Indian Military Aviation

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Jul 2011 22:23

French equipment are quite expensive but they are very reliable and IAF seems to have special place and liking for M2K , perhaps that is the reason why it has agreed to make this kind of investment , M2K still forms part of nuclear deterrent for SFC.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Jul 2011 22:46

I think its a myth that MKI is a $45 mil cost. maybe the first lot of ex-Indonesia MK came at that cost minus the Bars and all the geewhiz toys we later stuffed in. and unlike western deals it probably left out munitions (we already had r77 and r73) and long term service contract. the cost at present seems like $100 mil.

there is no way in hell a fresh MKI-mk3 can be purchased today for $45 mil imo.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 15 Jul 2011 22:48

Singha wrote: there is no way in hell a fresh MKI-mk3 can be purchased today for $45 mil imo.

+1.
I think the deal for the last 42 busted the myth that a new MKI costs $45mil.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Jul 2011 23:07

The last 42 (or 40) was for the Strategic command, vastly different than the MKI (or so it is rumoured). That may explain the very high cost. Still the current cost of MKI floating around (sourced fro CAG and other sources) is around $45 million. Not to say that it would have chnaged over the years. It would be good to have the cost of home made ones or the current russians one joining (not the last batch cost).
rgds,
fanne

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 15 Jul 2011 23:53

Katare wrote:Cain,

I know you are not silly neither are most BRfites and you just wrote it casually like others do so often. But read this line again and see if it should have been even written by a senior member like yourself---

"This $ 4 billion deal was a baksheesh thrown to Fra - no more Rafales, IAF makes ready for Typhoon"

Katareji, I still don't get what is so offensive about my comment - perhaps a french poster might get offended? For that I apologize don't mean to demean anybody. Greater point though, and which I feel most forumites well understand is that this deal probly has $$s going into different directions apart from the pure upg. of said a/c.

fanne wrote:The last 42 (or 40) was for the Strategic command, vastly different than the MKI (or so it is rumoured). That may explain the very high cost. Still the current cost of MKI floating around (sourced fro CAG and other sources) is around $45 million. Not to say that it would have chnaged over the years. It would be good to have the cost of home made ones or the current russians one joining (not the last batch cost).
rgds,
fanne

Yes, that is more likely the reason. Also we do not know what config these last 42 are coming in - perhaps they will come straight with all MLU options and extras - AESA, engine change?, IRST, conformal AESA - who knows. Perhaps some money given towards other strategic imports as well.

IT is v.v. unlikely that the cost of an MKI is going to jump by over 100% in a mere 3 years.

CM

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 16 Jul 2011 02:32

Singha wrote:I think its a myth that MKI is a $45 mil cost. maybe the first lot of ex-Indonesia MK came at that cost minus the Bars and all the geewhiz toys we later stuffed in. and unlike western deals it probably left out munitions (we already had r77 and r73) and long term service contract. the cost at present seems like $100 mil.

there is no way in hell a fresh MKI-mk3 can be purchased today for $45 mil imo.

Added to Singha's point, our present stock of R73s are coming to the end of their Shelf life with no replacement in sight... another major irritant with Russian planes.

With lower uptime, 2 gas-guzzler engines, 2 pilots etc, the total lifetime cost of MKIs are far far higher than M2Ks. This information is not lost on the IAF... relax, have a samosa and watch the fun across the border... it is Friday...

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 16 Jul 2011 02:35

Traditionally western platforms are more expensive to acquire but come with high uptime and reliability. Desh also stocks up on 3-5 years of spares with probable sanctions in mind. Russian (& FSU) platforms on the other hand are cheaper to acquire, lower uptime and a torrid time to get spares. We also end getting fleeced for spares... remember the problems we had with Mig brake seals, MKI tires etc... I am limiting myself to IAF cases.. IA cases are a saga in itself.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Jul 2011 03:55

fanne wrote:One way to look how bad the deal is, for this amount, we could have baught brand new 51 SU30MKI (more capable than 51 upgraded mirages) and kept our 51 un upgraded mirages.
How much money Rajmata needs to fleece India?
Sheesh

Su-30MKIs do not cost $45 million apiece. the last batch cost us nearly $80-90 million each.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Jul 2011 05:05

Austin wrote:French equipment are quite expensive but they are very reliable and IAF seems to have special place and liking for M2K , perhaps that is the reason why it has agreed to make this kind of investment , M2K still forms part of nuclear deterrent for SFC.

