India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Nov 2011 02:29

any projections against plaaf for 2020? I think some 150 LCAs will play some role, and couple of squadrons of AMCA can be made possible too against plaaf's assuming 50 odd J20s are in ops.

next generation passive sensors, AlGaN long range lpi aesa radars, toyed decoys, astras, brahmos and ks172s, stealth frames, can play to our advantage.

and if we are discussing JSFs, we could also think about boeing tie up for pahntom rays - mki.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Nov 2011 02:46

Christopher Sidor wrote: F-35 is not a carrot. The F-35 program is running critically low on cash. Under a deal done in congress recently, the US DoD has to find cuts of approximately 400 billion USD. If those cuts cannot be found, automatic cuts of approximately 600 billion USD will occur over a period of a decade. Add to this UK has pulled out of F-35B program again due to funding cuts. US needs money to fund the F-35 program. Now consider the fact that we are going to spend approximately 10-11 billion USD on a 4th generation fighter. We have ample leverage to get what we want namely
1) Only 18-20 fighters to come in fly away condition. Rest to be manufactured in India
2) Complete hand over of source codes. If not available we ditch the American avianoics and weapon systems for other sources without in any way impairing its ability. Some thing similar was done for some of our other air assets.

It is a carrot. The timing of the offer, coinciding as it does with the bids being opened is not coincidence. The F-35 program has been troubled for a long time now, its not something new. What makes you think that the JSF partners would sit by and watch as a non-partner nation would get source codes or a complete assembly line that even they couldn't get !? It would endanger the entire program itself.

Isn't going to happen, and that is the point of the carrot- it will tempt people to dump what they have in hand today (in the form of concrete offers from EADS and Dassault) to resolve an urgent operational shortfall, in the hope that they have "leverage" due to the F-35 program's issues and the size of the IAF order...and when that leverage doesn't materialise, India will have no option but to go with what is offered, since by then our force levels would have dropped to below even 25-27 squadrons with all our MiG-21s gone and no other OEM will bother to try selling to the IAF since they'd have felt duped by the current process being dropped at the last moment.

LM's record on maintaining schedule and cost on the F-35 program aren't quite confidence inspiring BTW, a huge part of the reason that they're seeing funding cuts and order cuts now.
DoD slashes F35 order to pay for cost overruns

A 30-aircraft order means the production rate will actually decline from the previous year. The LRIP-IV contract signed last November ordered 32 aircraft, including one for the UK and one for the Netherlands.

The Senate Armed Services Committee, meanwhile, wants the DoD to freeze F-35 production for another two years. The decision would devastate the programme office's original plan to sharply increase the production rate over the next five years, ultimately reaching one aircraft per day by fiscal year 2016.

The DoD has already backed away from the ramp-up plans, however. The LRIP-VI order, scheduled for award later this year, has been reduced to 38 aircraft, or 80 fewer than planned only two years ago. Ongoing budget discussions for the FY2013 budget request are considering further F-35 cuts in LRIP-VI and beyond.

Things are not as rosy in the F-35 program as some here would like to believe or as Ajai Shukla so naively puts down to as issues seen with all other programs- the Typhoon and the Rafale are way past those developmental delay and cost overrun issues.

F-35 was not on offer for various reasons. The reasons were valid prior to 2008 lehman fiasco. Now they are not.
J-20 is a work in progress. But if we do not cater for its eventual arrival we will be loosing some very important time.
Just because China is doing something does not mean that we should ape or follow in their foot steps. China has always tried to overwhelm its opponents by numbers. We have followed a different path. It is a path of brain. Chinese path has been that of brawn.

And the PLAAF is retiring all its J-8, JH-7, Su-27, Su-30MKK, J-11B, J-10A etc. is it ? Because the way you make it sound, the J-20 has suddenly made every other platform worthless. Or are they fools to continue to develop the J-10B when the J-20 is also a work in progress?

Fact remains that the J-20 isn't in service today- the rest of those a/c I listed are. They are the current threat and the F-35 can meet them but it cannot enter IAF service before it enters service in a host of partner nations that have already invested money in the program. 2015 entry into IAF service date is bullshit. LM is lying through its teeth when it says that. Not unless the USAF agrees to take fewer F-35s and transfer its own to the IAF- which is unlikely considering that they are themselves looking at a numbers shortfall.

I do not deny that F-35 has some critical drawbacks. Chief among them being the ability to adhere to timelines of the current MMRCA tender. i.e. It is known that F-35 will not be able to join by 2015 and with 2015 I being very very optimistic.

timelines are one aspect- the ToT is a big aspect as well. Next to impossible that they would offer anything on the level that Dassault and EADS would offer.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 06 Nov 2011 02:57

Hey Cain_Marko!

OK, weird combo idea then, at the Dubaï aero salon later this month
the UAE sign the purported Rafale deal and get their first AC in less
than a year.

They then make their 63 ( ??? 63? What a coincidence! ) M2000-9
available to resale to India by way of Dassault.
Those are as close to Rafale as can be, you know, IT core and all.

Immediate pick-up for Dassault production line, fast acquisition for
India and sped up delivery for the UAE?

