MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Dec 2010 16:54

sarjapur rd or near by is ideal then for HAL.

vic · Post by **vic** » 25 Dec 2010 18:07

I thought that MMRCA was to be produced by Pvt Sector????????????

Saurabh_M · Post by **Saurabh_M** » 26 Dec 2010 09:57

shukla wrote:India’s MMRCA battle enters the final rounds
FlightGlobal

"All the technical evaluations are done," says an industry source. "The next stage will be a downselect, likely in April or May after the Aero India show [9-13 February]. This will determine which aircraft go into contract negotiations." Another source, however, indicates that there is no fixed number of aircraft for the shortlist, and that all six aircraft types could, in theory at least, advance to the contract stage.

Hindustan Aeronautics chairman Ashok Nayak says that development of the production capacity required to produce the eventual MMRCA winner is already under way. "We will have to set up new infrastructure for this," says Nayak. "It won't happen in one of our existing factories, but hopefully will still be in Bangalore." He estimates that Hindustan Aeronautics alone will employ 3,500 to produce the MMRCA, and that it will take about three years to set up the facility.

Correct me, if wrong, but
(a) If they are building a capacity to produce MMRCA, then does it not mean that the winner has been chosen, cause surely one would require inputs from aircraft vendor to build facility for the same here
(b) If we are building facility to produce them then we are getting ToT. If Americans are not giving this to other then can we rule out Hornet and Viper

Saurabh_M · Post by **Saurabh_M** » 26 Dec 2010 10:01

Viv S wrote: The AESA and Meteor were still cleared for integration. Between the UK, Germany, India, there's enough clout to over-rule any inertia from Italy and Spain. With France you need only get access to the upgrades that they deem necessary for their own aircraft and you get to pay their prices. India will not get a say in whether a 90kN engine should be developed, or whether TVC or CFTs are necessary and far more importantly will be compelled to pay French prices for the available upgrades.

Spoke once with a retired Col from NDA. He said that the French are considered to be extremely reliable and timely suppliers of quality stuff. They are expensive, but money is not an issue as it once was 15 years ago.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 26 Dec 2010 10:08

Saurabh_M wrote:Correct me, if wrong, but
(a) If they are building a capacity to produce MMRCA, then does it not mean that the winner has been chosen, cause surely one would require inputs from aircraft vendor to build facility for the same here

Not building the facility just yet, just identifying the likely site where it might be built.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 27 Dec 2010 19:46

Indian MMRCA offsets differences near solution
Defenseworld

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Dec 2010 23:27

^^

.........
"our offset policy is very nascent. It is complicated and foreign vendors find it difficult to understand”. Barbora is reported to have made it clear that the comments were his personal views.

The Indian MoD is scheduled to announce a new edition of its defence procurement policy early next year which is expected to address some of the concerns of international vendors.

mmm.. lot of contradictions and arguments here. I doubt things will be clear very soon. I guess the vendors would wait for the new offset policies rather, if they all gang up.

now, if it is all confusing (per barnora) then there exists a big chance for the loop holes. keep closer watch, especially the raja kinds.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 31 Dec 2010 09:00

Yet, analysts and industry officials note that, despite India professing the intention to move towards competitive bidding, none of the marquee deals that have been put on an open tender are close to being finalized anytime soon. These, include the $10 billion purchase of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for the Air Force and a $11 billion follow-on order for six submarines.

Major said the MMRCA and FGFA would meet Indian needs over different time spans in the next 30-40 years and one couldn’t be chosen over the other.

“That is stupid if we do that,” he said. “The IAF squadron strength will keep depleting, you will have to replace them...when we talk of MMRCA, we are not talking of new technology; it’s one generation behind. The FGFA is the next generation aircraft. You cant wait. In the meantime you need aeroplanes.”

“None of the big-ticket tenders are likely to see the light of day anytime soon. A tender for replacing the ageing Bofors howitzers was recently cancelled after allegations of corruption,” noted the head of an Indian defence systems manufacturer. “Government-to-government deals seem to work better because the Indian government appears to be more comfortable with such a process.” The person didn’t want to be named.

