuro wrote:
There were no air defences where Rafale operated in the first wave of attacks, and Benghazi was in rebel hands. That is why the US together with the UK and France launched hundreds of cruise-missiles on the western parts of the country where the air defences were situated.
Henrick,

You are simply wrong,
If kadafi tanks were deployed the most likely is that there were some air defenses...Especially knowing that a mig 23 was downed by air defenses...Don't try to downplay the performance

Mega rofl lol

The MIG were downed by a MANPAD or maybe some other SHORAD because it was flying way to low. The only air defences with any real danger were to the west and even those are pre-Vietnam war era crap. Those were the only ones with any real range anyway. Rafale is a plane sophisticated enough to fly high above the MANPADS and the SHORADS and take those out along with the tanks and the like with GBUs and AASM.

Now, be realistic please, there is a reason why the US together with the UK and France launched hundreds of cruise-missiles. Is it because the US lacks some capability France posesses? No not really... France, UK and US don't waste hundreds of cruise-missiles for nothing.

And please spell my name right.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 20 Mar 2011 21:55

Drishyaman wrote:
Henrik wrote:Rafale made its A2G debut in Afghanistan btw.
And, where did Gripen debut ? Or did it not debut at all ?

No it haven't, not yet. But that's purely out of political reasons. There's quite a lot of bash going on here in newspapers and in the political opposition on why we haven't sent Gripens to Libya yet. Even the damn commies are asking that question.

Basically all political parties except the main party in the ruling coalition are all for Sweden participating in the air campaign. There's a possibility that we might see Gripens over Libya soon, but not yet.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Mar 2011 22:28

Guys lets please stick this to MMRCA discussion. Thank You.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 20 Mar 2011 22:54

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_uk ... al_1522292

United Kingdom reports on typhoon.

The aircraft will not have full multi-role capability for some years, the report said attributing its problems to absence of a single decision-maker at the top and delayed decision making leading to delayed delivery.
Also, the Typhoon is still in the process of acquiring air-to-ground attack capability and also the tranche-3B agreement, between its four partner nations is yet to be signed, required for its full final production.

The fact that Eurofighter is the youngest could be its undoing...The report by National Audit office UK willl not please the Eurofighter bosses one bit, particularly the timing.
Its not multirole onlee...

Drishyaman · Post by **Drishyaman** » 20 Mar 2011 22:56

Henrik wrote: There's a possibility that we might see Gripens over Libya soon, but not yet.

Hmmm ! Seems to be a wise decision.
Let, the Rafale clear out the remaining pre-Vietnam era Air Defense.
Then the Gripen will join the action to post a goal in the empty goal post.

Gripen can then say it has combat history as well.
Well Planned.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 Mar 2011 23:09

ramana wrote:Of the MRCA candidates which has the best air superiority role? I think the strike can be handled by the many planes in IAF inventory.

The way TSP is in downward spiral India needs to ensure air strike from TSP is negated. The DRDO efforts(PAD/AAD/etc) in ABM show that the TSP mizziles will be fizzles.

So while the requirement is for multi-role, what is needed is an air superiority fighter.

just my thoughts.

not an easy question to answer.

I would rate only EF, rafale and shornet since the others are inadmissible IMHO due to various reasons. (mig-35 and F-16 old and little future, gripen, not quite what we should spend on. buying gripen would be being 'penny wise pound foolish' when we can get much better platforms for some more money)

for sheer aerodynamic performance nothing beats the typhoon with its superlative TWR, rafale comes second while the shornet is considered a brick. all 3 have good slow speed handling but shornet will find it harder to recover from an energy bleeding maneuver.

A) Aerodynamic Performance
EF >Rafale>>Shornet

Radar and overall sensor suite
shornet = rafale>~EF
not much to choose between the 3. shornet leads at the moment because US is much more experienced especially when it comes to AESA radars. that advantage will however erode with time. however it is unlikely we will get the real APG-79 from US. also, the fact that US depends on specialised stand-off jamming aircraft like the growlers(and hence not everything needs to be done by the vanilla platform) possibly counts against the shornet. rafale edges ahead of EF due to SPECTRA. shornet and rafale both lose points due to problems with IRST -- shornet doesn't have an internally mounted one and jugaads with one mounted on a drop tank, which comes with its own restrictions (unless they have changed this recently) while rafale has had major problems with its IR channel of OSF.

C) Weapons (only A2A)
rafale>EF>>shornet
one word, meteor. pushes both euro-canards far ahead of shornet.
in WVRAAMs all 3 are comparable but rafale's mica's come in both IR and EM varieties, and have BVR-ish ranges. that offers more flexibility than either EF's asraam/iris-T or shornet's aim-9x.
final numbers, out of 10 for A2A performance.