HUM

Agreed otherwise to your last post.
Good day all, Tay.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Nov 2011 03:14

Singha wrote:afaik the Growler is not on the table for sale to any NATO ally yet, let alone India. the US is happy to depute some naval air arms Growlers on land like it did in Libya ops to help out.

some of the next-gen electronic attack, self-defence and SEAD features to be seen in USAF/USN JSF will likely not be for export at all.

small correction- the RAAF has converted its option for 12 Super Hornets to the EF/A-18 E/F Growler variant. They did get the original deal with 12 of their 24 SHornets wired to be converted to the Growler.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Nov 2011 03:28

^^ They are Growler-lite and not the full monty.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... te-322542/

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Nov 2011 03:33

GeorgeWelch wrote: Because the EF still isn't fully capable of ground attack while SH is fully capable of everything right now. And frankly some capabilities are more important than others. The AESA of the EF *might* be done by 2015, but there are always teething problems.

Also the production line is faster and more capable of rapid delivery if the need arises.

And yet it was the SHornet that was rejected by the IAF wasn't it ? So while I am in awe of its St.Louis assembly line, their lean manufacturing processes and their ability to stay within cost and schedule, it is moot. They didn't meet the IAF's requirements and they were rejected. Game over for them.

BTW, the Rafale doesn't have any of these problems, and is a very capable strike jet as well as a very capable air superiority fighter. It doesn't have any of the airframe deficiencies of the SHornet either. So why suggest the SHornet that has been rejected when the Rafale is part of the final 2 contestants?

I also noted that you deliberately ignored my questions on where the F414-EPE engine and all the other 'International' features shown at AI-11 are? Will they be ready by 2015? Will they also have teething problems? How can we be sure that they will they meet their performance goals? We all know how the SHornet itself disappointed initially when it didn't meet some of its performance goals.

It's not an either/or for the USN. They are getting BOTH. As far as I can tell, India would only get one of the EF/Rafale/F-35.

That doesn't answer the question - Why are they getting both?

Why not simply wait and get the uber-F35C when they would need to support the 4th generation SHornet which won't have the same stealth capabilities as the F-35C? Wait- maybe they have an urgent need for numbers as well and cannot put off their modernisation plans anymore? Why is that different from what the IAF is facing today?

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 06 Nov 2011 03:48

LM has order book of 5000 JSF from dozens of countries that combined togather makes up of ~$50 trillion in GDP. It's designed from the scratch to be the low cost, single engine, 5th gen fighter with economy of scale that no other aircraft program can dream off. It'll most certainly cost substantially less than both MRCA finalists just by virtue of the size of the program....

Just 2 years back Eurofighter was also a joke all over the net and media for not being on schedule not having full FOC etc. It still doesn't have full capabilities and none of the 2 contenders have a working deployed/tested AESA radar.

So, trying to trash JSF is useless, any which way you cut it it'll be heads and shoulder above everything else out there. Although I don't think JSF is being offered by US as an MMRCA for this tender (Shukla's analysis aside) but as an additional purchase, may be as a replacement for MRCA options. No one is going to stop MRCA at this stage, it would be criminal but India should seriously consider and explore JSF option for both IAF and IN. This is going to be world's leading fighter aircraft program for next half a century that we need to participate in.

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 06 Nov 2011 04:04

The IAF needs at least 40% of its inventory to be im the medium multi-role class ( with 30% in the heavy and 30% in the light category).

The AMCA is still a concept and India's R&D in aircraft development has yet to mature. We also know that the IAF is very demanding. Realisticly, the first flight of the AMCA will only take place after 2020, add to that 5 years of testing and further development before AMCA Mk. I enters service with the IAF.

The Mirage 2000's and MiG-29's will reach the end of their service life by then (2025).

The MiG-27's should all be retired long before 2025. As for the Jaguar fleet, the one's that entered servive in the 1980's face retirement in the next 10 years, so their numbers will go down significantly. Furthermore, it's no longer fit to do deep strike missions even in Packeeland (underpowered, can't protect itself) in 2011, this will only worsen as Packee's upgrade their air defense and replace older aircraft with JF-17's, J-10's and possibly even more F-16's (donated from US inventory).

Al this considered, I say let's order 200 MMRCA right away, with an option for a further 60 aircraft or so.

This would help the IAF standardize to Su-30MKI's (270), MMRCA's (260) and LCA's (300) in the next 15 years.

It would also give the AMCA and the FGFA team more time (a more realistic period) to develop the aircraft.
And with India buying more MMRCA aircraft then the home countries (as well as spending a whopping USD 40 plus billion on them), we could ask for serious concessions.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 06 Nov 2011 04:08

Kartik wrote: The F-35 program is running critically low on cash.

And guess who is hit the hardest? Yup, the Euros. So if the JSF is in trouble, you can bet that the eurocanards are in far deeper trouble.

What makes you think that the JSF partners would sit by and watch as a non-partner nation would get source codes or a complete assembly line that even they couldn't get !?

* As mentioned, if the source codes are not forthcoming, simply replace the concerned avionics suite. No problems, we've done it before.

