MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

[Vips]

Also for each hour in the air how many hours will it require to be grounded for maintenance.

[Cain Marko]

Also for each hour in the air how many hours will it require to be grounded for maintenance.

No worse than sanctioned maal from Western countries I guess

[Kartik]

No there should be no "race" at all. We already had one a decade ago with almost all the same contenders as now and the Rafale won. We already bought 36 of them. So if we can't afford 114 more, then buy whatever we can afford and tell the AF to make do with them.

Mig 35?

How long should the IAF then wait for a mature solution to emerge from what the MiG-35 is today? Clearly the RuAF has no real intention of using it in any meaningful numbers, nor is there any development roadmap ahead when there is no paying customer.

The MiG-35's strong point is it's superb aerodynamics. In all other areas it lags behind the other contenders, especially the radar and EW warfare aspects. Even to date, no operational AESA radar on it. Or on the Su-35.

If the MiG-35 is selected, it can only be on price. And we'll have to pay for development costs, because rest assured, a half baked untested and un-debugged aircraft will end up in IAF service then. Which we'll have to spend several years or maybe even a decade maturing and fixing.

[Kartik]

On costs alone hhe MIG-35 would romp home. It's less than $50M,we could even get it for around $40M if we press hard. It comes with all the bells and whistles like AESA,etc

I may have asked you this before, but could you provide some details on how many AESA equipped MiG-35's are currently in service.

None exist in service and no one arguing for the MiG-35 will dispute that. They are still just about putting an AESA equipped MiG-35 on airshow static display. Very raw, very immature. They didn't even reveal some basic details of the AESA, not even it's name and basic specs.



MAKS 2019- refined MiG-35 gets new missiles and avionics

Russia still hopes to win an Indian order for the MiG-35 multirole fighter, RAC MiG general director Ilya Tarasenko told journalists at MAKS 2019. The airshow that closed on September 1 saw Indian test pilots Group Captain BS Reddy and Wing Commander FL Roy taking seats in a MiG-35D two-seater for type familiarization flights.

India’s national delegation was led by Director General of Air Operations Air Marshal Amit Dev, who visited Russia to learn more about yet another export version of the MiG-35 that was unveiled at the show. Russia is expected to offer it in the ongoing competition for 110 medium fighters for the Indian air force.

According to Tarasenko, the new version features further-refined geometry of the airframe, uprated Klimov RD-33MK engines with thrust at full afterburner of nine tonnes, an advanced electro-optical reconnaissance system, and an active-array (AESA) radar capable of tracking up to 30 targets simultaneously. Additionally, RAC MiG’s press release also mentions “renewed mission equipment” and “other improvements made to meet the requirements of potential foreign customers."

It is also worth mentioning that a flyable example of the aircraft that was demonstrated to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey on the show’s opening day had new air-launched munitions on its weapons stations, including the Grom-E2 glide bomb and the 600-kg (1,232-pound) Vympel R-37, also known as RVV-BD, the Russian acronym for “air-to-air missile, long-range.” Although the possibility of the MiG-35 being outfitted with the 300-km (162-nm) R-37 was first mentioned a couple of years ago, MAKS 2019 was the first time that the aircraft had been displayed with this weapon.

The MiG-35 full-scale mockup at MAKS 2019 featured a new head-up display with extra-wide field of view, part of a new mission equipment suite from Ramenskoye PKB. The latter is described as “a generation ahead” of that in use on the MiG-29K/KUB deck fighter and its land-based MiG-29M/M2 derivative in service with the Indian Navy and Egyptian air force, respectively. The mockup also exhibited taller, more upright vertical tails that had hitherto only been seen on a small model.

Speaking to journalists on the eve of the show, Tarasenko acknowledged “issues” with the low operational availability of the Indian Navy’s MiGs, but insisted that the aircraft “fully meets the original specification” demanded by the customer at the program launch 15 years ago. The aforementioned issues arose during operational service after the guaranteed lifetime had expired, he noted.

Tarasenko further said that Russian industry has been working closely with India to resolve the issues and introduce changes to the MiG-29K/KUB fleet, amounting to 45 units, so it meets “a recent version of the customer requirements for deck aircraft intended for operation from the Indian navy carriers." RAC MiG hopes to win a new Indian Navy order if the earlier announced tender for 57 deck fighters proceeds. They would equip the navy’s new carrier, Vishal, construction of which is yet to start.

They still can't get the MiG-29K to work right and they're still "working closely" to meet a "recent version of the customer requirements" for deck operations. This after over 10 years since the MiG-29K flew in IN colors.

The MiG-35 may not have the same type of structural issues thanks to the fact that it won't operate off an aircraft carrier, but it's level of immaturity is the highest. The MAKS 2019 unveiling was of a variant never even seen before, with avionics never displayed before. With company funds being limited, and the RuAF not showing anything more than token interest in the type, it will take several years before all the new avionics and electronics are fully tested out.

[Kartik]

Back during MRCA 1.0, the MiG-35 (the version offered then) was rejected due to issues with the radar and engines.

Engines and radar to blame for MiG-35 failure in MMRCA contest

Engines and radar to blame for MiG-35 failure in MMRCA contest

By Vladimir Karnozov4 August 2011

Radar and engine performance shortcomings were to blame for the MiG-35 failing to make the shortlist in India's medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) contest.

The revelations are contained in feedback from India to Russia's arms export agency, Rosoboronexport.