Agree totally.

As posted by "Teer" on Keypubs, this very detailed article by Georg Mader has some great nuggets of information

ACIG article on visit to HAL during AI-2011

This clearly illustrates exactly why the Jaguars are being put through DARIN-III upgrades along with the new engine RFP

HAL’s ‘Overhaul Division’ is the approved repair agency for carrying out all major servicing of Jaguar aircraft and its engines, components and systems. At the time of visit, about 10 airframes of all the three versions Interdiction-Strike (IS), two-seat Trainer (IB) and Maritime-Strike (IM) were undergoing major servicing and upgrading, shown in different stages of disassembly. HAL technicians said the company already has indeginised about 520 items into the original Jaguar-IS, including the spoiler mechanical block, throttle box, front/rear canopy frame, excitation/demodulation unit, bottom panels and canopy beams.

Only each 5th airframe is reportedly showing issues of fatique or cracks, when they are inspected about every 10 years. That is seen as “an encouraging fact, given the stresses of mainly low-level work they are used in” a shop-manager underlined to ACIG. Not stressed beyond 8g with a design maximum of 12g, airframe-life was originally calculated at 3.000 hours for single-seaters and 6.000 for two-seaters. “Therefore it makes truly sense to invest in further improving and upgrading of the Shamsher”, the engineer said.

clearly, there is plenty of life in the Jags, and with periodic maintenance, the more recently produced Jags can easily pull through for another 20 years.

And regarding the Mirages

Apart from servicing and upgrading the 51 remaining Indian Airforce’s (IAF) Mirage 2000H/THs, HAL’s overhaul-division was described to ACIG the only installation outside France authorized by Dassault Aviation, to undertake major inspection on and materiel supply to Mirage 2000 fighters of global customers. According to personnel in the ‘Mirage’-shop at Bengaluru in early Feburary, Mirage-2000 operators like Peru, Egypt or Qatar and UAE have begun various level co-operations with HAL, since Dassault issued that licence back in March 1998.

Called the ‘Vajra’ (Thunderbolt) in IAF-service, the single-seat Mirage 2000H (serials from KF101 on) and two-seat Mirage 2000TH (serials from KT201 on), the bulk of the planes were acquired in the mid-1980s. According to sources on site, nine (8+1 trainer) have since been lost or severely damaged in accidents. Now over 20 years old, all Mirage 2000s airframes like the six present on Feb. 7th were explained to ACIG as already in their second inspection- and overhaul cycles. The two operating sqdns. at Gwalior would usually send the fighters to HAL every 12 years or 2000 flying-hours, but so far all IAF Mirage 2000s have undergone overhaul and modernisations only after the calendar, not because of reaching 2000 hours.

HAL’s shop-personnel was proudly pointing to the fact, that even in the second cycle, “pratically no fatigue or cracks are discovered in the very robust blended delta-structure, not the same case in the Jaguar-fleet for example.” Despite with the standard Thompson RDM-radar the ‘Vajra’s does not offer multi-target capability for their SUPER 530D and Magic 550, “that does not take anything away from Mirage 2000 as its an excellent and beloved aircraft in India and by far the best purchase made by the IAF, even better than the Su-30 MKIs when you look at flexibility, performance and availability of the French aircraft, for example in the Kargil-conflict”, a technician expressed of course his personal views to ACIG.

ACIG learned that when the Kargil conflict broke out in 1999 after Pakistani infiltrations in Kashmir, the Mirage 2000 performed remarkably well during the whole hostilities in the high Himalayas, even though their air-interdiction capability was a brand new asset. Right before the conflict, 38 remaining 2000Hs had been upgraded at Bengaluru with local flare dispensers and with the integration of LGBs. Their capability to drop PGMs – as well as conventional unguided bombs – was hastly made operational and the two squadrons flew a total of 515 sorties. In 240 strike missions they reportedly dropped 55 tons (120,000 lb) of ordnance. According to the HAL-personnel, easy maintenance and a very high sortie rate made the ‘Vajra’ one of the most efficient IAF-assets in the conflict.