* A separate production line does not make economic sense for almost all of the partners but they are participating in different ways nevertheless.

* Japan will probably choose the JSF over the F/A-18 after having rejected the Typhoon. It will not become a partner country due to its domestic laws but it will still get a production line because it wants to preserve its domestic aeronautical production base.

The Americans will accept us as a full partner/co-developer. The point is, what do we want? If we end up as one of the biggest JSF users, we need to be confident enough of our position to extract the best deal we can.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 06 Nov 2011 04:14

Katare wrote:No one is going to stop MRCA at this stage, it would be criminal but India should seriously consider and explore JSF option for both IAF and IN. This is going to be world's leading fighter aircraft program for next half a century that we need to participate in.

Budget permitting, sure, India can buy Rafale/Typhoon, FGFA and F-35. But not sure India is that wealthy (just yet!). If the FGFA fails to meet expectations, and the threat level escalates to a point where Rafale/Typhoon, Su-30MKI, Mirage 2000 (Upgraded), MiG-29 (Upgraded) and assorted other airborne and ground based air defence systems are inadequate to handle the enhanced threat, then F-35 potentially becomes a necessity. But by then (2025 or so), US will be producing F-35 at a massive rate, and we should be able to procure them more efficiently.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 06 Nov 2011 04:30

Victor wrote:* As mentioned, if the source codes are not forthcoming, simply replace the concerned avionics suite. No problems, we've done it before.

There are high chances that Uncle Sam may not allow us to tinker with its product. And even if they do, replacing the avionics suite may pose many challenges such as integration issues with hardware, weapons etc and cost/time related repercussions.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 06 Nov 2011 04:32

eklavya wrote:
Katare wrote:No one is going to stop MRCA at this stage, it would be criminal but India should seriously consider and explore JSF option for both IAF and IN. This is going to be world's leading fighter aircraft program for next half a century that we need to participate in.
Budget permitting, sure, India can buy Rafale/Typhoon, FGFA and F-35. But not sure India is that wealthy (just yet!). If the FGFA fails to meet expectations, and the threat level escalates to a point where Rafale/Typhoon, Su-30MKI, Mirage 2000 (Upgraded), MiG-29 (Upgraded) and assorted other airborne and ground based air defence systems are inadequate to handle the enhanced threat, then F-35 potentially becomes a necessity. But by then (2025 or so), US will be producing F-35 at a massive rate, and we should be able to procure them more efficiently.

i second that f-35 should be our plan B ,IF AND ONLY IF, FGFA and AMCA ,don't eet expectations or are delayed,because f-35 will be much cheaper that what it is now.and it will be more mature compared to what it is now.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Nov 2011 05:13

Victor wrote:
Kartik wrote: The F-35 program is running critically low on cash.
And guess who is hit the hardest? Yup, the Euros. So if the JSF is in trouble, you can bet that the eurocanards are in far deeper trouble.

that wasn't my quote. You quoted Christopher Sidor.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Nov 2011 05:22

Multatuli wrote:The MiG-27's should all be retired long before 2025.

yes, with the MRCA replacing them.

As for the Jaguar fleet, the one's that entered servive in the 1980's face retirement in the next 10 years, so their numbers will go down significantly. Furthermore, it's no longer fit to do deep strike missions even in Packeeland (underpowered, can't protect itself) in 2011, this will only worsen as Packee's upgrade their air defense and replace older aircraft with JF-17's, J-10's and possibly even more F-16's (donated from US inventory).

Jaguars are going to go through a DARIN-III upgrade, they are very likely to get a new engine (F125IN) and a new CCM (likely to be the ASRAAM). Don't see what you're talking about here.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 06 Nov 2011 05:37

GL Kartik mate.

Good evening all others, Tay.

P.S. Any new rumor about the thread's subject lying around by any chance?

member_20018 · Post by **member_20018** » 06 Nov 2011 05:59

Rahul M wrote: South Korea, Japan, and the US are not likely to come to India's aid in case a war breaks out between India and China. However, it's more then likely that the Packee's would try to use the situation to their advantage.

I therefore think that China could afford to commit all of the modern aircraft in their inventory to the Indian front.
I also think that it serves no purpose to bring in the Japanese, South Korean and American air power into this equation, none of those countries would risk war with China to help defend India. .

When we think of war between India and China, usually we think of this:

But, in my very humble opinion, we should think of this:

In the words of Robert Frost, "Good fences make good neighbours". Even though the Chinese have this shadow play going on with their listening stations, I dont see 1. Chinese and Indian people having friction between them, as the border are these huge Himalayas and the large desolate Tibetan Plateau. India is West and China east of the Tibetan plateau. As the people are not coming in contact with each other, I believe that friction between India and China is grossly overrated.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 06 Nov 2011 06:17

houstonrice wrote:As the people are not coming in contact with each other, I believe that friction between India and China is grossly overrated.

And China gave/gives nuclear bombs and ballistic missiles to Pakistan as an act of goodwill towards India?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 06 Nov 2011 06:20

Kartik wrote:I also noted that you deliberately ignored my questions on where the F414-EPE engine and all the other 'International' features shown at AI-11 are?

