Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

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.
Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3961
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Rakesh » 17 Oct 2017 16:34

https://twitter.com/saurabhjoshi/status ... 5385577472 --> Vartaman committee has submitted it's report on FGFA acquisition. Its classified. We have also submitted our report. Its classified - Dhanoa

:lol:

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Vips » 17 Oct 2017 18:46

^^ Not so secret. EXCLUSIVE: IAF flags concerns about Fifth Generation Fighter deal. Can India cancel it?

The Narendra Modi government now has a problem on its hands. The Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Programme (FGFA) was planned about a decade ago and several billion dollars have been spent by both the countries for its design and development.

As far as the Indian Air Force is concerned, the FGFA was part of its future. But with the IAF giving the government its doubts about the project in writing, the Modi government will have problems on its hands. Will it accept the IAF's point and close the programme it has heavily invested in for years? This becomes tricky as the Russians are still India's closest military ally and a decision to not go ahead with it could strain ties. There will also, most certainly, be pressure from the Russians. Going ahead with it would also make the Air Force unhappy.

Along with a report by Air Marshal S Varthaman (retired), the Air Force has sent a note to the Defence Ministry. The note is written by Assistant Chief of Air Staff (Plans) Air Vice Marshal BV Krishna. But while the Varthaman report appears to support the project, the Krishna papers raise doubts. Naturally, the government will have to go by what the Air Force wants and at this point, the IAF does not seem very keen.

Arun Jaitley, the then defence minister, has already sat through a presentation on the subject. At a recent press conference, IAF chief Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa refused to speak about the subject, saying it was classified. But several points about the Air Force's dissatisfaction with the plane have emerged.

1. The radar cross-section surface area, according to the Russians, will be less than 0.5-metre square. The IAF isn't quite sure that will be the case. In any case, there is a belief it should be 0.2-metre square, comparable with the F-35, the American fighter plane. The higher the cross-section, the more visible the plane to radars, making it easier to track it down and fire missiles at it. A higher cross section makes it more vulnerable.

2. The IAF seems to have doubts about the performance of the engine. An engine is easier to maintain if it follows the "modular concept". There appears to be no certainty if that will be so.

3. There is also the issue of maintenance. The Russian aircraft are usually cheaper but they cost more when it comes to maintenance. The FGFA, however, has been an expensive plane to develop and it is still far from ready. Initially, it was felt the plane would be ready by 2017 and then, 2019. That seems unlikely now.

The note has come in the wake of the Varthaman report which has given the fifth generation fighter the go-ahead. The Air Force apart, the DRDO, the ADA and the HAL were part of the study.

Now, high-level sources said a political decision has to be taken.

India and Russia were close military-strategic allies and this programme was part of the future as far as the two countries were concerned. Russia has supplied India with a nuclear-powered submarine, a point its officials often make. But with the Air Force not very happy with the FGFA, it will be up to the government to do decide whether the deal goes through or not. The decision will also have to be taken at the highest level. There are some concerns about what happens if the deal falls through. Would the Russians play hardball on the S-400 air defence system deal? That is something India wants.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Vips » 17 Oct 2017 18:49

Most likely India will have to do a Rafale redux. Depending on how desperate we are for cutting edge Russian technologies (Nuclear Submarine and S400), we may order a couple of squadrons of not so stealthy and under powered FGFA and also buy another stealth jet (F 35?)

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3557
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby srai » 17 Oct 2017 20:01

Each of the fighter acquisition program of the IAF has become a prolonged mess. MMRCA -> LCA Mk1A -> SE-MII -> PAKFA ...

Under the circumstances, safer bet would be to keep acquiring in-service platforms like the Su-30MKI and LCA Mk1.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7514
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Pratyush » 17 Oct 2017 21:17

Wrt the S 400 and the Russians playing hard ball. What prevents us from ordering THAAD.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1280
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Zynda » 17 Oct 2017 21:26

<Deleted>
Last edited by Zynda on 18 Oct 2017 11:55, edited 1 time in total.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cybaru » 18 Oct 2017 05:56

Damn, this is getting very convoluted. IAF really doesn't seem to like the PAKFA engine.

