MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 20 Feb 2019 22:50

Austin wrote:As some one said , PAF would be operating F-16 we would be operating F-16 , But 21 > 16

PAF operates 16, and 17.. 18 is already taken. So is 22. 21 is shubh shagun ka number..

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Feb 2019 23:30

Aging fightets in the news.Apart from the aging beauties being touted for the IAF, the US DOD is pushing the USAF to buy 80 F-15X fighters instead of the issue -plagued F-35JSF.The F-35 has serious airframe reliability issues, much shorter lifespan and " unacceptable" weapons firing inaccuracies.Instead of a buy of 12 F-35s for $1.2 B, the USAF is chasing 80 new F-15X fighters.

kit · Post by **kit** » 20 Feb 2019 23:43

why dont they bring in the F35 in its beast mode as a contender .. for sure THAT would make a difference instead of a souped up F16 ... Old colonial mentality perhaps ??

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Feb 2019 00:04

Philip wrote:Aging fightets in the news.Apart from the aging beauties being touted for the IAF, the US DOD is pushing the USAF to buy 80 F-15X fighters instead of the issue -plagued F-35JSF.The F-35 has serious airframe reliability issues, much shorter lifespan and " unacceptable" weapons firing inaccuracies.Instead of a buy of 12 F-35s for $1.2 B, the USAF is chasing 80 new F-15X fighters.

That is totally false and this is easily demonstrable. The USAF has left the SAR # and the program of record on the F-35A unchanged. The US Air Force Air National Guard was never budgeted to replace the F-15C's with the F-35A's. The total USAF program of record did not account for those and the current acquisition plan for the F-35A FULLY FUNDS all the aircraft that the USAF wants and more. There are reasons why an F-15X makes a LOT more sense than the F-35A for the USAF ANG especially when the only serious alternative is not to buy F-35As but to either keep flying old aircraft via upgrades or switch to F-16's.

As far as your other point is concerned, here is what the Chief of Staff of the USAF said as recently as yesterday -

“The F-35 operationally is meeting or exceeding our expectations.”

Video from which the above quote comes from - https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4781222/ ... erformance

kit wrote:why dont they bring in the F35 in its beast mode as a contender .. for sure THAT would make a difference instead of a souped up F16 ... Old colonial mentality perhaps ??

Most likely because based on their understanding of the RFI and what has been communicated they feel that they will be less competitive if they do offer. If you are going to throw in a 5th generation aircraft with equivalent MII requirements or offer then you have to be certain that the significantly higher cost will be something that will not go against you. LM has probably come to the conclusion that based on their understanding they are more competitive with offering the F-16.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 21 Feb 2019 00:11

Austin sir, we all know what happened to DTTI. No ToT apart from screwdrivergiri is coming. No point in waiting for that. Wont F35 come under the heavy cateogry. But even that aside, our defence budget is not doubling so no point in venturing into 3 gen5 programs. We have AMCA, PAKFA (for a future date we still have some million dollars spent there). Even khan doesnt have more than 2 official ones.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 00:21

All discussion of F-21 (aka F-16 Block 70) in this thread only.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 00:33

Austin wrote:F-16 Blk 70 or call it F-21 should be a good buy if IAF wants to bump up Squadron Number with Good Quality Aircraft with Low Maintenance (single engine) and proven air frame design.

Please do not wish this nightmare on the Indian Air Force. Proven plane, but un-reliable partner.

Austin wrote:IAF can easily up the squadron to 10-12 in shortest possible time with our fast depleting squadron number. This aircraft can replace the Mig-27 , 21 and Jaguar eventually. So replacing 3 types with a single one.

Please provide timeline as to when you expect these 10 - 12 squadrons to be replaced. Just a FYI....MMRCA 3.0 is in RFI mode. Please factor that into your timelines when responding to my query.

