IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 24 Mar 2016 17:18

All countries trying to sell to India now know that even at the risk of having a severely depleted air force India will not agree to any conditional offer and the question of agreeing to end user verification does not arise. Since PAF operates F-16 and IAF prefers a twin engined aircraft a F414 engined F-18 will be an ideal buy. We should insist on deep TOT for engines for giving the order.

If MIG-35 is available at special Natasha prices

then it is worth a dekho too.

If we want to go the Sukhoi route then instead of ordering more SU30's we should instead go for SU35.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Mar 2016 17:21

If the IAF truly want to diversify acquisitions from a heavily tilted Russian basket,then the Gripen is the best affordable and technologically advanced 4++ western shot. On the condition that SAAB assist in accelerating the LCA 1A/2 dev.with their tech where is fits,including components and production facilities. One can easily absorb 300-400 light single-engine multirole fighters of both Gripen and LCA in the planned 45 sqd inventory. There must be no abandonment of the LCA.

Increasing numbers of upgraded MIG-29/35s and MKIs (BMos,LRAAM,etc) are another option.In any case if the Rafale deal fails,one will surely see at least 2 extra sqds of more potent MKIs acquired. The only problem The LC cost of acquiring 4+ MKI sqds should be looked at as they're two-seaters,requiring 2 pilots plus the families to look after.If the Gripen however costs around the same as an MKI,then forget it. We've invested so much in setting up MKI production facilities,now service centres too,it would probably work out a cheaper acquisition even with the additional pilot.Vipul's point about the SU-35 should be looked at. One less pilot.I've always felt that the lack of a strat bomber aka SU-34 at least ,is a gap in our capability.Ru SU-34 ops in Syria should be examined.

If cost-effectiveness is the prime criteria,then the MIG-29/35 would be the best bet,with a contract condition to set up full service /spare facilities from deliveries as is being done for the 4 Sukhoi regional centres.

Around 320 MKIs (and all existing ones are planned to be upgraded),300-350 LCA.Gripens,200 upgraded MIG-28s,M2Ks and Jaguars,and the first couple of sqds of FGFAs should give us around 900+ aircraft by 2025.

Some of the $8B that we've set aside for just 36 Rafales could be spread around the IAF's other needs like the tankers,AEW aircraft,trainers,etc.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 24 Mar 2016 17:47

Geo political situation has changed, India will have to take risk. Since local production, I would say.

For single engine - F16IN, as it is M2k and Mig29 were in response to F-16, M2K production closed, Mig29 will have the same issue with spares. Grippen dependent on US,

For twin Engine - F-18 ASH, cheaper than Rafale, larger production run. EF again costly, will have to deal with many more country, political nightmare.

Both the above offers: large supplier base, more weapon choices, US is large trading partner, China is a common threat, US has option of next generation. Since we are anyway dependent on US for C-17, P-8, Apache, chinook, howitzar, bombs, missiles, engine why not another one.

For non-US fighter there is no next generation product roadmap.

There is enough non-US product in our inventory to take care of TSP. the numbers are needed for China, so what better option than US, Russian support is at best doubtful on China.

Since we need numbers, I do not see any one of them as threat to LCA, it will be at best a hedge against any issues with LCA Mk1/2.

No matter when these fighters came into existence, they are a totally different plane now, and meet the current threat environment that India faces.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 24 Mar 2016 17:54

imports are always a threat. In many many ways. The faster we can get rid of imports and build complete weapons indigenous the better.

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Mar 2016 18:04

Alternative to the Rafales :

More Su 30 .. upgraded to 35 standard with AESA radar and avionics upgrades .. maybe a "Silent Flanker " version
Ramp up LCA production .. 2 production lines .. AESA radar and ? engine upgrades

Move up time lines for MCA and armed drones .. separate production lines for drones

money will be found all that ! ( if the Rafales dont beggar the budget ! )

no more new planes please .. its already a circus !

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 24 Mar 2016 18:24

If there is no need for another type including Rafale, Grippen, then stop all import, that would be an ideal situation.

The fact is that we are not there at this time, a hedge to Russian dependence is required, that is what Rafale, EF,Grippen was offering, we needed western option, what better option than from Khan himself. Cheaper, matured supply chain, large production base, large choice for weapon, tap into technology base. I see we are increasingly involved with khan on many products, so why not the next step.

