India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

[Pratyush]

No not on this forum

[Singha]

couple interesting videos of rafale & m2k in afghanistan here http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

[Christopher Sidor]

@ Christopher Sidor
The time line for the Rafale is 6 to 12 months from now
for F3+ standard WITH AESA. Once again those are being produced as we write.
And yes, the F-35 should be ahead of the Rafale if only
for the superior stealth. The Typhoon may very well be
up to par as Rafale by 2016(read -18) but it should not be as versatile.

So within a period of say 2-3 years a fighter with a better capability, compared to the two short-listed MMRCA contenders, will be available. That is assuming that we get the winner of the tender in the second half of 2012. And still we should go for a 4th generation fighter?

The moot comes from two things the first being the fact that F-35 won't face
Chinese air defenses for quite a while yet.

Then that the Rafale has demonstrated its SEAD abilities already.

Yes since F-35 will come later it is given. But it does not mean that the two MMRCA contenders will be better at meeting the challenge. In fact F-35 will be better on this score. Compare the Chinese air-defense systems with what Gaddafi had. It is like comparing oranges and apples. If we couple SU-30MKI, flying in an air-dominance role, with F-35 then we can overcome anything that the chinese can bring up in the next decade. The same cannot be said for the two remaining fighters in the fray for MMRCA.

About the source code issue, UK is essentially a poodle as far as US-UK relationship is concerned. UK needs US more than the reverse. India and US are not on the same level.

The very facts that BAe is a major contributor to the Lightning II and that
the codes denial brought even rumors of Rafale for the Royal Navy suffice
to show a) how little the USA can be trusted and b) that the poddle has
bared some teeth and may yet take a nip at that star-spangled hand.

The poddle will never bare some teeth not against its master. UK has curtailed its participation in F-35 program, especially the F-35B program, only due to one factor - money. We have the money, UK does not.

What would the MMRCA winner be sharing with us, 4th Generation or 5th Generation capabilities?

Two remarks :
Primo, 4th gen vs 5th gen is advertising talk, those definitions being loose at best.
Secundo, 50% plus of 4th gen beats 5% of 5th gen tech transfer.
Tertio, the sharing can begin now?

Assuming that this is the truth, then what should we do with 50% of tech transfer of 4th generation fighter? Design another 4th generation fighter. Or make a 4th generation fighter with stealth capabilties? Let us be very clear on what is on offer w.r.t 4th generation fighter, it is yesterdays technology. What we require is access to 5th gen. And not only that, we need to target 5th generation fighters from now onwards. Targetting the acquisition of 4th gen planes makes no sense.
And why would we only get 5% of the tech transfer? Has the americans said or indicated anything on similar lines? And even if they did, India would have no issue in rejecting the offer then and then. But over here, we have not asked, the yanks have not said no nor have they said what they would not offer, but we are going and building castles in the air, with this 5% ToT talk. And based on what, on the status of UK-USA relationship.

[SaiK]

all these discussions of jsf and upgrades etc. resembles choosing the next generation intel iX processors (sensor package), while ignoring memory speed(weapons package), i/o speed of hdd (engine), and the network speed (awacs integration).

[Taygibay]

@ Christopher Sidor

So within a period of say 2-3 years a fighter with a better capability, compared to the two short-listed MMRCA contenders, will be available. That is assuming that we get the winner of the tender in the second half of 2012. And still we should go for a 4th generation fighter?

As already explained, generation classification is misleading.
As already explained, the F-35 should be ahead on stealth
and only so with internal weapons.
Most important ToT will be high with MMRCA and close to null with F-35.
Accessorily the AMCA would suffer from an F-35 buy; it won't from MMRCA.
( Would even gain from derived cooperation with MMRCA winner. )

we can overcome anything that the chinese can bring up in the next decade. The same cannot be said for the two remaining fighters in the fray for MMRCA.

Totally unproven assumption. The difference between Libyan air defences and Chinese
one will be accounted for by development of the existing systems* on the MMRCA
contenders. There are no valid reasons to suppose that existing PLAAF aircrafts have
technology on par with those.
* Already feasible with SPECTRA. Please note the use of existing above.

The poddle will never bare some teeth not against its master. UK has curtailed its participation in F-35 program, especially the F-35B program, only due to one factor - money. We have the money, UK does not.

I suggest that you take into account the timeline of events concerning the U.K.'s
reactions to the source code controversy. First came the announcement that full source
codes sharing would not happen, then the annoucement that the F-136 was unecessary
and should not be financed. Then the UK steered to a renewed cooperation with France *2
on military matters more specifically drones and missiles which as we know are vaguely
related to fighters. Then the change from a dual order of F-35 B/C to a C only formula.
That change in turn was accompanied by the expectative transformation of British carrier
to CATOBAR set-up and the previously unimaginable perspective of Rafale for RN.
While this does not diminish the interoperability between the UK and the US, it does shift
it from UK expeditionary/USMC format to UK expeditionary/USN format and thus opens it
to the UK's RN/Marine Nationale one.
All that shows a certain amount of estrangement that would have not have been credible
before the source codes controversy between the UK and USA.
As for your call on money, while it is true that India has more overall means, if you love
your country, please do not rely on that alone. Money can get you sex from a prostitute ...
it does not buy her love for you.

Assuming that this is the truth, then what should we do with 50% of tech transfer of 4th generation fighter? Design another 4th generation fighter. Or make a 4th generation fighter with stealth capabilties? Let us be very clear on what is on offer w.r.t 4th generation fighter, it is yesterdays technology. What we require is access to 5th gen. And not only that, we need to target 5th generation fighters from now onwards. Targetting the acquisition of 4th gen planes makes no sense.
And why would we only get 5% of the tech transfer? Has the americans said or indicated anything on similar lines?