The MiG-35's radar, the Zhuk-MAE active electronically scanned array (AESA), from Russia's Phazotron, failed to achieve the required acquisition and tracking ranges. And its Klimov RD-33MK engines also fell short of the Indian performance criteria.

Speaking to the media on 3 August, Vladimir Barkovsky, chief of MiG's engineering centre, said: "The Klimov and Chernyshev [engine companies] briefed [India] at length about their capabilities and intentions to improve their offering, but unfortunately their arguments were not taken into account."

Despite this, the same RD-33MK met Indian navy requirements and powers the newly-built MiG-29K/KUB fighters being delivered to the service.

Barkovsky also defended the Zhuk-MAE AESA radar, pointing out that the prototype nature of the model fitted to the MiG-35 meant that it did not meet the tender specifications, particularly regarding range.

He said: "We told the tender committee that this particular unit is experimental, and that in future we will make a larger radar antenna [capable of being used at a longer range]."

..

This was in 2011. 8 years later, there still isn't an operational MiG-35 with an AESA radar anywhere in service.

This state of affairs has much to do with the complete lack of interest on the part of the RuAF in the type. A token order for 24 or so has been placed, which pales in comparison to the 100+ Su-30SM and Su-35 orders. The potential is there to produce a really good 4.5 gen fighter with the kind of aerodynamics some of the other contenders can't even approach, but poor funding has blighted the MiG Corp for decades now.

[Vips]

Also for each hour in the air how many hours will it require to be grounded for maintenance.

No worse than sanctioned maal from Western countries I guess

Just guess work? What about the smoking engine?? Remember a air show plane does not necessarily make a good war plane.

[brar_w]

None exist in service and no one arguing for the MiG-35 will dispute that. They are still just about putting an AESA equipped MiG-35 on airshow static display. Very raw, very immature. They didn't even reveal some basic details of the AESA, not even it's name and basic specs.

So where do we stand? Since 2011, when MiG claimed there was a mature offering in the AESA equipped MiG-35, there is yet to be any substantial MiG-35 force structure fielded anywhere on this planet. They had 9 years yet no one really took them up on the offer in any substantial way. (One can easily google up how many Super Hornet's Boeing, Typhoons the EF consortium, Rafale's Dassault,have delivered over the same time-frame).

Yet in 2020, MiG is going to come back again and claim they have a mature product with demonstrable performance, a viable product with assured or at least low-risk life-cycle support and upgrades. And then on top of this, we are so confident about it that some say that it can be bought for $50 Million..heck $40 million if the MOD negotiates like their life depended on it ...

[nachiket]

What exactly is a "Mig-35" anyway? The aircraft is a Mig-29M2 with some features from the Mig-29K (like the RD-33MK engines) and some additional avionics improvements, the most important of which was supposed to be the Zhuk-AE AESA radar which hasn't panned out.

The 35 designation is just the usual Russian tactic to make it seem like a new aircraft. LM seems to have caught on to that tactic as well with the F-21 nonsense.

[Cain Marko]

No worse than sanctioned maal from Western countries I guess

Just guess work? What about the smoking engine?? Remember a air show plane does not necessarily make a good war plane.

Yeah I know. But thankfully the IAF seem to be having a good experience with upgraded baaz and wish to provide more. Says something. Navy too.

[Cain Marko]

None exist in service and no one arguing for the MiG-35 will dispute that. They are still just about putting an AESA equipped MiG-35 on airshow static display. Very raw, very immature. They didn't even reveal some basic details of the AESA, not even it's name and basic specs.

So where do we stand? Since 2011, when MiG claimed there was a mature offering in the AESA equipped MiG-35, there is yet to be any substantial MiG-35 force structure fielded anywhere on this planet. They had 9 years yet no one really took them up on the offer in any substantial way. (One can easily google up how many Super Hornet's Boeing, Typhoons the EF consortium, Rafale's Dassault,have delivered over the same time-frame).

Yet in 2020, MiG is going to come back again and claim they have a mature product with demonstrable performance, a viable product with assured or at least low-risk life-cycle support and upgrades. And then on top of this, we are so confident about it that some say that it can be bought for $50 Million..heck $40 million if the MOD negotiates like their life depended on it ...

From what I understand the Egyptians ordered the non aesa version aka M, for about 40 million a piece. So far the price point seems good. The opportunity lies in getting the production line along with hands off conversion to whatever MKI standard India wants. For a large order like 114 birds, I wouldn't be surprised if the Russiaans offered the best deal in terms of tot and customization.

Yes it'll probly mean a different radar but I don't see why an uttam/el2052 variant won't work. Entire roster of Indian, Israeli and Russian weapons should work as with the bars and the mki or Tejas.

[Cain Marko]

Mig 35?

How long should the IAF then wait for a mature solution to emerge from what the MiG-35 is today? Clearly the RuAF has no real intention of using it in any meaningful numbers, nor is there any development roadmap ahead when there is no paying customer.

The MiG-35's strong point is it's superb aerodynamics. In all other areas it lags behind the other contenders, especially the radar and EW warfare aspects. Even to date, no operational AESA radar on it. Or on the Su-35.

If the MiG-35 is selected, it can only be on price. And we'll have to pay for development costs, because rest assured, a half baked untested and un-debugged aircraft will end up in IAF service then. Which we'll have to spend several years or maybe even a decade maturing and fixing.

Price, tot and relatively independent production. These will and should be the benefits. Converting to an uttam or israeli kit shouldn't take forever. HAL and BRD have tons of experience with this type.