Once you involve Khan, the chance of better option from Russia, EU and Israel is also possible.

Granted there is risk with Khan, but there is risk of cost, supply, obsolescence from other sources as well. No source is safe, till you do it yourself.

Indigenous is the mantra, til that time, import, license build, absorb technology and learn production is the other best option. India is on this path, expediting is possible only to certain extent. Private involvement will help, but everything has a limit, you have to give time, jo kisi ka intzaar nahi karta.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 24 Mar 2016 20:32

India keen to buy F/A 18 Super Hornet fighter jets for IAF

Gautam Datt
New Delhi, March 24, 2016 | Posted by Anand Jayaram | UPDATED 11:38 IST

India is keen to consider Boeing's offer to supply F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets to the Indian Air Force (IAF).
Sources said that New Delhi will take a hard look at the proposal in April when a high-level delegation will engage the Indian officials on the construct of the offer. US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter will be in India on April 10 in a visit that is expected to take lift cooperation to a new level.
Boeing has offered F/A-18 Super Hornets under the "Make in India" framework of the Indian government. Sources said the proposal is worth considering as IAF is facing acute shortage of fighter jets. The IAF has already made it clear that the 36 Rafale fighter jets that are being negotiated with France are inadequate to meet its operational requirement.

There is a view emerging in the Indian security establishment that F/A-18 Super Hornets can also negate the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan by the US. Super Hornet is a carrier based multi-role fighter which can be used by the Indian navy as well. Sources said the aircraft can meet both the IAF and Indian navy's operational requirement.
India had considered F-18 Super Hornet during the earlier hunt for 126 medium multi-role fighter jets. But the US entry lost out to the French Rafale.
With the government scrapping the proposed contract which could not be sealed even after prolonged discussions with the French side, it opened doors for other fighter makers to make fresh bids.

Defence minister Manohar Parrikar has said the government is working out the best deal with the French. The contract, said to be in the final lap of negotiations is stuck over the price of 36 jets being sought by the French side. Sources said the deal is working out to be worth Rs 60,000 crore.
There is a sense of urgency in acquiring new aircraft as IAF's force levels are depleting due to an ageing fleet. Sources said the "Make in India" proposal of F-18s will solve the problem on the long term basis. Boeing's proposal also involves significant transfer of technology with a substantial indigenous content.

The proposal will also benefit the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft "Tejas" programme which needs to be resurrected after prolonged delays.
Sources said the acquisition can be put on fast track considering the urgency. The government has already stressed on going for direct military sale the route which is faster instead of inviting global bids.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 24 Mar 2016 20:55

LCA needs to be Resurrected? Really?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 24 Mar 2016 21:46

Talk about being dramatic

, I guess in this context he means resurrected as being a flick of a production switch.

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 24 Mar 2016 22:41

I see +90 Advanced Super F-18 as the only real Rafale alternative.

The talk of 'Sea Gripen' by presstitutes indicates that the MII will also have to keep future IN carriers in mind. F-18 is the only other fighter apart from Rafale that can be used off of carriers.

Boeing is showing willingness for MII with full line indigenization, when compared to Dassault which is very reluctant. This should be the most important factor in my mind. AMCA needs to benefit from this new fighter line by developing private industry and ToT.

It also means the SAME engines for the Tejas Mk1/2, AMCA, and F-18. All of them will be running on the GE-414 variants. This will save on logistics and give better ToT, and possibly full engine indiginization.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 24 Mar 2016 23:18

uddu wrote:imports are always a threat. In many many ways. The faster we can get rid of imports and build complete weapons indigenous the better.

How is Russian support doubtful on China? If the question is to reduce dependence on Russia then dependence on USA is a chose that is not as good either, since it will not be deployed on one boundary due to sanctions alone and logistics chain deployed on another boundary. Plus it is dangerous to have any country interfering directly in deployment - especially during war time and new logistics and expensive weapons package. It is no good to have let project Pakistan not dismantled already which a problem, while Chinese were growing in strength.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 24 Mar 2016 23:39

Tom Antonov ‏@Tom_Antonov 8h8 hours ago
French negotiators would reach NewDelhi on March 29 to present a NEW price quote for the #Rafale deal
#France #India

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Mar 2016 23:49

All countries trying to sell to India now know that even at the risk of having a severely depleted air force India will not agree to any conditional offer and the question of agreeing to end user verification does not arise. Since PAF operates F-16 and IAF prefers a twin engined aircraft a F414 engined F-18 will be an ideal buy. We should insist on deep TOT for engines for giving the order.

