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.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Viv S » 22 Oct 2017 12:16

Austin wrote:My bet is we won't see F-35 in service in near/medium future as there is no official reqst from MoD or IAF much less the trials, negotiations, TOT, etc. These would be another lengthy process going through multiple layers of babudom, that might change next decade we will have to wait and see if this makes any progress.

All of that red-tape & bureaucracy applies to the F-16 & Gripen as well. And the MoD does have an open requirement for a "single-engined aircraft" (with a possible buy-American subtext). The longer this SE business drags on, with the Chinese continuing to ramp up J-20 numbers even as the FGFA remains at a distance, the more likely the MoD is to upgrade its requirements. Meanwhile, the IAF will continue getting feedback from friendly air forces (esp. the IsAF & USAF but maybe also the JASDF) and will factor that into its force planning.

Of course, it'll be different if the SE deal is wrapped up quickly, but that's unlikely for all the reasons you've listed.

If AMCA gets delayed like Tejas, there is high probability IAF will go for some variant of F-35 like the SE competition.

Not necessarily. The AMCA is expected to arrive in the 2035-40 time-frame. If its delayed (2040-45?), the obvious alternative at that point is more FGFAs, which should be a mature evolved platform, in-service with a degree of domestic content & requisite customization. There may also be 6th gen options of the table at that point.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Austin » 22 Oct 2017 12:48

Still with all the redtape only Gripen and F-16 is in competition unless the SE gets cancelled [ which I hope it does and Tejas get all the orders of SE ] we will not see another competition RFI/RFP etc that F-35 can then compete.

Right now there is not a possibility because we do not have any Requirement for F-35 from IAF/MOD , Ofcourse things can change and I can see that may happen of AMCA gets cancelled/delayed and F-35 should be the logic requirement for the class but then it may not happen and we might just see AMCA by 2035 .....its all crystal ball gazing

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Viv S » 22 Oct 2017 14:31

Austin wrote:Still with all the redtape only Gripen and F-16 is in competition unless the SE gets cancelled [ which I hope it does and Tejas get all the orders of SE ] we will not see another competition RFI/RFP etc that F-35 can then compete.

Nope. As of now, no RFPs have been issued for the SE deal - the Gripen & F-16 are not formally in contention. There is no compulsion on the MoD/IAF to pick one of the two. An apt example is the IAF's pursuit of a license-produced Mirage 2000, an effort that concluded in a Rafale purchase (albeit truncated).

If the SE deal drags on, the F-35 is a very real possibility (unless you think the F-16 is a done deal) - one that I would welcome and that doesn't really threaten the future of the Tejas program, although it may be an obstacle to the Rafale & PAK FA's prospects in India.

Right now there is not a possibility because we do not have any Requirement for F-35 from IAF/MOD , Ofcourse things can change and I can see that may happen of AMCA gets cancelled/delayed and F-35 should be the logic requirement for the class but then it may not happen and we might just see AMCA by 2035 .....its all crystal ball gazing

Class doesn't matter - function & capabilities do. The F-35 doesn't fit into a different slot from the PAK FA. If it is passed over, there is no reason for it to be purchased in the post-2035 time-frame over the FGFA, which will presumably have been in-service with the IAF for a while (and would be assembled/partially-produced by HAL).

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 22 Oct 2017 16:45

It is the US who armed Pak for decades against India,pushing them into war against us to grab J&K, who have also turned a blind eye to their N-proliferation, chicanery in Afghanistan duplicity on terror, who now want us to be their stepney! Said many a time it is trying to make money out of our misery,selling arms to both.The US lust for India has appeared after China replaced Pak as principal weapons supplier and the increasing Indian arms market becos of the threat to us from the Sino-Pak JV. All through the last 50 yrs Russia never supplied Pak with any major weapon system,even now just a few utility helos and via China,copied RU engines for its modest JF-17.

If we pull out of the FGFA arguably even Pak could ask for Ru aircraft. Egypt has ordered both MIG-29s and 50+ MIG-35s.If properly negotiated this is an opportunity to acquire IP rights for the bird,plus leverage the TOT as much as poss. for the future AMCA.If the SE deal is sealed soon,the LCA will be in trouble and I anticipate the IAF asking for faster AMCAs instead of obsolete LCAs.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4122
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Rakesh » 22 Oct 2017 17:18

Philip wrote:If we pull out of the FGFA arguably even Pak could ask for Ru aircraft.

How about I start a GoFundMe page for the PAF to acquire the FGFA? I am sure the Pakistan will award me with the Nishan-E-Haider!

Philip wrote:Egypt has ordered both MIG-29s and 50+ MIG-35s. If properly negotiated this is an opportunity to acquire IP rights for the bird, plus leverage the TOT as much as poss, for the future AMCA. If the SE deal is sealed soon, the LCA will be in trouble and I anticipate the IAF asking for faster AMCAs instead of obsolete LCAs.

It is actually 10 years this month, that a joint partnership for the FGFA has been announced. Apart from an airframe (in which her stealth features are highly questionable), there is nothing really "fifth" generation about that plane. FGFA might as well stand for Fourth Generation Fighter Aircraft. We have been negotiating for 10 years on this project and gotten no where with the Russians wrt to IP. Nothing is going to change and the IAF sees the writing on the wall. We need to step out of this project for good.

Image

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Vips » 22 Oct 2017 17:35

If we pull out of the FGFA arguably even Pak could ask for Ru aircraft.


This is blackmail, plain and simple. In any case Russian sale of defence equipment to shitland is going to happen. The ball was set rolling when Russia supplied engines for the bandar jets.

For the immediate future Porkis dont have the cash and if they are foolish enough to buy Russian wares, then let them realize the real cost of the acquisition (Spares, Serviceability, Availability). After the first deal, it will go for comparable (even a little less capable) Chini maal which is available at special friendship prices, it will not buy anything Russian.

