Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Sep 2013 18:43

There was a reply by AKA in the house ,that annual maintenance of the M-2000 fleet was $80M,approx. $2M per aircraft.I am sure that there are figures in France for Rafale annual maintenance costs.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Sep 2013 19:51

^^^Was he referring to cost of spares or including cost of man power for maintaining and preparing the M2K through a year?

member_27444 · Post by **member_27444** » 02 Sep 2013 04:32

No wonder during 9-11 national guard could not summon F-16 till everything was over

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 02 Sep 2013 05:07

Several years back during a visit to a temple in MP, i was hosted by a retd wing commander working with a private cement company. He was a well respected wild life photographer and before retirement taught at ASTE. He flew mostly Mig 21s but also other migs and mirages.

He thought that no one had made anything as good as mig 21s nor it can be repeated. He thought very highly of mig 29s too. He thought they would blow away f16s like flies. Although feeling assured and happy i pushed him on comparitive advantages of western stuff and if there were none why IAF insists on buying western aircrafts. Be finally spilled the beens which can be essentially summarized as 'migs can do all that only if they can be made ready to get in the air and can be kept in the air in the air in minimum quantities. He mentioned instanses where certain mig squads had single digit availability for more than years and entire mig fleet rarely maintains 50+% availability for entire years. On the other hand, western aircraft have never had less than 50% availability ever.

He also mentioned only partially working systems, like only 1 mode of radar operable etc

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 02 Sep 2013 08:23

Amyrao wrote:No wonder during 9-11 national guard could not summon F-16 till everything was over

Factually incorrect. They scrambled F-16s. There were communication errors and the F-16s flew out in the wrong direction, as that was what was practiced till then based on the threat assessment till 9-11.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 02 Sep 2013 10:05

Dhananjay wrote:
Mort Walker wrote: Is there any open source info as to how long it takes to prepare for a full mission for other modern FA? Although the IAF has enough manpower, but does it have enough skilled manpower for just such a preparation on a large scale? (This may explain why the MMRCA will be brought in over a large period time for proper absorption in to the force). To get to the expertise of a flight engineer and technical sergeant takes years of practical experience that cannot be prepared for from books alone. 50-70 hours tells me that it takes a half-dozen highly skilled persons from dawn-to-dusk to prepare the Su-30MKI ready for mission.
Probably Kartik and Jean M might have some idea.

Years ago I remember reading somwhere either keypublishing or geo site maybe f-16 dot net about preparation hours and cost per hour comparisons
f-16 vs mirage 2000

where f-16 was claimed to have a little edge compared to mirage 2000. But also was claimed that m2k was fastest to be prepared in IAF.

Also amongst all MMRCAs Rafale and grippen were claimed to be easiest and fastest to be prepared.

[/quote]

An operational mission would mean live weapons..preparing these, loading them onto the aircraft is a hazardous activity and a lot of precautions are taken..that would involve checks that relate to the weapons and not the aircraft. But not all flights are with live weapons. Most are practice flights with no weapons at all, or training rounds or ACMI pods. So, don’t use that operational mission as a thumb rule to tell you how many maintenance man-hours are required per flight hour on the Su-30MKI. That will not be 70 man hours. After each flight there are line checks that must be mandatorily carried out. These involve visual inspections of the airframe, engine, landing gear, etc. These don’t take too long and can be done while on the tarmac itself. If there are issues reported during a flight or prior to a flight, there will be maintenance required.

Scheduled maintenance for various components including avionics depend on their MTBO and then depending on how easily accessible such parts are, they may be time consuming or not. Modern designs like the Rafale try to reduce maintenance time by keeping parts that are regularly inspected, in bays that can be easily accessed. Line Replaceable Units are also meant to reduce the maintenance effort.

Obviously, for a twin engine fighter, the number of accessories, especially engine accessories are twice those on a single engine fighter and that means twice the maintenance time.