Austin wrote:IF US transfers deep tot for F-21 with local production like MKI and even for engine and a guarantee it wont be sanctioned for what we purchase and Life Long Support in terms of spares then we can go for this.

You are a senior member on BRF. You honestly believe the US will transfer any ToT of value to India? For that matter, neither will any other nation. Why make such statements then?

American guarantees are only valid till you tow their line. We are still waiting with bated breath about Donald Trump's statement (India will find out soon enough) on CAATSA sanctions.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 00:34

nam wrote:There was a report I was reading a while back, where it mentions some babus telling LM guys.

Pak already has F16. It is not possible to buy the same jet. You have a better chance, if name it something else...

F-21 designation is a marketing ploy.

F - Fighter
21 - 21st Century

Fighter for the 21st Century and thus F-21

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 00:35

arshyam wrote:Sounds like a re-badged F16. Do we look like such suckers?

Because it is. Changing a name does not change the aircraft.

By that logic, I should change the name of my Toyota to Lamborghini

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 00:40

Karan M wrote:Pratyush, agree. I see no logic in having the F-18 and F-16 in a race which could have had the F-35.

They want to squeeze us for the F-16 first and then only the F-35 will come. Good luck with that!

gaurav.p · Post by **gaurav.p** » 21 Feb 2019 00:55

F21 also has a satcom antenna (round bulge) similar to F18 blockIII.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 00:57

Aero India 2019 Emphasizes The Long, Hard Road To India’s Next Fighter Jet
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/02 ... r-jet.html

Finally, there’s the question of the Rafale, the centrepiece of a continuing political war being fought before India’s next election in a few months. Asked about the scandal, Dassault Aviation CEO Eric Trappier told Livefist, “There is no scandal involving the Rafale. If the government wants more than 36 aircraft, we are happy to supply. We will need a minimum order of 100 more aircraft if we are to make the Rafale in India.“

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 21 Feb 2019 01:15

Man this really sucks. Why do we have to launch MRCA competition again ? Simply negotiate on Rafale. Have Indian companies (HAL, TATA, Mahindra, Ambani etc) bid for contract for local manufacturing with Dassault in transparent way and let Dassault choose.

It's such a waste of time and resources to go through this again with same set of aircrafts. Don't we (MOD & Babus) ever learn anything ? And if we have such a powerful urge to negotiate something then let it be between EF Typhoon and Dassault Rafale, whoever helps us most with ToT, price and AMCA gets the deal.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 03:24

Sumeet, please we do not need the EF Typhoon. That plane is a disaster.

Additional Rafales are the only option.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 21 Feb 2019 06:12

They all play the same game....Mig 29 to Mig 29UPG, Mig 29SMT, Mig 29K, Mig 35, Mig 35MKI and Mig 41. Old wine in new bottle.

IAF will be crazy to buy anything else but Rafale, just does not make any sense to keep adding different type of aircraft from all over the place.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 21 Feb 2019 06:18

Need some gyan and shiksha here! What is the significance of adding across-the-length ventral spine (not ventral fin as is being quoted, from what I can see and learned from chacha) to India specific version. It seems to be, a not so insignificant, structural change to the old man's body. Google chacha says for civilian airliner, ventral fin adds stability when engine on one side goes off andyou need to fly back home on asymmetric engine power.

How would this help in the single engine aircraft and why would India need it?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Feb 2019 06:27

Not false at all.Jared Keller's report 20/2/19
taskandpurpose.com quoting a Bloomberg News report. Read it for yourself.

Yes the IAF will be crazy to buy the Rafale at over $200+M a pop when for $40M you could get a MIG-29/35 and other western fighters for about $70+M.You could even get 3 SU-30MKIs/35s for the price of one Rafale.It's why the IAF/ MOD has asked Ru for an urgent delivery of 21 29s.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 06:28

Philip, please provide link of article. Save everyone the headache of having to search. I found it.

