India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

[manum]

but you really think Indians didn't calculate it? All the financial things about MMRCA coming to us...who is the source actually, who talked about price till now? Gripen?

I would really like to know what was the cost of new 42 mki's we ordered in dollars...in rupees it costed 15000 crore i.e. 3.3 billion dollar...i.e. each MKI cost around 78 million $...so what is wrong will MMRCA costing extra, a totally new infrastructure.

Mirage upgrade was staggering with 43 million $ each fighter though...but it'll extend its life by like 20 years, I think in 20 years, we'll call this decision a wiser decision than buying SH in 60+ and paying more and more and more...

aircraft require a lot of hustle bustle around them, we couldn't cope up too many and then throwing a trusted platform with years of life in its air frame...

economics is not just simply adding numbers...

[sohels]

Hope it works out better.

^Define 'better' - what would be the best case scenario regarding the outcome of this tender, in your opinion?

[Cosmo_R]

@sohels^^^: "^Define 'better' - what would be the best case scenario regarding the outcome of this tender, in your opinion?"

As it supposed to on paper: Offset evaluation, L1, price negotiation and contract signing March 2012.

@Manum ^^^: "economics is not just simply adding numbers." But accounting is and so is politics.

[kelesis]

I think what we are all overlooking or underestimating is the impact of the attack of the bond markets on European economies. All the major economies in the EF consortium: Germany, Spain, UK and Italy are going to have to make wrenching changes. The last three because they have unsustainable levels of government debt and GDP growth rates that are going to be slower than the rate of increase in debt from deficits. The higher rates they are going to have to pay will compound that problem.

Germany will have a problem with its banks that hold a lot of this debt plus they are cutting defense. France has a problem with both the sovereign debt and its banks. They are going to have to cut a a lot on the social side and you forget about major defense purchases. The next couple of weeks are likely to see a major bond market assault on these countries and the German will come under pressure too because of their banks.

So what? Well, unless they (France or the EF group) eat the development cost in the MMRCA and they throw in the 'ToT' and the offset, you're looking at $100MM+ per Rafale or EF. For 189 (126+63 options), you're talking ~$20 billion.

You can be sure that when this number hits the media, that LM and Boeing are going to be in there rubbing it in as will the Russians who will conjure up the 'Stealth SU-30MKI' which bridges the gap to the FGFA . This will be accompanied by the usual CAG and suspects who use it as a stick to beat the UPA. You can also bet the commies will be encouraged by the PRC and pakis to rail against the purchase.

I'm hoping for a better outcome but experience shows there's a 50-50 chance of this being the usual fiasco despite all the hard work put in.

Hope it works out better.

At this stage, the US has been downgraded to AA+ with negative outlook (it means it can be downgraded again in the months to come), France and Germany are still AAA with positive outlook (it means they will not be downgraded in the year to come) and UK is AAA with negative outlook. The next country to cut military spendings is USA... Bad news for LM and Boeing are expected before the end or the year. Regarding the banks, the rumours concerning french banks were false, they remain among the strongest in the world (dixit rating agencies). While the real problem is the US monster debt, some newspapers still prefers to focus on Europe.

[sohels]

At this stage, the US has been downgraded to AA+ with negative outlook (it means it can be downgraded again in the months to come), France and Germany are still AAA with positive outlook (it means they will not be downgraded in the year to come) and UK is AAA with negative outlook. The next country to cut military spendings is USA...

Not so rosy for France:

French economy stagnates as consumers cut spending

The French economy failed to grow in the last quarter as households across the country cut their spending, in the latest sign that the European economy is stumbling.

Data released by Eurostat, the region's statistics body, on Friday showed that French GDP was stagnant between April and June. Economists had expected the economy to grow by around 0.3%.