FYI:

2012 :: India allows end-user inspection of warship by US

and, more recent:

Dec 5, 2015 :: Forces split on US deals

Title is a little misleading.

The Indian Navy is the only one of the armed forces that is comfortable with all the agreements. It has indicated as much to successive governments over the past decade. The pacts were first proposed in the year 2002.

The army and the air force are concerned over compromising sensitive data by signing the LSA, Cismoa and Beca. But they have indicated that the agreements may be signed if ways could be found around some of the clauses just as they were found when it came to signing an end user verification agreement with the US in 2009.

And, India is in a FAR better situation than either in 2002 (when these items came on the radar) and in 2009.

If MIG-35 is available at special Natasha prices then it is worth a dekho too.

Has the RuAF accepted it yet? They had wanted some modifications and therefore shelved the project. No idea of current state.

If we want to go the Sukhoi route then instead of ordering more SU30's we should instead go for SU35.

IF the "MMRCA" is dropped, then yes. Here is a quote from the latest AWST:

The Indian air force tends to be skeptical about the multiple "Make in Indian" offers, saddled as it is with an ever expanding type inventory. Already the largest operator od Su-30 MKI air superiority fighters (with an ambitious upgrade afoot), and with its fleet of MiG-29s nearly all upgraded, the service may not be as hard-pressed for high-performance medium-to-heavy jets. None of this, though, has dulled its push for the Rafale. The requirement is now all but inextricable from the air force's fleet planning. The senior Indian air force acquisition officer says there was no "pullback" from the Rafale deal - something made clear by how India committed to the procurement even before agreeing on price

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 Mar 2016 02:24

Bharat Karnad pooh poohs the two front war scenario painted by IAF brass:

http://bharatkarnad.com/

Silly “two-front war” scenario and related IAF’s Rafale push at expense of Su-30

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Bharat Karnad

All war planning ought to be on the basis of the worst case. That’s a truism. But the worst imaginable circumstances still have to bear some relation to reality and should be based on reasonable probability calculus. That there is cooperation and collaboration between China and Pakistan in the conventional and nuclear military fields, leading to sharing of intelligence, and transfer of weapons and related technologies is to acknowledge a fact. To conclude from this that China will join with Pakistan in waging general military hostilities against India is, however, to indulge one’s fancies and is belied by history.

Time and again, having initiated conflicts that rapidly turned against it on the ground, Islamabad hoped, and fervently pleaded for, the Chinese militarily to intervene — open a second front, to stave off inevitable defeat. This happened in 1965 when Beijing, trying to please its partner, warned Delhi about some of its livestock on the disputed mountainous border being herded off by Indians which probable cause for war was immediately rendered laughable when, to Beijing’s mortification, Indian opposition leaders, the socialist Madhu Limaye, among them, marched to the Chinese embassy gates in Chanakyapuri offering a gaggle of bleating goats in train as recompense. In 1971, Yahya waited in Islamabad, Niazi in Dhaka, for the “yellow army” to save Pakistan’s goose/goat from being tandoored with the Indian army contingents speedily converging on the Pak forces in soon-to-be Bangladesh, and waited some more before giving up the ghost and abjectly surrendering.

This to say that no country — a calculating and cautious China least of all — will fight on another’s country’s behalf or help out if its means courting danger for itself, let alone save, even an “all weather friend” — Pakistan that has managed once again to muddle into yet another military mess of its own creation. China will do everything short of actually deploying its forces especially now and in the future when it knows that opening a war front in the north and east in concert with Pakistan doing the same in the west, for any reason whatsoever, could likely end — should the situation become dire enough to India to merit it — Agni-5s popping up mushroom clouds over the extended Shanghai region and abruptly ending China’s run as economic power. If the Chinese were not foolish enough to do this in the past when much less was at stake, it is likely they will be even more circumspect now and in the future when, other than concerns of avoiding irreparable damage and destruction to itself, will be preoccupied with displacing the US as the dominant great power rather than stepping into the breach for a whiny but risk-acceptant Pakistan on its flanks. So a two front war featuring China and Pakistan is not only inconceivable but the weakest possible predicate for Indian force planning.