Anit Mukherjee, an analyst at the New Delhi-based Institute of Defence Analyses (IDSA), points to two reasons for this.

First, he points to the “government’s wariness” of floating big tenders, “as every major defence tender has a potential for scandal”.

Retired brigadier and defence analyst Rahul K. Bhosle agrees. “A high degree of weapons’ obsolescence and delays due to several cases of charges of kickbacks in tendering processes, have led the armed forces to insist on a fast-track mode for acquiring weapons, thus forcing the government to take a more direct route for buying weapon systems,” he says.

Major says the country also needs to focus on ways to develop an indigenous defence industry through the offsets generated by the billions of dollars of procurement. Under the offset policy, foreign manufacturers are required to source from India a part of the content for weapons systems being purchased by the country.

“We need robust organization to handle offsets. We need to increase indigenous capacity by involving private sector in a big way,” Major said. “When we talk of military aviation, we talk of also getting technologies into the country. We should bargain and leverage technologies that we want through offsets. It’s not easy, but effort should be there.”

read more..
http://www.livemint.com/2010/12/3022475 ... l?atype=tp
Most of the big-ticket agreements have been between governments, and were not open to competitive bidding

Tamang · Post by **Tamang** » 01 Jan 2011 02:18

Secret IAF file goes missing (later found), probe ordered

A secret file related to over $ 11 billion deal for procuring 126 multi-role combat aircraft went missing from the defence ministry and has been found on the roadside in New Delhi [ Images ], prompting the Indian Air Force to order a probe into the incident.

The secret files are related to the offsets clause in the deal and were found on the roadside in a Delhi locality recently, India [ Images ] Air Force officials said in New Delhi, adding that the file has been recovered.

"The IAF has ordered a CoI into the loss of the secret file which went missing from the defence ministry. The ministry will order a separate probe into the incident as the file had gone missing from there," Air Vice Marshal M Matheswaran, Assistant Chief of Air Staff (Operations) told PTI in New Delhi.

The incident comes at a time when the multi-billion dollar deal has entered the critical stage after the IAF carried out extensive flight evaluation trials of the six participating aircraft.

The IAF had submitted its report to the defence ministry, which has to take a final call on the deal. He said the IAF had ordered the probe under a senior official to find out how the file had gone missing from the ministry as it belonged to the air force.

"The secret file has been recovered and it is in our custody," he added.

However, it was not clear as to how and who recovered the file. Under the Offsets clause in the defence production procedure, a foreign vendor bagging any deal worth over Rs 300 crore has to invest back at least 30 per cent of the contract's worth back in Indian defence sector.

Under the M-MRCA deal, the offsets were pegged at 50 per cent of the worth of the deal. American F-16 and F/A-18, French Rafale, Swedish Gripen, Russian MiG 35 and European Eurofighter are the six contenders participating the deal for supplying the aircraft to the IAF.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Jan 2011 02:46

Wow... that should really delay the process now. Hope there is no scam.

ChetanZ · Post by **ChetanZ** » 01 Jan 2011 04:05

this has all the makings of another bofors like scandal...
hope our fly boys get what they need in time.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 01 Jan 2011 07:41

Until the contents of this file 'recovered from the roadside' are made public, I wouldn't read too much into it. The military as a matter of protocol classifies a lot of information secret, that may not be very sensitive and may even be public knowledge. Anyone familiar with the IA's accounting practices (with ammunition for example) would agree, they are sticklers for procedure even if its not too serious a matter.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Jan 2011 07:58

Making the file public at this stage virtually nullifies the MRCA final selection process if it should contain classified information w.r.t the MRCA vendors and offsets (example comparisons etc). This file no matter what it contains, lying on the road is unacceptable loss to the whole MRCA selection process. What is the guarantee that agent/double crosser would have read it, passed it along to the vested vendor agent, and made some huge money, and perhaps agreed to drop this file near by? For example, how did IAF /MoD came to know about this missing? what is the story here? etc..