What would you do with 50% of 4th gen tech?
OK, let me be blunt then!
At present, as evident in the LCA case, India struggles to produce and use
3.5 to 4 th gen on its own.
The amount of knowledge for successful development of such weapons as
modern fighter planes is staggering and clearly underestimated by many
people in this forum. The copycat efforts of China may lure you to believe
it is simple but until their products have effectively demonstrated actual
factual efficiency over the available ones from the "West", it should be
considered as pixie dust or hot air at best. *3

I state to you, Christopher, that : It is much better for India in all respects
to acquire full mastery of "4th gen" and to then apply it to a cooperative
effort on the AMCA project so that it then becomes autonomous for good,
than it is to expect that just acquiring a stealthy plane will turn HAL et al.
into a Boeing/LM type plane maker.
In other words : One learns to walk before one learns to run.
( Unless, of course, one is intent on learning to fall. )
An analogy would be that if your maximum bench press ability is 50 kgs,
a gym with 200kgs fixed barbells will do NOTHING to gain in strenght
while a gym with 50 to 100 kgs assortment of fixed barbells will allow it.

Finally,

And based on what, on the status of UK-USA relationship.

;
if your take on life is that when a accointance of yours treats their friends
with disregard and lies, it means nothing as far as how they will treat you, *4
chances are you value yourself too much and bigger chances are you will
get ........... huh, say mistreated to stay polite.

I am on Bharat Rakshak and would not be for the sole sake of pushing the Raffy.
I consider the interest of India through the arms deal that is MMRCA.
I contend that it should get as much as it needs/can from it, be it by choosing the
EF if that is to its advantage.
I have no reason to believe that India will be served as well by going for the F-35,
which still is not the subject of this thread BTW.

I would respectfully suggest that you open a new thread dedicated to it.
I promise to come by regularly and defend the AMCA against your F-35.


Sincerely, Tay.

*2 A cooperation that brought us the Gazelle, Lynx, Jaguar and Concorde.

*3 A J-10b is a ******** child between the F-16, the Eurofighter and Russian
motors and equipment derivatives and although its doubtful lineage may
well hide self-worth, I'll only trust that after a) the PLAAF's procurement of
it shows some serious AND b) it has been pitted at known warplanes.

*4 BRIC, out of which Russia and China are clear cut opposites to America,
has not been a great priority fon the USA's friendship agenda.
Ask the fourth member, Brazil, for their opinion!


P.S. @ SaiK, very true; I know people who are computer illiterates that just
cannot do without the latest machine even though they never use more
than 25-30% of it which is more or less the way they use their brains.

[member_20029]

Defeating air-defense systems is not the moot point. It is in fact the main point. If you have info on how F-35 would be less capable than any of MMRCA contenders in handling chinese air-defenses please share it with us. We can then come to some conclusion.
And can you please elaborate why is it a moot point?

I'm pretty sure that he's trying to say that the F-35 is not on par with Chin fighters *RIGHT NOW*.
There's a grand total of 13 F-35 built as of now, and the MMRCA deliveries would commence in around 2013-ish.

I maintain that a US-spec F-35 Lightning II would be more than a match for it's Chin counterparts, but since a F-35 with fully-combat integrated systems is yet to be built and tested, I doubt it's applicable for the MMRCA timeframe.


2nd point: For you people who are counting air assets:
in this modern world, the number of aircraft doesn't matter as much as the quality and capability.
In a fight, a single F-22 would be more than a match for 7 Fishbeds.

plus, notice that the "25 plane difference" is due to a massive discrepancy in the Multirole section. 10 Air Superiority Fighters are useless when they can't do the job of 3 Multirole or Ground Attack fighters. And Remember this: the IAF isn't the PLAAF.
we can't just throw Flanker-clones at targets until they explode, we need to manage our combat inventories.

[ramana]

Rafale?

[Katare]

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 ?

Rahul Ji,
You must argue on merit not by threats of trolling or calling others uninformed. Please educate yourself and open your mind instead of asking others to read etc unless u beleive u r an authority on these matters? I do not wite anything unless I mean it so this troll business should not arise.

Also, I hve clearly indicated that I do not believe that MRCA should be canceled or delayed. Although the compulsive political anti-americanism being justified based on logic and short comings of JSF is absured.

As far the trolling remark of yours...
The realistic timeline for FGFA is 2025 to 2030, no matter what you wish or HAL/Su tells u, unless its another copy of 4th gen flanker. We saw how long it took to even make an upgraded MKI, Eurofighter, LCA and even JSF, no reason to believe that Russians would have better success than Americans with lesses experience, money, customer base and technology base.

Sure there are lots of issues, shrinkage and shortcomings in JSF program but all those apply to rest of the worls's fighter programs at more sever sclale. There is no other program that is going to be bigger, better, longer, more supported and most assured than JSF. Althoug it'll suffer through and fall short of original performance and cost parameters as did almost all previous gen aircrafts all over the world in the past. But in the end it'll be worth its weight in gold for fighting battles and having access to weapons that come with it

[Rahul M]

oh I am arguing on merits alright, just that I saw none (or very little) in your post. it was all a jsf rah rah god bless america type post. I mean you are not even aware of the very basic info that any damn enthusiast would know. what exactly is the value of your post other than running down other projects and peddling JSF ?

and AMCA in 2050 ? what is that but blatant trolling ?

[arunsrinivasan]

Katare ji, my 2 cents. - not everyone who opposes F-35 does it from compulsive anti-americanism. Many people here support better relations with America but find the arguments supporting F-35 faulty thanks to marketing hype / plain ignorance. I for one am yet to be convinced that F-35 is a good option for us - at the moment the project suffers from significant cost overruns, technical problems etc etc. Till we fully understand the costs & its technical capabilities, which itself might take at least a few years - so dont see how it could be a viable option for India in the near future. Even if we are keen on the F-35 we should wait for a couple of years before we consider it seriously & the MMRCA cant wait till then. It is quite obvious that the F-35 marketing push by Ajai Shukla, Pentagon reports etc is aimed at derailing the MMRCA decision.

