MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 18 Apr 2018 23:09

Saab elevates testing of the world’s most cost-effective fighter plane
http://www.dpaonthenet.net/article/1521 ... plane.aspx

Saab Aeronautics needed to find a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) solution to replace its custom system for interfacing to line-replaceable units (LRUs) in Saab Aeronautics simulators.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 19 Apr 2018 01:00

Ignore the text and just click on the link and check out the pictures....

https://twitter.com/DetrimentoSumus/sta ... 1844384781 ---> Hemma från den första turnén med Gripen E simulator. Kul att vara del av historia. Resan gick till Chennai i Indien.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Apr 2018 01:22

These are the same chaps who did all they could to scuttle the LCA program, and now, they are trying to do the same to the LCA Mk2. Hope they are shown a polite response saying, kindly leave these decisions to the current Govt.

Rakesh wrote:I do not see the wisdom in going for the Gripen E. I do not see what that plane can offer. Unless they are hedging their bets that the Tejas Mk2 will not arrive on time.

Modi’s Sweden visit may get us Gripen, but Air Force needs more
https://www.thequint.com/voices/opinion ... a-pakistan

Just a week before the RFI of 6 April, a group of former IAF chiefs and other strategic thinkers met at Delhi Forum For Strategic Studies to confront the IAF’s dwindling combat fighter strength, which would plummet from the present 27/31 squadrons to 24 combat squadrons by 2032. It was decided that former IAF chiefs would seek a meeting with PM Modi and apprise him of the growing crisis. The request was to immediately order an IAF capability review against a two-front collusive threat, and simultaneously order a government-to-government ‘Make in India’ contract for the single-engine Saab Gripen of Sweden, for establishing a new production line integral with transfer of technology but avoiding the tedious MMRCA tendering process, which it has already gone through. This route was explored tentatively in October 2016 along with Lockheed Martin’s F-16 but the project vanished mysteriously. This forum’s recommendations were given to the press and copies sent to the IAF.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 19 Apr 2018 10:34

^it is for these types of reasons that I was not too happy with the iaf commitment for a non existent mk2. It would have been far better if NS could've gotten iaf to commit to another 123 mk1a ...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2018 10:36

The build factor is a bottleneck for IAF on Tejas not its commitment

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Apr 2018 10:59

My gut feeling is that GOI is not doing what most folks assume it is doing with this latest iteration of MRCA deal.

What had happened the last time was that India has boxed itself into a corner once we selected a contest "winner". I mean once you go that route you are at the mercy of the winner in terms of price + TOT. The same logic works against you when you *select* a vendor.

Instead it should have been technical + financial + TOT together to pick the winner. My *guess* is that the latest iteration is to correct the past mistake. We already have the technical evaluation. Now we will ask for the financial + ToT bid and do a proper cost/benefit analysis on the combined technical + financial + ToT parameters to select the winner.

Ideally, this should help us re-negotiate the cost and/or better ToT terms on Rafael and give them the order for the remaining planes but the field is wide open.

A real bania will never close the door to a cheaper but slightly inferior product especially as a negotiating tactics. What Modi has done is to throw the doors wide open and make everyone sweat in trying to best the rest of the competition.

arun · Post by **arun** » 19 Apr 2018 16:25

Rakesh wrote:We will offer the latest F/A-18: Boeing India Chief
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ne ... 505309.ece

Boeing is hopeful of grabbing the $15-billion deal to sell 110 fighter jets to the Indian Air Force (IAF) by offering its latest and most advanced F/A-18 Super Hornet. In an interview with BusinessLine on the sidelines of the DefExpo 2018, Boeing India President Pratyush Kumar said that the company will be offering its latest twin-engine F/A-18 Super Hornet to India, the price of which will be much cheaper than the French Rafale. He also said the fact that the RFI - this time - puts emphasis on the operational aspect of the fighters than technical specifications makes it more interesting. Kumar also said Boeing is set to build the F/A-18s in India under the ‘Make in India’ programme should it get the order to supply the entire 110 warplanes. Excerpts:

Q. The Indian Air Force has finally issued the long-awaited request for information (RFI) to procure 110 fighters under a $15-billion deal. Will Boeing be offering the F/A-18 Super Hornets?

A. Yes, we will. I think it is a well thought out RFI. It broadens the aperture without restricting the number of engines which will make the competition much more vigorous and give Indian Air Force the option to consider different platforms with different capabilities. What I really like about this RFI is that it asks about the kind of operational requirements that they need to have rather than technical specifications. With too much focus on technical specifications, the operational part gets ignored.

……………..{Rest Snipped}…………………..

Question, albeit tubelightly

.

Why is Boeing steadfastly pushing the F/A 18 rather than the other aircraft in their stable, the F15, which is in more widespread service globally and does not suffer from the F/A 18 problem of being relatively more short legged

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 19 Apr 2018 18:12

Old question. This was asked right at the start when many pointed out that the f15 was more capable than the 16/18

forgot. Think it was something to do with it being heavier without an established roadmap for the future especially given it isn't a heavily marketed fighter like the other 2.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Apr 2018 23:06

F-15 is too similar in capability to the MKI. Makes no sense for an air force operating 270 MKIs to buy the F-15. Not to mention the fact that we probably can't afford it anyway.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Apr 2018 00:30

Karan M wrote:These are the same chaps who did all they could to scuttle the LCA program, and now, they are trying to do the same to the LCA Mk2. Hope they are shown a polite response saying, kindly leave these decisions to the current Govt.

Two possibilities exist;

Possibility A - This article is a lifafa piece and is someone's imagination to push an agenda. More than likely Saab onlee.

Possibility B - If this article is true and such a meeting did take place (just among the chiefs that is), it just reinforces the theory that the IAF loves the Gripen E. But there are a number of questions/observations that come to mind.