When the technician compares the Mirage-2000H/TH to the Su-30MKI, take it with a pinch of salt. Nevertheless, it is one of the most important types in IAF service today, after the MKIs.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 16 Jul 2011 05:11

Kartik wrote:
fanne wrote:One way to look how bad the deal is, for this amount, we could have baught brand new 51 SU30MKI (more capable than 51 upgraded mirages)
Su-30MKIs do not cost $45 million apiece. the last batch cost us nearly $80-90 million each.

Karthik, $45M or $60M or $90M all depends on how you calculate cost or what you include in the cost. Typically RFP based acquisitions (by IAF) would talk about a lifetime cost , acquisition cost along with weapons package giving us Jingos a sticker shock. Adhoc quick buys like SU30 start low... also what we bought originally from the Yelstin era Russia was a plain vanilla SU27, on which we tacked along so many bells and whistles.
The basic russian Airframe would have been 40mil a pop... add the cost of all the developments RU has done for Desh (paid for by us) and what Desh developed, add the French, and Israeli stuff added onto it... The cost just baloons up. I am not even going into lifecycle cost of Rambhas, it is not a post but an entire Dhaga.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 16 Jul 2011 05:48

India Halts US Missions to Find World War II Dead in Arunachal
The Indian Express

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 16 Jul 2011 06:24

AFAIK, Su-30MKI cost was originally really low...around 2007 when the penultimate batch of 40 was ordered, the cost for 230 units was around $ 8.5 billion. So it is rather incredulous that the last batch ordered only in about 3 years of the previous one should be $ 100 mil a piece.

I think Fanne hit it on the head - there is a probly a lot more to this price.

Problems with the M2k upg (if it is not in some way offsetting some other costs unknown to public) include the length of time (9 years), and the rather plain-jane tech involved (mech radar, no irst, no new engines).

Seems like IAF will be inducting 90s tech around 2020 - when our neighbors might be looking at AESA variants and 5 gen birds. This makes the cost all the more unpalatable.

CM.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 16 Jul 2011 06:36

Cain Marko wrote:Seems like IAF will be inducting 90s tech around 2020 - when our neighbors might be looking at AESA variants and 5 gen birds.

Where did this NINE years thing come from? i thought after the initial FOUR, the next 48 are going to be completed at a rate of one a month (avg) by HAL.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 16 Jul 2011 08:32

I like this 9 years thingie by our rodina lovers, for the first time this yardstick hitherto applicable only to the tejas(yeah the 30yr thingie) is being applied to M2K

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 16 Jul 2011 10:40

"resident rodina lovers"??? Preferable to being the "resident idiots", i s'pose.

Where does this 9 year thing come from? Here are the sources:

India’s cabinet committee on security cleared the deal on July 13/11, and added that it’s the 9-year, $2.3-2.4 billion deal discussed earlier. Only the 1st 2 jets will be refitted in France, with the next 2 done by HAL in India under French supervision, and the rest done by HAL. India’s standard 30% industrial offset obligation will apply, but HAL’s workshare is a very substantial percentage.

via defenceindustrydaily.com

Here is another one:

Two of the planes will be upgraded in France by manufacturer Dassault Aviation, two in India with French help and the remaining 48 entirely by the HAL. The upgrade of the entire fleet will take nine years.

via economic times. http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... e-ministry

Happy? Anyways, I thiink it will take this long because of 2 issues: a) Dassault has pretty much stopped playing with the M2k for the last few years, they may have to reopen, realign a lot of lines from various suppliers for components/subcomponents - time consuming. b) They have to find/setup facilities in India as well - double work. THis is probly also the reason for the massive cost - India will have to develop this capability to maintain the bird for till 2035-40. not easy considering that by then, the M2k will have been long retired world over - perhaps a few HAF birds might still be around, but they will be few. Wonder how they'll manage spares.

IOWs gents, when the IAF receives the fabled M2ks with their sooper-dooper mech radars, the Chinkis will probly be churning out AESA equipped J10s, J11s, J20s and God knows what else. And then they plan to keep 'em for another 20 years - wonderphul.

Frankly, I'd prefer them to spend the extravagance on the Tejas Mk2, they could probly import a freakin AESA for each bird at that rate.

