MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

Vivek K wrote:Admiral Sir - that is a poor question in my opinion and you are being facetious to defend your advocacy of the Rafale. But let's take a stab at it
Admiral is fine. I understand it is meant in jest. But why are you calling me Sir? :D
Vivek K wrote:a) Jaguars - 125+ in number - IAF does not take them to war, not even to Sri Lanka. I guess that the IAF feels its DPSA capabilities do not assure success for the missions they have to undertake. So retiring them and replacing with an equal number of LCAs - great solution.
b) Mirage 2000s - (50 odd) After having spent more than one would spend on new build aircraft in upgrading M2Ks (without an engine upgrade), I would let them live out their useful airframe life and then replace with LCA Mk2. But if money is no problem and grows on trees then wasting the $2+ billion on upg and investing in domestic MIC is a solution - I will let you take the call on it.
c) Mig-29s - Like the M2ks, these have just been upgraded with a lot of money spent on them. Once they complete their useful frame life - replace with MK2.
d) SU-30s - Have they reached the end of their useful life? Typical lifecycle is 4 decades and these were bought in 2000s when the 30ks were returned. So having invested a large sum in these, why would you ask for them to be put out of service? Once they have outlived their life, these should be replaced by the AMCA.
I was following your own advice - adding up India's imports and correcting them to today's dollars. You asked me to do the exercise. These four aircraft are all imports. None of them are Indian in origin. We should replace all of them and ensure that the IAF is an all Tejas fleet.

Why should it matter that these aircraft have any airframe life left? After all, imports are equal to the destruction of local MIC. Why bother negotiating with Russia to improve the serviceability of the Su-30MKI fleet? Why bother negotiating with Russia for the 12 "attrition replacements" Su-30MKIs or the 21 MiG-29s? Would it not be better to invest energy and time into Tejas?

Should the IAF honestly concern itself with "minor" issues of endurance, range and weapon payload of Su-30MKI vs Tejas? The former is an import, versus the latter is local. That should trump everything else no?

Why wait for four decades of Su-30MKI life to be completed? Imagine the OPEX that the IAF will have to incur on the Rambha fleet - over four decades - versus the Tejas. Retire the Rambha fleet right now and replace 272 airframes with around ~300 Tejas.

During the Balakot strikes, would it not have been better to use the Tejas from No 45 Squadron rather than using those upgraded Mirage 2000s (which did not even have an engine upgrade, as you rightly pointed out). Mirage 2000 is an import after all, while Tejas is local maal. Why bother with imports during such an important and vital mission?

By the way, please think about this. The IAF - at present - has no plans to upgrade the engine of the Rambha. The Super Sukhoi upgrade is largely avionics, sensors and weapons package based. And at 272 birds, it will be a multi-billion dollar upgrade. Same thing happened with the MiG-29 upgrade, which was around $900+ million I believe. I am pointing this out, because you brought up the lack of an engine upgrade on the Mirage 2000 and what a waste of money it was. Would you consider - since upgrading the engine is a benchmark for you - the MiG-29 and Su-30MKI upgrades also to be a waste of money? Or can I safely assume that you believe money grows on trees when it comes to Russian maal, but money does not grow on trees when it comes to French maal? Why have a double standard?
Vivek K wrote:The bigger question is why doesn't IAF look for using the Mk1s, Mk1As to build up fleet strength. Why not place an order for 10 squadrons of LCAs instead of the way they have gone about it.
That is why I am arguing to retire all the other combat aircraft in the IAF fleet and replace them all with Tejas Mk1 and Mk1As. Imagine how strong our Indian MIC will be with 400 - 500 American fighter aircraft called Tejas. And yes, I did type American and you know why :)

Why is the IAF insisting that after the first two units of the AMCA, all follow-on units of the AMCA be powered by a turbofan of Indian origin? Why not stick with the proven GE F414? An turbofan that has thousands of proven flight hours and from an organization that lives & breathes turbofans for a living? Why add risk to the program?
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Vivek K »

Rakesh wrote: Admiral is fine. I understand it is meant in jest. But why are you calling me Sir? :D
Mark of respect for the rank!
Why should it matter that these aircraft have any airframe life left? After all, imports are equal to the destruction of local MIC. Why bother negotiating with Russia to improve the serviceability of the Su-30MKI fleet? Why bother negotiating with Russia for the 12 "attrition replacements" Su-30MKIs or the 21 MiG-29s? Would it not be better to invest energy and time into Tejas?
Bring it on brother - that would be a terrific effort to improve Indian national security. However, your post borders on (with all humility) a) lack of belief in Indian MIC, b) ingrained acceptance of everything foreign. That is why since you have no real answer, you're pushing the limits to show indigenous efforts in poor light.
Should the IAF honestly concern itself with "minor" issues of endurance, range and weapon payload of Su-30MKI vs Tejas? The former is an import, versus the latter is local. That should trump everything else no?
Again, your defence of imports is affecting your thought process. You're bringing in an aspect that has not even been discussed in these threads. The Sukhoi is not an MRCA. The question and the argument here is - India does not need an MRCA - build the MK1, the MK1A and the MK2. That would provide enough capability to phase out the Jaguars and the Mirages. Larger orders of the Mk1/MK1A would allow fleet strength enhancement. It has never been argued that the MK1 or MK1A should be considered replacements for the Sukhoi. Are you fighting imaginary blows?
Why wait for four decades of Su-30MKI life to be completed? Imagine the OPEX that the IAF will have to incur on the Rambha fleet - over four decades - versus the Tejas. Retire the Rambha fleet right now and replace 272 airframes with around ~300 Tejas.
Admiral Sir - read the above. Yes - if the IAF, the GOI had all believed in domestic MIC and continued development of the Marut, there may have been an aircraft on offer to compete with the MKI.
During the Balakot strikes, would it not have been better to use the Tejas from No 45 Squadron rather than using those upgraded Mirage 2000s (which did not even have an engine upgrade, as you rightly pointed out). Mirage 2000 is an import after all, while Tejas is local maal. Why bother with imports during such an important and vital mission?
Really Admiral? But seriously tell me this, do you think that the Tejas is capable of induction into the IAF? What do you believe in? Are you yet again putting words in my mouth because you feel that the Tejas is not capable? How capable do you think the Tejas is - as much as Mig-21/19/17/15 or less?
By the way, please think about this. The IAF - at present - has no plans to upgrade the engine of the Rambha. The Super Sukhoi upgrade is largely avionics, sensors and weapons package based. And at 272 birds, it will be a multi-billion dollar upgrade. Same thing happened with the MiG-29 upgrade, which was around $900+ million I believe. I am pointing this out, because you brought up the lack of an engine upgrade on the Mirage 2000 and what a waste of money it was. Would you consider - since upgrading the engine is a benchmark for you - the MiG-29 and Su-30MKI upgrades also to be a waste of money? Or can I safely assume that you believe money grows on trees when it comes to Russian maal, but money does not grow on trees when it comes to French maal? Why have a double standard?
So there you have it - You're the one pushing French vendors! I am pushing neither the Russian or the French or any other. Paying as much as a new aircraft for an upgrade (be it for any aircraft) will always be questioned - irrespective of the vendor/nation involved. Careful Sirji - don't get carried away by imagined slights.
Vivek K wrote:The bigger question is why doesn't IAF look for using the Mk1s, Mk1As to build up fleet strength. Why not place an order for 10 squadrons of LCAs instead of the way they have gone about it.
That is why I am arguing to retire all the other combat aircraft in the IAF fleet and replace them all with Tejas Mk1 and Mk1As. Imagine how strong our Indian MIC will be with 400 - 500 American fighter aircraft called Tejas. And yes, I did type American and you know why :)
Pray enlighten me about what your intent in the above is. I don't know if I understand - "are you referring to the American Engine in the Tejas? And are you pointing to US sanctions on the engine? Well - Sirji - pray read the geopolitics again. US needs allies against China. Unless we're allying with China...... (that is a discussion for another time). So how come if there is this fear that orders for GE engines (200-500 nos) not already placed? The Tejas has been ready since 2015 - the IAF made it jump through additional hopes waiting for the Chobham nose cone and the IFR probe additions. The engines could have been ordered way back then.

