Rakesh wrote:And the best part about this...this gives enough time for Tejas production to ramp up (which is already well on its way).
I remember when this thread started in Oct 2016. The outlook was not that rosy for the Tejas or Donald Trump. How the tables have turned.
SEF file movement will take their own time
However, the switch from LCA Mk.1 to Mk.1A around 2020 is a real concern at this point in time. I don’t think Mk1A would be ready for production by the time Mk1 assembly ends. That gap will create more support for SEF, IMO. We will hear more of the “desperate IAF” shrill all over again.
^^^
India doesn’t have experience selling major platforms like a fighter aircraft aboard. In any case, the assembly line would require orders 24-36 months in advance to start deliveries.
American aerospace and defence major Lockheed Martin has proposed to manufacture custom-built F-35 fighter jets in India, which its officials say will give Indian industry a unique opportunity to become part of the world's largest fighter aircraft ecosystem.
"We plan to introduce two new words into the lexicon of international fighter aircraft manufacturing: 'India' and 'exclusive'," Vivek Lall, vice president, strategy and business development, at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics told PTI in an interview.
"India-specific state-of-the-art fighter production in India will be exclusive, something that has never before been presented by any other fighter aircraft manufacturer, past or present. There will also be a significant export market available for Indian-made fighters," he said.
...
Many of the systems used on the India-specific platform are derived from key lessons learned and technologies from Lockheed Martin's F-22 and the F-35, the world's only operational fifth generation fighters, he said.
Northrop Grumman's advanced APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar on the F-16 Block 70 provides F-16s with fifth generation fighter radar capabilities by leveraging hardware and software commonality with F-22 and F-35 A
...
Lall said the F-16 provides the path to business relationships with Lockheed Martin, the only company in the world that has designed, developed and produced operational fifth generation fighter aircraft.
...
Technology improvements will also continue to flow between the F-16, F-22 and F-35 for decades, at a fraction of the cost to F-16 operators, he said.
The platform being offered provides unmatched opportunities for Indian companies of all sizes, including micro, small & medium enterprises (MSMEs) and suppliers throughout India, to establish new business relationships with Lockheed Martin and other industry leaders in the US and around the globe, Lall said giving an insight into the offer being made by his company.
Asserting that approximately half of the Indian fighter supply chain will be common with the fifth generation F-22 and F-35, Lall said the aircraft brings the most modern avionics, a proven AESA radar, modernised cockpit, advanced weapons, longer range with conformal fuel tanks, auto ground collision avoidance capability, and an advanced engine with an extended service life.
chola wrote:The DDM might be jumping the gun about the F-35 because Vivek Lall, the NRI VP of LM, is obviously talking about the F-Solah.
BUT still they are hinting at a pathway to the F-35. In fact, IMHO, they sound pretty explicit about it.
If we get the chance to get the F-35 and hook into that $1.5T eco-system, we have to grab it with both hands.
The time to join development of a combat plane is at its inception, not after the plane has been produced.
The entire supply chain ecosystem will remain in the US as they have already done the hard work of developing the plane's sub-systems.
Unlike China which in 10 years will emerge as a major aerospace civilian and military power, India is doing a very poor job of developing its domestic aerospace ecosystem.
There is no national plan that has been articulated for development of the domestic aerospace ecosystem.
Transfer of (screw-driver) turning technology being made to India in exchange for enormous purchase costs will make a country of 1.35 billion little more than an appendage to major aerospace companies of the west.
The DDM might be jumping the gun about the F-35 because Vivek Lall, the NRI VP of LM, is obviously talking about the F-Solah.
BUT still they are hinting at a pathway to the F-35. In fact, IMHO, they sound pretty explicit about it.
(He was born in Indonesia, so not sure he is a "NRI". But, not Germain to this thread. Just an observation.)
"VP at LM". VP of Strategy and Business Development. That is the key. He is not selling, that is *not* his job at LM. And his quotes reflect that - he is developing LM's business. His sales team/s will follow.
However, as VP of Strategy and BD, there are two things that are important: he reports to LM's CEO and he has - more than likely the only one - with company wide visibility of present or future. No one else has that on a day-to-day basis.