Because they weren't relevant to the question at hand. They can always be fitted in the future if desired. The point remains that the SH is combat-ready NOW without them, something the EF can't claim.

Kartik wrote:Will they be ready by 2015? Will they also have teething problems?

The minor advantage an uprated engine provides is inconsequential compared to the advantage a fully-functional AESA provides.

Kartik wrote:
It's not an either/or for the USN. They are getting BOTH. As far as I can tell, India would only get one of the EF/Rafale/F-35.
That doesn't answer the question - Why are they getting both?

Why not simply wait and get the uber-F35C when they would need to support the 4th generation SHornet which won't have the same stealth capabilities as the F-35C? Wait- maybe they have an urgent need for numbers as well and cannot put off their modernisation plans anymore?

Yes.

Kartik wrote:Why is that different from what the IAF is facing today?

All the difference in the world.

1. Everything about how the MRCA was put together and run says you do NOT have an urgent need. You can holler all you want, the IAF disagrees and is apparently content to take it's sweet time.

End of discussion.

But I'll continue anyways.

2. The USN isn't investing anywhere near as much in 4th gen as India is. The planes are cheap ($55 million flyaway) and it's topping up an existing fleet so all the support infrastructure (training, maintenance, logistics) is already in place

Overall they're spending less than a third what the IAF is for the same number of aircraft.

The USN has an urgent need and is making a 'minimal' investment. The IAF doesn't have an urgent need and is making a massive investment. Do you see the difference?

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 06 Nov 2011 06:47

The MRCA was not urgent.

The MMRCA can't be delayed.

The passing of time, old chap.

Good night all, Tay.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 06 Nov 2011 08:12

eklavya wrote:
Katare wrote:No one is going to stop MRCA at this stage, it would be criminal but India should seriously consider and explore JSF option for both IAF and IN. This is going to be world's leading fighter aircraft program for next half a century that we need to participate in.
Budget permitting, sure, India can buy Rafale/Typhoon, FGFA and F-35. But not sure India is that wealthy (just yet!). If the FGFA fails to meet expectations, and the threat level escalates to a point where Rafale/Typhoon, Su-30MKI, Mirage 2000 (Upgraded), MiG-29 (Upgraded) and assorted other airborne and ground based air defence systems are inadequate to handle the enhanced threat, then F-35 potentially becomes a necessity. But by then (2025 or so), US will be producing F-35 at a massive rate, and we should be able to procure them more efficiently.

India has option to buy another 67 MMRCA, that budget can be used to buy 100 JSF. I dont't think budget is an issue these days, we are talking about small sums of money, that can come from increasing defense budget by 0.1% of GDP for few years. Having a stealthy 5th gen aircraft on hand would certainly act as force multiplyer for rest of the fleet and other armed forces. Russians would take a decade or more before anythin starts coming out of assembly lines. AMCA would take 2 decades at least if not more by than dragon may have delivered another lesson for dhoti shivering.

JSF now!!!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Nov 2011 08:29

With so much of official statements in evidence,only a blinkered one would insist that the JSF is not in serious trouble.Leave aside the RN abandoning the STOVL version,there are now some who think that a CTOL version of the EF or naval Rafale would suffice for its lonely QE carrier to be.The JSF is in serious trouble with its funding,development,cancellation of orders and late arrival,forcing all its allies and would-be buyers to look to other existing 4++ aircraft as interim alternatives until 2020,when the aircraft will arrive and its capabilities apart from maintenance issues are sorted out.The massive cost of maintaining the Raptor ($250-300m) is frightening and even though the JSF comes in at half that price,the maintenance issues will be known only when its is in large-scale sqd. service.Moreover,when even Britain will not get full JSF capable fighters,a second-class version for America's closest ally, only a third-class version will be sold to "turd-world" non US allies like us....but at first class prices! Should India be the sucker that is born every day and turn the JSF way? When we have "two birds in the hand" to choose from,why should we let go for one "bird in the bush"?

Katare,"JSF now"? It isn't available until 2020! The attempts to try and sell us the JSF is to saboatge the MMRCA deal which has reached the tape and also put a spoke into the wheel of the already signed off the blocks FGFA JV with Russia,where we are co-developers and not simlpy buyers or screwdriver assemblers.

It is quite obvious that our mortal enemies,the Sino-Pakis,will possess at least 90% of their inventory of 4 and 4+ fighters until 2020,even if the J-20 enters service .What ever conflict that might occur between India and the axis of evil will be fought with those assets only.At the moment we have a qualitative advantage over both with ou MKIs to be further upgraded into Super-Flankers with BMos and LR AAMs around 2015+.Two years down the line the first of our 250 FGFAs will arrive (in Russian service planned from 2015),as we are also now apparently obtaining the first version almost identical to the Russian single-seat version,with only about 40 twin-seaters.With our qualitative edge assured ,what is sorely needed is replacements for all those legacy MIG-21s and UG MIG-27s.The Jaguars are to have an upgrade and last for another decade+,both M-2000s and MIG-29s being upgraded,so it is very clear that the MMRCA is to fill the gap of retiring MIG-21s and 27s,which was supposed to be the role of the LCA.We must realistically look at any LCAs that arrive as a "bonus".If those developing the MK-2 version act on a war footing and gvien enough funding and quick decision-making from the MOD,we could have around 100+ by 2020 with accelerated production,that is if the Mk-2 is certified by 2015.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Nov 2011 08:48

