Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Apr 2015 19:54

There is a degree of smoke and mirrors that is happening that I cannot understand. I can hypothesize that there are two separate streams of information about indigenous aircraft projects which are released or not released based on logic that I cannot understand.

On the one hand there is the "In the public eye" projects like LCA. There are a series of announcements about dates, setbacks etc. On the other hand there are some things that are announced and then all information goes "underground" - nothing gets revealed - like LSP 6

There there was another "in the public eye" project - the IJT. It started with a bang and spluttered forward until the crash after which the project went underground. There was some reference to a third prototype on and off. The first flight was never announced in public. Now suddenly they are saying that some 1000 flights (or some such benchmark) has been achieved. That surprisede me. We have jingos watching the skies and the area around HAL. There have been very few reports of thes eplanes having been spotted. There is obviously a clampdown on information.

There there is the LUH program. I can't recall exactly but I think I took several images of posters at Aero India 2009 of planned helicopters including LUH and a heavy helicopter. I need to dig up those images. Then there was this big drama of tenders being called, three competitors submitting bits and then poof the whole thing collapsed. And now suddenly HAL is producing the first prototype of its LUH. Obviously some work was going on behind the scenes even when that LUH bids drama was going on.

There is one more project that is out of public eye and that is HTT 40. HAL does not seem to care too much about the Air Force not wanting it. It will have ejection seats and armament and it will be offered to teh Army to double up as a kight attack aircraft I guess. Money is money. If army can get cheap they will buy in and expand their little air force and displace the Air Force just a little bit.

Finally there is the LCH. The iAF wants it. The IA wants it and it seems to be moving ahead steadily - and it remains in the public eye for now - and it is even occasionally visible around HAL.

The point I want to make is that information is being tightly controlled with only selected news being revealed to the news media. For many of us who have been online for over a decade it is obvious that the digital revolution has caused an enormous proliferation of defence news reporters and defence news portals. They all have to write something to earn their keep and they do. And it appears that a lot of this news must be simply cooked up out of the very very little information taht is released in a controlled manner.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 16 Apr 2015 19:59

The Indian Air Force (IAF) issued the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the replacement of the engines of it’s fleet of some 125 Jaguar aircraft to Honeywell on Monday.

Which other airforce in the world would want to replace a licence built engine with another one, which is prone to sanctions ..that too after a good 35 years of operational service! ..hainji..?

Dont you find it funny..do you understand the seriousness with which khan was trying to.sabotage the country?

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 16 Apr 2015 20:10

geeth wrote:
The Indian Air Force (IAF) issued the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the replacement of the engines of it’s fleet of some 125 Jaguar aircraft to Honeywell on Monday.
Which other airforce in the world would want to replace a licence built engine with another one, which is prone to sanctions ..that too after a good 35 years of operational service! ..hainji..?

Dont you find it funny..do you understand the seriousness with which khan was trying to.sabotage the country?

With all due respect - take the tin foil hat off. There was a tender, one company won - it might not be based in your favorite country, but then who gives a damn.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 16 Apr 2015 20:29

Biswarup Gooptu, ET Bureau Jun 22, 2011, 04.42am IST

BANGALORE: The US is likely to be the prime beneficiary of yet another lucrative military contract, after the defence ministry withdrew its commercial tender for the re-engining of the Indian Air Force's Jaguar Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft last month.

New Delhi is likely to proceed through the Foreign Military Sales route as the existing defence policy does not allow procurement from a single vendor.
http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... e-ministry

^^^^next time, I may not show this kindness in doing the work for you.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Apr 2015 21:28

shiv wrote:There is a degree of smoke and mirrors that is happening that I cannot understand. I can hypothesize that there are two separate streams of information about indigenous aircraft projects which are released or not released based on logic that I cannot understand.