Combine that with his experience with Indian procurement processes, he has been hired to define the value prop to the biggest importer (and within the GOTUS).
Pertaining to this thread, Lal is *not* responsible for sales. That team follows after Lal has done his job. Lal is neither selling a F-16 nor a F-35.
How about a 100+ Tejas Mk-U line for US?
Tejas plane with American Engine, Radar, missiles.
Will save a lot of money for Trump.
Win-win for both India and US.
US still touting the F-16, media today saying that the aircraft would be India specific with lots of Indian requirements", chai maker in the cockpit, what?!
The huge attempt to shove the outdated F-16 down our throats must be resisted at all costs.It will kill the LCA and make us chained to the mil-industrial complex of Uncle Sam.
Twitter posts saying that purchase of f16 is quid pro quo for the N deal. Also that USA wants another country than Turkey to manufacture f16 and export it as Turkey is getting too green.
Neshant wrote:
The time to join development of a combat plane is at its inception, not after the plane has been produced.
The entire supply chain ecosystem will remain in the US as they have already done the hard work of developing the plane's sub-systems.
Unlike China which in 10 years will emerge as a major aerospace civilian and military power, India is doing a very poor job of developing its domestic aerospace ecosystem.
There is no national plan that has been articulated for development of the domestic aerospace ecosystem.
Transfer of (screw-driver) turning technology being made to India in exchange for enormous purchase costs will make a country of 1.35 billion little more than an appendage to major aerospace companies of the west.
Neshantji, when the F-35 was formulated and the eco-system set up we were never offered. Now there is a pathway to it. Not only the aircraft but also its eco-system.
We have never tried the American TOT route, we dud the Russian one onlee. Look at South Korea and the T/A-50. They started off screwdriver giriing their F-16K much later than us and our MiGs. They are now selling their FIRST home grown jet everywhere. In fact, they are in competition for the USAAF trainer contract.
The F-35, like EMALS, are ground breaking systems that can vault our capabilities to the cutting edge. Just like the C-17 and the P-8I had transformed our capabilities. Think about it, our P-8Is had accumulated 10K hours in two years while the whole fleet of Tu-142 had only 30K in three decades. This is transformative technology.
We need to preserve our Tejas program first and foremost but we also need to grasp these kinds of opportunities.
F16 will be a death knell for Tejas program. Every F16 we buy will mean 1 less Tejas because that's where the nos are coming from. With Trump insisting on preserving US jobs, we won't get anything better than SKD and CKD kits to screw together. Not to mention that we will be stuck with a bulky legacy fighter till atleast 2050. If the GOI goes ahead with this purchase, I will lose any faith I have in this country ever becoming self dependent or even having a relevant MIC.
chola wrote:Neshantji, when the F-35 was formulated and the eco-system set up we were never offered. Now there is a pathway to it. Not only the aircraft but also its eco-system.
A FACO line is not a path to an ecosystem. A FACO line is exactly what the acronym states - Final Assembly & Checkout Line.
Access to ecosystem, will be from parts coming from the American supply chain. Plug and Play. That is It. You cannot change the ecosystem and neither can you modify it, to suit your needs. No matter what any executive at LM says.
chola wrote:We have never tried the American TOT route, we dud the Russian one onlee.
Wrong Sir. We have tried the Western route. In the form of the Jaguar and the Hawk. We are still at square one.
chola wrote:Look at South Korea and the T/A-50. They started off screwdriver giriing their F-16K much later than us and our MiGs. They are now selling their FIRST home grown jet everywhere. In fact, they are in competition for the USAAF trainer contract.
We have discussed this to death before. So I am going to let you believe that point.
chola wrote:The F-35, like EMALS, are ground breaking systems that can vault our capabilities to the cutting edge. Just like the C-17 and the P-8I had transformed our capabilities. Think about it, our P-8Is had accumulated 10K hours in two years while the whole fleet of Tu-142 had only 30K in three decades. This is transformative technology.
