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

'Make in India' Single engined fighter

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.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kartik » 26 Oct 2017 00:09

nirav wrote:Such retardation on display by the chums.

@indranil, if I do go to a lawyer, it will be for content and a deletion from database, not just a ban.
It's fine by me if that's how you guys want me to roll.

@kartik : aren't you the clown who said htt40 tyres will melt because of the exhaust?


yes, I'm the guy who expressed concern over hot exhaust directed in the general region of the tires and the possibility of it leading to tire degradation or tire burst. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. So what? Its not like you know anything that makes you worthwhile here on this forum, and your absence won't make a whit of a difference. Go to some other defence forum and s*** over it, BRF doesn't need you to stink it up.

You really are a clown. One of the biggest we've seen in a long while. You cannot stay away from this forum and ASK that you be banned so you don't regurgitate your bile. :rotfl:

Admins, please just ban this clown and let's move on. Not worth wasting any more time on him.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2021
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby nirav » 26 Oct 2017 00:13

Kartik wrote:
nirav wrote:Such retardation on display by the chums.

@indranil, if I do go to a lawyer, it will be for content and a deletion from database, not just a ban.
It's fine by me if that's how you guys want me to roll.

@kartik : aren't you the clown who said htt40 tyres will melt because of the exhaust?


yes, I'm the guy who expressed concern over hot exhaust directed in the general region of the tires and the possibility of it leading to tire degradation or tire burst. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. So what? Its not like you know anything that makes you worthwhile here on this forum, and your absence won't make a whit of a difference. Go to some other defence forum and s*** over it, BRF doesn't need you to stink it up.

You really are a clown. One of the biggest we've seen in a long while. You cannot stay away from this forum and ASK that you be banned so you don't regurgitate your bile. :rotfl:

Admins, please just ban this clown and let's move on. Not worth wasting any more time on him.


Right,
You are the same diggaj who just compared LCA mk1 to Gripen E..

poof, abuse deleted

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kartik » 26 Oct 2017 00:37

nirav wrote:
Right,
You are the same diggaj who just compared LCA mk1 to Gripen E..

MATLAB, wholesale talkoutofyourassathon ?

In the name of "defence discussions"..
Some garbage about being ahead of the curve..


I never compared the LCA Mk1 to a Gripen E, but hey, who wants to argue with a person like you? :roll: That would be akin to wrestling with a pig, I'll get dirty, you'll enjoy it.

If you'd have the slightest bit of self-respect, you'd banish yourself from this forum where "defence discussions" occur and go puke all over some other forum where discussions are more at your level. But then you're you and I guess one would be expecting too much from you to do that.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 26 Oct 2017 02:52

Admins, please clean up this thread and others. Troll in the house :((

Need that ignore button ...

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Oct 2017 04:53

This thread will be cleaned up soon, along with the LCA thread. Please, no more responses on the above or replies to the above.

In the meanwhile, I found an interesting article on the SE issue. Will post soon. I have now only two wishes in life - SE competition goes on forever and I live forever bashing SE competition on BRF :)

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Oct 2017 05:04

I said this a few days back, perhaps in this thread onlee. It appears that Lockheed Martin has seen the writing on the wall. Read below. Another statement I made - in response to stupidity - that Indo-US relations will only continue to soar, despite the F-Solah not being chosen, is also now true.

If the Americans want to see any traction on the F-18 deal, Sea Guardian and EMALS will have to be released. The latter has - as per recent media reports - now it is the MoD's turn to cough up the cash for the Vishaal.

Rex Tillerson bats for new wave of US defence sales to India
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 073_1.html

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is visiting New Delhi at a delicate moment for American defence sales to India. Having rung up $15-18 billion in defence sales to New Delhi in the last decade, Washington is backing the US defence industry’s drive for a second wave of contracts that could add up to another $18-25 billion. Addressing the media with Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj in New Delhi on Wednesday, Tillerson stated: “[W]e are willing to provide India advanced technologies for its military modernisation efforts. This includes ambitious offers from American industry for F-16 and F/A-18 fighter planes.”

On October 18, speaking in Washington before his India visit, Tillerson specified additional platforms that could feature in India’s shopping basket. He said the US had put forward proposals for “[Sea] Guardian UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles), aircraft carrier technologies, the Future Vertical Lift program, and F-18 and F-16 fighter aircraft, [which] are all potential game changers for our commercial and defense cooperation.” US policy insiders tell Business Standard that the Washington bureaucracy believes that, given the tight strategic partnership, US industry should, by right, get at least one of the two fighter contracts.