Code: Select all

        Aero    Sensors     Weapons  Total
EF      9/10    7.5/10      8.5/10   25/30
Raf    8.5/10    8/10        9/10   25.5/30
F/A-18   6/10    8/10        7/10    21/30

personally, I think the A2G qualities are more important but not by much, about 55-45 should be the weightage. what IAF has right now is enough to destroy PAF's air power and stall PLAAF in a defensive war. what we need is enough quality for a possible counter force strike option to be on the PM's table.

admiral koshy sahab, I am not sure I agree with the size ~1/WVR capability thing.
what matters is the agility and those massive al-31's put out enough to keep the su's nimble. its superb nose pointing authority is very handy in any WVR situation. you need to look no further than No. 20 sqdn's deployment to nellis AFB for red flag.
before red flag started the su's practiced 1v1 (which makes it almost certainly WVR exercise. doesn't make much sense to have 1v1 BVR exercise) with USAF F-15 and F-16 aggressor squadrons at mountain home. after the 'youtube terry' incident pushpinder singh commented via flightglobal that the kill ratio was 21:1 in favour of the MKI's. this was confirmed by vishnu som(and also by shiv ji) on BR who was on the ground during red flag.
even that '1' in 21:1 was a draw, no MKI was 'shot down' in those 1v1 exercises.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 21 Mar 2011 00:32

Drishyaman wrote:Hmmm ! Seems to be a wise decision.

I see where you are trying to go with that statement of yours, but I can tell you that it's all political. If you think you know better, fine.

Let, the Rafale clear out the remaining pre-Vietnam era Air Defense.

There isn't any left, they were all cleared out by American, British and French cruise missiles.

Then the Gripen will join the action to post a goal in the empty goal post.
Gripen can then say it has combat history as well.
Well Planned.

Is that a poor attempt at trolling or are you just being dumb? Staying out of range of MANPADS can any modern fighter jet do.

Now I'm leaving that and if you want to continue to troll, fine. I'm back to topic.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Mar 2011 01:07

drishyaman, please don't bait people.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 Mar 2011 01:54

UK slams Typhoon vying for India’s biggest deal

Even as India inches closer to finalise its biggest defence deal, United Kingdom’s audit watchdog has come out with a damning report about the Eurofighter which is one of the six contenders for 126 multi-role combat aircraft replacing the ageing MiGs.

As per National Audit Office (NAO), the single-seat fighter aircraft suffers from problems like spares unavailability and rising costs. The aircraft will not have full multi-role capability for some years, the report said attributing its problems to absence of a single decision-maker at the top and delayed decision making leading to delayed delivery

Also, the Typhoon is still in the process of acquiring air-to-ground attack capability and also the tranche-3B agreement, between its four partner nations is yet to be signed, required for its full final production.

Spares availability for aircraft support and maintenance, as per NAO, is shared by the four partner nations, independent of each other. But the contracts which are collaborative face problems for the supply of spares and repair of equipment, resulting in the inability to meet target for annual flying hours for the aircraft.

The technical evaluation of all the six competing vendors for the IAF’s 126 MMRCA concluded last year, after which the report is with the ministry of defence for review and a decision is awaited.

To reduce costs, the Royal Airforce (RAF) has cut down its Typhoon squadrons and therefore its flying hours, but the department managing the programme has prioritised pilot training on air defence roles which is currently its key task, the report said.

On the funding, the report said, “The department is confident that it can deliver the full range of support for the reduced number of aircraft within the originally approved figure of £13.1 billion. The number of aircraft being bought has fallen by a third and compared on a like for like basis the unit cost of support per aircraft has risen by approximately a third.

Typhoon’s multi-role capability will be further enhanced by planned upgrades and integration of new weapons to make it swing-role - which means the aircraft will have the flexibility to switch between missions while still in the air and so respond to changing operational demands. The multi-role swing-role is an important requirement in the IAF deal tender.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 21 Mar 2011 02:41

This report is very believable, which for me spells the death knell of the typhoon. Come to think of it, the decision making process in Tiffy board rooms is going to involve a lot of bickering as well as chai biskotti.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Mar 2011 03:34

When we say A2G, (A2S?) are we thinking of SEAD role with ALARM on typhoon (Matra/Bae). What would be on Rafale?

UK slamming Ef2K is actually a good news for our price negotiating team.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Mar 2011 05:14

Sorry if this has been posted earlier, but came across this. Entertaining post:

A K Antony holds a poisoned chalice

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Mar 2011 05:20

Libya No-Fly Zone :: Operation Odyssey Dawn

Britain deployed Typhoon patrol jets and all-weather Tornado attack aircraft, based at Royal Air Force bases in Scotland and the eastern county of Norfolk. ..............................

There is more such refs. Seems, at least the RAF Typhoons, are really not ready for A2G - yet.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Mar 2011 06:12

Feb, 2011 :: Battling US for huge deal, Eurofighter woos Japan

The contract is expected to be worth upward of $10 billion,..............

Seems some overlap with the Indian effort.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Mar 2011 07:28

Eurofighter is battling for its future 40 year business.

UK report is like Indian CAG report lot of smoke from little fire.