CM.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jul 2011 10:51

Cain Marko wrote:a) Dassault has pretty much stopped playing with the M2k for the last 8-10 years, they may have to reopen, realign a lot of lines from various suppliers for components/subcomponents - time consuming. b) They have to find/setup facilities in India as well - double work.

likely yes when they were offering us to move the entire production line to india as part of the original IAF recommendation to buy 126 M2K in early 2000 , they were doing very little M2K work and hence preferred India become the regional hub to service M2K and upgrade their own types , that was a sweet deal but that didnt went through and there was no serious upgrade work done on M2K for a long time.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 16 Jul 2011 11:01

I suppose if they really want to make something out of this investment, they might as well see if they can get a few birds at decent prices - Qatar and Greece come to mind. May be even Taiwan ? Perhaps the IAF is thinking along these lines - "since we have invested soo much into M2k facilities, why don't we get a few more birds? Afterall, there is too much capacity being wasted". Nice.

CM

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 16 Jul 2011 13:12

Cain Marko wrote:I suppose if they really want to make something out of this investment, they might as well see if they can get a few birds at decent prices - Qatar and Greece come to mind. May be even Taiwan ? Perhaps the IAF is thinking along these lines - "since we have invested soo much into M2k facilities, why don't we get a few more birds? Afterall, there is too much capacity being wasted". Nice. CM

Not a bad idea to acquire couple more birds from GCC or the far-east countries. they'll probably be gently used as compared to IAF. What about France ADA itself, it will still have a good number of M2Ks, can we get some from them... particularly the M2KN birds..
I think, desh should have something akin to the Offset policy..
IAF - For every foreign bird you order you need to buy 3 LCA or ALH/LCH as in the case may be.
IA - For every tin can you buy / upgrade you need to buy 2 Arjuns / TankEx / FICV, ditto for Nag missiles.
IN - For ever mil$ of Indian stuff you add to your warship, i'll add 2 Mil$ to your budget. Anyway they build all ships in Desh...this $ fund can then be used by IN to buy some technology / weaponry not available in Desh.
the same logic to be applied to CRPF, BSF, ICG etc

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 16 Jul 2011 19:59

Juggi G wrote:India Halts US Missions to Find World War II Dead in Arunachal
The Indian Express

this is DDM at its best. the article makes it look like permission was not given to US b/c India is scared of PRC. more likely case is that India doesn't want foreign countries involvement in this region and wants to ensure that this remains a strictly India-PRC issue. it is the same strategy is not allowing US intervention in Kashmir, etc. this is strategic calculation on part of India, not b/c India scared of PRC.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Jul 2011 23:54

Shrinivasan wrote:Karthik, $45M or $60M or $90M all depends on how you calculate cost or what you include in the cost. Typically RFP based acquisitions (by IAF) would talk about a lifetime cost , acquisition cost along with weapons package giving us Jingos a sticker shock. Adhoc quick buys like SU30 start low... also what we bought originally from the Yelstin era Russia was a plain vanilla SU27, on which we tacked along so many bells and whistles.
The basic russian Airframe would have been 40mil a pop... add the cost of all the developments RU has done for Desh (paid for by us) and what Desh developed, add the French, and Israeli stuff added onto it... The cost just baloons up. I am not even going into lifecycle cost of Rambhas, it is not a post but an entire Dhaga.

Srinivasan, typically IAF deals do not include weapons package costs since those packages are negotiated separately. So, that 40 Su-30MKI buy didn't include any weapons, so the "sticker shock" you refer to is not because weapons inflated the cost.

Besides, nothing of note (avionics or radar wise) was developed for the second batch of Su-30MKIs within India. The Su-30MKI Mk3 model was similar to what was already there in the IAF, and worse still, these were already being built in India, almost from raw materials (they've even flown an Al-31FP made at Koraput from raw materials on a Su-30MKI). Even if we include the costs of development for the Brahmos central pylon and related structural strengthening, it is inconceivable that the cost shot up by $30-35 million per unit for just carrying a Brahmos.

