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.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3186
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Postby kit » 19 Jul 2019 21:01

Philip wrote:F-21.Oversell of an old hag with inches of makeup!

Putin very recently visited a base escorted by 6 SU-57s shortly before meeting Pompeo, MIG-31 carrying the " hypersonic 2000km range missile" inspecting it and other aircraft.

From all recent info, this contest will take a few years to find a winner and likd the Rafale more time in price negotiations before the deal is sealed and deliveries arrive 5 to 7 years from now at the earliest.All for 4yh-gen expensive birds being replaced by 5th- gen aircraft and development of the next gen. of 6th- gen birds.

The most cost-effective way to augment and increase capability for ghe IAF is for extra acquisitions of aircraft in service, upgrafes to carry improved sensors and weaponry.The 4 types to be increased in number are the
MKIs, MIG-29/35s,Rafales and Tejas.Jag upgrades will add to capability.Equipped with newer engones, AESA radars, cutting edge PGMs and AAMs, the IAF can junk this laborious and self- defeating exercise in acquiring aging prima-donnas not in service with the IAF plus setting up new infrastructure at huge cost .The two Yanqui birds will fast become museum pieces and the very expensive F-35 is suspected by the US itself as being detectable by S-400 radars.

The only new bird to be considered is the SU-57 , giving us a top-end stealth fighter .There is also some talk of a
Yak-130 requirement for trg. plus GA/ CS capability.The IAF chief just flew the bird in Russia.



not detectable now by the S400 but will be as soon as Turkey gets their hands on both :mrgreen:

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5645
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 20 Jul 2019 18:49

I was at the LM Supplier Conference. All of us suppliers got the opportunity to see and experience the simulator. I had flown the Tejas simulator in the past, and wanted to fly this one. But being time constrained, only one member could do it, and I gave the chance to my colleague, and chatted with the retd USAF viper driver instead.

The simulator didn;t have a HUD. Instead the symbology is embedded into the environment screen. The display is a large format full width all glass one like the MWF model at AI19. The symbology on the display appeared to be dummy, ie not sync with the flight. Only HUD symbology on the environment screen was real. Also, it was supporting only the "flight" part. No wonder the IAF pilots were not impressed. The Tejas simulator at ADA actually allows you to aim da bomb using the HUD.

Also saw Flt Lt Avani at the conf venue.

My friend from Business Development says there is a bid going on for 47 aircraft. This he got from his existing customer on the Rafale stream and also from the LM stream he is romancing now. The number didn't make sense to me, but the guy is sharp on business matters.

I noticed a major difference in the attitude of the Americans. Till after AI17, they were sitting on a pedestal and was "ready to help india". Now they are standing on ground shaking hands and "please.. let us be partners onlee". However, I sensed that everyone knows that the Haseena Atim Bum with one inch makeup will not pass muster. ALL the Tier 1s we met said that it is not only about just F-21 (and S-76D Helo), but about anything and everything they could move to India.

Was surprise to hear offers to "build to spec" (which I love 8) ) of processor level LRUs. That is NEW!! I never ever in the past heard that from Americans.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5645
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 20 Jul 2019 20:57

The viper driver told me "I would LOVE to talk to the Tejas engineers who designed the Pilot-Vehicle interface to find out how they segregate functions between glass and tactile inputs". This is in the context of the F-35 being all glass, needing the pilot to actually look at the glass and guide his fingers. The F-21 initially had the same glass, but there is overwhelming demand from pilots to have the tactile option on the left edge of the panel, so that they can do things without looking. I told him that the Tejas PVI is actually designed 100% by the serving pilots, and he looked incredulous.

Once again, he was honestly talking as equals for a pleasant change. Was that careful training? Maybe.. or Maybe not..

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1660
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

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

Postby Zynda » 20 Jul 2019 21:22

Dileep saar...good going. Please continue to feed us with more stuff like the above.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4146
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

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

Postby Manish_Sharma » 20 Jul 2019 21:50

^without giving any tech knowhow for engine, just hanging plastic carrot of dtti.

They're getting all our secrets first was "with what technology Kilo sub detected their nuclear submarine Los angeles...

And this must be across the platforms navy air army. Really american friendship is indeed more dangerous than enmity

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 20 Jul 2019 22:05

Dileep wrote: I told him that the Tejas PVI is actually designed 100% by the serving pilots, and he looked incredulous.