Household consumption in France fell by 0.7% compared with the first three months of 2011, increasing the pressure on president Nicolas Sarkozy to convince financial markets that he can meet his fiscal targets. Sarkozy has promised to release revised plans to cut France's budget deficit within days.
...
Separately, disappointing industrial production data suggested that Europe is running out of steam. Production across the eurozone declined by 0.7% in June, compared with May.

Christoph Weil, a senior economist at Commerzbank in Frankfurt, warned that there had been a "strong economic deceleration" across Europe in recent months.

"We're depending on Asia. Risks that we'll slip into another recession have increased," said Weil, according to Bloomberg.

France feels the economic force of the credit ratings agencies

Friday's news that the French economy flatlined in the second quarter means there will be no respite from rumours that France could be the next country to follow America and be stripped of its coveted AAA-rating.

Although the finance minister, François Baroin, said the figures were "not a surprise", consumer spending in France dipped alarmingly last month and the government may now have to find even deeper budget cuts to meet its deficit reduction targets.

Growing Concern Over France’s Top Credit Rating Spreads Market Anxiety

PARIS — With the sense of economic crisis deepening in Europe after the United States debt downgrade, investors have played Who’s Next with the shrinking list of nations that still hold the top rating of AAA. And their sights have landed on France.

Shares of French financial institutions were hammered Wednesday on the Paris stock exchange on mounting fears that France’s own sterling credit rating could be cut, if the cost of cleaning up the European debt crisis weighs on the nation and its banks.

French banks are loaded up on the debt of Italy and Greece, among other troubled European countries that share the euro.

It seemed not to matter that the French government — along with the credit raters Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch — issued statements on Wednesday insisting France’s rating was not at risk. The market anxieties spread wildly, engulfing Société Générale, the second-largest French bank. Its shares slumped as much as 21 percent before closing down by 14.7 percent.

Stock in BNP Paribas, France’s largest bank, fell 9.5 percent.

President Nicolas Sarkozy interrupted his vacation on the French Riviera to return to Paris for an emergency meeting with finance officials to discuss “the economic and financial situation” of France, whose government debt and budget deficit make it look the weakest of any big AAA-rated nation.

As for military spending,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

US: $698 bil
UK: $59.6 bil
France: 59.3

So what if the US cuts military spending? Think the other two will catch up anytime soon?

[kelesis]

Who said it's rosy for France? It is just in a far more confortable situation than US or UK. S&P clearly confirms it. That's a fact. US will have to make huge cuts in military spendings while France will not (already done years ago). Cuts to come in France are nothing compare to what happened in UK and what the US will suffer.

[chackojoseph]

Other day I passed comments on the vulneribility of Euro's and leverage India can get. Then subsequently recd a release from BNP Paribas (BNP Paribas defends eurozone and France on ratings). The impression is that Erozone is safe. I do not want to dispute that. However, the place is not as strong as what it was pre 2008.

Hypothetically, if we had one of the teens on offer, we probably wouldn't have experienced a cartalisation of price if it exists. Say F-18 pricing would have put pressure on the Euros.

At the same time, its just a rating downgrade. Its purely notional. The economics are still the same.

If bid prices have been locked, we can benefit only if there are currency rate change.

[sohels]

Other day I passed comments on the vulneribility of Euro's and leverage India can get. Then subsequently recd a release from BNP Paribas (BNP Paribas defends eurozone and France on ratings). The impression is that Erozone is safe. I do not want to dispute that. However, the place is not as strong as what it was pre 2008.

Hypothetically, if we had one of the teens on offer, we probably wouldn't have experienced a cartalisation of price if it exists. Say F-18 pricing would have put pressure on the Euros.

At the same time, its just a rating downgrade. Its purely notional. The economics are still the same.

If bid prices have been locked, we can benefit only if there are currency rate change.

BNP Paribas is headquartered in Paris and holds a huge amount of risky sovereign bonds:



What it says is not surprising, but should perhaps not be taken at face value.