All true. But not the F-16. If the F-35 is transformative, let us go directly to the F-35. What is the itch to sell us the F-16 first?
chola wrote:We need to preserve our Tejas program first and foremost but we also need to grasp these kinds of opportunities.
chola wrote:The DDM might be jumping the gun about the F-35 because Vivek Lall, the NRI VP of LM, is obviously talking about the F-Solah.
BUT still they are hinting at a pathway to the F-35. In fact, IMHO, they sound pretty explicit about it.
If we get the chance to get the F-35 and hook into that $1.5T eco-system, we have to grab it with both hands.
makes economic sense for LM but not for India. The F35 is just a carrot dangled in from of the cart., two decades down the line the 35 will be the 16 of that day when they finally say yes to make in India F 35 !! Right now F35 is very highly unlikely.
The quid pro quo for the N deal was not system specific but qty. That's why the huge C-17 order appeared out of nowhere when the IAF's priority was the MMRCA.Along with that came P-8Is,Chinook, Apaches and light howitzers. C-130Js too.That's a huge order well compensated.But these are comparatively lower in tech than fighter aircraft where the US compliances were too much for India to sign on too.Too restrictive and intrusive.Nothing suggests that that attitude has changed and when the French and Russians and other EU nations care a hoot, why buy Amreki?
Rakesh, while you are correct that a FACO is essentially giving you an ability to master putting the aircraft together but there are other degrees of involvement that can industrially negotiated with the consortium of suppliers. Turkey for example does not assemble its aircraft, but TAI produces the center fuselage and delivers it to Northrop Grumman for final checks before it moves to Lockheed Martin for final assembly. When you have a large enough order you can negotiate with the industrial partners and make them carve out capacity for you in order to be competitive on the program. It will cost a lot because they are set up to produce thousands of structures while your facility will only be producing perhaps a 100 but then a lot of this is for industrial reasons and not necessarily for producing the aircraft most efficiently.
While Turkey's facility is likely different, smaller and perhaps less automated than Northrop Grumman's it is designed by the same team -
Israel which is an FMS customer also produces outer wing boxes, not only for its aircraft but also for other.
As far as why LMA is choosing to offer the F-16 and not the F-35 - It is very simple. They are not throwing darts at a wall but responding to interest by a customer with what they deem is their best proposal for a whole host of reasons. As I have said on many occasions the F-35 has not really had an "IAF" like customer..so far customers have mostly been historic US kit users where you have had minimal customization at best. It is far easier to put together a competitive F-16 offer when pitted against the Gripen offer. The F-16 can differentiate itself on cost, and on risk.
Brar, I am not disagreeing with anything you say about the FACO line. My disagreement lies in the mistaken belief that a F-16 FACO line - in this case run by Tata - is going to germinate a whole new aerospace industry within Tata and in India as a whole. It will not. Neither will this dent the unemployment rate in India.
Beyond Bahrain, how many countries are buying brand new F-16s? And we will get zero margin on the Bahrain order, as no deal has been signed between the GOI and LM on the SEF. There is a huge market for upgrading F-16s to the Block 70 standard. I will admit that. But the margin of profit in upgrading current F-16s will be smaller than producing brand new F-16s.
So we can negotiate with LM to locally source material for fuselage, wings, canopy and other similar parts for around 100+ F-16s. But will that investment be wise for a production run of a 100 or so birds? I believe you have alluded to the same thing. Switching then to a F-35 line would be another investment, as the tools, jigs and raw materials would be different no?
If what a recent article is true, LM has gotten zero interest from the IAF on the F-16. LM is saying that the GOI is dragging their feet on the SEF program.
And you are correct that the F-16 is a less risky proposition than the Gripen E. There is a *tiny* problem though. The customer or end user. A number of senior IAF officers believe the platform is amazing and cutting edge. The previous Chief - ACM Raha (retd) - flew to Sweden to fly an earlier model of the Gripen and he loved it. Grp Cpt Suneet Krishna (read) - a former Tejas pilot - was all praises for her. I even posted a video of that. The IAF has had a history of adopting new and risky platforms i.e. Su-30MKI comes to mind. Delays, Cost Overruns...but they got a fairly advanced platform at the end of it. I see no different this time.