Rest I agree, it is half baked compared to say a raffle or shornet. But the gripen doesn't seem much better off, and I'm not sure what's happening with the ef2k aesa either. But That's the price to pay if larger numbers are a must.

Like i said earlier, if numbers are a desperate need, I don't see how any other type is possible considering the economic doldrums currently facing India. Ideally the follow on order of 36 raffle should be pressed and more Tejas can make the numbers.

But in my post, I was purely writing in context of the mrca competition.

[deejay]

How long should the IAF then wait for a mature solution to emerge from what the MiG-35 is today? Clearly the RuAF has no real intention of using it in any meaningful numbers, nor is there any development roadmap ahead when there is no paying customer.

The MiG-35's strong point is it's superb aerodynamics. In all other areas it lags behind the other contenders, especially the radar and EW warfare aspects. Even to date, no operational AESA radar on it. Or on the Su-35.

If the MiG-35 is selected, it can only be on price. And we'll have to pay for development costs, because rest assured, a half baked untested and un-debugged aircraft will end up in IAF service then. Which we'll have to spend several years or maybe even a decade maturing and fixing.

Price, tot and relatively independent production. These will and should be the benefits. Converting to an uttam or israeli kit shouldn't take forever. HAL and BRD have tons of experience with this type.

Rest I agree, it is half baked compared to say a raffle or shornet. But the gripen doesn't seem much better off, and I'm not sure what's happening with the ef2k aesa either. But That's the price to pay if larger numbers are a must.

Like i said earlier, if numbers are a desperate need, I don't see how any other type is possible considering the economic doldrums currently facing India. Ideally the follow on order of 36 raffle should be pressed and more Tejas can make the numbers.

But in my post, I was purely writing in context of the mrca competition.

With any Russian aircraft, the primary concern is the Engine. What the Russians need to do their engines - Increase the life for TBO, decreased rate of failure, lower fuel consumption and lower maintenance. We have no issues with the thrust they develop.

Having done this much work on the engines, they need to do the same for rest of the components on the aircraft. JMT.

[brar_w]

From what I understand the Egyptians ordered the non aesa version aka M, for about 40 million a piece. So far the price point seems good.

Egyptians changed their order from the MiG-35 to the the MiG-29 M/M2. Why did they change it? Did it have something to do with aircraft produced for some other client? I'm not sure but as it turns out, it appears that even after Egypt changed its order the MiG-35 prototyped that flew still lacked the AESA radar. Why is that? This thing was claimed to be mature 9 years ago. Surely dozens of aircraft should be flying with it right now. What justifiable excuse is going to cover for that?

Based on Wikipedia, there are only 24 orders for the MiG-35, out of which 8 (some say 6) are firm based on the order placed by the Russian Air Force back in 2018. That is 7 years after the aircraft was offered as a turn key solution to the IAF's needs. Now I don't know how many of the 8 are currently operational, or have an AESA radar etc but you can dig that up if you wish (and post here).

From a systems maturity, life cycle support and development a small installed base and an anemic sales campaign is not a good sign. When push comes to shove and the economy isn't doing that good, the Russian Air Force will rightly prioritize its Flanker (all variants) fleet which is the mainstay of its capability. A couple of dozen MiG-35's ordered 8 at a time (quite possibly to keep the lights on) aren't going to be consuming those resources or be as important as the Rafale is to the French Air Force, the Typhoon is to its user community, or the SH is to the USN. Actually the F-21 is in a similar boat to the MiG-35, with one key difference - things like AESA radars, and other proposed changes will be produced in the hundreds. The radar itself has an order tally in the 500+ range.

[Manish_P]

Yeah I know. But thankfully the IAF seem to be having a good experience with upgraded baaz and wish to provide more. Says something. Navy too.

Why then all these cyclic contests by the IAF and the IN? Why no government-to-government deal like the Rafale, the C17s?

[ritesh]

Mig 35?

How long should the IAF then wait for a mature solution to emerge from what the MiG-35 is today? Clearly the RuAF has no real intention of using it in any meaningful numbers, nor is there any development roadmap ahead when there is no paying customer.

Why dont the roosi sell errr... Gift them to their new buddy, packees?

[Kartik]

So where do we stand? Since 2011, when MiG claimed there was a mature offering in the AESA equipped MiG-35, there is yet to be any substantial MiG-35 force structure fielded anywhere on this planet. They had 9 years yet no one really took them up on the offer in any substantial way. (One can easily google up how many Super Hornet's Boeing, Typhoons the EF consortium, Rafale's Dassault,have delivered over the same time-frame).

Yet in 2020, MiG is going to come back again and claim they have a mature product with demonstrable performance, a viable product with assured or at least low-risk life-cycle support and upgrades. And then on top of this, we are so confident about it that some say that it can be bought for $50 Million..heck $40 million if the MOD negotiates like their life depended on it ...

From what I understand the Egyptians ordered the non aesa version aka M, for about 40 million a piece. So far the price point seems good. The opportunity lies in getting the production line along with hands off conversion to whatever MKI standard India wants. For a large order like 114 birds, I wouldn't be surprised if the Russiaans offered the best deal in terms of tot and customization.

Yes it'll probly mean a different radar but I don't see why an uttam/el2052 variant won't work. Entire roster of Indian, Israeli and Russian weapons should work as with the bars and the mki or Tejas.