1) I am convinced that the squadron shortage is not that acute as made out to be and the IAF will be glad to wait it out till the mid 2020s for this bird to achieve FOC. Even the IAF is aware - despite the Prime Minister's assurance - Round 3 of MRCA competition will take just as long as Round 1 and Round 2. It is just the way our bureaucracy functions.

2) With the arrival of 36 Rafales, upgraded M2Ks and MiG-29s (along with the Jaguars and Su-30MKIs)....the IAF believes it can be a deterrent against the PAF and the PLAAF, even at a reduced squadron strength. The spectacular success of Exercise Gagan Shakti clearly proved that.

3) The IAF is enamoured (they have called it a game-changer) with the Meteor BVRAAM and Saab states that the Gripen E will have a two way datalink. The Meteor is already coming with the Rafale, albeit with a one-way datalink.

4) The Gripen E is everything the Tejas Mk 2 is, with a prototype already flying. Eons left for FOC, but hard to shake off the notion that "phoren maal is better" and minor quibbles like FOC for phoren maal is always set aside

They will produce the plane in IOC mode - if a deal is struck soon - and will gladly wait for FOC. The IAF has done that before on other platforms (MiG-21, Su-30, Mirage 2000) and will have no qualms of doing it again.

5) If the Gripen E is indeed given the red rose by the IAF, I would not be surprised that Kaveri88 will come on board. The Gripen E is coming with the F414 anyway and so is the Tejas Mk2. Single engine type across multiple platforms is hard pressed to argue against. Even the F-18 Super Hornet scores on this point, however only with the F414 engine. I am not sure how open Boeing will be "open" to the idea of putting a Kaveri88 onboard. With Saab promising India the moon (actual deliverables to be verified) - i.e. 100% ToT

, revolutionize aerospace industry, etc - the IAF and India has certainly stood up and taken notice.

6) In relation to point 4, I suspect the IAF believes the Gripen E will be a perfect model for the Tejas Mk2 to emulate. Similar engine, similar weapons, awfully close in design and capability, etc. Rather than risk it by testing everything on the Mk2 - which the IAF believes will cause long delays - use the Gripen E as a test bed.

My worst fear with this - is if the Gripen E does indeed win - the IAF may change their mind on the Tejas Mk2 altogether. They already have a bird in the Gripen E, so why then invest in the Tejas Mk2? For that matter, all the other platforms will likely achieve the same result. Even with the Rafale, nothing more than 2 - 3 squadrons. I was hoping the GoI would order additional Tejas Mk1s and convert them to Tejas Mk1As and then move on to the Tejas Mk2.

But Defence Minister Sitharaman's statement proved otherwise. She said she cannot force the services to adopt platforms. She can encourage indigenization, but only to a certain point. See below....

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7634&p=2265784#p2265784

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 20 Apr 2018 01:40

Rakesh exactly. The lure of ready imports is a mindset which has yet to leave many in the old gen brass. These guys will gladly talk of how Gripen is an example of cooperation, how India made a mistake going it alone and then also turn and state how Tejas engine is imported and hence it is not indigenous. This cognitive dissonance is a big reason for not supporting indigenous programs and buying half ready imports which take a decade to mature, by which time, the PLAAF will come up with J-30 and the IAF will then make a stern presentation to some Parliamentary Committee, stating the only way is some stealth- MRCA v3.0.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 20 Apr 2018 05:18

I am glad the conversation has come back to the why F-18 point (again).
I think (and I have said this before) , the choice for MRCA Chapter 3 will be done with the Navy in mind.

There a lot of forks down this tricky road to get us fighter aircrafts for our defence forces (not IAF but IN too).

As you read the para below, please think of yourself walking down a road and encountering multiple forks.

Here we go
The F-18 and the Rafael are the only ones with carrier capable aircrafts, however none of these are certified with Ski-Ramp.

@brar_w , I remember asking you this before. What would it take for an F-18 to take off from INS Vikrant. Need to dig out that answer.

Now even if the F-18 jumps from the ramp, how capable aircraft are we looking at once its airborne ?
How much fuel does it have ? How much offensive/ defensive payload is it carrying ?

You can boil it down to this.
Is a ski-jump launched F-18 more or less capable than a ski-jump launched Mig-29 ?
If no, then are we buying a squadron of Mig-29s for the Vikrant or over strengthening the existing 2 squadrons.

However INS Vishal might be coming with EMALS or a Steam Catapault but a catapault so .... the future is something is currently catapault certified (read F18 and Rafael). But only seems the choice for Make In India for IAF .... do you get where I am going with this.

So I think
the IAF is going to be getting the F-18 without being told that it was IN that was the strongest factor in that decision making, looking through the lens of Make In India and operating the common equipment.

A separate Make In India for the navy was only possible if INS Vikrant was coming with a catapault.

F-18 Make In India with the GE Engines providing another common reason to work with Tejas Mk1A and/or Mk2.

for the Navy, perhaps this could happen.
Over Strengthen the current two squadrons to 26 aircraft combat capable each. i.e adding another flight and allocate them to the two ski-ramp carriers.

Raise the third Naval Air Combat Squadron INAS 305 - the Jaguars with F-18s from the Make in India programme.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 20 Apr 2018 06:45

Another thing that goes for F18 is the growler version. Not sure how much will that require integration with Indian systems, but that fact that such thing exists may be something that even IAF would be keen on

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Apr 2018 06:47

Khalsa-Ji....

1) Has the design for the third carrier been completed? The Vishaal is nowhere on the horizon. Last year, the MoD scoffed at the Navy's plan to make her nuclear powered due to the high cost involved. The Navy then grudgingly accepted that she will be powered with gas turbines. In the absence of the Vishaal, the IAF will NOT be convinced to go in for the F-18. If the F-18 is acquired by the IAF, it will be on her own merits. It is sink or swim for the F-18 vis-a-viv the IAF, but Boeing has done an amazing job by tying up with Mahindra and HAL for the venture. On that merit alone - Boeing could win - as it is a well thought out business strategy considering RaGa's accusation of Reliance & Dassault and depriving HAL of jobs.