From this perspective, a follow on order of 36 - 44 Rafales make perfect sense. Quicker induction, cheaper induction (initial investment are already being made at Ambala AFS and Halwara AFS for various ground support equipment) and from a capability perspective vis-a-viv the F-16 Block 70, the aircraft is more or less matched. In some aspects, the Rafale has the edge and in others the F-16. But they are negligible in the larger picture.
And from a numbers perspective, 36 + 44 Rafales and 40 Su-30MKIs = 120 aircraft. Six short of the original MMRCA order.
Brar, so this talk of 200 F-16s and 100 F-18s for the IAF is a moot point. I am not saying you said it. The IAF can only work within the confines of a 42 squadron strength for the next decade or so. So whatever numbers are purchased of whatever aircraft acquired MUST fit within that ORBAT. No Babu will loosen the purse strings now for beyond 42. We have done the numbers before - numerous times on this thread itself - and beyond 100 fighters, some other platforms will have to be retired early or some other platforms will have to be scrapped altogether. That is why Mk2 development causes khujli to BRF’s import lobby.
When China has begun testing its version of the AMCA, for the IAF to go " back to the future" ,with a brand new ( legacy) type, not even an upgrade of a type in service is plumbing thd depths of imagination and visian.That too for a type being discarded by almost all US allies like little Belgium, who have been cleared to acquire almost 38JSFs for $6.8+B.
PS:The Rafale is a far superior fighter to the F-16 which didn't even make it to the shortlist in the MMRCA stakes.It is also twin-engined and still has upgrade potential even though it comes at a price.My only angst is that we should've taken up the original offer with TOT in retrospect at initial costs too.The French were desperate, we could've got the original prices if we had leveraged enough with other deals .Now with a second batch buy , no TOT, etc., we will be permanently dependent upon Dassault for spares at exorbitant prices,Dassault and the R co.will be laughing all the way to the bank!
PS:The Rafale is a far superior fighter to the F-16 which didn't even make it to the shortlist in the MMRCA stakes.It is also twin-engined and still has upgrade potential even though it comes at a price.My only angst is that we should've taken up the original offer with TOT in retrospect at initial costs too.The French were desperate, we could've got the original prices if we had leveraged enough with other deals .Now with a second batch buy , no TOT, etc., we will be permanently dependent upon Dassault for spares at exorbitant prices,Dassault and the R co.will be laughing all the way to the bank!
The Gripen is a better prospect if we have to buy another fighter, which can be avoided by judicious extras of the various aircraft in service like MKIs, MIG-29s, Jags and ramped up LCA production.But the IAF would be delirious with new toys and have desi vested interests applying massive pressure for the deal.The only problem is that the economy is in sh*t street at the street level ( pun intended) , coffers are empty and elections due soon.with a populist budget expected to mollify the populace disappointed with the eco situ.
Last edited by Philip on 21 Jan 2018 21:00, edited 1 time in total.
Philip. Nobody will give you ToT of anything valuable. That is some made up nonsense. No company (who is in the business of making profits) will give away her prized jewels.
That's what we demanded from France and was agreed upon.The stumbling block was quality of Indian produced components and for the OWN to guarantee the quality of HAL built aircraft!
Russia has offered us full TOT on the FGFA, for a price in a JV where we're dithering and dithering.We will never get such an offer with full IP rights for the aircraft and its tech.Vested interests are trying to scupper the deal even though one committee and the HAL chief have plumped for it.Amazing that we're even considering the F-16.
Philip, can you can tell what exactly we demanded and what did the French agree to? Give me a component break down list, OK?
Russia offered the same for the Su-30MKI and while HAL is producing the Su-30MKI from the raw material stage...can India make an aircraft like the Su-30MKI? The answer is a definite NO and thus the reason we are entertaining the FGFA.
The same will be true with the F-16, Gripen or any other aircraft. License production - whether from raw material stage or from a FACO line - will only remain as license production. It will not change.