That cockpit and pilot vehicle interface on the F-35 was also designed by current and retired combat pilots in the case of both the primary concept but also every design element that had to be approved and iterated after feedback from the formal test team supporting the program including John Beesley who is/was one of the most accomplished test pilots (F-16, F-117, YF22, F-22 and F-35 test pilot) in the US if not the world. This is an established best-practice on most combat aircraft development projects around the world. It is the norm, and not an exception.

Mike Skaff, a former F-16 pilot, led a team of current and former F-16, F-18 (among others) pilots to design the F-35 cockpit and PVI and the theory there was to purposefully deviate from the approach on the F-22's vehicle interface where they were trying to answer "how can current generation cockpits and PVI be improved" to answering the question on "What would future generation of pilots prefer". So where there was overlap between physical button, glass screens and even finger on glass on the ATF cockpit (YF22), this was avoided on the F-35 in part because they wanted to start completely clean but also because they wanted to predict what the future crop of pilots, particularly those that were likely still in their teens or even younger (at the time it was being designed) would prefer or be proficient at exploiting.

Additionally, on the ATF they were getting together in the mid to late 80's and trying to design something that was to be used in the late 90's (lot of the promising technology that would enable an F-35 like capability was at very low technological readiness level). On the F-35 they began working on it in the mid to late 90's for a fighter that was going to be at its peak (in terms of production rates and prevalence) in the decades to come. Another thing that the F-35 team benefited from compared to the ATF was that the F-35 was planed, from its inception, to have a Tick–tock technology refresh cycle with one iteration of hardware refresh followed by 1 or two rounds of software updates. They therefore had more flexibility in designing concepts and interfaces that may have been pushing the current boundaries of mil-grade technology to the limits (This is now seen in the cockpit upgrades that are coming with block-4 and switch to full LED's and other processing improvements).

So, re-configurable and customizable large panoramic display , cursors, and heavier use of voice recognition and commands (compared to F-22A) won. It's the first all touch display cockpit but it isn't going to be in that space for long. The Gripen E/F, F/A-18 Block III, the F-15QA / EX and many others are taking very similar or exact same approach as would many others down the road. I don't think that this is a coincidence.

The cockpit was designed by pilots for pilots and is the culmination of a 15 year effort which started in 1995. A small team of former and current military fighter pilots assembled to design the cockpit. This multi-service team had over 150 years of tactical aviation experience in 7 different fighters including the 4th generation fighters the F-35 is designed to replace....

The PVI process is the pragmatic application of human factors done by subject matter experts. It is sometimes referred to as a BOGSAT (bunch of guys sitting around a table). The key is that these are all extremely experienced and astute military aviators who have “been there - done that” and, in general, know what they need to be lethal and survivable in tactical aviation warfare. What, from the outside, appears to be a swirling dervish of opinions, ideas, and pride; will in fact result in a good design and effective operator interface. The most challenging part of PVI is not the paper design, but the implementation on target hardware. The pilots, more times than not, can design PVI which is well beyond the hardware state of the art in graphical processing power. Because of this a number of technology refreshes were designed into the program. Even with the refreshes the hardware is taxed to present the PVI.

None of the pilots on the design team were trained in formal human factors and man-machine interface which makes them
poorly suited to scientifically integrate the human into the cockpit. For this task human system / human factors engineers are called into the process. Their task is to properly engineer the accommodations, escape, life support, personal flight equipment, HOTAS, and displays. These tasks are done through full scale mockups, engineering trade studies, and anthropometric modeling. The human factors engineering is the backbone of the cockpit..

Image

Note that three of the configurations do not depict a Head-up Display (HUD). In these configurations a Helmet Mounted Display (HMD) would have to be used as a virtual HUD. During this trade study a large number of current 4th generation fighter pilots were polled and to a person they asked for the largest displays possible. Initially, the lower left configuration with three displays was the preferred design. As the cockpit design progressed the pilots migrated to the upper right configuration as their preferred design. This configuration incorporates two 10 × 8 inch displays butted together with a small septum in between. The decision to adopt the two large displays caused two major engineering challenges.