This response is typical of us Indians and this is the mindset and the reason we will never have an MIC or believe in our own capability. The Admiral is using a tried tactic to denigrate domestic efforts. Here is what makes sense for the Tejas in the IAF
a) Build up fleet strength - how does that involve the MKI? I fail to see the thought process. Current squadron strengths are dangerously low and the Tejas provides a cost effective method to build up domestic MIC and to also enhance national security. I would recommend buying 500 LCAs (at current rates of these will be delivered in 2 decades unless additional investment in manpower and assembly lines is made
(b) The Admiral insists upon retiring aircraft that have significant life left in them and have been upgraded. The time for that decision would have been before the investment. Now - there is no chance even in hell that anyone is even thinking of that. But there are a large number of aircraft facing obsolescence and should be replaced with Tejas - the bisons and un-upgraded (even upgraded) Jags first and the Mig 29s and the M2Ks after the exhaustion of their current MLU. That would mean almost 250+ aircraft.

The fact is that the arguments put forth here show our mindset against the domestic MIC. We cannot pay lip service to domestic efforts and expect to project power with bisons and Jaguars. The small M2K fleet with enhancements and the Mig- 29 fleet with upgrades can go only so far. Ultimately, a credible local solution needs to be supported. Investments in engine development, airframe design and sensors have to be made - and these cannot only be used as tech demonstrators as the Admiral here seems to prefer. The developments need to be battle tested, improved and tactics developed around them. Yes LCA should have played a role in Balakot strikes and it might have if the induction was allowed in 2015. This line of thinking that locally developed weapon systems cannot stand to real life tests must be proven to be wrong.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

Vivek K wrote:Bring it on brother - that would be a terrific effort to improve Indian national security. However, your post borders on (with all humility) a) lack of belief in Indian MIC, b) ingrained acceptance of everything foreign. That is why since you have no real answer, you're pushing the limits to show indigenous efforts in poor light.
I am highlighting the inconsistency in your own standards. You asked me to add up all of India's imports and see what the cost is. When I highlighted it, you are getting takleef over it. Oh well.

Actually I get it now. You only wanted me to add up the French imports (Mirage 2000 and Rafale) and not the Russian imports (MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25, MiG-27, MiG-29, Su-7, Su-30, etc). You should have been more clearer. So you are correct. French imports are expensive and they are a waste of money and they destroyed the Indian MIC. The Russian imports - which cost way more than the French imports, due to the sheer scale of numbers acquired from Russia - actually uplifted the Indian MIC. 36 Rafales and 49 Mirage 2000s cost the Indian taxpayer a lot more than the hundreds (if not over a thousand) of Russian planes India acquired since the 60s.

You are so correct. I hang my head in shame over the French imports. Shame, Shame.
Vivek K wrote:Again, your defence of imports is affecting your thought process. You're bringing in an aspect that has not even been discussed in these threads. The Sukhoi is not an MRCA. The question and the argument here is - India does not need an MRCA - build the MK1, the MK1A and the MK2. That would provide enough capability to phase out the Jaguars and the Mirages. Larger orders of the Mk1/MK1A would allow fleet strength enhancement. It has never been argued that the MK1 or MK1A should be considered replacements for the Sukhoi. Are you fighting imaginary blows?
But that would go against your argument that imports are bad. Since the Su-30MKI is an import, then it is bad. Is that not the standard that you are repeatedly emphasizing on BRF? That an import destroys the local MIC.

In that same vein, C-17 is also bad. C-130 is also bad. Never mind that we have no local platforms to substitute them with, but they are bad...because they are imports. You asked me to add up all of India's imports. I am doing it. Are they not bad Vivek? Yes or No?

Why buy imports like C-17 and C-130 to supply much needed material to the Indian Armed Forces? Is sustaining really necessary over supporting the local MIC? Or it could it actually be that these imports - like C-17, Su-30MKI and C-130 - are vital because there is no substitute local product? Yes or No?
Vivek K wrote:Admiral Sir - read the above. Yes - if the IAF, the GOI had all believed in domestic MIC and continued development of the Marut, there may have been an aircraft on offer to compete with the MKI.
But since that did NOT happen, what do you want the IAF to do? Retire all the imports and wait for the local MIC to come out with a product? How does the IAF conduct her primary mission - protect the air space - till a local product comes on board?

What do we tell Pakistan and China? Give me 10 years please. I need to develop my own product. You cannot attack me. This is not fair.

You keep bringing up the past (Marut), but it is the past. It cannot be changed. How does it change the situation today? If I had invested in Google or Amazon back in the 90s, I would be a billionaire today. But since that did not happen and following your role model, I should be in deep depression over it. I should be doing rona-dhona everyday, like you how do you on BRF because of the Marut.
Vivek K wrote:Really Admiral? But seriously tell me this, do you think that the Tejas is capable of induction into the IAF? What do you believe in? Are you yet again putting words in my mouth because you feel that the Tejas is not capable? How capable do you think the Tejas is - as much as Mig-21/19/17/15 or less?
Seriously tell me this. How capable do you think the Tejas Mk1 variant would have been vis-a-viv the upgraded Mirage 2000I? Because these variants were used at Balakot. I asked you a specific question on Balakot, so please be specific. Please do not give me statements on MiG-teens being less capable than the Tejas.

Would the Tejas Mk1 variant been able to do what the upgraded Mirage 2000 variant did at Balakot? When Avenger 1 (Su-30MKI) held the fort against a number of ingressing PAF aircraft on Feb 27th, Tejas would have done a better job. Why do technical specifications and parameters matter? Import is bad after all.

When the time comes for the Tejas to prove her mettle, it will be used by the very same IAF that used the Marut during the 1971 Indo-Pak War.
Vivek K wrote:So there you have it - You're the one pushing French vendors! I am pushing neither the Russian or the French or any other. Paying as much as a new aircraft for an upgrade (be it for any aircraft) will always be questioned - irrespective of the vendor/nation involved. Careful Sirji - don't get carried away by imagined slights.
:lol: You are the one who said that the Mirage 2000 upgrade is a waste of money because it did not have an engine upgrade.

You are also stating that the MiG-29 upgrade cost a lot of money and therefore they should be used till the end of their service life. But it did not have an engine upgrade.

You also said that the Su-30MKI should be used till the end of her service life. But just like the MiG-29 and Mirage 2000, they are being upgraded as well but without an engine upgrade.

So I ask again, is the MiG-29 upgrade and the Su-30MKI upgrade a waste of money...just like the Mirage 2000 upgrade? Since you support using the Su-30 and MiG-29 till they end of their service life, they have to be upgraded to stay relevant. But yet you find it hard to swallow when it comes to the French Mirage 2000? Why?

But I get it now. The few billions it will cost to upgrade 272 Su-30MKIs and the $900+ million it cost to upgrade the MiG-29s will be cheaper than upgrading 49 Mirage 2000s at $2.2 billion. French are bad (no engine upgrade), Russians are saints (no engine upgrade). French have looted us (no engine upgrade), Russians have uplifted us (no engine upgrade). How could I have missed this? :lol:
Vivek K wrote:Pray enlighten me about what your intent in the above is. I don't know if I understand - "are you referring to the American Engine in the Tejas? And are you pointing to US sanctions on the engine? Well - Sirji - pray read the geopolitics again. US needs allies against China. Unless we're allying with China...... (that is a discussion for another time). So how come if there is this fear that orders for GE engines (200-500 nos) not already placed? The Tejas has been ready since 2015 - the IAF made it jump through additional hopes waiting for the Chobham nose cone and the IFR probe additions. The engines could have been ordered way back then.
Am I reading this correctly? :eek: You are actually arguing for an import and that too in numbers of 200 - 500? You? Import?

Why is the IAF doing the opposite then? I ask again ---> Why is the IAF insisting that after the first two units of the AMCA, all follow-on units of the AMCA be powered by a turbofan of Indian origin? Why not stick with the proven GE F414? An turbofan that has thousands of proven flight hours and from an organization that lives & breathes turbofans for a living? Why add risk to the program? Is the IAF not reading the geopolitics? Why did the CAG report on MMRCA 1.0 clearly state that the IAF was apprehensive about purchasing the F-16 or F-18 because of fear of sanctions? Why is it an open secret that the IAF still feels that way, till today?

Think carefully before you answer....AMCA is a local product. GE F414 is a phoren product and so it is an import. And in your own words, "....add up India's imports and correct them to today's dollars. The number will make you want to hang your head in shame...."
Vivek K wrote:a) Build up fleet strength - how does that involve the MKI? I fail to see the thought process.
Somebody told me to add up India's imports and correct them to today's dollars. The number will make me want to hang my head in shame and reverse the Rafale purchase.