Now, the more this file content is revealed, the more MRCA will not happen for IAF. We only need to know the story line who dropped it, when, eye witness, etc., and not the contents to jeopardize the selection process.

First question is who's responsibility or ownership was this file supposed to be with (holder of the file)? Name the person who is handling the file in the MoD?

did I ask the wrong question? If somebody says yes, note his name as well.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 01 Jan 2011 09:19

SaiK wrote:Making the file public at this stage virtually nullifies the MRCA final selection process if it should contain classified information w.r.t the MRCA vendors and offsets (example comparisons etc). This file no matter what it contains, lying on the road is unacceptable loss to the whole MRCA selection process. What is the guarantee that agent/double crosser would have read it, passed it along to the vested vendor agent, and made some huge money, and perhaps agreed to drop this file near by? For example, how did IAF /MoD came to know about this missing? what is the story here? etc..

We're assuming that it contains classified information or comparisons. 'Secret file' can contain anything including mundane pointless facts already known to the public. And MRCA isn't going to be cancelled come what may. Its already progressed too far for a breach of information to have any impact.

The important factor is that the technical and financial bids have already been placed and cannot at this stage be altered. The IAF and MoD decisions are independent of any media interest in the case and will judge the winner on its merits. Even in the very unlikely event that their deliberations are leaked, their authority to take those decisions remains unchanged.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 01 Jan 2011 09:30

Well, one of the MRCA files was earlier stolen by Lockheed Martin, and one executive sent it back to the MoD by mistake! Wonder who was responsible for it this time around.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 01 Jan 2011 09:35

Classified or Not...but the protocol has been broken..so the concerned party should be shown the door....and also the officer who dare leaked that....!

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 01 Jan 2011 10:13

CT Time folks,

The file was thrown on the road side by the people who want the MRCA compitition to be srcaped in favour of additional MKis and Tejas Mk 1,2,3 etc.

CT OFF.............

vic · Post by **vic** » 01 Jan 2011 10:48

I think that now MMRCA joins the LCA. The files for AMCA & LCA have always been lying at the roadside. Now MRCA file joins them

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 01 Jan 2011 11:17

heh heh may be this is one way to scrap this circus! J20 photoos are making the MRCA look not so hot! Get a scandal going, dump the deal, put the $$s into an MRCA equivalent Tejas Mk2, a far better AMCA and Pakfa.

CM

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 01 Jan 2011 18:17

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2011/01/ti ... -file.html

The file 'divulges' the winning firm's contractual obligations with regard to offsets. For the life of me, I can't see how any firm can leverage this to win the contract or why the government would be overly harassed by the leak. Every bidder would have been made clear via the RFP, what the offset requirements were. While some concerns have been aired by the bidders recently, the financial bids have already been placed and they effect all those parties equally.

I can understand an investigation into the breach of protocol. But the hohalla about this, presenting it as some sort of major scandal or scam, seems to be overblown.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Jan 2011 19:25

Viv S, imho that is corollary argument that does not prove one assumption is better than a different assumption. It is just for that reason, it is better at any stage before the sign of any contract, things are kept secret even the secret means nothing.

If you have reasons to think this is overblown (let us assume your analysis is half bottle), the other reasons makes it believe it is half empty.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Jan 2011 20:50

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC988PkoOXg
Not sure about BR blessings to this video (check comments), but it is definitely wrong to club pics of EF2K before a final decision is made by MoD. I'd not have linked this tube to here had I not seen "thanks to BR" in the comments.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 02 Jan 2011 23:20

LCA, MCA and MMRCA are not linked! Why equate them? Today LCA/ AMCA development is not restricted by money. How will you utilize more money pumped into LCA/AMCA?!!

LCA/AMCA have all the designers present within the establishment working on them. Scrapping the MMRCA would not increase or decrease their number. So please don't equate one with the other.

LCA MkII won't be able to do what the MMRCA's can do. Its was not designed to challenge them, and rightly so.

And please don't go by the bling of the J-20 and the AMCA. The are decades away from seeing their true potential. EF/Rafale/Gripen/SH/Mig-29/35 and the likes will be the frontline work horse aircrafts in the world for quite some time to come.

