MRCA News and Discussion

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 05:01

Ah. OK. Understood.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 23 Sep 2009 06:54

2012,2013,2014 are all not that important, what rfp states is more important
RFP stes the first aircraft should be delivered within 36 months of the MMRCA contract and the 18th aircraft within 48 months of the contract. so it all depends upon when the contract is signed.as of now the contract will probably be signed in 2011,so expect the first aircraft by 2013 and the 18th by 2014 or early 2015. but if russia wins the first mig-35 will be delivered by 2015 and 18th by 2018

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 07:07

Only FYI:

MRCA RFP: India floats its biggest-ever global tender for jet fighters

The first batch of 18, to be supplied in a flyaway condition, has to be inducted in the IAF by 2012.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... osals.html

It plans to make a decision by 2010, and envisages the first aircraft entering service around 2012.

Air Force Plans To Induct Multi Role Combat Aircraft By 2012

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 07:30

NOT a MRCA point, but a potential data point in the selection of the MRCA:

From tweeter.com/livefist:

13 SEPT 09 // Lockheed to field Korean KT-1 turboprop for IAF's primary trainer replacement and T/A-50 AJT for follow-on to Hawk AJT

13 SEPT 09 // Lockheed-HAL-IAI Bedek to co-produce modular refuelling probe for F-16 Block 60. Probes already on F-16s under trial.

How do we spell "Sufa" in Hindi?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 07:35

Rafale Wins The MMRCA Competition On LiveFist!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 08:08

India - Last Chance for Super Viper

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 23 Sep 2009 10:57

Why do you guys think that the MiG-35 can't be produced in time? Any specific reasons? I know the Sokol foreman said so about "his" plant, what about Lukhovitsy where the IN's MiG-29Ks are being produced? The K/M/35 are from the same "family" and the airframe similarity is v.high, naturally with the tooling already in place for the K, the 35s should easily follow.

Currently SOKOL (nizny novogorad) has its handsful with civilian a/c projects, MiG-21/29UB only/31 upgrades, not to mention the Yak trainer as well. Remember the M/K/35 types are simply not done here so the statement by its chief needs to be taken in context. I believe this plant is pretty much leased or taken over by Irkut (JSC).

It is the Lukhovitsy plant near moscow that deals with the K and probly is best prepped for the 35. So, meeting production time lines should hardly be an issue. The MiG-29K (9.41/7) first flew in 2007 was delivered to IN pilots by late 2008. We'll see all of them (12) in India soon enough. That is two years from 1st flight to 12-16 deliveries.

I could be wrong, but I can't see why it won't be the same or better for the 35?

CM.

PS. I understand that we have some fulcrum naysayers around, but jumping on every possible (and imagined) weakness is a bit premature to say the least. IIRC, Mig (according to Vlasov) was ready in 2007 to begin production for the 35 in 6 months. Whazzabigdeal!

abhi.enggr · Post by **abhi.enggr** » 23 Sep 2009 11:14

Cain Marko wrote:Why do you guys think that the MiG-35 can't be produced in time? Any specific reasons? I know the Sokol foreman said so about "his" plant, what about Lukhovitsy where the IN's MiG-29Ks are being produced? The K/M/35 are from the same "family" and the airframe similarity is v.high, naturally with the tooling already in place for the K, the 35s should easily follow.
I could be wrong, but I can't see why it won't be the same or better for the 35?

CM.

hi cain
iam not clear on mig-35 ground attack capabilities.
can you help me there
secondly can you also elaborate on the precision guided laser weapons on mig 35. are they being used in any other variant in russain or indian air force and
third how do you compare mig-35 with the improved su-35 (su-35 bm i think).
if IAF already have su-30 mki do we really need mig-35
and also since iam a big strong advocater of russia india defence setup can you provide me with valid reasons for preferring mig-35 over rafale.
lastly is the thurst vectoring feature a regular tested one in mig-35 or is it merely an option.
please help............