India has to pour her own resources and develop everything from scratch. What we do not know - which at this stage right now - is only the turbofan. With that, we adopt license production (as we will be doing with the GE F414) and JV with engine manufacturers, as we are doing with the Kaveri88 (with Snecma) and the Kaveri200 (with RR). If the JVs work, great. If not, we start afresh. There is no other option. See below...
Can someone illustrate what will be "India exclusive" in an Indian F-16 Block 70? I honestly would love to know.
And this is the piece de resistance! And we are accused of having the mindset of a 1990s India Just buy the platform and blindly trust us. We are always looking out for India's interests. See below....
A response from Admiral Bernard McCollough of Lockheed Martin, however, raised concerns, when he said that on the eventuality of conflict between company contract and government interests they would honour the terms of the contract unless US government said they couldn't.
So tomorrow if we do a nuke test, would that irk the US Govt? Or how about if we develop deeper relations with the axis of evil - Iran - would that go against American interests? Or if we take action against Pakistan - detrimental to American goals in the region - would that piss off the US Govt?
Rakesh wrote:Brar, I am not disagreeing with anything you say about the FACO line....
I would advise you to read my post again. I said nothing of the F-16 FACO line, or any benefits that entails. I disagreed with your post that a FACO at best (specific to the F-35 as you quoted Chola who was referring to the F-35) will allow just assembly of pre-fabricated components. That is just one approach, others have instead chosen to incorporate their industry into the supply chain by striking deals with program suppliers and the prime. Israel did that for the outer wing boxes, while TAI did it for the center fuselage. Neither customer chose the FACO which is the most expensive option.
As I have said, Lockheed is offering aircraft and industrial offsets because the MOD/IAF have expressed interest in a SEF. The reason why they are offering the F-16 and not the F-35 is simply because under the terms (or what they think of them) they feel that the F-16 stands a higher chance. If they think the F-35 is perfectly suited for the SEF MII effort they would offer it just as they are likely doing in the half a dozen or so countries where they are likely pursuing F-35 customers.
Can someone illustrate what will be "India exclusive" in an Indian F-16 Block 70? I honestly would love to know.
For this you would have to be privy to their proposal, what sort of india specific mission system changes they are proposing etc. If one is willing to spend there are possibilities to make the Indian F-16 different from the block 70 in many ways, pointless though it may be.
brar_w wrote:I would advise you to read my post again. I said nothing of the F-16 FACO line, or any benefits that entails. I disagreed with your post that a FACO at best (specific to the F-35 as you quoted Chola who was referring to the F-35) will allow just assembly of pre-fabricated components. That is just one approach, others have instead chosen to incorporate their industry into the supply chain by striking deals with program suppliers and the prime. Israel did that for the outer wing boxes, while TAI did it for the center fuselage. Neither customer chose the FACO which is the most expensive option. Other customers (even FMS ones) have chosen to both produce components and do a FACO.
My point is would the Indian Govt make such an investment for only 100 birds? What is the point of negotiating with program suppliers for just 100 aircraft? And as of now, the FACO line is the option on the table. It is likely the most expensive option, but there is very little market for brand new F-16s right now. Apart from Bahrain, India might be the only other customer for new build F-16s.
In response to a question on whether Lockheed Martin was offering to move its assembly line, Howard said, “So that’s part of what we’ve been discussing. Certainly that’s (FACO) on the table. We’re going to have these discussions in the coming weeks and we’ll better understand that once we understand what the requirements are from the customer. I think we need to have that conversation first but we believe it being at least that much, right, potentially even more.”
My point is would the Indian Govt make such an investment for only 100 birds? What is the point of negotiating with program suppliers for just 100 aircraft? And as of now, the FACO line is the option on the table. It is likely the most expensive option, but there is very little market for brand new F-16s right now. Apart from Bahrain, India might be the only other customer for new build F-16s.
The Indian Ministry of Defense communicates to foreign OEMs what sort of program they are looking for. Whatever has gone across, both Lockheed and SAAB are proposing building their aircraft in India under MII. Why do you think that is for just 100 aircraft? What will be the impact of the Gripen-E, aa sub 500 aircraft program having 3 different assembly lines? Will the MII Gripen-Es be competing with Brazilian or MIS Gripen-Es? The OEMs are not proposing extensive FACO and even component production just on a whim..they are doing this likely because they feel that this is what is being demanded by those that hold the purse strings.