Is there any way we can start working on an engine for PAKFA with safran like we are doing for LCA? So basically Safran core and our engine that is modular enough for IAFs tastes? PAKFA is atleast 7-8 years away. If we start today we should be able to get there. This way we can bring clarity to what is possible and what is not possible directly to IAF and IAF can dictate things early on. Perhaps this would allow IAF to invest in the PAKFA project more comfortably (Perhaps we don't invest in their engine) and get a reduction in partnership.

We should work on a engine plan for every type that we are going to bring online or support for a while like MKI, AMCA, PAKFA etc.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2758
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 18 Oct 2017 07:11

From what I can gather from media reports, it seems that the IAF doesn't want anything from the Russians, not the pakfa, not the mki and definitely not the mig 35. Right now it seems that they have their eyes on the gripen, 4th gen fighter when neighbors are well on their way to 5g.

In any case, the bird is anything but underpowered.... It's not breaking acceleration records because it's low on power, that's for sure.

Of course all of this could be obfuscation to get a better deal.

The political will otoh seems entirely in favor of the US. Just combine the need for the sef, 5g fighter and the naval rfi and buy 200 JSF. The end.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4971
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby ShauryaT » 18 Oct 2017 07:53

So, the IAF does not like the RCS and Engine of the PAK-FA. Fair enough? What is the RCS and engine capabilities of the competition they are likely to face, in our areas of interest?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15821
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 18 Oct 2017 07:59

IIRC, in all fairness to the IAF, the Russians have not yet been open. IAF or anyone else has not had a hard look at that plane. Including when the one time the engine caught fire, the Indians were allowed to look at the display, but no plans were made to get close to the craft.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2758
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 18 Oct 2017 10:01

It could very well be that the IAF does in fact feel mistreated as a "junior partner" and has not gotten the access it should. In either case, development of the bird seems to be chugging along well enough - some more noises - not entirely confirmed:

Empty weight is likely to be around 17000kg
Main FCR (not includinng the side arrays) is said to have 2000 TRMs.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15821
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 18 Oct 2017 10:10

Have not kept up with this at all. How many have the RuAF actually ordered?


Found some data.

Original order was for 52 crafts. Current estimate is for 12 Su-57s. ?????

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17608
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 18 Oct 2017 21:16

I think with the new engine on the cusp of completion,the series prod. has been rescheduled to commence when the engine is in prod. instead of making initial batches with older ones.There may be a few LSP built to put the bird through its paces,but with the RU equiv of the MKI now giving way to SU-35 prod. and MIG-35 prod. in the pipeline,the Russians after their Syrian campaign feel that there's no need for any indecent haste,legacy Sov. era Frogfoots and Fencers,Bears and Backfires still doing splendidly! More money for missiles and subs.The RU navy appears to be the biggest beneficiary after Kalibir strikes from corvettes and subs.

4++ gen. aircraft still v.popular in the export market due to performance and low cost.Flanker sales still appearing along with Egyptian orders for MIG-29s and up to 50+ 35s.

The IAF has it's work cut out with dealing with the 2-front war scenario.Only large numbers with stand-off ASM s like BMos,BMos-NG which will be capable of carriage by med. fighters too ,will fill the gaps existing in the IAF's capability.Other multipliers like AWACS/AEW aircraft ,tankers also reqd. For the 5th-gen req. to deal with China,A clear date of introduction and intro. capability must be fxd. then negotiate backwards to seal any deal.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby abhik » 19 Oct 2017 01:45

ShauryaT wrote:So, the IAF does not like the RCS and Engine of the PAK-FA. Fair enough? What is the RCS and engine capabilities of the competition they are likely to face, in our areas of interest?

How does it matter what the RCS and engine capabilities of the adversaries are?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby abhik » 19 Oct 2017 02:01

Even before the PAF-FA made its first flight, people were claiming like fanboys - "This is my next!". How was the decision made to buy this in the first place? Even time critical requirements like MRCA had to go through elaborate competition. Or are we obligated to buy every piece of equipment that the Russians ever make (even if it is crap)?