As regards the rest of your post, its too general with no specifics-the IAF didn't buy Yeltsin era- vanilla Su-27s. the Su-30K/MKs were only supplied to allow the IAF to acquaint itself with the Su-30 as a stop-gap measure, while the Su-30MKI was being developed. The Su-30MKI wasn't in the remotest an ad-hoc purchase, rather a very well thought out program which included DRDO from the beginning. Maybe you need to read up a bit more on the Su-30MKI program's history.

the original Su-30MKIs cost ~ $37 million each (which included the cost of integrating Indian/French/Israeli equipment as well as coming up with a digital FCS, glass cockpit,etc.). source:link to Vayu Sena page

Deal I (30 Nov 1996) : The IAF signed a US $1462 million (equivalent to Rs 5122 crore) deal with Sukhoi on 30 November 1996 for the delivery of 40 Su-30 aircraft and the associated equipment from the Irkutsk plant in phased manner, spread out over four years - from 1997 to 2000. The contract provided for setting up of a Service Support Centre in India which was to undertake extended second line repair tasks of aircraft, avionics, aero-engines and aggregates to avoid the need to despatch them to the manufacturer.

Under this original contract, Su-30s would be delivered to the IAF in four batches:

The first batch (Su-30MK-I) of 8 aircraft would be delivered in 1997. These were 'standard' Su-30s (a development of the Su-27UB) and contained 100% (probably) Russian components and are primarily sir-superiority aircraft only. These fighters were first delivered to India at Lohegaon AFS in March 1997. They were inducted into the IAF on 11 June 1997 by the then Prime Minister, Inder Kumar Gujral. These planes are currently in service with IAF with serial nos SB001 to SB008 in the No. 24 Hawks squadron based at Lohegaon AFS.

The second batch (Su-30MK-IIs) of another 8 aircraft would be delivered in 1998 and would be fitted with Sextant Avionique's avionics from France, liquid crystal multi-function displays (MFDs), a new flight data recorder, a dual ring laser gyro INS (inertial navigation system) with embedded GPS (Global Positioning Satellite), EW (Electronic Warfare) equipment procured from Israel's IAI (Israeli Aircraft Industries), a new electro-optical targeting system and a RWR (Radar Warning Receiver).

The third batch (Su-30MK-IIIs) of 12 aircraft would be delivered in 1999 and would feature canard foreplanes

The fourth and final batch (Su-30MKIs) of 12 aircraft would be delivered in 2000 and would add the AL-31FP turbofans.

Since it included the cost of integrating French/Israeli and Indian avionics on board the Su-30, as well as the cost of setting up a service center, that wasn't the basic flyaway cost but rather the total flyaway cost (it comprises not only the "basic" flyaway cost, but also the delivery costs and the support equipment, technical data packages, training equipment, and a variety of contractor services required to provide initial support for the airplanes; all of this is usually amortized over the size of the customer's purchase), or the procurement cost (which includes the cost of initial spares which are amortized over the number of airframes bought) or the program acquisition cost (which adds the costs of research and development, testing and evaluation, and related military construction (e.g., new hangars, test facilities, etc.) to the procurement cost.

Later,

Deal II (September 1998) : The IAF decided to buy 10 additional Su-30Ks for US $277.01 million (equivalent to Rs.1187 crore) and thus bring the total number of IAF Su-30s on order to 50. These 10 were originally destined for Indonesia, but due to the financial crisis there Indonesia was unable to take delivery. The first 4 units were delivered in June 1999. These have updated electronic warfare suites, PGM (Precision Guided Munitions) capability and possibly updated radar.

So, when the second batch was purchased, the price went down from $37 million to $27.7 million since that was the "total flyaway cost" for the Su-30Ks. Whatever the IAF spent on its own to build hangars wouldn't have been included.

then when they were being built in India under licence production, the costs were supposed to be $32 million per unit initially

Therefore, the new schedule would mean that a maximum of 14 planes per year will be churned out by HAL and hence finishing in 2013. The original costs of Rs. 20,000 Cr remained as it is, even though such an action is expected to raise costs. According to Mohanty, HAL planned to counter the inflation by "outsourcing in low and medium type jobs while the critical items will be HAL's own."

As mentioned here certain components were imported from Russia to accelerate local production which drove up costs by $350 million.