So why is the IAF brass so vociferous in drumming up fear of precisely this contingency? To wit, Vice Chief AM BS Dhanoa in March 2016 who averred:”Our numbers are not adequate to execute an air campaign in a two-front scenario… Probability of a two front scenario is an appreciation which you need to do. But are the numbers adequate? No.” For his part, DCAS Air Marshal R K S Bhadauria revealed IAF’s plan behind such statements, saying a decision to fill the full MMRCA complement will be made after the 36 Rafales are first secured, meaning IAF will thereafter argue that having gone a third in with the Rafale, it makes sense to go full in with this same plane, damn the treasury-bankrupting costs of going in a third and, even more, fully with Rafale. (http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 648_1.html). Obviously then, the two-front war-talk is not for any grand reasons of geostrategics (assuming Vayu Bhavan has sense enough to read the unfolding geopolitical situation correctly). But because it serves IAF’s parochial purposes well, particularly in propelling its preferred but wasteful and unnecessary procurement of the French Rafale combat aircraft — a decision hanging fire for some years now. Such an improbable war scenario is being summoned up as a last gasp argument to push the Modi government into signing up for this white elephant of a plane. By doing so, Vayu Bhavan is resorting to an old and tested tactic favoured by the military — frighten the generally national security strategy-wise ignorant and illiterate political ruler-generalist bureaucrat (in MOD/Finance) tandem operating in Delhi into anteing up scarce funds for near useless military hardware purchases that invariably leave the country in a bigger financial-cum-national security hole than before.

But Let’s look at some details. Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha soon after assuming his post in Sept 2014 himself provided figures for a contract for 126 Rafales — $25 billion (or Rs 1,50,000 crore). Assuming the deal would be signed by end-2014, Raha had also stated that delays couldn’t be brooked because the last of the Rafales will enter service only by 2025 by when, and this he didn’t say, these aircraft would be way on the other side of antique. (http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/iaf ... BvyrJ.html)

Except two years later and properly worked out, this $25 billion is, actually the projected lifetime cost of just 36 of this aircraft inclusive of the necessary infrastructure, spares, weapons, etc. But two years is a long time and this figure is too big not to balk at. Whence, the Rafale decision, fortunately, is on the verge of becoming a non-starter, notwithstanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s impetuous and, hence, foolish decision to travel to Paris bearing the gift of a buy of a third of the requirement 126 MMRCAs at, as it turns out, about the same total cost! Quick on the uptake, Modi has perhaps realized the costs of his unmerited intervention and is, therefore, staying his and PMO’s (read NSA Ajit Doval’s) hand is pushing the Rafale regardless. In other words, he is leaving it to the Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, who has favoured the more cost-effective Su-30 MKIs, to extricate him and the country from a difficult situation by not peremptorily nullifying the deal as allowing it to wither away, die a slow death, in the Price Negotiation Committee. It saves Modi’s face with President Francoise Hollande to whom he had made the Rafale buy offer, even as Paris does a slow burn.

Seeking to do an end-run around Parrikar’s Su-30 option, Raha on February 18 this year volunteered that the Rafale, which he insists on calling “MMRCA”, and Sukhoi-30 requirements are “slightly different, [each with its] own capabilities.” “They complement each other but do not replace each other”, he intoned. Important to note he didn’t dilate on just what the differences are between the Rafale and Su-30, or how Rafale is indispensable. Su-30 is primarily an air dominance aircraft that can outdo the Rafale in air defence, interdiction/interception, and strike mission-roles as well. This is vouched for by all the reputed international aviation experts, among them Dr. Karlo Copp, the highly regarded Australian fighter aircraft analyst, who considers Su-30, all things considered on a comparative basis, the best combat aircraft flying, period. Indeed, so pronounced is Su-30’s superiority even a yokel would look askance at IAF’s choice of Rafale. More fundamentally, the low, medium, and heavy combat aircraft categories IAF’s force-structuring plans rely on are at best disingenuous, at worst ridiculous. (For analysis in detail about why this is so and for insights into other aspects of the country’s manifold military weaknesses, do read my book — ‘Why India is Not a Great Power (Yet)’!)

