PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jan 2014 17:47

Is Shock Law a consultant for Lockheed? The moment the Chinese stealth birds appear in service,there will be a stampede for the IAF to get its own stealth fighter asap.At that time there will be only the option of buying the JSF,which is v. short on orders.Is he developing a case for this bird?

There is also a flaw in the alleged IAF argument against the FGFA.If it can accept a MK-1 LCA waiting instead for the definitive MK-2 for which the second batch of 124 aircraft have been planned for,what is the harm in getting a MK-1 FGFA in basic T-50 form for a couple of sqds.,as this aircraft will be superior to the Rafale?In fact ALL the IAF's aircraft in service have in their service history been upgraded .WE're doing it with the M-2000s,the MIG-29s,the Jaguars,and earlier with the Bisons,etc.,If we've done it with the Sukhoi-30s upgrading them to MKI std. first and now to be upgraded to "Super-Sukhoi" std. in the immediate future,the argument for dumping the FGFA rests on quicksand. The definitive FGFA can be developed in the interim time while the MK-1s are being delivered.Some time ago Austin posted pics of the T-50/FGFA prototypes which showed conformal radar panels in the fuselage,so the claim hat the T-50 has only forward looking radar is a bit hollow.

However,that there is "beef" between HAL and the IAF is no secret.We were earlier fed with the news that HAL was incapable of handling the high-tech TOT that the Rafale was bringing,where Dassault has already signed on with...Reliance! No comment as to Reliance's superior capabilities to build aircraft/aircraft components than HAL! The IAF then accused HAL of deliberately abdicating its co-share of the FGFA work and instead was wasting its efforts in developing the BTT,a paper plane which it refused to accept.Here is an shocking statistic from the horses' mouth.

440+ defence scientists have resigned from 2008-2012 and 44 last year upto Nov. 2013"! A host of remedial measures are being taken to stem the rot.6 variable increments and promotions on fast track basis,professional upgrade allowance to all scientists,assured IIT,IISc ,etc. seats for higher qualifications as DRDO sponsored candidates,young scientists awards,excellent infrastructure facilities-the last one can vouch for .IAF officers on deputation marvel at the fab. conditions that DRDO boffins enjoy in comparison with their op stations,which sometimes resemble (in their formative days) MASH outfits.

Now,does HAL actually have the human resources to digest its huge workload? Is Shock-Law's piece a play for removing HAL from the Rafale main course or what? There seem to be a host of hungry animal species who are straining at the leash for the Rafale deal to go through in its entirety,which will leave the cupboard bare for any other birds that have to be fed,FGFA,etc.When LCA MK-2 hasn't even flown,it would be foolhardy to put one's stealth future entirerly upon the AMCA.As the elections near,and decision-making time for the UPA is running out,the nut-cracker is being applied by vested interests..on all sides.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Jan 2014 18:00

The IAF always had a beef against the FGFA (started with work share component), it is the details and perhaps the intensity of it, this time around, that is a surprise. The minutes of the two meetings have increased the list of TBDs (or are more specific). Other than IMHO nothing has changed.

The report is about IAF/FGFA and NOT IAF/PAK-FA.

The research and dev portion has gone up my 0.5 billion (from 5.5 to 6.0). What has happened to the work share remains to be seen.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Jan 2014 18:25

Philip wrote:Is Shock Law a consultant for Lockheed? The moment the Chinese stealth birds appear in service,there will be a stampede for the IAF to get its own stealth fighter asap.At that time there will be only the option of buying the JSF,which is v. short on orders.Is he developing a case for this bird?

The Chinese birds are already flying. When they enter service with the PLAAF no one's going to know about - the PLA's ORBAT isn't exactly public knowledge. And if a quick buy is warranted, the IAF can go to the Russians as easily as they can to the Americans.

As for the F-35 being 'very short' on orders. Really? Compared to what? (Its already delivered 100 aircraft with 75 more under construction and a production run estimated at over 3000 units.)

There is also a flaw in the alleged IAF argument against the FGFA.If it can accept a MK-1 LCA waiting instead for the definitive MK-2 for which the second batch of 124 aircraft have been planned for,what is the harm in getting a MK-1 FGFA in basic T-50 form for a couple of sqds.,as this aircraft will be superior to the Rafale?

No harm. The harm is in investing $6 billion into 'co-developing' a fighter that's just a few years away from service, and not even getting a decent level of ToT to show for it (assuming they honour the ToT agreement). If we want to buy it, there's no harm in waiting until the Russians have at least a pre-production variant available to the IAF for trials, a licensing deal without ambiguities for HAL, and a realistic cost figure for the MoD.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 21 Jan 2014 18:40

The IAF's objections seem to be based on current specifications of the T-50 prototype. Which will certainly be taken care in future iterations.