Shear size of our increasing defence budget ($150 Billion in the next 10-12 years) will mean that volume/$ value of even intermittent Indian acquisition from Russia would trump any pakistani capability to buy it. Would Russia be willing to risk that?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 22 Oct 2017 17:50

Rakesh wrote:.....
And the Govt should push for the continued development of the Tejas aircraft. From Mk.1 --> Mk.1A ---> Mk.2

Time for Prime Minister Modi to really put the money where his mouth is. The Tejas is truly Make in India. Rest is assembly onlee.

If Mk.2 is anathema to the IAF, call her Mk1.B then. But if you want to see AMCA come on board, then Mk.2/Mk1.B is crucial. Same with the Naval Tejas as well. Continue the development of that platform also. Validate whatever concepts you need to. AMCA will follow. Remember, the F-22 and and the F-35 did not come directly from the P-51 Mustang :) The F-15 and the F-16 had to exist FIRST in various Blocks, over a span of three decades for the F-22 and the F-35 to come about.

Just in case, for youngies who do not know what a P-51 Mustang is --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Ame ... 51_Mustang


Admiral Saar, agree with everything about f35 vs 16 but the part about mk2. Why is the mk2 so essential for the mca? In fact couldn't it tie up human resources that might be needed for amca? The mk1a seems the rightful priority. If they manage it in a timely fashion, only them should mk2 be pursued and that too by HAL and not ADA whose sole focus should be amca?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 22 Oct 2017 20:12

Rakesh there is much more to the SU-57 than the Rafale.Just read western analysts on the issue.Pl don't make casual remarks without comparisons of performance,systems,etc. You've nailed your flag to the Yanqui mast openly so your bias is understandable.My policy has always been "horses for courses" and acquiring cost-effective systems as we aren't an eco superpower.

The US has yet to offer us the JSF and it will have to go through such a maze of negotiations,coming with so many strings that it may take 5-6 years to decide if you go by the MMRCA experience.Other than use aboard our ski-jump carriers and planned amphibs if so equipped I do not see the need for it.Our req. is primarily to counter the Sino-Pak threat and the SU-57 in MK-1 avatar is worth acquiring with definitive IAF versions developed later,just as we did with the MKI.However,I am not for acquiring it in "indecent haste".Our current problem is numbers at affordable cost.We need to plan for a 50+ sqd. IAF and that can only be made up by sev. hundred affordable modern light fighters.LCA delays is why we're searching for a second SE bird. The Gripen to me is the common sense choice but a "political decision" may derail it.

Unfortunately the Rafale is prohibitively expensive costing even more than the FGFA estimate.Weighed in the balance it would be far better to acquire the FGFA instead of extra Rafales and as many light fighters /LCAs that we can build.

As for MK-2. By the time it finally arrives a decade down the line,the IAF will not want it.Whichever SE fighter is chosen will be preferred by the IAF! Far better to leapfrog MK-2 and save time in developing the AMCA which is reqd. from 2030 to replace the MIG-29s,M2Ks and Jags.That gives us only 12 years from now.Work should start in 2018.If we seal the FGFA deal we leverage the tech reqd.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6573
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Mort Walker » 22 Oct 2017 20:40

The FGFA is throwing money down a black hole. Dump it and put the money on to production of the LCA MK-1 in numbers to have at least 10 squadrons by 2020. If the LCA MK-1 had existed in 3-4 squadrons earlier this year, the PLA wouldn't have attempted Doklam.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4122
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Rakesh » 22 Oct 2017 22:02

Philip wrote:Rakesh there is much more to the SU-57 than the Rafale.Just read western analysts on the issue.Pl don't make casual remarks without comparisons of performance,systems,etc.

The Rafale is in active service with the French Air Force and the French Navy. Egypt, Qatar and India are all customers. Egypt I believe already has Rafales flying under her flag. The Rafale has gone through numerous updates in her short service from LF1 --> F1 --> F2 --> F3 --> F3R and now F4 in the early next decade. The FGFA (Fourth Generation Fighter Aircraft) is still in testing and is not in service even with Mother Russia. What performance and systems are you planning to compare?

Philip wrote:You've nailed your flag to the Yanqui mast openly so your bias is understandable.

And you nailing your flag to Russi maal is ok? :lol:

Philip wrote:My policy has always been "horses for courses" and acquiring cost-effective systems as we aren't an eco superpower.

And if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. You are looking at upfront cost, in which Russi maal is usually cheaper. But keeping them flying is whole other story. In the long run, Russi maal turns out to be a lot more expensive than Western equipment. No wonder the IAF came up with TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) after their dysmal experience with trying to keep Russi maal flying.

Philip wrote:The US has yet to offer us the JSF and it will have to go through such a maze of negotiations,coming with so many strings that it may take 5-6 years to decide if you go by the MMRCA experience.Other than use aboard our ski-jump carriers and planned amphibs if so equipped I do not see the need for it.Our req. is primarily to counter the Sino-Pak threat and the SU-57 in MK-1 avatar is worth acquiring with definitive IAF versions developed later,just as we did with the MKI.However,I am not for acquiring it in "indecent haste".Our current problem is numbers at affordable cost.We need to plan for a 50+ sqd. IAF and that can only be made up by sev. hundred affordable modern light fighters.LCA delays is why we're searching for a second SE bird. The Gripen to me is the common sense choice but a "political decision" may derail it.

When LM realizes - and they will realise it soon, if they already have not - they are seeing ZERO traction on the F-Solah offer, watch how the F-35 comes on board. You are talking about affordable cost and then you say the Gripen is the common sense choice. Among the few positives the F-Solah has is cost. I do not see how the Gripen will turn out to be cheaper than the F-Solah. You can throw that argument out the window. And cost is not an issue for the IAF, it is for the Govt. But seeing how the IAF has made the case for SE birds, cost will be secondary to capability.

Philip wrote:Unfortunately the Rafale is prohibitively expensive costing even more than the FGFA estimate.Weighed in the balance it would be far better to acquire the FGFA instead of extra Rafales and as many light fighters /LCAs that we can build.