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Karan M » 19 Oct 2017 02:43

abhik well said. why are we a captive market for russia? let it prove the pak fa if a tot type license deal is what we will do anyhow since the russians wont give us any real jv work in it.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17608
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 19 Oct 2017 16:02

We wanted a 5th-gen fighter and signed on in a JV.Russia is on a clear deadline Putin monitored.No BS tolerated by him as he is a hire or fire gent.
We simply did not have the aircraft design skills to participate in the project as we didn't know what we really wanted,other than a two-seat aircraft which we were told would be far costlier and take a lot of extra time to deliver.The IJT team was then amazingly asked to also handle this huge project since we had not enough human resources! Neither have we made any significant contribution to the SU-57 nor has the IJT arrived! After the prototypes flew we have now asked for 3 prototypes and some changes ,new engine being the most important factor.In the context of our two mortal enemies China and Pak, and the capabilities of their best birds,the latest filibustering about performance,etc. seem to be a ploy to delay/cancel the JV as the Rafale lobby led by the R Co. is making a huge push for more ultra
-expensive 4th-gen Rafales at the expensive of the FGFA ,estimated earlier at around half the cost for the 5th-gen fighter,as the GOI clearly cannot afford both.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cybaru » 20 Oct 2017 02:45

It is possible that the RCS of Rafale and PAKFA is very close and hence IAF maybe pushing back on reducing RCS further much further. They aren't going to get any leverage if they pay now. They need to get the RCS under control and be at a point which will serve them well for the next 40 years.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5901
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby brar_w » 20 Oct 2017 02:55

RCS of aircraft is only part of the story. Rafale carries external tanks, and munitions which basically negate any RCS suppression that may have been done to its design. PAKFA on the other hand fights clean when required.

Russia is on a clear deadline Putin monitored.No BS tolerated by him as he is a hire or fire gent.


What exactly does this mean?

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Karan M » 20 Oct 2017 03:50

russia stronk, that's what it doth mean

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3961
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Rakesh » 20 Oct 2017 05:12

:rotfl:

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2758
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 20 Oct 2017 06:05

brar_w wrote:RCS of aircraft is only part of the story. Rafale carries external tanks, and munitions which basically negate any RCS suppression that may have been done to its design. PAKFA on the other hand fights clean when required.

Russia is on a clear deadline Putin monitored.No BS tolerated by him as he is a hire or fire gent.


What exactly does this mean?


How would you rate a lightly loaded Rafale, say 2 wingtip mica and 4 meteors on fuselage, full internal fuel vs. a 5 gen fighter. Defensible with awacs or mki to actively guide it?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5901
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby brar_w » 20 Oct 2017 06:19

Low Observability's importance is more so when considering an offensive mission, and it is conceivable that in some or even many defensive scenarios a well supported 4th generation aircraft may be equally as effective. Having said that, all that would matter ONLY if the Rafale came in cheaper compared to 5th gen. aircraft. The problem for the French is that it doesn't.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Karan M » 20 Oct 2017 06:43

The whole issue with the T-50 is the IAF is now well aware of Russian tricks with the Su-30. Clearly, they dont want to be the launch customer for an unproven fighter which its own domestic AF is not buying in bulk and pay in advance for a decades worth of trouble shooting. They'd rather take more extensively debugged 4.5 Gen fighters like the Rafale off the shelf, and this speaks volumes of how badly Russia has mismanaged its leverage with the IAF by ignoring their concerns about product support

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Austin » 20 Oct 2017 11:40

Cain Marko wrote:It could very well be that the IAF does in fact feel mistreated as a "junior partner" and has not gotten the access it should. In either case, development of the bird seems to be chugging along well enough - some more noises - not entirely confirmed:

Empty weight is likely to be around 17000kg
Main FCR (not includinng the side arrays) is said to have 2000 TRMs.


Right now MOD has not invested more than $250 million in this program and that money is just to build infra at HAL , Training and Design infra , HAL itself has stated that they want to join the program earlier to gain greater insight into this program.
"If we join now, we will still get a significant part of the work share, thanks to delays in the PAK-FA project. HAL would co-design the avionics, including navigation systems, radars and weapon aiming devices. This is the heart of the fighter's combat ability," T Suvarna Raju, chief of HAL, the Indian partner of the project, told Business Standard.


Indian procurement process is broken that it takes eons to join any program or buy any new system , Show me one program that India managed to procure on time where delays have not exceed more than 5 years and beyond including our own indiginous ones. Rafale itself was selected in 2011 but signed in 2016 without zero TOT or any Lic Manuf involved.At this rate no one would wait for us and the bus would be missed all the time.