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 23 Sep 2009 11:21

I asked a MiGs guy on MAKS-2009 about this. He said 'Sokol' already takes a part in MiG-29K production, some parts are made there and they are satisfied with the quality. Although the finite assembly is realized in Lukhovitsy facility near Moscow. As I can understand from the Sokol's chief interview with the expressed readiness 'to start MiG-35 production from 2013 blah blah...' - he's just interested to move the finite assembly from Lukhovitsy to its plant. But it's dependent of real needs I can guess. Since it's not clear whether MiG wins MMRCA, the needed rate of production isn't known too. Even if MiG-35 win, the number of off-the-shelf produced MiG-35 for India hardly can achieve 20 units. So they can start the assembly on current MiG-29K line in Lukhvitsy immediately after the order for MiG-29K is finished. Of course if RuAF orders MiG-35 as it's seems to be, the Lukhovtsy facility would not be enough.

abhi.enggr · Post by **abhi.enggr** » 23 Sep 2009 11:28

can anyone please tell me how all mrca planes are compared with F-35.
iam more interested in knowing the capabilities of rafale.
question: when we have su-30 MKI do we really need eurofighter or mig-35 which i believe in the same class.
correct me of iam wrong.
question: if yes then shouldn't we b looking for rafale or gripen.
question: what is the current status of rafale ASEA radar.
question: is there any news on wether russain air force is inducting the mig-35 or not.

all you people please reply....
at least help your friend (that's me) to understand better.

also i have heard that rafale has been almost finalised for the deal mrca..........comments please with verdict.......

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 23 Sep 2009 11:42

Baldev wrote:india has three options to get AESA tech without any problem including software codes

1. from israel with love elta2052 for LCA
2.from france with love rbe2 aesa from france
3.from russia with love zhuk ae and aesa for su30 from NIIP

so i think these loving technologies from three countries are more than enough for us to digest there should be no need for any more i hope

The ELTA 2052 wont go on board any mrca fighter, the US has banned IAI and ELTA from participating in the deal, when they didnt let SAAB a US ally to sweeten the deal with Issy avionics, how on earth will they let Russia use Issy avionics for the mig. As of yet we have no idea, the final bids will come next year and LM or Boeing might just as well offer full-tot, the game is not finished yet. source codes are nice but to learn to use them and add or customizse them takes well over 5-10 years, its by no means easy, takes a lot of time and can be expensive. besides US radars have the largest library of threats off the shelf. They wont give source codes but a chance to add certainly. dont underestimate the competitive nature of this deal and importance of winning this for the US, they seem most commited to win and the most commited usually wins. mig has just begun testing and who knows how long will they contiue, i for one am dead against going for an aircraft that isn't fully tested yet, the mig wont come before 2015 and i doubt IAF will delay any decision, i am 99% sure they will sign the deal end of 2010 and the first aircraft will have to arrive mid-2013. mig wont win because even if it manages to please the IAF which i seriuosly doubt looking at the competitors, there will be lot of people in politics talking about the same problem of over-dependence on Russia. besides when mig themselves say production wont begin before 2013-2014, well its over for them. if IAF is very serious of wanting aircraft by end 2013, SH will be their bet coz its the only line thats over 3 months ahead of schedule and their production rates are the highest at over 40 aircraft per year, if SH is chosen all 18 will be delivered by end 2014 which is good enough. If IAF is serious about deadlines, they should get rid of mig-35 and Gripen now already, and only continue to test the remaining, gripen too small and too LCA like to win, the mig too late, too patched up, too useless compared to the others.

the mig can deploy the following air to ground weapons

KH-31 a/p (50-110km), kh-29 (10-30km), kh-59 (115-285km), KAR-500LGB, KAB-500TV guided bomb, fuel air explosives.

heavily undergunned compared to SH, SV, EF, Rafale and Gripen. the mrca and f-35 well not an easy comparison but yeah the f-35 is better in almost everyway, its avionics are whole generation ahead. RUAF has not ordered the mig-35 yet and they wont until we do, the mig-35 is also heavily undergunned compared to the su-35 which can drop almost all weapons in RUAF inventory, plus the su-35 has super cruise. Rafale's radar has been tested and will be ready for induction in 2011. the f-35 however has lower max payload compared to the Rafale, SH but can deploy more types of weapons compared to all the others in the mrca. gripen too claims supercruise but will IAF go for an aircraft that will be outperformed by the LCA mk-2. i think since day one the only aircraft that match our needs are the Rafale and SH, even EF doesnt match up to the weapons flexibility of SH and Rafale and its almost certain one of them will win.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 23 Sep 2009 11:51

abhi.enggr wrote:iam not clear on mig-35 ground attack capabilities.can you help me there