The first challenge was in the area of processing power. Each display is controlled by an independent computer and graphical processor unit (GPU) which must be able to function stand-alone, if necessary. The move from three displays to two means one less computer and GPU is
available for rendering PVI. The second challenge was the elimination of physical bezel buttons and keypad. The preferred design left no room in the
cockpit for a physical keypad. The HFE team suggested three co-primary control schemes which did not require buttons: cursor hooking, touch, and voice recognition. Through the triple availability of cursor hooking, touch, and voice every function may be accessed. Co-primary means that pilot
preference and flight conditions determine which control method is used.

Source F-35 Lightning II Cockpit Vision- SAE International 2010
Last edited by brar_w on 21 Jul 2019 09:33, edited 1 time in total.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5645
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 21 Jul 2019 06:44

^^Well, may be he was a Matheswaran clone. Who knows? But the fact is that the buttons on the glass of F-35 moved back to the old tactile buttons on the panel at the same convenient location for left hand operation as in F-16 when it is adapted to F-21.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5645
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 21 Jul 2019 06:57

Northrop Grumman guy talked about the radar. I mentioned that 'we build your competition', and he indirectly indicated that he knows what level we do, and they plan to do similar level of 'make in india' for theirs too. Which means the RF magic will still come in sealed units, but the Indian side will put it all together including support systems like power, interconnect and cooling.

This brings to the definition of ToT: 'ToT' means 'allow us to do what we already know'. My contribution to BRF Gyan onlee.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 21 Jul 2019 07:02

Dileep wrote:^^Well, may be he was a Matheswaran clone. Who knows? But the fact is that the buttons on the glass of F-35 moved back to the old tactile buttons on the panel at the same convenient location for left hand operation as in F-16 when it is adapted to F-21.


The F-35 cockpit and displays aren't moved to the F-21 (I don't know whether this is just spin from LM or a misrepresentation of info from an official). I don't know who suggested that but if they suggested that then they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Same with the insinuation that it was somehow surprising to him/her that combat pilots got to design the cockpit and and PVI, something that has been done on most fighters (in the US and beyond) for decades as far as I am aware and most definitely was the case on both the ATF program and the JSF program. All teams on both of those programs had fighter pilots composing the teams working on next generation PVI (and in most cases the person leading was a current or former fighter pilot).

The F-21 cockpit has evolved via multiple iterations during the block 50 and block 60 transitions and with the block 70 and F-21 proposal now. I haven't seen high res. (or in person) the F-21 proposal but from the photos it appears that they have simply separated the Upfront controls and re-located the ICP to the left while keeping the DED functionality on the panels itsel or in the space b/w the HUD and the flat panel (and it's just not shown on the "road-show" demonstrator). This was likely done to accommodate the larger touch display (and larger HUD?) so moving things around was probably the simplest way to do that without changing too many things. they've used a smaller central display than the one they are putting on the block 70 probably to save on cost or for a lack of need (since the central area is so much bigger now).

Image

So essentially, they've broken up the UFC, moved the ICP to the left (compare original location from the first picture) to accommodate a larger single panel display. To claim that they would have gone in for an F-35 like setup but chose instead to do minimal work and just move things around, white retaining their functions (tactile ICP), because of xyz is some really really good spin. Lockheed's objective with the F-21 cockpit is to present a proposal that is the lowest cost/risk and schedule to them and much like Typhoon, Gripen, Rafale or Shornet only thing that will do is to move things around allowing for new capability to be fitted in. They are not even assured of an order so it is ridiculous to claim that they have completely revamped the PVI based on a proposal when no one else is using this cockpit layout (or intends to). All the USAF asked of them for its Viper upgrade (cockpit) was a larger central display.



Boeing has done something similar on the F-15 QA by moving the ICP down (instead of to the left or right since they don't have a secondary central display below the primary one) and accommodating a larger wide flat panel touch display in the space freed up. Do note that these are OEM's looking to accommodate touch displays and wider panels into the existing cockpit layouts and avionics set up. They are not fundamentally changing the cockpit, PVI or re-designing the cockpit from scratch.

On the T-X Boeing has done something completely different from what LM has done on the F-21 or Boeing on the F-15QA/EX.

Image

^ They kept the ICP and UPC at the same traditional location (center, below the HUD) but used a digital/touch panel UPC instead of a tactile system. This likely forced them to use smaller wide panel displays but since its just an advanced trainer that is likely to be inconsequential (they may change that in case they ever develop an attack variant).