We understand the F-16 might be at a disadvantage, owing to Indian perception that US has long supplied it to Pakistan. But the F/A-18E/F is a fantastic aircraft and Boeing has the go-ahead from Washington to set up a plant to build the fighter in India”, a former top Pentagon official told Business Standard. India, however, is proceeding with competitive procurement. On January 25, the Indian Navy issued a Request for Information (RFI) to global manufacturers for 57 “multi-role carrier-borne fighters” (MRCBF). Consequently, the F/A-18E/F will probably compete with Dassault’s Rafale-M, Saab’s Sea Gripen and Russia’s MiG-29K/KUB that already flies with the Indian Navy.

The 57-fighter MRCBF deal is estimated to be worth $6-10 billion. Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin, which has offered India the new F-16 Block 70, finds itself in hot competition with Saab’s new Gripen E fighter in the “single-engine fighter” category. With India likely to buy 100-200 of these fighters, the contract would be worth $7-14 billion.

A more sensitive matter for Washington, one that could seriously test US-India relations, is India’s request for 22 Sea Guardian UAVs for maritime surveillance of Indian Ocean waters. Senior US defence industry executives say New Delhi initiated the request for the Sea Guardian in 2016, following it up with multiple high level requests in US-India meetings. The US administration, recognising a commercial as well as strategic opportunity, pulled out the stops to get it cleared in time for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the US in June. US officials say obtaining export clearances involved intensive lobbying by the Indian ambassador in Washington, and by pro-Indian Senators on Capitol Hill. This also involved dealing with strong counter-lobbying by Pakistan-friendly groups in Washington.

Now, based on the commitment made during Modi’s meeting with President Donald Trump in June, Washington responded to an Indian Letter of Request (LoR) for price and availability (P&A) of the Sea Guardian just days before Defence Secretary James Mattis’ visit to Delhi on 25-26 September. The cost would be in the region of $2-3 billion, say industry experts. Inexplicably, since then, Indian interest in the Sea Guardian seems to have cooled, say US officials. The Sea Guardian is a tightly controlled weapons platform, being in Category I under the Missile Technology Control Regime. This entails a strong “presumption of denial” to any export requests.

Contrary to media reports, the Sea Guardian is not strictly an unarmed platform. While it does not come with weapons, its wings are fitted with hard points for weapons carriage. If, at a later stage, India wants to weaponise the UAV, it would be possible to approach Washington for sanctions and weaponry. Indian Navy officers say buying the Sea Guardian would undercut the rationale for buying more Boeing P-8I multi-mission maritime aircraft. The navy has already signed up for 12 P-8Is, but would like to at least double that figure. However, the defence ministry would question the procurement of additional P-8Is, as well as Sea Guardians.

Perhaps the highest-tech piece of equipment that New Delhi and Washington are negotiating is a billion dollar “electromagnetic aircraft launch system” (EMALS) for its second indigenous aircraft carrier, INS Vishal, which is still to begin construction. This uses an electromagnetic rail gun to accelerate carrier-borne aircraft to take-off speed, replacing the conventional steam catapult. The great advantage of EMALS is its “dial-up-a-power-level” capability, which allows it to safely and quickly launch aircraft of completely different sizes – from light UAVs to 60-tonne maritime surveillance and anti-submarine aircraft.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47919
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ramana » 26 Oct 2017 05:52

Rakesh Thanks.

US policy insiders tell Business Standard that the Washington bureaucracy believes that, given the tight strategic partnership, US industry should, by right, get at least one of the two fighter contracts.


Looks like big entitlement mind set.
What right is that?
Baap ka maal?

They have done so much to harm Indian security when our fathers were innocent babes in the wood.

Let them confess to the perfidy of 1965 war.
And Homi Bhabha plane crash.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 26 Oct 2017 06:12

Tx for that report.Solah being flown by Paki pilots for decades always a point against it.F-18.When the carrier is at least a decade+ away,and 200+ helos req., an F-18 and EMALS buy is years away.The attitude "we must get at least one" deal is so silly as both aircraft are 40+ years old,BOTH having been rejected for the MMRCA deal on tech grounds sev. years ago.To expect the F-18 being replaced by the F-35 to be chosen by the IN for nav ops post 2030 when it would be a certified antique is the height of optimism!