Fair to middlin decent is what I'd call it. Not a Rafale or a Shornet or an MKI but it is not designed for that. Carries more payload (6500kg+) and further (2200km+ on internal fuel alone) than the original requirement (mirage-2000-5). In terms of strike I always think of payload/range. On internal fuel, it competes with the best - eurocanards, shornet. The 16 sucks! Max payload equals the F-16 and surpasses the gripenNG but lags behind the rest. In terms of weapon varieties - it probly offers a LOT, and cheaper. everything from dumb bombs, Kab series laser guided weapons, ARH (Kh-31s), tV guided munitions, stand off missiles (work is on i think on the Kloob).
In terms of a2g sensors, it has a newly developed OLS-UEMK that does shows some v.resepctable specs. It does lack in that it still does not sport an ELS and use the KH-31 passively (although it could carry a HADF for that).

secondly can you also elaborate on the precision guided laser weapons on mig 35. are they being used in any other variant in russain or indian air force and

Kab series is fairlycomprehensive. Also, they have quite a few treats coming out. Maks 09 is indicative of this. expect weapons for the Pakfa to slowly peter down to the mig-35 as well.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-GBU.html
Almost all weapons on the MKI should be available for the 35 (other than the brahmos).

third how do you compare mig-35 with the improved su-35 (su-35 bm i think).

if IAF already have su-30 mki do we really need mig-35[/quote]
the mig-35 is much smaller (and consequently less capable) than the larger, modernized flanker series. It cannot be a substitute but will serve well as a supplement since it has a greater "medium" orientation, the flanker is "heavy". For QRAs or theater defence, i'd guess a fulcrum would be better suited.

and also since iam a big strong advocater of russia india defence setup can you provide me with valid reasons for preferring mig-35 over rafale.

Interesting question, the rafale is a beauty - but I like the mig as well. Still, what advantages does the 35 offer?
Price for sure.
secondly, commonality with existing mig-29 and IN Ks.
Existent infrastructure support. India currently has tremendous knowhow on fulcrum - in terms of technical knowledge (BRDs, RD-33 production) and probly tactics and SOPs.
Good deal of commonality in weapons used (not as much with the rafale, in fact I can't think of a single BVR ARH that the IAF currently uses that can seamlessly be transferred to the rafale),
expensive and somewhat limited weapons on the rafale.
in terms of performance, the rafale would be ahead or at least equal in most criteria other than ITRs. Sensors, I'd put the rafale ahead. MMI as well. But only marginally. In a sense a marginal advantage for such a heavy price is pointless since the IAF is already looking at the Pakfa/FGFA.
depth of access to technology. My guess is the mig chaps would offer more for less.
IOWs, the 35 would probly transition to the IAF more seamlessly than any other MRCA bird (rafale included) and at the lowest cost (perhaps the gripen can beat it).

lastly is the thurst vectoring feature a regular tested one in mig-35 or is it merely an option.

The TVC is tested well enough on an airframe that is from the same family as the current 35. However, it is optional in the sense that the customer does not HAVE to buy it.

CM.

abhi.enggr · Post by **abhi.enggr** » 23 Sep 2009 11:54

[quote="RameshC"]

from ur post it is clear that even if we cut a deal with super hornet there are very slim chances of our trying to get improved avionics from israel like radars etc. for f-18.
then we should go for rafale.
i firmly believe that it is the only one of the deals which can be trusted to continue supplies even in conflict with pakistan and technically sound.
plus iam much inclined towards it becuase it has almost totally french built ( correct me if wrong ) and it has proven land and naval versions.
france is almost totally dependent on them.
lastly the rafale will be very helpfull for LCA as well.they are masters in the delta airframe design and also rafale's precison guided weapons which i believe is the future of war can be integrated easily with lca.

