MRCA News and Discussion

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 16 Mar 2010 21:55

I think if we don't go American, then the Gripen would win it.

Gripen + Meteor

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Mar 2010 23:10

pakjabs have enough pull in sweden to rake up a protest to snap grippen supplies and spares, and politically sweden is more under the controls of Obama button rather EF2K or Rafale.

saab works with pakis as well for other aew systems that would supply better electronics and aesas, etc.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 17 Mar 2010 03:52

MMRCA to be political decision: Eurofighter
Can someone say I told ya so!!!

With the almost year-long trials for the 126 Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) tender of the Indian Air Force (IAF) expected to end by May, StratPost caught up with Dr. Matthias Schmidlin, the head of the Eurofighter Typhoon campaign in India, who said it was unlikely the trials would end with a single aircraft having a clear lead while recognizing the final result of the MMRCA contest would be a political decision.

The final decision at the end of the day will be political, says Schmidlin.
“It is my belief that there will be definitely more than one vendor when there is the opening of the commercial envelope. I believe we are in a good position and so I anticipate that we will be going up to the end of this campaign,” he says, adding, “The final decision at the end of the day will be political. We all know that. This is, at the moment, the largest defense contract around the globe. And it will be the largest fighter, combat campaign for the next decade to come. So clearly, this is very strategic for all the vendors in the campaign.”
....................................

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Mar 2010 04:08

need to table how many babooze are in this, and to where all they visit, rather than compile this a/c vs. the other, or any such tech spec or dog-fight information. voila!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Mar 2010 04:27

SaiK wrote:need to table how many babooze are in this, and to where all they visit, rather than compile this a/c vs. the other, or any such tech spec or dog-fight information. voila!

Wait watch what N. Rao report back. Atharah walas was invoking "Asha" a lot and it means complications for them.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Mar 2010 04:48

well they are knee deep in big $h!t at home, failing in all aspects of politics. they can't even maintain their own health now-a-days.. totally screwed up.

solah ka rassi is also losing grip.. i think, this is one of the reasons Israel was complaining that the khans will screw gripen, since there is a stealthy understanding for porting the elta walah ka tejanvesa. you see, they would never accept this equal-equal west banking with hum-ass doctrine.

babooistic plans would be like the indo-us nuke deal chartering a broad understanding to supply those parts including weapons from raytheon, and source code help to integrate them, while our dardo boys will work hard with elta help to work it out with gripen.

if that does not work, get a bigger plan drafted with ankh-rassians.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 17 Mar 2010 05:13

The cost of such an undertaking, the MMRCA, could remain unclear for the near future. Curiously, while both the technical and commercial proposals were delivered by April 28, 2008, with the former being opened at 1500 hours that day, the commercial proposals were ‘locked away and sealed’ to be valid for ‘up to 24 months’, Schmidlin confirms.

And although it is clear that the evaluation is unlikely to be at a stage where the commercial bids are in a position to be opened by the expiry deadline on April 28 this year, Schmidlin finds himself at somewhat of a loss about their status after that date. “According to the DPP (Defense Procurement Procedure), there is a requirement for having valid commercial proposal, and so far – I have to be honest – I don’t know, we have not been officially approached in this regard.”

According to industry sources this eventuality has not been entirely unforeseen and there is a likelihood the vendors will be required to either resubmit their commercial bids or extend their validity. Trade speculation regards this as an opportunity for vendors to adjust their commercial proposals on the basis of their perception of performance in the user trials.

Easily the most important part of that article that Craig Alpert posted- it has revealed something we didn't know earlier. That the commercial proposals were tendered alongwith the technical proposals and were valid for 2 years from April 28, 2008. Obviously, even the second phase of the flight trials, i.e the weapons trials in the home countries of the vendors won't be over by April 28 2010, so the likeliest scenario is that the GoI will ask the vendors to submit new commercial proposals and based on those, will eventually negotiate with 2-3 finalists.

Common logic will state that with the addition of inflation, the costs will go up, but as mentioned in the article above, there is a likelihood that some vendors who may feel that they didn't do too well in the flight and weapons trials may try and compensate by reducing their prices further to sweeten their deal. It is in the IAF's interest that they should finally submit a list where 2-3 contenders are knocked out clearly, so that the commercial negotiations phase doesn't wander about getting stretched for 2-3 years without finding a clear winner.