By 2025 when the IN starts looking around in earnest and if my advice about dumping the LCA-2 is taken in favour of accelerating the AMCA, we could have a naval stealth AMCA available when IAC-2 is ready for its sea trials around 2030. If the vessel's design has both a ski-jump and cats MIG-29Ks ,upgraded by then,could operate as well for commonality with the two carriers in hand if AMCA-N is delayed.But a superior bird than the 29K will be wanted.Perhaps a 35K may arrive with AESA radars,new TVC engines,some stealth etc. but that's dependant upon RU future reqs. where a naval variant of the SU-57 is being mentioned.Should that bird arrive a definite contender.

Alternatively if the NLCA has arrived by 2030 it could fly off the carrier but it would be a v.limited bird capability wise and AMCA would still be needed.Rafale-M a rank outsider given its huge price.There are two other birds that might be available.The US may relent and offer us the F-35B and There's an outside possibility that the YAK STOVL bird planned for future Ru CVs may have arrived by 2030.By 2030 F-35B glitches would've been rectified
and the bird "seasoned" enough for evaluation.

These STOVL options and the AMCA,naval SU-57 if developed, keeping in mind what the PLAN by then is operating or planned for its CVs, to my mind are the best options as these fighters will be contemporary ,serve for a few decades and have plenty of upgrade potential unlike the 20th century antique the F-18.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Oct 2017 08:00

ramana wrote:Looks like big entitlement mind set.
What right is that?
Baap ka maal?

They have done so much to harm Indian security when our fathers were innocent babes in the wood.

Let them confess to the perfidy of 1965 war.
And Homi Bhabha plane crash.

Well that is what they want. We give you the title of Strategic Partnership and we want you to buy this, that and this :)

Be careful of the above. You might be accused by "some" in BRF of having a mindset of India that is pre-1990 :mrgreen:

I am not sure if you noticed, AFAIK not one mention of Make In India anywhere. And even if he did, this is screwdrivergiri and not Make in India.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Oct 2017 08:09

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923211401346162688 --> Apparently, denying core tech transfer for even obsolescent F-16s is Tillerson's idea of offering India 'cutting edge' defence technologies.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923211823226142720 --> Moreover, when the US says we are offering defence technologies, it basically means 'defence products'.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923212991276900354 --> What is this talk about 'India is an emerging power in the region'? No thanks Mr Tillerson, We have already emerged & far beyond the region.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923213585433497601 --> There is nothing cutting edge about the F-16 & F-18 platforms. Late models have some new gen avionics, but tech for that will be denied.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923214193456660480 --> India will become a superpower only via hard core military-industrial indigenization.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923214870899703808 --> Then there are these people busy running down the Tejas just so that they can wantonly say that India should settle for old tech via DTTI.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923216431709220864 --> The India-US strategic partnership is being hyped beyond all proportion by some quarters. Time will tell.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/923216892680052736 --> Especially not to support 'jobs' in larger military-industrial complexes trying to saddle it with obsolescent stuff.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Oct 2017 08:35

Kartik wrote:
Rakesh wrote:How is a plane whose FOC is planned for 2025 to be ready in 2019?

Basically equivalent to the IOC-1 that was granted to the Tejas Mk1 in Jan 2011. FOC is a long way off for the Gripen E.

Okay I get it. Even this article says the Gripen E is entering service in 2019, but I am assuming - as you said above - in IOC mode.

Gripen E goes supersonic for first time
http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2017/10 ... -time.html

Flight testing will continue through next year and first delivery is scheduled from 2019 to Swedish and Brazilian Air Forces.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Oct 2017 08:42

Read some of the responses to the tweet....hillarious :)

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/923151189490900993 --> Interviewing "Lockheed Martin India" leadership tomorrow on the single-engine fighter bid & the F-16. Have a question? Post here. We’ll ask!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 26 Oct 2017 11:35

Will we get a genuine "antique certification" with every F-16 just as copies.limited edition prints of paintings by famous artists come with? The value of the bird then will go up with age! Except that there are thousands of originals of the marque available worldwide. So will our investment in this specimen of US art actually depreciate with time?

Tillerson should be nicknamed as "Silly-son" instead!

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5918
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 26 Oct 2017 15:22

But a superior bird than the 29K will be wanted.Perhaps a 35K may arrive with AESA radars,new TVC engines,some stealth etc.


With or without antique certification?