On the one hand there is the "In the public eye" projects like LCA. There are a series of announcements about dates, setbacks etc. On the other hand there are some things that are announced and then all information goes "underground" - nothing gets revealed - like LSP 6

There there was another "in the public eye" project - the IJT. It started with a bang and spluttered forward until the crash after which the project went underground. There was some reference to a third prototype on and off. The first flight was never announced in public. Now suddenly they are saying that some 1000 flights (or some such benchmark) has been achieved. That surprisede me. We have jingos watching the skies and the area around HAL. There have been very few reports of thes eplanes having been spotted. There is obviously a clampdown on information.

There there is the LUH program. I can't recall exactly but I think I took several images of posters at Aero India 2009 of planned helicopters including LUH and a heavy helicopter. I need to dig up those images. Then there was this big drama of tenders being called, three competitors submitting bits and then poof the whole thing collapsed. And now suddenly HAL is producing the first prototype of its LUH. Obviously some work was going on behind the scenes even when that LUH bids drama was going on.

There is one more project that is out of public eye and that is HTT 40. HAL does not seem to care too much about the Air Force not wanting it. It will have ejection seats and armament and it will be offered to teh Army to double up as a kight attack aircraft I guess. Money is money. If army can get cheap they will buy in and expand their little air force and displace the Air Force just a little bit.

Finally there is the LCH. The iAF wants it. The IA wants it and it seems to be moving ahead steadily - and it remains in the public eye for now - and it is even occasionally visible around HAL.

The point I want to make is that information is being tightly controlled with only selected news being revealed to the news media. For many of us who have been online for over a decade it is obvious that the digital revolution has caused an enormous proliferation of defence news reporters and defence news portals. They all have to write something to earn their keep and they do. And it appears that a lot of this news must be simply cooked up out of the very very little information taht is released in a controlled manner.

We, HAL & BR, are developing many highly advance platforms. But the jingoes of BR have not seen them flying !!

WHY

They are all stealth aircraft

K

PS Excuse my PJ. There is an overdose of Rafale since last few days. I need something to let off my steam

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 16 Apr 2015 23:03

Fighter jet makers eye Indian riches after scaled-back French deal.

Foreign fighter jet makers see a multi-billion dollar opportunity in India's decision to scale back purchases of high-end aircraft from France, which may free up cash in the world's largest arms importer to buy a new fleet of mid-range planes.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced last week that India would buy 36 French Rafale jets for an estimated $4.3 billion, in effect ending talks on a larger deal for 126 planes that would have sucked up some $20 billion and locked rivals out of the market for a generation.

Sweden's Saab and US Lockheed Martin are set to re-pitch their Gripen and F-16 planes, eliminated in the Rafale tender, as the kind of lighter, single-engine aircraft that Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said on Monday the air force needed to rebuild its fleet.

"We are here and we are ready," said a source close to Saab. Saab was proposing to establish "fully-fledged production" of the Gripen in India alongside a local partner.

Lockheed Martin may also tout its F-16, one of the most widely used fighter planes in the world, as a replacement for Russian-made MiGs that are a mainstay in India's fleet, industry sources said. Lockheed Martin declined to comment.

"The light combat aircraft opportunity is going to be there in the near future because the MiGs have to be replaced really fast," said Delhi-based defence commentator and analyst Neelam Mathews.

Russia, traditionally India's largest arms supplier, is hopeful it can sell more of its Sukhoi Su-30s, a plane partly assembled in India, to tide over the air force while it waits two years to receive the first Rafales.

Foreign manufacturers have also welcomed India's decision to negotiate directly with the French government for further Rafales.

"What is positive about the announced Rafale deal is that purchase is supposed to be based on a government-to-government agreement. We have been asking the Indian side for a long time to get back to this practice instead of tenders," said one Russian diplomat.

Moscow wants to speed up the conclusion of talks with India for the joint manufacture of a new generation stealth fighter jet, the diplomat said.

India needs to replenish an air force fleet that has fallen to 34 operational squadrons, down from 39 earlier this decade and below the government-approved strength of 42 considered necessary to face a two-front challenge from Pakistan and China.