Su-30MKI is not an import. MiG-29 is not an import. MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25 and MiG-27 are all not imports.

Mirage 2000 is an import. Upgrading Mirage 2000 is bad. Rafale is an import. Buying Rafale is bad.

Building the fleet strength with Tejas is wonderful.

Building the fleet strength with hundreds of Russian aircraft, not ideal...but ok.

But building the fleet strength with 36 French Rafales and 49 French Mirage 2000s is haram.

I hang my head in shame.
Vivek K wrote:(b) The Admiral insists upon retiring aircraft that have significant life left in them and have been upgraded. The time for that decision would have been before the investment. Now - there is no chance even in hell that anyone is even thinking of that.

Somebody told me to add up India's imports and correct them to today's dollars. The number will make me want to hang my head in shame and reverse the Rafale purchase.

The $900 million invested in the MiG-29 upgrade is okay, because they have significant life left in them.

The billions India will spend in upgrading 272 Su-30MKIs is okay, because they have significant life left in them.

The $2.2 billion invested in Mirage 2000 upgrade should have been invested in the Tejas, despite the fact that they have significant life left in them.

But I get it. French Upgrade = Waste of Money. Russian Upgrade = Significant Life Left in Them.

I hang my head in shame.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

By the way, since we are on the topic of not retiring aircraft that have significant life left in them, here is then Air Chief Marshal PV Naik defending the Mirage 2000 upgrade. The same argument can be applied for the MiG-29 and the Su-30MKI upgrades. He is saying the exact same thing you are saying. Did you advise him? :mrgreen:



But I know what you will say Vivek. I would be disappointed if you did not :)

And let me help you with some starter points;

* Vishal Thapar in the video above states that the MiG-29 fleet is larger in number than the Mirage 2000 fleet and the upgrade costs cheaper. Actually more than half the cost. Please bring that up!

* The narrator in the background uses the term "...the IAF brushes aside the controversy." Bring that up as well!
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by nachiket »

The Mig-29 upgrade did include an engine change, though not an upgrade. The old smoky RD-33's were replaced by the reportedly less smoky RD-33-series 3 engines. The Mirage-2000 engines did not have this issue, were quite reliable and out of production AFAIK so they were not replaced.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

I believe that was a separate contract from the $900 million upgrade of the MiG-29.

Russia to deliver MiG-29 engines to India
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... s?from=mdr
21 Aug 2009
In 2005, Russia signed a $250 million deal to modernise the MiG-29's engines. According to the terms of the deal, HAL will make 120 RD-33/series 3 jet engines at its Koraput plant for the upgrades of the fighters
Also, I cannot confirm the veracity of this, but wiki says a $888 million deal was signed in 2005-06 to upgrade the entire MiG-29 fleet to carry the R-77 BVRAAM. Then there is the above and then another $900 million was awarded to upgrade the MiG-29s to the SMT standard. Assuming the R-77 upgrade cost is true, it looks like the total upgrade cost was US $2+ billion. Wiki also states a multimillion-dollar contract was awarded to Israel Aircraft Industries for avionics and related sub-systems as part of the SMT upgrade.

And sirjee, please don't say such logical things like French engines are reliable. You will give him heartache. Please do not bring up the MiG serviceability vis-a-viv the Mirage 2000. He is only concerned with upfront costs, not life cycle costs.

Please also do not highlight the struggles that the IAF had with the MiG-29 in the 80s and then into the 90s, when the Soviet Union collapsed. Do not bring up the stories of the number of East European nations the IAF had to turn to, to get spares for the MiG-21 fleet, used MiG-21 trainers and spares for other MiG-2X series aircraft.

Keep up with the theme of bashing French maal.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by LakshmanPST »

My 2 paisa...
Starting from 2000 upto 2020, IAF had plans for retiring 30 squadrons of MIG 21/23/25/27... And considering the need to reach 42 squadrons, they needed 32 squadrons of new jets to be inducted between 2000 to 2020...
And IAF inducted only 12 Su30 and 1 Jaguar squadron in this period... 2 Tejas and 2 Rafale are in the process of induction while retirement of 6 Bison squadrons was pushed ahead to 2025...
Overall, there is shortage of around 10 squadrons in this decade which many ppl repeatedly propose to be filled up with 10 squadrons of Tejas Mk1...
----
All the arguements I see from ppl supporting induction of more Tejas Mk1s to fill the shortage somehow seem to overlook one simple fact---> IAF's plans for composition of fighter jet squadrons and their technical requirements like range/ payload/sensors etc. have also changed with rapid changes in technology in the last 20 years...

Two points the proponents are missing--->
1) Tejas Mk1 is a good aircraft. No one is denying this fact... But where does it fit in the IAF's overall plans...? It has lesser range and payload than a Mirage 2000... It is equivalent to a Jaguar in these parameters...
It is easier for us to assume the Strike range based on open source data, but what if IAF has requirements of striking targets at longer distances in enemy territory without refuelling...? And range is just a number. It varies for various flight profiles & missions and how much do we know about Tejas Mk1 fulfilling all the requirements in various sectors...?
Also, lesser payload would mean more sorties... IAF can not have unlimited jets... They are restricted to the number 42 squadrons... So, how wise is it to induct a jet with 4 Tonnes payload in 100s, instead of equal number of jets with 6 Tonnes payload...?

All this is deeply technical in nature and impossible for us to get open source data to discuss it... But still, I have never come across any of them even recognizing this issue but see repeated posts about inducting Tejas Mk1 in the 100s...

2) Also, many of them are missing the fact that IAF is not stopping at Mk1/1A but is planning to induct Tejas Mk2... ADE won't be simply designing & building prototype of a new fighter without firm commitment from IAF...

I remember B S Dhanoa sir once said, "Tejas Mk1 has range and maneuverability issues that will be taken care in Mk2"... Clearly IAF knows certain things about Tejas Mk1 which we do not know... Their feedback went into development of Tejas Mk2, the jet that will truly meet IAF's requirements...
There are various numbers floating around, but I definitely see atleast 6 to 8 squadrons of Mk2 inducted in IAF.
How can IAF be accused of not supporting Tejas program when 1/3rd of its fleet will be filled with Tejas variants...?

Tejas Mk2 induction in numbers will take another 8 years... As I already said, number of jets that IAF can induct is restricted... They can not keep on buying fighters just like that... IAF is preferring to wait for the better bird...
bharathp
BRFite
Posts: 453
Joined: 24 Jul 2017 03:44

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by bharathp »

LakshmanPST wrote:
Two points the proponents are missing--->
1) ..... So, how wise is it to induct a jet with 4 Tonnes payload in 100s, instead of equal number of jets with 6 Tonnes payload...?

2) Also, many of them are missing the fact that IAF is not stopping at Mk1/1A but is planning to induct Tejas Mk2... ADE won't be simply designing & building prototype of a new fighter without firm commitment from IAF...

Tejas Mk2 induction in numbers will take another 8 years... As I already said, number of jets that IAF can induct is restricted... They can not keep on buying fighters just like that... IAF is preferring to wait for the better bird...
Lakshman ji, my 2 cents to your 2 cents:
1) there are 100+ mig21 s still in active service - surely the Tejas in its current forms or iterations (without going to mk II) can replace the MiG 21s - in good numbers? (the 123 numbers are for this purpose, so either ways, we are going ahead with the 100+ tejas)
2) the increase in numbers of tejas can improve economies of scale - and we do not need to stick to 42 sqdns (why is that number a hard stop?) and perhaps increase that since the 42 numbers before was for imported aircraft - if we get 3 desi aircraft for 2 imported aircraft, perhaps we can increase our sqdn numbers without changing the base costs?
3) IAF can keep waiting to buy a better bird, there will always be a newer bird on the horizon. we will keep playing catchup to more advanced (in fighter aircraft mfg atleast) nations.
4) when we do have the mk2s, the AMCAs, they can certainly replace the mirage and SU 30 respectively.

the "100s of Tejas" was a way to counter the MRFA/MRCA drama, which probably will only work against improving our Tejas fleet.

but then again, maybe - the argument for MRFA was to bring a new ecosystem with private players into the mix - by keeping the LCA with the DPSUs and keeping them happy.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by brar_w »

I'll add my .0002 cents - Replacing a fighter isn't a mission/requirement. Fulfilling a need (go through the wide array of combat missions an AF uses fighters for) is. The MiG-21's were procured eons ago when the operational needs of the IAF were likely a lot different. The current IAF leadership isn't looking back but looking ahead and it has to call the plays based on what it sees itself needing down the road. If that means that MWF >> over 2x increase in MK1A's then it will end up waiting because that is the force structure it has determined it needs. Requirements change and AF's adapt.
Last edited by brar_w on 08 Jul 2021 20:45, edited 1 time in total.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Pratyush »

My .000002 cents for every one else. The requirements of the IAF are what they are. The reality of the industrial base is what it is.