I have disproven that theory, in which you believe the Rafale will be prohibitively expensive with facts and figures in the Rafale thread onlee. But you live in a world of utopia where only Russi maal is cheaper and cost effective. So continue.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4122
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Rakesh » 22 Oct 2017 22:19

Cain Marko wrote:Admiral Saar, agree with everything about f35 vs 16 but the part about mk2. Why is the mk2 so essential for the mca? In fact couldn't it tie up human resources that might be needed for amca? The mk1a seems the rightful priority. If they manage it in a timely fashion, only them should mk2 be pursued and that too by HAL and not ADA whose sole focus should be amca?

You mean AMCA and not MCA right? Because AFAIK, there is no MCA. And I agree, Mk2 should be pursued by HAL. Let the focus on AMCA be for ADA only. No issues of human resources then.

But Mk2 is essential for AMCA because of what is learnt with the continued development of the Tejas can be incorporated into the development of AMCA. For example, could Dassault design the Mirage 2000 without the Mirage III/V? Could Dassault design the Rafale without the Mirage 2000? Could Dassault go from Mirage III/V directly to Rafale? And each of these planes had multiple variants that improved on the former before even moving on to the next generation. Valuable lessons learnt. Could ADA develop AMCA without development lessons learnt in Tejas?

But if you stop Tejas at Mk1A or Mk1, you will start all over again. And then when AMCA Mk1 comes out, you will have folks peddling 5th generation aircraft at the expense of AMCA development. This import cycle has to end at some point. Or be resigned to the fact that you want to import. But you cannot do both. It is not sustainable.

I find it hypocritical that folks (not you!) who argue for the F-Solah being valid for eternity, are critical of the Tejas. That makes no sense. They are the same who state that the Rafale will be osbolete by 2036 :lol:

Sanjiv
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 19 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Sanjiv » 22 Oct 2017 22:19

Philip has any one seen him recently or an FSB not is running his account joking
Just joking but seriously Philip smell the coffee will the oil only economy of Russia the economy the size of Italy is the place you want the IAF to dependent on for the next 40 years
On those grounds alone I would be very wary of investing our money on an unfinished product
Have you seen the economic and demographic predictions of Russia. As time goes on they will be evermore dependent on China ??

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15869
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 22 Oct 2017 22:50

^^^^^
+1


If we pull out of the FGFA arguably even Pak could ask for Ru aircraft.


And what would they - those asking - get?

For the record, the "FGFA" is still waiting, after some 7/8 years, for $5 billion from India. (Then get billions more from manufacturing that plane.) An India that expects to modify the Russian plane. You know, to actually make the Russian plane better - for India.

So, who is going to pay to make the Russian plane better? And are these ask-ers willing to pay billions to Russia - assuming they love a sub par product.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 23 Oct 2017 01:08

Pl read my posts again."No indecent haste" for the FGFA .Negotiate the deal well,meaning ck costs,TOT,performance,etc. properly before signing on.Since earlier reports official said that all design parameters were agreed upon,and so much time and some money spent, it is at the moment the only 5th-gen fighter we've been offered and have a stake in.Byzantine bargaining goes on for every deal.If the cost is less than the Rafale would it not be worth it? It is far superior to our MKIs definitely stealthier with the internal weapons bays, plus will come with new engines,AESA radar and conformal radars,weapons,etc.

Anyway, the SE is what's first on the menu.I am astonished at those eager to see the F-16 dumped upon us while we have the LCA Ain hand albeit with a lousy prod. rate that needs to be fxd. We can save time be developing the AMCA now as even by the IAF's timeline 2030 is when the med. upgraded birds will have to be replaced.I am sceptical of the LCA MK-2 date of arrival as it will involve extensive redesign. Any delays on that score will see it being dumped in favour of whatever bird is chosen for the SE role.It will also delay development of the AMCA as we do not possess such an abundance of aeroo-engineers working on 3-4 projects simultaneously.

It is going to be v.interesting to see how this "game of crows " is going to pan out! The aerial battles taking place on the ground right now in the corridors of power.

PS: Until an official offer is made for the JSF and we know what TOT comes with it (and what doesn't!) ,costs etc.,forget about it.The US is so unwilling to share such tech with it's allies do you really think that non-ally India will get a better deal?The UK was p*ssed off about being denied its tech and has entered into a JV with SoKo for the KF-FX.Japan was also denied the F-22.So let's be realistic.It is v.clear that the US wants us to buy both the second rate birds rejected by us earlier, F-16 for the IAF and F-18 for the IN,for a carrier that may appear by 2030 or beyond by which time the aircraft (F-18) will be 50+ years old! It will then fly into battle against Chinese naval stealth fighters or even superior naval variants of the current Flanker.What suckers we must be if we end up doing just that.
Last edited by Philip on 23 Oct 2017 01:22, edited 1 time in total.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4122
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Rakesh » 23 Oct 2017 01:22

Philip, you keep harping on negotiating the ToT. Boss, we are not getting any ToT. You can negotiate money, dal chawal, Bollywood actresses or whatever...but nobody is going to give you ToT, unless you want to end up like a poodle nation. If you want that, then you might as well lower the Indian Trilcolor from Lal Qila and raise the Russian Tricolor. We are not in a position to negotiate the performance parameters either, because the IAF is not allowed near anywhere of the design of the plane.

On what basis are you determining that the FGFA will be cheaper than a follow on order of Rafales? Please show me the cost.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15869
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 23 Oct 2017 02:27

it is at the moment the only 5th-gen fighter we've been offered and have a stake in.


I think this is at THE core of the issue:
1) on top of what the Russians have spent, Russia wants to spend *another* $10 billion, split equally
2) IAF has been opposed to this relation from day one
3) India has a list of 40 some modifications - again from day one
4) India has been suggesting/requesting techs that can be used by India on Indian projects. No response from the Russians (that we know off)
5) plenty of Indian techs too

Hardly any measure of confidence in a 5th gen craft. Not saying it is not one, just that we cannot be sure of it. Especially from an Indian POV. What the Russians think and therefore what most Western report is immaterial to this discussion.

