Transport Aircraft for IAF

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
VikB
BRFite
Posts: 340
Joined: 29 Jun 2009 10:02
Location: Mumbai/Delhi
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby VikB » 04 Nov 2014 19:29

My bad :)
Alenia - Finameccanica lafda. all companies under that umbrella are currently banned

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Victor » 04 Nov 2014 20:05

Too bad about Antonov but it was a known conclusion. It would have made an excellent Avro replacement and also the perfect RTA. Not sure about An-32 even though that too was a civilian passenger plane originally. What a mess.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Victor » 04 Nov 2014 20:13

VikB wrote:My bad :)
Alenia - Finameccanica lafda. all companies under that umbrella are currently banned

afaik not banned since BJP govt sent them a rfq. It must have been the cockeyed requirement for 40 aircraft.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4461
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby putnanja » 04 Nov 2014 21:02

From Ajai Shukla's blog...

Fresh tender likely after Tata-Airbus single bidders for Avro replacement

The defence ministry (MoD) is likely to issue a fresh international tender for building 56 transport aircraft in India to replace the venerable Avro HS-748 in the Indian Air Force (IAF) inventory, say ministry sources.

...
Yet, for various reasons, only one OEM has bid. Amongst those left out is Antonov, of Ukraine, which had partnered Larsen & Toubro (L&T) in a proposal to build the An-132 aircraft in India. However, political turmoil in Ukraine, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea, has stalled its bid.

..
..
The Swedish company, which wanted to supply the Saab-2000 aircraft, has not bid because the MoD is unwilling to let it build all 56 aircraft in India. The RfP insists that 16 aircraft must be supplied in flyaway condition. Saab, having shut down its line in Sweden, wants to build all the aircraft in India, which the RfP does not provide for.

Russian manufacturer, Ilyushin, wants to supply the IL-214. However, this aircraft does not have a rear ramp, which the RfP demands. Interestingly, the Avro, which the new aircraft will replace, does not have a rear ramp either.

A senior MoD procurement official say it would be difficult to continue with a single vendor. A waiver would be required for that deviation from the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP).
...

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 04 Nov 2014 22:13



Analysts have argued that the Avro-replacement fulfils no operational role. AK Antony, told parliament in 2012 that the programme aimed to “encourage development of the Indian private sector in aircraft manufacture”.

His more forthright air chief, Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne, bluntly stated that the aim was to develop a competitor to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL).


So, they actually want to spend that kind of money just to get a competitor for HAL?

Really?

No other way to achieve that goal?

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2737
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JTull » 05 Nov 2014 02:46



Ajai Shukla's is implying that IL-214 should be considered despite lacking a rear ramp, as the Avro doesn't have one. Well, what about An-32? Should we ignore that fact that it DOES have one? Or should IAF declare that they don't need a ramp and loading pallets is not their concern for transport aircraft.

Saab wants to build all 56 in India. So who stopped them from replying to the RfP. It is not a bid, it is a reply to the RfP, mate! Make a bloody proposal, if you care.

And India shouldn't have launched this RfP just because Ukraine is busy killing it's own people or raising it's skirt for the west!

Bizarre!

There is plenty of precedence with single-vendor situations. Now is the time to test if this govt. is serious about doing away with the delays plaguing acquisition process. Otherwise, people who don't want to compete fairly, by not bidding, they get a chance to grease the palms to skew the new RfP to suit their aircraft. In the meantime, services just have to make do with some more jugaad.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Victor » 05 Nov 2014 07:42

All we need now is some paki to phone in an anonymous "allegation" of corruption and *bam!* contract cancelled. That's all we have needed for decades to deny our forces badly needed weapons. What a comedy. Truly hope BJP govt wakes up and moves quickly on this.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2014 10:07

saab-2000 is the platform for the paki ereyie btw. they pulled from frames from the few operators and used it. not really a plane with a strong future..infact thats why the production line is long shut down! boasted a very swift climb rate though, rivaling jets.