Parrikar said on Monday that India needed 100 new light combat aircraft within five years to replace the MiG-21s, and that the heavier and pricier Rafale was not the plane to do it.

His preference would be for the indigenously-made Tejas to fill the void. But Parrikar himself has admitted the jet, in development for three decades, has limitations while the latest version still awaits final clearance.

Either way, air force officials and industry sources say India is unlikely to buy anything like the 126 planes agreed in the original deal with France after all-in costs doubled to an estimated $20 billion.

Parrikar said he had not decided how many more Rafales he might buy. Manufacturer Dassault Aviation could also pitch its single-engine Mirage if India opts for something cheaper.

Foreign planemakers may need to join forces with an Indian state-run or private partner to win orders, especially if Modi is to realise his goal of developing a military industrial base.

Under the original deal with Dassault, 108 of the jets were to be produced at a state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) plant. But the two sides could not agree terms.

Such disagreements could open up opportunities for nascent private players to partner foreign manufacturers and build locally, experts said.

"This could be Rafale, or any other aircraft as long as the government is able to address the core issues of tech transfer, joint production and design collaboration," said M. Matheswaran, a former Air Marshal and adviser to Hindustan Aeronautics.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 16 Apr 2015 23:46

geeth wrote:Biswarup Gooptu, ET Bureau Jun 22, 2011, 04.42am IST

BANGALORE: The US is likely to be the prime beneficiary of yet another lucrative military contract, after the defence ministry withdrew its commercial tender for the re-engining of the Indian Air Force's Jaguar Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft last month.

New Delhi is likely to proceed through the Foreign Military Sales route as the existing defence policy does not allow procurement from a single vendor.
http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... e-ministry

^^^^next time, I may not show this kindness in doing the work for you.

I am not sure what that proves other than we are buying Honeywell engines...where does it prove sabotage, malicious intent, etc. ?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Apr 2015 01:56

Parrikar said on Monday that India needed 100 new light combat aircraft within five years to replace the MiG-21s, and that the heavier and pricier Rafale was not the plane to do it.

You cannot get a fighter jet to be Made in India and still meet those targets. The only way to do so is to ramp up LCA FAST and buy more MKI's. SAAB can't begin to produce Gripen's in India and manage 100 in 5 years, no one starting from scratch could.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 17 Apr 2015 05:10

I am not sure what that proves other than we are buying Honeywell engines...where does it prove sabotage, malicious intent, etc. ?

Top

But I am sure your claim about "selection after due tender process" is bunkum

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 17 Apr 2015 05:19

Re Honewell F-125 engines ^^^ If one Googles Rolls Royce declines to bid on Jaguar re-engining

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ng-353432/

Honeywell was the only other option

srai · Post by **srai** » 17 Apr 2015 06:49

Parrikar said on Monday that India needed 100 new light combat aircraft within five years to replace the MiG-21s, and that the heavier and pricier Rafale was not the plane to do it.

If we look at the numbers for 2020 based on current/planned purchases, number of squadrons hovers between 30-35 squadrons without counting whatever is left of the MiG-21/27s.

14 x Su-30MKI
6 x Jaguar UPG
3 x MiG-29UPG
3 x Mirage-2000UPG
2-to-3 x Rafale
2-to-6 x LCA Mk.1

Total: 30-35 squadrons

LCA Mk.1 orders and production needs to be ramped up. Option to add another squadron of Rafale will most likely be executed. Then extending Su-30MKI production run by another couple of years would add a squadron (or two) to take it to around 36 squadrons.