There is extensive coverage of the Eurozone debt crisis at the following sites:
http://www.ft.com/intl/indepth/euro-in-crisis
http://www.economist.com/node/21524378

If I had to summarize, I'd say that the two countries willing to help the PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) are Britain and France but they do not have the capacity to do so. Both have their own debt to worry about and if they don't cut their deficits, they risk getting downgraded. The one country that perhaps has the financial strength to do it is Germany but there is a question mark over its willingness. I'm not very optimistic.

The rating downgrade may be notional, the resulting hikes in interest rates on borrowing will be real. That will cripple recovery efforts by all accounts, trigger defaults, and send the markets plunging.

You do make a good point about the F-18's impact on Eurocanard pricing.

[Rakesh]

Since we are talking about prices, Euros and Dollars...check this out...

Switzerland may take a decision sooner
http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/2011/08/ ... n-now.html

Euro-Swiss Franc exchange rate shows that since the 2008 Swiss Air Force evaluation, the Rafale price has become 30% cheaper (same for the Gripen and Eurofighter)

[Cosmo_R]

Since we are talking about prices, Euros and Dollars...check this out...

Switzerland may take a decision sooner
http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/2011/08/ ... n-now.html

Euro-Swiss Franc exchange rate shows that since the 2008 Swiss Air Force evaluation, the Rafale price has become 30% cheaper (same for the Gripen and Eurofighter)

"The Rafale price has become 30% cheaper..." To the Swiss yes, the SF has gone up against the Euro. But what has the Euro done WRT to the Rupee which is trade weighted against the dollar? To India, the dollar fall is more important.

[sohels]

^Yes, here are the relevant charts:
Euro vs Swiss franc: http://www.ecb.int/stats/exchange/eurof ... hf.en.html
Euro vs Indian rupee: http://www.ecb.int/stats/exchange/eurof ... nr.en.html

If you compare the trends over the last year, the Euro has fallen by 16% against the Swiss franc and risen by 8.4% against the rupee.

[Henrik]

Who said it's rosy for France? It is just in a far more confortable situation than US or UK. S&P clearly confirms it. That's a fact. US will have to make huge cuts in military spendings while France will not (already done years ago). Cuts to come in France are nothing compare to what happened in UK and what the US will suffer.

I'd say that France is in a more uncomfortable position than the US and UK, due to the fact that France doesn't have it's own currency. France is way more dependant on Italy, Spain and Greece than the UK for instance. Being dependant on Italian politicians.. I'd say that sounds like a nightmare.

My guess is that France will have to make some pretty demanding cuts soon, not necessarily in military spending. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if France would have to cut some military spending as well. Also, spending-cuts in France have an unpleasant habit of upsetting a lot of people making them take it to the streets, rioting etc.

[shukla]

Russian Cost –effective Offer Not Considered in Indian MMRCA Contest: MiG Chief
Defenseworld

He said the MiG-35, his company’s entry into the Indian MMRC competition, had met all the parameters as outlined in the Request for Proposals (RFP). “We demonstrated our Active Electronically Scanned Phased Array Radar (AESA) and scored a direct hit with the first shot during the evaluation trials”, he added.

Under the Indian MMRCA procurement program, the commercial bids of only the two shortlisted bidders, considered technically qualified, will be considered. However, the commercial bids had to be submitted together with the technical bids during initial response to the RFP. This system has put RAC-MiG at a disadvantage as its low initial price and life cycle cost had not been considered before the elimination, he claimed.

Korotkov clarified that the MiG corporation will not protest the Indian decision to eliminate the MiG-35 and would continue to work closely with their Indian partners in fulfilling another order to supply MiG-29K fighters to the Indian Navy. The program to supply the carrier-based MiG-29K fighters had been progressing well with 16 to be delivered by end of this year while the balance of the total 45 within the next few years.

[SaiK]

So, what about their spare problems and service issues? highly risky especially say, the chippanda club thinks about double sided attack on us from NW-NE states.