abhi.enggr · Post by **abhi.enggr** » 23 Sep 2009 12:06

Cain Marko wrote:
third how do you compare mig-35 with the improved su-35 (su-35 bm i think).
if IAF already have su-30 mki do we really need mig-35

CM.[/quote]
hi cain what a reply man.....thanks for helping me out
now as you have already answered about the scheduled delivery with mig-35 ....
please elaborate on another issue....
is there any news of the russian airforce having mig-35 in near future....
ALSO I REQUIRE YOUR VIEWS ON WHY IS NO ONE LOOKING AT THE PROSPECT OF US DUMPING INDIA OR STEMMING SUPPLIES IN TIME OF SAY INDO PAK CONFLICT OR SAY INDO CHINA CONFLICT.
from what i know of russains they have always helped us (except gorshkov and t-90 )

now the most important
don't you think india is leaning on other sources than russian because of russia having close defence ties with china (rd33 with jf-17).
please answer this as i strongly believe this is important in regards to mrca as not only the a/c is important but the supplies,inventory and post delivery support is more important.........
and i from personal experience with russians believe they have always helped us in times of need..
i know the full case of INS ARIHANT and countless others as well.........
comments.........
also i favour the rafale the most and the second choice is mig-35.

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 23 Sep 2009 12:53

fact is the SH doesn't need any avionics from Issy since all the avionics on board the SH surpass almost everything Issy has except may be the Mayavi EW suite which will go on board the LCA mk-2 and Issy f-35s but for the rest the apg-79 out performs the el-2052, its ew suites is second only to the Spectra on the Rafale and closely macthes the DASS on the EF. i repeat RuAf has not yet ordered the mig and they wont do so till we do, which wont happen. the su-30mki can do much more than the mig and if we need something we can always order more mki, with 280 on order so far, the mig is not needed. Russian delivery itself is shady with many bad quality parts making their way into new mig-29s for Algeria lets not even go for the after sales support where Russian record is kinda sad. The french, US, EU have better sales support. Besides with F-18SH's avionics constantly being upgraded ther is no need for any Issy or EU inputs, whats proabable is to get some Issy & EU weapons like python-5, Delilah, Popeye-2, MSOV, Meteor, Asraam, Taurus KEPD(500km+) (f-18 can carry this, Rafale cant') etc. integrated on the SH if needed.

Rahul PS · Post by **Rahul PS** » 23 Sep 2009 13:14

The most inportant thing when you buy anything is money.
It will require double(perhaps even more) the amount of RFP to purchase SH,RAFALE,EF.
(I have given the math earlier in my post).Not only that the weapons onboard will also be expensive other than the investment needed for fulfilling offsets.
So only one way, is to either reduce the purchase to 60 fighters or double the RFP amount.
There will be a scandal if the budget offshoots particularly for a US deal(sample arg:there were cheaper options available), do anybody think the GOI will be prepared to take that risk after the BOFORS fiasco.Why we selected sukhoi instead of Mirage2000?
That will bring us down to three, F-16,mig-35,gripen.
F-16 is an old aircraft(we are talking about an aircraft in the service even at 2040) that are in the hands of our enemy and costlier than the other two.
I am seriously sure that the IAF wont buy it.(assumpion)
That brings our list down to two, MIG 35 and Gripen.

Gripen has got an added advantage of a European fighter especially when the IAF is looking for diversifying its assets and also learn a thing or two about european design.But it is a light fighter(the deal is for medium multi role), comparable to LCA mk2 and costing more compared with LCA and MIG 35.