Future

Between 2020 and 2030, FGFA and LCA Mk.2 would join the fleet replacing MiG-29s and augmenting squadron numbers.
Between 2030 and 2040, FGFA and AMCA would replace Mirage-2000s and Jaguars.
Post 2040, AMCA and UCAV would replace LCAs, Su-30MKIs and Rafales.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 17 Apr 2015 07:08

IMHO I think we are following a good strategy and not putting all the eggs in one basket. The way I look at it there is no way in the world that we can ramp up production of Tejas to about 24 AC per year in a short time frame. And that is mk1. After mk2 comes online the ramp up will take longer - 2022-2025. During this time we will probably have our oldest m2k, jags and probably the rambha ( older airframes) either retiring or being relegated to lesser flying duties to preserve airframe life.
The Gripen is powered by the same engine that will be doing duty in the Mk2 Tejas. Also allows for having a mix of single engine and twin engine medium fleet with the AMCA and PAK-FA a long way out.

It is a good way to ensure force levels are raised quickly while also developing capabilities.
3-4 squadrons of the Rafale ( China front) , 3-4 squadrons of Gripen ( pak front), 7-8 squadrons of Tejas ( point defense) and 10 squadrons of Su-30 ( dominance and attack) will be almost perfect solution. This also allows induction from multiple production lines at same time allowing for faster induction.

srai · Post by **srai** » 17 Apr 2015 07:27

^^^

There is no way Gripen would join the IAF anytime before 2020. The negotiation for it in itself would take that long

Besides, what strategic value has Sweden to offer India? The French got the G-2-G deal in return for a host of strategic investment/support, such as support for India's permanent seat at the UN Security Council and nuclear technologies.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 17 Apr 2015 07:44

FMS route for Gripen? Possible?

It is about shoring up capabilities in a short time frame. The Tejasii( mk2) will also maybe need external consultant support from SAAB ( and maybe the AMCA). They are almost sanction proof IMHO.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Apr 2015 07:55

srai wrote: There is no way Gripen would join the IAF anytime before 2020. The negotiation for it in itself would take that long

I would not say that with so much confidence.

Between 1984 and 1989 the IAF inducted the MiG 23, the Mirage 2000 and MiG 29.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 17 Apr 2015 08:35

Responding to some thoughts on the LCA dhaaga.

Do we still need that theoretical 42 squadron number or can we do more with less. Compared to a/c of yesteryear which typically had specialised roles like a switchblade we now have Swiss knife like capabilities. Almost all current and future gen a/c are multi role. Effective range of operations has increased with armament rather than the delivery machines themselves ( standoff bombs!). Theoretically an LCA can fly within a 100 kms of the ground target and release a glide bomb and egress without having to face SAM defences.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2015 08:39

Gripen could worm in if the swedish air force is willing to give 48 Gripens from its own stock to be later replaced by NG when production is done.

since it can already fire the amraam thats another lollipop for iaf to ponder.

being a american engine + amraam + aim9X , they would make money whichever way it rolls, more in gripen via amraam.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Apr 2015 08:44

nikhil_p wrote:Responding to some thoughts on the LCA dhaaga.
Do we still need that theoretical 42 squadron number or can we do more with less. Compared to a/c of yesteryear which typically had specialised roles like a switchblade we now have Swiss knife like capabilities. Almost all current and future gen a/c are multi role. Effective range of operations has increased with armament rather than the delivery machines themselves ( standoff bombs!). Theoretically an LCA can fly within a 100 kms of the ground target and release a glide bomb and egress without having to face SAM defences.

My view on this is that we need more, but they should be affordable. At the height of IAF action in Kargil when Pakis were getting their asses ripped open with MIg 21, 27s, Mi 8s, Mirage 2000s with MiG 29 CAP and Jaguar/MiG 25 on recce flights one senior IAF (Engineering) officer told me that the only reason why a small piffling area of 5000 km borders got so much attention was that there was no fighting anywhere else. If there is all out war then resources will be very very thin on the ground. I am all for 750 combat at least.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Apr 2015 08:54

In addition to Rafale, India could also buy light fighter to replace MiG-21: Parrikar

With Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi facing tough questions over the purchase of 36 Rafale fighters, announced on Friday during his visit to Paris, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, appeared on Monday on the state-run broadcaster, Doordarshan, to explain this move.