We dont know if the media is telling us the truth some reports states one committe formed by MOD has cleared the FGFA other says IAF has some concerns while IAF Chief says both reports are classified and with MOD and he cannot comment.

Reminds me of a time between 2011 and 2016 where media came with many stories on Rafale with deal being outright cancelled to deal to be signed soon .....Cant believe indian presitutes quoting sources unless backed by Official Statement

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17608
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 20 Oct 2017 12:12

I've been carefully reading between the lines of the new chief's interviews.Whenever he's asked about the FGFA he says that it has been considered for a long time and that the IAF was fully behind a desi AMCA.Actual quote:
"The FGFA prog. has been on for the last 10 yr. and the case is presently with the MOD.The IAF plans for a stealth aircraft with sufficiently low RCS to delay detection by modern radars. The IAF along with the DRDO is closely working towards the dev. of an indigenous 5th-gen aircraft called the AMCA and the IAF is providing active support to the DRDO."

It is v.clear from this and the second report sent to the MOD asking Qs about the FGFA's capabilities after it was first "OK'd" by an IAF team,that the new chief isn't interested.He seems to want the Rafale (no matter what the cost is),"v.capable fighter" ,but again quoting him,"first the SE fighter"! Given serious doubts about HAL/DRDO's ability to perfect the definitive LCA MK-2,how on earth are we going to finesse the AMCA all on our own when we cannot even make a fighter jet engine and are buying the AESA radars for the LCA from abroad,dumping our once touted Uttam? Barring ASTRA (which has an RU seeker),all the AAMs and ASMs will also be firang.The med. sized AMCA will also be restricted as to its armament carrying capability give its much smaller internal weapons bay when compared with the FGFA/SU-57.No way that it will be able to carry BMos-L at all internally!

If the FGFA is dumped by the IAF,then for the next 15 yrs. we will have no stealth fighter at all to counter the Chinese J-20 and others that it may field,also passed on to the Pakis. Given the desi rate of aircraft development,going by the LCA saga,it will take us post 2030 before the AMCA arrives and when it does,it will be a decade older and would reach obsolescence faster than the new 6th-gen fighters which may be appearing in the skies by then!
Furthermore,the AMCA is meant to replace M2Ks and MIG-29s (both upgraded) around 2030,but can the AMCA carry the same payload as these two aircraft in a stealthy mode? No way! The IAF need around 200+ med. sized "bomb trucks" with a heavy payload of ASMs/PGMs with good stand-off ranges for survival,apart from a large no. of dedicated GA/CS aircraft with sufficient armour to support the IA in its ground war. Here the armed/armoured Hawk is one option,along with the Jags.

jpremnath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby jpremnath » 20 Oct 2017 13:06

^^ with russia slowly gravitating to Pak, wriggling out of the bear's grasp wouldn't be such a bad idea..there is nothing india can do to stop ruskies selling lethal weapons to pakis, which I am sure will begin within next 5 years... Committing to FGFA will mean being dependent on russia till 2050 atleast... Imagine the defence of the skies of the second biggest economic power being at the mercy of the then economic and political light weight..

Give the ADA and HAL a definite GSQR, and a committed budget with full backing by IAF( No 3 legged cheetah or other undermining tactics ), i am sure our desi estabLishments can bring a flying prototype within 10 years...Even if we go ahead with FGfa program does anyone think it will join the service within next 10years..?

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2205
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby darshhan » 20 Oct 2017 13:27

jpremnath wrote:^^ with russia slowly gravitating to Pak, wriggling out of the bear's grasp wouldn't be such a bad idea..there is nothing india can do to stop ruskies selling lethal weapons to pakis, which I am sure will begin within next 5 years... Committing to FGFA will mean being dependent on russia till 2050 atleast... Imagine the defence of the skies of the second biggest economic power being at the mercy of the then economic and political light weight..

Give the ADA and HAL a definite GSQR, and a committed budget with full backing by IAF( No 3 legged cheetah or other undermining tactics ), i am sure our desi estabLishments can bring a flying prototype within 10 years...Even if we go ahead with FGfa program does anyone think it will join the service within next 10years..?


Yes there is one thing India can do to preclude Bear from making arms sales to Pakistan. Destroy Pakistan.