Going by what Dr. Rajkumar had to say, AMCA by 2025 will be an achievement. Similarly I think the PLAAF will be very happy to get J-20 in service by 2020. They will be dazzling new planes then. To settle on niggles and make strategies for them will easily take 5-10 years.

On the other hand MMRCA would be quite a lot tested by 2014/2015. So as Vina says, "Don't worry, have curry", millitary planners are no fools

.

Just one plea from me, keep the show clean and and for God's sake please don't drag it any further

.

P.S. One sector where I would love to see some funds pumped in is the Engine development front. I really pity the blokes out there.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 03 Jan 2011 00:21

Going for MRCA because earlier (yr 2000-05) it was considered a right thing to do , if it takes 4-5 yrs more to get first MRCAs , would be a dumb head decision.
Buying some F35s for Navy/AF and using rest of the money to built more LCA-X and MCA would be a far better decision .

Since the deciders don't look like in a hurry whats the point going for mrca when current condition isnt considered an emergent situation ?

These reptiles had taken 4 years just to decide a single aircraft amongst 6 good aircrafts .While the rationale for decision are well known and clear .!!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 03 Jan 2011 01:05

How much time has similar evaluation in other AFs taken?

When will the LCA-X come? What will be its capabilities?

When will the MCA come?

When will the F-35s come?

Where will you operate the F-35s for the Navy? What will be its price?

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 03 Jan 2011 02:27

^^^
We don't even need F-35s or the MRCAs.Ideally we should have done
a) Order 50 more MKIs.
b) Order 20 Jags.
c) Order 20 LCA Mk1s.
d) Spend the bulk in developing MCA and LCA mk2.
e) Spend some money on improving MKIs based on experiences w.r.t LCA, MCA, FGFA(T-50)

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 03 Jan 2011 05:19

sohamn wrote:^^^
We don't even need F-35s or the MRCAs.Ideally we should have done
a) Order 50 more MKIs.
b) Order 20 Jags.
c) Order 20 LCA Mk1s.
d) Spend the bulk in developing MCA and LCA mk2.
e) Spend some money on improving MKIs based on experiences w.r.t LCA, MCA, FGFA(T-50)

Again ( I understand Lal Mohanji's lal chicks now. I think I should order some for me now)
1. Is 20 Jags == 20 MMRCA?
2. Is 20 LCA Mark I == 20 MMRCA?
3. Is 50 Su-30s = 50 MMRCA? Also where will you produce these?
4. Again, is there a correlation between LCA Mk II/MCA/FGFA development funds with the MMRCA. If I listen to Dr. Saraswat, apparently not. The money seems to be coming now.
5. I don't expect design tech to percolate to us through TOT, but one can certainly expect production/manufacturing ToT. That has immense value as we set up our production bases for indigenous fighters. We can absorb many good practices.

Nuggets:
1. The MKIs are improving (they have been improving since there inception, please read up on their various "Mk"s). They will improve immaterial of the funds poured into MMRCA. Besides, how do you correlate more money to more improvement especially in design?
2. The most likely outcome of the MMRCA being scrapped is that the Finance minister will yet again accept with the glee "unutilized" defence budget for the years on end ... A happy ending for all and time for Lal chicks

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 04 Jan 2011 08:12

Original article: http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luftwa ... eaderblock

Translation of article on the Luftwaffe website - Eurofighter vs SU30MKI:
German to English translation
David and Goliath
Bareilly, India, 30.12.2010.
The Sukhoi Su-27 "Flanker" and its two-seat Indian development, the Su-30 MKI are aviation enthusiasts for many the epitome of highly agile fighter aircraft. Those who do not have the incredible "Cobra" - surprised surprise maneuver on the big international air show and wondered, "Who is there still a chance in a dogfight?"

The answer is: The Air Force - and with the Euro Fighter

The Su-30 is impressive for its sheer size. The Sukhoi Su-30 MKI is a two-seat advanced variant of the Russian Sukhoi Su-27 interceptor "Flanker", equipped with the latest avionics from different nations, including Russia, Israel, France and India. It is the product of cooperation of Russian and Indian defense industry, and also equipped with a thrust vector control unit that allows the machine to maneuver well beyond the purely aerodynamic as possible, in the so-called "post stall" - to take wraps range.