."No indecent haste" for the FGFA .Negotiate the deal well,meaning ck costs,TOT,performance,etc. properly before signing on.Since earlier reports official said that all design parameters were agreed upon,and so much time and some money spent,


India has spent a few 100 millions. Spent time, discussions, work splits, what not. Decent due diligence. Yet one cog in the wheel is opposed to it.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 23 Oct 2017 02:57

NR I remember a report a few months ago saying that the dev.costs to us had been reduced to $3.5B. Now if we get equal or proportionate IP rights with accompanying TOT is it worth it? It looks like a Mexican standoff where Ru says "put your money on the table" first for your prototypes to come later and we are saying "put the plane first,so we can see whether it is what you say it is"!

There was a report v.recently in a journo I think from a retd. sr. officer who was critical of the services in general in wanting the very latest,bestest and correspondingly costliest weapon systems.We still appear not to have learnt how to "cut one's coat according to the cloth ".

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1791
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Vivek K » 23 Oct 2017 03:13

Admiral Rakesh - SALUTE!!

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15869
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 23 Oct 2017 03:24

It looks like a Mexican standoff where Ru says "put your money on the table" first for your prototypes to come later and we are saying "put the plane first,so we can see whether it is what you say it is"!


I have said this before. India of today and especially of the near future needs to be respected. Russia absolutely needs to give unfettered access to those techs. No two ways about it. Old thinking has gone by. I do not think Russia has too many options.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6006
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby brar_w » 23 Oct 2017 03:35

Although different programs but i think the IAF would welcome the sort of access the brits got with the JSF, where even before the winner was selected there was a UK test pilot embedded with both the X-32 and X-35 technology demonstrator programs. In fact even after the down-select, the very first flight of the F-35B prototype (BF-1) was conducted by a Brit (Graham Tomlinson). Industrial participation, and financial incentives aside, embedding developer partners in your test program has good optics and instils a level of confidence within bureaucracies and politicos controlling the purse strings.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3684
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby srai » 23 Oct 2017 05:30

NRao wrote:
It looks like a Mexican standoff where Ru says "put your money on the table" first for your prototypes to come later and we are saying "put the plane first,so we can see whether it is what you say it is"!


I have said this before. India of today and especially of the near future needs to be respected. Russia absolutely needs to give unfettered access to those techs. No two ways about it. Old thinking has gone by. I do not think Russia has too many options.

India needs Russian vote for the permanent seat at the UN security council :wink:

Billions of dollars of arms imports (aka "strategic partnerships") will need to be distributed among these four members (with China the odd one out for the moment):
  • Russia
  • France
  • UK
  • USA

Beyond that Russian influence in the Indian military is quite vast. Huge percentage of weaponry are of Russian-origin. They are also the only source for strategic platforms, such as Akula SSN.
Last edited by srai on 23 Oct 2017 05:50, edited 1 time in total.

ranjan.rao
BRFite
Posts: 458
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby ranjan.rao » 23 Oct 2017 05:48

While everyone debates about ToT (real fake whatever)Just asking, how much good 100 million USD would have done to Tejas program. If anyone thinks that billions of dollar will buy us out the veto. Please also believe that I have Tajmahal and Millions of acres of land to sell on moon

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3684
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby srai » 23 Oct 2017 05:53

ranjan.rao wrote:While everyone debates about ToT (real fake whatever)Just asking, how much good 100 million USD would have done to Tejas program. If anyone thinks that billions of dollar will buy us out the veto. Please also believe that I have Tajmahal and Millions of acres of land to sell on moon

Yes, the moral of the story is to develop your own. But the current practice adopted favors imports for "strategic" leverage. Otherwise, why would India after having successfully developed a 4th-Gen fighter in LCA (and in production) go on to put up a global request for single-engine MII? Same for Arjun MBT vs T-90S?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 23 Oct 2017 12:27

For the record.latest reports on the SU-57.The new engine is supposed to have been developed will be tested by the year end.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/ ... orces.html
Su-57 Fifth Generation Fighter: Incredible Weapon to Enter Service with Russia’s Aerospace Forces
ALEX GORKA | 03.08.2017 | WORLD
Su-57 Fifth Generation Fighter: Incredible Weapon to Enter Service with Russia’s Aerospace Forces
Russia’s Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA fifth-generation stealth fighter is slated to enter service with the Aerospace Forces in 2019. It has been given designation Su-57. The plane is a 5th generation multi-role, single seat, twin-engine air superiority/deep air support fighter. Currently, nine Su-57 prototypes are conducting flight trials and undergoing technical testing with two additional aircraft to be handed over to the Russian Aerospace Forces for trials by the end of the year. Two Su-57 planes simulated an air combat at the MAKS-2017 international airshow on July 19.

Russian Sukhoi T-50 fighter jets perform amazing stunts at MAKS 2017

The fighter will complete its first set of flight tests by the end of 2017, said the commander-in-chief of the Russian Aerospace Forces, Viktor Bondarev. According to him, «We do have something to be proud of. The first phase of PAK-FA trials will be over in December and eventually we will receive such planes».

Various hardware elements designed for a future 6th generation fighter jet have been tested on the Su-57 during flight tests.

The new plane is designed to rival the American F-22. It offers much of the same capabilities as the new fifth-generation fighter, with exception of stealth. The Su-57 possesses advanced avionics such as active phased array radar and sensor fusion. The radar offers both forward-looking and side-scanning capabilities.

Combined with a high fuel load, the Su-57 has a supersonic range of over 1,500 km, more than twice that of the Su-27. Maximum speed: at altitude: Mach 2 (2,140 km/h; 1,320 mph), supercruise: Mach 1.6 (1,700 km/h; 1,060 mph). Range: 3,500 km (2,175 mi; 1,890 nmi) subsonic, 1,500 km (930 mi; 810 nmi) supersonic. Service ceiling: 20,000 m (65,000 ft). Operational endurance: up to 5.8 hours. Maximum take-off weight: 35480 kg, maximum operational load: 10 tons. During testing the aircraft demonstrated the ability to achieve a 384 meters per second climbing rate. It could equal to the peak of Mount Everest, the highest mountain on Earth, in a mere 23 seconds.