The CAS then drew out an over-familiar arrow from the IAF’s quiver, namely, a warning about the supposed drawdown of combat squadrons and to deflect potential criticism about rank bad force planning by the IAF HQrs that obtained this deplorable situation, he maintained that air forces everywhere face the same problems of obsolescence in their respective cycles of operations. “It is not new or specific to Indian Air Force,” he told journalists at Aero India (with almost all media persons entirely innocent about what operational cycles or anything else remotely technical mean and thus are reduced to being just obedient regurgitators of whatever is proffered by uniformed types). Raha added that if the Rafale agreement were inked that day, the first squadron will be available only in three years and the rest in 5-6 years. (http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... -arup-raha). Raha apparently hoped no would notice the discrepancy in the induction timelines he had glossed over. In 2014, he had claimed the last of the Rafales would enter IAF by 2025. By Feb 2016, apprehensive about the definite obsolescence of the Rafale by the 2nd decade of the 21st century becoming a factor in nixing the deal altogether, he had collapsed that time frame for the public’s and Modi govt’s consumption from 11 years to 9 years. Alas, this is a minor matter and akin, as the phrase goes, to dressing up a pig with lipstick.

In March 2016 VCAS Dhanoa, in a concerted attempt in line with Raha’s pronouncements seeking to derail Parrikar, pitched in with the implied criticism of Su-30 with its serviceability alleged in the 35%-40% range by assuming 90% serviceability of the Rafale saying “If we have 35 squadrons and 90 percent serviceability, it will be as good as having [the authorised strength of] 42 squadrons.” By this reckoning the natural solution for India would be to d what’s being planned for the production of Kamov utility helicopters — Tata will also make all the spares in-country, thereby ensuring high serviceability rates. That this solution has not been implemented for the Su-30MKI only confirms HAL’s and IAF’s duffer-headed policies. DCAS Bhadauria joined the melee by citing the US sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan, asserting this made his life “more difficult” as he now had “to put more hi-tech platform [read Rafale] against it. The MMRCA is designed in such a way”, he explained, “that we need to offset this capability. If you demonstrate your deterrence, we should have peace because he will know that he will be hit very badly.” (http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... t-war-iaf/). This last suggests IAF’s assesment that Rafale can out-match Su-30, really?!! Bhadauria must know something the rest of the aviation world doesn’t.

It is hard to know what to make of the above sort of statements by Messers Raha, Dhanoa & Bhaduaria except to say it smells of quiet desperation to buy French and to persist with the cost-prohibitive import habit IAF (and the armed forces, generally) has cultivated over the years with the connivance of the political and bureaucratic establishment. Such import-tilt is sustained, moreover, by the extraordinarily resilient and entrenched system of payoffs established over the years by the arms vendors and their agents (“commissions” routed to secret offshore accounts, “green card” and equivalent, “scholarships” to prestigious universities and job placements for sons and daughters of secretaries to the central govt — which no one talks about because everybody’s hand, up and down the hierarchy, is in the cookie-jar).

And finally nobody seems to have noticed that the basic problem of combat squadron drawdown is not going to be addressed anytime soon by the Rafale. So, the question arises: Are Raha and his cohort serious about filling the immediate need or not? If they are, and Rafale is manifestly not the answer, why are they equally noisily avoiding indenting for more HAL Nasik-assembled Su-30MKIs, that will will be available at a fraction of the Rafale and in vastly big numbers? For everyone’s information, just the up-front $9billion cost of 36 Rafales will fetch India 130 of the fully armed Su-30s, with newly bought units inductable inside of two years. This only starkly highlights IAF’s insidious intent to acquire the Rafale at the cost of beggaring the country. This quite curious behaviour by those in high posts in the service is rightly a matter of public concern and may in time to come require investigation as it tilts against the national interest and toward the ultimately unclear and unexplainable weightage the IAF leadership has accorded a particular exorbitantly priced Western combat aircraft.

srai · Post by **srai** » 25 Mar 2016 03:24

IMO, fixation on "MMRCA" has set back the IAF by a decade at least--another one of those lost decades. How much longer does it "plan" to suffer?

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 25 Mar 2016 03:33

^

In military planning you should hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Else you will end up in a position France found itself in WW2, where their extravagant Maginot Line was entirely bypassed by a German Blitzkreg through Belgium. A possibility they had not adequately prepared for.

So 2-front war possibility should always be considered.