VikB
BRFite
Posts: 340
Joined: 29 Jun 2009 10:02
Location: Mumbai/Delhi
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby VikB » 05 Nov 2014 10:13

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=21397 Finmeccanica out, US’s Sikorsky joins Navy copter acquisition race
"With the Modi government implementing "a partial ban" on Finmeccanica, under which ongoing contracts will continue but there will be no fresh deals, the European NH-90 chopper has now been eliminated from the naval chopper procurement case."
so Finmeccanica and hence C27 is out

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8216
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Pratyush » 05 Nov 2014 10:17

Merge the Avros replacement with the AN 32 replacement. You have approx 150 ac the need to be replaced. The money can have better ROI, in this respect.

The cancellation of the tender at the moment will be a poor policy choice. But if they persist with the tender, then they expose themselves to allegations of corruption.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2014 10:18

seriously this 'global tender' deserves to be a famous word like
EGOM and EGOS - empowered group of ministers/secretaries made famous by nda1 and upa.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 05 Nov 2014 21:32

Not strictly military but on civilian aircraft manuf

Russia-India joint Sukhoi Superjet-100 production

http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/758070
Russia and India discussed the prospects of launching the joint production of Sukhoi Superjet-100 medium-haul airliners on Indian soil, Dmitry Rogozin said after a meeting of the Russian-Indian inter-governmental commission for trade, economic, scientific and technical and cultural cooperation.

“The talk is about producing Sukhoi Superjet-100 airliners on Indian soil. The planes can be produced both for the needs of the Indian market and for sale to third countries,” Rogozin said.

India also “showed interest in the MS-21 medium-haul passenger airliner,” which fully meets “the requirements of the Indian market both by the number of passenger seats (180 passengers) and the flight distance (up to 5,000 km), the Russian vice-premier said.

The first MS-21 plane is set “for its first flight in 2016 and the start of its serial production is scheduled for 2017,” Rogozin said.

Russia also considers as promising its cooperation with India in helicopter-making, the Russian vice-premier said.

“Our proposal in this sphere boils down to using Ka-226 helicopters both for civilian and military needs,” the vice-premier said.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Victor » 06 Nov 2014 00:43

^ Huge risk compared to Airbus or Boeing who have decades of experience in jetliners, and huge expense when considering the existing infrastructure for those two in Indian service. Even if we go with Russian airframes, we'll need to use western engines so what's the use? Who exactly is talking to the Russians? HAL I bet, with another "MTA" in the making :evil:.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 06 Nov 2014 07:03

the superjet-100 is in doldrums with no big airline interested. all this 'co production' is code word for they need funds to make it viable but will not share any worthwhile tech.

even the PAKFA 'co dev' is in doldrums with zero indian input to R&D phase and our workshare reduced to 13% from 50%. HAL does not care. they will be happy to assemble and service CKD kits for guaranteed work over decades. but what is the use of putting up 50% of funds then. might as well just be a buyer and let them fund it to completion unless this 50% is a discount we get later , with contract to be arbitrated in a non-russian court incase of dispute.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 06 Nov 2014 09:51

Alenia drops India Avro replacement tender

So its final. Alenia will not bid for the HS-748 Avro replacement program. Too bad, they'll struggle to find a bigger market anywhere else without selling the entire technology developed for the C-27J. In the meantime they'll just about struggle to find customers like Slovakia, who'll buy 2 C-27Js after 6 years of negotiations.