Politics will obviously play a huge role, and that unfortunately doesn't augur well for the Gripen NG being such a political lightweight when compared to the others. Its other advantages of price, capability, operational costs, etc. will be tough to ignore, but Sweden just doesn't have the necessary clout to swing it against the US, Russia, France, and other EU countries.

Another early favourite of mine is equally hard to gauge. I'm just not able to fathom Dassault's handling of this contract..is there behind the scenes activity going on which Dassault believes is more important than media interviews, DefExpo simulators or AeroIndia displays ? Or is it that Dassault believes that the Rafale is out of the running just by gauging the nil marketing interest that Dassault has shown in this deal? They have been concentrating on the Brazilian and UAE deals instead and maybe that's best for them and for us. Leaves the other 4 to fight it out and frankly speaking, any of these MRCA candidates can pick apart anything that the PAF or PLAAF will throw at them.

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 17 Mar 2010 06:09

SaiK wrote:pakjabs have enough pull in sweden to rake up a protest to snap grippen supplies and spares, and politically sweden is more under the controls of Obama button rather EF2K or Rafale.

saab works with pakis as well for other aew systems that would supply better electronics and aesas, etc.

SAAB is not as big as the companies it competes against in the international market, and it cannot really pick and choose when it comes to contracts.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 17 Mar 2010 08:57

Kartik wrote:Another early favourite of mine is equally hard to gauge. I'm just not able to fathom Dassault's handling of this contract..is there behind the scenes activity going on which Dassault believes is more important than media interviews, DefExpo simulators or AeroIndia displays ? Or is it that Dassault believes that the Rafale is out of the running just by gauging the nil marketing interest that Dassault has shown in this deal? They have been concentrating on the Brazilian and UAE deals instead and maybe that's best for them and for us. Leaves the other 4 to fight it out and frankly speaking, any of these MRCA candidates can pick apart anything that the PAF or PLAAF will throw at them.

So you are pulling for the Rafale?

kit · Post by **kit** » 17 Mar 2010 09:17

Economic and military intelligence depends a lot on espionage., electronic and otherwise.Americans have used their Echelon and the French are not behind in their intelligence gathering which can profit their multinational corporations.Its quite probable that the French and more recently the Swedes have got wind of the probable ultimate result of the MRCA "competition".So no big push for Rafale and no Gripen NG.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 17 Mar 2010 09:33

johnny_m wrote:SAAB is not as big as the companies it competes against in the international market, and it cannot really pick and choose when it comes to contracts.

I think it did though.. if I'm not wrong, Sweden chose not to sell Gripens to pak when mushy went there in 04..

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Mar 2010 09:36

rafale was my preferred choice too but considering everything else in mind (commonality of engine, future upgrade path of both aircraft and engine etc ) I would prefer the EF for commonality with the LCA's engine if for nothing else. gripen comes a close second because it will not burn a hole in the pocket and the profile is similar to what LCA Mk2 will look like, allowing MOD/IAF to concentrate funds on the FGFA/NGFA programs.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 17 Mar 2010 10:00

Rahul M wrote: I would prefer the EF for commonality with the LCA's engine if for nothing else.

I agree that there needs to be commonality.. but what if the GE414 is picked for the LCA. I've always believed that the winner of the LCA engine contract will have an upper hand.. I dont think the SH & Gripen are out of the race until the LCA engine is chosen.. And I thought the engne decision is by end of march.. wonder who'll have the first bite?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Mar 2010 10:11

Rahul M wrote:rafale was my preferred choice too but considering everything else in mind (commonality of engine, future upgrade path of both aircraft and engine etc ) I would prefer the EF for commonality with the LCA's engine if for nothing else. gripen comes a close second because it will not burn a hole in the pocket and the profile is similar to what LCA Mk2 will look like, allowing MOD/IAF to concentrate funds on the FGFA/NGFA programs.

Will Rafale or Eurofighter fit in the $ 10 Billion budget set aside for MMRCA , this includes TOT cost , Lic Production to build 126 fighters ?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Mar 2010 17:11

What our MMRCA'swill have to deal with.
The extra 18+18 F-16 C/Ds Block-52 that Uncle Sam is giving Pak,plus the AMRAAMS and GBU-11/12 kits,upgrades of all earlier models and possibly more F-16s from certain Gulf/NATO operators who are modernising with later aircraft.This is sure to rule out the F-16 from the contest and put a black mark on th F-18SH.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Mar 2010 17:17

austin, simply put, I don't know.