The USAF is asking for an all touch display on the F-15EX (and USN likewise for the block III Super Hornet) as well and will likely utilize the same co-primary means of accessing additional functionality (touch, voice, or cursor) as they did in the F-35 though these aircraft will inherently demand more manipulation and tweaking given the lack of the fusion capability relative to the F-35 . Each aircraft will be designed differently and with different trades and limitations in mind. The F-21 lacks the F-35's ability when it comes to the fusion engine and how threats are characterized in real time using on board (central and sensor level processing) and offboard (MADL seamlessly sending tracks in formation and even beyond) data and sensors so while its advanced cockpit will make things simpler, easier to visualize threats and sensor data you are not going to get the same level of automation or processing and input power as you are on the F-35 thereby affecting the trade space that is available to them. Another area is cost and complexity. The F-21 is and will never have the internal budget of an F-35 so they aren't going to magically build a complex interweb of sensors and processing all feeding into the fusion with the level of computing that is available there. Nor will they fundamentally re-do the cockpit and PVI just for a bid. Those are much heavier lifts. Current strategy, much like every other 4+ gen fighter is to drop in as many advanced capabilities as possible hence new wider displays are being accommodated by moving stuff around.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5645
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 21 Jul 2019 11:18

I reported what he told me. The glass on the simulator looks like the same as the F35 I see in images. The software seems to be dummy, just like the MWF software demoed at AI19. The glass did have buttons corresponding to the ICP, and he said those will be removed, since the pilots wanted to have the ICP in tactile. His reaction on the pilot designing the Tejas PVI looked genuine, for whatever reason.

I am not in favor of F-21 with a lot of reasons stacked against it. But.... if we happen decide to buy it, I want my share of work, as a business, as a technologist and as an enthusiast. Also, I want to rub whatever good technical oil the Americans may have on the Tejas. Knowledge is welcome, even from the enemy.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 21 Jul 2019 11:40

The glass on the demonstrator is just like any other glass so that is not what I was talking about. A display is a display after all. It is the entire PVI, the computers running it, and the software and how it interacts with the mission systems and pilot input was what I was referring to. If you go through the paper from the F-35 PVI effort you'll realize that hardware limitations were constantly holding the pilot_led design team back from getting all they wanted in. In fact there are display (LED) and display-processing upgrades planned to begin next year that will both improve current processes and allow for new things. This wasn't easy and I don't think it is realistic to expect LM to add a whole host of dramatic changes to the PVI of the F-16 when their internal forecast probably points to 50-100 additional sales at best.

The road-show stuff is just that, it is not an actual aircraft simulator but just a demonstrator running on some fairly low cost stuff that they can unpack and take around the world from air-shows to private road shows and events at other suppliers etc etc. The Boeing one also had ICP buttons on the display but they also retained the same panel at the bottom at the one for the QA. The problem isn't that they can't get the thing to work like the F-35, it is trying to fit something in with minimal effort. It is a cost-benefit trade. They aren't replicating the F-35 cockpit and PVI here (at least not for a company funded concept that has fairly low chances of actually succeeding) The cursor inputs, the GUI, and the way you scroll on the F-35 and the voice commands are going to be much superior and unless you do some extensive work you aren't going to get that on the F-16 or F-15. There are literally tens of thousands of hours and well over a decade of work that has gone into developing that with inputs from dozens of current and former pilots. The current F-21 cockpit design was probably developed over a couple of years given what LM was offering in earlier advanced F-16 variants.

Moreover there is a lot more automation of tasks happening at the back end. They (neither the OEM, nor the operators) want to do that. So to get to the F-35 end state on the F-16 will require a level of refinement and investment that no one (including LM) is willing to make and that is what separates the marketing "spin" vs the actual reality. It is easier to make the pilots feel natural and transition them seamlessly by just moving the ICP to the left to make room for the larger display than to introduce other technical solutions that the F-35 team developed because they had the luxury of starting with a clean slate (even there the initial designs had a lot more tactile touch points but it was through the iterative process that they ended up with the current state). On the F-35 the objective was to only have buttons/switches etc for safety related stuff where the controls would not be mapped via the software. Regardless, I believe they even left some non-functional buttons in there for the future. The rest is all re-configurable screen based on individual pilot preferences. Shrink windows, move them around, reconfigure them etc etc. This is what they focused on. Same with redundancy in how to manage the screen. Customization and touch was seen as a big thing as new pilots transition who have grown p with smartphones and tablets. If they don't want to touch they can use the cursor (which extends to all screens and windows and is a lot more "usable" and lag-free unlike previous gen teens where I believe it is restricted to just a few areas) and if they don't want to do that they can use voice which was made a lot more usable than where they were in the 1990s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oyCzT6sB_4

I am not in favor of F-21 with a lot of reasons stacked against it. But.... if we happen decide to buy it, I want my share of work, as a business, as a technologist and as an enthusiast. Also, I want to rub whatever good technical oil the Americans may have on the Tejas. Knowledge is welcome, even from the enemy.