The Mig corp will get work via pak-fa/fgfa as well, which is higher in the range of $30b three times the budget for MMRCA.

[gakakkad]

\
I'd say that France is in a more uncomfortable position than the US and UK, due to the fact that France doesn't have it's own currency. France is way more dependant on Italy, Spain and Greece than the UK for instance. Being dependant on Italian politicians.. I'd say that sounds like a nightmare.

My guess is that France will have to make some pretty demanding cuts soon, not necessarily in military spending. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if France would have to cut some military spending as well. Also, spending-cuts in France have an unpleasant habit of upsetting a lot of people making them take it to the streets, rioting etc.

Don't you think supplier countries being in financial crap can actually be a good thing for desh? I mean they wont be able to cry "Piglet rights" in case of an emergency situation.

[rajanb]

How close can a Typhoon get to a C-130? Have a look. And it isn't photo shopped.

Enjoy

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... d-Personal

Apologies if posted earlier.

[Indranil]

^^^ Great lengths that they would go for a photoshoot!

[sohels]

Well, unless they (France or the EF group) eat the development cost in the MMRCA and they throw in the 'ToT' and the offset, you're looking at $100MM+ per Rafale or EF. For 189 (126+63 options), you're talking ~$20 billion.

You can be sure that when this number hits the media, that LM and Boeing are going to be in there rubbing it in as will the Russians who will conjure up the 'Stealth SU-30MKI' which bridges the gap to the FGFA .

You Sir, are prescient:
Indian Sukhoi 30MKI to be upgraded into “Super Sukhoi”‎

The upgrade will include a new cockpit, an upgraded radar and certain stealth characteristics to make it less visible to enemy radar than the present Sukhoi 30. Most significantly, the aircraft will be able to carry a heavier weapons load including the airborne version of the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile, he added.

[Singha]

I guess it means hw and sw changes for a Bars2 radar? , because someone was saying the MKI does not have enough onboard electrical power to support the Irbis radar (which Su35BM has).

[shukla]

The contract to develop electronic components for the radar system on the Eurofighter Typhoon was won from Edinburgh-based Selex Galileo. In addition to mapping surrounding terrain, the radar is integrated with sensors around the aircraft.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-14568423

[GopiD]

Good article.

DIPLOMATIC VIEW OF THE MMRCA DEAL

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/IDR- ... -Deal.html

[wig]