The other common argument is the J-20 dhoti shiver - completely forgetting that FGFA will take care of J-20, so there is no real need for the F-35 to counter it. Also as many guru's have argued, stealth is not necessarily the answer to stealth - there are other ways to take care of J-20. I think we should give F-35 a rest for now & revisit it we have more clarity on how the development / costs are panning out.

[Viv S]

<Rant Alert!>

Grrr... what the heck is wrong with this thread!!!

Here I turn on my PC after a couple of days (busy month and all) and what do you know... the initial result of the MRCA bidding has started trickling in. Naturally I scout around the web... try to see which way the wind is blowing.

For last couple of years the domestic media has consistently trundled out a price quote of $85 million for the Rafale and $125 million for the Eurofighter. Folks from Dassault have been heard to claim that it costs 60% less than the EF. All manner of figures have been trotted out but the general consensus is that the Rafale is significantly cheaper.

So imagine my surprise, when I discovered -

A person with direct knowledge of the matter said that Dassault was “marginally lower” on the unit cost.

Livemint

The cost difference between the two companies is ‘marginal’ when seen in the context of the overall cost of the tender that is more than Rs 42,000 crore. Also, on broad parameters like per unit cost, engine costs, maintenance costs and operating costs, there isn’t much difference between the two.

The Tribune

While the French Rafale came out to be slightly cheaper than the European Consortium’s Eurofighter in terms of ‘fly away cost’ per unit, as expected, the difference was less than 5 per cent. This throws the competition open.

Indian Express

FWAFAWRFWHAT!!??!!

Naturally I ask myself, are the news report accurate, after all the Rafale was once reported to have been ejected from the competition. Maybe the methodologies used by both companies weren't completely in sync with the MoD's guidelines, after all that's how Eurojet lost the Tejas engine race to GE (by the time they resubmitted the bid, the contract had been awarded). Maybe there's some blatantly obvious difference in the quotes (inclusion of VAT for example) that the our so called DDM hasn't picked up on. Anyway, it still big news. Still worth discussion. Have offsets or domestic manufacture played a part? Is it the 7% partner discount India is eligible for, as a prospective consortium partner?

I immediately hotfoot it over to BRF to dive into the 'Typhoon & Rafale' thread. We've spent page after long page debating ToT, offset proposals, private sector tie-ups and above all... L1. Late to the party, I wonder how much I've missed. Arriving here, I receive my second big surprise of the day - everyone seems to have been talking about the frikkin' F-35 instead<sob><whine>.


:Sigh:

<Rant subsides/>

Ah well... if you can't beat them, join them.


We're not going to order the F-35 because -


1. We wouldn't get it by 2014-15. Or 2016. Or 2017.

The Air Force, in its statement, says it expects a two-year delay in the F-35A's IOC, which would push it back to 2018.

Aviation Week

“Officials underestimated the time and effort needed to develop and integrate the software, substantially contributing to the program’s overall cost and schedule problems, testing delays and requiring the retention of engineers for longer periods,” it said.
The total system-development cost since 2001, when Lockheed Martin won the program from Chicago-based Boeing, has risen to $56.4 billion from $34.4 billion and has extended to 2018, a five-year slip from the current schedule that was revised in 2007.

Bloomberg

While activity at Eglin is already beginning this year, operationally capable units are not expected to stand up before 2018. This milestone has been delayed several years from the original scheduled set after the original contract award ten years ago, as costly redesigns have slowed flight testing from the early stages, causing major delays, the latest was announced in February 2011.

Defense Update

A very relevant article -

“Another complication concerns the acceptance of early production aircraft.
“Here, experience with the F-111C program could be relevant.
“The first Australian F-111C aircraft were to be delivered in 1968.
“Even though development and production slipped because of technical issues, Australia adhered to the delivery date rather than the production slot.
“As a result, in 1968 Australia took notional delivery of underdeveloped aircraft with technical difficulties.
“Consequently, there was a five-year delay in delivery while some of the technical problems were remediated.“Several modification programs and almost 10 years later, the RAAF eventually operated an excellent bomber,” the statement outlined.
“This experience suggests that there could be very good reasons for Australia to delay delivery of the F-35 until the production line is mature.

Australian Defence Magazine

Lets say we delay the purchase for a few years - not a bad compromise, waiting a few more years for an evidently superior aircraft. I will bet my entire (admittedly meagre) fortune that in 2018-2019, folks will be saying - lets just wait a few more years and go straight for the PAK-FA.


2. Lets also forget about Indian industry involvement and real ToT of core components. Maybe some airframe construction and assembly, but nothing deep.

US Guards JSF Crown Jewels

The Pentagon, after years and years of deliberation and heavy pressure from Britain, has finally decided it will not share the all-important computer source code for the Joint Strike Fighter.

‘Code crisis’ overshadows Turkey’s planned purchase of F-35 jets

A “code crisis” has erupted in Ankara that could threaten Turkey’s participation in a US-led project to produce F-35 fighter jets, further complicated by the presentation of a bill to Turkey for an additional $4 billion to offset the growing costs of the project.The Turkish side in this $16 billion project has repeatedly knocked on America’s door to ask for the flight codes for the fighter jets into which so much money has been invested. However, the Pentagon has rejected these demands on the part of Turkey

America’s refusal to turn over the codes belonging to the jets and to share the software technology used in their production is making Turkey nervous.

Though Ankara plans at this point to purchase around 100 of these fighter jets, there is the awareness in the Turkish capital that without the codes in question, possession of the jet planes will only be partial. There are assertions at hand that the F-35s will be controllable from outside sources, that they may be defenseless against electronic warfare and that no changes will be able to be made to their software.

How well the F-35 will fit within the AFNET is anyone's guess.


____________



That said the F-35 is an excellent choice for the Navy's IAC-2. Given the relatively small complement - procurement cost, interoperability within the fleet and logistics are not as critical issues as they are to the IAF's requirements.