Parrikar was unable to clarify how many Rafales would eventually be bought, or what price would be paid. Noting that there had only been an in-principle decision at the PM’s level, he said: “We have not detailed its price and terms and conditions yet… the (Indian and French) teams will now sit and work out details”, he said.

“It may be worked out that we will buy another 90 Rafales… The ‘Make in India’ part will be decided only after government-to-government talks”, said Parrikar.

Contradicting himself later, Parrikar said India could not afford 126 Rafales. “We must remember that Rafale is a top-end, multi-role fighter… but it is quite expensive. When you talk of 126 aircraft, it becomes a purchase of about Rs 90,000 crore”, he said.

This is the first time an official has revealed the amount Dassault had quoted for 126 Rafales. Media speculation had favoured a figure of $15-18 billion. Parrikar’s revelation of Rs 90,000 crore come to about $15 billion.

Parrikar made the far-reaching announcement that, in addition to the Rafale, India could buy a second foreign fighter, in the lightweight category, to replace several MiG-21 squadrons that will retire this decade.

“Rafale is not a replacement for MiG-21. LCA Tejas is a replacement for MiG-21. Or, if we build some other fighter under “Make in India”, that is also possible. If we build another single engine [fighter] in India, which is possible, that could be a replacement for the MiG-21”, said Parrikar.

Indian Air Force (IAF) planners do not favour buying two new types of fighters. Yet Parrikar has thrown up a tantalizing prospect for light fighter builders like Lockheed Martin, which had offered the F-16IN Super Viper to India; and Swedish company, Saab, which had offered the Gripen NG.

It has been widely speculated across the industry that Anil Ambani’s Reliance Group was interested in building the Rafale, supplanting Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). Parrikar has now stated that production in India would be open for companies other than HAL.

“Initially HAL would be preferred, but that need not [remain the case]. Since we’ve started a new file, we don’t need to stick with the RfP (Request for Proposals, or tender) conditions.”

On Monday, Parrikar had scrapped the 2007 RfP for 126 MMRCA, which had mandated that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) would build 108 fighters in India.

Intriguingly, the defence minister blamed the competitive procurement model that had been followed in the MMRCA tender for its eventual collapse. Said Parrikar: “It is wrong to do an MMRCA type deal using an RfP model. You cannot compare different types of aircraft like the F/A-18, Eurofighter and Rafale. All three have different strengths and capabilities. All three are probably good enough planes… One of them was made L-1 (lowest bidder). The entire procedure was completed and then we find that the entire procedure will have to be repeated all over again. How do I answer air force?”

Parrikar also blamed the preceding United Progressive Alliance government for handling the MMRCA procurement poorly. In fact, it was the National Democratic Alliance government of the early 2000s that ordered competitive procurement.

More than once, Parrikar referred to the Rafale’s capability for delivering weapons on deep-lying strategic targets --- his reference to a “strategic purchase” apparently hinting at a nuclear delivery role.

“Rafale is a strategic purchase and should never have gone through an RfP. These important decisions need to be taken at government-to-government levels. Modiji took the decision; I back it up”, the defence minister said.

“The penetration capability of this aircraft (Rafale) is 1,000-1,100 kilometres. The other [IAF] aircraft penetration range is 300-450 kilometres. So we get double the penetration,” said Parrikar, again referring to deep strike capability.

In what would not be welcomed in the IAF, the defence minister stated he might compromise with the IAF’s sanctioned squadron strength, instead accepting a lower figure. “Forty-two squadrons is the strength approved. We should have at least 37-38 very active squadrons”, said Parrikar.
Posted by Broadsword at 08:35

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Apr 2015 08:55

I think it would be a shame if we replace the light fighter category by any thing except Tejas.

No one except the dallals make money from yet another Light Fighter RFP program

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Apr 2015 09:04

Austin wrote:In addition to Rafale, India could also buy light fighter to replace MiG-21: Parrikar
With Prime

More than once, Parrikar referred to the Rafale’s capability for delivering weapons on deep-lying strategic targets --- his reference to a “strategic purchase” apparently hinting at a nuclear delivery role.