The fighter is armed with a 30 mm autocannon. T-50 carries four long-range missiles in its two main weapons bays and two short-range missiles in the wing root weapons bays. The primary medium-range missile is the active radar-homing K-77M, an upgraded R-77 variant with AESA seeker and conventional rear fins. The short-range missile is the infrared-homing ("heat seeking") K-74M2. The armament can include further developed and modified variants of Kh-35UE (AS-20 «Kayak») anti-ship missile and Kh-58UShK (AS-11 «Kilter») anti-radiation missile.

The main bays can also accommodate air-to-ground missiles such as the Kh-38M, as well as multiple 250 kg KAB-250, or 500 kg KAB-500 precision guided bombs.

For missions that do not require stealth, the T-50 can carry weapons on its six external hardpoints. PAK-FA chief designer Alexander Davydenko has said the installation of BrahMos supersonic cruise missile on the Su-57 is an option. Only one or two such missiles may be carried due to heavy weight of the BrahMos.

According to the plans, the aircraft will carry Р-37М (AA-13 Arrow) air-to-air missile with a maximum range of 370 km. The missile is now in production to equip upgraded Russian MiG-31BM Foxhound interceptors. It is designed to shoot down AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft whilst keeping the launch platform out of range of any fighters that might be protecting the target. The KS-172, an even more agile long-range air-to-air missile with a maximum range of 460 km, is at the stage of development.

The Sh-121 multifunctional integrated radio electronic system includes X band active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, or active phased array radar. The use of the L-band in the operation of the radar in the air-to-air mode is the main means of detecting low-profile aircraft from the T-50.The avionics suite comprises the 101KS Atoll electro-optical system which allows to control airspace in the optical range around the perimeter of the aircraft, as well as to protect the aircraft from attacking missiles. Four sensors provide for infrared vision to help the pilot during maneuvers at low altitude or when landing. There are systems for generating interference in the infrared range. The Atoll also features ultraviolet missile warning sensors and 101KS-N navigation and targeting pod.

Two N036L-1-01 L band transceivers on the wing's leading edge extensions handle the N036Sh Pokosnik friend-or-foe identification system and are also used for electronic warfare purposes. The T-50 will have secure communication links to share data with all other friendly aircraft in the area, as well as airborne and ground-based control points.

A new avionics suite is being developed to use indigenous Russian multi-core microprocessors and a new indigenous real-time operating system. It’s expected to make use of fiber-optic channels with a throughput of the more 8 Gbit/s, which is up from 100 Mbit/sec for traditional copper wires.

The T-50 has a glass cockpit with two 38 cm (15 in) main multifunctional LCD displays. Positioned around the cockpit are three smaller control panel displays. The cockpit has a wide-angle (30° by 22°) head-up display, and Moscow-based Geofizika-NV provides a new NSTsI-V helmet-mounted sight and display for the ZSh-10 helmet. Primary controls are the joystick and a pair of throttles. The aircraft uses a two-piece canopy, with the aft section sliding forward and locking into place. The canopy is treated with special coatings to increase the aircraft’s stealth.

The first T-50 aircraft will be powered by interim Saturn AL-41F1 afterburning turbofans producing 32,500lbs thrust each. The same engine is installed on the new Su-35 fighter. It is a highly improved and uprated variant of the AL-31 that powers the Su-27 family of aircraft. A new power plant (Product or Izdelie 30) is being developed. It has not yet received its name. The new engine is supposed to provide 17-18% more thrust, improved fuel efficiency, and higher reliability than the AL-41F1.

The plane’s body incorporates all-moving horizontal and vertical stabilizers, which toe inwards to serve as the aircraft's airbrake. The advanced flight control system and thrust vectoring nozzles make the aircraft departure resistant and highly maneuverable in both pitch and yaw. The plane is capable of performing very high angles of attack maneuvers such as Pugachev's Cobra and the Bell maneuver, along with doing flat rotations with little altitude loss.

The T-50 is not an «invisible» aircraft but it vastly uses stealth technology. It makes extensive use of composites, comprising 25% of the structural weight and almost 70% of the outer surface. The plane boasts internal weapons carriage. The payload is housed in two tandem main weapons bays between the engine nacelles and smaller bulged, triangular-section bays near the wing root. It eliminates drag from external stores and enables higher performance compared to external carriage, as well as enhancing stealth.

The airframe incorporates planform edge alignment to reduce its radar cross-section (RCS); the leading and trailing edges of the wings and control surfaces and the serrated edges of skin panels are carefully aligned at several specific angles in order to reduce the number of directions the radar waves can be reflected. The infrared search and track system is turned backwards when not in use, and its rear is treated with radar-absorbent material to reduce its radar return. Radar blockers are used in front of the engine fan to hide it from all angles.

It is believed that the T-50 is more maneuverable than its US rivals – the F-35 and F-22. The plane has a comparative advantage in air engagements. Compared to the F-22, the PAK-FA is faster, has a longer operational range, and better target detection. «It certainly has greater agility with its combination of thrust vectoring, all moving tail surfaces, and excellent aerodynamic design, than does the F-35», said former US Air Force intelligence chief Lt. General David Deptula. :rotfl:

India and Vietnam are already on the list of potential buyers.


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

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 23 Oct 2017 13:09

say PAK-FA gets shelevd..and India buys F-35(Provided AMrikans even bother about it)..the wet dream of many Dollar boys here..what technology will come our way..
Answer is zero.

anyting to aid in developmnet of future AMCA?? nothing..NAda..

will America ever bother about honoring/respecting any of ur geo political concerns..again..no way

but what will happen..is for sure..lot of tech will pass on to China.

Russia will slowly get sucked more into Chinese SInk Hole..due to its poor economic structure dependent mainly on energy exports..free flow of weapon tech to China which is ever ready to shell out money fr any tech coming its way..