Btwn mig 35 is an enhancement of mig 29 and I too think the existing production lines for MIG 29 can be tweaked for MIG 35.Even if we agree that it will be late compared to others and so it is breaking the RFP then what about the offshoot in RFP amount with other aircrafts.I think indians can take a delay but cannot part with extra money(that too double!).About the spares, the russians have offered full ToT, so within 10 years we will be able imbibe that and have our own production lines.

abhi.enggr · Post by **abhi.enggr** » 23 Sep 2009 13:21

Rahul PS wrote:The most inportant thing when you buy anything is money.
It will require double(perhaps even more) the amount of RFP to purchase SH,RAFALE,EF.
Btwn mig 35 is an enhancement of mig 29 and I too think the existing production lines for MIG 29 can be tweaked for MIG 35.Even if we agree that it will be late compared to others and so it is breaking the RFP then what about the offshoot in RFP amount with other aircrafts.I think indians can take a delay but cannot part with extra money(that too double!).About the spares, the russians have offered full ToT, so within 10 years we will be able imbibe that and have our own production lines.

although i favour the rafale, well i have to strongly agree on you on this issue mig 35 is the second best choice after rafale because of cost and full tot.
also when needed there delivery schedule can not be affected by external sources......
but still i seriously think rafale will remain the best choice since if we are looking at a a/c till 2040 then we shpuld be choosing a a/c which another country is using for the same scenario (till 2040 and beyond ) and significantly they are basing their emtire force (airforce and navy ) on variants of a single plane rafale........
we should be doing the same since if we choose any other option because of cost then we may be looking for another a/c after say f-35 enters service......

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 23 Sep 2009 14:58

well the SH is being sold to the USN for as low as 50 million, the mig hasnt even been properly tested plus dont expect it to remain cheap, knowing Russian habit of cost escalation every year or so, the mig will also be just as expensive as the Gripen plus if we go for mig chances are we wont go for Russian avionics on it, it will need French goodies to make it as good as the others in their current state, issy goodies are banned from the mrca unless they are on US platforms. what mig-29 line are we talking about??? we never built a mig at home, we just tweaked them from normal mig-29A to BAAZ variant, as of now we havent signed any contract for extra mig-29ks those 30 remain a choice and we havent made it yet and chance are we wont because the second ADS may have things like steam catapult launchers and may be big enough to launch the SH or rafale, so where is the question of a mig line, we only locally produce RD-33 engines, some common fighter avionics and thats it. if we have to produce mig-35 we have setup new line. We only have MRO facility for the mig and that is not enough to produce a mig. so dont expect it to be as easy as you think. no matter which aicraft we go for we'll have to setup a new line or either revamp the HAL-line in Hyderbad, because Nasik will be very busy building the mki and now with additional orders that line will be busy atleast till 2015 and well beyond. Bangalore makes helos as well as LCA mk-2 will made there, so HAL HYD is most likely the place where the mrca will be built locally.

knowing that the mig wont begin production till end 2013 or 2014 in Russia, when on earth will we begin local production ?? no matter what you say the IAF will dwindle down to its lowest levels circa 2012-2013...IAF is not going to wait another 4 years beyond 2013 for local production to begin. mig is out. cost and full-tot are secondary concerns. plus we are bound to loose another 10 or more aircraft per year average by the time we begin recieving the mrca knowing our crash rate. if cost is really a concern EF, Rafale would have never recievd the rfp , they were far more expensive when this tender actually began , the EF was well over 130 million and Rafale the same, now due to possibities of orders for Rafale in UAE, Brazil the price has come down, the EF too thanx to Saudi the price has gone down by few millions.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Sep 2009 15:13

Further to Rao's links,if one remembers correctly,one option mentioned many moons ago was that initial aircraft could be transferred from the manufacturing nation's own air force inventory and then taken back once fully developed production aircraft arrived.We did the same thing with the SU-30s,acquiring the basic SU-30 initially (which are now reportedly due to be returned to Russia).The statement about inducting the MMRCA by 2012 will require all the manufacturers to somehow give the IAF what it wants if the decision is taken on time as specified,by late 2010.Only the MIG-35 is not in service with its parent nation unlike all the others,but considering the commonality with existing MIG-29K production,where approx.75%+ commonality exists with the carrier Fulcrum,delivering the first few by end 2012 shouldn't be a problem theoretically.We also do not know what the exact specs demanded by the IAF are which might also require some modifications of the other contending aircraft.