If we have to sit and fix the MRCA to make it work the way the IAF wants it to work, then what is the point of an imported jet? The whole point of the MRCA is to hopefully buy imported one last time, but something mature and reliable that will form the bulwark of the spear, while proving superior to anything the PAF can hope to buy in the next 2 decades at least.

MiG Corp still hasnt' fixed the MiG-29K's reliability issues and has an extremely immature product that has no other orders from anywhere else. And on top of that you want customization, which will take another 5-10 years like the MKI took from the time it was inducted to the time the Mk3 variant finally entered service.

If we have to splurge, get 48 Rafales and then turn the focus squarely on the MWF and if the IAF wants, the ORCA. Those are the indigenous jets where tweaking, customization, etc. makes sense. Not on an imported jet.

[Kartik]

How long should the IAF then wait for a mature solution to emerge from what the MiG-35 is today? Clearly the RuAF has no real intention of using it in any meaningful numbers, nor is there any development roadmap ahead when there is no paying customer.

The MiG-35's strong point is it's superb aerodynamics. In all other areas it lags behind the other contenders, especially the radar and EW warfare aspects. Even to date, no operational AESA radar on it. Or on the Su-35.

If the MiG-35 is selected, it can only be on price. And we'll have to pay for development costs, because rest assured, a half baked untested and un-debugged aircraft will end up in IAF service then. Which we'll have to spend several years or maybe even a decade maturing and fixing.

Price, tot and relatively independent production. These will and should be the benefits. Converting to an uttam or israeli kit shouldn't take forever. HAL and BRD have tons of experience with this type.

Rest I agree, it is half baked compared to say a raffle or shornet. But the gripen doesn't seem much better off, and I'm not sure what's happening with the ef2k aesa either. But That's the price to pay if larger numbers are a must.

Like i said earlier, if numbers are a desperate need, I don't see how any other type is possible considering the economic doldrums currently facing India. Ideally the follow on order of 36 raffle should be pressed and more Tejas can make the numbers.

But in my post, I was purely writing in context of the mrca competition.

for ToT and production by the OEM with its partner, the F-21 and Gripen E will likely be far more competent than the MiG-35. Both types are in production, have orders and their OEMs are aware that if this MRCA 2.0 actually is a serious contest, then it is one of their biggest opportunities. The MiG-35 being offered to IAF isn't anywhere close to production ready.

Coming to the comparison you made for the MiG-35 with the Gripen E -> The Gripen E actually went to an evaluation in Finland, the HX Contest. 2 of the prototypes flew there and participated in trials. One of which was a Production Standard prototype Gripen E 39-10 and the other being a two seater Gripen Demo prototype that is used as a testbed for sensors. The AESA has been integrated and tested, so has the IRST and the other avionics and the Gripen E should achieve IOC by 2021. While still in-development, it is still far more mature than the MiG-35, which isn't even close to IOC since nobody has paid for it to be introduced into service as yet. And with Meteor in service, it'll have a much longer and far more lethal stick than a MiG-35 with R-77. If Astra needs to be replacing the R-77, then we need to do the integration and testing and that costs both money and time.

Gripen E 39-10 in Finland for HX trials


Many of us have a tendency to gloss over the amount of work that needs to go into a fighter before all its new systems are fully operational and bug free. Just integrating something onto an airframe and putting it on a static display does not imply it is ready for service entry. Sadly, we've experienced that with the MiG-29K with some systems' reliability being an unresolved issue.

Our best bet from that perspective would be to get a couple of squadrons of the Rafale F3R with ISE, in the same standard as the one the IAF is now getting. Quite literally those can enter service immediately upon delivery. the IAF won't have to work on fixing any major issues and no India Specific Enhancements of any type will be required since they're already paid for and done with the 36 Rafales. If more are ordered, those can be in the F4 standard assuming it is worth the wait and cost.

[Cain Marko]

Questions are

What sub system on the 35 is buggy/untested? Other than the aesa of course. And that too we don't know where it currently stands. A non aesa variant of the bird is flying in one form or the other... From the mig29k to the mig29M in a variety of services. All other sensors and components seem to be doing just fine.

Porting a proven system like the 2052 to the 35 is at best an upgrade and shouldn't be impossibly difficult considering Hal's experience with the same. They've carried out more extensive work on the lush and the jags.

The gripen really is not the best idea in this race primarily because it will compete directly against the MWF. And comparing the development+testing of said bird with the 35 is ridiculous. For the gripen we are looking at a much newer product that began it's development about a decade ago. Otoh, the M has been flying since the 90s. Afaik, it is mainly the radar that is an issue but hardly unsurmountable.

Facts as they currently stand are:
1. the fulcrum is seriously low in price, around 40 million per unit from the latest Egypt deal. If it is bought in large quantities, price maybe still lower.

2. Tot and relatively unfeterred access is a traditional Russian strength. They set the bar here and the others will have to try to meet said standard. Even if they match, can they do it for an affordable price? Very doubtful.

3. All Western birds including the f16 will probly cost way too much for 114 units. Pricing from previous deals.

4. The closest price competitor is likely the gripen, which unfortunately, compromises the Tejas mk2.

5. F16 might possibly have a close enough price, but I don't see the iaf flying anything that tspaf has access to.

Under the circumstances, if they really want 114 birds, it send doubtful that there is much choice other than russki fare.