2) The keel of the Vikrant was laid in February 2009. She was launched in August 2013. Sea trials are set to commence in 2019. Commissioning is sometime between 2020 - 2023. And this is for a 40,000 ton, ski-jump equipped, aircraft carrier. The Vishaal is expected to be a 65,000 ton, CATOBAR aircraft carrier. If it will take Cochin Shipyard 12 - 13 years (optimum estimate) for the Vikrant, how long do you think it will take Cochin Shipyard to deliver the Vishaal? If the keel is laid *NOW* she will be ready for carrier ops only in the early 2030s, using the Vikrant timeline. However these are entirely two different vessels, design-wise and the Vishaal will be no easy feat for the Indian Naval Design Bureau or for Cochin Shipyard to build. I am not sure of the present status of JWGACTC ---> https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/content/i ... visits-goa

3) The Navy will never be able to fully optimize the F-18's capabilities from the Vikramaditya and the Vikrant, as they are ski-jumped equipped carriers. Her payload capability will be less versus from a CATOBAR vessel. However, if they are land based...that is a different story. But then again, that defeats the whole point of the Rs 95,000 crore (US $14.5 billion) purchase of 57 naval fighters. So then the question arises...will the IAF twiddle its thumbs till the design of the Vishaal is frozen and the keel is laid? When is that expected to be? In five years? Will the IAF wait till then? They hate the concept of aircraft carriers. It is hara-kiri to the air force.

4) The air force is the one asking for new combat aircraft, because of a squadron shortage. The Navy does not have that issue, but rather a "quality" issue i.e. the MiG-29K was never designed for carrier ops and her serviceability has been dismal. But unlike the air force - whose primary role is to control the skies - versus the Navy whose role is supremacy on the sea. Now one can get into theories of how carrier ops achieve supremacy on the sea and beyond, but to a MoD Babu - who calls the shots - that has no bearing. Who needs fighters badly? The Air Force. Not the Navy.

5) In a battle for acquiring air assets, the air force will win because of the ground realities that exist right now in the air force and the navy - squadron shortage in the IAF vs a "white mythical unicorn" called the Vishaal. MoD Babus cannot see beyond their nose. The F-18 will still come, but it will be for the Navy. That is the price to pay for EMALS. And the F-18 is a beautiful bomb truck. She does her job with aplomb in the US Navy and will continue to do so for the next couple of decades. But like I said earlier, if the F-18 arrives for the Air Force it will be on her own merits and will have no bearing on the Navy's decision.

6) But there is also the issue of cost. And yes, the F-18 is on the cheaper end of the scale when compared to the Gripen E, Eurofighter Typhoon and Rafale. Only the MiG-35 and possibly the F-16 Block 70 could be cheaper. There is also the issue of technology transfer (which is a bullshit term) and the costs India is willing to pay for the ToT and how much the OEM is willing to give. Then there is the issue of hourly operating cost, which the Gripen E wins hands down. Then there is the issue of quick turn around time, again the Gripen E has a distinct advantage. Operating from motorways and short runways? Again, Gripen E. These are the issues the IAF will look at. Then there are a myriad of other costs (weapons, spares, tools, base infrastructure, etc) that have to be factored in as well. The IAF wrote the technical aspect of the RFI, but the MoD Babus will get a sticker shock when they open the bids for the above. It is not just about 110 birds. I still believe nothing close to 110 birds will arrive.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Apr 2018 06:47

ArjunPandit wrote:Another thing that goes for F18 is the growler version. Not sure how much will that require integration with Indian systems, but that fact that such thing exists may be something that even IAF would be keen on

Growler is done. No longer made and is not on offer.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 20 Apr 2018 07:51

Rakesh wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:Another thing that goes for F18 is the growler version. Not sure how much will that require integration with Indian systems, but that fact that such thing exists may be something that even IAF would be keen on
Growler is done. No longer made and is not on offer.

Are you sure it is no longer made?
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/08/super-h ... boost.html

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Apr 2018 10:45

By the time bids are in and opened, ER kept ready,some of these birds may no longer be in production and will we be yet again looking for a " white tail" acquisition as we did after decades of evaluation of the Hawk ?

There is a 3-authored centre page debate in today's Deccan Chronicle reg. our military mess.Extra funds;one worthy wants even less to kickstart the services into adopting a meaningful roadmap.

The news report that a super committee headed by the NSA which would include all service chiefs, head of the Integ.Command etc., etc., will advise the DM and MOD on all matters military "defence diplomacy" and the like is v.interesting in an obvious attempt to coordinate security, intel and foreign affairs for a more coherent Indian approach to the issues , which at times appers to be a piecemeal affair..This is the first time that any NSA is going to have such overwhelming powers, a virtual de-facto super def/for. min.However, observers are wondering if anything worthwhile is poss. before the 2019 elections.

arun · Post by **arun** » 20 Apr 2018 18:38

Thanks to all those who responded on my tubelightly question regards the non candidature of the F15. Cheers.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Apr 2018 02:37

ArjunPandit wrote:
Rakesh wrote: Growler is done. No longer made and is not on offer.
Are you sure it is no longer made?
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/08/super-h ... boost.html

Let me get back to you on this, as there is more to the story of the Growler. Right now FGFA cancellation is more important and its relationship to this fighter purchase of 110 birds.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 21 Apr 2018 03:18

I dont think FGFA is cancelled, in the realms of MoD nothing is cancelled (just like ekta kapoor tv serials no one dies for sure) , it is put in a file that may be brought back later as per convenience and whims and fancies. If it has been decided that FGFA stands cancelled. Then it's a big shift.
That said, I am wondering how are turkey/italy affording 100-150 F35s. Italy..