There is a huge gap in building something at a lab scale which is what LCA has been for some time. As compared with building something at an industrial scale.

The problems that have to be solved for a domestic program are not applicable for a foreign made screwdriver-ed in India fighters. As the production problem has been solved by the host country and we are also plugged in to the supply chain of the host country.

In light of above. It makes sense for the IAF to order the mk1 in substantial numbers so that the supply chain can be ironed out by the HAL and suitable supplier base exists for follow up products.


Or else the next program will also take 40 years and I can very well imagine people having same conversation in 2060 with a successor project for Tejas.

Having said all this the mission set of the IAF has not changed so much that 200 to 250 Tejas absolutely don't have a place in IAF. I also see the size of the IAF growing to 75 + combat squadrons for a full scale 2 front war. With the improvement in PRC tanking capacity.

The issues of range faced by it can easily be resolved by a drone tanker which can enter into service by 2030 to 35. Payload is not really a major challange.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Aditya_V »

+1

Have more orders for Tejas and same supplier ecosystem will be able to deliver LCA mk 2 , AMCA, and TEDBF faster.pppp
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by LakshmanPST »

bharathp wrote: Lakshman ji, my 2 cents to your 2 cents:
1) there are 100+ mig21 s still in active service - surely the Tejas in its current forms or iterations (without going to mk II) can replace the MiG 21s - in good numbers? (the 123 numbers are for this purpose, so either ways, we are going ahead with the 100+ tejas)
2) the increase in numbers of tejas can improve economies of scale - and we do not need to stick to 42 sqdns (why is that number a hard stop?) and perhaps increase that since the 42 numbers before was for imported aircraft - if we get 3 desi aircraft for 2 imported aircraft, perhaps we can increase our sqdn numbers without changing the base costs?
3) IAF can keep waiting to buy a better bird, there will always be a newer bird on the horizon. we will keep playing catchup to more advanced (in fighter aircraft mfg atleast) nations.
4) when we do have the mk2s, the AMCAs, they can certainly replace the mirage and SU 30 respectively.

the "100s of Tejas" was a way to counter the MRFA/MRCA drama, which probably will only work against improving our Tejas fleet.

but then again, maybe - the argument for MRFA was to bring a new ecosystem with private players into the mix - by keeping the LCA with the DPSUs and keeping them happy.
My post is not about replacing each of existing IAF jets with better jets... What I wanted to say is that for the sanctioned strength of 42 squadrons, IAF would have planned a specific force structure with various jets of different categories to meet all operational requirements... So, if they're forced to take 250 Tejas Mk1s, it may alter the overall plans... Not that Tejas Mk1 won't be effective but the overall operations of IAF won't be efficient...

The 42 squadron number is the sanctioned strength by Govt... Yes, we need more squadrons for IAF to be able to fully dominate the skies in the neighbourhood... But tell me which Govt. would increase it...? And when...? Right now, IAF planned the force structure considering 42 squadrons atleast for the next 2 decades... They can not buy 12 more squadrons of Mk1 to fill up the numbers now and then wait for some future Govt. to authorize more squadrons... That is not how things work in reality... They will be stuck with light fighters if that happens...

When IAF says they need MRFA, they have certain minimum requirements in mind with respect to range, payload, sensors, weapons etc.... It was Medium Weight Category in MMRCA 1.0... In 2.0, nothing specifically was mentioned but IAF chief many times said that it will be 'Rafale Class', which is essentially Medium Weight (though Rafale has higher payload)...
Now Tejas Mk2 can meet most of these requirements, but Tejas Mk1 cannot meet the basic requirements of range and payload...

I'm all for development of domestic MIC... But then there need to be 'good enough' desi alternatives to these foreign products for us to order them in bulk... We can not simply order a Light fighter in bulk to fill in numbers of medium fighters...

I personally want MRFA cancelled and 2 Rafale + 4 more Tejas Mk2 squadrons (in addition to 6-8 Tejas Mk2 currently planned) bought in its place...
But buying 12 more squadrons of Tejas Mk1 now just because it is a local product is a big No...
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Aditya_V »

No point Inducting a new 4-4,5 Gen aircraft - order 2 Squadrons of Rafale but 114 new aircraft of a new type makes no sense.

It takes 5-7 years to induct a new type, weapons, spare parts, drop tanks, training ground crews etc. Better to invest in Tejas Mk1/ 1A, they can do most of the missions which any imported 4-4.5 generation can - yes range is less but it will free up Su-30, M-2000 and Rafales for these missions.

Plus any imported fighter with AESA, its weapons package will cost upwards of USD 150 million each .

Plus the very same facilities will make the Mk-2, TEDBF, AMCA come out faster and much cheaper as Land, tooling Machinery, skilled workforce can all be leveraged.

Through even 6-7 Billion USD on Tejas MK1A will get much faster production rates, customised Aircraft which will also help future generations of IAF aircraft.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by nachiket »

If the needs of IAF have changed and they need aircraft with higher payload and range, then how do the absolute numbers they need to buy not change? If the Tejas Mk1 is equivalent to the Jaguar in payload and range and superior to the 100+ Mig-21's in service, why do all of them need to be replaced by a Mirage-2000 class fighter instead? Can we even afford such a procurement? You can't say we are short 10 squadrons of aircraft because we have to retire Mig-21's and Jaguars but balk at purchasing 10 squadrons of Tejas Mk1 which has equal or superior capability in favor of something larger and more expensive. Then the absolute numbers need to come down, our finances and local industrial capacity being what it is.

The Tejas Mk2/MWF is meant to perform the roles that the M2k and Mig-29 do today and will be available in numbers roughly when those fleets are due for retirement not sooner. It cannot replace 200 Mig-21's and Jaguars. Not in time and not on budget. And since this is the MRCA thread, neither can an expensive foreign fighter.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by nachiket »

Comparing the Tejas with the Mig-21 and Jaguar in terms of payload and range alone also discounts the flexibility that a fully operationalized Tejas squadron can provide to the IAF during deployments. A single squadron at a forward airfield can provide aircraft for both ORP/CAP/escort duties along with a wide array of strike missions using PGM's or dumb bombs as the need may be. You would need to locate 2 squadrons of single-role aircraft to be able to perform the same variety of missions.

The best thing for us to do is to build and induct large numbers of Tejas and integrate every possible weapon on it which is available in the IAF inventory.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

Seeing how 114 MRFA will likely never see the light of day, additional Mk1As will arrive.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Vivek K »

Rakesh wrote:.

Actually I get it now. You only wanted me to add up the French imports (Mirage 2000 and Rafale) and not the Russian imports (MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25, MiG-27, MiG-29, Su-7, Su-30, etc). You should have been more clearer. So you are correct. French imports are expensive and they are a waste of money and they destroyed the Indian MIC. The Russian imports - which cost way more than the French imports, due to the sheer scale of numbers acquired from Russia - actually uplifted the Indian MIC. 36 Rafales and 49 Mirage 2000s cost the Indian taxpayer a lot more than the hundreds (if not over a thousand) of Russian planes India acquired since the 60s.

You are so correct. I hang my head in shame over the French imports. Shame, Shame.
Admiral sir - your French slip is showing. Me support Russian crap? Philip must be laughing his behind off! What have you been smoking saar! You should however hang your head in shame with Philip - I seriously belive that.
But that would go against your argument that imports are bad. Since the Su-30MKI is an import, then it is bad. Is that not the standard that you are repeatedly emphasizing on BRF? That an import destroys the local MIC.

In that same vein, C-17 is also bad. C-130 is also bad. Never mind that we have no local platforms to substitute them with, but they are bad...because they are imports. You asked me to add up all of India's imports. I am doing it. Are they not bad Vivek? Yes or No?