Alenia Aermacchi will not bid for an Indian air force contract to replace India’s Hindustan Aeronautics-built HS-748 Avro transports.
The deal for 56 medium transports is worth an estimated $2.2 billion, and Alenia’s C-27J was seen as a strong contender for the requirement.
A company spokesman tells Flightglobal that “the Indian air force Avro replacement programme calls mainly for a basic medium transport aircraft and therefore Alenia Aermacchi decided to not participate to the tender.”
The decision not to respond to India’s request for proposal (RFP), coupled to a lack of interest from other airframers, leaves Airbus Defence and Space as the sole bidder. It is pitching its C295 twin-turboprop medium airlifter along with Indian partner Tata Advanced Systems.
Alenia raised concerns about the viability of the programme. It believes the Avro replacement tender “may represent an opportunity to develop a long-term industrial collaboration, however the foreseen fleet size indicated in the tender today, may not allow a comprehensive satisfactory industrial return oriented to a serious technology transfer.”
New Delhi has set stringent requirements that will likely test the capabilities of the designated Indian production agency with a minimum value addition of 30% being called for in the first phase of license production for 16 aircraft. This value addition by Indian companies for the final 24 aircraft will increase to 60%.
Airbus has said that Tata Advanced Systems will undertake structural assembly, final aircraft assembly, systems integration and testing, and management of the indigenous supply chain in India. It is likely to be an uphill task for both Airbus and its Indian partner Tata to ensure that aircraft manufactured in India meet the stringent certification standards expected by the Indian air force.
..

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby member_20292 » 06 Nov 2014 10:49

Singha wrote:the superjet-100 is in doldrums with no big airline interested. all this 'co production' is code word for they need funds to make it viable but will not share any worthwhile tech.

even the PAKFA 'co dev' is in doldrums with zero indian input to R&D phase and our workshare reduced to 13% from 50%. HAL does not care. they will be happy to assemble and service CKD kits for guaranteed work over decades. but what is the use of putting up 50% of funds then. might as well just be a buyer and let them fund it to completion unless this 50% is a discount we get later , with contract to be arbitrated in a non-russian court incase of dispute.


For their production efficiencies, they are a surprisingly capitalistic and profit oriented enterprise.

A good idea would be to divest some stake in it, something like Maruti. At least then, some efficiencies of production would be coming in.

An HAL employee mentioned to me that since HAL itself needs certification from so many other agencies like CEMILAC and others, it takes extra time to fly.

These things will be sorted out or never be sorted out. Its a struggle. Better put a private player to it, who has the requisite management expertise.

VikB
BRFite
Posts: 340
Joined: 29 Jun 2009 10:02
Location: Mumbai/Delhi
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby VikB » 06 Nov 2014 11:02

Today all global OEMs are wooing the Indian private sector for doing the joint thing and bidding for the Indian contracts. The Russians are the only ones who dont want to deal with the private sector and only want to deal with PSUs like HAL, NAL, Ordnance factories, etc. it seems that they know that they will be big time exposed if a professional private sector guy is engaged where each penny will be counted and they held accountable for any lapse. just not good. I think it will take about 5-10 years to root out this marriage of convenience and the easy run that they have been having.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 06 Nov 2014 12:37

Kartik wrote:Alenia drops India Avro replacement tender

So its final. Alenia will not bid for the HS-748 Avro replacement program. Too bad, they'll struggle to find a bigger market anywhere else without selling the entire technology developed for the C-27J. In the meantime they'll just about struggle to find customers like Slovakia, who'll buy 2 C-27Js after 6 years of negotiations.


Building production line for just 56 aircraft is expensive and inefficient , I doubt they would even even out the production cost , For Medium Aircraft they need a firm number of around 150 aircraft to give TOT , Production cost etc.

It would be cheaper for IAF to just procure 56 aircraft outright in double quick time HAL would take and just build adequate spares and 1,2nd line of maintenance for them at BRD or HAL facility.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 06 Nov 2014 18:03

Building production line for just 56 aircraft is expensive and inefficient , I doubt they would even even out the production cost , For Medium Aircraft they need a firm number of around 150 aircraft to give TOT , Production cost etc.


That has got to be true for every player out there, including the Tata/EADS partnership.

IIRC, even the previous government had stated that they expected the winner/s of this contest to export or sell to internal users .......... cover their costs that a way.

Even the MTA has a 25% export component.

It would be cheaper for IAF to just procure 56 aircraft outright in double quick time HAL would take and just build adequate spares and 1,2nd line of maintenance for them at BRD or HAL facility.