The Air Force is eyeing an F-15 variant nobody wants while still struggling with the F-35
https://taskandpurpose.com/air-force-f15x-purchase-f35

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Feb 2019 06:33

Sorry was not able to provide the link due to tech. difficulties.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 21 Feb 2019 06:39

Philip wrote:Not false at all.Jared Keller's report 20/2/19
taskandpurpose.com quoting a Bloomberg News report. Read it for yourself.

Yes the IAF will be crazy to buy the Rafale at over $200+M a pop when for $40M you could get a MIG-29/35 and other western fighters for about $70+M.You could even get 3 SU-30MKIs/35s for the price of one Rafale.It's why the IAF/ MOD has asked Ru for an urgent delivery of 21 29s.

Your numbers are way-way off. Also you get what you pay for, if Russians were that good the USSR wouldn't have collapsed and the world market should all be flooded with uber high tech and cheap Russian products not western ones.

Mig 29 is the most expensive aircraft, to own, in the world. No thank you to lemon.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 07:06

I guess Saab has thrown in the towel (?) for MMRCA 3.0

Not one word about India in the article below and that is a good thing. Gripen E = Tejas Mk2

Gripen E enters serial production as Saab targets sales
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... sa-455831/

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 21 Feb 2019 08:21

Lockheed Martin - pitching the F-16V (which they strangely renamed F-21) to India.

If their bid succeeds, the Tejas will be in trouble and the country will be back to screw driver turning assembly work.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Feb 2019 11:22

Rakesh wrote:Please do not wish this nightmare on the Indian Air Force. Proven plane, but un-reliable partner.

Rakesh Sir , How come US is not unreliable when we buy C-130 , C-17 , P-8I , BBJ etc but is unreliable for F-21 ?

Like I said you need to ask and if they agree cut out a deal with proper legal frame work ......... Lets say if the US still backs out for some reason it will be their strategic loss not ours.

Austin wrote:Please provide timeline as to when you expect these 10 - 12 squadrons to be replace. Just a FYI....MMRCA 3.0 is in RFI mode. Please factor that into your timelines when responding to my query.

I dont understand why they need to RFI/RFI and then test all the contenders as they have done this during MMRCA 1.0 or 2.0.

IAF any way forges the RFI and would any way select a type where it meets RFI or RFP or not , so its a waste of Many years.

Just ask the IAF if F-21 is good enough if they say yes then just cut out a G2G deal with USG

Austin wrote:You are a senior member on BRF. You honestly believe the US will transfer any ToT of value to India? For that matter, neither will any other nation. Why make such statements then?

US of Today is not that of 20 years back ......... It has 22 Trillion Debt and a looming Recession plus a Political system which is all but kapoot due to internal fighting. It needs Exports to Grow and F-21 is that opportunity for them.

From our POV we can ask , F-21 is not the greatest tech from US POV , Plus the LM guys says we will transfer all the tech to make it in India.

If US cannot give TOT to F-21 then it wont give for F-18 or JSF

American guarantees are only valid till you tow their line. We are still waiting with bated breath about Donald Trump's statement (India will find out soon enough) on CAATSA sanctions.

We will see how this plays out ......For now I say ask the IAF if they say OK for F-21 then go ahead else look for something else less expensive choice other than F-16 , Mig-35 or Gripen again will full TOT plus MRO and Upgrade and local production facility.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 21 Feb 2019 11:53

https://twitter.com/Boeing_In/status/10 ... 2457176064

Combat Proven, Future Ready, and still called the F/A-18 Super Hornet.
Catch them here at #AeroIndia2019

Looks like Boeing is making fun of LM

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 21 Feb 2019 12:07

Rakesh wrote:I guess Saab has thrown in the towel (?) for MMRCA 3.0

Not one word about India in the article below and that is a good thing. Gripen E = Tejas Mk2

Gripen E enters serial production as Saab targets sales
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... sa-455831/

If I was to put it from Saab's perspective, the MWF design freeze will actually give Saab an edge over some of the contenders, apart from the Super Hornet. And that relates to the F-414 engine commonality. Between the two types, the IAF will be operating well over 300 F-414s, if the Gripen E/F is chosen, and the MWF is bought in the numbers that we are hoping for. Far easier for the IAF to maintain and overhaul a single engine type in such large numbers.