Why buy imports like C-17 and C-130 to supply much needed material to the Indian Armed Forces? Is sustaining really necessary over supporting the local MIC? Or it could it actually be that these imports - like C-17, Su-30MKI and C-130 - are vital because there is no substitute local product? Yes or No?
Seriously - you're falling apart Admiral. What is incorrect in the above? Yes it is all bad. But these are products that there are no domestic supplies for. Therefore can you start looking at sales without a product? I think that you're just wasting bandwidth and being a baby because your pet Rafale is being written about. Read the posts again - maybe use reading glasses and go over them slowly. And if you still don't come up with a different understanding, read the line below:
If we had invested the money that we have spent in imports of ALL WEAPONS since independence into a domestic MIC, there would have been viable suppliers of the entire range of products. We should therefore get serious about the domestic MIC. The LCA, like the Marut, the Arjun, INSAS and others provides a great opportunity. We must not lose this opportunity -either through failure of procurement or production.
You keep bringing up the past (Marut), but it is the past. It cannot be changed. How does it change the situation today? If I had invested in Google or Amazon back in the 90s, I would be a billionaire today. But since that did not happen and following your role model, I should be in deep depression over it. I should be doing rona-dhona everyday, like you how do you on BRF because of the Marut.
When you write three times more than my post, who is doing the rona-dhona?
Last edited by Vivek K on 09 Jul 2021 02:21, edited 1 time in total.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Vivek K »

Rakesh wrote: And let me help you with some starter points;

* Vishal Thapar in the video above states that the MiG-29 fleet is larger in number than the Mirage 2000 fleet and the upgrade costs cheaper. Actually more than half the cost. Please bring that up!

* The narrator in the background uses the term "...the IAF brushes aside the controversy." Bring that up as well!
I am not a supporter of the Migs. You seem to read what you want to read. My intent and understanding about the two - M2K worth far more than the 29s. The IAF had wanted to expand their M2K fleet to 150 (a great idea then) but the French saw the opportunity to make more money by selling the Rafale. And thus instead of expanding the M2K fleet, the IAF let itself get bogged down in the MRCA nautanki. If IAF had been smarter, today they would have had a larger M2K fleet and should have then retired the Mig-29s.

I have not followed the Mig-29 upgrade closely and if I wrote the 29 with "engine upgrade" - that is my bad. Though the large expenditure on their engines and introduction of the newer gen engines gives them that. Let me say this - even if F-35 was given to the IAF free of cost, I would recommend saying no and opting for LCA MK2/AMCA. Domestic weapon building is critical for India. Unlike you, at every threat, I do not jump into the laps of the French or the Russians. I would like the comfort of the domestic MIC to provide solutions. And how can it be made capable, by buying more of their products, by talking their products up. But that's it from me.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

Vivek K wrote:Admiral sir - your French slip is showing. Me support Russian crap? Philip must be laughing his behind off! What have you been smoking saar! You should however hang your head in shame with Philip - I seriously believe that.
When my French slip really comes, you will know ;)
Vivek K wrote:What is incorrect in the above? Yes it is all bad. But these are products that there are no domestic supplies for. Therefore can you start looking at sales without a product?
So you finally admit that there are some products there are no domestic supplies for. Wow....I am surprised! :)

1) So since there was no domestic substitute for C-17 and C-130, does it pass your "this-import-is-ok" test?

2) And since there is no domestic substitute for Su-30MKI, does it pass in your eyes?

3) I am afraid to bring up the Rafale, but I don't have a choice...since Rafale acquisition is what giving you all this heartburn. But I have to ask, since there is no domestic substitute for the Rafale, does it is pass? Please remember that the Tejas Mk1 - the only variant currently in existence - is not a medium multi-role combat aircraft. So what is the domestic substitute that is available right now? Please don't tell me about the future and please spare me the lecture about if we had invested in Marut. What domestic substitute existed when one of the seven contestants was finally selected - from MMRCA 1.0 - in 2012?

And remember only 36 Rafales are contracted for. In the next decade, when the Mirage 2000 retires, only 36 Rafales of French origin will be left. On the other hand, there is a confirmed order for 83 Tejas Mk1A and 40 Tejas Mk1 which will be flying in the next decade. That is 123 aircraft of Indian origin, minus the turbofan and radar. But I have a sneaky feeling, that you believe that 36 is bigger than 123.

And I am not even counting the Mk2 variant here, which based on who you ask, numbers anywhere from 108 to 200 birds. A final tally of anywhere from 200 - 300 Tejas will likely be in service. Even if we have to go by some media reports - that another 36 Rafale are on offer - it still will not come close to the 123 Tejas Mk1/Mk1As that will be flying by the next decade. But please continue with your rona-dhona of 36 Rafales and the upgrade of 49 Mirage 2000s. Please do continue.
Vivek K wrote:If we had invested the money that we have spent in imports of ALL WEAPONS since independence into a domestic MIC, there would have been viable suppliers of the entire range of products. We should therefore get serious about the domestic MIC. The LCA, like the Marut, the Arjun, INSAS and others provides a great opportunity. We must not lose this opportunity -either through failure of procurement or production.

Since the blue highlighted line did not happen, what are you expecting really today? Simple example - if I did not do any preparation for the UPSC exam, can I honestly be disappointed when I failed? I did not study, but I will do rona-dhona as to why I do not have the post of IAS officer. Life is so unfair! This is your amazing logic. Let go of the past. It is over.

The Tejas production line of the next 16 FOC Mk1s is now picking after COVID ravaged HAL, like it did the rest of India. The 83 order of Mk1As will take three years for delivery, which is the industry standard. But the IAF is depleting squadrons faster than new inductions. We had a major skirmish with China last year and Pakistan is dutifully playing the role of jihadi. War is knocking on our door and the IAF needs new aircraft, of different types - Tejas and MRFA. Each has her own role. But 114 MRFA will not come. It is not even an issue of import preference anymore. That deal is a political time bomb and no Govt will touch it with a ten foot pole. And in this quagmire, lies the make or break moment for HAL. The 83 Tejas Mk1A order. Every retired IAF officer is more or less saying the same thing

For 7+ decades the services, the bureaucracy, the entire government machinery has been importing. It is not easy to change this mindset overnight. See the controversy over a misunderstood statement that the CDS - General Bipin Rawat - made and the fallout that happened. If as a nation, we have this much takleef over what the CDS said about an operational role of a service in a particular theatre....you honestly believe it is going to be easy to change the import mindset?

You should be celebrating when the Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhaduria says, "Tejas today what you are getting is the BEST IN ITS CLASS IN THE WORLD. Take my word for it." When the Chief himself is saying this, the rest will follow. The product will speak for herself. If the 83 Tejas Mk1A order goes through successfully, the IAF will order more of the same. But even on that day, you will do rona-dhona over 36 Rafales.
Vivek K wrote:I am not a supporter of the Migs. You seem to read what you want to read. My intent and understanding about the two - M2K worth far more than the 29s.
If M2K is worth far more than the MiG-29, then you have to upgrade it. All combat aircraft go through this, during their service life. The MiG-21, MiG-27, MiG-29 and Su-30MKI all went or will go through this. Tejas will be no different. Why are you complaining about the M2K upgrade?
Vivek K wrote:The IAF had wanted to expand their M2K fleet to 150 (a great idea then) but the French saw the opportunity to make more money by selling the Rafale. And thus instead of expanding the M2K fleet, the IAF let itself get bogged down in the MRCA nautanki. If IAF had been smarter, today they would have had a larger M2K fleet and should have then retired the Mig-29s.
I like how you re-write history i.e. the French saw the saw the opportunity to make more money. But here is the reality;

1) The Mirage 2000 production line was closed in November 2007, with the last Mirage 2000 delivered to the Hellenic Air Force.

2) The MMRCA started on 28 Aug 2007, then with the technical downselect on 27 April 2011 and finally with the L1 selection on 31 Jan 2012.

* Is it Dassault's fault that our MoD sat on their proposal - from 2001 till 2007 - to transfer the entire Mirage 2000 production line to India?

* Is it Dassault's fault that then Defence Minister George Fernandes got cold feet, after the Tehelka Scandal and decided to make the single vendor Mirage 2000 acquisition into a multi-vendor bid?

* You want Dassault to re-open a closed line, that too after five years, with all the tools and jigs? If that could really occur, I would argue for the Dassault Ouragan instead of the Mirage 2000. It would have been even cheaper! Probably just a few million for 126 Ouragans.

* After re-opening this line (by the way are you going to pay for re-opening the line?), you then want Dassault to pit the Mirage 2000 against the Eurofighter Typhoon, the only other aircraft that made the technical downselect on 27 April 2011? On every measure, the Typhoon would have run circles around the Mirage 2000. Why would Dassault do something that dumb? Even in the 114 MRFA deal, Dassault is reportedly offering the F4 variant against the other competitors. Like all other OEMs, they are in it to win it. When HAL charged an astronomical amount to the GOI for 83 Tejas Mk1As, they had one motive in mind - PROFIT. Corporations operate on the premise of *PROFIT*. You are aware of that fact, are you not?