[Taygibay]

LOL Viv_S, rant understood, buddy!

So tracking back to the price difference,
my guess would be that Eurofighter Gmbh
has learned from past tenders and decided
that, in view of its founding partners' slow
but continuous attempts at orders reduction,
selling barely over cost is better than not
selling at all and went low-low-low in its
offer, even if the plane itself can't?

Alternatively, waiting for the offers to be
made public shall provide the answer.

Ah, waiting! Maybe the MMRCA is a plot
by India to teach the rest of the world to
just relax, keep cool, give time a chance.

Good afternoon all, Tay.

[SaiK]

we all know about this thread.. this ain't the end., just a start. wait for the winner announcements. . you will know it when rak bhai flashes his favorite bolly heroine image here.

again if it is rafale, we should seriously cancel the m2k upgrade and focus on rafale squadrons.

[Pogula]

It is amusing to see people pitching the F-35 for IAF while:

1. The IOC is slated for 2018, and FOC slated for around 2022 or later.
2. Unit cost, as of 2011, is estimated between $110 Million and $150 Million (push it to $200 Million by FOC).
3. It can carry only a tonne of payload internally (Compromising stealth with regular payloads of over a tonne).
4. It uses the same stealth coating as the F-22, which is notorious for its failure rate in tropical conditions!!!
5. None of the participating countries in the JSF program have been offered the source code.
6. IIRC, a Paki pilot mentioned in a news article that their F-16s were bugged and had remote kill switches (Sure IAF won't get bugged/compromised jets from the US?)

[Victor]

It is amusing to see people pitching the F-35 for IAF while:
6. IIRC, a Paki pilot mentioned in a news article that their F-16s were bugged and had remote kill switches (Sure IAF won't get bugged/compromised jets from the US?)

If I were a paki, I'd do everything to make sure India doesn't get any American fighters, certainly not the latest. what is really amusing is how impotent many of us here think India is when dealing with the Americans. Our history has shown that we have knocked their nuts for a 6 every time they have tried hanky panky.

[Katare]

oh I am arguing on merits alright, just that I saw none (or very little) in your post. it was all a jsf rah rah god bless america type post. I mean you are not even aware of the very basic info that any damn enthusiast would know. what exactly is the value of your post other than running down other projects and peddling JSF ?

and AMCA in 2050 ? what is that but blatant trolling ?

There is lots of substance in your last 2 posts addressed to me? Looks like utter trolling to me?

2050 is a realistic time line based on the past experience world over. Even F35 has origins going as far as mid 1980s, 1997 program was sanctioned, 2000 saw first flight and IOC is still uncertain at the end of 2011 so we are talkin 35-40 years for JSF made by countries with most advance technology base and deepest pockets.

AMCA might become a possibilitiy sooner if JSF is bought with some kind of deal that allows its engine to be used in Indian aircraft as next generation Kaveri -- "Narmada"

Flanker purchase in early 90s helped China bring out JF17, J10s and J11, it didn't impede domestic developments. JSF can most certainly help India in many ways.

[Katare]

Katare ji, my 2 cents. - not everyone who opposes F-35 does it from compulsive anti-americanism. Many people here support better relations with America but find the arguments supporting F-35 faulty thanks to marketing hype / plain ignorance. I for one am yet to be convinced that F-35 is a good option for us - at the moment the project suffers from significant cost overruns, technical problems etc etc. Till we fully understand the costs & its technical capabilities, which itself might take at least a few years - so dont see how it could be a viable option for India in the near future. Even if we are keen on the F-35 we should wait for a couple of years before we consider it seriously & the MMRCA cant wait till then. It is quite obvious that the F-35 marketing push by Ajai Shukla, Pentagon reports etc is aimed at derailing the MMRCA decision.

The other common argument is the J-20 dhoti shiver - completely forgetting that FGFA will take care of J-20, so there is no real need for the F-35 to counter it. Also as many guru's have argued, stealth is not necessarily the answer to stealth - there are other ways to take care of J-20. I think we should give F-35 a rest for now & revisit it we have more clarity on how the development / costs are panning out.

Anup,

I have no disagreement (except noted below) with any of your arguments above, not sure what gave you an idea that you need to explain that.

Ajai Shukla is not marketing JSF neither has any one proven that he is on anyone's payroll. I do not agree with his JSF proposal either but my argument is not that he is on LM's payroll or getting lifafa or what is his credntials and what not. I argue that he has an argument that has lots of merit in isolation but it is not practical or doable.

I have never said anything about J20 because to me its just another acronym coming out of china rumor mill.

Since people read what they want to argue against let me write it as bullets so as to make sure people would read what is being argued!

Is JSF running late? further delay possible? Performance shortfalls? Shrinking orders? Over budget? delayed IOC/FOC?

I beleive answer is yes to all of these questions.

Is it any worse than any other aircraft program in the past or future?
Answer is No!

How is JSF production deliveries going?
12 JSF delivered in 2011 so far, more to follow before the end of the year.

Should we cancel MRCA for JSF (Shukla's theory)
No

Is shukla getting a Lifafa or marketing for personal gains?
You should be ashemed of yourself.