Same is true for the MTA.

However, the main purpose for all these efforts was to bring certain expertise into India. With the MTA (and FGFA) it included "design" and with all of them "manufacturing". Spares, etc would follow.

The second goal was to involve the private players. I do not think any PSU involvement would be acceptable - especially WRT this plane.



They had/have a game plan and they need to stick with it. It does carry risk, no two ways about it. But if the goals are to be achieved they have ot stick to the game plan and not look for alternatives in the middle of the game.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 06 Nov 2014 18:13

Austin wrote:
Kartik wrote:Alenia drops India Avro replacement tender

So its final. Alenia will not bid for the HS-748 Avro replacement program. Too bad, they'll struggle to find a bigger market anywhere else without selling the entire technology developed for the C-27J. In the meantime they'll just about struggle to find customers like Slovakia, who'll buy 2 C-27Js after 6 years of negotiations.


Building production line for just 56 aircraft is expensive and inefficient , I doubt they would even even out the production cost , For Medium Aircraft they need a firm number of around 150 aircraft to give TOT , Production cost etc.

It would be cheaper for IAF to just procure 56 aircraft outright in double quick time HAL would take and just build adequate spares and 1,2nd line of maintenance for them at BRD or HAL facility.


Austin, those costs will get tacked on to the cost of the airplane that will be supplied to the IAF. the cost savings will come from whatever little labour costs savings they'll see. The airframer and its Indian partner won't absorb those costs. In addition, the ToT costs will get added on as well.

C-27Js have only sold about 80 odd units in ALL ! Now add the cost of the development and the existing assembly line, so then 56 is nearly 3/4th of the total sales of the C-27J so far. If what you're saying is true (about 150 units for breaking even) then the C-27J program will likely never break even.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8161
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Indranil » 06 Nov 2014 19:15

It will not be just 56 aircraft. Everybody knows this.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1954
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby srin » 06 Nov 2014 22:45

Pratyush wrote:Merge the Avros replacement with the AN 32 replacement. You have approx 150 ac the need to be replaced. The money can have better ROI, in this respect.

The cancellation of the tender at the moment will be a poor policy choice. But if they persist with the tender, then they expose themselves to allegations of corruption.


Actually, there was an article by Ajai Shukla a few months ago that essentially said An-32 replacement is far more important than the Avro replacement.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Victor » 06 Nov 2014 23:47

^?. An-32 is a perfectly competent aircraft and is being upgraded to make it even better. In fact, it may be worthwhile trying to buy off Antonov. AFAIK, it is in the pro-Russian part of Ukraine, all the critical parts come from Russia and its future is kaput without Russia India. We can then get An-140, An-74, An-148 (renamed In-140, In-74, In-148) and be self-sufficient in transports forever. Even Ukraine can have a minority stake. That helps all 3 countries.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby srai » 07 Nov 2014 06:12

indranilroy wrote:It will not be just 56 aircraft. Everybody knows this.


The IAF is keeping options for more aircrafts close to its chest. One would think if the IAF were to say they also want to replace their 100+ An-32 with the winning Avro replacement design there would be a lot more interest globally and from Indian private companies. Plus, it would get a better deal with volume order and save a lot of time having to negotiate for second contract. If the IAF chooses to go for a different design for its An-32 replacement, then it would kill its own efforts to move away from HAL.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 07 Nov 2014 13:14

My guess is that the IAF will add 12-24 more units to the existing 56.

As it is, the line would be open till the time the oldest An-32REs start retiring beginning 2025 and with MTA being nowhere on the horizon, the initial shortfall in transport capacity will be made up by the C-295 (since it is pretty sure to be chosen, with C-27J not being in the competition). That is how the additional C-295 orders will materialize.

If the MTA ever goes beyond models and slideshows, it will be the likely An-32 replacement in tandem with more C-295s. If the MTA goes into permafrost, then the KC-390 may be an option, with the C-130J and with the Kawasaki C-2 a very long shot (its expensive).