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 23 Sep 2009 15:30

http://www.russiatoday.com/Top_News/200 ... -cent.html

funny article above..gr8 read. well existing platforms like SH, Rafale, EF, F-16IN are tried and well tested so any new additons will take very little time to integrate but the mig-35 hasnt even recieved IOC yet and FOC is still far far away, without FOC we wont buy it, no matter how much commonality exists between the mig-29k and mig-35, they are different aircraft and we dont have enough orders for the mig-29k and we didnt order any extras. now when mig says it themselves that they cant begin rpoduction till 2013, well we have no reason to doubt it and chances are even that will lead to more delays because after it gets FOC circa 2013 only then we can begin thinking about added features or tweakings... no way mig, it comes too late and heavily undergunned and geared towards air superiority. you see now the apg-79/80 have been asked to add weather radar modes and both Raytheon and NG have begun work on these features, its easier to add to an aircraft that has FOC, aircraft that has no IOC well i dont trust it neither will the IAF. as it is we have problems with the existing fleet of operational migs, going for untried mig...well out of the question.

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 23 Sep 2009 17:29

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=11758

apparently the numbers are low and inadequate, so chances of mig seem to be dwindling, i am sure the aircraft that closely meet deadlines will be chosen.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Sep 2009 17:50

saptarishi wrote:2012,2013,2014 are all not that important, what rfp states is more important
RFP stes the first aircraft should be delivered within 36 months of the MMRCA contract and the 18th aircraft within 48 months of the contract. so it all depends upon when the contract is signed.as of now the contract will probably be signed in 2011,so expect the first aircraft by 2013 and the 18th by 2014 or early 2015. but if russia wins the first mig-35 will be delivered by 2015 and 18th by 2018

ya if contract signed in 2011 so how can first aircraft be delivered by 2013 in just 2 years and other 17 by 2014,but be realistic we won't get any aircraft before 2014 if contract is signed in 2011

Anthony Hines · Post by **Anthony Hines** » 23 Sep 2009 17:58

Decision on the winner will be determined to a large extent by the threat perception. If the current press comments from various officials is an indicator, China is considered the biggest threat. Chinese probably have a very good understanding of all Russian A/cs in India's inventory. Does it then make sense for India to add more A/c that China knows how to deal with?

Comments..

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Sep 2009 18:12

Anthony Hines wrote:Decision on the winner will be determined to a large extent by the threat perception. If the current press comments from various officials is an indicator, China is considered the biggest threat. Chinese probably have a very good understanding of all Russian A/cs in India's inventory. Does it then make sense for India to add more A/c that China knows how to deal with?

Comments..

my fried our western neighbor already has very good understanding of f16blk60,m2000,typhoon and will have good understanding of RAFALE as well

but the avionics in chinese jets and indian jets are totally different

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Sep 2009 18:16

RameshC wrote:well the SH is being sold to the USN for as low as 50 million

ya you are right too but they sell shornet to foreign buyers no less than 190million each

Aussies paid 4.9 billion US $s for 24 shornets and 7 billion US dollars price was set for 36 F18 for Brazil both deals included all associated cost so in both cases cost is over 190 million for each shornet

compare this to SAAB's offer of 86 gripens for 6 billion US $s

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 23 Sep 2009 18:21

RameshC wrote:well existing platforms like SH, Rafale, EF, F-16IN are tried and well tested so any new additons will take very little time to integrate but the mig-35 hasnt even recieved IOC yet and FOC is still far far away, without FOC we wont buy it, no matter how much commonality exists between the mig-29k and mig-35, they are different aircraft and we dont have enough orders for the mig-29k and we didnt order any extras.

IOC and FOC are not tech characteristics, it's about the unit's readiness for fight and the personal, skilled enough. May be a very checked aircraft from abroad with still zero-op. capability. So IOC and FOC of Rafale in France mean nothing for India.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 18:25

Baldev wrote:
saptarishi wrote:2012,2013,2014 are all not that important, what rfp states is more important
RFP stes the first aircraft should be delivered within 36 months of the MMRCA contract and the 18th aircraft within 48 months of the contract. so it all depends upon when the contract is signed.as of now the contract will probably be signed in 2011,so expect the first aircraft by 2013 and the 18th by 2014 or early 2015. but if russia wins the first mig-35 will be delivered by 2015 and 18th by 2018
ya if contract signed in 2011 so how can first aircraft be delivered by 2013 in just 2 years and other 17 by 2014,but be realistic we won't get any aircraft before 2014 if contract is signed in 2011

A quote from a press conf given by CAS Naik states the 36 months to be the party line.