Typically, on civilian airplanes, the turn around time between flights is around 30-40 minutes, depending on the airline. That is basically a line check. Some airlines keep a very tight control on the turn around time to maximize the utilization of the airplane. Emirates is one airline that is known to keep very high utilization rates, especially for a full service carrier. That implies well oiled procedures to inspect the airplane after each flight.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Sep 2013 12:08

After each flight there are line checks that must be mandatorily carried out. These involve visual inspections of the airframe, engine, landing gear, etc. These don’t take too long and can be done while on the tarmac itself.

I once saw the IN crew of an IL-38 do exactly just that.They inspected the aircraft on the tarmac as if it was Marilyn Monroe! Most professional.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 02 Sep 2013 13:16

Maintenance man hrs depends on the training of the crew.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... e-hardened

Rafale & SH manage 12hrs per flight hrs in the field, they are roughly the same with SH being cheaper to operate.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ty-353026/

With the Rafale, I think we waste a lot of money. SH is the more ecnomic choice without any loss in capability.

member_25400 · Post by **member_25400** » 02 Sep 2013 16:38

With the Rafale, ..... SH is the more economic choice without any loss in capability.

The SH didn't make it to the shortlist; meaning it was down-selected on technical grounds.

There is a blog post by a former US naval pilot (Gums) that the F-18 was retained/preferred over the F-14 (the Top gun movie airplane) as it was much more available; the F-18 panel board was supposedly a thing of beauty in organization, exceeding even that of (much larger) transport. Nevertheless, the USN and the USAF clearly have gone for a systems approach to tactics with several force multipliers including AWACS, in-flight refuelers, BVR missiles, network centric capabilities/ecm, and air-sea concept of battle that clearly would have been less available to the IAF. (not to mention valuing the capability to operate of a 100K ton aircraft carrier much less

. So I'm not surprised that the IAF found less value in the SH than the USN does. After all, the distant progenitor of the SH *was* rejected by the USAAF in favour of (what would become) the F-16.

* the blog post likened using the SH to going down to the neighbourhood store in comfort and sophistication of a luxury car.

I wouldn't second guess the IAF decision, myself. - Any single engine option such as the F-16 or Gripen NG would have been vastly more economical.
Though making the decision a few years earlier and concluding the contract then would also have been more economical ....especially as it would have obviated the need for massively expensive upgrades of older generation aircraft (never did understand a sensible reason for the Jaguar & Mirage upgrades)

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 02 Sep 2013 19:32

Not sure if question of economy was considered at the stage at all. Raffy came on top based on IAF requirements and rest is perhaps not for IAF's concern.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 02 Sep 2013 20:14

Kartik wrote: An operational mission would mean live weapons..preparing these, loading them onto the aircraft is a hazardous activity and a lot of precautions are taken..that would involve checks that relate to the weapons and not the aircraft. But not all flights are with live weapons. Most are practice flights with no weapons at all, or training rounds or ACMI pods. So, don’t use that operational mission as a thumb rule to tell you how many maintenance man-hours are required per flight hour on the Su-30MKI. That will not be 70 man hours.

Ok Kartik I had always thought weapon are just removed from the shelf put on trolly and taken to the aircraft and plugged in a couple of mins. Didn't know about the precautions. Reading your post I looked around youtube, and found this amazing video of f-16 being weaponised. Amazing, first they attach the body of the bomb using trolley then they attach the warhead:

Another one from Singaporean F 15 being armed:

member_27444 · Post by **member_27444** » 02 Sep 2013 20:43

Philip wrote:
After each flight there are line checks that must be mandatorily carried out. These involve visual inspections of the airframe, engine, landing gear, etc. These don’t take too long and can be done while on the tarmac itself.
I once saw the IN crew of an IL-38 do exactly just that.They inspected the aircraft on the tarmac as if it was Marilyn Monroe! Most professional.