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Apr 2018 03:28

X-Post from the PAK-FA Thread....

Chinmay wrote:The FGFA is dead

First off....I fully expect that above link to go into subscription mode, but you can access the entire article from the Broadsword blog fairly soon (if it is already not up).

Added L8r: And the article is already up on the Broadsword Blog ---> http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2018/04/t ... anced.html

Two excerpts that I would like to highlight from the above article...

The IAF has been split down the middle on the FGFA. Broadly, flying branch officers of the “French school”– whose careers have centred on the Mirage and Jaguar fighters — have tended to oppose the FGFA. Meanwhile, officers from the “Russian school”, their careers grounded in the MiG and Sukhoi fleet, have supported the FGFA.

I expect the former group to triumph. I believe there is a transitional shift going on in the Indian Armed Forces - but primarily in the Air Force and the Navy. The C-130, C-17, P-8I, AH-64, CH-47, Rafale (and other Western platforms) are changing the old way of doing things. The old way is dealing primarily with reliability issues of Russian hardware - the entire MiG-2x series and the Su-30MKI story is well known to all. One can argue that the transitional shift could have occurred with the M2K and the Jaguar as well. But the transitional shift lies in *HOW* India is acquiring these platforms. Now we have PBL-type agreements, with India insisting that the fleet has a guaranteed availability at any point in time. That is new to India, but the opposite experience is something India is well versed with.

We can only talk about the Rafale for NOW, because that is the only Western platform that is confirmed to be arriving. All others (F-16, F-18, Eurofighter Typhoon, additional Rafales, Gripen E and MiG-35) are up in the air, figuratively speaking. This "possible" cancellation of the FGFA will have a direct correlation to how the IAF will see itself in the future. We can now make an educated guess, as to how the IAF views the Tejas and the AMCA. I will explain a bit more in detail, after I quote Karan's post...because he has made an interesting point. See below this quote.

These challenges were expected to imbue Indian engineers with genuine design skills, of a far higher magnitude than the lessons learnt from licensed manufacture.

I rest my case

As said by many on BRF, license manufacture of any bird will give India zero value. What India has done (and is doing and will be doing) with the Tejas, far outweighs license manufacturing any aircraft - Russian or Western.

Karan M wrote:Rakesh exactly. The lure of ready imports is a mindset which has yet to leave many in the old gen brass. These guys will gladly talk of how Gripen is an example of cooperation, how India made a mistake going it alone and then also turn and state how Tejas engine is imported and hence it is not indigenous. This cognitive dissonance is a big reason for not supporting indigenous programs and buying half ready imports which take a decade to mature, by which time, the PLAAF will come up with J-30 and the IAF will then make a stern presentation to some Parliamentary Committee, stating the only way is some stealth- MRCA v3.0.

Do you remember Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa's statement on the J-20? He states that they can detect the J-20 from several kilometers away. The IAF realizes that creating a true 5th generation stealth aircraft is not just slapping on some sharp angles on a plane. There is much more to that. If the Russians are finding PAK-FA challenging, the Chinese are surely having a terrible go at it with the J-20. That will not be the status quo forever, but the IAF thinks there is a bit of cushion (time) available to India. One can argue, how soft that cushion really is. But that is semantics, for now.

On to your interesting point. Saar, I think they may have already made that presentation. What Dhanoa Sir said about the J-20, is something that the IAF has already likely mentioned in a closed-door-session Parliamentary Committee meeting. It is for this same reason, the IAF is not biting on the F-35 either. Dhanoa Sir said that as well, a few weeks back, about not being interested in the F-35. What the IAF wants now is fighters ---> 4++ generation fighters of the Rafale variety. The IAF believes they can achieve a strong deterrent vis-a-viv the PLAAF with the Rafale and something else i.e. Gripen E or even the F-18 Super Hornet.

What the IAF will do with Rafale and Gripen E or F-18 Super Hornet, is see what can be plug-and-played into Tejas Mk2 and then into AMCA. With the possible cancellation of the FGFA, the developmental path for AMCA is no longer PAK-FA ----> FGFA ----> AMCA. It is now Rafale and Gripen E or F-18 Super Hornet ----> Tejas Mk2 ----> AMCA. A Thales AESA radar (the Rafale F3R features an AESA radar from Thales) on a Tejas Mk1A will lead to further development of Uttam AESA for Tejas Mk2. Then possibly Uttam AESA ver2.0 for AMCA. A Kaveri88 turbofan (the Rafale flies with the M88 turbofan) for Tejas Mk2 will lead to further development of a Kaveri200 turbofan for AMCA.

Rather than taking the riskier approach - of partnering with the Russians on FGFA - I think the IAF believes acquiring a 4++ generation platform and further developing the components (not the platform), has a greater chance of success. All that remains now is which OEM will actually be given the red rose by the IAF. Will it be Dassault? Saab? Boeing? Who wants to play nice?

Cancelling the FGFA also gives the GOI financial room to acquire 110 fighters. Until this news piece broke, I was wondering from where they were going to get the funds for 110 fighters. Now there is a lot more financial wiggle room available. A very good and positive development - cancelling the FGFA that is.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 21 Apr 2018 04:52

Dear Admiral.
@Rakesh
Interesting points raised. I shall endeavour to continue the conversation.
I see this morning that the FGFA is dead.
More forks and more considerations going around.

Talk soon.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 21 Apr 2018 04:56

PAKFA is still several years away in refinement. This frees up 4 billion which would have been required now and maybe there would have been some fruit later. At the rate of 105 million this frees up money to acquire 36 more rafales. That adds immediate firepower to IAF (Ok when they are delivered) but they are on schedule then.

This move allows sukhoi to participate and showcase PAKFA in the MRCA-3 tender as well. That way IAF can evaluate them properly and see if it meets their requirement. This forces other folks to throw in 5th gen offerings as well. Piddle sticks like Gripen will probably have a tougher time if there are other 5th gen offerings in play.