Lt. Col. Frank Simon, the Su-30 MKI (Source: Frank Simon) Enlarge image unique opportunity to compare
Lt. Col. Frank Simon was the right man for such a task. As a former pilot of a MiG 29, both the air forces of the NVA and the Fighter Wing 73 "Steinhoff" (JG 73 S), he has flown both conceived in Russia machine, and the permission to fly the modern Euro Fighter.
"So this flight was a special feature, and I looked forward with great anticipation to the experience. Equally excited as I was Lieutenant-Colonel Frank Neurath from Euro Fighter-type escort from Manching. He accompanied me on this trip to India. "
When creating the suit had been his first Simon Deja Vu, "The Indian Flanker pilots use the same Russian anti-G trousers that we used on the MiG-29."
Then Simon became the Backseat of his pilots a briefing for the upcoming flight: As the ejection seat to operate it, a brief presentation of the Flanker and admission to the cockpit and the planned maneuvers and procedures.

Top

Su-30 Flanker-C on the mountains (Source: Niermann) Enlarge image cobras in the Himalayas
"In the training room by the breathtaking scenery of the Himalayas, it goes right down to business. My Indian pilot demonstrated to me how close and hard to maneuver and Su-30 can be me then try for yourself. We fly a variety of maneuvers with and without thrust vectoring, Immelmann, loop, and finally the cobra maneuver. "And although the Jets still below the Himalayan peaks are, the air would seem for the engines of the Sukhoi quite thin, because The Indian pilot like "the cobra" make an angle with the nose down and not up, because he probably fears that the incoming air is not sufficient to support the airplane during the combustion of oxygen.
"In the end we still practice how to deal with the Flanker with the aid of the thrust vector control an enemy who attacks from behind, out-maneuvered and can shoot. To this end, pull the edge after a hard curve sharply upward - it depends on how a cobra. The steep attitude you get into a low speed range in which to counteract the thrust vector control. Now we turn so the thrust vector control - and the elegant nose of the Sukhoi falls at a rapid pace down to aim straight to the stunned opponent: Quick with the helmet visor, an infrared missile intrude on the enemy - and off it, "So much for theory. ...

Top

Size Comparison (Source: Eurofighter GmbH €) Enlarge image lesson in physics
"Then I ask the pilot, he should do it again and it quickly put the nose back over the horizon in order to follow the enemy, if our intention recognizes and tries to climb over us: But that's what he does not manage. .. The nose of the Flanker is - despite the thrust vector control - too heavy, planned for the maneuver "a Euro Fighter would now have an easy game," The Flanker is sluggish in the air, without speed, we try the same again at the end of the flight - with the same result .
In this case the result is not so amazing: Has she passed the Cobra maneuver was successful and the enemy pilot this is not recognized in time, then the Flanker-C possibly the winner of the duel. However, the Cobra maneuver is alive - no matter who runs what pilots and aircraft - even a little of the legend, as an experienced opponent can guess this maneuver. The rest is done by the inertia of the mass: A heavy fighter aircraft like the Flanker-C is disadvantaged by its high weight if it is set by its exceptional aerodynamics and powerful engines only in a position to take wraps to such a maneuver in general, which Most fighters do not make - not even with a thrust vector control. Just the Treibstoffzuladung the Sukhoi over nine tons weight reached nearly empty weight of the € Fighters themselves: Flanker-C is a heavy weight, a Goliath, even with its strong engine here at a - pushes limits - physical.

Top

Defensive measures of a Euro Fighters (Source: Air Force) Enlarge image is display all information
The knowledge is sometimes not so new, not necessarily because they already can read on Wikipedia, but also because the Flanker even at one or another international flight maneuvers here and was impressed experienced pilots but by a spectacular performance, but not take advantage of them: A maneuver is only as good as it is able to afford - in the real application, where it arrives within a few seconds later to make the right decision.
For one or the other young Euro Fighter pilots this knowledge will be a valuable pillow, for the extraordinary handling characteristics of € Fighters to the air force pilots, the aerodynamic and technical ability to escape the Cobra maneuver, while this would be combat aircraft of the third generation is usually overwhelming.