Even civil airline pilots do especially for turbo prop like Embrair and Canadian regional jet

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 02 Sep 2013 21:53

walk around checks are normal for all aircraft - standard procedures

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 03 Sep 2013 16:49

Walk around is generally the term used for the crew who do a walk around and then sign a log book to confirm that the line check was done and found satisfactory.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2013 17:12

FWIW , MMRCA postponed indefinitely. next govt will have to take the call

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 03 Sep 2013 17:23

^^^^
Crap. If hope that this is not true. As it is the current ruling dispensation sat hand over fist and did nothing while our economy went to the dogs and now they are doing the same thing to our defense.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2013 18:41

I wonder if MMRCA moves over to next year will Dassult keep the price to the original frozen one something MOD PNC negotiated on ( goes for all parties involved in race ) , because I recollected the price was valid for this year after that it will be revised.

Any way not Dassult fault , the Indian Economy has slided to what it is now and no one would have predicted this one even during AI 2013.

This should impact any thing we import and pay in $$ .

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 03 Sep 2013 18:59

Austin wrote:This should impact any thing we import and pay in $$ .

Which is essentially EVERYTHING. Terrible news if true. Any source/link?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2013 19:03

^^ Yes true as even many indiginous systems have many imported component so atleast in near time what we order now will have impact.
Got the news from someone in know but like I said take it FWIW.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 03 Sep 2013 19:11

Christopher Sidor wrote:..the current ruling dispensation sat hand over fist and did nothing while our economy went to the dogs and now they are doing the same thing to our defense.

Oh but they did do something. It's not like they were sitting idle---they took the trouble to feed India the poison pills of guaranteed jobs, food security and land acquisition bills. Now not only is our economy in the pits, it will be harder and take longer to revive it when the time comes.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Sep 2013 19:27

Austin wrote:^^ Yes true as even many indiginous systems have many imported component so atleast in near time what we order now will have impact.
Got the news from someone in know but like I said take it FWIW.

I think it is great for indigenous efforts. This should help tilt the balance in its favor, by making them cheaper to make stuff within India now.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 03 Sep 2013 20:01

provided pvt industry is allowed to dive in.

this is the opportunity to truly let the pvt sector come in.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2013 20:19

NRao wrote:I think it is great for indigenous efforts. This should help tilt the balance in its favor, by making them cheaper to make stuff within India now.

Indigenous effort has to be a long term vision and goal irrespective of the external influencing factor like this time around Rupee fall ...since this requires planning , decades of commitment from all stake holders.

Right now I dont think the short term Rupee falling will directly improve indeginous effort ...what at best might happen is we postpone non-essential import and bite the bullet for the import we are already committed for by paying more .

Hopefully this is an eye opener and serves the long term sustained goal of reducing imports.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 03 Sep 2013 20:46

Hopefully this is an eye opener and serves the long term sustained goal of reducing imports.

Hope so

India either seems to find the right path when forced into or it blunders into it

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Sep 2013 21:19

Austin wrote:
NRao wrote:I think it is great for indigenous efforts. This should help tilt the balance in its favor, by making them cheaper to make stuff within India now.
Indigenous effort has to be a long term vision and goal irrespective of the external influencing factor like this time around Rupee fall ...since this requires planning , decades of commitment from all stake holders.

Right now I dont think the short term Rupee falling will directly improve indeginous effort ...what at best might happen is we postpone non-essential import and bite the bullet for the import we are already committed for by paying more .

Hopefully this is an eye opener and serves the long term sustained goal of reducing imports.

That is just one aspect and based on track record, not something India is good at. I just do not see much hope in "long term planning" (speaking as a planner myself) (as a nation that introduced long term planning to the democratic world in the 30-40s, India should be excellent at it, but it is not, it is pathetic as we post).

I was addressing the immediate circumstances - what India is really good at is when they faces a Kargil like situations (situ?). I am counting on people reacting to the situation and making things happen - not so much out of logic, but out of necessity.