Indians ..as has been the case for most of its history..would be the proverbial Dhobi ka Kutta..na Ghar ka na Ghat ka :)

keep funding Russians and get whatever technology you can out of them...as they r the cheapest source of tech ..unlike the Europeans or Americans

people can spend lot of time comparing specs..but all we know is tht Russian military kicked the butt of American elements in Syria..n Saudis went begging to Russia..

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15869
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 23 Oct 2017 13:14

brar_w wrote:Although different programs but i think the IAF would welcome the sort of access the brits got with the JSF, where even before the winner was selected there was a UK test pilot embedded with both the X-32 and X-35 technology demonstrator programs. In fact even after the down-select, the very first flight of the F-35B prototype (BF-1) was conducted by a Brit (Graham Tomlinson). Industrial participation, and financial incentives aside, embedding developer partners in your test program has good optics and instils a level of confidence within bureaucracies and politicos controlling the purse strings.


$5 billion will get the IAF to kick the tires.

Else all we have are reports like the above (check the source of that Swiss cheese "report" :wink: )

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 23 Oct 2017 14:05

http://defenceupdate.in/years-delay-ind ... a-fighter/
After years of delay, India-Russia to ink deal on 5th Gen FGFA Fighter
BY DEFENCEUPDATE · MAY 7, 2017

After years of delay, India and Russia are likely to soon ink a “milestone” pact to finalise the detailed design for the fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) and move ahead with the multi-billion dollar co-development project. Government sources said almost all the ground work has been completed to finalise the deal for design of the jet as well as some other critical issues.

“The contract for the detailed design would be signed soon and that will be a major milestone. It should be signed in the second half of the year,” a top official involved in the negotiations with Russia on the project said.

Asked whether India has linked the project to full-scale transfer of technology, the official, who requested anonymity, said both the countries are co-developers and India will have equal rights over the the technology.

“We are co-developers. There is nothing called technology transfer in this project. India has equal rights. We will have the wherewithal to continue production. We are equal partner in the project,” he said.

In the negotiations for the project, India had insisted that it must get all the required codes and access to critical technology so that it can upgrade the aircraft as per its requirements.


This was in May.What has happened in the last few months is intense attempts to derail the deal by rivals,understandable.It literally is a "dogfight"!
PS:Some JSF news in the Intl. air td.,how around 200 of the first built birds will not be combat capable unless they are extensively upgraded at high cost,affecting new acquisitions from the prod. line.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2013
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Gaur » 24 Oct 2017 12:37

Hope to see India-Russia FGFA project through: HAL chief

http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/hope-to-see-india-russia-fgfa-project-through-hal-chief-117102301248_1.html

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) Chairman T. Suvarna Raju backed the India-Russia Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft programme on Monday, saying it will bring home niche technology, even as the programme appears to be stuck over its high price.

Asked about the project, Raju said it was a "dream" for him and he expects to see it through.

Asked about the project, Raju said: "We are still hopeful, that is what we will say. It's an opportunity as an industry and as a country."

The HAL CMD said it was an opportunity for India as a country, and for the industry as well.

"This is an opportunity for us to go in for this kind of technology which no one else in the world is offering us... Let's see how it unfolds," he said.

He was speaking at the sidelines of an event to handover the 50th AL31FP engine, manufactured by HAL Koraput from raw material phase to Indian Air Force. The papers of the engine were handed over to Vice Chief of Indian Air Force Air Marshal S.B. SEO.

Asked if not going for the FGFA project may have political repercussions on India-Russia relationships, he said: "I will not be able to comment on political repercussion... But technology wise we have done the preliminary design already. It's just one step more to move on to."

To a question on what may have led to the IAF not being enthusiastic about the project, he said: "They would have their own priorities."

"Fifth generation is an opportunity for India to learn the technologies and I would definitely see this will be the first project, the way the contract has been written, it has lots of benefits and it will definitely have a very positive impact," he said.

The long delayed programme for a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft that India and Russia were to develop together appears to be stuck, primarily over prices, as India feels it is very expensive.

A committee was constituted by the Defence Ministry to look into the details of the programme between India and Russia, which has been in the pipeline since 2007.

The committee recently submitted a report on the programme to the Ministry.

However, as per the report, the cost of developing four prototype fighter jets would cost around $6 billion, which is very high according to officials in the Defence Ministry.

India and Russia had inked an inter-governmental pact for the FGFA project in 2007. It was to be based on the Russian Sukhoi-57 or the PAK FA T-50 fighter jet.

India has earlier also expressed to the Russia side that the project's cost was too high, and had also discussed buying the Su-57 fighters.

In December 2010, India had agreed to pay $295 million towards the preliminary design of the fighter, also referred to as 'Perspective Multi-role Fighter' (PMF).

However, negotiations faced various hurdles in the subsequent years.

There were several disagreements between New Delhi and Moscow, including on work and cost share, aircraft technology, as well as the number of aircraft to be ordered.

After evaluating the first PAK FA T-50 prototype (the Russian prototype of the PMF), the Indian Air Force (IAF) wanted more than 40 changes - addressing, among other things, perceived weaknesses in the plane's engine, stealth, and weapon-carrying capability.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Viv S » 24 Oct 2017 13:48

Gaur wrote:Hope to see India-Russia FGFA project through: HAL chief

He has to hope that, seeing as Dassault has tied up with Reliance, Saab with Adani, LM & Airbus (C-295) with TASL, IAI (UAV) with Dynamatic.

If the FGFA falls through HAL will be left with just the Tejas, HTT-40 and Su-30 upgrades in the fixed wing segment.

The Dornier & Hawk deliveries have just concluded. The last Su-30 will be delivered in 2019. MiG & Mirage upgrade programs will conclude by 2020 & 2021.

That would force HAL to double down on the Tejas (LIFT & Mk2?) and its rotor-wing lineup.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Vips » 24 Oct 2017 18:44

^^ HAL will also make Helicopters as India has a very large requirements there.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15869
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby NRao » 24 Oct 2017 19:51

Viv S wrote:
Gaur wrote:Hope to see India-Russia FGFA project through: HAL chief

He has to hope that, seeing as Dassault has tied up with Reliance, Saab with Adani, LM & Airbus (C-295) with TASL, IAI (UAV) with Dynamatic.