That being said, Air Chief Raha's insistence on Rafale nearly mirrors that of a foreign lobby, even if it is a necessary purchase. It is very distressing to say the least. Imagine if such energies were to be devoted to indigenous programs like AMCA or Tejas instead.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 25 Mar 2016 03:43

But Sir, this obsession with Rafael stinks - Does it need investigation or it is plain simple institutional bullheadedness?

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 25 Mar 2016 04:06

Investigations at this stage could hurt ongoing negotiations.

Just focus on getting a new fighter platform line from the best offer by year end, and then turn all attention to AMCA to get a prototype flying by 2020. If Parrikar can do these two things, then he will be remembered as one of the best MoDs in recent history.

kit · Post by **kit** » 25 Mar 2016 13:38

and meanwhile https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-423530/

is the F-35 Lightning II suddenly looking as a credible alternative to the Rafales ? ..esp if the americans can pitch in with an assembly line ? ( Read behind the scenes action on India making it to close ally status as regards tech transfers )

member_28756 · Post by **member_28756** » 25 Mar 2016 13:59

kit wrote:and meanwhile https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-423530/

is the F-35 Lightning II suddenly looking as a credible alternative to the Rafales ? ..esp if the americans can pitch in with an assembly line ? ( Read behind the scenes action on India making it to close ally status as regards tech transfers )

How much tech transfer are you expecting ? The Americans does not even give source codes their closest allies. They jealously guard their tech much more so than the Russians or Europeans. And the Americans can easily track F 35 just like they did with the Pakis F 16 during the Osama raid

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 25 Mar 2016 14:02

Karnadji has not addressed the possibility of China using Pakistan as a force enhancer to pressurize India with Pakistan. China may not engender hostility because of Pakistan but it is perfectly capable of pulling in Pakistan when China herself decides to instigate or even initiate hostilities.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 25 Mar 2016 14:23

The issue is how will super costly Rafale address the possibility of 2 front war better than Combination of Su-30MKIs and LCA?

srin · Post by **srin** » 25 Mar 2016 22:18

I came across this dilbert cartoon which immediately reminded me of the Rafale saga...

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 25 Mar 2016 22:48

kit wrote:and meanwhile https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-423530/

is the F-35 Lightning II suddenly looking as a credible alternative to the Rafales ? ..esp if the americans can pitch in with an assembly line ? ( Read behind the scenes action on India making it to close ally status as regards tech transfers )

Three squadrons of F-35s on outright purchase basis with full access to object codes to integrate Astra, other Indian made missiles/bombs and the threat library. This all we need IF we must import to buy time for AMCA. We won't get 'ToT and if it were available, it would be prohibitively expensive.

A line in India for anything F-16/F18/JSF/Rafale is uneconomical. We'd be importing 90% of of the components for 10 years because we don't have a supply chain and amortizing the cost of the local line over a smaller number of a/c. It would as usual, be screwdriver stuff posing as 'tech transfer'.

IF we import, buy the damn things via FMS and focus on building local capability in consumables (tires, gaskets, bombs, missiles) to lay the base for a supply chain for the AMCA.

In the Iron Fist exercise, what was truly depressing was the munitions being expended were all imported except for Astra (imported seeker?): Spanish bombs, Israeli Griffins, R-73s etc. The soldiers on the ground were probably carrying AK-47s from Bulgaria with ammo from God knows where.

The good part about the JSF (if available) would be that we at least learn stealth operational tactics. Plus, the fact that the Israelis will doubtless provide hacks.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Mar 2016 22:53

The IAF's postualtion that the Raffy will solve the two front threat beggars belief. Unless PC Sorcar magically makes one Raffy to be on both fronts at the same time,the numbers cannot add up.With the cost of almost all western med mrca birds equal to or far above MKI costs the rationale for their acquisition grows weaker by the day.There also appears to be little ball-squuezing of HAL to accelerate the LCA.Is it by design? The need for a parlamentary inquiry into the whole issue and review of the IAF's future forcce requirements is urgent.