Biting a bullet will not help. Once the pain point goes away they (in general) will resort to old ways.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Sep 2013 21:41

The US might have a "turkey" in the oven,but we too are now going to get the equiv. of the "Dodo"! A better name for the bird would've been that old familiar name,describing it to perfectly, "Mirage".A silver lining though.One Indian industry that will boom will be the "scotch tape" and "superstrength,superfast glue" business,holding our ancient birds together. The IAF can take a leaf out of the IN's book where that venerable old lady ,the Viraat 50 yrs old this year,will sail on until she is 60.Our dear old MIGs too are 50 years old in IAF service,they could keep the Viraat company.We could even vacuum clean the IAF museums for more vintage fighters.

With our "downhill racer" the Rupee breaking speed records,accompanied by the market,will the very expensive $2.5M M-2000 upgrade also be at risk? Does anyone also know how much it costs HAL to make a Jag? That may be our great brown hope,the poor man's Dodo!

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 03 Sep 2013 22:22

Anything we make whether public or private will need critical foreign components and expertise for next 20 years at least, even if we promising to start the process today by holding our ears and doing baithak dand. Engines are the top concern but close behind are electronics and advanced materials. Not only do we not have clear and sensible goals to tackle these but we are busily building roadblocks to industry and progress in general with the various vote-getting schemes that have phukked the country for a long time. Sadly it is not just UPA but the whole political class that is responsible.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 03 Sep 2013 22:28

Been saying this for months, there is no way the current government can close this deal. The fiscal condition will take some time to improve which might delay the signing by few more years. The Rafale deal now makes even less sense. Best we cancel it now else it will eat into Tejas and FGFA numbers in the future.
Also MRCA is not the only deal which may be stuck in limbo. There is the attack helicopter(Apache selected), heavy lift helicopter(Chinook selected), aerial tanker(A330-MRTT selected) and C-17 follow ups(production line is closing soon). Those are only the ones I could name. Its time to prioritize ones we really need and look for more value options for the others.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2013 01:24

abhik wrote:Been saying this for months, there is no way the current government can close this deal. The fiscal condition will take some time to improve which might delay the signing by few more years. The Rafale deal now makes even less sense. Best we cancel it now else it will eat into Tejas and FGFA numbers in the future.
Also MRCA is not the only deal which may be stuck in limbo. There is the attack helicopter(Apache selected), heavy lift helicopter(Chinook selected), aerial tanker(A330-MRTT selected) and C-17 follow ups(production line is closing soon). Those are only the ones I could name. Its time to prioritize ones we really need and look for more value options for the others.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 3#p1505333

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 04 Sep 2013 05:51

Party time over ...The rupee devaluation timing could not have been better. Common sense seems to be gaining ground now. Wonder what will our Imported Air Force (aka IAF) band leaders will be flashing now

Voting 100% to kill Rafale and buy 3x LCA MK-I,II,III...Let's for starters have
1. Another two production lines for LCA for 100 units per year. If not IAF, Army will buy these 'bomb trucks' for sure.
2. Sell or Privatize HAL. With an order book so strong, Reliance and TATA will be salivating for this PSU.

Jokes apart, Their is a lot of bad blood between IAF and HAL. IAF looks at HAL through 10 year old lenses and HAL does not know how to sell at all. Hoping for a leadership purge at both ends..Fresh and Young blood will do both sides a whole lot good.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Sep 2013 06:39

> MRCA and apache can be scrapped and the below three let through. chinook will to some extent cover for the Mi26 retirement and we really need those big tankers and transports...no domestic options exist.
more C130 as well if and when situation improves.

heavy lift helicopter(Chinook selected), aerial tanker(A330-MRTT selected) and C-17 follow ups(production line is closing soon)

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Sep 2013 20:13

Singha wrote:> MRCA and apache can be scrapped and the below three let through. chinook will to some extent cover for the Mi26 retirement and we really need those big tankers and transports...no domestic options exist.
more C130 as well if and when situation improves.

heavy lift helicopter(Chinook selected), aerial tanker(A330-MRTT selected) and C-17 follow ups(production line is closing soon)