Should we cancel FGFA or AMCA?
No

Would JSF affect AMCA or FGFA?
No

Would it help?
Yes

Can we afford all of the above?
Yes

Where does JSF fit in IAF/IN?
140 JSF bought instead of excercizing options of 67 additional MRCA and ICA2/3, deliveris starting 2020 or later

Is doing business with USA for important/leading assets dangerous?
Yes, but risks are diminishing. For buying F16 risk was too much but for JSF reward justifies risk

My take on realistic timeframe for -

LCA Mk1 (FOC) - 2015-16
LCA Mk2 (FOC) - 2020
AMCA (first flight) - 2025
AMCA (Project sanctioned full scale) -2027
AMCA (IOC) 2035
AMCA (FOC) 2040
AMCA ( 2 squadrons fully operational and combat worthy) 2045
IF ASQR changes, engine issues or RMA add few more years
JSF (FOC, combat ready all 3 versions) 2020
FGFA (FOC both version, 2 combat ready squadrons) 2030
J20 - All done
J25 - Ready as soon as needed by cyber army to keep morale up

[VishalJ]

Rafale Solo Display filmed at the Breitling Sion Airshow 16th September 2011 in HD http://vimeo.com/31329805
Checkout how relaxed Captain Michaël Brocard is throughout the display

[Katare]

Actually JSF is not the issue for me fkcu JSF its not that important anyhow. What gets my goat is - dishonesty justified by weired logics of showing product defects or justifying alternatives that does not exist or exist only on paper. Deals worth peanuts are toted as being done to same gigantic companies from bankruptcy, while deals actually done with Russia to save their companies are Kosher. Political beleives and witty skills are presented as great startegy gems. Alternate argument, however impractical, are being delt by leveling charges of lifafa or questioning credentials without showing any for themselves. If you lick Russian a$$ you are patriotic but even the thought kissing US lips makes you god knows what......

I guess it shows that all those much miligned babus and politicians have more sense than "ahead of the curve" BRF these days.....

Showing issues with JSF progrsm (that no one has denied) without any reference to other programs and claiming others are "rah-rah" and need to read or update there knowledge is a bit to cute.

[Thomas Kolarek]

Can US provide us ToT on Aero Engines and Cryogenics if we opt for F-35 ? If no, lets stop discussing F-35 here.
Don't ask me connections between F-35 and Aero Engines, as I would ask for connections between MMRCA and F-35.

[Nick_S]

Could people please take their JSF/ F-35 whines/desires to another thread?

This thread is for the Eurofighter and Rafale. The F35 is not happening, so stop whining about it.

[MarcH]

I don't see the point of F-35. The aircraft won't work without link 16 and military grade GPS. Note that the transports bought by India are not fitted with american coms.

Integrating Indian alternatives would require source codes. Codes are not even given to their pet, err closest ally UK.

[sohels]

That there is very little specificity in the news about the per unit cost of the two planes is alarming. As has been pointed out earlier, Dassault seems to have turned in a much higher than anticipated bid that only marginally undercuts the EF. Collusion/cartelization, if suspected, must be investigated. These are two very capable aircraft, but let us ask ourselves as to what is the absolute maximum that we ought to pay for them - $100 million each? $150 million each? Forking out 5th gen money for 4th gen capability makes little sense, especially when European supplier reliability in the long term is no longer assured. If it seems that there are no good options now, better hold off for some more time - a desperate buyer rarely makes a wise purchase. As the JSF matures, these two airplanes are likely to be made available at more competitive prices. If at that stage we are impressed with the JSF, we should get that. If not, we can still get one of these, at a better price. The threats we face, though substantial, are neither imminent nor existential.

[RamaY]

^ we are using 4th gen money to buy 4.5gen fighters (note that the MMRCA decision took nearly a decade from requirement to current point).

We will have enough money to spend on 5th gen toys (india just announced that they are planning to sell 4G spectrum)

[Philip]

Tx.Viv for posting the relevant quotes from US sources.When I mentioned them, I was "making them up"! The quotes clearly show that second and third class JSFs were planned for lesser nations and unlike with the FGFA,we will get the turd-class version! None so blind that those who will not read...anyway,the JSF is at this moment a turkey that will come home for thanksgiving only by 2018-2020! Before that we will have the MMRCA and FGFA both in service, as well hopefully with the LCA MK-2 and the Super Flankers.There is no room in the IAF's hangar therefore for the JSF which comes in at 24K prices.The US's desperation to rope in India with its JSF order book collapsing has to be countered and halted so that the decision on the MMRCA can go ahead.This is no time for the IAF to cow down to firang pressure,that too from a nation which secretly planned to attack us in '71 as recent revelations have shown!

Nevertheless,the two Eurocanards must show a realistic price as well.If as just mentioned,they adopt a cartel approach,then the cost of one E-bird at say $100m,which is the price for the FGFA,would be atrocious.We already have the huge glaring difference in the two upgrades for the Mirage-2000 vs the MIG-29 UG,$40/45m for MIG-29Ks for the IN and the same price reported for Gripens.If the costs are too prohibitive,then the IAF might very well look at the Gripen again and order more Flankers to keep the heavy end of the stick healthy.Just because we have selected the two aircraft on technical grounds,there is no reason to buy them at solid gold rates.I am positive though that the Europeans will indulge in some byzantine bargaining-they're so used to it as well as our beancounting babus.They wouldn't like lose this most lucrative of orders (to the Yanquis in particular) which will help bail them out in their time of extreme economic woe.

[Taygibay]

Guys? About the price?

For one. in an orders' cancellation run environment,
considering their being costlier on most past tenders,
Eurofighter might have come up with a record price,
very near cost.
It would make their position very strong.

For two, Dassault needs the contract for first export
but seems to have taken the offset choice? Take the
Brazilian FX-2 offer : local assembly, "full" ToT and
a sales license for South America.
It would make their position very strong.

Still a coin toss, I'm afraid.
We expected Dassault low on price and Eurofighter
strong on offsets, we may get the contrary!

Good night all, Tay.

[raj-ji]

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

The hint could be accurate. All the talk about the Rafale only being marginally cheaper is irrelevant as it still makes it L1. The GOI may not want to advertise an outright winner at this stage so that the British and Germans do not start thinking scandal (there have been enough real ones). By making it close, still makes it seem that they are in the race till all the details are ironed out and to leverage more out of the French.

The French are smart enough to understand that they don't have to give us unbelievable prices for the Rafale, just prices better than the British and Germans gave us for the Typhoon. This tactic can buy us more bargaining power at this critical stage of the competition. And we should leverage what we can from this.