I hope we are working with RR or Safran to get a expanded kaveri/m88 or erj2XX behind closed doors. 75-80KN dry and 120-130KN wet will make a huge difference to what the AMCA platform can be. That is a big piece of IAF puzzle, getting higher MTBF engines, will make a huge difference to operational intensity and ability to fight multiple conflicts.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 Apr 2018 10:19

The few billion saved from pakfa, if the pakfa has been cancelled that is, will be taken up for IAFs other priority purchase, the s400.

The service seems to think that a combo of layered and mixed ADS comprised of s400, lrsam, Akash and spider along with high end 4.5 gen fighters is good enough for near future until AMCA comes along.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Apr 2018 10:22

How modern are the latest engines on the f16 ? Could they be used for pakfa if m88kaveri or f414 not enough?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 Apr 2018 10:23

Doesn't the uae f 16 use the same engines as the f22?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Apr 2018 17:03

The F-16 came in two engine variants ---> the General Electric F110-GE-100/-129/-132 turbofan and the Pratt & Whitney F100/200/220/220E/229 turbofan.

The UAEAF F-16 Block 60 is powered by the F110-132 turbofan, a derivative of the initial GE F110 turbofan.

The F-22 is powered by Pratt & Whitney's F119-PW-100 turbofan. No relation to the GE engine whatsoever.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 22 Apr 2018 07:22

continuing the F-18 dhaga.

The FGFA ice/ dead (whatever) news point add an interesting twist if true.
Can the Navy afford F-35s along with VikA, Vikrant and Vishal (EMALS powered)

because the now next news for everyone to discuss will be, how does F-35 / AMCA fit in ?
Does F-35 kill the AMCA or bring it to life ?

Frankly, I see no reason whatsoever to go with F-35 for carrier. We will kill the bank.

I see valid reason on why IAF will not be convinced for F-18 from the IN or for the IN etc unless F-18 is a capable fit.
I actually see the Rafael purchase as having satisfied of filled the IAF requirements which are most likely to rule out the F-18.

We actually do need a good Medium Sized Bomb truck. The Australians wanted something they could use to bring tonnage across distance and they find it a good fit. I am sure, it will work fine for us too.

I am only dismayed at a rapidly diminishing window of opportunity for the Tejas but it is what it is.
The Hornet brings a strategic piece of equipment (EMALS) to our shores and I am all for it.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Apr 2018 06:24

Only a RFI has been issued and the hungry sharks are already making predictions

Gripen in pole position after re-issuance of IAF fighter RFI
http://www.janes.com/article/79454/dsa- ... ighter-rfi

Key Points

-The Saab JAS 39 Gripen E seems to be leading the IAF's latest fighter contest
-The requirement stipulating use of GaN-based TRMs in the aircraft's AESA radar seems to be a major discerning factor

Despite the decision in February to broaden the Indian Air Force’s (IAF’s) latest fighter competition to allow twin- as well as single-engined aircraft to bid, the Saab JAS 39 Gripen E is still likely to remain the favoured choice, according to industry sources familiar with the contest’s request for information (RFI) who spoke to Jane’s at Malaysia’s Defence Services Asia (DSA) exposition this month.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Apr 2018 06:27

IAF hits the runway again for a new fighter
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/op ... 649614.ece

By AK Sachdev, a retired IAF officer.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD), under pressure to formally push out a Request for Information (RFI) before the DefExpo 2018 kicked off, released a rather long-winded document just five days before the expo started. The RFI had much the same effect as a wild mating call; an ensemble of hopeful suitors set off apposite and loud responses. As is the wont of mating rituals, the noises were made for the intended partner as also for other contending suitors! An RFI issued in 2004 was a single-page notification referring to 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) which ended in a sordid anti-climax in 2015. In October 2017, Indian embassies in Washington, Moscow and Stockholm were asked to write to fighter OEMs in these countries to confirm whether they would partner an Indian company in building a medium, single-engine fighter with significant transfer of technology to the Indian entity.

No RFI was issued and the short letter betrayed a slapdash approach with even the number mentioned being a vague 100 to 200. In contrast, the current RFI is 72 pages long and covers substantial ground not just about the aircraft performance and parameters but about life cycle costs, transfer of technology, offsets, etc. However, its daunting tone has not discouraged prospective bidders. The fact that the RFI has widened the scope of the aircraft from a single-engine to include a twin-engine has changed the texture of the competition. The two single-engine contenders (Lockheed Martin F-16 Block 70 and Saab Gripen E) are expected to be joined in the contest by some twin-engine players. The prominent one, of course, is Dassault Rafale; 36 are on order and Dassault can be expected to underscore the advantages of scaling up from 36 to a larger number (savings in terms of training costs, spares inventories, maintenance facilities, etc).

Boeing has been very vocal even before the RFI was issued about the F/A-18 E/F. The E and F denote single-seat and twin-seat versions respectively; both the versions are known as Super Hornet and thus there are two Super Hornets in the fray. The fact that the Indian Navy is also scouting for 57 carrier borne multi role combat aircraft has Boeing making encouraging noises about the aircraft being best for India (with scale of purchase by the two services being an obvious advantage). The Typhoon, manufactured by a consortium of Airbus, BAE Systems and Leonardo called Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH is the European gladiator in the ring while the Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG company will field the MiG-35. Of these, the Rafale and the Typhoon have already crossed blades in the 2004 selection process and had both cleared the MMRCA flight trials. Arguably, life cycle costs will be the prominent factor in the selection process once the operational flight tests narrow down the field to a short list. However, the contending OEMs (and their parent nations) have also realised the perceived political value of ‘Make In India’ in an election year and so have been phrasing their pitches accordingly. While Boeing has announced that it would team up with Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and Mahindra Group to set up F/A-18 E/F assembly lines in India, Lockheed Martin has entered into an agreement with Tata Sons to offer shifting of its F-16 production line to India. Saab also has a tie-up with Adani Group to manufacture Gripen E fighter jets in India.