Given that the tenders will be "opened" in April, 2010, it should be within 36 months after that (say June, 2010).

IIRC, this whole process is behind by some 6 months, so end of 2012 was original time frame, now perahps mid 2013 at the earliest.

Baldev,

I feel that of all these the F-16 and Rafale will deliver (easily) by end of 2012. F-18 I am not too sure - because they are producing some 40 per year for USN. EF I think will divert from allocations to the UK (who wants to get out of their cintract it looks like). Gripen I do not know, but I feel they can deliver by end of 2012. MiG has stated that they will not start till 2013.

JMTs.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Sep 2009 18:27

Igorr wrote:
RameshC wrote:well existing platforms like SH, Rafale, EF, F-16IN are tried and well tested so any new additons will take very little time to integrate but the mig-35 hasnt even recieved IOC yet and FOC is still far far away, without FOC we wont buy it, no matter how much commonality exists between the mig-29k and mig-35, they are different aircraft and we dont have enough orders for the mig-29k and we didnt order any extras.
IOC and FOC are not tech characteristics, it's about the unit's readiness for fight and the personal, skilled enough. May be a very checked aircraft from abroad with still zero-op. capability. So IOC and FOC of Rafale in France mean nothing for India.

while that argument seems to be right, we have to realize that the MiG-35 is way behind the rest of the planes as far as manufacturing and induction is concerned. So, if the Rafale for India takes 6 months to go through the ringers, the MiG-35 could take 2-3 times that. In any case it will take a lot more.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Sep 2009 18:38

RameshC wrote:http://www.russiatoday.com/Top_News/200 ... -cent.html

funny article above..gr8 read. well existing platforms like SH, Rafale, EF, F-16IN are tried and well tested so any new additons will take very little time to integrate but the mig-35 hasnt even recieved IOC yet and FOC is still far far away, without FOC we wont buy it

are yaar how much there will be the difference between # 154 flying for last 4 years and exact mig35,

if you don't know about this this difference i tell you its simple-- there will be two extra hardpoints thats all everything else will be the same in terms of engines,avionics,EW you see on # 154 so there is no question about talking of when exact mig35 getting IOC or FOC

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Sep 2009 18:48

NRao wrote:A quote from a press conf given by CAS Naik states the 36 months to be the party line.

Given that the tenders will be "opened" in April, 2010, it should be within 36 months after that (say June, 2010).

IIRC, this whole process is behind by some 6 months, so end of 2012 was original time frame, now perahps mid 2013 at the earliest.

Baldev,

I feel that of all these the F-16 and Rafale will deliver (easily) by end of 2012. F-18 I am not too sure - because they are producing some 40 per year for USN. EF I think will divert from allocations to the UK (who wants to get out of their cintract it looks like). Gripen I do not know, but I feel they can deliver by end of 2012. MiG has stated that they will not start till 2013.JMTs.

my fried we are talking about this too early and what is the surety that contract will be signed by april next year even by then weapon trials will not be finished

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 23 Sep 2009 20:20

NRao wrote: while that argument seems to be right, we have to realize that the MiG-35 is way behind the rest of the planes as far as manufacturing and induction is concerned. So, if the Rafale for India takes 6 months to go through the ringers, the MiG-35 could take 2-3 times that. In any case it will take a lot more.

I agree about Rafale's more matureness for accelerated induction, but still think MiG-35 has a number of other strong sides, the weapon characteristics first of all and its commonality with the current and future (FGFA) Indian tactical weaponry. The engine commonality - is also very strong + for MiG. So both aircrafts have a chance, unlike other contenders IMHO.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 23 Sep 2009 20:34

Igorr wrote:
NRao wrote: while that argument seems to be right, we have to realize that the MiG-35 is way behind the rest of the planes as far as manufacturing and induction is concerned. So, if the Rafale for India takes 6 months to go through the ringers, the MiG-35 could take 2-3 times that. In any case it will take a lot more.
I agree about Rafale's more matureness for accelerated induction, but still think MiG-35 has a number of other strong sides, the weapon characteristics first of all and its commonality with the current and future (FGFA) Indian tactical weaponry. The engine commonality - is also very strong + for MiG. So both aircrafts have a chance, unlike other contenders IMHO.