Seriously, the F-21 has a fairly low if not NO chance of winning this contest (if it even gets to that stage) and if Lockheed's business wasn't going as good as it is I doubt they would have invested this much effort into it either. This is probably a good opportunity for them to develop relationships with their industrial partners and use that for other programs. They'll still manage to sell a fairly significant number of additional F-16's but that program will sunset over the next 5-6 years and it is too late in the day for it to be positioned for this requirement. If anything comes out of MRCA 2.0 it may just be a few dozen more Rafale's....Lockheed does not have an advanced 4.5 generation fighter in its portfolio that can compete with the likes of the Block III SH, Rafale, Typhoon or Gripen-E. They would have had the UAE and USAF pursued the F-16U but because they didn't their strategy is probably to cater to the lower cost end of the market and additional top up orders. Their F-16 portfolio is primarily aimed at block 70 upgrades of which, I'm sure they'll mange hundreds over the next decade. I would bet that 99% of their focus right now is on their 5th gen. portfolio which is where nearly all of their money (fighters) and sales come from. It is also an area where they have pretty much zero competition..
Last edited by brar_w on 21 Jul 2019 23:42, edited 2 times in total.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4363
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 21 Jul 2019 12:10

Dileep wrote:My friend from Business Development says there is a bid going on for 47 aircraft. This he got from his existing customer on the Rafale stream and also from the LM stream he is romancing now. The number didn't make sense to me, but the guy is sharp on business matters.



Whoa! what is that bid for 47 aircraft that you're referring to? Are you referring to an off-the-shelf purchase of 47 aircraft as another "emergency purchase" by the GoI from Dassault or what? If so, how could this have gone completely under the radar so long? Someone would have spilled the beans for sure.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4146
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

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

Postby Manish_Sharma » 21 Jul 2019 12:43

^ It happened before also Kartik. During twilight end of manmohan govt around October-November 2013 our fellow poster Klaus ji had written that mmrca will be cancelled and limited 2 squadrons will be bought off the shelf. That's exactly what happened. So there's a precedent.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5645
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 21 Jul 2019 13:02

I have no idea on the procedural formalities, but the aircraft makers, both Dassault and LM, mentioned that there is a bid going on. The former source is very reliable. The latter is like "oh.. we too are in that"

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4363
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 21 Jul 2019 15:21

That is big news..There has been a lot of heart burn on BRF about this whole MRCA tamasha and how instead of it we could just get 36 or 48 Rafales and call the thing off. 47 is very close to that number and would be perfect for the IAF's needs till the MRCA thing actually pans out.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4192
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 21 Jul 2019 17:23

Kartik wrote:That is big news..There has been a lot of heart burn on BRF about this whole MRCA tamasha and how instead of it we could just get 36 or 48 Rafales and call the thing off. 47 is very close to that number and would be perfect for the IAF's needs till the MRCA thing actually pans out.


IMO, 47 is a backup plan in place. MRCA 2.0 will end up like MRCA 1.0. Too expensive and not enough funds. Even for 36 Rafales the cost was around $7-9 billion.

In any case, don’t expect it to be signed anytime soon. Contractual agreement on the first 36 deal means big budget outlays are taking place until all delivered and then PBL payments follow. If the current GoI is going to sign new deal for 47, they would need to wait for sufficient funds to be made available after fulfilling other capital obligations. At the minimum a few years ... even possibly the next GoI ends up on its desk.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7595
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 21 Jul 2019 20:31

Dileep, awesome info! Thanks!

And going by Dileep's numbers....47 is interesting. If we break that 47 down, it could look like this....

* 36 - for two more squadrons
* 6 to 8 - for attrition reserves (~ two per squadron)
* 5 to 3 - for TACDE

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11019
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Jul 2019 20:39

Rakesh wrote:Dileep, awesome info! Thanks!