And then when the latest 42 Su-30MKI were contracted for the costs shot up to $71 million

02/03/201016:05

NEW DELHI, March 2 (RIA Novosti) - India and Russia are negotiating a new contract on the delivery of 42 Su-30MKI to the Indian Air Force, an Indian newspaper reported on Tuesday, citing military sources.

According to the Daily News and Analysis newspaper, the new deal, which is reportedly worth more than $3 billion, has been in the works for several months.

One of course doesn't pay life cycle costs up front, so since this isn't a contest where the user is comparing 2 aircraft to find out which has a lower LCC, there is no point bringing that up.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 17 Jul 2011 00:10

Cain Marko wrote:AFAIK, Su-30MKI cost was originally really low...around 2007 when the penultimate batch of 40 was ordered, the cost for 230 units was around $ 8.5 billion. So it is rather incredulous that the last batch ordered only in about 3 years of the previous one should be $ 100 mil a piece.

I think Fanne hit it on the head - there is a probly a lot more to this price.

Problems with the M2k upg (if it is not in some way offsetting some other costs unknown to public) include the length of time (9 years), and the rather plain-jane tech involved (mech radar, no irst, no new engines).

Seems like IAF will be inducting 90s tech around 2020 - when our neighbors might be looking at AESA variants and 5 gen birds. This makes the cost all the more unpalatable.

CM.

adding a new engine, a new IRST, a new AERA all of which would cost a lot more, not to mention the additional time it will take to develop and integrate them. the Mirage-2000-9 version is a very capable fighter as it stands, nothing to be scoffed at.

THe neighbours are upgrading their older F-16A/Bs to F-16 Block 50 standards and are just beginning to operate their new F-16 Block 50+s, apart from the JF-17s. Nothing that the Mirage-2000-9 cannot adequately take care of.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 17 Jul 2011 01:05

+1 to what Katareji said, suggesting that the M2K upgrade deal is being used to subsidize the MRCA also implies that the the MRCA competition is rigged and is a scam.

Austin wrote:... IAF seems to have special place and liking for M2K , perhaps that is the reason why it has agreed to make this kind of investment

Surely such a decision cannot be based on emotions.

BTW has the MoF actually cleared this deal?

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 17 Jul 2011 01:23

Kartik wrote: adding a new engine, a new IRST, a new AERA all of which would cost a lot more, not to mention the additional time it will take to develop and integrate them.

A lot more over and above to what has been apparently agreed to would make the upgrade cost more than a brand new fighter.

THe neighbours are upgrading their older F-16A/Bs to F-16 Block 50 standards and are just beginning to operate their new F-16 Block 50+s, apart from the JF-17s. Nothing that the Mirage-2000-9 cannot adequately take care of.

Both the F-16s and JF-17s are armed with AAMs which easily out range the MICA which is carried by the M2k.

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 17 Jul 2011 06:27

abhik wrote:
Kartik wrote: adding a new engine, a new IRST, a new AERA all of which would cost a lot more, not to mention the additional time it will take to develop and integrate them.
A lot more over and above to what has been apparently agreed to would make the upgrade cost more than a brand new fighter.
THe neighbours are upgrading their older F-16A/Bs to F-16 Block 50 standards and are just beginning to operate their new F-16 Block 50+s, apart from the JF-17s. Nothing that the Mirage-2000-9 cannot adequately take care of.
Both the F-16s and JF-17s are armed with AAMs which easily out range the MICA which is carried by the M2k.

Food for thought.....what if the reason for the 9 year time frame and the excessive cost is to cover the time and cost of same AESA radar currently planned for the Rafale and the Meteor and not the RDY2 and MICA's?

I know that's way out in the realm of speculation - but that's one way this deal makes sense.

Of course the excess could also be a quid pro quo for not dealing with our Western neighbours...?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2011 07:11

The AESA for the Rafale, supposedly, is already there!!!!

IF at all your logic makes any sense it could be for the conformal AESA.

But, I doubt that. The M2K line has been shut down - for eons. it WILL cost some to bring it up to life. Much of this cost must be towards that re-start.

Besides, if what you are saying is true, then the Rafale has already been selected for the MMRCA.

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 17 Jul 2011 09:03

NRao wrote:The AESA for the Rafale, supposedly, is already there!!!!