Multatuli wrote:Rahul sahib, I still don't think that there is a real military threat from Japan, Taiwan or even the US to China, and since India (IN/IAF) can certainly not reach their cities in the east, the Chinese do not require a reserve to protect their economic hearthland in the East.

the PLA doesn't agree with you. about 75-80% of army and air force strength of PLA is stationed along the coast. when your adversaries maintain strong forces on your doorstep a short distance away from your most important cities, the forces of japan, US, taiwan etc pose a very real threat by merely existing. and unless they go out of their away to assure china that they are not going to force the issue in case of a conflict with India (which would at a minimum involve US withdrawing its forces from the area and senior politicos making such statements in public) china will not ignore the threat.
china leaving beijing-shanghai unguarded is like expecting israel to leave jerusalem unguarded, they are far too important to national psyche.

nachiket wrote:Regarding the aircraft lists mentioned by Pogula and Rahul da, why are the non-upgraded Mig-21s (Bis and M/MF) ignored? Sure they may be old, but they are still flying. I haven't seen any report that says they have been retired. Only the FL's are gone AFAIK. They aren't any worse than the PAF's Mirage 3s, which have been counted.

hey I didn't make a PAF list.

bis and m/MF are not good for much beyond rudimentary a2g IMHO.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 06 Nov 2011 09:21

Philip,
I do not think any sabotage is being attempted you are always suspecious of US and fear it way more than desired. JSF is not in trouble it is marching ahead way better than most other aircraft programs in the past. It'll achieve costs and capability balance that will be unmatched by any other aircraft just because of the input/support available to it.

This is third 5th gen stealthy aircraft that US is making so they have most experience, money and order book.

If you think JSF will be avilable in 2020 than I would say Pak-Fa will be available in 2030 and AMCA in 2050.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Nov 2011 09:31

katare ji, you seriously need to update your jsf info before going rah-rah.

the unit price alone is above 120 million with every chance of it increasing even more. australia's 14 JSF's cost 240 million a piece.

the numbers will be at maximum 3500 and most likely as low as 3100, LM is still peddling decade old numbers.

If you think JSF will be avilable in 2020 than I would say Pak-Fa will be available in 2030 and AMCA in 2050.

trolling are we ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Nov 2011 09:54

we will know the true cost of JSF pkg only when someone gets 126+ and then pays for it ....only the USAF will get that many. obviously Australia with a pathetic 14 will get shafted on the unit cost. much of that pkg will be backend and spares cost that future tranche buys will not need to pay for.

imo it will weigh in around $100-120 mil eventually ie around 25% costlier than the latest models of F-16 and on par with the F-15SE/SK probably. so cost wise not much different from MRCA, but the degree of control and denial US will exercise on such assets will be more than euros. the US does not need a indian order to keep JSF humming, it will by itself order enough JSF to make it viable even if nobody else buys it.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 06 Nov 2011 10:06

People suggesting we buy large numbers of JSF, a combat aircraft that will then become critical to the IAF both in numbers and capability, and let the US get a hold of IAF's balls must seriously get their heads examined.

Having C17s, C130s and Apaches is bad enough (no credible choice available for heavy lifters in the C17 capability) but getting the JSF will require the IAF to be seriously deluded.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Nov 2011 10:08

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Kartik wrote:I also noted that you deliberately ignored my questions on where the F414-EPE engine and all the other 'International' features shown at AI-11 are?
Because they weren't relevant to the question at hand. They can always be fitted in the future if desired. The point remains that the SH is combat-ready NOW without them, something the EF can't claim.

They were relevant- the F/A-18E-F offered to the IAF wouldn't have been full spec when delivered initially either. Assuming that the SHornet had won and the deal was signed in early 2012, the 36 months for first delivery meant that the IAF wouldn't get its first SHornet Block II till 2015 either. I'm deliberately saying that and not International since there is little chance that the International would've been ready and into production by 2015 either.

So what big advantage are you touting here for the SHornet being battle ready as of today? What matters is whether it would be battle ready in 2015 or not. The Typhoon Tranche 3 variant is certainly battle ready as of today and will be a far better position by 2015 as well. Within the first batch itself the Captor-E is likely to enter production and while I agree that it won't be a mature radar, that alone doesn't mean that the SHornet was a better option.

The minor advantage an uprated engine provides is inconsequential compared to the advantage a fully-functional AESA provides.

If those are minor advantages then why is Boeing trying to develop these capabilities without a single customer having committed to it or having funded it? Reducing supersonic acceleration time by around 50% (as Boeing claims) is quite a big deal for a fighter whose slow supersonic acceleration has been a bugbear. Besides, it was part of the MRCA offer, so in this case, without that capability being developed, the SHornet wouldn't have met its required specifications. Basically meaning it wasn't going to be ready as you claim it would have, by 2015.

All the difference in the world.