Apart from Bahrain, India might be the only other customer for new build F-16s.
Same as it applies to Gripen-E which at or about the cost of the F-35A is too little too late especially when you factor in that each of its customer so far is producing its own aircraft (how is this sustainable at all? ). If the MOD wants to plan for future industrial work perspective, or is willing to pay a higher price they should frame the contract in such a way that allows for higher capability (F-35 can compete) or opens up twin engine options (F-18 , MiG-29, Typhoon and Rafale can compete). If the main driver is to sell the aircraft in the hoards off of the MII line then neither of these current options are going to support anything big. Sure there may be 1 or two sales campaigns MII F-16 can compete in and the same applies to the Gripen-E but that isn't or rather shouldn't be the main driver. However as I've said before, the proposals coming out of each OEM is a good indication on what the expectations are or at least what they feel the expectations are for the program as communicated to them by the MOD.
Brar, apart from a global RFI from the Govt of India (Min of Def) for 100 SE fighters to be Made in India, the only communication that has occurred to date has been from LM and Saab and her tie ups with Tata and Adani. So all this talk of FACO line, local assembly, license production and export to other countries are promises from LM and Saab in order to win this deal.
It is only for 100 aircraft, because that is what the RFI states. To be fair, i believe it is 108 aircraft (with 18 bought directly from the OEM and 90 to be MII). We can only go by what the GOI wants, not what we think they want.
As for the Gripen E, we will not be competing for orders anywhere. By the time, the IAF order is fulfilled....the Gripen will take second place to the F-35. No one is mad to spend upwards of $100+ million for a 4th Gen platform, at that point in time, when you can get the F-35 for around the same. The F-35 is eons ahead of the Gripen in every respect.
This export of Gripen E (or F-16) is fanciful marketing. That’s it!
Right, and this is exactly what I am saying. But hammering OEMs for offering particular proposals isn't really looking at the big picture. Assuming both wanting to be most competitive it is rather indicative of what is being demanded as far as a program is concerned. Like I said, any deviation from LMA towards the F-35, or others jumping in and offering something more capable will have to be based on changes from the MOD in terms of what they want. Until then they'll continue to offer something they believe stands the best chance and for Lockheed its F-16 and SAAB Gripen.
Rakesh wrote:Philip...ith the GE F414) and JV with engine manufacturers, as we are doing with the Kaveri88 (with Snecma) and the Kaveri200 (with RR). If the JVs work, great. If not, we start afresh. There is ** other option. See below...
Reverse engineering rights can be sought. I think this is the entry door to Chinese ways of bijnej works better to mature.
I say, go ahead and replicate with help. Don't do SKDs. While the Kaveri program is revitalized parallel with this approach. It is a strategic plan and there can't be a joint ways. Using Snecms and RR core is no learning exercise. As good as GE F414 on COTS mode.
srai wrote:However, the switch from LCA Mk.1 to Mk.1A around 2020 is a real concern at this point in time. I don’t think Mk1A would be ready for production by the time Mk1 assembly ends. That gap will create more support for SEF, IMO. We will hear more of the “desperate IAF” shrill all over again.
So then we should continue with Mk1 assembly. As per HAL Chief, Mk1s can be converted into Mk1A. So continue production of Mk1, if Mk1A is not ready. That "83" order of Mk1As can be Mk1s, till Mk1A is ready for production.
The Tejas is India's SINGLE ENGINE FIGHTER...warts and all. Either platform - F-Solah (Amreeki tantrums) or Gripen E (vaporware) - comes with its own set of risks. Why take the headache? Why waste $20 billion of FOREX, with zero return? The GOI and the IAF have both got to invest their energies in ensuring success of the platform. If the OEM could be held liable for delays in SEF deliveries, then HAL must be held to the same yardstick. And if they cannot perform, invest the ~$200 million into Tata and/or Adani for a Tejas line. Let HAL learn its lesson.