Buy a fighter for war By Air Vice Marshal (Retd) Vinod Patni

India has selected two multi-role combat fighters, namely, Eurofighters and Typhoon, but the final choice will be made in December. To begin with out of 126 fighters at the cost of $ 10.4 billion, India will buy out of shelf 48 ready to fly, and the rest will be assembled at Hindustan Aeronautical at Bangalore. Meanwhile, Mirage- 2000 will be upgraded by French manufacturers at the cost of $ 4.3 billion. The intriguing part of the acquisitions is that by the time all 126 fighters are delivered in a phased manner these may become obsolete. Probably, the defence ministry has not taken into consideration these factors for reasons well known to IAF top brass. Many defence experts have opined that instead of such deals India should buy more Sukhoi-MKI, and wait for sometime for the fifth generation stealth fighters for which it has entered into agreement with Russia. The stealth fighters are likely to be operational by 2017-18, at the same time the entire fleet of multi-role combat fighters will be delivered to IAF.
Given that the IAF will operate its 126 MMRCAs till about 2050, anything short of today's cutting edge would become irrelevant long before that. Broadly speaking, the critics' arguments were that the stealth fighters will not fulfil the role of MMRCA is partly true and partly convoluted. The stealth fighters as Russians claim will be capable of both striking ground targets and also will have bombing capacity deep inside enemy targets in the radius of 5000 km.
What are India's foreseeable security threats and how must the IAF respond? While Pakistan remains a lingering hangover, especially in its embrace of cross-border terrorism, it is diminishing as a full-blown military threat to India. The IAF's most likely missions against Pakistan centre on air-to-ground strikes: punitive raids against terrorist camps or ISI locations, perhaps in retaliation for yet another terrorist outrage; or pre-emptive strikes against Pakistani ballistic missiles when a nuclear launch against India seems imminent.
A devastating ground strike capability is also primary for contingencies on the China border. With Beijing relentlessly developing roads and railways to the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has already built, and is increasing the ability to amass an invading force faster than the Indian Army can rush in troops to defend the threatened area.
With an attack imminent, or some Indian territory already captured, New Delhi's immediate response will inevitably centre on air strikes against PLA forward troops and the routes on which their logistics - ammunition, fuel, food, water and medical care - depend. In the 1962 debacle, one of New Delhi's most unforgivable, and inexplicable, blunders was to abjure the use of air power. This time around, as evident from the rapid creation of IAF infrastructure along the China border, India's first response will be with air strikes.
Given these requirements, it is evident that the IAF needs powerful ground strike capabilities. But the fighter pilots who dominate the pinnacle of the IAF have a special fascination for air supremacy fighters. The IAF has traditionally focused less on enemy ground troops and more on that fighter-jock ambition, shooting down enemy fighters in air-to-air duels.
The IAF's emphasises air-to-air combat capabilities - speed, rate of climb, turn rate, etc. - with ground strike capability a mere side benefit. Already deficient in air-to-ground strike power, the IAF's two major fighters under development - the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) - are primarily air supremacy fighters. The third fighter in the pipeline, the MMRCA, cannot share the same bloodline.
To mask its ideological proclivity for air superiority fighters, the IAF argues that the "multi-role" MMRCA can also strike enemy ground forces. Strike it can, but nowhere as effectively as stealth fighters.
The army has not forgotten the IAF's irrelevance during the Kargil conflict. When IAF fighters should have been supporting assaulting infantry by hammering Pakistani positions with air strikes, fire support came almost exclusively from the army's own guns. Meanwhile, the IAF was searching for a way to equip its Mirage-2000s (an MMRCA!) to deliver bombs accurately onto mountaintops. Without a world-class, customised strike fighter like the stealth this sorry saga could be replayed some day on the Sino-Indian border.
The basic argument for the stealth fighters remains Indian self-interest. Tomorrow's IAF must be a comprehensively 5th Generation force, using custom-designed aircraft for specific operational tasks. In the US Air Force, the F-22 Raptor obtains air superiority; meanwhile, US ground forces are supported by the F-35 joint strike fighter. The IAF cannot fall short on either of these counts. With the 5th Generation FGFA, an air superiority fighter, perhaps a decade away, the IAF must obtain a war-winning advantage from matching strike fighters.

http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/

[ashish raval]

Euro fighter will win the deal. Three of four nations in ef are under heavy debt and will do anything to seal the deal and go back to their countries electorate and show that jobs in defense are still with them.

[Christopher Sidor]

Buy a fighter for war By Air Vice Marshal (Retd) Vinod Patni

....
The army has not forgotten the IAF's irrelevance during the Kargil conflict. When IAF fighters should have been supporting assaulting infantry by hammering Pakistani positions with air strikes, fire support came almost exclusively from the army's own guns. Meanwhile, the IAF was searching for a way to equip its Mirage-2000s (an MMRCA!) to deliver bombs accurately onto mountaintops. Without a world-class, customised strike fighter like the stealth this sorry saga could be replayed some day on the Sino-Indian border.
The basic argument for the stealth fighters remains Indian self-interest. Tomorrow's IAF must be a comprehensively 5th Generation force, using custom-designed aircraft for specific operational tasks. In the US Air Force, the F-22 Raptor obtains air superiority; meanwhile, US ground forces are supported by the F-35 joint strike fighter. The IAF cannot fall short on either of these counts. With the 5th Generation FGFA, an air superiority fighter, perhaps a decade away, the IAF must obtain a war-winning advantage from matching strike fighters.

http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/

Airforces generally world over have focused on air dominance roles or Air interdiction (AI) roles. They have resisted close air support for a very practical reason. Collateral casualties, which can be very demoralizing for the forces.