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7660
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby nachiket » 07 Nov 2014 14:13

srin wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Merge the Avros replacement with the AN 32 replacement. You have approx 150 ac the need to be replaced. The money can have better ROI, in this respect.

The cancellation of the tender at the moment will be a poor policy choice. But if they persist with the tender, then they expose themselves to allegations of corruption.


Actually, there was an article by Ajai Shukla a few months ago that essentially said An-32 replacement is far more important than the Avro replacement.

The C-295 can easily fill both roles. It has similar payload and range characteristics as the An-32. The only downside is that it won't be able to match the hot and high performance of the An-32. The AL-20 engines of the An-32 are almost twice as powerful as the piddly 2600 horsepower engines of the C-295. That's where the C-27J had a big advantage over the C-295, but we aren't going to get that now.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2958
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby tsarkar » 07 Nov 2014 15:25

^^ I recall Embraer cooperating magnificently with CABS on AEW&C, and with it being one of the more successful partnerships. If they're open to partnering on MTA, why not KC-390.

Unfortunately HAL Transport Division Kanpur is happy with Do228 orders and willing to play along with the Russians in a chalta hai manner.

What has HAL done on MTA design so far?

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 07 Nov 2014 16:14

tsarkar wrote:^^ I recall Embraer cooperating magnificently with CABS on AEW&C, and with it being one of the more successful partnerships. If they're open to partnering on MTA, why not KC-390.

Unfortunately HAL Transport Division Kanpur is happy with Do228 orders and willing to play along with the Russians in a chalta hai manner.

What has HAL done on MTA design so far?


KC-390 was a great opportunity to get a big chunk of design work and then actual production work. That and the follow up sustaining engineering activities would've given some real business to whichever Indian entity would've tied up on the KC-390. The economics of that airplane will be good, given the engine that's been chosen. and India could have had multiple variants developed for it, with a large chunk of the workshare being negotiated for ourselves..versus being the perennial junior partner working with a behemoth like Russia, which does the bulk of the work and then let's Indian entities develop small value items.

Instead, HAL is stuck on powerpoint presentations and scale models presented at every other air show. AFAIK, zilch engineering work has gone on at HAL so far on the MTA. They'll wait to be handed over the bulk of the engineering drawings and learn next to nothing from the Russians on the actual design engineering that will go into the Il-214 design.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 07 Nov 2014 16:26

Not going to be easy to deal with Russia. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Make sure to protect your grid.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2737
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JTull » 07 Nov 2014 20:02

Perhaps a bigger powerplant for C295 may be possible in future for An-32 replacements to match it's hot and high performance.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Viv S » 08 Nov 2014 00:56

Kartik wrote:C-27Js have only sold about 80 odd units in ALL ! Now add the cost of the development and the existing assembly line, so then 56 is nearly 3/4th of the total sales of the C-27J so far. If what you're saying is true (about 150 units for breaking even) then the C-27J program will likely never break even.


To be fair, the C-27J was an evolution of the Alenia G.222, of which the same production line delivered 110 units or so.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Viv S » 08 Nov 2014 01:00

From Ajai Shukla's article -
___________

HAL points out that, since each Avro flies barely 350 hours every year, most of them have a residual life of about 80,000 hours. In a request for information (RFI) released on August 15, HAL has proposed replacing the aircraft’s engines (Rolls Royce Dart) with “modern fuel efficient engines”.
___________




So, the IAF's Avros have a residual life of 228 years at the current rate of usage. Ain't life grand? :mrgreen:

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Victor » 08 Nov 2014 01:20

HAL is getting frantic about fending off any and all competition to save itself by proposing to re-engine Ambassadors :(. No need for modern controls, safety and avionics since IAF pilots are expendable. Hope this report is not true because if it is, HAL is more gone case than I had expected.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3282
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kakkaji » 08 Nov 2014 06:10

Re. the single vendor situation: What is the problem in awarding a contract to a single vendor, if the single vendor's bid is compliant with all the terms of the tender? :-?

isubodh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 03 Oct 2008 18:23

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby isubodh » 08 Nov 2014 08:44

^ In theory it will not let you discover the price properly.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1954
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby srin » 08 Nov 2014 10:24

Kakkaji wrote:Re. the single vendor situation: What is the problem in awarding a contract to a single vendor, if the single vendor's bid is compliant with all the terms of the tender? :-?