[Cain Marko]

From what I understand the Egyptians ordered the non aesa version aka M, for about 40 million a piece. So far the price point seems good. The opportunity lies in getting the production line along with hands off conversion to whatever MKI standard India wants. For a large order like 114 birds, I wouldn't be surprised if the Russiaans offered the best deal in terms of tot and customization.

Yes it'll probly mean a different radar but I don't see why an uttam/el2052 variant won't work. Entire roster of Indian, Israeli and Russian weapons should work as with the bars and the mki or Tejas.

If we have to sit and fix the MRCA to make it work the way the IAF wants it to work, then what is the point of an imported jet? The whole point of the MRCA is to hopefully buy imported one last time, but something mature and reliable that will form the bulwark of the spear, while proving superior to anything the PAF can hope to buy in the next 2 decades at least.

MiG Corp still hasnt' fixed the MiG-29K's reliability issues and has an extremely immature product that has no other orders from anywhere else. And on top of that you want customization, which will take another 5-10 years like the MKI took from the time it was inducted to the time the Mk3 variant finally entered service.

If we have to splurge, get 48 Rafales and then turn the focus squarely on the MWF and if the IAF wants, the ORCA. Those are the indigenous jets where tweaking, customization, etc. makes sense. Not on an imported jet.

Err.... It's the numbers that are the issue boss. I thought I made that clear in my post. Iaf and we can want whatever fantasy. But ultimately the bean counters in the mof and mod will make decisions.

[Cain Marko]

Yeah I know. But thankfully the IAF seem to be having a good experience with upgraded baaz and wish to provide more. Says something. Navy too.

Why then all these cyclic contests by the IAF and the IN? Why no government-to-government deal like the Rafale, the C17s?

Please connect the dots for me. What relevance does my reference to iafs satisfaction with baaz have to do with multi vendor DPP?

[Cain Marko]

How long should the IAF then wait for a mature solution to emerge from what the MiG-35 is today? Clearly the RuAF has no real intention of using it in any meaningful numbers, nor is there any development roadmap ahead when there is no paying customer.

Why dont the roosi sell errr... Gift them to their new buddy, packees?

Nice. I can imagine all the rnd and gnashing of the teeth if the ruaf even gives the Packees a small dekko at the fulcrum.

[brar_w]

What sub system on the 35 is buggy/untested? Other than the aesa of course. And that too we don't know where it currently stands. A non aesa variant of the bird is flying in one form or the other... From the mig29k to the mig29M in a variety of services. All other sensors and components seem to be doing just fine.

In 2011, the MiG-35 was positioned as a turn-key operation..an "almost ready" platform with high maturity to serve IAF's needs at par with something like what Boeing, Dassault, Lockheed, or Eurofigther were proposing. It was rejected. How many MiG-35's (like the one promised) are currently in service? If you can just provide that data it will put this entire argument to rest. How have the other platforms progressed since 2011? Are they being backed by their domestic or export customers? The MiG-35 appears to be stuck in time..it has barely moved since 2011 with the first Russian order for 8 (or six) placed in 2018, 7 years after it was offered to the IAF. Therewas an order in between but that customer switched it to MiG-29M. Nothing since then has been announced. Maybe Syria will order some..or maybe Serbia..but until then, Russia has to keep the lights on.

[Manish_P]

Why then all these cyclic contests by the IAF and the IN? Why no government-to-government deal like the Rafale, the C17s?

Please connect the dots for me. What relevance does my reference to iafs satisfaction with baaz have to do with multi vendor DPP?

A multi vendor DPP which lead to one of the most exhaustive technical evaluation contests in which the MiG 35 ('next gen' Baaz) was one of the first aircraft to get down selected.

No serious funding/development/orders/roadmap (even in the parent country) in the decade thence.

Meanwhile we have had to work hard on fixing issues in the MiG 29Ks. Agreed it was a conversion of a land based platform but given the experience of their industry it shouldn't have taken this long, especially when there customer was partly paying for the development.

More than dots they seem like question marks which we have had to turn to exclamation marks, with us putting in more efforts, money and resources than what we expected and fairly signed up for.

Is there a possibility that MiG corporation will get bought out/amalagated into Sukhoi in the future? Might work out for a better funded future development (and support, MLU, upgrades) program. Or they might kill it, unlikely though it seems.

[Cain Marko]

In 2011, the MiG-35 was positioned as a turn-key operation..an "almost ready" platform with high maturity to serve IAF's needs at par with something like what Boeing, Dassault, Lockheed, or Eurofigther were proposing. It was rejected. How many MiG-35's (like the one promised) are currently in service? If you can just provide that data it will put this entire argument to rest.

What argument? I'm not arguing about the relative rawness of the 35s aesa. That is assumed. Although I'm not sure there is enough to say either way in form of any evidence.

How have the other platforms progressed since 2011? Are they being backed by their domestic or export customers? The MiG-35 appears to be stuck in time..it has barely moved since 2011 with the first Russian order for 8 (or six) placed in 2018, 7 years after it was offered to the IAF. Therewas an order in between but that customer switched it to MiG-29M. Nothing since then has been announced. Maybe Syria will order some..or maybe Serbia..but until then, Russia has to keep the lights on.

[/quote]
Point again is that this is exactly the argument that can be used to negotiate and bring the entire line to India with liberty to customize and support the product to India's standard. Migs poor market position is the leverage that can be used to get a good deal on terms of price and customization. Can't do that with the others.

[brar_w]

Point again is that this is exactly the argument that can be used to negotiate and bring the entire line to India with liberty to customize and support the product to India's standard. Migs poor market position is the leverage that can be used to get a good deal on terms of price and customization. Can't do that with the others.