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 17 Mar 2010 17:33

I think the F 16s and AMRAAM's are paid for by Pak. The LGBs and Cobra upgrades are not but then again they are there to do what Americans want PAF to do.

As long as our F 16s/F 18s can lock on to PAF ones, it should not be an issue.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Mar 2010 20:29

The question of affordability of the typhoon largely lies in the tie up offer they are willing to get us. To what level of local manufacturing can be done, and how much the cost may come down. The proof of the pudding is in the details of the offer, and mostly where our babooze muck up with bad English and get screwed up.

It is high time to hire firangi legal experts to review our contracts [example: Gorskhov, MKI, hawk etc..], cause the devil is in the details of firangi understandings.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 17 Mar 2010 21:36

SaiK wrote:The question of affordability of the typhoon largely lies in the tie up offer they are willing to get us. To what level of local manufacturing can be done, and how much the cost may come down. The proof of the pudding is in the details of the offer, and mostly where our babooze muck up with bad English and get screwed up.

It is high time to hire firangi legal experts to review our contracts [example: Gorskhov, MKI, hawk etc..], cause the devil is in the details of firangi understandings.

SaiK sahab, why so much hate for the babus? There are rots in every strata of the society - both civilian and the military. Gorskhov, for all you know, could very well have been a political bungling or Russian high handedness, the jury is still out on it. As for the allegations about 'bad English', this is just imagining things and finding an opportunity to discredit this particular section.

You think foreign legal experts would best protect our own national interest? Plus you understand how much of an intel opportunity would that be for foreign agencies? There are tons of legal experts more qualified at home who can do the job.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 17 Mar 2010 21:41

MMRCA to be political decision: Eurofighter

Just like to mention that Euro/$ exchange rate has gone from about 1.56 to 1.37 in the last 2 years. So, in $ terms, Eurofighter has become cheaper by 12% since the sealed commercial bid was made. With European sovereign debt woes set to continue in the near future, it could only get cheaper. If the bid was made in British £ (with UK/BAE systems taking the lead instead of Germany), then it has become cheaper by 23% in the same period.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 17 Mar 2010 22:14

JTull wrote:
MMRCA to be political decision: Eurofighter
Just like to mention that Euro/$ exchange rate has gone from about 1.56 to 1.37 in the last 2 years. So, in $ terms, Eurofighter has become cheaper by 12% since the sealed commercial bid was made. With European sovereign debt woes set to continue in the near future, it could only get cheaper. If the bid was made in British £ (with UK/BAE systems taking the lead instead of Germany), then it has become cheaper by 23% in the same period.

good point there JTull. On Keypub forums too the same thing has been mentioned. The Rafale, Gripen NG and Typhoon all will profit from the fall in the Euro's exchange rate vs the USD. From open sources, its known that Germany was the one that led the bid, so they would have been the ones that submitted the commercial proposals too and so it must have been in Euros.

However, what will be interesting is whether the GoI asks the vendors to simply extend the validity of their commercial bids or whether it gives them time to submit new ones. 10-12% is a huge fall in prices though the Typhoon and Rafale will probably still be slightly costlier than the rest, or maybe the Rafale may end up being just a little cheaper than the SH. The only problem is that with commercial negotiations set to continue for 1-2 years at the very least, would the exchange rate go back up, making them costly again ?

JimmyD · Post by **JimmyD** » 17 Mar 2010 22:30

Austin wrote:Will Rafale or Eurofighter fit in the $ 10 Billion budget set aside for MMRCA , this includes TOT cost , Lic Production to build 126 fighters ?

If they really wanted the EF, they could just pull a T-90; i.e. negotiate a contract which fits the bill as far as price is concernced, but leave out a significant portion of the gadgetry. They would then just sign another agreement with additional costs which finally brings in all the other fancy equipment.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 17 Mar 2010 22:43

Denmark bails on F-35, leaning towards SH

Pressure Builds for More Hornets; Multi-Year OK Likely

Boeing: willing to license F/A-18 production to Japan

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 17 Mar 2010 22:59

The Super Hornets are really starting to eat into the F 35 pie. I doubt Japan would select it though.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Mar 2010 23:05

Nikhil T ji,

No no.. that was not my point.. The feeling is that there exists a large gap in various contractual understandings. Of course, we are the best judge of our security and defence, but that is not the point of my argument.

It is only a ratification from a legal sense that we may have to look into later, as we have failed to obtain spares or get tech transfer done or such support issues (hopefully it is not entirely ddm) earlier.. just looking at plugging the loopholes in these contracts.