The basic idea is like auctions. If there is only one player, then they can price it very high and say "my way or highway". If you have multiple *independent* bidders, then because of competition, the bidders are mindful of not pricing it too high.

Here is the fun thing though. If there is only one vendor at the RFP stage, then there is no competition. However, if a vendors submits a bid thinking there is competition, but it turns out that the other bidder is disqualified, then it is considered a competitive bid and still valid.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby GeorgeWelch » 16 Nov 2014 20:16

http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/1 ... -17-story/

Australia has formally requested “up to four” more Boeing C-17A

. . .

Boeing has built about 10 “white tailed” aircraft on speculation that these can be sold to new or existing customers of the aircraft. There is believed to be interest for additional aircraft from India, Canada and the UK, and possibly new customers in the Middle East.


India may be 'penciled in' for 6, but if Australia buys 4, that leaves zero margin. If anyone else wants to buy some, I think that India's spots will be erased fairly quickly.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 16 Nov 2014 20:28

GeorgeWelch wrote:http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/11/defence-c-17-story/

Australia has formally requested “up to four” more Boeing C-17A

. . .

Boeing has built about 10 “white tailed” aircraft on speculation that these can be sold to new or existing customers of the aircraft. There is believed to be interest for additional aircraft from India, Canada and the UK, and possibly new customers in the Middle East.


India may be 'penciled in' for 6, but if Australia buys 4, that leaves zero margin. If anyone else wants to buy some, I think that India's spots will be erased fairly quickly.


True. I think that ship sailed when Hagel left India after his last visit a few months ago. Which perhaps may be why the Australians ordered the 4.

But, that does not mean there are no options left on the table.

BTW, there 13 that were made. Are all 13 accounted for? Just curious (JC).

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 16 Nov 2014 21:52

Viv S wrote:From Ajai Shukla's article -
___________

HAL points out that, since each Avro flies barely 350 hours every year, most of them have a residual life of about 80,000 hours. In a request for information (RFI) released on August 15, HAL has proposed replacing the aircraft’s engines (Rolls Royce Dart) with “modern fuel efficient engines”.
___________




So, the IAF's Avros have a residual life of 228 years at the current rate of usage. Ain't life grand? :mrgreen:


Someone has really lost his marbles at HAL to even be suggesting such a thing.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2607
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 17 Nov 2014 05:06

Kartik wrote:
Viv S wrote:From Ajai Shukla's article -
___________

HAL points out that, since each Avro flies barely 350 hours every year, most of them have a residual life of about 80,000 hours. In a request for information (RFI) released on August 15, HAL has proposed replacing the aircraft’s engines (Rolls Royce Dart) with “modern fuel efficient engines”.
___________




So, the IAF's Avros have a residual life of 228 years at the current rate of usage. Ain't life grand? :mrgreen:



Someone has really lost his marbles at HAL to even be suggesting such a thing.



Why? If the airframe can handle more flight hours, why not?

And on another note, we don't need new A330 refuelers. We need Singapore airlines/Emirates used A330's which have a residual life of 45% at a 30% price point. They constantly dump old planes for new planes to keep their customer base happy. If we fly those refuelers once every 3rd day for 10 hours, we still won't use its remaining useful life in 20 years. Buy old and refurbish. Buy 12 instead of 6.

Push the 6 Il-476 from refueler to AEW duty. Phalcon them up. That will give us our projected need of 9 AEW birds. 7 on duty and 2 under upgrade/refurbishment. With 2 on active duty and on spare with each front. The extra one is for emergency/training spare.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Kartik, Kritavarman, Sagrawal and 65 guests