But you forget the biggest thing going against the Mig...it's (self-admitted) inherent inability to meet India's RFP requirements and deliver 18 A/C within the stipulated time frame
Considering the IAF's statement about insufficient numbers today, I would believe timing is a MAJOR factor in the IAF's eyes...thus the media PR campaign to prevent the babus from spending an extended period of time 'negotiating' with Natashas, Texas Blondes, Swedish Sweetdish etc

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 23 Sep 2009 21:08

If India can save 8 years of Defense R&D in AESA technology, by delaying MRCA deliveries by 1 year, its still a better deal.

India is not going to die as if fighter deliveries are delayed by 2 years.

The more strong we are becoming economically, the more weaker we are turning in our foreign policy posture.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 23 Sep 2009 21:10

vishwakarmaa wrote:If India can save 8 years of Defense R&D in AESA technology, by delaying MRCA deliveries by 1 year, its still a Good deal.

According to the LCA thread India is already working on it's own AESA...
plus, it's not our call on what constitutes a good deal
if according to the IAF, they need numbers, and NOW
then thats a better deal...spl considering they decided when they want the planes (in the RFP)
plus ToT is part of the deal...so anyone who wins will have to bring the AESA tech to the table

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 23 Sep 2009 21:21

vishwakarmaa wrote: India is not going to die as if fighter deliveries are delayed by 2 years.

Unfortunately, both the IAF and I think we just might if they come 2 years after we need them

IAF claims they dont have sufficient numbers...can't argue with the end user's take on things

IAF says they want deliveries as per a certain schedule (first 18 A/C...etc) as per RFP...can't argue with end user's take on that either...they obviously came up with the time table keeping fleet strength in mind and not because it was thier lucky number...so obv they think they will be significantly/adversely affected if x number of A/C are not delivered by a certain date

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 23 Sep 2009 21:34

Raveen wrote:thus the media PR campaign to prevent the babus from spending an extended period of time 'negotiating' with Natashas, Texas Blondes, Swedish Sweetdish etc

Don't remember any case of Russian involving in corruptions deal with India, do you. It's not like the Israelis and Europeans, each year we read a new high level corruption story.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 23 Sep 2009 21:39

Igorr wrote:
Raveen wrote:thus the media PR campaign to prevent the babus from spending an extended period of time 'negotiating' with Natashas, Texas Blondes, Swedish Sweetdish etc
Don't remember any case of Russian involving in corruptions deal with India, do you. It's not like the Israelis and Europeans, each year we read a new high level corruption story.

As an Indian, I am not naive enough to believe the dealings have been absolutely clean...neither the Indians nor the Ruskies are famous for ethics AFAIK

prabir · Post by **prabir** » 23 Sep 2009 21:55

Does this mean that all defence deals in Western world are above board ?
How do you think political parties in India mobilize funds in absence of public funding of elections ?
Defence deals will remain shady. We have to make sure, best equipment is bought without any delays.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 23 Sep 2009 21:56

Cain Marko wrote:The russkis have been helping and co-developing on far more important strategic assets (than a radar). Despite the break up of the SU and dipso yeltsin's catering to US pressure, india still received (continues to receive) considerable assistance - Arihant, Akula, MKI, Brahmos, Space projects. IOWs, compared to the others, esp. the US, russia is certainly more tried and tested.
Nice attempt by cynics to equate this with a purely commercial relationship - sorry but that just reflects another "wesht ish besht" type mindset. (And no Raveen, I am not referring to your post)

CM.

Bulls eye.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 23 Sep 2009 22:00

prabir wrote:Does this mean that all defence deals in Western world are above board ?

Janaab, please feel free to point out one place where I even referred to the West either in positive or negative light...are you reading the same post I am ?

A lil reverese

"wesht ish besht"

syndrome in action here?