Will also mean that the IAF will have over 310 medium weight single engine fighters, which will mean far lower operating costs than any other combination. And if Saab does offer source codes for the Raven AESA radar, the possibility of some common weapons as well.

Saab will basically benefit from the life-cycle costs calculations, not just the up-front acquisition costs that will be amongst the lowest in the competition. If the Gripen E/F meets all the ASRs, they just might be amongst the favorites. Their weakest link is the absolute lack of any geo-political weight that Sweden carries.

gaurav.p · Post by **gaurav.p** » 21 Feb 2019 12:21

^^ also the meteor love of IAF according to DDM, will be shared post Gripen. But IMO egos of babus at ADA/HAL/MoD will get hurt to a buy a similar plane which are they are building.

Guys at gripen and boeing are at pinnacle of marketing. My feed is flooded with Sweeden-Brazil ToT etc and Boeing is flooding the advts from newspapers, websites etc. Also the boeing would have the edge if attachment to HAL is considered + compatible with carriers. Issue for Boeing IMO is that it is pricey as the rafale.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Feb 2019 20:07

Says who? Getting into the air a task? You should've watched the MKI perform its standard stunts this aft. at AI.If the birds are so bad why is the IAHF wanting another 21 new 29s to UPG std.? Why does the IAF also want another 18 MKIs too? The answer is a simple one, they're great birds and quite affordable.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 20:46

Russia says will select HAL as partner for India contract to buy 114 fighter jets for IAF
https://theprint.in/defence/russia-says ... af/196108/

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 20:46

India’s elusive $15 billion fighter jet deal frustrates everyone from Boeing to Lockheed
https://theprint.in/defence/indias-elus ... ed/195310/

gaurav.p · Post by **gaurav.p** » 21 Feb 2019 20:58

Rakesh wrote:Russia says will select HAL as partner for India contract to buy 114 fighter jets for IAF
https://theprint.in/defence/russia-says ... af/196108/

^ lifafa media house saar

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1098448478131359744

HAL chairman: We have an exclusivity contract with @BoeingDefense for the IAF’s 110 fighter program, so we won’t be partnering with anyone else.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 22:14

Gaurav, HAL will wave the Boeing flag till the down select occurs. If Boeing loses, then HAL will jump on to the bandwagon of whoever wants to partner with them. No company - HAL or a private one (Tata, Mahindra, Reliance, Adani) - will turn down the opportunity to do screwdrivergiri on 110 fighters. This is a multi billion $$$ deal. HAL would be certifiably crazy to turn it down.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 22:53

Austin wrote:Rakesh Sir, How come US is not unreliable when we buy C-130 , C-17 , P-8I , BBJ etc but is unreliable for F-21 ?

Like I said you need to ask and if they agree cut out a deal with proper legal frame work ......... Lets say if the US still backs out for some reason it will be their strategic loss not ours.

Are you not following the CAATSA sanctions story? That is a Damocles sword hanging over our neck. Despite all assurances, the waiver has yet to come. None of the platforms you have indicated above are tip-of-the-spear or will conduct deep strikes in enemy territory. Let me add the AH-64 and the CH-47 to the list as well. Even CAG highlighted the IAF's concerns in the first MMRCA contest.

Austin wrote:I don't understand why they need to RFI/RFI and then test all the contenders as they have done this during MMRCA 1.0 or 2.0.

IAF any way forges the RFI and would any way select a type where it meets RFI or RFP or not , so its a waste of Many years.

Just ask the IAF if F-21 is good enough if they say yes then just cut out a G2G deal with USG.