IF at all your logic makes any sense it could be for the conformal AESA.

But, I doubt that. The M2K line has been shut down - for eons. it WILL cost some to bring it up to life. Much of this cost must be towards that re-start.

Besides, if what you are saying is true, then the Rafale has already been selected for the MMRCA.

It may already be here but the first priority will go to the French Air Force and while the radar is here weapons integration is not yet complete.

I'm speculating that all that will take time before the IAF's Mirages get the matured package.

While the Mirage line has been shut down this is not primarily a structural upgrade - its an avionics upgrade primarily - doesn't require the manufacturing line to be restarted,

It doesn't mean that the Rafale has already been selected - the EF could still be selected and yet have the M2k's upgraded with the AESA / Meteor combination.

Anyway - as I said - pure speculation - the deal doesn't make sense otherwise - 9 years and at those prices?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2011 10:13

Imo we will go for a top-up order of around 20-30 M2K either from GCC/greece/french stocks in a few yrs both to finish up the 3rd squadron to full strength and form one more squadron. these would generally already have the components of the upgrade pkg we are buying and just need some airframe 'zero-houring' and deep inspection.

the engine despite its thrust seems to be extremely reliable and dassault will be supplying OEM spares for as long as large operators like GCC, greece, taiwan, india and frenchAF continue to operate...i.e. until 2025-30 for sure. prices wont be cheap but no need to scrape rusted airframes off some turkmenistan boneyard in search of spares lol

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 17 Jul 2011 11:05

Singha wrote:Imo we will go for a top-up order of around 20-30 M2K either from GCC/greece/french stocks in a few yrs both to finish up the 3rd squadron to full strength and form one more squadron. these would generally already have the components of the upgrade pkg we are buying and just need some airframe 'zero-houring' and deep inspection.

I too think the same (had posted on this yesterday). IAF loves this plane a lot and even after inducting Rambhas M2Ks seem to have a pride of place at the high table.. i think it will change once the MMRCA birds, and LCA Tejas MK2 (and cousins) come on board. PAKFA and AMCA would be the mainstay of our force couple of decades hence.. till then M2Ks will have niche of its own.
SINGHA, MY PRAYERS FOR YOUR WISH TO COME TRUE.
On a side note: I was surprised to learn couple of years ago that M2Ks were a single engine bird, after seeing them roar away i thought they were twin engined!!!

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 17 Jul 2011 16:11

US, Israeli firms in race for supplying bunker-busters to IAF

...
The IAF plans to induct more than 100 bunker-buster LGBs that will be equipped on its fighter aircraft fleet to destroy strongly fortified enemy targets, sources told PTI here.

They said the IAF had issued a global Request for Proposal (RFP) for the purpose earlier this year, and defence majors including American Lockheed Martin and Raytheon along with an Israeli missile manufacturer have submitted their bids for the tender.
...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2011 17:47

I was surprised to learn couple of years ago that M2Ks were a single engine bird, after seeing them roar away i thought they were twin engined!!!

It is:

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 17 Jul 2011 17:58

isnt that the m4000 prototype Nrao saar?

Suhas H · Post by **Suhas H** » 17 Jul 2011 18:02

^that would be the mirage 4000 I believe, i don't think it never got any orders.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 17 Jul 2011 18:25

Singha wrote:Imo we will go for a top-up order of around 20-30 M2K either from GCC/greece/french stocks in a few yrs both to finish up the 3rd squadron to full strength and form one more squadron. these would generally already have the components of the upgrade pkg we are buying and just need some airframe 'zero-houring' and deep inspection.

the engine despite its thrust seems to be extremely reliable and dassault will be supplying OEM spares for as long as large operators like GCC, greece, taiwan, india and frenchAF continue to operate...i.e. until 2025-30 for sure. prices wont be cheap but no need to scrape rusted airframes off some turkmenistan boneyard in search of spares lol

Experts
Is it possible that the Mirage 2000 upgrades include hard wiring for nuclear weapons ? I would not mind paying a top price for THAT upgrade ?
K

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Jul 2011 19:33

kersi saar, unconfirmed reports say out mirages are already wired for nukes. don't think we will need to depend on the french for that. in any case it's not worth that much.

singha ji, I think AdlA M2k's are well worked, unlike GCC ones which are for the occasional fly-past and photo-op.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Jul 2011 20:02

Nobody mentions real prices in public. These deals cost billions as it is and all the calculations we see on public fora are probably all nonsense because billions will be lost if real figures in secret negotiations are mentioned in public. Not telling how much you are paying is important for both sides and is written into the fine print of the contract It is naive to imagine that the figures quoted represent anything other than obfuscation.