1. Everything about how the MRCA was put together and run says you do NOT have an urgent need. You can holler all you want, the IAF disagrees and is apparently content to take it's sweet time.

End of discussion.

But I'll continue anyways.

What the MoD or the GoI does, does not necessarily reflect the IAF's viewpoint. the IAF has needed MRCA fighters for a while now. Without them, it has had to go with additional MKI purchases and still sees dwindling squadron numbers. To say that the IAF is taking its own sweet time is bullshit to be polite. They've done their evaluations on time and have had to be very careful to not do something that would allow a vendor to raise objections that could derail it any further.

2. The USN isn't investing anywhere near as much in 4th gen as India is. The planes are cheap ($55 million flyaway) and it's topping up an existing fleet so all the support infrastructure (training, maintenance, logistics) is already in place

So that's your answer? that the USN isn't investing as much into the SHornet as India is on the MRCA?

why invest on the SHornet at all if the F-35C is so far superior to a 4th gen fighter? Obviously the cost of supporting a 4th gen fighter for another 30 years is no small amount, even if the flyaway costs are only $55 million..and if it is going to be hopelessly outclassed since its not designed with stealth in mind, then it will only be a liability in another 15 years won't it? Or will it?

India has other goals as well as the numbers gap to fill- it wants technology and the MoD views the MRCA as the perfect opportunity to get large aerospace companies to pump in money and transfer tech to develop the Indian industry as well. That alone means 50% money ploughed back into India itself. That ain't going to happen with the F-35 now will it? Maybe some parts here or there, some tech transfer, but why would the partner nations sit around watching when they get so less and a non-partner nation gets more?

Overall they're spending less than a third what the IAF is for the same number of aircraft.

The USN has an urgent need and is making a 'minimal' investment. The IAF doesn't have an urgent need and is making a massive investment. Do you see the difference?

You're trolling now, maybe because the IAF rejected the fighter that the USN basically uses as its primary fighter right now? Maybe it touched a raw nerve, huh ? frankly, the USN's need isn't one bit more urgent than that of the IAF. It was lucky it didn't need to have to run hoops around a byzantine bureaucracy or have a multi-national competition and instead plumped for whatever it already had instead.

Less than a third spent is it? Did you account for the costs sunk into the existing SHornet infrastructure? How about looking at the RAAF SHornet purchase and comparing those numbers to what we're looking at for the MRCA? Want to give that a shot?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Nov 2011 10:28

^^ aussies will buy 72 if not more. israel, which is getting about 100 at discount prices because the deal will be paid for by US is getting it at 95 mil.
canada is buying 65 at 127 mil per piece and agrees that price is unlikely to come down. also, I don't see why the cost advantage would not apply to these purchases, after all is that not the argument of JSF fanboys ? even US will most likely slash JSF numbers.

Citing a Pentagon document, Reuters reported Thursday that the military has reduced its order for the Lockheed jet from 449 aircraft to 325 F-35s through fiscal year 2016, and "cost-cutting efforts were still needed." The order reduction could save the government more than $10 billion, Reuters reported, and nearly half of that money would head right back into the program's development to offset cost overruns. Airframes (without engines) are currently priced in the ballpark of $130 million.

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/pe ... 914-1.html

The DOD was planning to buy 14 F-35B STOVLs in fiscal 2012, which begins Oct. 1, and 25 the following year. Instead, six of the aircraft will be bought next year and another six will be purchased in fiscal 2013.

Over the next five years, the Marines will receive 50 F-35s. That’s 60 less than originally planned.

The number of Navy F-35Cs and the Air Force F-35A Conventional Takeoff and Landing jets also have been reduced, although not as severely.

The Navy total was reduced by seven jets over the next five years. Most of the cuts will be in fiscal 2016.

The number of Air Force jets was decreased by 57 over the next five years. Nineteen jets are slated for delivery next year.

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/impact ... rines.html

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Nov 2011 10:36

let's not forget the F-22 numbers went from 750 to 187.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 06 Nov 2011 10:37

Katare wrote:Philip,
I do not think any sabotage is being attempted you are always suspecious of US and fear it way more than desired. JSF is not in trouble it is marching ahead way better than most other aircraft programs in the past. It'll achieve costs and capability balance that will be unmatched by any other aircraft just because of the input/support available to it.

This is third 5th gen stealthy aircraft that US is making so they have most experience, money and order book.

If you think JSF will be avilable in 2020 than I would say Pak-Fa will be available in 2030 and AMCA in 2050.

The theatre of the absurd.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Nov 2011 11:15

I don't think it is worth for unkill to proceed with 750 of the raptors. utter waste for that ransom.

there are better designs now. boeings ucavs are on the right dot that does mission profile specific warfare with a payload of 4500lbs. that is awesome considering a fly-by-mouse interface from the base.

now tell, which is more needed for us. for chips, i think ucavs are the best bet.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 06 Nov 2011 12:15

Philip wrote:Leave aside the RN abandoning the STOVL version

For the carrier version . . .

Philip wrote:Moreover,when even Britain will not get full JSF capable fighters,a second-class version for America's closest ally

Please, stop making stuff up.