And going by Dileep's numbers....47 is interesting. If we break that 47 down, it could look like this....

* 36 - for two more squadrons
* 6 to 8 - for attrition reserves (~ two per squadron)
* 5 to 3 - for TACDE

Or are there any Naval aircraft in the mix. 47 could also be 57.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7595
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 22 Jul 2019 01:16

I am not sure the IN can get in on this...YET.

The last I read is that the wings of the Rafale M cannot fit in the narrow lifts of the Vikrant or the Vikramaditya. And as per Boeing, the F-18 can fit in the lifts. Dassault's solution is detachable wingtips I believe.

Both Boeing and Dassault have confirmed that the F-18 and the Rafale M can take off from either vessel with a significant payload. That word (significant) is subjective though :)

The 57 carrier borne fighter contest is even further back - in the MoD acquisition process - than the current MMRCA contest.

If additional Rafales do come for the IAF, an order for the Rafale M could be on the cards.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7595
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 22 Jul 2019 01:23

Russian spin on the MMRCA contest. This should make Philip Saar very happy :)

Enjoy with popcorn!

Who Will Win India’s MMRCA Competition? MiG-35, Su-35, Rafale, Super Hornet and More Go Head to Head
https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5d347c31 ... 00ad2f53fd

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2476
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 22 Jul 2019 19:20

Headline from a timepass article (I won't bother linking) :rotfl:
IAF Pilots Could Soon Fly Tom Cruise’s Fighter Jet From Top Gun Maverick

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2723
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

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

Postby ArjunPandit » 22 Jul 2019 21:10

would be the nth time, but i hope the money doesnt impact anything for tejas

naird
BRFite
Posts: 228
Joined: 04 Jun 2009 19:41

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

Postby naird » 23 Jul 2019 23:31

Kartik wrote:That is big news..There has been a lot of heart burn on BRF about this whole MRCA tamasha and how instead of it we could just get 36 or 48 Rafales and call the thing off. 47 is very close to that number and would be perfect for the IAF's needs till the MRCA thing actually pans out.


This is a huge news !!! I wonder why this hasnt been leaked and come into the press. I am not able to figure out why LM is in the fix, this should be a G2G contract. Pray it doesnt turn into a bidding situation.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1587
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

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

Postby Khalsa » 24 Jul 2019 07:56

As I keep on saying there is no such thing as a 126 ac MMRCA. Just a carrot to keep sanctions away while we boy S400.

Chinese got sanctioned
Turks got kicked out of 35 club
India gets ???????

That level of punishment is the sum total of what we have bought + will buy - what we won't buy - CAATSA.

In other words
MMRCA is the antidote for CAATSA we just don't know how strong either of the two medicines are ?

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 647
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

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

Postby sankum » 24 Jul 2019 15:40

47 nos Rafale in second lot should come in 2022-27 timeperiod for dollar 8 billion @ $ 170 million per aircraft. A yearly payout of dollar 1.6 billion per year .

The squadron strength by 2027 will be 4sq Rafale , 15 sq Su30mki,3sq Mig29, 5sqJaguar, 3sq Mirage 2000i, 6sq Tejas mk1/mk1a for a total of 36 sq.
Last edited by sankum on 25 Jul 2019 10:50, edited 1 time in total.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3694
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 24 Jul 2019 15:55

Khalsa wrote:As I keep on saying there is no such thing as a 126 ac MMRCA. Just a carrot to keep sanctions away while we boy S400.

Chinese got sanctioned
Turks got kicked out of 35 club
India gets ???????

That level of punishment is the sum total of what we have bought + will buy - what we won't buy - CAATSA.

In other words
MMRCA is the antidote for CAATSA we just don't know how strong either of the two medicines are ?


Khalsa ji, that is just an unintended benefit. MMRCA had been dragging along way before CAATSA. But there is sone truth to that as Unkil wanted to sell F-21s and Hornets. Though your examples are not really good ones as Cheen is under sanctions and arms embargoes way before S400 and Turkey already had a high level of trust with the US being in the F-35 program. If we were in the F-35 coalition and we bought the S400, we'll face sanctions in the program too.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6938
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 25 Jul 2019 01:47

sankum wrote:The squadron strength by 2027 will be 4sq Rafale , 15 sq Su30mki, 4sq Mig29, 5sqJaguar, 3sq Mirage 2000i, 6sq Tejas mk1/mk1a for a total of 37 sq.