The G2G Rafale deal caused a big brouhaha in the Congress. You think a G2G deal with LM over the F-21 will be any different? They have to test the parameters again, as a number of the contenders in MMRCA 1.0 were different birds than the contenders in MMRCA 3.0

- F-16IN is now F-21
- F-18 Block II is now F-18 Block III
- Su-35 was not even in the contest
- Gripen IN is now Gripen E/F

Even the MiG-35 is different from the MiG-35 offered in 2007. Dassault will likely offer the F4 variant. EF Typhoon will be different as well. The IAF will likely test all seven birds again on their new capabilities. It will be a waste of many years, but that is what the process will be.

Austin wrote:US of Today is not that of 20 years back ......... It has 22 Trillion Debt and a looming Recession plus a Political system which is all but kapoot due to internal fighting. It needs Exports to Grow and F-21 is that opportunity for them.

From our POV we can ask , F-21 is not the greatest tech from US POV , Plus the LM guys says we will transfer all the tech to make it in India.

If US cannot give TOT to F-21 then it wont give for F-18 or JSF

What ToT are you expecting LM to give you? Please explain Austin. Give me specific ToT that you think LM will offer.

Austin wrote:We will see how this plays out ......For now I say ask the IAF if they say OK for F-21 then go ahead else look for something else less expensive choice other than F-16 , Mig-35 or Gripen again will full TOT plus MRO and Upgrade and local production facility.

Austin, you need to stop drinking the ToT kool aid. None of the seven OEMs are going to give you any ToT of value. Wake up from your dream.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Feb 2019 23:23

Kartik wrote:If I was to put it from Saab's perspective, the MWF design freeze will actually give Saab an edge over some of the contenders, apart from the Super Hornet. And that relates to the F-414 engine commonality. Between the two types, the IAF will be operating well over 300 F-414s, if the Gripen E/F is chosen, and the MWF is bought in the numbers that we are hoping for. Far easier for the IAF to maintain and overhaul a single engine type in such large numbers.

Will also mean that the IAF will have over 310 medium weight single engine fighters, which will mean far lower operating costs than any other combination. And if Saab does offer source codes for the Raven AESA radar, the possibility of some common weapons as well.

Saab will basically benefit from the life-cycle costs calculations, not just the up-front acquisition costs that will be amongst the lowest in the competition. If the Gripen E/F meets all the ASRs, they just might be amongst the favorites. Their weakest link is the absolute lack of any geo-political weight that Sweden carries.

The IAF is least interested in geo-political weight and that was proven in the recent CAG report on the Rafale. During the first MMRCA contest, the IAF was wary in selecting either the F-16 or the F-18 due to possible sanctions. With CAATSA waiver yet to come (what is the delay in issuing the waiver?), I do not know if the IAF's mindset has changed. All this geo-political talk was only from the American apologists on BRF and from others in institution like the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. From the IAF's perspective, it had zero effect on platform selection.

The Gripen E will trump all contenders on life cycle costs. And like you said, sharing a single engine (GE F414) is huge plus for the Gripen team. The Super Hornet will also be a contender on that measure.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 22 Feb 2019 01:19

Rakesh wrote:Gaurav, HAL will wave the Boeing flag till the down select occurs. If Boeing loses, then HAL will jump on to the bandwagon of whoever wants to partner with them. No company - HAL or a private one (Tata, Mahindra, Reliance, Adani) - will turn down the opportunity to do screwdrivergiri on 110 fighters. This is a multi billion $$$ deal. HAL would be certifiably crazy to turn it down.

But I don't think that this is how it'll work. They'll need to select their Strategic Partner in India before the winner or finalists are selected. Which means HAL is locked with Boeing and cannot at the last moment, switch partners if the Super Hornet fails to qualify.