Philip wrote: The attempts to try and sell us the JSF is to saboatge the MMRCA deal which has reached the tape and also put a spoke into the wheel of the already signed off the blocks FGFA JV with Russia

So the F-35 is an attempt to sabotage BOTH the MRCA and the FGFA?

F-35 has nothing to do with FGFA.

Philip wrote:Two years down the line the first of our 250 FGFAs will arrive (in Russian service planned from 2015)

No one believes 2015 (2017 for India) is remotely realistic.

Add 10 years and you'll be closer to the truth.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 06 Nov 2011 12:56

Kartik wrote:They were relevant- the F/A-18E-F offered to the IAF wouldn't have been full spec when delivered initially either.

What you keep missing is that the 'non-full-spec' version (ie what's available NOW) is fully capable. The additional goodies are nice but not necessary. On the other hand the EF is missing core capabilities.

Kartik wrote:Assuming that the SHornet had won and the deal was signed in early 2012, the 36 months for first delivery meant that the IAF wouldn't get its first SHornet Block II till 2015 either.

There's no reason for it to take 36 months if India wanted it sooner.

Kartik wrote:The Typhoon Tranche 3 variant is certainly battle ready as of today

Which is why it needed buddies to drop bombs and wasn't involved in SEAD in Libya . . .

Kartik wrote:and will be a far better position by 2015 as well. Within the first batch itself the Captor-E is likely to enter production and while I agree that it won't be a mature radar, that alone doesn't mean that the SHornet was a better option.

Again the point I'm making is that the IAF is willing to wait. This process started over 10 years ago and first deliveries aren't expected for another 4 years at least.

If they're willing to wait for the EF to mature, why not the F-35?

Kartik wrote:
The minor advantage an uprated engine provides is inconsequential compared to the advantage a fully-functional AESA provides.
If those are minor advantages then why is Boeing trying to develop these capabilities without a single customer having committed to it or having funded it?

1. Even minor advantages are advantages
2. They aren't developing it. They are proposing it as an option to get someone else to fund it.

A better question for you: If it was such a big advantage, why has the USN shown ZERO interest in it?

On the other hand the USN is developing the EDE variant which has reduced maintenance and better fuel economy, stuff that actually matters.

Kartik wrote:Reducing supersonic acceleration time by around 50% (as Boeing claims) is quite a big deal for a fighter whose slow supersonic acceleration has been a bugbear.

Only in the mind of the masses who get enamored by kinetics and ignore the reality of air combat.

Subsonic Harriers shot down Mach-2 Mirages and Daggers. Somehow they managed this feat with NO supersonic acceleration. Amazing isn't it?

Kartik wrote:Besides, it was part of the MRCA offer, so in this case, without that capability being developed, the SHornet wouldn't have met its required specifications. Basically meaning it wasn't going to be ready as you claim it would have, by 2015.

It may not have met certain artificial specifications any earlier, but it would have been ready for REAL combat far earlier.

Kartik wrote:
2. The USN isn't investing anywhere near as much in 4th gen as India is. The planes are cheap ($55 million flyaway) and it's topping up an existing fleet so all the support infrastructure (training, maintenance, logistics) is already in place
So that's your answer? that the USN isn't investing as much into the SHornet as India is on the MRCA?

why invest on the SHornet at all if the F-35C is so far superior to a 4th gen fighter? Obviously the cost of supporting a 4th gen fighter for another 30 years is no small amount, even if the flyaway costs are only $55 million..and if it is going to be hopelessly outclassed since its not designed with stealth in mind, then it will only be a liability in another 15 years won't it? Or will it?

Because a carrier without planes is pointless. However, if a carrier has to go into a high-risk situation, you can bet that it will be carrying as many F-35s as possible.

Kartik wrote:India has other goals as well as the numbers gap to fill- it wants technology and the MoD views the MRCA as the perfect opportunity to get large aerospace companies to pump in money and transfer tech to develop the Indian industry as well.

So again it seems that filling numbers isn't the first priority.

Kartik wrote:That ain't going to happen with the F-35 now will it? Maybe some parts here or there, some tech transfer, but why would the partner nations sit around watching when they get so less and a non-partner nation gets more?

If India ordered 126+, they would be a full partner.

Kartik wrote:You're trolling now

Just pointing out the cold, hard facts. The IAF is blowing a ton of money on a fighter that will soon be obsolete.

Kartik wrote:maybe because the IAF rejected the fighter that the USN basically uses as its primary fighter right now? Maybe it touched a raw nerve, huh ?

*shrug* The USN is already moving on to the F-35C. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if the USN was flying the F-35C before the IAF was flying the MRCA.

Kartik wrote:frankly, the USN's need isn't one bit more urgent than that of the IAF

You have GOT to be joking.

The MRCA is going to be a 15 year process to add 126+ jets. When it became clear the F-35 was going to be delayed, the US acted quickly and ordered another 124 SHs. THAT sort of swift and decisive action is what happens when there's actually an urgent need. A 15-year process for an 'urgent' need indeed . . .