Top

A Su-30 starts (Source: Patrick Hoeveler) Enlarge image duel of the best
Finally, one must wonder why this knowledge was not already so public, sometimes an indication that the pilots of the NATO and why were so successful in the past because they exercised more often than, say, pilots on a MiG-21 former Warsaw Pact countries. But even without the reference to the better practice practice, the Western world have respect for this multi-purpose aircraft that was inspired in his role of U.S. F-15E Strike Eagle and the one or the other exercise with NATO partners whose weapons systems offered Paroli. The U.S. armed forces even bought in May 2009, two Su-27 in order to assess the possibilities for electronic warfare Flanker better - and thus the results of our own and future weapon systems in comparison.

The launch of a Euro Fighters (Source: Hans-Joachim Suhren) Enlarge image of course, all weapons systems have their strengths and weaknesses. Because the Flanker was originally designed as a heavy interceptor and imported into the army service, they can in the action described by the much smaller and lighter € Fighter not keep up that as a result, a better thrust / weight ratio defines the day, what the Luftwaffenjet in explain this fictional scenario, the winner on points would. However, one must consider when comparing all weapon systems that such maneuvers always represent the portion of a reality. In real use it would be rather that fight the two pilots, with its extensive arsenal of weapons from a distance - to have ever ever seen without the potential opponent. And of course, is the Su-30 MKI Cobra maneuver without a never to be underestimated opponent. Your experienced Indian pilots can now focus on new take wraps extraordinary stunts with the thrust vector control. For your own purpose and location of such exchanges including thought - for both sides shall be a win-win situation one.
For the Air Force and all the nations that have concerned the Euro Fighter, is the knowledge that their weapon system, which has been since its introduction in constant development, the amount of time and that you have made with the technology support Euro Fighter is the right choice.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 04 Jan 2011 11:50

DefMin's IAS Officers under lens

MoD was tight-lipped about the incident but sources said the file was apparently lost by the bureaucrats, one an additional secretary-rank officer and the other a director, while being taken to the Bharat Electronics Limited guest-house on Khelgaon Marg. The file was found by a security guard who then got in touch with the authorities concerned.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Jan 2011 12:07

^^^

You beat me to it.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jan 2011 13:25

if the bars did not weigh in at a hefty 750kg, the nose of the mki would not have this issue. the APG79 weights 250kg per web reports. so the APG77 is unlikely to be more than 350kg. aesa hero, yindu zero.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 05 Jan 2011 00:22

IIRC, the Irbis is lighter and has a smaller antenna. Expect some weight loss on the Bars during MLU.

CM

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Jan 2011 11:25

http://www.hindu.com/2011/01/05/stories ... 651100.htm

Indigenisation in focus: Antony
"Due diligence will be taken before signing medium multi-role combat aircraft deal "
S. Anandan

Chaliyam (Kozhikode): Defence Minister A.K. Antony on Tuesday said a deal to buy 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) would be signed with due diligence.

“Before a deal is signed, a lot of procedures have to be completed. The utmost care is exercised at each stage of finalising the contract. We will not do anything in a jiffy,” he told journalists after unveiling a plaque to mark the laying of the foundation stone here for the National Institute for Research and Development in Defence Shipbuilding (NIRDESH) under the Department of Defence Production.

Mr. Antony said the reported missing and recovery of a secret file on MMRCA was being investigated. (Boeing's F/A-18, Lockheed Martin's F-16, Russian aircraft MiG-35, European consortium EADS' Eurofighter, French Rafale, and Swedish SAAB's Gripen competed in the MMRCA field trials conducted by the Air Force.)

On indigenisation and self-reliance in defence, the Minister said the Defence Production Policy and Defence Procurement Policy, to be released soon, would place extra emphasis on indigenisation.