Secondly, I am not convinced that we must sacrifice further Tejas development, in the *hope* that AMCA will be the real deal. That is like saying, I am going to starve my living child, because I know my second child (which is yet to be born) will be really brilliant. That is a stupid line of thinking.
Rakesh wrote:The Tejas is India's SINGLE ENGINE FIGHTER...warts and all. Either platform - F-Solah (Amreeki tantrums) or Gripen E (vaporware) - comes with its own set of risks. Why take the headache? Why waste $20 billion of FOREX, with zero return? The GOI and the IAF have both got to invest their energies in ensuring success of the platform. If the OEM could be held liable for delays in SEF deliveries, then HAL must be held to the same yardstick. And if they cannot perform, invest the ~$200 million into Tata and/or Adani for a Tejas line. Let HAL learn its lesson.
And what do the IAF fight with if the Tejas (MK1A and/or MK2) can't be scaled up to deliver numbers in time ? At that point Tata/Adani will be too little too late.
Secondly, I am not convinced that we must sacrifice further Tejas development, in the *hope* that AMCA will be the real deal. That is like saying, I am going to starve my living child, because I know my second child (which is yet to be born) will be really brilliant. That is a stupid line of thinking.
But that's precisely what you're saying w.r.t. Tejas MK1A/MK2. Neither have been born yet.
I really do not know if the SEF is the right approach or not (I agree with you that the Rafale is likely the best foreign jet to buy), but one thing should be easy to ascertain - Lockheed Martin has built and delivered many thousands of the jets they'e proposing to sell. The HAL hasn't as yet made a single Tejas of the variant the IAF wants in service. A 5-10 year delay in delivering would put the IAF in serious trouble.
KrishnaK wrote: Lockheed Martin has built and delivered many thousands of the jets they'e proposing to sell. The HAL hasn't as yet made a single Tejas of the variant the IAF wants in service. A 5-10 year delay in delivering would put the IAF in serious trouble.
The IAF wants at least 20 and perhaps 40 Mk1s in service and that's what HAL is building. And considering that the F-16 was eliminated in the technical round of the MRCA, and the SEF deal is a long way away from tech evals, Lockheed Martin definitely hasn't built a single fighter jet that the IAF wants in service. The F-16 variant they are proposing to sell seems to be a version customized for the IAF, which again hasn't been built yet by LM. Sauce for the goose etc.
KrishnaK wrote:And what do the IAF fight with if the Tejas (MK1A and/or MK2) can't be scaled up to deliver numbers in time ? At that point Tata/Adani will be too little too late.
So let us take that scenario to its logical conclusion.
As per LM's own admission, it will take around three years from contract signing date to first delivery. Even with Dassault, for the 36 Rafales, the contract was signed in September 2016 and first deliveries are expected in September 2019...which is three years. I believe around three years is the industry norm.
Let us say, for argument's sake...SEF competition is signed by the end of 2019 with F-16 as the winner. I am condensing all of the below into 23 months (Feb 2018 to Dec 2019). Unlikely to happen, but let us say it does for argument's sake.
- We are in RFI stage now. An RFP was supposed to be issued by the MoD by December 2017. We are now entering Week 4 of January 2018. Issuing RFP has yet to happen. But let us say the MoD wakes up from its slumber and issues it by February 2018.
- From RFP issuing, the MoD has to evaluate both proposals to see that they meet the requirements of the RFP and gives the green light to the IAF to conduct technical evaluations. Heaven Forbid, if Is are not dotted and the Ts are not crossed. This is the MoD after all.
- Then, and only then, can the IAF take over and conduct technical evaluations. I have no clue on how the IAF plans to conduct technical evaluations on the Gripen E, whose FOC is only in 2025! Perhaps deejay (or some other guru) can answer that one. Failure to conduct technical evaluations - on either platform - will restart this process all over again.
- Once technical evaluations are completed, the IAF has to make its recommendations to the MoD on which is the best platform. So basically L1, but only from a technical standpoint.