It is actually us which is creating opening for arms sales to Pakis by other nations. By letting Pakistan exist.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17608
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 20 Oct 2017 13:37

One must ask why Russia is being less stringent about selling some low-level arms to our enemy Pak. Our recent bum-chumming with the US sthe major reason.Sales to China though took off after the USSR collapsed,understandable,their industry had to survive.They also epmloyed en masse hundreds of top Russian scientists to work in their mil. industry.Yet even now,it is still only India which gets it best and first,like N-subs,MKIs,etc.,plus the JV offer for the FGFA.This comes too with no strings and intrusive agreements like those which the US want (CISMOA,etc.) All they'r eager to provide is 40 yr. old hags like the F-16 and F-18,which are being discarded by most of their allies in favour of the hugely expensive F-35 stealth fighter.

When the 4th+ gen Rafale is costing us twice the cost (estimated) for a 5th-gen SU-57,it would be asinine to buy the inferior bird. The good air chief talks about RCS.What's the diff. in RCS between the FGFA/SU-57 and the Rafale? No problem about buying more Rafales provided the cost is reasonable,which it isn''t. It's also approx 1.5 times more than even a JSF! Commercial interests seem to behind the "thrust" and "surge" of Rafale publicity right now as the SE deal appears to be first on the list of priorities.Here there is no scope at all for the french,a pity that they stopped M2K production.After the SE deal is sealed/decided upon,the GOI will have to take a call on the FGFA ,AMCA,and/or extra Rafales.These are all huge tkt items for which moolah is lacking and in an election year much freebies have to be thrown to the masses before elections are announced!

jpremnath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby jpremnath » 20 Oct 2017 13:56

^^You mean to say if we buy some stuff from someone else than russia, they will sell weapons to our mortal enemy to be used against us... that sir is called blackmailing and precisely the reason why Russia shouldn't be trusted on the defense of the realm and we should get out of our relationship with this country asap...
Many of us still view russia through glasses tinted with USSR shades...We need to realise these are two different countries with different priorities...Russian wares are cheaper to own off the shelf, but our experience says we pay thorough our nose when it comes to maintenance and upkeep..Also their availability rates are much less ...So bang for buck russian wares are expensive compared to the western ones...BUT nothing beats our desi mals in that department...They may be assembled by people in their chappals in what looks like glorified workshops, But they are practically Ferraris at maruti pricetags

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Karan M » 20 Oct 2017 14:05

Many of us still view russia through glasses tinted with USSR shades...


Actually just one of us. Philip who is completely devoid of objectivity for all things Russian.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1280
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Zynda » 20 Oct 2017 14:42

Putin himself has said in many interviews that current Russia is different from USSR (political structure, foreign relations etc.) and new alliances can form while older ones can fade/wither away.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5901
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby brar_w » 20 Oct 2017 14:58

Yet even now,it is still only India which gets it best and first,like N-subs,MKIs,etc.,plus the JV offer for the FGFA.


Yet it is China, which has virtual Su-27 and 30 clones coming out of production lines, has Su-35s on order which no doubt will be cloned, became the first global customer for the S400 and also has many JVs in place. What's the point? They are allies with shared interests so Russia will continue to develop and grow that relationship. Plus China has deep pockets and a general lack of access to Western high tech defense equipment which makes them a solid and reliable customer for many Russian systems.

That obviously shouldn't alter India's strategic relationship with Russia - an important partner on many projects, but no one should be mistaken that Russia would not continue to pursue its independent strategic relationship with China, which is quite possible its number-1 strategic partner given the sort of relationships that exist within Putin's Russia and the West.

When the 4th+ gen Rafale is costing us twice the cost (estimated) for a 5th-gen SU-57


There is no Su-57. Just some prototypes with a small batch that MAY be ordered and delivered by 2020. Serial production is yet to begin and prototype testing is currently ongoing. There is absolutely nothing out there that you or I can use to develop a baseline production_example cost of the Su-57, especially comparing it to a Rafale that is a known entity and has a known performance and cost (high as it may be).

Moreover, to get to the IAF IOC for FGFA, the MOD will have to meet its obligation in the joint-development project which means a few billion in development dollars. Then Russia needs to complete development, development testing, and operational testing of the new engine and all other sub systems, provide test examples to India and let the IAF evaluate. Add all that cost to the FGFA unit cost when comparing to Rafale.