There's an outside possibility that the YAK STOVL bird planned for future Ru


:rotfl: :rotfl:

Fitting a YAK b/w the 5th generation PAKFA and the 8th generation SF fighter may be redundant.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 27 Oct 2017 12:19

If you want to succeed,you have to examine every possibility,even some of which might seem "farfetched",a word used by a sr. IAF officer reg. our desi LCA MK-2. In the td. I've recommended getting Gen.Bogdan down,who turned the JSF prog. around,like we did with Dr.Kurt Tank (HF-24),as a consultant for the LCA programme which might get stuck at the MK-1A stage not proceeding any further.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47919
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ramana » 28 Oct 2017 01:12

Philip, India has many talented turn around officers and doesn't need outsiders. The will to implement is needed.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5918
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 28 Oct 2017 01:21

I am sure the MOD, and the individual services have a track for officers that want to develop expertise either in program executive leadership and acquisition. It then becomes a case of creating a policy on moving them to positions of influence and allowing them the freedom to put to practice their expertise. In other words it is likely not a lack of talent as ramana has put it but more of a policy and political will concern.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Oct 2017 04:32

Technology Transfer For Production of F-16 Not One Way Affair, Says Lockheed Martin :lol:
http://www.india.com/news/india/technol ... n-2574317/

Defence manufacturer Lockheed Martin on Saturday said the company is looking beyond the production of F-16 fighter jets in India. Company’s National Executive for India Abhay Paranjape said Indian industry will soon define the scenario of production of defence equipments in the future. Paranjape said both sides will have to work to make technology transfer for production of fighter jets in a smooth manner. He maintained the possibilities of transfer has increased after the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson visited India on Thursday this week. In an interview to News 18 India, Paranjape said that technology transfer for production of fighter jets is not just a one-way handover. He said companies from both sides will protect their technologies in their interests. The company also said American fighter F-16 is best suited to meet India’s demands in modern-day warfare.

Integrated Fighter Group Director of Business Development Randall Howard said that fighter jet is capable of carrying more ordnance in comparison with other competitors. Similarly, it can protect 50 percent more space by carrying more fuel. Howard said the fighter is equipped with radar technology of the F-35. India need not to worry about its association with arch-rival Pakistan. Howard added Pakistan is one of 27 clients for F-16 fighter jets. He said India still have a critical role to play in the production of fighter jets. The company is one of the major contenders to supply 126 fighter jets to Indian Air Force. Although India decided to place its order to French defence manufacturer Dassault Aviation, it reduced the number of fighter jets to 36. Earlier, Tata Group and American aerospace giant Lockheed Martin had signed a deal to jointly produce the combat-proven F-16 fighter jets in India. Under the deal, Lockheed will shift its Fort Worth, Texas plant to India.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Oct 2017 05:39

Okay, I am calling it. The SE deal will be won by Dassault. Yup, you read that right. By Dassault. And the clincher will be the twin engine Rafale. There will be a follow on order for a minimum of 36 Rafales (I am thinking 72) for the Air Force + 57 for the Navy. I am all for assembly of phoren aircraft, as long as Tejas development continues.

X-Post from the Vayusena Rafale thread...

Dassault – Reliance Aerospace Manufacturing Facility In Mihan, Nagpur Inaugurated
http://bharatshakti.in/dassault-relianc ... augurated/

DRAL will manufacture components for the Legacy Falcon 2000 Series of Civil Jets manufactured by Dassault Aviation and thus will become part of its Global Supply Chain. These first steps are expected to achieve in the coming years, the possible setting up of final assembly of Rafale and Falcon Aircraft.

It will also attract and house an organic ecosystem of over 200 MSME’s to secure the component and avionics manufacturing needs of Rafale and Falcon jets.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 29 Oct 2017 06:09

Was that horror price of birds for Bahrain accurate?

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3033
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kakkaji » 29 Oct 2017 07:19

If we do order 36 more Rafales for the IAF, then the offsets this time should be focused on Dassault's help in quick design, testing and productionizing of LCA Mk2.

Dassault doesn't have a competing single-engine fighter, so they should be more willing to help with LCA Mk2 than Saab.

Admiral Rakesh: I am not very confident about the Dassault/ Reliance joint venture. Chhota Bhai has driven to ground every business he has engaged in, and is effectively bankrupt.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7516
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Pratyush » 29 Oct 2017 07:51

A fool and his money is soon parted. We are the fools and we have told all the swindlers of the world to come take our money. By coming up with this farce of a competition. Bloody hell what is the comparison between 16 and Gripen. None. What tech transfer from F-16? Nil. Gripen is dependent on US export clearances for Indian service.