There are bad elements at all level(no need for explanations here I guess). A well paid firangi may help us there because he may be more legally tuned in the country where we are likely to source our equipments, was my observation. It is important for MRCA contract that we don't again screw it up., since this one we are planning so many aspects including ToT, 30-50% offsets, etc., where we need to pay more attention to exactly what is written in these contracts.

This thought would not be there for me if our slate were to be clean on this.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 17 Mar 2010 23:39

shukla wrote:
Rahul M wrote: I would prefer the EF for commonality with the LCA's engine if for nothing else.
I agree that there needs to be commonality.. but what if the GE414 is picked for the LCA. I've always believed that the winner of the LCA engine contract will have an upper hand.. I dont think the SH & Gripen are out of the race until the LCA engine is chosen.. And I thought the engne decision is by end of march.. wonder who'll have the first bite?

If the engine goes to GE, I would definitely like the rafale or EF for MRCA. Having half the fleet dependent on US is suicide in my opinion.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 18 Mar 2010 00:35

Carl_T wrote:So you are pulling for the Rafale?

It was my favourite at the start of the competition, but Dassault's distant interest in this competition has bee a huge turn off. And of course at that early stage, we didn't really know how damn expensive this fighter was, which we're finding out now, in part thanks to the Euro-USD exchange rate.

Now I feel that there is no need to award such a huge contract to a company with a very expensive product when all the signals point to them not being so interested anyway. The way they've been chasing the UAE and Brazilian order makes it look like they're more interested in winning competitions where the US is not a strong competitor. I'm sure they feel that they're justified in their viewpoint, and their experiences in South Korea and Singapore basically have coloured their view and given them reason to believe that there is little use wasting marketing and other resources on competitions where the US will use its political muscle to turn the choice in their favour. In the South Korean competition, despite being considered the winner on technical evaluation basis, they were turned down in favour of the F-15K. And that gave the South Koreans such a bad name that when they launched a second competition later to buy 20 more fighters, no one except Boeing even tendered.

Fani_A · Post by **Fani_A** » 18 Mar 2010 01:29

If the engine goes to GE, I would definitely like the rafale or EF for MRCA. Having half the fleet dependent on US is suicide in my opinion.

why deal with a supplier who supplies the country you are most likely to and most frequently go to war with, regularly, on the same technological level and sometimes for free? supplier who is responsible for forcing adverse peace agreements on us in the past. supplier who does not openly supports our UNSC claim. supplier who is not even promising complete ToT enabling the development of indigenous industry. and supplier whose promises, based on very strong historical evidence, can not be trusted anyway. We are better off working with Israel and Russia. current numerical gaps can be filled MKI. and technological gaps can be filled with assistance from Israel and Russia. why pay for whole system if we only need some components. at significant cost yet economic overall Israel and Russia can be tempted to provide all we need. all deals can be made at Government level so as to avoid corruption, as recently done with Russia. we will not get enough in return for the huge amount we are spending.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 18 Mar 2010 03:49

U.S. Grounds 104 Hornets After More Cracks Discovered

U.S. Naval Air Systems Command grounded 104 U.S. Navy and Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornet fighter jets March 12 after inspectors discovered the airframes were developing cracks much earlier than engineers had thought.
...
..
The number of Hornets affected makes up 16 percent of the Navy-Marine A through D fleet.
...
.

The grounding notice from NavAir covered a "high stress focus area" that engineers already knew about as part of the Hornets' service-life assessment program, Christensen said, so NavAir issued a set of instructions for affected aircraft.
...
...

Note that these are F18 A-D models, not F18/E-F super hornets. However, E-F is derived from A-D models though, and these weren't involved as they are relatively new frames

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 18 Mar 2010 04:04

JimmyD wrote:
Austin wrote:Will Rafale or Eurofighter fit in the $ 10 Billion budget set aside for MMRCA , this includes TOT cost , Lic Production to build 126 fighters ?
If they really wanted the EF, they could just pull a T-90; i.e. negotiate a contract which fits the bill as far as price is concernced, but leave out a significant portion of the gadgetry. They would then just sign another agreement with additional costs which finally brings in all the other fancy equipment.

If they do something like this they will pay very dearly, case in point being: Austria. The Austrians got the EFs some of them which were used examples (might be alll of them cant remember) and they decided to downgrade without the DASS and some other bells and whistles (radar modes etc).