Needless to say, these arrangements are predicated on firm orders for the IAF and the Indian Navy. Wishful thinkers would see this as a ripe situation for deriving the maximum technology transfer by playing one contender against the others. However, there is a problem. HAL, which already has infrastructure and experience for aircraft assembly, has so far not proved to be a worthy recipient of technology, while private players will take some time to establish the infrastructure (but eventually contribute hugely to India’s stature as an aerospace power). The final choice of aircraft will decide whether the technology transfer will flow. For now, there are murmurs among analysts about the high costs (on account of twin- engine aircraft being included in the RFI’s ambit) and the complex and demanding stipulations in the RFI on transfer of technology. The government has also made some noises about its intent to bring this RFI (unlike the previous one) to a logical conclusion through a final procurement/production deal but, given the previous MMRCA selection experience, the cynical view appears dominant currently.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Apr 2018 11:27

Cancel this fool's RFI and focus on the Tejas in all its variants. So that by 2030 all have been produced. And the production of AMCA can begin seamlessly.

habal · Post by **habal** » 24 Apr 2018 11:52

no commission or party fund welfare is possible in domestic fighter approval.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Apr 2018 12:42

The B.S. report puts the pros and cons on the issue well.However, what the IAF and YOU need to well understand is yhat post 2020, most air forces worldwide would've graduated to operating some type of stealth bird , dumping their older legacy 4th-gen aircraft.In our concern, the Chinese are relentless in fielding their stealth aircraft and whatever snide remarks our chief may make abiut ghem, they're coming and far superior to their current crop of types barring the Flankers ( SU-35)s.Pak too will definitely acquire the same.

Our desi AMCA is at best a wet dream.We still haven't completed production drawings for 2-seat LCA trainers! Which if we're lucky will arrive post 2030.By then 5th- gen would be making way for 6th-gen! The Vardhaman committee is spot on.IAF rivalry between M2K and Ru birds is ancient.Mirage pilots were shocked when in closed exercises the 29 bested the M2K every time (.AM Masand).How relevant a 4th- gen Rafale which costs the same or even more than an SU-57 would be in the future is questionable.What superior RCS does it also bring to the table? Had we bought F-18s for example or MIG-35s, the far lower cost of both as cost-effective bomb trucks in decent number makes more sense.

The IAF can decide whether it wants to remain a 4th-gen air farce or a 5th-gen air force.The recent massive air exercises had the MKIs at a superb 90% availability factor.
The SU-57 from the same stable comes with new equipment almost everywhere from engines to radars / sensors ,avionics and weaponry. There is little point in placing the same amt. of money for a 4th- gen bird when you can get a far superior 5th-gen type.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Apr 2018 12:47

PS: The IN's req. for the 57+ aircraft is way into the future.At the rate of carrier construction,now well into the second deecade of a 45K t CV, the IN's 65K t CV will most likely at our current rate of construction (ancalet one remind you that "ALL" DPSU yards are behind time with almost every major warship being built with huge cost over-runs too) emerge somewhere around 2035! By then China would've acquired and completed all its 5-6 carriers,including the larger 70K t+ ones. So the IAF's choice for the MRCA bird is not contingent upon any IN liking as any of these types would be truly antiques two decades from now.

If the Gripne comes in cheapaer than the others,barring the MIG-35,it is likely to win given that there are still Q marks about LCA production rates and development of the MK-2.Liek Bush and Trump,the GOI/MOD/IAF can declare the LCA "Mission accomplished",after a paltry 100+ are built,add more Gripens as desired and "proceed upon the next-generation far superior med. stealth fighter the AMCA"!

That to me seems to be the writing between the lines.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Apr 2018 20:44

Boeing's Make in India pitch for selling 110 jets to Indian Air Force
http://wap.business-standard.com/articl ... 313_1.html

A strong ‘Make in India’ theme will be behind US aircraft maker Boeing’s pitch for the Indian Air Force’s order for 110 fighter jets. The order, worth around Rs 800 billion, seeks commitment from vendors to supply sensitive technologies as well to carry out a bulk of manufacturing in India.

For the current order, Boeing has tied up with Mahindra Defence System and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited for producing F/A-18 Super Hornets. “The RFI (request for information) is much contemporary this time. It broadens the scope and competition. It focuses on the IAF’s real war-fighting capabilities. Our joint venture is an optimum mix of capability, cost and industrialisation,” Pratyush Kumar, president, Boeing India, said in an interview.

Kumar said the US government’s willingness to liberalise rules on transfer of technology (ToT) gave them a leg-up against competitors. “I don’t think ToT is an issue. It is not us but the US government is saying that rules will be more forward-looking. The US now recognises India as its ‘major defence partner’ and they are much more forward-leaning and sharing technology with India,” he said.

Recently, Kenneth Juster, the US ambassador to India, indicated the same. “The United States plans to offer India certain technology and platforms that we have offered to no other country in the world. We are going to be very forward-leaning in technology, the transfer of technology, and indigenous production that we can offer to India,” he had said.

Several foreign manufacturers have objected to ToT without a majority stake in a partnership. Under the current strategic partnership model, it is mandatory for an Indian firm to have at least a 51 per cent stake. Kumar said that having a public sector player as partner made their case of indigenisation stronger. “With a public-private partnership approach, I am bringing the best of public sector and private sector — the only two companies in India which have manufactured airplanes,” he said.