No it isn't. It is a non-mature product that has little to no backing besides the piecemeal order placed by Russia to keep the lights on and to prevent the line from sun setting. Arguing that the IAF/MOD should bankroll yet another non performing Russian program in the hope that this will get some concessions the IAF's way and result in a net net better solution than others available out there is quite absurd IMHO. If this were the case, then the MOD wouldn't have walked away from the PAKFA - a program that is delayed, economically challenged, a program that had no other international customer, and one where the Russian side has significantly scaled back. By your logic the MOD would have been able to pocket a 5FGA program just like that. Instead, they thought rationally and scaled back and exited the program unitl such time the Russians side retires risk and demonstrates the platform as a viable in service platform with the desired maturity level. IAF rejected the MiG-35 back in 2011 and since then the program has barely moved the needle forward. Even the IN wants to explore western naval fighters despite being the only *real* MiG-29K carrier operator. The MOD/IAF can do without being a *foster parent* to the MiG-35 or any other fighter. It has the LCA, MWF and AMCA to support. The entire point of going out to get a fighter to fill the numerical gaps is to pick something that doesn't need a financial benefactor to exist let alone thrive and enhance capability over time.

[Cain Marko]

Please connect the dots for me. What relevance does my reference to iafs satisfaction with baaz have to do with multi vendor DPP?

More than dots they seem like question marks which we have had to turn to exclamation marks, with us putting in more efforts, money and resources than what we expected and fairly signed up for.
.

Yes sure there are questions marks. But that's what we get at price points that are affordable. This has happened before, India can rarely afford Western platforms in large numbers, not when the country has larger welfare programs to run. Whether it was m2k5 vs flanker in the 90s or the downsizing of the mrca rafale order, this is the lesson. If it is numbers, then go Desi. And if not, then russki.

[Cain Marko]

Point again is that this is exactly the argument that can be used to negotiate and bring the entire line to India with liberty to customize and support the product to India's standard. Migs poor market position is the leverage that can be used to get a good deal on terms of price and customization. Can't do that with the others.

No it isn't. It is a non-mature product that has little to no backing besides the piecemeal order placed by Russia to keep the lights on and to prevent the line from sun setting. Arguing that the IAF/MOD should bankroll yet another non performing Russian program in the hope that this will get some concessions the IAF's way and result in a net net better solution than others available out there is quite absurd IMHO.

Really? What do you think the MKI program was? Assuredly the mki was an even less developed product than the 35. Despite it's many problems, the iaf went on to order extra numbers, not once, but twice! And one imagines that the Indian side has learnt some lessons and will negotiate a better deal in case of the 35.

Even the IN wants to explore western naval fighters despite being the only *real* MiG-29K carrier operator.

Err the Indian Navy is looking for Western naval fighters mainly because the nlca didn't make it. The CNS is on record saying this. Plus they want something more technologically advanced, likely for the 3rd CV. and that's understandable considering this will be a purchase way in the future. BTW you might have noticed that this is going nowhere thanks to the lack of funds.

[brar_w]

Really? What do you think the MKI program was? Assuredly the mki was an even less developed product than the 35. Despite it's many problems, the iaf went on to order extra numbers, not once, but twice! And one imagines that the Indian side has learnt some lessons and will negotiate a better deal in case of the 35.

MKI was during a different time. The choices available to the IAF were different in 2011 and the MiG-35 didnt even make the cut. Nothing substantially has changed since then in terms of the platforms maturity, or demonstrated performance in an operational context. It has been 9 years. Just because the IAF had fewer choices and chose the MKI way back then doesn't mean it is wedded, for life, to fostering underfunded Russian aerospace programs especially when other viable options are available. The picture which was painted by MiG on the MiG-35 back in 2011 hasn't panned out at all. In fact not even 10% of it has panned out. The one export customer Russia secured, backed out of the program and picked a different variant. And because no one else ordered it, the Russian put a token order back in 2018..with some features still lacking from what was promised to the IAF in 2011.

[Cain Marko]

Really? What do you think the MKI program was? Assuredly the mki was an even less developed product than the 35. Despite it's many problems, the iaf went on to order extra numbers, not once, but twice! And one imagines that the Indian side has learnt some lessons and will negotiate a better deal in case of the 35.

MKI was during a different time. The choices available to the IAF were different in 2011 and the MiG-35 didnt even make the cut. Nothing substantially has changed since then in terms of the platforms maturity, or demonstrated performance in an operational context. It has been 9 years. Just because the IAF had fewer choices and chose the MKI way back then doesn't mean it is wedded to fostering underfunded Russian aerospace programs that when other viable options are available.

First, the fact remains that the MKI has served the iaf well, clearly allowing it to retain an edge vs both tsp and plaaf. Despite all the whining about maintenance etc., It clearly is ahead of the mirage, against which it competed. Second, one can easily argue, especially in Indias case that the more things change, the more they remain the same.... Just look at what happened to mrca 1.0 and the rafale. If you really think that now when the economy is in doldrums, the situation will allow India to suddenly fork over Uber billions on a 100+ Western fighters, I have a bridge to sell you sir.

And in the event that by some miracle, India can buy a vast quantity of Western fighters, rest assured, I surely won't be complaining if the 35 were ditched.