If the FGFA falls through HAL will be left with just the Tejas, HTT-40 and Su-30 upgrades in the fixed wing segment.

,.................

.


Not sure if that is a right characterization. Just the way the IAF has opposed this effort from day one, the "Labs" have been behind it and have worked rather hard to bring their concerns to the forefront (and that is a lot considering that they had to work through a lot from rt.con, etc). Point being the Dassualts, SAABs, etc were not even in the picture.

Anyhow, what I would be curious about is what techs does he think would help India AND why $4.5+ billion.

If he thinks or knows that the PAK-FA is really that advanced, then why this additional infusion of a combined $9.0+ billion? And if the PAK-FA has not reached it's technical zenith (which is what the infusion indicates), then what makes him think he can compete in a timely manner. Granted there is more to it than just techs, for starters it includes some 3 prototypes. Yet ..........

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 25 Oct 2017 11:48

Here's the official Ru comment on the issue. As far as the HAL comments on the subject,the main reason is that we will gain access to cutting edge stealth tech which we will find v.difficult to develop ourselves,at great cost too,leapfrog 4++ tech. in the bargain which we're acquiring at high cost ,Rafales,etc., which we can then leverage in the AMCA project.It is the logical step upwards after the Flanker acquisition,MKI variant and future SS upgrade to around 200 MKIs.Approx 200 FGFAs (eventually),will see us through from 2020-2050.AMCAs developed/in prod. from 2030 onwards,So as rightly said,HAL want to be kept busy and are feeling left out of the boodle in biz being farmed out to pvt. industry.But it all comes down to the issue of moolah,moolah,moolah.

Russian-Indian development of 5th-generation fighter jet goes according to plan

Military & Defense October 24, 15:17 UTC+3
Indian Air Force is expected to be the first customer

Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jet© Sergei Bobylev/TASS
MOSCOW, October 24. /TASS/. Russia and India continue their joint project to develop the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), the press office of Russia’s state arms seller Rosoboronexport said on Tuesday.
READ ALSO

Russia’s 5th-generation fighter jet named as Su-57
Defense News earlier reported citing a report by the command of the Indian Air Force that the plane being developed on the basis of the Russian Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jet did not meet desired stealth features. Besides, in the opinion of Indian Air Force officials, the fifth-generation fighter aircraft does not have a modular engine concept, which makes maintenance and serviceability of the fleet expensive. That is why, they proposed to the Indian authorities to get out of the Russian-Indian FGFA program, Defense News reported.
"Currently, the Russian-Indian inter-governmental agreement is in effect; there are commitments, under which the parties are implementing the joint project for developing the 5th-generation plane in accordance with the agreed stages and time limits," Rosoboronexport said.
The agreement on the FGFA project was signed in 2007. In early May, a source in India’s Defense Ministry told the Indian news agency PTI that a contract on the development of a detailed project of the new fighter jet would be signed in the second half of 2017.

In spring, Russian officials announced that Russia was fully implementing its obligations under the project and expected a decision by the Indian side.
The Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) is being developed on the basis of the Russian Su-57 plane in compliance with the technical requirements set by the Indian side. The Indian Air Force is expected to be the initial customer of this plane, after which these aircraft are planned to be exported to third countries.

http://tass.com/defense/972291

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2116
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby VinodTK » 28 Oct 2017 21:44

Is India About to Give Up on Building Stealth Fighters with Russia?
India’s Air Force is pushing the government to abandon a massive deal with Russia for a fifth-generation fighter aircraft, citing its inferiority to America’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

This week, Defense News reported that the Indian Air Force (IAF) has been pushing back against the proposed nearly $10 billion agreement for India and Russia to jointly develop and produce a fifth-generation fighter aircraft, or FGFA. A senior IAF official told Defense News, “IAF is not keen to continue with the program,” adding that the service had raised its concern with the Ministry of Defense.

The article lists a number of IAF concerns. First among them is that the Air Force believes the plane’s stealth and cross-section features are inferior to America’s F-35. Another concern, according to the article, is that the FGFA “does not have modular engine concept, making maintenance and serviceability of the fleet expensive and troublesome.” A second IAF official explained that the lack of a modular engine would prevent India’s Air Force from repairing planes in-house. Instead, servicing would have to be performed by the manufacturer. Previously, IAF sources have complained about the high maintenance costs of the Su-30 planes India purchased from Russia.

This is not the first time the IAF has expressed opposition to the bilateral agreement, which has India procuring between 120 and 130 planes. Just last month, an Indian media outlet published a report citing IAF complaints about the expected cost of the aircraft.

“Sources said the investment of $6.7 billion (Rs 44,800 crore) would give India only four prototypes of the FGFA aircraft and it will have to pay another $135 million (Rs 900 crore) each for the 127 planes, which would be ready for induction only after 2027–28,” India Today reported in September. “The cost per aircraft at the time of delivery in 2027–28, due to high inflation in defense deals, would come around $250 million bringing the total project value to around $32 billion (Rs 2 lakh crore).”

India’s Air Force’s opposition is not the only issue holding up the agreement. The two countries have also clashed over the issue of sensitive technology transfers from Russia to India. As the Diplomat reported in March of this year: “India wants a guarantee that [it] will be able to upgrade the fighter jet in the future without Russian support, which would require Moscow sharing source codes (sensitive computer code that controls the fighter jet’s various systems — the key to an aircraft’s electronic brains). In addition, the FGFA should directly support India’s advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA) program—a separate Indian fifth generation fighter project.” One Indian official has called the last demand “mandatory.” Another issue, although one that appears to be resolved, is over how many planes each side will buy for their own armed forces.