- Then the PNC (Price Negotiating Committe) has to evaluate both bids to ensure they meet every requirement stipulated in the RFP and from there, L1 has to be decided.
- Once L1 has been determined, the PNC has to open negotiations with the winner and hash out a deal.
So going back to my earlier timeline, a contract is signed on (lets say) 25 December 2019. From that date, it will take around three years to deliver the first set of planes to the IAF. So we are now at 25 December 2022. When the plane is inducted into the IAF on that date, there will be a first squadron that is raised and the squadron will have pilots already trained to fly the bird.
So here lies the logical conclusion --> What happens when China comes knocking between now and December 2022? What are we going to do then? Now if China decides to wait till 25 December 2022, will one squadron of 18 F-16 Block 70 aircraft be enough to keep the PLAAF at bay? Or better yet, let me turn your question right back at you ---> And what do the IAF fight with if the F-16 can't be scaled up to deliver numbers in time? At that point Tata/Adani will be too little, too late. Would you agree? Beautifully phrased by the way.
Perhaps we should tell China to wait for a couple of years - after December 2022 - when the F-16 has a confirmed syllabus, an operational doctrine has been evaluated, the platform has been fully exploited and a couple of squadrons have been raised in the IAF. War is after all, VERY fair and Chinese really play fair. The PLA's motto after all is, War is a Gentleman's Game.
In the words of the late Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan from New York, "Sir, you are entitled to your opinion. But Sir, you are not entitled to your own facts." And the confirmed facts of the matter are;
1) The SEF is nowhere near induction in the IAF and will never address the squadron shortage in the timelines required.
2) The Mk1 is better than the MiG-21 it is destined to replace - IN EVERY RESPECT.
3) Tejas Mk1 production is continuing and will only scale up in 2018 and 2019.
4) The MoD has placed an order for 83 Tejas Mk1As in December 2017.
By 2019, Tejas will be produced at the rate of 16 per year. SEF will still be in negotiation at that time. Even if I halve that number - from 16 to 8 - it will still beat the SEF. I say again, the Tejas is India's SINGLE ENGINE FIGHTER. To induct yet another single engine, foreign fighter is the height of stupidity on behalf of the GOI. Make in India has been an utter sham. And that is the not the Prime Minister's fault. That is the bureaucracy's fault. His idea alright, but the bureaucracy failed him. Read this article for reference.
KrishnaK wrote:But that's precisely what you're saying w.r.t. Tejas MK1A/MK2. Neither have been born yet.
No. I would have bought that argument until the day the GoI ordered 83 Mk1As. Mk1A is nothing more than an upgraded Mk1. The Mk1A does not go need to go through IOC or FOC certification all over again. The upgraded components will be tested and certified before it enters production. The GOI would not have placed the order for the bird, if they were unsure it will happen.
Mk2 development has been confirmed already, along with AMCA. So much for that half baked theory that ADA would not be able to do AMCA and Mk2 together. I would rather invest money in a local product and take the risk, then waste my valuable FOREX on a proven platform, but from a country whose foreign policy is unstable.
Secondly, developing Mk2 from Mk1/Mk1A is a lot easier that starting from scratch on AMCA which has a lot of technologies that needs to be proven. Going back to the child analogy, easier to teach your 4 year old kid that is *ALIVE* how to count, read and write versus *IMAGINING* your yet-to-be-born second child to play Mozart, do Physics and conduct Open Heart Surgery....all at the same time.
KrishnaK wrote:I really do not know if the SEF is the right approach or not (I agree with you that the Rafale is likely the best foreign jet to buy), but one thing should be easy to ascertain - Lockheed Martin has built and delivered many thousands of the jets they'e proposing to sell. The HAL hasn't as yet made a single Tejas of the variant the IAF wants in service. A 5-10 year delay in delivering would put the IAF in serious trouble.
I am sure you have seen these videos, but I would suggest that you rewatch them. The pilots who are part of No 45 Flying Daggers Squadron have nothing but praises for her. The IAF loves the plane and they would love to have more. And this is the Mk1 variant.
Just buy the platform and blindly trust us. We are always looking out for India's interests. See below....