Its different for bars of soap and airline tickets that are sold in millions. But megabucks deals that are done with one, two or a handful of countries are kept a closely guarded secret.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 18 Jul 2011 00:59

Kakarat wrote:US, Israeli firms in race for supplying bunker-busters to IAF

...
The IAF plans to induct more than 100 bunker-buster LGBs that will be equipped on its fighter aircraft fleet to destroy strongly fortified enemy targets, sources told PTI here.

They said the IAF had issued a global Request for Proposal (RFP) for the purpose earlier this year, and defence majors including American Lockheed Martin and Raytheon along with an Israeli missile manufacturer have submitted their bids for the tender.
...

I am intrigued by this news? Are these bunker busters significantly different from a 1000lb LGB? We have sudarshan now and based on open source info, there is an order from IAF for Sudarshan kits? is this offer to styme Sudarshan?
was there an RFI/RFP for this? intriguing...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jul 2011 08:42

there is a diff between bunker buster and a garden variety of bomb though both will use same laser kit.
the first will have a slim long but very heavy casing- look up gbu28. not that we cannot make it locally but i guess sudarshan guidance kit working is 1st priority.

nothing prevents us mating a sudarshan kit with a imported or desi deep penetrator weapon with the right programming later.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 18 Jul 2011 08:56

Thanks Singha... I am not able to locate this RFP...Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are offering their variants of Paveway... dunno which Israeli company is offering their ware... Have you seen this RFP? Also this 100 Qty looks suspect? why only 100, is it to try these out before Sudarshan comes along or is it for some "special project" which cannot wait till Sudarshan comes along. If we can mate a Rod-Penetrator type on a LGB, we have an accurate bunker-buster comparable to what these Khan companies can offer? Hopefully this purchase doesn't styme Sudarshan.
Checked the GBU-28 too, Hopefully Sudarshan matures and we produce a variant like this.

Further explanation for BR Jingos:
LGB: A laser guidance kit mated to a dumb bomb.
Bunker Buster: A Penetrator kit which is mated on to a bomb (dumb or laser guided)
I read a detailed analysis here http://www.ausairpower.net/GBU-28.html

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 18 Jul 2011 09:06

Singha wrote:there is a diff between bunker buster and a garden variety of bomb though both will use same laser kit.
the first will have a slim long but very heavy casing- look up gbu28. not that we cannot make it locally but i guess sudarshan guidance kit working is 1st priority.

nothing prevents us mating a sudarshan kit with a imported or desi deep penetrator weapon with the right programming later.

The bomb body would probably be a forging of some special hardened steel. This bomb may be required in 100s not 1000s. To set up a forge shop for 100s of bombs may not be feasible. So why not buy the bomb instead of setting up a plant (under OFB) and waiting for years for the PSU for delivery.

Perhaps the day of the "garden variety" is over. Now u have different types like HE, fragmentation, cluster, armor piercing, runway cratering. illimunation, practise blah blah blah. All these would be required in large quantities and should be made locally.

As far as I understand, Sudarshan is a guidance kit. So (theoritically) it can be fitted on any bomb of same size and aerodynamic characteristics

K

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 18 Jul 2011 09:40

Indian OFB produces this bomb - Bomb 450 Kg HSLD High Speed Low Drag Bomb .
Get more details @ http://ofbindia.nic.in/products/data/am ... n/rb/8.htm.
If we fit a laser Guidance ALA Sudarshan to this we will have our own LGB, which is what is being currently attempted with some degree of success. We don't have any bomb under production which is anywhere near GBU-28 (which 4700lb), also desi bombs don't have the penetrator system needed for a Bunker Buster... This 100 is only going to be the start, for IAF to familiarize itself. There are going to be many such purchases like this, hopefully Sudarshan will mature and have a bunker-buster variant.