Still, there are signs for continued support for the deal from both sides. For instance, in February of this year, the Hindustan Times reported that the Ministry of Defense established a panel to review the FGFA program and offer up recommendations. In August, it was reported that the four-person panel “strongly recommended” moving forward with the program. After the Defense News report was published this week, Russia's official arms exporter, Rosoboronexport, put out a statement saying that both countries remain committed to developing the FGFA. “Currently, the Russian-Indian inter-governmental agreement is in effect; there are commitments, under which the parties are implementing the joint project for developing the 5th-generation plane in accordance with the agreed stages and time limits,” Rosoboronexport said, according to Russian media.

The FGFA program dates back to 2007, when India and Russia signed an agreement to explore jointly developing a fifth-generation aircraft. Three years later, the two countries reached an agreement to spend $295 million for a preliminary design of the jet. The project stalled after that phase, however, until reports last spring suggested that the two sides could reach an agreement to each invest $4 billion to complete the final phase of the plane’s development. The increasingly vocal opposition from India’s Air Force is likely an attempt to prevent that deal from ever coming to fruition.

If the two sides decide to move forward, the plan is for the FGFA to be based on the Sukhoi Su-57, Moscow’s first fifth-generation aircraft. As Franz-Stefan Gady has explained, “The Sukhoi Su-57 is a fifth-generation multirole, single seat, twin-engine air superiority/deep air support fighter intended to replace the Russian Air Force’s fleet of MiG-29 and Su-27. The Su-57 will be armed with beyond visual range air-to-air missiles as well as of air-to-ground missiles including the extended range Kh-35UE tactical cruise missile.”

Russian media have explained that the FGFA itself will be modified to meet India’s technical needs. This likely will include enabling it to carry Indian-origin weaponry. In addition, Tass has reportedd the modifications will include “the design and development of a two-seater version of the aircraft, the integration of an advanced engine with increased thrust are planned at the request of India.” Russian media have also said that after India purchases the jet, it could be exported to other countries.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 29 Oct 2017 02:34

NRao wrote:
Viv S wrote:He has to hope that, seeing as Dassault has tied up with Reliance, Saab with Adani, LM & Airbus (C-295) with TASL, IAI (UAV) with Dynamatic.

If the FGFA falls through HAL will be left with just the Tejas, HTT-40 and Su-30 upgrades in the fixed wing segment.

,.................

.


Not sure if that is a right characterization. Just the way the IAF has opposed this effort from day one, the "Labs" have been behind it and have worked rather hard to bring their concerns to the forefront (and that is a lot considering that they had to work through a lot from rt.con, etc). Point being the Dassualts, SAABs, etc were not even in the picture.

Anyhow, what I would be curious about is what techs does he think would help India AND why $4.5+ billion.

If he thinks or knows that the PAK-FA is really that advanced, then why this additional infusion of a combined $9.0+ billion? And if the PAK-FA has not reached it's technical zenith (which is what the infusion indicates), then what makes him think he can compete in a timely manner. Granted there is more to it than just techs, for starters it includes some 3 prototypes. Yet ..........

Well, if the fgfa is still on the drawing board, there should be plenty of learning for HAL. If not, and it is only pakfa mki, then the cost would be more to do with setting up production infrastructure.

From what I hear...
Pro fgfa = HAL, avm deo, vardhaman committee
Anti fgfa = lifafa journos and unnamed sources? Possibly, IAF.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Austin » 30 Oct 2017 15:18

CM there are no Heros or Villains in this the issue is complex one.

HAl , Vardhaman Committe etc opinion are not binding on MOD much like IAF opinion too is a non-binding one both have put up their opinion to MOD, It is quite natural and normal to have different opinon from different stake holders no opinion will be 100 % for or against FGFA because the issue is wide and complex and not a binary one 1 or 0 types and it is MOD job to reconcile and take a decision in the best interest of the country.

It is possible that in near and medium term MOD would build extra 30MKI and Upgrade it , Go for SE and Tejas and buy extra Rafale to get the squadron strength going and look at Fifth Generation program at a later date and time. Alternatively they might just take a long term view and go for FGFA program with changes recommended by Vardhaman Committe , HAL and IAF plus other stake holders.

These are long term decision with major impact on Planning and Finance and as such wont be taken lightly by MOD as IAF has many programs beyond just the fighter programs like AWACAS,Refullers,Choppers,Transport fleet , ADGES you name it , MOD/MOF will have to take a long term view of the Budget and see which program can be funded Immdiately and which could be delayed and how would budget for IAF look 10 years from now to maintain a balance between CAPEX and OPEX part of IAF budget.

You dont want to fund multiple program today only to find out that 80 % of IAF Capex Budget is spent on funding then while just 20 % is left for maintenance and other activity.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3623
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby deejay » 30 Oct 2017 15:43

Has the IAF report on FGFA (which the chief stated was confidential) been made public? Are the reports in media citing IAFs views on FGFA based on this confidential report? If yes, was there a leak?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Austin » 30 Oct 2017 20:05

deejay wrote:Has the IAF report on FGFA (which the chief stated was confidential) been made public? Are the reports in media citing IAFs views on FGFA based on this confidential report? If yes, was there a leak?


Neither VArdhaman Committe report is made public nor IAF report and IAF chief is on record stating both record is confidential , so yes media is speculating knowing Sources

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4998
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby ShauryaT » 30 Oct 2017 21:05

Austin wrote:
You dont want to fund multiple program today only to find out that 80 % of IAF Capex Budget is spent on funding then while just 20 % is left for maintenance and other activity.
This is exactly where the LTIPP comes into play. It was done in 2012 to go up to 2027. The contours of the type of assets they will fund would be known under this plan but, but, but even the 5 year DAC plan plans are not funded let alone the 15-year plan. MoD's first task is to get these 5-year plans funded.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby Philip » 31 Oct 2017 02:28

Funds allocated for the services if not utilised in the fin.yr. used to get transferred back to the Fin.Min.This led to repeated babu red-tapism delaying acquisitions. Has this issue been resolved?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48126
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread - June 2014

Postby ramana » 31 Oct 2017 06:31

No. It still there. Besides MoD allocation as % of GDP is also down.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bijeet, brar_w, deWalker, Karthik S, williams and 19 guests