The Typhoon is an impressive fighter but IMO the Rafale is the best fighter for the IAF.

Hate to throw more jet fuel in the fire but no to the F35 because:

- not an official entry to the MMRCA
- very expensive
- unproven
- we are already getting a stealth fighter from Russia
- in the future the US will just donate F35s to the Pukis anyways
- kill switches and EUMA
- uncertainty of US support during times of need

The US can take the opportunity now to build a better relationship with India, and in the future their chances will be greater for such competitions. A good relationship takes time, and the US is not there yet with India.

[Taygibay]

^^^Two thumbs up all the way.

[Eric Thompson]

Since the cost difference is marginal wouldn't it make more sense to acquire both of them (126+126) instead of going for 200 of the same type. Money seems to be no object. This deal has grown from initial estimates of $10 billion to now $20 Billion. God only knows what would be the final figure.

Pros:

=> Faster ramp up of the falling squadron strength
=> Contract with each would act as backup for the other should things go south
=> Offsets from both. Even if India could learn 20% from each of the 50% offsets, that is 40% of what is needed for LCA MK3 & AMCA
=> Avoids controversy regarding the calculation used to decide L1

Cons:

=> training and maintaining an additional type

PS: I think India should seriously pursue and procure limited quantity of F35s.

=> It acts a backup for FGFA. Note that India only paid for initial design phase. This keeps the pressure on Russia not to back out on sharing the knowledge & IP
=> Best way to know the strengths and weaknesses of the bird as it is bound to end up in Pak inventory.

[sohels]

All the talk about the Rafale only being marginally cheaper is irrelevant as it still makes it L1 ...The French are smart enough to understand that they don't have to give us unbelievable prices for the Rafale, just prices better than the British and Germans gave us for the Typhoon.

How are the French able to guess to within 5% as to what price the Typhoon will be? Being as keen as they are to bag the first export order, why make the competition so close as to enable a decision based on political considerations, as some recent news reports seem to indicate? The price we pay, including the way in which it is arrived at, is most certainly relevant to our decision. $100-150 million per copy for a 4th gen plane is very hard to swallow.

[sukhish]

I have been saying in this forum that EF will get the MMRCA order, however now I'm beginning to think weather french might be the front runner. politically french dont' align all the times with UK and Germany. also french will allow us ENR technologies despite the new NSG guidelines. So Gut feeling inside me has begun to change. boy this time india has been really independent, I mean this kind uncertainty at this later stage is awesome.

[Tumba]

it will be an idiotic decision if we buy Rafale, the reason is simple logic.

The french economy has come to an halt growing close to zero percent, this wont be giving them any extra funds to upgrade rafale in future until unless India shares bulk of the cost so If we buy rafale today at slightly lesser price we are going to pay more than Typhoon in the long run.

And in case of Typhoon well atleast there are bulk of European Union even if they grow annually at a rate of zero still they are much better bet than France alone and Saudis with Petro Dollors are always thr plus India will make it simply more attractive investment in the longer run.

And If Rafale is bought then India should be ready to cut the development cost from AMCA or some other future project and give this money to upgradation of Rafale which will be sky high.

So my Bet is on Typhoon and somehow if Rafale wins then all I can say is pretty stupid decision by pretty stupid people.

[Kartik]

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.

Fully capable in what way? It didn't meet the IAF's requirements ! Obviously the IAF didn't think that it was fully capable. And to make it meet the IAF's requirements, the capability enhancements were required. How is that different from what the Typhoon T3 or Rafale F3's situation is ? THe Typhoon dropped over a 100 PGM weapons over Libya..more that what our own Mirages did over Kargil- that obviously means that it is a multi-role fighter, as much as others like it say it still isn't. I agree that there are certain A2G capabilities where the F/A-18 E/F is ahead of the Typhoon, but the airframe itself has more potential and better performance than the F/A-18 E/F and far greater upgrade potential. The IAF has obviously factored that into its calculations.

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

Boeing is on record as having stated that the first deliveries would be made 36 months after the deal was signed. Unless they somehow figured out how to get long lead items for the IAF SHornets from some other batch, it wouldn't be possible for them to make them any earlier. But I do agree that Boeing has a remarkably good record of staying on schedule and on cost for the SHornet program. Yet, 36 months was the minimum.

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

Litening III LDP was integrated onto the Typhoon long ago. Just because it didn't lase its own targets over Libya doesn't mean it cannot do it.



Back in 2007 itself, the RAF developed the austere weapons capability for its Tranche 1 Typhoons and that time itself developed and demonstrated the Typhoon's a2g capabilities.

Typically, Typhoons would leave Nellis in dry power carrying four Enhanced Paveway IIs, a Litening III pod and two external fuel tanks, plus two Raytheon AMRAAM and two MBDA ASRAAM air-to-air missiles. The fighters would then transit to the exercise area at 40,000-50,000ft, delivering an unrefuelled mission endurance of between 1h 50min and 2h.
...
Representing the first squadron-level opportunity to demonstrate the UK's so-called austere weapons capability for the Tranche 1 Typhoon, the work came just weeks after BAE Systems had in early March completed the integration of the aircraft's Rafael Litening III laser designator pod. Bombs were typically released from a medium altitude of around 10,000ft (3,000m), with pilots using a mix of co-operative and self-designated targeting.
...

After a week of work-up activities, the RAF unit participated in a two-week exercise, during which 67 live 455kg (1,000lb) bombs were dropped, including more than 40 Raytheon Paveway II laser-guided bombs, plus laser/GPS-guided Enhanced Paveway IIs and freefall weapons.

The RAF had a different issue- a very small number of pilots qualified for A2G ops. Around 8 or so if I recall correctly. That wasn't the issue with the Tornado fleet, so it was used to lase targets. Doesn't mean the Typhoon cannot do it.

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?