[brar_w]

The solution of buying a platform that no one is really backing in any sort of way and then spend a greater part of the decade putting it through its paces and turning it into the desired combat system seems an equally bad if not a worst decision. Better off acquiring the number of Rafale's that the MOD can afford now and wait till the LCA/MWF mature, or till the economy improves to allow for more aircraft. At least that will guarantee the platforms the IAF gets are sufficiently mature and capable of delivering on their indented promise and not something on a brochure somewhere that the IAF is stuck with as the only invested party... India has the LCA and MWF (something that it did not when the MKI was chosen) to own, develop and promote. It need'nt adopt a neglected and underfunded Russian aerospace project anymore. If the Russians have a proven, operational and reliable aircraft that can demonstrate the desired performance to the IAF, it will be shortlisted. Otherwise, 2011 is likely to repeat itself. There is one thing about buying a smaller or cheaper aircraft because you can't afford the alternative. It is an entirely different thing to walk into a complete landmine from a risk perspective only to save some money upfront and then spend a ton of time and resources to getting it to the way you would have originally preferred it.

MKI has served the iaf well, clearly allowing it to retain an edge vs both tsp and plaaf. Despite all the whining about maintenance etc., It clearly is ahead of the mirage, against which it competed.

Like I said the choice was limited and it turned out well..but not without a lot of hard work and investments both economically and diplomatically. That the MKI was competing with the M2K goes to show the limited choices. Ideally they wouldn't even be competing in a same program given the stark difference between the two platforms and intended roles.

[Cain Marko]

Let me repeat one more time:

IF the 114 number that the IAF is looking for is critical and holds, there is little choice in the mrca race other than the mig 35.

Rest assured ideas such as buying limited number of rafale with more Tejas are simply preaching to the choir.

I've advocated for the same many times.

[brar_w]

IF the 114 number that the IAF is looking for is critical and holds, there is little choice in the mrca race other than the mig 35.

No it doesn't guarantee that in any way. The idea isn't to fit whatever is offered in the 114 and the budget. The idea is to find a capable product that meets or exceeds requirements, or at least at a minimum is capable enough that the MOD/IAF won't be stuck as the only major operator left to carry the weight over its lifetime because no one is invested in the platform in any substantial way. That will be a bad decision. The MOD/IAF will probably much rather find some other ways of going about it. Like staggering the purchase, buying it over a longer time-frame..buying fewer aircraft and delaying recapitalization etc etc. I suspect 36 Rafale's will be ordered and then perhaps more. The RFP for the MMRCA will likely be delayed until it goes away. Buying the MiG-35 is not a very smart decision..till at least the Russian side commits to field 100+ aircraft.

[Manish_P]

Yes sure there are questions marks. But that's what we get at price points that are affordable.

Converting the question marks into periods is what seems to take the price points to a more comparable number (when you cover the entire life-cycle). Might be still cheaper, but not a multiplication factor like it is made out to be.

If it is numbers, then go Desi. And if not, then russki.

Would put it in a slightly different way. Never ever let go of Desi (keep at it till we get there eventually, protecting it especially in the threat of cheap imports). If not for self use, then do your hardest to export the desi-stuff. It will keep the tools (the developers) sharp. And it will help us to reach the tipping point. For a nation with demonstrable success in related areas such as space programs it is more a question of 'when' rather than 'if'

Till then see what takes care of our immediate goals. Some goals are short-term (urgent requirement against an imminent threat), some are long-term (strategic - geo-political). The ultimate goal remains unchanged - self-reliance.

Since we are not at a stage of self-reliance, and not a very rich country (with welfare programs as you have rightly pointed out) several times we have been forced to use the products we have procured for short-term requirements to soldier on for way beyond their operating parameters. And if the country of origin from whom we have procured it doesn't have a properly defined (and verifiable) upgrade and support path for it then in the future we are again stuck with having to make compromises, often at extra costs. Doesn't matter if they are russki or non-russki.

Point again is that this is exactly the argument that can be used to negotiate and bring the entire line to India with liberty to customize and support the product to India's standard. Migs poor market position is the leverage that can be used to get a good deal on terms of price and customization. Can't do that with the others.

Good point. Is there any indication that the powers-that-be are even exploring this with the Russians? And that the Russians are even open to that?

I might be way wrong but given the past history of the fabled 'T-o-T', i would expect objections from the Russians initially, who obviously wouldn't want one of their biggest Customers to reach self-reliance Then they would ostensibly agree but raise the prices higher (keeping it below the competing platforms) by justifying it as for the 'T-o-T' and get the agreements done. And then find ways of delaying the handing over said 'T-o-T' for more costs. Costs which will eat away from our in-house development programs.

[Cain Marko]

No it doesn't guarantee that in any way.

We'll see.

Like staggering the purchase, buying it over a longer time-frame..buying fewer aircraft and delaying recapitalization etc etc. I suspect 36 Rafale's will be ordered and then perhaps more. The RFP for the MMRCA will likely be delayed until it goes away. Buying the MiG-35 is not a very smart decision..till at least the Russian side commits to field 100+ aircraft.

Staggering necessarily means that 114 number won't be bought straight up and it contradicts your earlier assertion that the entire number will be bought. Buying in smaller numbers is precisely what I've said as well.

The mig 35 becomes relevant only if the purchase is for the entire number. Smart decision or not.

[Cain Marko]

And if the country of origin from whom we have procured it doesn't have a properly defined (and verifiable) upgrade and support path for it then in the future we are again stuck with having to make compromises, often at extra costs. Doesn't matter if they are russki or non-russki.