Posted by Broadsword at 08:35

This is a Pakistani definition of strategic. Only Pakis use "strategic" and nukes interchangeably.

Ajai Shukla left the army and became a journalist before his education was complete and that naturally arrested any possibility of further education

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Apr 2015 09:08

^^ True , A strategic purchase can also mean G2G purchase without the need to go through RFP and in double quicker time etc and I suspect thats what DM went

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Apr 2015 16:20

nitin gokhale ‏@nitingokhale 41m41 minutes ago

A Bold Political Decision for a Crucial Defence Need http://shar.es/1pnRB4 via @sharethis

http://www.vifindia.org/article/2015/ap ... fence-need
A Bold Political Decision for a Crucial Defence Need - Nitin A Gokhale, Editor & Senior Fellow, VIF

The saga for procurement of 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (M-MRCA) for the Indian Air Force (IAF) actually began in 2001, gathered steam in 2007 and was stuck in price negotiations for the past three years. Meanwhile, the IAF's combat fighter jet strength was depleting fast. Over the past couple of years, the Air Force top brass was alarmed enough to tell the government that its conventional combat edge even against Pakistan was in danger of being lost.

So last week, hours before Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarked on his three-nation tour, a political decision was taken to explore the option of buying Rafale jets through a government-to-government (G-to-G) contract with France. The breakthrough will now allow the IAF to induct Rafale fighter jets in a two year time frame and at least partially make up for its depleting combat jet strength.

However, it is the next step in aircraft procurement that will be watched intently. Will this decision of going for G-to-G mean that all future purchases of this magnitude will be handled in this manner? If so, what happens to the much-touted Make in India programme? The roadmap is not clear but Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar gave enough hints about what the government is thinking in an interview that this writer co-hosted on Monday for Doordarshan (https://t.co/jktB9j7EYI).

Not surprisingly, skeptics have hit out at the decision. The criticism has ranged from "it's too little too late," to "it goes against the Make in India concept." But both Modi and Parrikar were clear that they had to put the interest of the IAF above everything else and which what they have done. Mind you, procuring 36 Rafales is just a stop-gap arrangement to arrest the rapidly falling numbers in IAF's combat fleet.

Lauding the Prime Minister for taking a bold decision in breaking the Rafale deadlock, Parrikar said future large procurements for the IAF and indeed for the armed forces at large, will have to be G-2-G but Make in India will also get a look in for other projects. For instance, IF more Rafales, were to be bought--over and above 36 decided now--Dassault could be asked to manufacture them in India. Even if any other lighter aircraft was to be selected, the pre-condition will be a tie-up with an Indian company or consortium.

It is to Parrikar's credit that he decided to think differently on a knotty issue and suggested a way out to the Prime Minister. In fact, in less than six months after taking over, Parrikar has studied various complex issues dogging the defence ministry and has come to his own conclusions on what needs to be done. By his own admission, Parrikar spent the first four months as defence minister in taking inputs from a range of experts both within and outside the MoD before making up his mind.

In his review, Parrikar also found that the bureaucracy in the ministry—both civil and military--was sitting on some 400-odd big and small projects that are critical to the three armed forces. Without getting into details, he said: “The first thing I did was to look at projects that are stuck at various stages of clearances since the most common complaint across the board was ‘nothing moves’ in the MoD.” A thorough review revealed that nearly one-third of the 400-odd projects were now irrelevant. So they were discarded. About 50 projects were accelerated since they were of critical importance.

A decade-long impasse in defence acquisitions has been broken with the decision on Rafale, raising renewed hope in the sector. Parrikar has brought in a sense of purpose in the notoriously obdurate MoD bureaucracy. “There was no control over the system. There were no reviews, no feedback and there was no fear of punishment for non-performance. An important ministry like Defence cannot run like this,” Parrikar said in an interview. So he has now instututed a time-bound performance review system aimed at speedy clearances and implementation of projects.