Land Battlefield situations can be very fluid. The days of trench warfare have long gone. The emphasis right now is on agility and mobility. Let us say at 10:00 hrs IST a fighter takes off from ambala or from somewhere in Himachal on way to carry out close air support for our troops fighting on LAC around ladakh. It arrives at the battle field at 10:03 or 10:05, by this time Indian land forces positions might have been altered. Chances are our fighters might end up strafing or bombing our new positions or worse still they might drop bombs on empty enemy positions.

To enable a truly effective close air support requires two things
1) Ability of the ground forces to interact with the fighters or helicopter gunships on a real time basis when they are in flight so as to assist the targeting of enemy forces.
2) Ability of the pilot to target his bombs and missiles in the air or when he is over/near the target, rather before he or she takes off.

For close air support the threat of shoulder fired SAM missiles or AA guns have also to be taken into account. That is why world over the primary means of enemy suppression is via rockets like Pinaka or Smersh or via long range Artillery. In the future this might be assisted with armed drones, which travel along with infantry and can be launched from anywhere.

Close air support is best carried out by planes like A-10 or AC-130 or Su-25 which are not fighters in the best case scenario. For example Wikipedia reports that the max speed of Su-25 is less than 1000 kmph with a combat radius less than 400 kms. Now compare this with Rafale and Typhoon.

For close air support the best use case scenario for airforce is reconnaissance. But again with prevalence of drones coupled with satellite navigation and communication is even rendering this role as a chapter in history books.

[shiv]

Land Battlefield situations can be very fluid. The days of trench warfare have long gone. The emphasis right now is on agility and mobility. Let us say at 10:00 hrs IST a fighter takes off from ambala or from somewhere in Himachal on way to carry out close air support for our troops fighting on LAC around ladakh. It arrives at the battle field at 10:03 or 10:05, by this time Indian land forces positions might have been altered. Chances are our fighters might end up strafing or bombing our new positions or worse still they might drop bombs on empty enemy positions.

Jasjeet Singh's treatise on air warfare is the best read in this regard. It is a must read for any jingo interested in the application of air power.

This is how he makes his argument:

Close air support as mentioned by you above is definitely welcomed by the soldier in the thick of battle and he feels the absence of such air support. People get killed in the absence of such support.

But.. and there is a very significant but

• Aircraft resources are limited. Close support cannot be given in all situations. But the soldier will want support in all battles.
• The early days and hours of the war will be spent by the air force suppressing enemy air defences and taking out vital assets like radars and airfields. It would be reasonable to expect up to 25% attrition rate at this time. One in four aircraft might be lost. This is unsustainable in the long term, but will have to be accepted in the initial stages. The rest of the war will have to be fought with a smaller air force.
• Close air support only helps individual frontline battles and will rarely change the course of war along a front and will add to attrition of scarce resources (aircraft and pilots in other words) from heavy AA fire faced by CAS aircraft.
• What can change the course of an entire battle front is deep strikes that interrupt logistics - the food supply and the fuel and ammunition supply to the frontline and the control and communications centers that coordinate and control the enemy batle.
• While the air force can make a huge contribution to the war by interdicting supplies and C and C - they do not have enough assets to give close air support in addition to that - giving the army the feeling that the Air force is not interested in close air support. But in reality interdicting supplies/C&C is a "force mutiplier" because it affects the enemy's ability to fight along a broad battle front. Its effect is typically felt only after a few days rather than the immediate visible effect of CAS.

This is the reason why the army is investing in its own air assets for close air support (attack helos) while the air force concentrates on the deep strike that is has trained for. In Kargil the Air Force got the supply dump at Muntho Dalo that deprived Pakis of their supplies and left them starving. But the soldier facing enemy action without air support is unlikely to directly feel the benefit of such action and is justified in feeling that he got no support from his air force.