It is a tough one for the IAF, to set requirements in such a way that their favoured jet qualifies. This time, all the competitors know what they did wrong in MRCA 1.0 and will have more compliant offerings. The key will be life-cycle costs. All of them are AESA equipped (except the MiG-35 and Su-35), all have IRST (except the Super Hornet, which has it planned for now) and many have clear roadmaps for future development. Affordability, technology transfer and growth potential will be the key aspects. IAF will demand that India should be able to integrate weapons of its choice without any clearances being required from OEM's govt or any other govt for that matter.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 22 Feb 2019 01:50

The changes don't warrant a new designation, but it is being branded to avoid the stigma of being co-related with PAF's mainstay fighter of the past 3 decades.

Dorsal equipment fairing, retractable inflight refueling probe housed in the starboard CFT, large format smart displays and triple launchers for AMRAAMs, possibly towed decoys and braking parachute.

From AW&ST

BENGALURU, India—With an eye on an upcoming order for 114 fighters, Lockheed Martin has unveiled a version of the F-16, branded the F-21, specifically configured for the Indian Air Force (IAF) and which would be built jointly with Tata Advanced Systems at a new facility in India.

A model of the F-21, which supersedes the previous F-16IN Block 70 version offered to India, was unveiled at the AeroIndia 2019 show, which opened here Feb. 20.

“The F-21 is different inside and out,” says Vivek Lall, vice president of strategy and business development for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics. F-21 is a trademark, not an official U.S. designation, and stands for “Fighter for the 21st century,” he says.

Differences from the F-16IN Block 70 include the addition of the dorsal equipment fairing, a retractable inflight refueling probe housed in the starboard conformal fuel tank, large-format touchscreen cockpit display and triple launchers for AIM-120 Amraam air-to-air missiles on the middle pylons under the wing.

A Lockheed video shows the F-21 deploying a towed decoy in combat and a braking parachute on landing. The fighter is equipped with an active electronically scanned array radar and helmet-mounted curing system, as was the previous Block 70 offering. The manufacturer says the India-specific F-21 incorporates technologies derived from those in its F-22 and F-35 fifth-generation fighters.

Lockheed Martin has previously said an F-16 contract with the IAF would make India a key hub for the fighter’s production and export. There was no confirmation on whether the new variant has been configured after consultations with the IAF.

..

And unlike many who don't have a very high opinion of the F-16 being offered, I will always hold this fighter in very high regard. For sheer offensive and defensive punch, it is still at the very forefront, IMO. The sensors being offered with this type are as good as anything else being offered. Airframe growth potential is the one area where it will lag.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Feb 2019 01:52

Kartik wrote:But I don't think that this is how it'll work. They'll need to select their Strategic Partner in India before the winner or finalists are selected. Which means HAL is locked with Boeing and cannot at the last moment, switch partners if the Super Hornet fails to qualify.

It is a tough one for the IAF, to set requirements in such a way that their favoured jet qualifies. This time, all the competitors know what theIy did wrong in MRCA 1.0 and will have more compliant offerings. The key will be life-cycle costs. All of them are AESA equipped (except the MiG-35 and Su-35), all have IRST (except the Super Hornet, which has it planned for now) and many have clear roadmaps for future development. Affordability, technology transfer and growth potential will be the key aspects. IAF will demand that India should be able to integrate weapons of its choice without any clearances being required from OEM's govt or any other govt for that matter.

There are a couple of factors working against the scenario above;

1) HAL is adamant that they could have built the Rafale.
2) Congress is also adamant that HAL could have built the Rafale.

The final decision is not going to happen anytime soon and will likely go into the 2024 general elections. After 10 years of BJP rule, the electorate could swing the other way and when that happens, if a foreign OEM partners with anybody but HAL, the Congress Party will have to answer why. As per Rahul Gandhi, the BJP stole jobs from the youth of Karnataka and gave it on a silver platter to Reliance. Regardless of the absurdity of the statement, that image has now struck a cord in HAL and with Congress supporters. How hypocritical would it be if say for example LM won the contest with the F-21 and Tata was assigned the task to license produce 110 F-21 fighters. What answer is Rahul Gandhi going to give then? Not a single OEM - worth their salt wants - to hand over production to HAL. Even Boeing who entered into a joint venture with HAL, has offset that risk by partnering with Mahindra. HAL will get screwdrivergiri to do, but Mahindra will likely get the bulk of the meat & potatoes of the production.