Now, I don't know what the workshare the MOD gets in return for its investment into the JV (beyond the small amount that has already happened) but if you do, please compare it to what the industrial benefits say the UK derived from its JSF Level 1 partnership which was roughly in the $2-3 Billion area.

All they'r eager to provide is 40 yr. old hags like the F-16 and F-18,


The US OEMs are offering the sort of equipment that meets IAF's and INs requirements as communicated by the MOD to international vendors. If the IN wants a naval fighter then the F-18E/F, the USNs mainstay is what Boeing will offer. They can't offer the F-15 or F-22 for that. Same with MiG which is also offering the MiG-29K its only naval aircraft but one which the IN seems to be wanting to move away from, and one that does not have as advanced mission system suite as the Block II or III SH that is on offer. If the IAF want's a SE 4th gen aircraft for domestic production, and the MOD engages global suppliers or releases an RFI to that end, then you cannot blame the OEMs for offering what they have in that space. Of course if requirements were to shift to more demanding and capable aircraft, they have a program that will be producing close to 100 aircraft a year in the next few months but the requirements from the MOD have to reflect that since higher capability will come with a higher cost and this has to be demanded upfront.

which are being discarded by most of their allies in favour of the hugely expensive F-35 stealth fighter.


Not really. Compare the cost of South Korean, Japanese, and Israeli F-35 FMS deals (that included weapons and support (PBL) ) with those of the Rafale to India, Qatar and Egypt. Most F-35 customers in Europe know that from a long term capability acquisition perspective (buying aircraft, buying sustainment, buying upgrades etc) they aren't really paying much more than they would have had they signed up for the Typhoon or Rafale. The only western aircraft that is likely to be significantly cheaper to acquire to the F-35 will be the Gripen-C. On top of this, the customers are also buying into a decade plus of unprecedented follow-on-development, funded primarily by the USDOD via block 4 and block 5 modernization. And, nowhere else do they have the plethora of US and foreign weapons being integrated thanks to the wide installed customer base (JSM, Turkish weapons, Meteor, ASRAAM, SDBII, JSOW, SPEAR II etc etc). If you are a small customer with 20-30 aircraft (any modern aircraft), you will have to pay an astronomically large price for custom weapons integation on any aircraft and are therefore for all practical purposes slaved to the organic eco-system that exists within that aircraft. JSF customers, even the really small ones like many European nations don't have that problem as others are paying or spreading the cost of a diverse weapons and upgrades aimed at different markets, cost points and capability.
Last edited by brar_w on 20 Oct 2017 16:38, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15821
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 20 Oct 2017 16:25

It is v.clear from this and the second report sent to the MOD asking Qs about the FGFA's capabilities after it was first "OK'd" by an IAF team,that the new chief isn't interested.


Which other Chief was interested? IIRC, *none* were.

IAF has never been interested in the PAK-FA. And, it seems to be for a very simple reason. Russia has never allowed any Indian even near the craft. Leave alone provide details, other than some percentages of "work share".

Very seriously, other than a claim published first by sputniknews or rt.com, that the rcs matches that of the F-22, what do the Indians have actually to go by?

Heck, one of the original 42 improvements that Indians wanted was "composite material" for the skin!!!!! Two years latter the Russians said we can do that. Since then the Russians have slowly whittled away at this remaining 41 items on the to do list. Even then check here. Indian FGFA is expected to have better rcs than the PAK-FA.

Given serious doubts about HAL/DRDO's ability to perfect the definitive LCA MK-2,


No need to doubt anything WRT the Mk2.

But, IMHO, it is not coming. But not because it cannot come. The issue, IMHO, is timing, not technical.

how on earth are we going to finesse the AMCA all on our own


Just the way anyone does it. Fund the project to the hilt. Route the $5 billion to the AMCA , instead of the FGFA.


I think after the AI-55 Indian funded effort, there is absolutely no was the IAF will have any confidence in the new engine for the PAK-FA. A craft that is at least 5 years out to even prove it would be a viable craft. Unless of course one believes that India is paying $1.8 billion for 80 radars. Heck who knows, they got a phoren prez elected. Stand up half a dozen web sites and you can have a 5th gen plane for $5 billion down payment too I guess.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Vips » 20 Oct 2017 17:00

Chinese J20 fears need not be taken seriously at least at this point. If Russia is struggling with achieving 100% Stealth and engines to power its FGFA then there is no way the Chinese will be be able to make a F22 competitor at least for another decade (unless the Russians would pass on the subsequent developed technologies to them).