* Is it Dassault's fault that our MoD took their own sweet time from 2007 till 2012 to select a bird?

I am sure in your understanding it must be. If you were the CEO of any company and you made such decisions during contests of this financial magnitude, you would cease to be CEO. But it in the real world, that is not how it works.

Your white lies will not work. You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.
Vivek K wrote:I have not followed the Mig-29 upgrade closely and if I wrote the 29 with "engine upgrade" - that is my bad. Though the large expenditure on their engines and introduction of the newer gen engines gives them that. Let me say this - even if F-35 was given to the IAF free of cost, I would recommend saying no and opting for LCA MK2/AMCA. Domestic weapon building is critical for India. Unlike you, at every threat, I do not jump into the laps of the French or the Russians. I would like the comfort of the domestic MIC to provide solutions. And how can it be made capable, by buying more of their products, by talking their products up. But that's it from me.
The IAF will not take F-35. Why do you think they bought S-400? :) The IAF is apprehensive about American fighters.

Domestic weapon building takes time and it has to meet the requirements. Just as Tejas Mk1 is not the substitute for the Su-30MKI, the same is true for the Rafale. You may not know this, but it was Air Marshal Raghnunath Nambiar (the pilot who bombed Tiger Hill in 1999 and later served as a test pilot in the Tejas program) who said that the Tejas Mk2 will exceed even the Rafale of today, sensor and avionics wise. But the IAF is living in today and the IAF's dire need is of today. The situation is not perfect and the import lobby is very strong, but it will change in due course. The Mk1A will serve as the catalyst of that change.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by LakshmanPST »

nachiket wrote:If the needs of IAF have changed and they need aircraft with higher payload and range, then how do the absolute numbers they need to buy not change?
If the Tejas Mk1 is equivalent to the Jaguar in payload and range and superior to the 100+ Mig-21's in service, why do all of them need to be replaced by a Mirage-2000 class fighter instead? Can we even afford such a procurement? You can't say we are short 10 squadrons of aircraft because we have to retire Mig-21's and Jaguars but balk at purchasing 10 squadrons of Tejas Mk1 which has equal or superior capability in favor of something larger and more expensive. Then the absolute numbers need to come down, our finances and local industrial capacity being what it is.

The Tejas Mk2/MWF is meant to perform the roles that the M2k and Mig-29 do today and will be available in numbers roughly when those fleets are due for retirement not sooner. It cannot replace 200 Mig-21's and Jaguars. Not in time and not on budget. And since this is the MRCA thread, neither can an expensive foreign fighter.
Sir, the sanctioned strength of 42 squadrons is a number that has been floating around in media for quite long time. If I'm not wrong, it was 39.5 squadrons in year 2000 which was later revised to 42. I'm not sure who has the authority to increase the number, but it is a constraint within which IAF is working...

Over the last 20 years the capability of PLAAF has grown exponentially. Not much in absolute numbers, but in capability... They not only inducted 4+ Gen fighters in large numbers but also inducted a lot of SAM systems... Not only that, the infrastructure in Tibet and Xinjiang has also improved greatly...
In the coming decade, it is only going to increase...

Isn't it important for IAF to improve its capabilities when our adversary in growing more powerful...? Pakistan lacks strategic depth but not China... Isn't it important for IAF to have the capability to strike targets that are much deeper in China...? If IAF is restricted to 42 squadrons, then the only way to improve the capability is to buy more capable jets in large numbers rather than limiting themselves to light fighters...

Yes, Tejas Mk1 is a good aircraft that can perform a variety of roles... Tejas Mk2 will provide much superior capabilities mainly with respect to range and payload... A strike mission that would require 6 Tejas Mk1s can be done with 4 Tejas Mk2s... And they can reach deeper...

Coming to affordability, getting to 42 squadrons is the need of IAF... We may or may not afford 114 Rafales, but we can definitely afford the procurement of 200 Tejas Mk2, assuming it costs 50-60 million $ per jet... This payment will be spread over a period of 15 years...
-
Once again, I'm not talking about 1 to 1 replacement of MIG21s or Jaguars or MIG29s or Mirage 2000s and their roles... If we are to replace the jets that way, we shouldn't be inducting Su30 MKIs to replace MIG23 or MIG27 squadrons which we did...

I'm talking in the context of overall force structure of IAF by 2040...
Out of the 42 squadrons, 1/3rd of the fleet will be Heavy Su30s and 1/6th of the fleet will be light Tejas Mk1/1A... These 20 squadrons are confirmed orders...
Out of the remaining fleet, 1/6th (6 squadrons) is reserved for 5th Gen AMCA...
We have place only for 1/3rd fleet (16 squadrons) that will be filled with Rafale/MRFA/Tejas Mk2... 2 squadrons of Rafale are already bought...

We essentially have place only for 14 squadrons to be filled...
IAF want it to be 6 MRFA + 8 Tejas Mk2...
Some ppl want it to be 2 Rafale + 4 Mk1A + 8 Mk2
I personally want it to be 2-4 Rafale + 10-12 Tejas Mk2 (as Tejas Mk2 is more capable aircraft and in same class as some MRFA jets which would not really effect IAF's overall plans much...)

There are some who want 200 Mk1A orders... Where is the place for 10 Mk1A squadrons here...? Any increase in Mk1A orders will only directly eat into Tejas Mk2 orders and a reduction in the overall capabilities of IAF... It will also disturb the fleet balance... Nothing else will be achieved...
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Aditya_V »

This squadron requirement changes

For example what do we have

1) 2 Squadrons Rafales
2) 13 Squadrons of SU30MKI
3) 3 Squadrons Mig-29
4) 3 Squadron of M-2000- it can 2.5 squadrons
5) 2 Squadrons of Tejas by 2023or 2022
6) 6 squadrons Jaguars- 3 retiring by 2030
7) 6 Squadrons of Bison.

4 squadrons of Tejas MK1A ordered and may be 1 more squadron of Mig 29 to be finalised.

By 2030 that leaves space for 11 squadrons and as others retire another 5 squadrons by 2035 and by 2040 another 5 squadrons for.

Plus Navy requirements, no way are more Tejas Mk-1/ 1A going to come in the way of Tejas Mk-2, infact it will facilitate faster induction and production of MK-2 and AMCA since the parts Bin and suppliers/ weapons/ training will all be similar.

A new 4.5 gen MRFA to be starting induction from 2025-26 makes no sense at all.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

The Tejas Mk2 will not arrive in the timeframe planned. It will be delayed. To be expected in a project of this nature. The 114 MRFA deal will not pan out either. In the absence of both, the only other option left is the Mk1A. Otherwise the IAF will be staring at a very low number of squadrons.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Pratyush »

Admiral, naah it will be fine.

Given the thinking displayed by the IAF till now. I don't think that additional order's for mk1a will be placed.


Though I do think that the MWF can enter service by 2026-27. All the elements needed to make it happen are in place. If required funding available to put the damn thing together and finish the flight test program.

I will be watching with interest the allegations of curruption against officials involved in this program like it was done in Cryo engine situation or the various 155 mm gun projects since 2000 till now.

That's the only way to derail it now.
VickyAvinash
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 89
Joined: 02 Oct 2017 07:31

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by VickyAvinash »

Pratyush wrote:
I will be watching with interest the,......................,.....,....,..........

That's the only way to derail it now.
Call me paranoid, but pls stop giving such ideas to prestitutes. In this country, anything goes.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

Lockheed proposes to set up MRO facility for F-21s in India
https://www.defencenews.in/2021/08/12/123-6/
12 August 2021

US aerospace company Lockheed Martin Corp. is open to setting up a maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) facility in India for F-21 to further sweeten its bid for the 114 fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force (IAF), its representatives said on Wednesday.

Michael Kelley, vice president, India, Lockheed Martin aeronautics strategy and business development, and Brett Medlin, the F-21 India campaign lead, are in the country to hold talks with government and IAF officials on the multibillion-dollar deal. This comes against the backdrop of India planning to procure 114 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for the air force. Lockheed is competing with Boeing’s F-18, Swedish SAAB’s Gripen, Dassault Aviation’s Rafale, EADS’ Eurofighter Typhoon, and MiG-35 of Russia’s United Aircraft Corp.