Boeing’s probable rivals in the process, Dassault, Saab and Lockheed, have chosen private players Reliance, Adani and the Tatas as their respective partners. “The only company which has achieved something in aircraft manufacturing is a public company. The industry I believe cannot suddenly ignore them and go for other, that’s not wise. We brought our industrial partners and spoke to almost 400 companies in the sector. We realised ignoring HAL is a bad idea,” he said. After criticism that the new defence policy did not envisage any role for defence PSUs, the government is now mulling a change to allow them to forge joint ventures with foreign partners.

In terms of capability, Boeing will be pitching the latest design of F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft, the most advanced and cheapest to operate. “We are capable of supplying aircraft to India that we are supplying to the US today. It brings advance capability that will be supplied to US defence forces in the foreseeable future. Cost-wise, it is much more affordable, having the lowest cost per flight hour than any aircraft in the US air force inventory,” he said. Recently, the US navy ordered 24 F/A-18 Super Hornets.

Kumar also stressed that an order was essential to kickstart the defence indigenisation story and encourage global giants to invest in India. “In defence, it’s a monopoly situation. You have only one buyer. So if we don’t have that buyer with any order in near foresight, it’s too much risk to invest in capacity. The best way for the government to catalyse investment is to make orders. Not simple RFI and RFPs. We need actual orders,” he said.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 25 Apr 2018 20:48

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... technology
Lockheed to Sweeten India Fighter Jet Bid With F-35 Technology

Lockheed Martin Corp. will provide latest combat jet technologies including a target tracking device aboard the F-16 aircraft that it plans to offer to India in its bid for the world’s largest order from the Indian Air Force.

The global defense giant will offer jets equipped with the advanced radar which is fitted on its fifth-generation combat jet, the F-35, as well as a helmet-mounted tracking system and a new radio data link system, Vivek Lall, vice president for strategy and business development at Lockheed Martin said Wednesday.

The bid also comes with an offer to shift its lone production line for F-16s from Fort Worth, Texas in the U.S. to India as it takes on competitors Saab AB and Boeing Co. The variant being pitched is the F-16 Block 70.

“There are a lot of technologies that come into the F-16 from F-35 and F-22, including the latest radar on these platforms,” Lall said in an interview. “It is a contemporary, state-of-the-art platform.”

Getting state-of-the-art fighters is crucial for Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the South Asian nation faces increased risks from neighboring Pakistan and China at a time when the Russian MiG jet -- India’s mainstay -- is being phased out. As part of that plan, India sought proposals from global manufacturers for 110 combat planes, a deal worth at least $15 billion.

Defense Modernization

The jet order is an attempt to modernize the South Asian nation’s defense forces, a plan which could cost as much as $250 billion over a 10-year period ending 2025. And Modi wants a significant part of it to be done locally under his ‘Make in India’ campaign, which aims to promote domestic manufacturing.

Lockheed Martin sees a huge export potential to provide over 200 F-16s to the global market if India chooses the aircraft, Lall said. The winner of the combat jet tender will be required to establish a production line within three years.

”We already see a global rise in the demand for F-16 from the 25 air forces around the world that already fly them. This export potential for the F-16s could be met through the exclusive production line we propose to put up in India,” Lall said.

Lockheed Martin has received the request for information from India for the F-16s to meet its air force requirement, he said

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Apr 2018 20:52

The fighter for India’s future: Going back to the beginning...
https://www.deccanchronicle.com/opinion ... nning.html

By Mohan Guruswamy

Clearly we need two production lines of single engine light fighters, one of who must almost certainly be the Tejas.

The Indian Air Force has just released an RFI (request for information) for 110 fighters not very much after the Narendra Modi government scrapped the MMRCA deal for 126 fighters to buy 18 ready for combat Rafale fighters and 108 to be built in India. The French Rafale was chosen as the fighter for the future after an almost decade-long process of contemplation, examination, evaluation and a competition that came to be called the “shoot-out”. We still haven’t got to know why it really was scrapped? The IAF was hoping for a minimum of four squadrons of Rafale fighters, but the Narendra Modi government has kept the initial order down to 36 fighters in a flyaway condition for 7.8 billion euros or $9.13 billion (@1 euro=$1.17).

Commenting on this, the officer who headed the intensive selection process that led to the choice of the Rafale, Air Marshal (retd.) M. Matheswaran observed that “the original MMRCA tender was cleared for $10.5 billion for 126 aircraft,” suggesting that delay in deciding is also a factor that is costing the country dear. The Rafale is a twin engine, canard delta wing, multi-role fighter designed and built by Dassault Avions to replace a multitude of specialised platforms such as the Jaguar, Mirage F-1, Mirage 2000 and Super Etendard. To that extent it is truly a multi-role aircraft, but is still very different from what it was initially intended to originally replace — the Mirage 2000.

The single engine Mirage 2000 was designed as a competitor to the USA’s F-16 and made an impressive debut at the Farnborough air show in 1978. In 1985, in response to Pakistan’s acquisition of F-16 fighters, the Rajiv Gandhi government decided to induct 150 Mirage 2000 fighters into the IAF. The first 49 aircraft were to be imported from France and the rest manufactured by HAL. But the second part of the program was not implemented despite HAL having invested in an assembly line for Mirage 2000’s. What happened is still a matter of speculation. But there is another scandal implicit in how a bid by the IAF to buy more single engine Mirage 2000 fighters became a bid for the heavy MMRCA. But the MoD turned this IAF request down opining that the Mirage 2000-5 variant being offered by Dassault was a different aircraft because it was not the Mirage 2000.

The dash 5 suffix was enough for the mandarins to decide it was a different aircraft and hence a fresh bid should be called for. This is how the requirement for a light fighter became a competition between twin-engine fighters. Now we are back at square one. The IAF still wants light fighters to replace its large but obsolete fleet of single engine light fighters like the MiG 21, 23 and 27 series. The arguments over the pros and cons of single and twin-engine fighters are old. One perennial argument is that two engines make the aircraft less vulnerable, give it more range and weapons load.