One fine mess we find ourselves into.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Oct 2017 10:00

Philip wrote:Was that horror price of birds for Bahrain accurate?

If you are referring to the ~$145 millon per F-16V, then yes it is true. But that includes everything - weapons, spares, base, etc. Kartik posted a very accurate analysis of the Bahrain deal. Truly eye opening.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Oct 2017 10:03

https://twitter.com/menoiconoclast/stat ... 6577321984 ---> A country like India should not spend billions of FX on import of arms.

...and the above tweet ties in with the tweet below...

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/923216892680052736 ---> Especially not to support 'jobs' in larger military-industrial complexes trying to saddle it with obsolescent stuff.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Oct 2017 10:08

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/924222401197490182 ---> The time to set up an empowered Defence Technology Commission is here.

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 182
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Luxtor » 29 Oct 2017 10:47

Why can't the Gov't order the 3 services to induct indigenous weapon systems in fair numbers?

The Gov't needs to tell the tri-services that you will only get weapon systems from foreign sources that are not at all available indigenously. We can get a fair number of Rafale fighters from France to keep our fighter strength up. We should get all the Rafales fully built in France; no need for the screw driver giri local assembly. We have learned everything that we can for several decades now with local assembly which has helped in building LCA and ALH, LCH, etc. No reason to keep doing it with Rafale. We'll also continue to induct MKI's from Russia in fair numbers as well. All other MiG serious fighters will be retired with the exception of upgraded Mig 29s and 29Ks. And there is also Jaguars that are being upgraded. We don't need this foreign single engine fighter contest farce; instead induct LCAs and NLCAs in large numbers.

The Army needs to be ordered to induct Arjuns in large numbers as well. T-90s will be reduced to only the number needed until the Arjun induction is completed. Rudra, ALH and LCH all need to be inducted in large numbers to keep the Army from crying about not enough tanks. Rudra and LCH will serve to thin the herd of enemy tanks with anti-tank missiles such as the Nag and Helina and imported varieties while Nag & Helina pair get their final kinks worked out.

India is the only country in the world that has such a large variety of indigenously developed weapon systems and almost none of them are in large full scale use by the nation's armed forces. Look at Russia, U.S. Israel, France, China, Korea, Sweden, Japan, U.K., Italy, Brazil, etc.

An ultimatum has to be issued to the tri-services by the PM and the Parliament via the President that states Either you fully induct all indigenous weapon systems that are fully developed except for some small issues which will be worked out as time goes by or the Gov't will raise National Guard Units under totally a separate command structure that will induct the indigenous weapons and the budget for these National Guard Units will be subtracted from each one of the tri-services.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 29 Oct 2017 13:33

Lux, said a long time ago.The GOI,principal stakeholder,representing the people of India taxpayers,must first see the light and then improve DPSU productivity and quality,enter into meaningful JVs where we do not have the tech,saving time reinventing the wheel and generously fund domestic R&D.Imports only where and when reqd. as of critical importance to our def. and security.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5918
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 29 Oct 2017 16:40

Rakesh wrote:Okay, I am calling it. The SE deal will be won by Dassault. Yup, you read that right. By Dassault. And the clincher will be the twin engine Rafale. There will be a follow on order for a minimum of 36 Rafales (I am thinking 72) for the Air Force + 57 for the Navy. I am all for assembly of phoren aircraft, as long as Tejas development continues.



The SEF deal CANNOT be won by Dassault since it is not going to be able to participate in it. What could happen is that the entire effort is scrapped or set aside due to various reasons and additional Rafales pursued. But that isn't the same thing as picking a twin engined aircraft after requiring global bids for a single engine fighter.

Rakesh wrote:If you are referring to the ~$145 millon per F-16V, then yes it is true. But that includes everything - weapons, spares, base, etc. Kartik posted a very accurate analysis of the Bahrain deal. Truly eye opening.


There is no Bahrain "deal" to analyze as there is only a FMS announcement. Customers, especially those from the Middle East, always request the absolute maximum that they can vis-a-vis hardware, services, and support since FMS process and subsequent approvals between various USG agencies is long and time consuming. It is often the case that months, even years down the road the actual negotiated contracts end up looking a lot different form the FMS announcement, with the customer choosing only a subset of the things it had requested officially.