Why do we need more tankers. If we order another 10-12 C 17. We can refurbish all our all old il-76 and push them into taker role. Use older Air India A-320s and Il-76 in that role. They can solder on for another 30 years. The k707s introduced in the 50s still fly both AWACS and tanker roles.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 04 Sep 2013 21:05

regarding conversion of exsisting civil assets to refuelers -that sort of thinking never seems to happen in IAF circles

they will have a study which will prove it is unviable

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 04 Sep 2013 21:31

Converting to tankers should be doable but may not be cost effective if we need relatively few. Older planes also come with increased maintenance baggage and lower availability. In the end, it is effectiveness and economics in that order. Just speculating.

raj-ji · Post by **raj-ji** » 04 Sep 2013 21:44

nik wrote:Party time over ...The rupee devaluation timing could not have been better. Common sense seems to be gaining ground now. Wonder what will our Imported Air Force (aka IAF) band leaders will be flashing now

Voting 100% to kill Rafale and buy 3x LCA MK-I,II,III...Let's for starters have
1. Another two production lines for LCA for 100 units per year. If not IAF, Army will buy these 'bomb trucks' for sure.
2. Sell or Privatize HAL. With an order book so strong, Reliance and TATA will be salivating for this PSU.

Jokes apart, Their is a lot of bad blood between IAF and HAL. IAF looks at HAL through 10 year old lenses and HAL does not know how to sell at all. Hoping for a leadership purge at both ends..Fresh and Young blood will do both sides a whole lot good.

Very interesting to hear the panic regarding the Indian economy and the Rupee. While things are slowing down for India, India's growth rate is still way better than most of the world. Speculation and over correction is taking place at the moment. That won't last long, things will settle down soon.

Regarding the Raffy deal, standard procurement procedures tie the price to certain exchange rates. If that wasn't used, doubtful this is the case, India still has massive foreign currency reserves.

The slowdown won't affect the Raffy purchase, but will affect future ones that are not yet posted. With the economy one has to take a look at the big picture, and over the long term. Not react to every bump along the way.

Another interesting fact, the Panda is spending billions to keep their currency artificially low, to help exports. We are spending billions trying to prop up our currency. Cheaper rupee means our products are cheaper to foreign customers. See where this is going?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2013 21:51

Cheaper rupee means our products are cheaper to foreign customers. See where this is going?

Turns out India needs to import so it can export. Outside of IT, there is not much export from India - this is based on what I just heard on NPR and an article (somewhere) in the past day or two.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 04 Sep 2013 21:53

india is a major exporter of jewelery and leather products

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Sep 2013 21:57

LM, How much does labor value addition happen in that area?

NRao is right. India is a major net importer

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Sep 2013 21:59

And textiles. And ........

But where does India get the raw materials for all that? Diamonds for instance?

India does export top notch jeans and such. BUT the latest raw materials come from China. Not that India does not produce those raw materials, just that they are not exportable as much.

Just heard that the Rs bounced (upwards) because of the new RBI head - one of the reasons: he is handsome looking (tracked by London College on Facebook!!!!). He is supposed to be aggressive and is very well known in the West - was a prof at Univ of Chicago, which is something. Was brought back by MMS and is a confidant/advisor of MMS

Let us see. Pakalam.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Sep 2013 22:33

Victor wrote:Converting to tankers should be doable but may not be cost effective if we need relatively few. Older planes also come with increased maintenance baggage and lower availability. In the end, it is effectiveness and economics in that order. Just speculating.

Civil aircrafts are easier to maintain and will have higher uptime than your shiniest new toy whether it comes from khan uncle or "Masha Aunty".

And seriously are your refuelers flying two 8 hour sorties a day? Probably once a week anyways in support of some long range requirement in peace time. There will probably of pile of spares that we probably have stocked to keep these civil planes run 12 hours a day during their normal operations. They will move from 60-80 hour flights a week to probably under 20. And then the added advantage of going this type is that the ground staff is already trained to find good jobs at the end of their required service into civil service.