Why is the IAF bothered about the russians reluctance to share design info. Should it not be coming from the HAL?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jan 2014 19:06

The original number of JSFs was around 6000.This has been slashed to half that number,with the US making up for most of the orders.Allies have also been wary of costs,operational costs,etc.,and have been downsizing their numbers as the cost is not less than $100M per unit ,when it was supposed to cost $75M per unit.

AWST news,Jan 13/14:
Now look at the latest timeframes for IOC,etc.The next 15 months are crucial for weapons testing for the aircraft to reach operational status.IOC for the USMC's F-35B is Dec. 2015,with the "limited 2-B" software release.USAF IOC is scheduled for Dec 2016.USN around early 2019.Block 4 versions will only come by 2022.
The problem wiht the JSF is that its so software dependent,that its full capabilities cannot be exercised unless the ultimate software version arrives.Each version depends upon the complete functioning of the former.The JSF is most heavily dependent upon the AMRAAM missile for destroying airborne threats and a major problem that it is encountering is communicating with the missile during combat ("highly stressing conditions in a chase")."Every shot we take is getting more and more complex",says Charles Wagner,Weapons team leader for the programme.Even using the gun and Sidewinder AIM-9X SR missile requires the "3-F" software package. Other problems,the weapons bay heats up when carrying ordnance during some flight conditions! The IHMD helmet display yet to be perfected is vital for close-in combat combat using both WVR and BVR missiles at extremely high off-boresight angles.

At the moment,the 100 JSFs delivered ,with little if any combat capability are the equivalent of very expensive flying walkie-talkies and airborne cameras!

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Jan 2014 19:51

Philip wrote:The original number of JSFs was around 6000.

That's twice as many fighters as the US fielded at the peak of the Cold War. You sure of that figure?

This has been slashed to half that number,with the US making up for most of the orders.Allies have also been wary of costs,operational costs,etc.,and have been downsizing their numbers as the cost is not less than $100M per unit ,when it was supposed to cost $75M per unit.

Current flyaway cost is $115M per unit @30 units/yr. When its production ramps upto 200 units/yr, you can expect the cost to fall under $90M.

The problem wiht the JSF is that its so software dependent,that its full capabilities cannot be exercised unless the ultimate software version arrives.Each version depends upon the complete functioning of the former.

The F-35A will have its FOC by 2019. Unless you want it tomorrow, the time-frame is not an issue for any of its customers.

The JSF is most heavily dependent upon the AMRAAM missile for destroying airborne threats and a major problem that it is encountering is communicating with the missile during combat ("highly stressing conditions in a chase").

Every aircraft is heavily dependent on a BVR missile in today's world. When it comes to guns, even a Gnat can occasionally kill an F-22.

At the moment,the 100 JSFs delivered ,with little if any combat capability are the equivalent of very expensive flying walkie-talkies and airborne cameras!

Not having received their IOC, they're not expected to be combat capable. However since they have an operating radar and have been integrated with the AMRAAM, I'm afraid your statement is incorrect.

^^

How does any of this justify investing $6 billion into the FGFA for a 15% workshare, limited technology transfer and a commitment to an aircraft who's performance and price, are both unknown.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Jan 2014 19:52

RKumar wrote:Guys complain is for FGFA and not about PAK-FA. So please don't mix the products. Kill 2 products (FGFA and AMCA) with one stone. Excellent job and internal politics at best.

i hope you are not serious.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jan 2014 20:21

Rafale and PAK-FA discussion is like the proverbial fleecing the Pig for wool , little wool, lots of squealing

member_28041 · Post by **member_28041** » 21 Jan 2014 20:58

Philip wrote: 440+ defence scientists have resigned from 2008-2012 and 44 last year upto Nov. 2013"!

This could be due to the demoralization setting in after seeing their hard work being washed away for a foreign product.
Wont be surprising if the scientists like those who put all their effort in developing a world class tank like Arjun is leaving the organization watching in pain their hard work being thrown away for an imported inferior product

.

srin · Post by **srin** » 21 Jan 2014 21:52

If Shooklaw's report is correct on the arguments (and that is a big IF), I can understand both sides of the argument.

From the IAF side ...
a) In times of fund crunch, they would spend money on what they will get now, than what they may get five years later.
b) They have invested a lot of effort in the Rafale deal and don't want to start all over again.