“Currently, we are nowhere near attaining self-reliance. The NIRDESH is set up as a top-notch centre of excellence in the design and development of as many naval equipment and platforms as are possible within the country. We [the Defence Ministry] prefer procuring available equipment and materials made within the country, even from the private sector. But as of now import is inevitable.”

On the indigenously developed MBT (Main Battle Tank) Arjun and Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, Mr. Antony said these grand projects had made it to the realm of reality now. “LCA will get its initial operational clearance on January 10.”

On the recent deal India signed with Russia for joint development of a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, Mr. Antony said the contract was for a preliminary design. “Given the circumstances, we require a fifth generation fighter. Only they [the Russians] were ready to give us the technology.”

Earlier, speaking at the foundation stone laying ceremony, the Minister said coastal security was a grave issue demanding urgent attention.

“It has become an important agenda for the country. This is why the Navy and the Coast Guard have begun maintaining extra vigil along the coast.”

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jan 2011 11:34

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker- ... ocId928438

irbis looks vastly more capable than bars against low RCS targets..but no public detail on weight reduction vs bars if any.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 05 Jan 2011 16:24

Anticipating MMRCA offsets, HAL planning large aero structures unit
Defenseworld

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jan 2011 16:32

Singha wrote:http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker- ... ocId928438

irbis looks vastly more capable than bars against low RCS targets..but no public detail on weight reduction vs bars if any.

I believe they have achieved good weight reduction with Irbis which helped them remove the canard , I read in a magazine recently that the heavy BARS caused a pitch up movement leading to use of canard on MKI which stabalised it.

I was under the impression before that the canard was there for many other reason , I was not aware that the weight of bars was the key reason they opted for canard , one of the key reason Su-35BM with Irbis does not have the canard.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 06 Jan 2011 03:09

Contract Talks Moving Slowly On MMRCA
Aviationweek

India has proved once again that it cannot move too fast in acquiring a major weapon system. Even as the evaluation of its Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) tender comes closer to its final stages, evidence is mounting that downselect winners will not learn of their acceptance until the fourth quarter instead of the first.

That raises the prospect that volatile financial markets might cause swings in currency rates that could change the value of the range of highest to lowest bidders significantly, given that rates are determined not when bids are received but when the commercial evaluation begins.

The holdup centers on terms for technology transfer, which must be completed with the main contract, a defense official explained. India requires that licensed production of the aircraft—including engines, accessories, radars, systems and tooling—be covered by the tech-transfer proposal. The ministry holds refusal rights on any specific item, and suppliers must provide full life-cycle product support.

Vivek Lall, vice president of Boeing India, views the process positively, citing “greater opportunities for the Indian defense industry to work with partnerships, or in collaboration with foreign companies thatwill likely continue to supply [the industry with] defense armaments and transfer of technology.”

But analyst V. Siddhartha of the Center for Air Power Studies in New Delhi has reservations. “There is no guarantee that the technology you get will not be state-controlled,” he says.

Former Air Chief S.P. Tyagi says that opening up the market to foreign direct investment will be good for India. The current limit is just 26%. But that level is too small to give foreign investors a meaningful say in board decisions, he says.

India sees everything from microtechnology and materials to prototype production emerging from MMRCA’s tech transfers. Air Vice Marshal M. Matheswaran, the assistant chief of the air staff, says the country can leverage MMRCA “to get what we want” and persuade vendors to “part with technology.”

Additionally, India’s domestic defense sector is favored by “buy local” and taxation arrangements. It also will likely require foreign firms to provide inputs into both platform and systems development, says Lall.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Jan 2011 04:08

on the bramhos link (br home page), the news report says (quotes russkie media) the brahmos is air-launch capable from M35, SH, EF2K and Rafale.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jan 2011 04:15

Can you see the dimensions and see if these aircraft can indeed carry such a large, heavy missile? I havent done the calculations myself, but doubt that they would, given even the Su-30 MKI had to be strengthened for it.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Jan 2011 04:24

what are the dimensions for BrahMos Block II (per the link/if it ain't a ddm) ?