Kartik wrote:It was lucky it didn't need to have to run hoops around a byzantine bureaucracy or have a multi-national competition and instead plumped for whatever it already had instead.

If the IAF need was desperate, they could have done the same. France offered the Mirage line. Russia would have been happy to sell MiGs.

The FACT is that if India was in any sort of rush, cheaper, more quickly available 'number-fillers' were available.

Kartik wrote:Less than a third spent is it? Did you account for the costs sunk into the existing SHornet infrastructure?

Of course not. That's the point. The USN need was desperate so they did the quick and expedient thing.

The IAF had several opportunities to make a quick and expedient purchase and repeatedly passed over them.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 06 Nov 2011 13:06

India opens bids for combat planes
LiveMint

one of the negatives that could possibly go against the consortium is that it sources parts, components or sub-systems from more than 100 countries. And a delay by any one or more could affect the supply of critical spares that could lead to the fleet getting grounded.

Analysts say India will be making its choice based on the best available technology, and commercial and offset proposals by the vendors.

“Both are European-manufactured, so there is no question of strategic implications (that) there would have been if the competition was between Russian and US companies,” said Deba Mohanty, an analyst with Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation. “I think the most important consideration will not be political or strategic in that sense. It will be based solely on the satisfaction of the end-user—the Indian Air Force.”

Former foreign secretary Lalit Mansingh concurred. “I think the only message that is being sent out is that India has reached a stage where it can buy the best technology. India can choose quality and not go in for bargains. There is also the transfer of technology. I think India will choose the best technology and the vendor who allows for substantial manufacture of the aircraft in India under the transfer of technology clauses,” he said.

Former IAF chief Fali H. Major said the very fact that the two are shortlisted means they are both good machines and now it is only a question of costs. “As far the Indian Air Force is concerned, it does not really matter,” he said. “In my reckoning, it (choosing the winner) should happen in the next one or two months.”

Major said he does not agree that the MMRCA purchase should be scrapped for the fifth-generation joint strike fighter F-35, offered by the US to India this week.“I don’t subscribe to that,” he said, adding that this could be the view of some “vested interests”. “Because there is an FGFA (fifth-generation fighter aircraft) programme with Russia, we already have the agreement and you cannot compare the two (fighter jets),” Major said.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Nov 2011 13:20

^^ aha, thank you !

The MRCA is going to be a 15 year process to add 126+ jets. When it became clear the F-35 was going to be delayed, the US acted quickly and ordered another 124 SHs. THAT sort of swift and decisive action is what happens when there's actually an urgent need. A 15-year process for an 'urgent' need indeed . . .

what's the saying about a little knowledge ?

let's see, additional 82 MKI's, 37 jaguars, deep upgrades for jaguars (2 phases in fact) and mig-27, full scale upgrades for mirage-2000 and mig-29.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 06 Nov 2011 13:36

Rahul M wrote:let's see, additional 82 MKI's, 37 jaguars, deep upgrades for jaguars (2 phases in fact) and mig-27, full scale upgrades for mirage-2000 and mig-29.

The only legitimate one you list is the extra MKI's, and is precisely the thing they would have done more of if there truly was an urgent need.

The others are just regular upgrades.

If you want to see what desperation truly looks like, look into the Hornet 10,000 hour upgrade.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Nov 2011 13:43

I see, so 37 new built jaguars are just regular updates ? so is the 124 SH buy by that impeccable logic.

clearly you have zero idea about the level of the upgrades to call them regular updates.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 06 Nov 2011 14:07

Has India selected Rafale?? Orbat.com seems to hint so.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 06 Nov 2011 14:19

GeorgeWelch wrote:<SNIP>The only legitimate one you list is the extra MKI's, and is precisely the thing they would have done more of if there truly was an urgent need.

The others are just regular upgrades.

If you want to see what desperation truly looks like, look into the Hornet 10,000 hour upgrade.

A sincere piece of advise - please give examples which are contextual to the scenario at hand. This is IAF we are taking about and not USAF/USN. So, your example of 10K hours upgrade on SH is a non-starter.

The Government of India sat on purchase of MMRCA and not IAF - hence, IAF did not wait - but was forced to wait and make do with whatever it could. Not an ideal situation but that is how situation is in India when it comes to higher defence management. A small data point - all that IAF wanted initially was 7 Squadron worth of Mirage-2005 but the time delyas meant that the requirement has matured into types like Typhoon/Rafale. Guess what, IIRC, we even tried to to buy ex-UAE M2K-5 but I think the deal fell of because of money factor.

So, others are not just regular upgrade - but an effort to keep the current fleet as viable and modern as possible - keeping in mind the 'hoped' for induction schedule(s) of newer aircrafts. Any further delay in the induction schedule will have consequences which the nation and IAF can hardly afford - but the way things move in this country, some are inevitable. So, you may again see some OTS purchases and "regular" upgrades which ideally should not have been there - the UAE M2K-5 may still end up with IAF, you never know. So, lets keep this canard of IAF willing to wait.

Will · Post by **Will** » 06 Nov 2011 14:28

Has anyone made any promises of mithai equal to the weight of a Rafale if the Rafale is selected a la Admiral Koshy and the Akula ?