It would be worthwhile for India to join Korean/Brazilian efforts to make a fifth generation fighter jet. I am surprised the Europeans and French have no plans so far to make one.

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 20 Oct 2017 18:36

I would really like to understand what any of these european or american aircraft deals actually bring to the table.regards our ability to fight any war that will be highly attritional..

Zero ToT,not long enough range to really pose any real threat to eastern china..Tech wise too nothing great which will give us proper edge over chinese as numbers will be too small due to expensive nature of any such deal..

Do.the deal with FGFA ..You will atleast get a 5th gen.plane in near future..No.F-35 is ever coming..

N buy extra Migs 29,35 whatever to deal with immediate mig 21 shortfall till the time lca is there in large numbers and order 4 more squadrons of SU 30.. n be happy with it


Wars are about attrition..Always remember that ..N u vl need numbers..So always go for wt u can procure in numbers
.No tech in the world is there till now.which can assure even 1:2 kill ratio fr any 4th gen plane out there..

Will
BRFite
Posts: 536
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Will » 20 Oct 2017 18:45

Vips wrote:It would be worthwhile for India to join Korean/Brazilian efforts to make a fifth generation fighter jet. I am surprised the Europeans and French have no plans so far to make one.


The Germans and French have recently announced that they will be developing a 5th gen aircraft.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5901
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby brar_w » 20 Oct 2017 18:50

The Germans and French have recently announced that they will be developing a 5th gen aircraft.


Announcements don't a program make (or else we would have had the European Collaborative Fighter with French support) ! Given 15-20 year time-line for joint projects to come to fruition, if this goes anywhere, it will be a 5th gen. aircraft fielded @ 6th gen. timelines.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2758
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 20 Oct 2017 20:29

Austin wrote:Reminds me of a time between 2011 and 2016 where media came with many stories on Rafale with deal being outright cancelled to deal to be signed soon .....Cant believe indian presitutes quoting sources unless backed by Official Statement


Agreed. Media reports are more often than not, rubbish.
In any case, I think there will be plenty of purchases still from Russian stable....s400 is already done seems like. Next in line is the mki upgrade and the likeliest path is by keeping mki line open for pakfa/fgfa and using related hardware for mki upgrade. Both these seem connected and therefore are equally delayed.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5052
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Viv S » 20 Oct 2017 22:17

Indian Air Force wants out of fighter program with Russia
By: Vivek Raghuvanshi

NEW DELHI – The ambitious $10 billion Indo-Russian program for joint development and production of fifth generation fighter aircraft, or FGFA, faces a new serious hurdle, as the Indian Air Force demands a discontinuation of the project.

Senior IAF leadership recently expressed apprehension to the Ministry of Defence, claiming the proposed FGFA program with Russia does not meet desired requirements like U.S. F-35 fighter type capabilities, disclosed a senior IAF official. That official added, that “IAF is not keen to continue with the program.”

The proposed FGFA program does not meet desired stealth and cross section features compared to a F-35 fighter, the official explained, thus major structural changes are needed that cannot be met in the existing Russian prototypes.

FGFA also does not have modular engine concept, making maintenance and serviceability of the fleet expensive and troublesome. A second service official said the modular engine concept is required for the fleet serviceability and availability of FGFA aircrafts at short notice, since it can be done by the user itself.

Russians have offered non-modular engines for FGFA and its maintenance and other relations can only be handled by the manufacturer.

Russian Embassy diplomats here were unavailable for comments.

Vaijinder K Thakur, retired IAF squadron leader and defense analyst disagreement with the Air Force assessment of capability, saying that the current Russian FGFA prototype, known as Su-57, features the AL-41F1 engine. But the production variant of FGFA would be fitted with the Product 30 engine which is 30 percent lighter, features improved thrust, and has better fuel efficiency and fewer moving parts. That results in improved reliability and 30 percent lower life-cycle cost, Thakur said.

Without having operated U.S. fighters, the IAF is hardly in a position to pronounce judgment on the comparative long-term operating costs of Russian and U.S. fighters, Thakur added.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ajacob, Ganimi_Kawa, Google Feedfetcher, marimuthu, Vivek K and 39 guests