- LM has partnered with Tata
- Saab has partnered with Adani
- Boeing has partnered with Mahindra (HAL is an adopted step child, just to win the contest)
- Dassault will partner with HAL and they even said so as much
- EF will not partner with HAL

Mikoyan and Sukhoi are okay with HAL, as both have experience with HAL in the past. MiG-21, MiG-27, Su-30MKI, etc.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Feb 2019 01:59

solution is increase private hold on HAL, to about 30-40%.. and it would then be the fighting between political parties which private company favors which one of them.

..

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Feb 2019 02:27

Another solution is to privatize HAL and end the unions. Easier said that done though.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 22 Feb 2019 02:35

You said it. I have met HAL workers and HAL managers. Some of the workers and their attitude left a bit to be desired, and those guys invariably flaunted their union connections and caste identity.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 22 Feb 2019 02:38

Quoting again for truth. Each and every point rings true! I am even against the Gripen NG, too close to the MWF plan.

Rakesh wrote:
Austin wrote:Rakesh Sir, How come US is not unreliable when we buy C-130 , C-17 , P-8I , BBJ etc but is unreliable for F-21 ?

Like I said you need to ask and if they agree cut out a deal with proper legal frame work ......... Lets say if the US still backs out for some reason it will be their strategic loss not ours.
Are you not following the CAATSA sanctions story? That is a Damocles sword hanging over our neck. Despite all assurances, the waiver has yet to come. None of the platforms you have indicated above are tip-of-the-spear or will conduct deep strikes in enemy territory. Let me add the AH-64 and the CH-47 to the list as well. Even CAG highlighted the IAF's concerns in the first MMRCA contest.

Austin wrote:I don't understand why they need to RFI/RFI and then test all the contenders as they have done this during MMRCA 1.0 or 2.0.

IAF any way forges the RFI and would any way select a type where it meets RFI or RFP or not , so its a waste of Many years.

Just ask the IAF if F-21 is good enough if they say yes then just cut out a G2G deal with USG.

The G2G Rafale deal caused a big brouhaha in the Congress. You think a G2G deal with LM over the F-21 will be any different? They have to test the parameters again, as a number of the contenders in MMRCA 1.0 were different birds than the contenders in MMRCA 3.0

- F-16IN is now F-21
- F-18 Block II is now F-18 Block III
- Su-35 was not even in the contest
- Gripen IN is now Gripen E/F

Even the MiG-35 is different from the MiG-35 offered in 2007. Dassault will likely offer the F4 variant. EF Typhoon will be different as well. The IAF will likely test all seven birds again on their new capabilities. It will be a waste of many years, but that is what the process will be.

Austin wrote:US of Today is not that of 20 years back ......... It has 22 Trillion Debt and a looming Recession plus a Political system which is all but kapoot due to internal fighting. It needs Exports to Grow and F-21 is that opportunity for them.

From our POV we can ask , F-21 is not the greatest tech from US POV , Plus the LM guys says we will transfer all the tech to make it in India.

If US cannot give TOT to F-21 then it wont give for F-18 or JSF
What ToT are you expecting LM to give you? Please explain Austin. Give me specific ToT that you think LM will offer.

Austin wrote:We will see how this plays out ......For now I say ask the IAF if they say OK for F-21 then go ahead else look for something else less expensive choice other than F-16 , Mig-35 or Gripen again will full TOT plus MRO and Upgrade and local production facility.
Austin, you need to stop drinking the ToT kool aid. None of the seven OEMs are going to give you any ToT of value. Wake up from your dream.