What the IAF really need are a couple of hundred of low cost affordable
replacements for the legacy MIGs being retired.The MKIs have proven that they can best anything in the sky barring the Raptors.Thus whatever is chosen should not cost more than 75% of an MKI,if a light fightrr prefrrably 50%.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 25 Mar 2016 23:16

I have got it. Rafale deal will make us so poor that neither Pakistan or China will attack us. My God! IAF is really devious.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 25 Mar 2016 23:44

MANNY K wrote:How much tech transfer are you expecting ? The Americans does not even give source codes their closest allies. They jealously guard their tech much more so than the Russians or Europeans. And the Americans can easily track F 35 just like they did with the Pakis F 16 during the Osama raid

We'd get at least as much tech as we're getting through the ongoing Rafale deal. The South Korean deal involved 25 key technologies as part of the offset deal, of which the USG sanctioned 21 for transfer (the 4 denied consisted - AESA, RF jammer, IR beacon and EO pod). Also, the PAF F-16s were scrambled only after the Americans left, and were tracked by a USN E-2C not by spyware onboard.

kit · Post by **kit** » 25 Mar 2016 23:53

srin wrote:I came across this dilbert cartoon which immediately reminded me of the Rafale saga...

+!

kit · Post by **kit** » 25 Mar 2016 23:55

i think if any Govt does the Rafale at this cost ( and nearly double with weaponry) .. will make for a good "scam" for the opposition ..even if its a well meaning one !

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 25 Mar 2016 23:56

Cosmo_R wrote:IF we import, buy the damn things via FMS and focus on building local capability in consumables (tires, gaskets, bombs, missiles) to lay the base for a supply chain for the AMCA.

^+1

A FACO line here, similar to that at Cameri, Italy and Nagoya, Japan would still be good business. The value addition from kit assembly would be limited (<10% of the aircraft's cost), but the opportunities in overhaul/maintenance are very substantial. IAF/IN yes, but also others like the RSAF, ROKAF, RAAF as well as US forces based in the Middle East.

And given that the aircraft will be in production till 2038, that pool will only grow. Its the new F-16.

F-35 Will Fly Until 2070 — Six Years Longer Than Planned

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Mar 2016 03:30

At this point, if renegotiating MMRCA with new vendor like LM for F-16, then it's better for India to go for JSF. Why pay huge sum of money for legacy technology when a brand new is available? Even if it takes another few years to negotiate, the aircraft will still be current. Why always a step behind rest?

Now that would be "out-of-box" thinking ... moving beyond the original contenders for solutions.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 26 Mar 2016 08:36

The only replacement for Rafales as we have been discussing for eons is special built MKI's with Electronic warfare equipment tied in with some sort of Anti Radiation missile package. Or order 60 FA-18G from us under FMS and call it a day. No need to build, tool and do any of that rubbish. Order extra plug and play kits and learn to fix them locally. Get a deep repair depot and maintenance line rather than CKD line.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 26 Mar 2016 10:43

USD 9 Billion dollars can get us around 9000 Nirbahy missiles. The Total Cost of 36 Rafales can get us 20,000 Nirbhay Missiles. What can 36 Rafales do, which 20,000 Nirbhay Missiles (supported by LCA, Su-30MKI) Cannot do?

member_29350 · Post by **member_29350** » 26 Mar 2016 13:27

The IAF's postualtion that the Raffy will solve the two front threat beggars belief. Unless PC Sorcar magically makes one Raffy to be on both fronts at the same time,the numbers cannot add up.

Fully agree with this IF the IAF had indeed said, 36 raffy are enough for both fronts. you either go for the full complement of 120+

OR

Get MKIs till the LCA prod line is stabilised and work out a 200+ LCA count. And do a major push on enhancing the EW and electronics on the MKI to make it even more potent.

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Mar 2016 16:22

^^^

Straight forward solution would be to order more of Su-30MKI and LCA Mk.1/A along with continuous upgrades. But will the IAF desire that remains to be seen.

Next 10-years:

3 squadrons x Su-30MKI (additional) -> these could be more specialized ones i.e. EW/SEAD/LR-Strike
10 squadrons x LCA Mk1/A (6 on order + 4 additional) -> affordable multi-role combat aircraft that meets the needs and can easily fill up the numbers without breaking the budget as desired; larger order would dictate greater production rate beyond 16/year.
12 x A-300 MRTT (6 pending + 6 additional) -> increase air refuelers for extended missions (East-West type of deal)
6 x DRDO AEW&C (3 + 3 additional) -> more should be acquired of the current Embarer one
10,000 x PGM/ASM (existing plus more stand-off types) -> more on stock and increase stand-off munitions
13 squadrons x Su-30MKI (existing) -> major MLU and incremental updates to keep it relevant along with increased spending to get its serviceability rates to around 70%.