Hopefully, the new measures will revitalise the functioning of the crucial arm of the government in coming months.

As I had stated in the Rafale thread
1. We are in a tricky 5-10 years given the lost decade and the planned phaseouts.
2. The situation wrt facing 2-front war was getting serious enough to warrant a stop-gap G2G deal to stem the losses. It is strategic in that sense and wrt diversification.
3. ALL options are on the table given how precarious the condition is. Same with the submarine wing. Money will have to be spent.
4. Depending on how the future programs evolve, our equipment sourcing will have to change. There is no other why around this issue.

However, I am hopeful of the following.
1. Realization at the top of GOI that we have to get off the foreign drip. It is too expensive for a country like ours.
2. That will make the political leaders to push for domestic production in a big way including of Tejas
3. More attention and resources to be spent on domestic projects going forward.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 17 Apr 2015 19:53

Austin wrote:^^ True , A strategic purchase can also mean G2G purchase without the need to go through RFP and in double quicker time etc and I suspect thats what DM went

In that DD interview Manohar Parrikar clarified that when he uses the word strategic, he really means "critical" purchase.. He clarified that..

Not related to Nuclear !!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Apr 2015 20:04

What if?

What if US offers to shift the entire F/A 18 production line to India?

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 17 Apr 2015 20:25

shiv wrote:What if?

What if US offers to shift the entire F/A 18 production line to India?

shiv, you know better than that! Production line means nothing if all of 10s of thousands of components need to be imported from US.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Apr 2015 20:42

JTull wrote:
shiv wrote:What if?

What if US offers to shift the entire F/A 18 production line to India?
shiv, you know better than that! Production line means nothing if all of 10s of thousands of components need to be imported from US.

Precisely. But it will appear like "make in India". And for that reason the media will be full of "experts" who will argue that this would be a very good thing.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 17 Apr 2015 20:45

^^^ It will become similar to Turkish F-16 assembly/up gradation lines, where everything is imported from US.

Silvering will be in terms of services we can provide, e.g. India will become service center/hub for these planes. Equipment from Australia, Malaysian, etc AF can be serviced/supported/overhauled here with competitive prices.

But on the down side....... well everyone knows what will happen.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 17 Apr 2015 21:47

This is absolute crap. The world is moving to drones. No one is buying new fighters. Let HAL continue to build. If the new players want to enter aerospace market, it is far easier to enter the automated drone market versus the manned fighter market. Lower capital required to enter, its still in infancy and they can make major inroads.

After govt invests 12billion dollars to get a second production line going, there aren't going to be enough orders to keep all the fat cats happy and these planes are going to cost us a lot. I think this is a bad idea in so many ways. All in all the taxpayers will lose.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 17 Apr 2015 22:19

Cybaru wrote:This is absolute crap. The world is moving to drones. No one is buying new fighters.

Well, except for China, Pakistan, the US, the UK, Germany, Italy, France, Australia, Canada, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, Brazil, Egypt, the UAE and Israel, you may have a point.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 17 Apr 2015 22:22

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Cybaru wrote:This is absolute crap. The world is moving to drones. No one is buying new fighters.
Well, except for China, Pakistan, the US, the UK, Germany, Italy, France, Australia, Canada, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, Brazil, Egypt, the UAE and Israel, you may have a point.

Old pipeline that was committed for and even then the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Greece are hoping someone will buy their commitment for stuff they said yes to.

srin · Post by **srin** » 17 Apr 2015 22:30

Cybaru wrote:This is absolute crap. The world is moving to drones. No one is buying new fighters. Let HAL continue to build. If the new players want to enter aerospace market, it is far easier to enter the automated drone market versus the manned fighter market. Lower capital required to enter, its still in infancy and they can make major inroads.

After govt invests 12billion dollars to get a second production line going, there aren't going to be enough orders to keep all the fat cats happy and these planes are going to cost us a lot. I think this is a bad idea in so many ways. All in all the taxpayers will lose.