Fighter pilots who know say that single engine fighters being smaller are better optimised aerodynamically improving their survivability in a dogfight. They argue, “having one engine means that mass is distributed closer to the central axis which reduces roll inertia and improves roll onset rate”. Their smaller size also means that they are more difficult to acquire by hostile radar or visually. These experts also argue that single engine fighters tend to have superior fuel fractions, which is the weight of the fuel divided by the gross takeoff weight of the aircraft. A lower fuel fraction means a comparable or longer range. Besides all modern fighters, light or heavy, are now equipped with aerial refueling.

The generally believed superior survivability of a twin-engine fighter is also questioned. Most modern twin-engine fighters have their engines next to each other and the loss of one in combat or due to fire often means the other also doesn’t make it. These experts also cite numbers to bolster their claim. Their data shows that the USAF loses more twin jet F-15s to engine fires than the single engine F-16. Also the F-18 Hornet’s crash rate is 3.6 per 100,000 hours, while the Gripen’s is 2.46. Others challenge the survivability argument citing Gulf War data analysis showing the F-16 had a loss rate of 0.22 per 1,000 sorties while the F-15s had a loss rate of 0.91 and F-18’s a loss rate of 0.66.

The proponents of twin-engine fighters usually weigh in with the IAF’s experience with the MiG-21. The MiG-21 was designed in 1954 and has some basic design flaws such a cockpit visibility and high landing speed (360 kmph). Almost half the MiG-21 crashes were due to pilot error due to inadequate training facilities such as AJT’s and simulators. To compound problems the quality of manufacture and spares by HAL has been very suspect. In any case, the MiG-21 series are well past their use till age. The IAF literally flies them held together with wire and soap. That’s why they should be retired to parks and playgrounds as soon as possible.

Finally there is the cost factor. According to open sources a JAS 39 Gripen can cost anywhere between $30-60 million each depending on configuration. By contrast a Rafale starts at $80 million. According to the website http://www.airforce.com, the Gripen can outcompete the Eurofighter on costs and in a number of key areas such as better range, higher speed, less weight and lower operating costs. A former Air Chief estimates a price difference of anywhere between 250-350 crores each between a 4 gen single and twin-engine fighters.

The IAF has been shouting itself hoarse over the rapidly depleting fleet. The MoD’s insistence on a complete new process, like the almost decade long MMRCA process, is seen as another ploy by the bureaucrats to delay the process. It makes even less sense when the IAF and MoD have the information needed to make an enlightened and perhaps even honest decision. But the question still remains; why not restrict this bid to single engine fighters, particularly since the total costs will be much less? Besides the only two single engine fighters to choose from now are the Saab JAS 39 Gripen and the Lockheed F-16C Block 72 Viper have already been evaluated in the course of the MMRCA shoot out. Both manufacturers have expressed their willingness to break ground in India and build factories to aggregate the aircraft here.

The promise of the Tejas LCA has so far remained a promise. Even if the Tejas Mark II is finally cleared for serial production, HAL cannot produce them in the numbers and time frame the IAF requires. Clearly we need two production lines of single engine light fighters, one of who must almost certainly be the Tejas. In the years to come, as India’s economy grows and as regional geo-politics will inevitably change, India will have to consider a bigger air force and hence cost will become a more important factor. Unlike the Marut HF24, the Tejas should become the building block for a truly indigenous fighter aircraft design and production capacity. That’s why, apart from the huge economic benefits, “Make in India” becomes so important. Without it we are just like another Saudi Arabia splurging on military hardware.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Apr 2018 22:32

Dassault Aviation Executive Committee gathers in New Delhi to reaffirm full commitment to the "Make in India" policy
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/ ... olicy.html

(Saint Cloud, France, April 23, 2018) - After a four days visit of a major industrial mission of more than 60 French companies part of the GIFAS, the French aerospace industries association, in Delhi, Bangalore, Mumbai and Hyderabad to strengthen French Indian aerospace cooperation, Eric Trappier, Chairman of the GIFAS and Chairman and CEO of Dassault Aviation has held Dassault Aviation Executive committee in New Delhi in order to highlight the key importance of India in the Company's vision and his dedication the success of the "Make in India" implementation. This top level meeting, organized for the first time outside of the company's headquarters in Saint Cloud, France, comes as a conclusion of several visits from each director and teams to main industrial partners all around India, Delhi, Bangalore, Pune and in Nagpur, to reinforce the existing links and to finalize the roadmap for the establishment of concrete methods and processes to ensure the efficiency and competitiveness of Dassault Aviation setting up in India.

In addition to the creation of the joint venture Dassault Reliance Aerospace Limited in April 2015 and the laying of the foundation stone of its manufacturing facility in Mihan Nagpur end of October 2017, the gathering of the Committee illustrates the company's commitment to pave the way towards building up an Indian aero-defence manufacturing eco-system, matching the highest standards in this field and positioning India as an international supplier reference in the global aerospace market. It comes after numerous industrial seminars held both in France and India to promote Business to Business interactions and to highlight existing and future synergies between the French and Indian entrepreneurs. "Dassault Aviation Executive Committee rallies around the huge challenge to highly contribute to the Make in India and Skill India policies that will lead to India's self-sufficiency in the aerospace domain. Each of them, in its own field of expertise, takes the engagement to set up all the necessary measures to meet the requirement of such an ambitious vision. Dassault Aviation is dedicated to make a success of its establishment in India and to be part of the future the biggest Republic of the world." said Eric Trappier at the end of his journey.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 26 Apr 2018 14:08

Lokmart is offering f 16 with f35 tech to India. As reported by times of India.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 26 Apr 2018 14:14

Here's the link

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 922346.cms

“There are a lot of technologies that come into the F-16 from F-35 and F-22, including the latest radar on these platforms,” Lall said in an interview. “It is a contemporary, state-of-the-art platform.”