Lockheed has already tied up with Tata group to locally manufacture the aircraft. It had previously promised to shift its production line to India if it secures the MMRCA deal and not sell the F-21 to any other country. “Once you build an airplane and put it together in the country you also know by extension how to take it apart,” Kelley said.

“So you have the fundamental competencies of an MRO once you put the final assembly and checkout capability. If you add to that the ecosystem of the different avionics and subsystems, there will be Indian companies in the supply chain feeding the checkout facilities. So yes, there will definitely be the possibility for MRO. It has got to be competitive because obviously IAF would want to do the MRO here, but bringing other aircraft to do MRO, Indian industry has got to be competitive in bringing that work here,” Kelley said.

Once an MRO facility is built in India the aircraft need not be taken to the US or other countries where Lockheed has an established MRO unit, according to analysts. “It is, however, unclear if this means that engine overhaul will be done at the Indian facility, considering that Lockheed does not manufacture engines. Another point is that if the F-21 is only offered to India, as Lockheed has said, I am not sure of the economics of the MRO proposal. For instance, how aircraft of other countries can be serviced at the Indian unit,” said a person aware of the matter, seeking anonymity.

Kelley said he was hopeful that India could come up with a decision on procuring the MMRCAs by the first quarter of 2022. When asked how the F-21 would fit in with the requirements of the IAF, which has already procured 36 Rafales from France and has allocated ₹48,000 crore for state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd to manufacture 83 Tejas, a light combat aircraft, Medlin said, from an operational perspective, the F-21 complemented both the Tejas and the Rafale.

“If you assess what is the fighter squadron requirement of Indian Air Force, they are operating well below that. If you look at the pace of deliveries of the Tejas versus their requirement, the force structure gap that the IAF has, what the F-21 will provide is help fill that gap of capacity as well as capability for the IAF,” Medlin said. The IAF has a squadron strength of 30 against the sanctioned strength of 42, mostly on account of the phase-out of its aging Russian MiG fighter jets.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4056
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by ArjunPandit »

There is only 1 scenario where a deal is completed and that is a tough military scenario by clear political communication. Otherwise BIF will cry at any other deal. The only way forward is rafale additional sqdns over time.
In my viewpoint
- F21 is not coming after F16 downing.
- F18,has some possiblity but given naval case seems to be gone ...very unlikely given situation of CATOBAR..
With passage of time, all numbers are more likely to filled with Tejas mk2/amca.

My sense is once things are stabilized products will be increased
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 939
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by YashG »

https://mobile.twitter.com/cvkrishnan/s ... 3650536449
New IAF chief looks beyond 36 additional Rafale jets, wants 114 MRFA

Says wrong to assume that S 400 and MRSAM can lead to reduction in need for fighters as some think

Says 42 Squadron is a long road ahead

Even for 35, it will take 15 years
Okay this is a bit of a , perhaps a sad closure to a debate we had here on why iaf is not ordering more tejas when it wants to reach 44 or even 60 squadrons. Indeed import lobby has convinced the IAF that we should keep waiting for imports (another MRFA tamasha) and never fully develop our own aircraft industry. No Mk2.

Obviously we aren’t doubling in Tejas because we want to keep funding foreign MICs and create the urgency.

One would think that its juvenile to think that we have money to import 114 MRFA and our policy makers and IAF leadership can see what everyone can see. But its not juvenile of them to keep 114 MRFA dream alive, its actually sinister.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

But he will only get MRFA in piecemeal orders. 36 here and 36 there. There is no money for 114 MRFA.

No manufacturer will shift their production line for such small orders. So keep calm and carry on.

When Bhadauria Sir took over as Chief in Sept 2019, he said there is no plan to acquire 36 more Rafales and the 114 MRFA contest will continue. A year later, he changed his tune and said that they are looking at 36 more Rafales. Now the new Air Chief says the opposite. A year later, he will change his tune.

Round-And-Round the merry go round we go :lol:
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

New IAF chief looks beyond 36 additional Rafale jets, wants 114 multi role fighter aircraft
https://theprint.in/defence/new-iaf-chi ... ft/745485/
05 October 2021
The new IAF chief also said that the Service is looking at having 5th generation and even 6th generation technology on board the MRFA in terms of modern weapons and Artificial Intelligence.

“In MRFA, most of the contenders have the 4.5 generation technology. One of the key features that we are seeking is the ability to integrate 5th and 6th generation technology. It will be a Make in India model,” he said.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by brar_w »

5th generation design elements include (some) Low Observable designs & materials, Internally carried weapons/sensors, "more electric" architectures, next generation propulsion (including incorporating LO features in propulsion) and LPI/LPD high frequency comms. No one has publicly discussed what sixth gen features would be the focus but suffice to say that it will include adaptive engines, broadband and even multi-spectral stealth (to include long range IR countermeasures), and a generational leap in autonomy and/or AI. No OEM is going to be capable of retrofitting most of those things on a 4.5 generation aircraft because of both technical limitations and because the cost and ROI considerations. Best they can do is work within platform constraints and integrate the avionics and some of the sensor and computing architectures but then their performance is still limited because they can't get as close to many of the threats as 5th or 6th gen designs thus limiting how much utility they get out of it compared to those aircraft.
Last edited by brar_w on 05 Oct 2021 21:40, edited 1 time in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 96330?s=20 ---> IAF Chief: 114 Multi-role fighter aircraft acquisition project is very much on. They should have considerable 5th gen capability available in them as well as the integration/embedding of 5th/6th gen tech in them. This will be a deciding factor for which jet will get chosen.

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 35140?s=20 ---> Wish list is F-35 level but IAF can't get it as long as US does drama over S-400.

https://twitter.com/KSingh_1469/status/ ... 63106?s=20 ---> I have to wonder what planet these people live on - 4.5+ generation with 6th generation upgradability later down the road? Anyway Rafale has active stealth like sole 5th generation platforms. F-21/F-18 will be taken off the table when India accepts delivery of S-400 in a few weeks.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/144 ... 19235?s=20 --->

* 114 x MRFA will happen.
* Tejas MK2 will also happen.
* AMCA will definitely happen.

Unnecessary confusion is being generated by some quarters.

https://twitter.com/NotThatUT/status/14 ... 62401?s=20 ---> Is there any chance MRFA going to the USA to avoid CAATSA sanction?

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/144 ... 90432?s=20 ---> Not in my view. In fact, that is precisely why no aerial combat teeth will be brought in from the United States ever. A few attack helicopters here and there don't count.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Rakesh »

Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 96330?s=20 ---> IAF Chief: 114 Multi-role fighter aircraft acquisition project is very much on. They should have considerable 5th gen capability available in them as well as the integration/embedding of 5th/6th gen tech in them. This will be a deciding factor for which jet will get chosen.
https://twitter.com/Firezstarter1/statu ... 41377?s=20 ---> Marketing bonanza for the contenders. On a serious note, IAF Chief makes absolute sense. We should look at the longest range/LO oriented radar/IRST, state of the art EW suites, network connectivity, weapons packages as discriminators. All four essential in era of LO/VLO targets.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5352
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Cain Marko »

Rakesh wrote:
Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 96330?s=20 ---> IAF Chief: 114 Multi-role fighter aircraft acquisition project is very much on. They should have considerable 5th gen capability available in them as well as the integration/embedding of 5th/6th gen tech in them. This will be a deciding factor for which jet will get chosen.
https://twitter.com/Firezstarter1/statu ... 41377?s=20 ---> Marketing bonanza for the contenders. On a serious note, IAF Chief makes absolute sense. We should look at the longest range/LO oriented radar/IRST, state of the art EW suites, network connectivity, weapons packages as discriminators. All four essential in era of LO/VLO targets.
Hate to say this but maybe the Russians (and the iaf) know something we don't...
Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 263
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Chinmay »

Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/Firezstarter1/statu ... 41377?s=20 ---> Marketing bonanza for the contenders. On a serious note, IAF Chief makes absolute sense. We should look at the longest range/LO oriented radar/IRST, state of the art EW suites, network connectivity, weapons packages as discriminators. All four essential in era of LO/VLO targets.
Those criteria are F15EX territory...
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by brar_w »