Willing to wait till 2014-15. They have no option but to do so. That doesn't mean that they'd be willing to risk another 4-5 years or more in the hope that the F-35 arrives. The delays in the MRCA process, which mostly have to do with the new DPP and the extreme emphasis on sticking to procedure so as to not have the process derailed like the IA's artillery acquisition process, have pushed it that far and it isn't something that they chose to do. The simplest way to explain it is that famous saying ' a bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush'. The MRCA is nearly in hand. If they dump it now, there is no saying when a replacement program will come in, and whether or not the GoI will even approve a sole-source F-35 FMS purchase without another competition. And if that happens, then its basically a huge disaster for the IAF.

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.

So accelerating to supersonic 50% faster is a minor advantage? If that is so, why is the F-22's performance touted so much? I don't care about why the USN didn't show any interest in it. I know that Boeing felt that it needs to develop these capabilities for any one else who isn't a captive customer and is likely to reject it due to its not so good T/W ratio and its attendant performance limitations.

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?[/quote]

I could simply say "Why don't you go sell this crap of the non-importance of kinematics to the USAF who seemed quite enamoured with their F-22s?"..

it seems like you're tailoring your argument based on the lack of kinematic performance of the F/A-18, ignoring what else it represents- on a hot and humid day at a high altitude airbase, an F/A-18 with lower thrust is likely to have lower payload and fuel capacity than a Typhoon. That may not matter to you, it does to the IAF. BTW, keep off the patronising statements ok? There's been a few of them coming from you now..The IAF are a competent professional force who knows what they're doing- they're not "masses enamored by kinetics and ignorant of air combat".

The IAF set the MRCA requirements based on its own unique set of operational requirements, and the ones who met it best, qualified. the SHornet didn't. Get over it.

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

sour grapes.

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.

So the answer is that because the USN had no other choice to make- it was a captive customer. Shafted by LM's delays on the F-35C and with dwindling fighter numbers, it had no choice but to go with a fighter that people like you yourself believe is inferior to another fighter it will induct in a few years' time.

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

Filling numbers is a first priority- but ToT is a big priority as well. And we all know that the F-35 will not match the Euro offers in this matter. Nor will it be available quicker than the Euro fighters. Nor will we have as much autonomy on how we operate it and against whom, how we upgrade it, what weapons we install.

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

Says who? is that an official LM line or just something you're saying?

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

I want to be polite, but this is absurd nonsense. I wonder if you'd said that if the SHornet was selected. I know the answer and hence your statement is just that- nonsense.

*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.

It wouldn't surprise me either. the F-35C was supposed to be in service a lot earlier. DOesn't say much of its schedule adherence either.

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 . . .

Processes that work in the US doesn't necessarily work in India. Its slower, there's more red-tape and there was a competition to be carried out- the USN's job was a lot simpler. Simply buy more of a fighter that it already operates. the MRCA was a lot more convoluted, with evaluations, in-country and out-of country, RFIs, RFPs, changing DPPs, and all that. The need was urgent, as it was back in the 1980s when the IAF asked for an AJT- it didn't get one till 20 years later, but that didn't mean that it didn't need an AJT urgently. They just got around to using the MiG-21 in a role it wasn't designed for. As we call it, jugaad. For the MRCA need, they had to keep ordering more and more Su-30MKIs instead, but the IAF cannot sustain that many heavy fighters.

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.

It was a GoI decision, not an IAF one. Read up more on the MRCA competition itself to see how the IAF's request to buy Mirages was turned down on the premise that a competition was required for such a large order.

[Rahul M]

oh I am arguing on merits alright, just that I saw none (or very little) in your post. it was all a jsf rah rah god bless america type post. I mean you are not even aware of the very basic info that any damn enthusiast would know. what exactly is the value of your post other than running down other projects and peddling JSF ?

and AMCA in 2050 ? what is that but blatant trolling ?

There is lots of substance in your last 2 posts addressed to me? Looks like utter trolling to me?

to tackle a troll you have to speak in his language, the other option would be a straight forward ban. your choice.

2050 is a realistic time line based on the past experience world over. Even F35 has origins going as far as mid 1980s, 1997 program was sanctioned, 2000 saw first flight and IOC is still uncertain at the end of 2011 so we are talkin 35-40 years for JSF made by countries with most advance technology base and deepest pockets.

marketing speak and hyperbole coupled with ignorant disdain of anything not american.
LCA went from project sanction to IOC in 18 years, in spite of non existent R&D base, tech denial, confiscation of India developed FBW SW by your beloved unkil sam, lack of funds, a protracted development scheme and most importantly lack of support from the IAF.
anyone with half a brain can see that the Indian MIC is much more mature than it was in the early days of LCA and unrealistic development schedules are, well, unrealistic.
I understanding you love getting high on LM brand koolaid, just don't ask the rest of us to take leave of their senses as well. peddle your wares elsewhere.

countries that are not backed by the hyperbole of "countries with most advance technology base and deepest pockets", like russia, china and in the future India will likely develop their own 5th gen fighters much faster than unkil sam and her poodles. oh the irony.

AMCA might become a possibilitiy sooner if JSF is bought with some kind of deal that allows its engine to be used in Indian aircraft as next generation Kaveri -- "Narmada"

well lol to you that you are not even aware JSF class engines are completely unsuitable for AMCA. so much for your cheap dig.
look, I get it, you are completely uninterested in Indian developments and can't see outside the dazzle of JSF's tail. fine, that is your choice. but do you really have to troll the interwebs putting down any other project with misplaced sarcasm and cheap digs like an adolescent fanboy ? why don't you restrict yourself to f16.net, the crowd there would be much more appreciative of your jokes about the stoopid Indians.