There are a few problems with drones. Their survivability in hostile EW conditions is doubtful. Think Iran forcing down Reaper (?). Also, they are mainly used for strike and for ground surveillance - not for air superiority.

Doesn't mean we don't need to invest in drones. Likewise, doesn't mean we don't need to invest in SAMs. We also need manned aircraft for foreseeable future. You always hedge your bets.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 17 Apr 2015 22:55

Cybaru wrote:Old pipeline that was committed for and even then the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Greece are hoping someone will buy their commitment for stuff they said yes to.

So China and Pakistan are just buying the last few fighters they are committed to and then they'll stop, that's your position?

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 17 Apr 2015 23:02

^^^^^Biggest problem with UCAV concept is its "man-in-the-loop" model, due to ethics or whatever human inferiority complex reason is.

They will be much more deadlier when their control is not centralized, but hive minded (swarm). Basically make them autonomous and remove the weakest link.

But until that happens all these talk of last manned fighters is nonsense. A remote controlled UCAV cannot outmaneuver a manned fighter due to latency in communication and situation awareness of pilot on ground.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Apr 2015 07:02

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Cybaru wrote:Old pipeline that was committed for and even then the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Greece are hoping someone will buy their commitment for stuff they said yes to.
So China and Pakistan are just buying the last few fighters they are committed to and then they'll stop, that's your position?

My position is:

Manned fighter sales will decrease as time goes by. Investing 12 billion dollars in a new player does not make that much sense. There is already built up capacity at HAL, stream line that.

There is a huge new space in unmanned tech opening up. That space is relatively un-explored/ un-organized and growing very rapidly. Instead of trying to get into a market that is shrinking in size, it is best if new players position themselves in a growing market space. There is enough opportunity for these players to make forays not in just domestic market, but also international if they take significant lead in this space. The next 30-50 years will see shrinking of one segment to 0 and the other unmanned segment will grow exponentially. If you are going to make a significant investment, atleast do so in a market segment that is growing.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Apr 2015 07:09

well considering that we have not managed to get a single credible large UAV into service yet...rustom2 is sputtering along, and have NO turbofan powered UAV project (HALE) ..all this talk of getting into UCAV manufacturing is like TSP expressing willingness to setup a fab for Intel.

where is the domestic products in UAV and UCAV space to manufacture? and when will they arrive?

we seriously missed the boat in not attempting to 'clone' the heron and searcher in the 90s and 00s....Cheen would be on that like a shot from day1. today they are playing with a GHawk sized bird.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 18 Apr 2015 07:13

Yes, we missed the boat. Having said that we didn't have anything to power those type of projects. Now that the Kaveri is pretty much on the verge, underpowered as it may be perhaps it is time to look at options?

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Apr 2015 07:16

Well, I am suggesting we get these players to pony up cash and do R&D as well. Why do they have to be just manufacturing houses. For all the dung they throw on DRDO/HAL let them stand on their own and do something useful. Gone are the days when you can suggest private players are better at this than govt labs. If we do want to follow a DARPA style model, then give these guys contracts to get prototypes in the air within 2 years and fund the best one. One cannot take lead by just assembling. Private players will need to invest in R&D themselves to innovate and differentiate.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 18 Apr 2015 07:35

Crossposting from the pics thread:

Vishal Jolapara wrote:

Some CHOR has cropped the Original Image which i had already posted here with the URL back in Jan 2012.

This is one of the reasons why most photographers hate to put good work up online & especially without a big distracting watermark right on the subject

I was about to share, My Latest Photo [Hi-Res] of LCH 1 & 3's side-by-side comparison: http://www.airliners.net/photo/2608519/L/

And i avoided putting a watermark to spoil the look of the image but, i guess its the only way forward .

Okay folks, that is the very first time I am seeing a missile than a R-73 being carried by the Tejas. Is that a dummy derby? Very, very interesting!

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Apr 2015 07:40

The photo in the post above is an LCH3 carrying a smoke generator. Are you seeing a different image? Can you post a link to that image?