If we had US like resources we could equip everyone with as many aircraft of every type in any conflict. We can get there only slowly In the meantime we have to resort to force multipliers of various types.

[abhik]

^^^
But CAS itself was really not the subject of the V-AM rant/whine/complain I think

..
But the fighter pilots who dominate the pinnacle of the IAF have a special fascination for air supremacy fighters. The IAF has traditionally focused less on enemy ground troops and more on that fighter-jock ambition, shooting down enemy fighters in air-to-air duels.The IAF's emphasises air-to-air combat capabilities - speed, rate of climb, turn rate, etc. - with ground strike capability a mere side benefit. Already deficient in air-to-ground strike power...

[saps]

The ultimate logic that needs to be applied here is

cost vs benefit

Well if the CAS mission is for ensuring a high value special ops then i guess it would be provided however one has to look at efficacy of present asset vs the likely benefit..it would be nearly impossible in todays scenario of shoulder launched wpns to provide any effective CAS unless relative air advantage is definitely achieved.
Efficient deployment of 10-15 men company with shoulder launched sam could take care of an entire batch of fighters coming in for CAS with devastating outcome. Just my bit.

[MarcH]

Focus on CAS is all nice if your enemy has no airforce. Hardly the case for India. Without (punktual) air superiority CAS aircraft will suffer extremely high attrition rates. Given that India has to compensate with higher quality vs. the quantity of Chinese + Pakistani airforces I think its actually dangerous for the airforce to go for anything else than an excellent a2a performer.
Otherwise the army sooner than later has to deal with CAS-from the enemy airforce.

[NRao]

Land Battlefield situations can be very fluid. The days of trench warfare have long gone. The emphasis right now is on agility and mobility. Let us say at 10:00 hrs IST a fighter takes off from ambala or from somewhere in Himachal on way to carry out close air support for our troops fighting on LAC around ladakh. It arrives at the battle field at 10:03 or 10:05, by this time Indian land forces positions might have been altered. Chances are our fighters might end up strafing or bombing our new positions or worse still they might drop bombs on empty enemy positions.

Very true.

However, one of the major +ves of a network centric architecture is JUST to deal with a fluid situation. It is expected to mark the locationS of all parties. The ability to pin point the location of an enemy and be able to deliver to that point should take care of most situations.

[chackojoseph]

How feseable is all fifth gen aircraft fleet, even in 2050? Costs will be prohibitive, eh?

[NRao]

How feseable is all fifth gen aircraft fleet, even in 2050? Costs will be prohibitive, eh?

WRT India, depends.

I suggest we get rid of TSP and save plenty of funds.

[Christopher Sidor]

How feseable is all fifth gen aircraft fleet, even in 2050? Costs will be prohibitive, eh?

Extremely. The cost of F-22 and F-35 attest to this. Even if PAK-FA/T-50 comes at half the cost of F-22 or F-35, a extreme optimistic assumption, then also the cost will be prohibitive. To have the entire Air force fleet made of 5th generation fighters, is well expecting India to break the bank. This is the situation as it stands today.

Now let us look at it from future perspective. India has two 5th generation fighter programs. One is PAK-FA/T-50 and the other is AMCA. AMCA is very nebulous currently. India is growing at 7-9% currently. We grew at 6% in 1990s, and about 8-9% in the first decade of 2000s. If we manage to break into double digit growth in this decade then the situation radically shifts. Then we need to plan for transitioning our airforce to an entire 5th generation fighter force.

Moreover our target should not be 5th generation fighters. But we should start building a base for the 6th generation planes, which will be unmanned weaponized drones, which can ideally stay in the air for extended period of time. They might or might not have energy-based weapons. 5th generation fighters are already on the scene. F-22/F-35/J-20/PAK-FA and so on. For India work has to start on the 6th generation fighters now.