As an example : See this FMS announcement for Singapore's acquisition of AESA radars -

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress today of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Singapore of 6 AN/TPQ-53 (V) Counterfire Target Acquisition Radar Systems and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $179 million. LINK


Compare this to the actual contract signed recently -

The US government has awarded Lockheed Martin a USD63 million firm, fixed-price contract in support of a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) procurement effort of six AN/TPQ-53 counter-fire target acquisition radars destined for Singapore, according to federal contracting documents reviewed by Jane's on 21 August.The contract – which was signed on 13 April 2017 – includes options that would bring the cumulative value of the order to USD81 million if exercised by the Singapore government. Work on the radar systems is expected to be completed by 13 March 2019 LINK


Even with the options factored into the actual "signed contract", the FMS notification estimates are off by >50% when compared to the deal that was eventually signed.

Until we see an actual contract, and the terms and things contracted within it, there is no real way to judge the aircraft cost portion within it. For example, the Saudi F-15SA deal involved a heck of a lot of MILCON and infrastructure set up costs in order to get their local industry ready to convert their older aircraft to SA standards and to sustain them long term. Same is the case with a lot of the ME customers where they have a complex web of state and "family" owned industrial interests that are now increasingly involved with supporting their military purchases.

Bahrain F-16V Contract Not Yet Signed, Despite Reports

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 29 Oct 2017 17:13

Pl read BK's latest a few hrs ago where he asks the Q whether this govt is going to dump the LAX and go back 50 yrs into the past buying US antiques.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 29 Oct 2017 17:14

Pl read BK's latest a few hrs ago where he asks the Q whether this govt is going to dump the LCA and go back 50 yrs into the past buying US antiques.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7516
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Pratyush » 29 Oct 2017 19:24

Will the khan agree to installation of Uttam and indian mission computer along with ecm gear on the 16?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5918
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 29 Oct 2017 19:27

Pratyush wrote:Will the khan agree to installation of Uttam and indian mission computer along with ecm gear on the 16?


The question is better framed as what those costs would be to either buy the technical rights to be able to do it domestically, or to ask the OEM to do it . In the latter's case, sure but again, at what cost? Same applies to the Gripen, Rafale etc.

The main focus with the F-16 V (compared to baseline 50/52) and to some extent the Gripen E has been to introduce better, and more modern mission systems and sensors including new mission computers, AESA radar, and upgrades to other systems such as EW etc. That to a certain extent drove the development and incremental cost growth over the baseline. Doing away with all that and completely replacing systems is unlikely until a decade or more down the road but that assumes that the IAF even reaches that stage with this acquisition program. Hopefully, saner heads will prevail at the MOD, shifting focus on LCA MK1, MK2 and perhaps another Rafale off the shelf buy.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1924
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cybaru » 31 Oct 2017 04:29

If dassault/reliance wins then few things are quite likely to happen before.

1. M88 + kaveri will be working out.
2. RBE2 may come for Tejas

If those two things happen, then the only TOT Reliance will see is some composite manufacturing skills that it will pick up in its screwdriver giri along with inflated profits. It will be nice if they refit the indian rafale (if ever made with Kaveri88 or Kaveri100) with a local M88 + Kaveri product.

I do wish that we form a GTRE + Safran + HAL company that works on the following
Kaveri100 for LCA mk2
Kaveri120 for AMCA
Kaveri144M for MKI
Kaveri144P for PAKFA

GTRE and Safran work on R&D and HAL for producing the final engine at the Koraput plant.

This will allow both PAKFA and AMCA to move forward and give us a real aviation infrastructure to move forward.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15829
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby NRao » 31 Oct 2017 06:53

CY,

Trying to bail out Safran eh? :wink:

Please consult with Dassault before you suggest that option.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1924
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cybaru » 31 Oct 2017 08:49

No but certainly hoping it will push Indian avaition industry off the ground. If we make engines for all future needs, we have a future in aviation industry. If it helps safran good for them. If they want to survive they would propose this model themselves!

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 31 Oct 2017 09:02

Cybaru wrote:No but certainly hoping it will push Indian avaition industry off the ground. If we make engines for all future needs, we have a future in avaition industry. If it helps safran good for them. If they want to survive they would propose this model themselves!


India is already infusing them with its FOREX in its Mirage-2000 and Rafale deals. They didn't have to do too much to help India. More cash infusion expected to come due to "desperation" on the Indian side.

Besides with India's protracted acquisition process and often piecemeal orders, the foreign defense corporate won't make money by manufacturing in India. They make better profits and keep their high-skill citizens employed by out-right selling. They just need to provide a good lip-service but negotiate away anything of essence. You don't rule the world by giving away your hard-earned know-hows and tech lead.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15829
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby NRao » 31 Oct 2017 10:16

Just saying.