The idea is that if we buy large enough number, we should also buy the rights to develop our own upgrade path. This is where the nuts and bolts will have to be worked out for everything from deep access to all/critical aspects of the fighter to rights in modification and even exports and up sharing etc.

Good point. Is there any indication that the powers-that-be are even exploring this with the Russians? And that the Russians are even open to that?
I might be way wrong but given the past history of the fabled 'T-o-T', i would expect objections from the Russians initially, who obviously wouldn't want one of their biggest Customers to reach self-reliance Then they would ostensibly agree but raise the prices higher (keeping it below the competing platforms) by justifying it as for the 'T-o-T' and get the agreements done. And then find ways of delaying the handing over said 'T-o-T' for more costs. Costs which will eat away from our in-house development programs.

There is plenty of reason to believe that such things could be explored and are being done with Russia. From the joint work bring done on the ssbn to the brahmos jv and even the upgrades of the baaz and mki. And the integration of the s400. Sjha, who is more reliable than most also suggests that cooperation with the Russians is indeed quite deep and dark.
Ultimately, India has tremendous expertise with this type, why not leverage it? For sure tot can be nothing but screwdrivergiri. However, you'll notice that India's access to russki tech increased considerably from say the license production of mig21 to su30 and arihant. The su30 deal had much more built in, including access to sensitive tech like the bars, which was the Uber russki fcr at the time. I don't see why a new deal can't build upon this, rectify previous mistakes, and gain better, independent access to the bird. Makes no mistake, this will be another rescue of a faltering Russian mic unit, however that can and should be leveraged aggressively.

Again, all this is applicable if the iaf is truly desperate for numbers via this mrca race one better way to go about it could be a follow on order of 36 rafale with another order of mk1A. And there are other ways to pursue this as well but we've discussed this before umpteen times on brf

[Manish_P]

...Ultimately, India has tremendous expertise with this type, why not leverage it? ...

I don't see why a new deal can't build upon this, rectify previous mistakes, and gain better, independent access to the bird. Makes no mistake, this will be another rescue of a faltering Russian mic unit, however that can and should be leveraged aggressively...

Would agree with this way even with past failed experience (missed opportunity?) with the Mirage 2000 production/assembly line (partly delay by bureaucracy, partly poor financial position, partly political, partly smart play by the competition - MiG ). Question is - is it even on offer?

I am a firm believer in keeping all options open, especially as the erstwhile head of MiG seems to have been appointed as director general of UAC

Merger of RSK ´MiG´ and JSC ´Sukhoi Company´ continues

On 6th February 2020, the press release issued by PJSC United Aircraft Corporation informed about significant changes in management of RSK ´MiG´ and JSC ´Sukhoi Company´, both aviation manufacturers being a part of UAC corporation.

By decision of the Management Board of the company, the new General Director of JSC ´Sukhoi Company´ was appointed Ilya Sergeyevich Tarasenko, who is also currently a General Director of RSK ´MiG´ and Deputy General Director of UAC.

The former General Director of JSC ´Sukhoi Company´, Igor Yakovlevich Ozar, is leaving the company. Although he was a successful manager of Sukhoi since 2011 and during his leadership the company started with successively deliveries of Su-34 fighter-bomber and Su-35S fighter aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces, the latest failure with implementing new 5th generation fighter tipped the scale.

[nachiket]

Question to be asked is if the technical requirements for this procurement are different from those for MRCA 1.0. If they aren't, won't we end up with the same downselect as last time - Rafale and Typhoon? Followed by Rafale being selected, several years of negotiations and no result?

[Manish_P]

+1

That is fundamentally THE question.

Although will disagree on the 'no result' part. There will probably be yet another bit purchase. Accompanied by several shouting matches in parliament & media and several posts here on this thread or a new thread - MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode IV - A New Hope

[brar_w]

Staggering necessarily means that 114 number won't be bought straight up and it contradicts your earlier assertion that the entire number will be bought. Buying in smaller numbers is precisely what I've said as well.

I have never asserted that the entire number would be bought. In fact I have always been a skeptic of this deal and just favor that the IAF buy 36-48 Rafale's with ISE and call it a day instead of trying to bank roll underfunded defense wares from Russia that have failed to attract significant internal or external customers despite being on the market for a decade plus. I most definitely don't recommend walking straight into that landmine on a product that hasn't gone anywhere since it was promoted as a turn-key project to the MOD nearly a decade earlier. Instead of adopting (quite literally) it, the MOD should concentrate its time and effort on the three to four domestic projects that will see the light over the next decade plus. Whatever they import should be capable, have its bugs sorted out, being supported domestically and by others in the market and should come with good support. Otherwise you are just buying numbers for numbers sake and not really getting the desired capability..

[arvin]

I have never asserted that the entire number would be bought. In fact I have always been a skeptic of this deal and just favor that the IAF buy 36-48 Rafale's with ISE and call it a day instead of trying to bank roll underfunded defense wares from Russia that have failed to attract significant internal or external customers despite being on the market for a decade plus

The present state of the deal is RFI evaluation and SQR finalisation. Essentially repeating what they did 10 years back. MOD must be enjoying doing it again and again. And no timelines defined.
The ' staggered purchase' statement is i think a hint that govt wants to end this farce with another 36 rafale order and token manufacturing by HAL so that pappu doesnt make noise again.
No OEM will be interested in a curtailed order and RFP stage might never see the light of the day.