Overall these jets ended up being more costly than brand new examples with all bells and whistles bcoz of the effort taken to mod the jets to suit their requirements

And now they end up with a fighter that is a used example, has no bvr capability or bvr weapons, has a very limited amount of short range IRST weapons (90 I think), no defensive aids and is more costly than a brand new example....its a disaster. The purchase was for 15 jets the initial amount was a lot higher.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 18 Mar 2010 06:29

What our MMRCA'swill have to deal with.
The extra 18+18 F-16 C/Ds Block-52 that Uncle Sam is giving Pak,plus the AMRAAMS and GBU-11/12 kits,upgrades of all earlier models and possibly more F-16s from certain Gulf/NATO operators who are modernising with later aircraft.This is sure to rule out the F-16 from the contest and put a black mark on th F-18SH.

Based on this logic - neither Israel or Egypt should use F 16s

kit · Post by **kit** » 18 Mar 2010 08:57

Over the last few years, the navy has found that both their older F-18C Hornet fighters, and their newer F-18E "Super Hornet" are wearing out faster than expected.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatri ... 00317.aspx

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 18 Mar 2010 09:02

well they have been in ops rather than sitting pretty in hangars.

So at least there is some logic to it

Jus tlike we flogged our first SU 30s

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 18 Mar 2010 10:56

Fani_A wrote:all deals can be made at Government level so as to avoid corruption, as recently done with Russia. we will not get enough in return for the huge amount we are spending.

WISHFUL THINKING

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Mar 2010 11:50

Egypt was "neutered" (against Israel) by the US in the aftermath of the Camp David accord,with geenrous supplies of US militay aid that Sadat/Mubarak gleefully accepted.The US arms were more to proetct Egypt from its Arab neighbours,hostile to the accord than Israel with whom it had smked the peace pipe.In any case,Israeli F-16s were a cut above the Egyptian ones and had the emans to counter them if ever used against Israel.

Which Indian is willing to be so "neutered" by the US against Pak? Hasn't the US shown that its top dog is Pak over the AF-Pak issue? It is why the Ind.Exp. today has called for Dr.Singh to "bring back" India's security and foeign policy from Washington!

The point made that we can buy components instead of whole inferior weapon systems from Israel and Russia is the route that is being taken as far as the Sukhois are concerned.The same is apparently being done now for the LCA after years of indecision.This has been done very successfully in the case of IN warships and subs,were a mix of Indian,Russian and western weapon systems,missiles,electronics,radars sonars,etc.,have been successfully integrated into the Delhi class and oher earier warships.With the MMRCA eeal too,if the IAF finds that a particular radar/system of one aircraft is ideal,while the rest is not,it should examine whether the same could be used on the aircraft prefered.However,the IAF is a "user" not a "chooser" as one western wit put it!

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 18 Mar 2010 12:17

those days are long gone philips sir. su-30 mki changed all that. one has to build capabilities first. gripen NG will be the choice in my opinion.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 18 Mar 2010 12:37

.In any case,Israeli F-16s were a cut above the Egyptian ones and had the emans to counter them if ever used against Israel.

1. No one is stupid to neuter themeselves - The Israelis do not proceed on that assumption. They have a healthy respect for the M1s and F 16s etc

2. and what prevents us from making our F 16s a cut above the rest the MKI way. A lot of spinoffs of programs you deride will contribute to differentiating

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 18 Mar 2010 14:37

Surya wrote: 2. and what prevents us from making our F 16s a cut above the rest the MKI way.

EUMA

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 18 Mar 2010 16:59

The plan is to use the fly-off to cull the field; the remaining companies will then submit a financial proposal. The planned budget is about $11 billion for 126 aircraft.

Quote from a random news report about MMRCA competition, here in the land of Oz.. not sure how much truth there is to it.. fly-off? anyone else heard of it??

http://industry.bnet.com/government/100 ... -lockheed/

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Mar 2010 17:47

The insane logic defeats me.The US sells Pak sophisticated military hardware to give it the advantage over India and India in return buys similar US hardware,which gives us little or no advantage at all and only enriches the US arms naufacturers! If we have to defend ourselves and buy foreign weapon systems to counter Pak's US arms then by all means buy anything else BUT US!

Just look at how the US is treating India over Headley and Raman's statements that all are protected, US interests (CIA,FBI,DEA),ISI's interests,....except the poor defenceless Indian!
We are being "shafted" time and time again by Uncle Sam and his henchmen of the ISI thanks to MMS & Co.