NBAA: 'Serious' new problem with Silvercrest rattles Dassault

Oct 16, 2017.

The ref to your proposal:

But the Silvercrest’s development problems plague Safran’s plans to remain a full-service developer of modern turbofan engines. The company last delivered a full engine for the Dassault Rafale about 20 years ago. Its largest business involves supplying the low-pressure sections of the CFM International CFM56 and next-generation Leap engines. But the Silvercrest represents the first engine to feature a Safran-designed low-pressure and high-pressure section since the Rafale’s M88.


So, their last good full engine was for the Rafale. 20 years ago. Nice.

This new engine, Silvercrest, has their latest and greatest tech. Good. But after 5 years of problem solving has developed a brand new problem. Hmmmm..... Enough to tick off Dassault.


Dunno.

But, I was only wondering if there is a correlation between research funds and successful new engine techs, across the globe. And, if so, if one can actually derive a risk model based on that data.

Just wondering.

I mean it is after all an engine. And as observed a wee bit off does not cut it. Russians are struggling. The French could be too. Who knows about RR? And, of course, GTRE is dead in the water (or air).

Just wondering. Dassualt.

OK, back to the pavilion.

Sorry, continue.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17655
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 31 Oct 2017 10:31

Terribly depressing.Only silver lining is that NS is doing her best.

Ck the link for the graphic with more details.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 349989.cms
‘Make In India’ projects come undone
Rajat Pandit | TNN | Updated: Oct 31, 2017, 10:11 IST
HIGHLIGHTS
Half a dozen mega projects remain stuck at different stages without the final contracts being inked.
MoD officials contend Sitharaman is holding meetings of the defence acquisitions council every fortnight.

India is still far away from reducing its strategically-vulnerable dependence on foreign military hardware and software.

NEW DELHI: Bureaucratic bottlenecks, long-winded procedures, commercial and technical wranglings, coupled with the lack of requisite political push and followthrough, have ensured that no major "Make in India" project in defence has actually kicked off in the last three years.
Stock-taking of half-a-dozen mega projects, collectively worth over Rs 3.5 lakh crore, shows they remain stuck at different stages without the final contracts being inked. They range from future infantry combat vehicles (FICVs), light utility helicopters and Naval multi-role choppers to new-generation stealth submarines, mine counter-measure vessels (MCMVs) and fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA). The initial request for information (RFI) for another major 'Make in India' project, to manufacture 114 single-engine fighters in a second production line after indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft, of course, is also about to be issued.

But though the Gripen-E (Sweden) and F-16 (US) jets are already in a dogfight to bag the estimated Rs 1 lakh crore contract, it'll take years for indigenous production to take off. Defence ministry (MoD) officials contend minister Nirmala Sitharaman is holding meetings of the defence acquisitions council every fortnight, as also reviewing projects on a case-to-case basis, in a bid to break the bureaucratic and other logjams.
"These are big complex projects for a country which cannot even manufacture specialised ammunition. They will take some time," said a senior official. Some steps have indeed been taken to boost the private sector's role in defence production through "strategic partnership" and other policies, besides according top priority to "indigenous design, development and manufacturing (IDDM)" category in the Defence Procurement Procedure.
But India is still far away from reducing its strategically-vulnerable dependence on foreign military hardware and software. PM Modi's talk of defence as the cornerstone of his "Make in India" thrust is also yet to translate into concrete reality.
s
The Rs 60,000 crore FICV project (see graphic), first approved in October 2009, for instance, remains deadlocked over whether two or all the five Indian private firms in the fray, apart from the Ordnance Factories Board, be asked to design and build prototypes. "Sitharaman is holding meetings to break the FICV logjam... It will be resolved soon," said an official. Meanoffer," said the source.
T
The FGFA project with Russia to co-develop and coproduce an Indian variant of its Sukhoi T-50 fighter, in turn, has taken a steep nose-dive after the IAF raised doubts about its stealth capabilities, engine performance, high cost and delivery time-frame. Under a 2010 pact, India and Russia conducted preliminary design work worth $295 million, but the final R&D and production contract has been hanging fire since then. It will take around $25 billion to make 127 such single-seat jets in India. "It will have to be a top political decision whether to go in for the FGFA project or junk it," said a source.
Another project with Russia, the Rs 6,500 crore plan to manufacture 200 Kamov-226T light utility helicopters, is also in the doldrums despite an inter-governmental agreement in 2015. "The joint venture has been set up. But the request for proposal is yet to be issued to the JV to submit its techno-commercial offer," said the source.


Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1924
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cybaru » 31 Oct 2017 10:34

srai wrote:
Cybaru wrote:No but certainly hoping it will push Indian avaition industry off the ground. If we make engines for all future needs, we have a future in avaition industry. If it helps safran good for them. If they want to survive they would propose this model themselves!


India is already infusing them with its FOREX in its Mirage-2000 and Rafale deals. They didn't have to do too much to help India. More cash infusion expected to come due to "desperation" on the Indian side.

Besides with India's protracted acquisition process and often piecemeal orders, the foreign defense corporate won't make money by manufacturing in India. They make better profits and keep their high-skill citizens employed by out-right selling. They just need to provide a good lip-service but negotiate away anything of essence. You don't rule the world by giving away your hard-earned know-hows and tech lead.


Sure yeah, but that still leaves us without an engine. If we were to form a partnership and or own the engines 100% and pay for consultancy and import the low pressure and hot core, we will have flying engines and learning that comes with it.

This way we alteast design engines that are easier to service make a lot of parts that need constant changing and own a large portion of the supply chain. We may end up still importing 40-50% value of engine from outside but if that delinks us from russian engines for Pakfa or american engines for Mk2 and AMCA it is price well paid.

It will also mean we go through complete life cycle of multiple engines. Should a day come when french act arrogant and start squeezing us, we can replace it with a less efficient core and take the penalty for reduced performance and higher aggressive maintenance schedules. Plus we design engines and planes around those engines to suit our needs. It is independence in many ways.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kartik » 31 Oct 2017 11:12

brar_w wrote:There is no Bahrain "deal" to analyze as there is only a FMS announcement. Customers, especially those from the Middle East, always request the absolute maximum that they can vis-a-vis hardware, services, and support since FMS process and subsequent approvals between various USG agencies is long and time consuming. It is often the case that months, even years down the road the actual negotiated contracts end up looking a lot different form the FMS announcement, with the customer choosing only a subset of the things it had requested officially.
..

Even with the options factored into the actual "signed contract", the FMS notification estimates are off by >50% when compared to the deal that was eventually signed.

Until we see an actual contract, and the terms and things contracted within it, there is no real way to judge the aircraft cost portion within it. For example, the Saudi F-15SA deal involved a heck of a lot of MILCON and infrastructure set up costs in order to get their local industry ready to convert their older aircraft to SA standards and to sustain them long term. Same is the case with a lot of the ME customers where they have a complex web of state and "family" owned industrial interests that are now increasingly involved with supporting their military purchases.

Bahrain F-16V Contract Not Yet Signed, Despite Reports


There were news reports that the deal had been signed, and the price being reported was even higher than the FMS notification. But AW&ST has disputed the news, stating that it hasn't yet been signed. But I would not expect the costs to be much lower than the FMS notification at least.

Bahrain seals $3.8 billion deal for F-16V aircraft

MANAMA, Oct 17 (Reuters) - The Bahrain Defence Force signed a $3.8 billion deal with Lockheed Martin to buy 16 upgraded F-16 aircraft on Tuesday, the official Bahrain state news agency said.
In September, the U.S. State Department approved arms sales packages worth more than $3.8 billion to Bahrain including F-16 jets, upgrades, missiles and patrol boats.

and this

Bahrain orders F-16V fightesr for $3.8 billion

Bahrain Says It Signed $3.8 Bn Deal for F-16 Fighter Jets
(Source: Agence France-Presse; published Oct 18, 2017)

MANAMA --- Bahrain on Tuesday announced it had signed a $3.8 billion deal with Lockheed Martin for 16 upgraded F-16 fighter jets.

The Bahrain Defence Force signed the agreement with the US company during a defence exhibition in the Gulf kingdom, home to the US Fifth Fleet, the state-run BNA news agency reported.

..

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Bahrain had originally requested 19 F-16V aircraft, for which it expected to pay $2,785 million, or $147.6 million each (see below).
However, it is now paying $3.8 billion for only 16 aircraft.
The difference is presumably due to additional equipment and weapons included in the final contract, but details are unlikely to be released unless Bahrain suddenly becomes much more transparent about its defense acquisitions.)



Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A Sharma and 33 guests