Flanker purchase in early 90s helped China bring out JF17, J10s and J11, it didn't impede domestic developments. JSF can most certainly help India in many ways.

j-11 is license manufactured su-27sk that was later modified, J-10 is a modified lavi that has very little to do with J-11 other than the engine it shares with it and JF-17 is again a very low tech fighter that is hardly considered an achievement for china's aerospace industry.
if all china did was buy a few flankers it won't have improved their industry in any way, they have developed by investing in domestic R&D and by buying designs and blueprints of manufacturing processes, not by a one time acquisition.
just add this to the list of things you have no idea about, you do not know how many F-35's are going to be procured or what its cost is going to be, you have no idea about the AMCA but still see it fit to predict asinine timelines, you have no idea about chinese aerospace industry but pretend to be knowledgeable about it. what exactly do you know, one might ask ?
yet, in spite of all that ignorance you find nothing odd about passing authoritative comments and expect people to take you seriously. for that to happen, kindly go and inform yourself first and develop some politeness to go with the twin mountains of ignorance and arrogance.

_____________________________

quoted for posterity.

LCA Mk1 (FOC) - 2015-16
LCA Mk2 (FOC) - 2020
AMCA (first flight) - 2025
AMCA (Project sanctioned full scale) -2027
AMCA (IOC) 2035
AMCA (FOC) 2040
AMCA ( 2 squadrons fully operational and combat worthy) 2045
IF ASQR changes, engine issues or RMA add few more years
JSF (FOC, combat ready all 3 versions) 2020
FGFA (FOC both version, 2 combat ready squadrons) 2030
J20 - All done
J25 - Ready as soon as needed by cyber army to keep morale up

[Rahul M]

.........
So my Bet is on Typhoon and somehow if Rafale wins then all I can say is pretty stupid decision by pretty stupid people.

some would find n number of reasons to call a typhoon win moronic and they would possibly have as much justification as you do. if you want to survive on this board start respecting other opinions even if you do not agree with them.

[Tumba]

.........
So my Bet is on Typhoon and somehow if Rafale wins then all I can say is pretty stupid decision by pretty stupid people.

some would find n number of reasons to call a typhoon win moronic and they would possibly have as much justification as you do. if you want to survive on this board start respecting other opinions even if you do not agree with them.

i never quoted anyone, i was not saying anything against anyone's opinion. I just posted what's my opinion and I think I have full right to post that. I was not refuting anyone here on this forum and If you have or some one else have n number of reasons in favor of Rafale, i will respect his/her opinion and would love to give my perspective.

[Rahul M]

don't be naive. you are calling everyone who might support the rafale whether here or in GOI stupid ! that's not 'respecting' other opinions. just because you didn't name anyone doesn't change that.
as a mod, I am obliged to tell you what goes and what does not. it's up to you to take my advice or not, not following my advice would however brings its own set of problems.

p.s. this has nothing to do with which aircraft I support. if you really wanted to know, I think this whole circus is a waste of time and money, we should have bought any available mirages and mig-29's by 2010 and upgraded them. but since MRCA is here to stay, either of these two will do, I am happy as long as it is not spruced up 70's fighters or swedish LCA.

[arunsrinivasan]

.... It is quite obvious that the F-35 marketing push by Ajai Shukla, Pentagon reports etc is aimed at derailing the MMRCA decision. ....

Anup,

Is shukla getting a Lifafa or marketing for personal gains?
You should be ashemed of yourself.

Katareji,

Name is Arun not Anup.

Re. Shukla - that is not what I meant ... while I might not have been clear in my above post - I had commented previously in Military Aviation thread I think, on the F-35 saga that Shukla was either being paid to peddle nonsense or he is ignorant of basic facts about F-35 - he quoted a price of $65 million in his Business Standard article. Just one example of getting his facts wrong. I always respected Ajai Shukla, but now am left wondering. A humble request to everyone - lets all leave F-35 out of this thread. Lets focus on Rafale & EF.

Lets also learn to respect the IAF who are driving this decision - they know better than most of us on this forum. At best we can raise some concerns on speed of decision making, or try to understand / question their logic - I would imagine their decisions should be right 99% of the time. Lets not forget that.

[Tumba]

don't be naive. you are calling everyone who might support the rafale whether here or in GOI stupid ! that's not 'respecting' other opinions. just because you didn't name anyone doesn't change that.
as a mod, I am obliged to tell you what goes and what does not. it's up to you to take my advice or not, not following my advice would however brings its own set of problems.

p.s. this has nothing to do with which aircraft I support. if you really wanted to know, I think this whole circus is a waste of time and money, we should have bought any available mirages and mig-29's by 2010 and upgraded them. but since MRCA is here to stay, either of these two will do, I am happy as long as it is not spruced up 70's fighters or swedish LCA.

supporting is something different and buying a machine is a totally different thing, because at the end of day some of my
tax money will be involved in this purchase and If someone is buying in this case GOI, I want it to be the best.
So everyone who supports Rafale, I did not call them stupid I myself love Rafale a very capable machine may be right now more or less same capability as Typhoon but for how many years will it remain so and yes I will call those people stupid who will make this decision to buy Rafale because
Revenue of Indian Government is around 200 Billion $ out of which we already spend close to 40 Billion on defense so we spend 20% of our Income on Defense so if 20% of my Tax Money goes to fund the defense projects and as a citizen of poor country who already spends 20 Percent on defense I dont want it to increase to more than 20% in coming years so even if a single extra percentage can be saved on upgrading which definitely will be saved because of distributed funding structure of typhoon and that same saved spend on more civilian development projects I will say money well spend.

[manum]

I think its important to understand that we are buying a leverage till 2030...by buying Rafale or typhoon, Upgrading Mirage increasing the number of MKI's and FGFA...

So whatever the cry over cost is...It'll fade away when we'll see investment in longer term i.e. we are stuffing our food scaffolds for a long R&D ride in the ocean...It will be pointless that in 2025-35 we don't have our own range of fleets, so Its better to have all the collections to remain in peace till 2025-30...costs money but works in long shot...

All the talks of producing LCA in numbers just now before one cycle is complete or buying shornets and JSF's are wrongly aimed projectiles which really don't plug the long term objectives of Indian state...That is it...