Where is this fourth squadron of Mig-29s coming from?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7595
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 25 Jul 2019 04:09

nachiket wrote:
sankum wrote:The squadron strength by 2027 will be 4sq Rafale , 15 sq Su30mki, 4sq Mig29, 5sqJaguar, 3sq Mirage 2000i, 6sq Tejas mk1/mk1a for a total of 37 sq.

Where is this fourth squadron of Mig-29s coming from?

I believe he is referring to the 21 MiG-29s that have yet to be purchased which will form a fourth squadron.

@sankum, those 21 birds are not yet confirmed. Best to remove that from your tally, until a confirmation is there.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6938
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 25 Jul 2019 04:22

Yeah that is only a proposal right now. Hopefully that news does not end up like the Qatari Mirages which had excited me many moons ago.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 647
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

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

Postby sankum » 25 Jul 2019 10:49

My mistake for using news based info. For the time being IAF chief statement is for 6sq Tejas mk2 which basically means rest 6sq IAF wants is MMRCA 2.0 for the 12 squadron legacy fighter replacement apart from 4sq Rafale.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 647
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

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

Postby sankum » 25 Jul 2019 10:52

Reduced the Mig29 sq to 3 sq from 4sq in the list.
Rafale 4sq plan is on Dileep info.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20011
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 25 Jul 2019 23:52

The extra 18 MKIs and 21 MIG-29s as an interim package has been widely reported in the media.There have as yet no contradictory reports of the same, except that the MMRCA-2 contest may take a couple of years to finalise.Therefore, being extras of birds already in service there should be little delay in procurement.Pricing may be ongoing for the same.The air chiefs visit to Moscow and remarks reported could indicate a tough contest for the competing aircraft.The GOI should after buying the 36 Rafales, again start serious negotiating for an extra sqd. on a G basis with some hard bargaining on the price.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 27 Jul 2019 02:52


LakshmanPST
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 91
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

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

Postby LakshmanPST » 27 Jul 2019 05:03

Vips wrote:...

I think the term 'Transfer of Technology' is quite misleading even within Armed Forces... All the panelists seem to suggest & believe that arrival of, so called, Technology will boost indigenous Aerospace industry..When I see these videos where veterans push for ToT (which in reality is nothing but mere assembly) I start doubting myself whether I have actually understood these issues or not...

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4192
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 29 Jul 2019 18:12

Bit OT ... look what the Qataris have been up to the last few years ... dream MRCA purchases so to speak. Little bit of top of line money and geopolitics can buy 8)

  • 36 Rafale
  • 36 F-15E QA
  • 24 EF2000
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_Air_Force

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 29 Jul 2019 19:08

But capability does that buy them? Collecting 4+ gen fighters for the sake of them doesn't buy you much in terms of capabilities. There is big doubt in my my mind that they'll be effective at operating just one of those types let alone all 3.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11019
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 29 Jul 2019 21:15

The F-15 and EF deal were done at exorbitant prices after they were threatened by MBS of Saudi. More than capability it is protection money against being swallowed by Saudi, they have kept France UK and US happy to keep themselves independent.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 29 Jul 2019 23:15

Aditya_V wrote:The F-15 and EF deal were done at exorbitant prices after they were threatened by MBS of Saudi. More than capability it is protection money against being swallowed by Saudi, they have kept France UK and US happy to keep themselves independent.


I believe all those three deals were within 15-20% or so of each other which for the most part can be explained away based on deal specifics (support, customization, timelines etc) , and the fact that at least one of the deal would have involved paying royalties to KSA which I doubt they would have gotten a waiver for.

https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/1403876/

https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/1403876/

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11019
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 30 Jul 2019 11:02

So Saudis got a little bit of the protection money to protect them from the Saudis

MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 292
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

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

Postby MeshaVishwas » 30 Jul 2019 11:54

Agree with the geopolitical viewpoint but his Technical knowledge is questionable.
But everyone here probably knew that the VayuSena would not want the Fteens.