You're still not getting close to the fifth gen level of capability though because of the huge mismatch between the two platforms types when it comes to RCS (range equation), detection ranges, electric architectures and networking. Being able to get closer dramatically improves every sensor and EW kit that you may have and that currently is a huge advantage for 5th gen platforms relative to fourth or even 4+ generation systems that have relatively high RCS which gets only worst by adding external weapons or pods, tanks etc. But at least it is an improvement over 4th gen aircraft from many years back that didn't have some of these systems. Same with Rafale it has advanced nicely with its new standards, but limitations still remain (why FCAS, AMCA, Tempest, KF-X, Checkmate, J-31 etc exist as future platforms).
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by ldev »

Vs China which has rapidly emerged as the biggest threat to India the requirement and current shortfall is the lack of long range penetrative strike options. Rather than concentrating on immediate LO, 5th gen etc. fighters, India should try and get long range precision strike options from the US i.e. the US Army's proposed Precision Strike Missile with a current proposed range of 500 km but upgradeable to 1600 km, the medium range options they are exploring with the ground launched SM-6 and the supposed offer on the table currently for Tomahawks, ~2000 km range ( this appeared a few weeks ago in the Hindustan Times). And the biggest boost will be if India is able to work on the LRHW, Long Range Hypersonic Weapon i.e. the ground based version destined for the US Army, range in excess of 2700 km. In theory this acquisition/purchase/collaboration should not run up against the S400 vs F35 debate. And it will plug the shortfall that India has vs long range strike options against China. It will fit in nicely with the recently proposed "Rocket Forces" for the Indian armed forces. Something like this will necessarily require toning down of the inter services rivalry for weapons such that the overall strike objectives are met.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by brar_w »

ldev wrote:Vs China which has rapidly emerged as the biggest threat to India the requirement and current shortfall is the lack of long range penetrative strike options. Rather than concentrating on immediate LO, 5th gen etc. fighters, India should try and get long range precision strike options from the US i.e. the US Army's proposed Precision Strike Missile with a current proposed range of 500 km but upgradeable to 1600 km, the medium range options they are exploring with the ground launched SM-6 and the supposed offer on the table currently for Tomahawks, ~2000 km range ( this appeared a few weeks ago in the Hindustan Times). And the biggest boost will be if India is able to work on the LRHW, Long Range Hypersonic Weapon i.e. the ground based version destined for the US Army, range in excess of 2700 km. In theory this acquisition/purchase/collaboration should not run up against the S400 vs F35 debate. And it will plug the shortfall that India has vs long range strike options against China. It will fit in nicely with the recently proposed "Rocket Forces" for the Indian armed forces. Something like this will necessarily require toning down of the inter services rivalry for weapons such that the overall strike objectives are met.
The US is playing catch up on ground launched long range fires because until recently it couldn't field anything with a range greater than 500 km. The IA already has several options in production and currently fielded or being upgraded/enhanced. Also, the US long range fires is very specifically designed around the counter IADS mission with a limited target set whereas the IA has an option for much greater target sets and warhead sizes.
Lohit
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 28 Feb 2019 01:03

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Lohit »

Asking a noob question to the gurus here, please assume in advance the question is posed from one who has a 5 year old's knowledge/acumen on vayusena matters,

Q. Does the S400 acquisition dramatically stabilize our fighter requirements, at least on the Western front?

If I try and assess things from first principles, we have ~36 sqdns. Lets assume half of these, 18 sqdns, are dedicated to the West are meant to face 25 sqdns of PAF. In an ideal scenario I would want to maintain, say 26 sqdns to slightly balance out the adversary ie a deficit of 8 sqdns.

But perhaps the deficit is lower - here is how: ideally I as well as the adversary would deploy 1/3rd jets to forward bases keeping 1/3rd in slightly deeper bases while the rest kept reserved in "strategic depth". Hence for any adversarial play, I would want to outmatch 2/3rd of PAF sqdns ie 17 sqdns and hence given that currently my 2/3rd add to 12 sqdns this results in a deficit of 6 sqdns to have a slight edge of 1 sqdn.

Now, of the 5 S400s I am acquiring, 2 can be used on the west keeping 2 for Tibet and 1 as reserve.

An S400 can engage upto 80 targets. Let's scale this down by a Rusi factor of 80%. ie 64 targets or ~3 sqdns worth. Deploying 2 S400s means I am "augmenting" a net of 6 sqdns worth and meeting the bare minimum deficit.

Now an S400 has a magnitudinal advantage in radar and missile range v a jet, BUT an S400 cannot perform precision strikes, maneuvers or other ground support roles that a jet can. But in a "basic" airforce balancing exercise in a two front war scenario, I have enough to just counter-balance the PAF.

Am I right in these assumptions? That breaking down the play at the common denominator of sqdns, S400 help us restore balance.

If true, this exercise provides an insight as to why rampng up Tejas production is so critical.

Once S400 acquisition and integration gets completed in the next couple of years, every single sqdn we add will start tilting the balance of airpower in our favor, which is currently "just" balanced by S400.

Given that a max sortie for a Tejas on the west will be 1000kms, to and fro, given Pak's limited 'width' and given Tejas theoretical range of 3k kms, if Tejas can match an F16 or Bandar in terms of avionics and weapons, its what we want.

Now, as per available data, HAL has been given a target of providing 83 Tejas in 5 years but HAL has stated they can complete the order in 3 (https://www.ndtv.com/bangalore-news/raj ... on-2361868) - which leads me to believe they have a production capacity of ~28 jets or ~1.5 sqdns p.a. Investing (and that too not much on CAPEX if HAL has good industrial engineers which Im sure it has) to scale throughput by 40% gets us to ~40 jets or 2 sqdns p.a.

If I add 2 sqdns of Tejas per year from today - PAF has to proportionately add 40 Bandars at a cost of $600-800 Mn per year - something that is not financially feasible for them at all.

Thus, in 5 years time; assuming PAF due to NaPak's economic implosion is unable to add jets, then vs 17 PAF sqdns in play I field 12 existing sqdns + 6 S400 sqdn equivalent + 10 Tejas sqdns or 17 vs 28 or almost a 1.5x numerical advantage (not to forget that actuals would be 3x counting in Eastern inventory), which in my view qualifies as overwhelming! Even if we buy the 114 MRCA to make the difference starker and counter-act any PAF inventory additions, our core focus should remain on adding 2 Tejas sqdns p.a.

This way we outmatch PAF vastly in the numbers we field within 5 years. Of course the assumption here is for two fronts. In a single front theater its not even a contest. Thus a moderate increase in Tejas throughput and S400 integration has the potential to turn IAFs frown upside down :D. This should also give the IAF and HAL enough breathing space and confidence to single mindedly pursue a best-in-class AMCA that once fielded, ends any attempt by PAF to posture parity at all and presents a credible AF deterrent to PLAAF.

Apologies in advance for the OT post, just trying to get some gyaan. ALSO, I am in no way challenging the prevailing wisdom on the thread that down the line, we must have 60 "real" sqdns to project overwhelming force on either side. I welcome thoughts and musings on the ballpark exercise above, TIA.

----

Let me also add, that the above exercise leads me to believe that there is scope for both - external procurement of MRCA class jets to ensure any PAF inventory additions are shadowed by us with global best-in-class crafts like Rafael that outclasses PAF - and Tejas which will ensure that I have a base case 1.5x superiority for my goto workhorse that outnumbers PAF.
Last edited by Lohit on 07 Oct 2021 21:26, edited 1 time in total.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5352
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Post by Cain Marko »

brar_w wrote:You're still not getting close to the fifth gen level of capability though because of the huge mismatch between the two platforms types when it comes to RCS (range equation), detection ranges, electric architectures and networking. Being able to get closer dramatically improves every sensor and EW kit that you may have and that currently is a huge advantage for 5th gen platforms relative to fourth or even 4+ generation systems that have relatively high RCS which gets only worst by adding external weapons or pods, tanks etc. But at least it is an improvement over 4th gen aircraft from many years back that didn't have some of these systems. Same with Rafale it has advanced nicely with its new standards, but limitations still remain (why FCAS, AMCA, Tempest, KF-X, Checkmate, J-31 etc exist as future platforms).
Hmm... How would you rate a lightly loaded rafale or typhoon, say 6aams + internal fuel since these can carry 4 recessed bvr and 2 wingtip wvr missiles that are almost bvr? In combination with their irst, they should offer some advantages over older 4gen upgrades like f15ex, f16.70, su35? What about vs something like a j20, j31 which are probly iafs main 5g concern?

Iirc the ecanards, esp. rafale tomtoms it's discrete functionality and has shaping, s ducts and crosstooth joints, super cruise too. Overall could it be competitive air to air vs a j20 esp. with meteor/mica?
Post Reply