[Nihat]

Rather good point made by Chris Cidor Wrt CAS and the IAF. A big purchase like MMRCA cannot be made on the basis of CAS role mainly because it's not the IAF's primary role. As long as these planes help IAF establish Air superiority over hostile skies , are able to strike deep into enemy territory to disrupt lines of communication and supply as well as take out static targets like HQ's , Oil depots etc. It will make the Army's job so much more easier just like Kargil war.

If the Eurofighter can help IAF in that air superiority role then it would not deter them to opt for it over the Rafale , the Rafale supposedly superior A2G capabilities may not impact IAF decision at all , if they've already laid out a plan about what kind of force they want.

[Rakesh]

Please remember the second 'M' in the acronym MMRCA stands for multi-role. That is not to discount the IAF love for air supremacy fighters, but being able to strike ground targets with pinpoint accuracy is a must have for the Vayu Sena. They are not purchasing MiG-29s, but rather Mirage 2000s...they will serve multiple roles.

[Cosmo_R]

Euro fighter will win the deal. Three of four nations in ef are under heavy debt and will do anything to seal the deal and go back to their countries electorate and show that jobs in defense are still with them.

Not that I have any preference but I would point out that French Banks hold more than their share of Italian and Spanish Bonds not to mention Greek ones. France needs this more than the others right now and they have No export order for the Rafale.

Regardless, once the pricing comes in, there is going to shock and awe in MoD at the total cost ~$20bn+ for 189 units.

My bet is still the 'Stealth SU-30MKI(s) or 'Silent Flanker' (as Boeing would have it) as a gap filler to the FGFA/AMCA. MMRCA ain't gonna happen IMHO especially given the MMS Govt's AH predicament.

[Victor]

There is little or no difference between "air superiority" and "Strike" aircraft any more. Unless it is a specialized plane, all fighters are multi-role capable for the same reason that all phones are "smartphones" nowadays--it costs the same and doesn't make a difference in performance to build in both capabilites in one package. Essentially a combined Jaguar/MiG-21.

But the strike role is quite different from and not to be confused with Close Air Support. A CAS aircraft engages enemy ground forces that are in close proximity to friendly troops in fast-moving, fluid situations. A strike aircraft can release heavy precision guided bombs from 20 km away to destroy fixed positions like mountain bunkers and heavily guarded supply depots and airstrips (Safed Sagar) or carry out a fast low-level raid deep inside enemy country. There is little overlap in these roles and they require different aircraft types.

The IAF does not have and has not articulated a need for CAS type aircraft beyond attack choppers and neither has the army AFAIK. But the Americans have already recognized that F-16s and F-18s are expensive overkill in places like Afpak (aka "irregular conflicts") and are considering the OA-X light-attack concept which will bring back propeller planes of 1960s vintage. Availability of accurate missiles (a2a, a2g, g2g) and UAVs will change things even further in the coming years and it is possible that the only manned warplanes will look like the Sturmovik "flying tank"!

[shukla]

Is Typhoon the end of history for UK aerospace?

[shukla]

United States Defence and Security Report Q3 2011

Boeing has said that India is a major market for its future efforts, according to reports from the Economic Times. This comes despite the painful failure of Boeing to be shortlisted for the current tender process on India's new multi-role combat aircraft, with the Typhoon from Eurofighter and Dassault's Rafale being selected for the US$11bn programme. Yet again it is understood that strict American controls on the transfer of technology may have played a role, with much of the European lobbying with the Indian government concerning their willingness to share technology and involve Indians closely in the production process.

Business Monitor International - Research & Markets.
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/resea ... rt_q3_2011

[SriniY]

^^^ that article is from may


edit: posted in wrong thread

[shukla]

^^^ that article is from may

Business Monitor International, July-Aug 2011

Here's another link..

http://www.sys-con.com/node/1952919
Businesswire - August 2011