If a foreign (but not-Russian) is desired and no other alternative is satisfactory, then go for F-35 JSF. Get 60+ units. Don't go for legacy tech fighters in F-16/18, Rafale, EF or Gripen. Use the FOREX to get best and latest the money can buy. Even in this case, set aside funds to order more of LCA and MKI to bridge over lean times and make sure to have enough to do upgrades and increase serviceability rates.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Mar 2016 00:31

Carter is expected to take the DTTI to "the next level". April 10 is the day.

All said and done, perhaps the F-18 in all forms is the way to go. IAF, IN including the Growler.

Better still the F-35, all variants.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 27 Mar 2016 02:39

NRao wrote:Carter is expected to take the DTTI to "the next level". April 10 is the day.

All said and done, perhaps the F-18 in all forms is the way to go. IAF, IN including the Growler.

Better still the F-35, all variants.

Nrao saar IMVHO the Shornet for Iaf most probably will require the 414 EPE injun to improve hot and high for where the IAF will operate them for. As far as Growler is concerned we will not get any of the current jamming stuff like next gem jammer etc given its only coming online or will be coming online shortly. That leaves the current which may or may not suffice against potential threats we face. F35 I am not so sure we will even get anything decent. Also with the F35 or F18 I suspect it will mean hosting a bunch of yanks to monitor assets etc not a comforting thought best avoided if possible. Not sure if we already are doing this for the P8s or C17s etc

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 27 Mar 2016 02:56

Nrao saar IMVHO the Shornet for Iaf most probably will require the 414 EPE injun to improve hot and high for where the IAF will operate them for

That was on offer as part of Boeing's proposal for the MMRCA as well and there is little doubt that it would be offered in case of the outside possibility that the Shornet is ever reconsidered. Boeing and GE have enough clout in the Congress to even get the USN to bring ahead its plans to fund work completion, if they see that as a deal clincher for a large order. The upgrades are retrofittable on existing engines at the depot level.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy is being pitched an F414 upgrade that would bring 20% more thrust, twice the power takeoff for systems, and lower maintenance costs. “It’s a very low-risk upgrade incorporating an all-blisk compressor and 3D aero in the compressor and turbine,” she notes.

The upgrade is also being considered by India for its next-gen fighter program, and a deal there could include partnering with Indian industry on design of components.

As far as Growler is concerned we will not get any of the current jamming stuff like next gem jammer etc given its only coming online or will be coming online shortly. That leaves the current which may or may not suffice against potential threats we face.

Current pods are no longer in dev/production and existing ones are not available for export. The NGJ is out of contention as even Australia, that operates older pods will find it tough to get the NGJ as is unless they make certain unique investments in support of the export variants as was made clear recently at a HASC sub. comm. hearing by the PEO. Regardless, the Growler and NGJ are not available on the export market outside of Australia, and is really is not relevant in a multi-role fighter context. There are other digital, integrated EW solutions available that could boost the Hornet's EW suite if that is required as is being currently done on the F-15C's and E's, using GaN AESA and digitization at the element level.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Mar 2016 04:45

most probably will require

The slate is clean, no MMRCA, but we have DTTI, which has made some progress - against bad headwinds (IMHO). The key is will India get what India needs. Not the glossy stuff, but real stuff that builds a MIC while providing for the Services.

I happen to think the chances are very good.

And, I would not worry too much about those agreements and intrusive things. There are ways around it and India has played her cards very well. Have followed the rules - eve when others have not played the game by the rules.

Will not be easy, IMHO, but certainly looking forward.

One last thing, India does not have a better source.

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 27 Mar 2016 05:43

F-35 purchase will require 'full commitment' to NATO and US. Something India must avoid at all costs.

F-18SH is a much better option that doesn't require the same shackles, and indigenous production with ToT can be guaranteed. This includes the added bonus of having GE-414EPE engines powering F-18SH, Tejas, and AMCA. So full engine compatibility and logistics with 3 major platforms.

I hope the French realize and understand how good of an offer F-18SH would be to India, and offer a more competitive deal for the Rafale. I expect we might hear some positive news about the Rafale negotiations before April 10.