F-16 never stood a chance with IAF. Lockheed Martin messed it up so much
https://theprint.in/opinion/f-16-never- ... 69699/amp/

-Abhijit Iyer-Mitra

If US President Donald Trump offering to mediate on the Kashmir issue wasn’t enough, he went ahead and exonerated ‘selected’ Prime Minister Imran Khan – implying that under Khan, Pakistani perfidy has stopped. To cap it all, the State Department announced a resumption of military supplies – specifically F-16 spares – to Pakistan. In many ways, the F-16 is a microcosm of India-US ties: oversell, unable to understand the other, stringing your lover along in spite of not understanding what he/she is saying, and a final rejection leading to bitterness.

Let us be clear, however, that the F-16 never stood a chance. Lockheed Martin (LM) screwed up on several issues: its primary weapon the AMRAAM; its sales pitch peddling a point the Indian Air Force (IAF) did not understand; a sales campaign that bordered on outright lies; and finally, Balakot, which proved to be the last nail in the coffin.

Avoiding F-16 in a dogfight
The moment India is offered the same equipment as Pakistan, you pretty much know it’s going to be rejected. Although, India had no hesitation buying the same manufacturer’s C-130 transport aircraft, which Pakistan also operates. However, the IAF, instead of looking at how its aircraft perform in combat situations, seems to be obsessed about fitting them with one particular missile: the European Meteor. The Meteor missile’s long range outclasses the F-16s primary long-range air-to air weapon, the AMRAAM.


It is in fact a tribute to the F-16s potency that the IAF wants to avoid engaging it in a dogfight and would prefer to take it out at longer ranges. In effect, it wasn’t the F-16 that irritated the IAF so much as it was the AMRAAM – after all, no matter how advanced the F-16 India was being offered, if the missiles of India and Pakistan were going to be the same AMRAAM, the electronics differential of the launch platform wasn’t going to be much use to India.

F-16, upgraded to F-21
To counter this perception, LM had a clear case that the F-16 being sold to India (the Block 70 variant, since renamed F-21) was a whole different beast from the Block 50 that Pakistan has. Beyond the superficial exterior resemblance, there’s about 40 per cent difference in terms of equipment; and the electronics derive much from the F-35’s heavily network centric architecture. As such, the F-21s are a generation ahead from anything on Pakistan’s F-16 that could be better in terms of being able to see further, ‘talk to’ other networked assets, and jam enemy frequencies better. So, even if the F-21 and F-16 use the same missile, the F-21 can detect its enemy faster and shoot first and more accurately.

Sadly, given the hodgepodge of equipment the IAF operates, almost none of which talk to each other, the IAF simply doesn’t understand networked warfare, nor does it care. Stuck in the 1980s’ mindset, the IAF still believes in kinetics while the rest of the world has moved towards electronics. The simplest explanation for this is the scene from Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark, where an Arab swordsman comes around flaunting his sword skills and Indy simply shoots him with a revolver. Here, the IAF is the Arab swordsman, who thinks a better sword could have won him the battle, instead of transitioning to a revolver; Lockheed Martin is the revolver salesman, who futilely tries arguing with the swordsman to give up his sword for the revolver.

Also read: Was it US’ F-16 or China’s JF-17 that ‘downed’ MiG 21 Bison piloted by Abhinandan?

US firm’s disinformation campaign
If LM’s sales pitch left the IAF confused, then LM’s disinformation left the IAF entirely not-amused. This disinformation campaign started off with the promise of F-16 production being shifted to India. This developed into a set of transparent lies that F-16 production would involve deep technology transfer and make India independent. Obviously, it didn’t take long for the lies to get called out, which was followed by a public retraction from Lockheed. The amount of damage this did to LM’s campaign is almost incalculable.

But Balakot was the last straw. The IAF is convinced that it shot down an F-16 using an obsolete MiG-21. The severe factual inaccuracies of the “IAF didn’t shoot an F-16” lobby, combined with an embarrassing set of tweets by the Pakistani DG-ISPR unable to explain two missing pilots, means the IAF is now convinced that its reliance on dogfights is valid (that is, the Arab swordsman can still win against Indian Jones’ revolver) and that the F-16 is a flawed product.

In the end, the overall problems of the India-US relationship explained earlier are distilled into the India F-16 saga: India’s understanding of war and technology being different to the US, both talking a different language; disinformation from the US’ side; India giving false hope where there was none to begin with. In such circumstances, the resumption of military sales to Pakistan was a foregone conclusion, and would have happened regardless of whether there was a Donald Trump involved without anyone getting surprised.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aditya_V, raghuk, VickyAvinash and 62 guests