OTOH,
a) Many AMCA technologies are still unproven and I'm very much concerned that regardless of the promises, it will be delayed.
b) In 5 years, they will be forced to react to Chinese developments and buy a stealth aircraft anyway. And we will have more say (even if it is MKI'ization) with PAKFA than with F35.
c) On the engine front, the current engine in PAKFA is an acknowledged interim engine, and the Russians have gone ahead with what they know will work.
d) Russians and the HAL too probably judge that we don't have that much to contribute for the PAKFA. So workshare increase may not be feasible.

There may be interim solutions ...
a) Budget comes out of R&D budget (say of HAL - which is now giving back surplus money as dividends to the Govt).
b) Budget comes out of DRDO - which means rope in ADA.

I'm a bit intrigued by the DRDO-HAL dynamics btw ... ADA develops the LCA, but HAL is involved in developing the PAKFA/FGFA.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 21 Jan 2014 21:54

It is not the first time that IAF is complaining about FGFA. There were reports earlier that IAF was not happy with the current design and also with the work share between India and Russia, given the amount of money that India was investing in it.

Even I am not too very enthusiastic about FGFA. Given the MRCA and SU-MKI, they should hold their own for next 15-20 years, and India should rather focus on AMCA. If India invested the same $20-30 billion earmarked for FGFA into AMCA, we could have a similar aircraft and also will build up our mil-av complex!

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Jan 2014 22:28

SaiK wrote:
RKumar wrote:Guys complain is for FGFA and not about PAK-FA. So please don't mix the products. Kill 2 products (FGFA and AMCA) with one stone. Excellent job and internal politics at best.
i hope you are not serious.

Sir ji I am serious. Today, you can laugh at me but we will see in coming years.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jan 2014 00:21

The IAF's objections seem to be based on current specifications of the T-50 prototype. Which will certainly be taken care in future iterations.

The FGFA is a totally different animal - the funding of $6 billion is for this animal, which is yet to materialize.

While the health of the PAK-FA does impact the FGFA, since there is an overlap across the two programs, it is not directly correlated (in all aspects).

I would think it is a combination of things that has made the IAF wary of the situation - not the least of it being the impotency and perhaps total neglect on the part of the MoD/GoI to act on the current holes in the operational situation within the IAF. Seems to me this is a desperation move, more than anything else. The IAF wants squadrons .................. now. It would rather take the $6 billion and plunk it on the Rafales and be perfectly happy postponing the FGFA deal. And, for the time being this seems to be the only way to get attention to that situation.

This one - IMHO - has to be placed on the shoulders of the political+bureaucratic group - not it matters to them.

And, certainly, one hopes that the PAK-FA does well for her own sake.

Why is the IAF bothered about the russians reluctance to share design info. Should it not be coming from the HAL?

IAF wants certain techs and is willing to pay for them. HAL - the provider of such techs - does not have them, so they have approached the Russians for them. The expectation is not just the techs, but also the why/where/what/how/when/etc related to each tech. Now, not all will be parted with - cannot expect that - but it seems that the Russians are unwilling to part with sufficient technologies to keep the Indians happy.

IAF has made it very clear that in the future India needs to be self sufficient in certain areas, so there is no confusion there.

Because HAL has to ask for what IAF wants/needs and the IAF is paying for. "India" is not just expecting technologies, but the why/what/where/how of those techs too.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 Jan 2014 02:15

Was it 2009 or '10 that there was a sudden 'breaking news' of Rafale having been ousted from competition? It was broken in a very sophisticated and organised way. First there was "........some sources confirmed that a plane from MMRCA has been dropped...."

and then

another breaking news after some time "..... ITS RAFALE....." turned out Rafale beat them all finally.

Going through shukla article suddenly this above old false-news flashed through my mind.

Also we know shukla visited boeing's f-35 factory in '11 and came back to write against buying MMRCA and instead buy f-35.

So dots are connecting, the man has some agenda. He's doing mischief.

My feeling is Govt. as a whole PMO-DefM-Forces are now very experienced with non-soviet russia. And knowing all the chaturangi moves are using different arms of govt. to get maximum from russkies. Just to lower the numbers of 'Eta Secret'.... responses in future.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 22 Jan 2014 02:28

nitinraj wrote:
Philip wrote: 440+ defence scientists have resigned from 2008-2012 and 44 last year upto Nov. 2013"!
This could be due to the demoralization setting in after seeing their hard work being washed away for a foreign product.

Could be. But it could just as well be, and more likely IMO, disillusionment with the management style, work culture, corruption and low pay. If these scientists were any good, they would have considered joining or been approached by Indian and foreign private sector companies at some point. So their intelligence, pride and motivation would be strong enough to ward off any "demoralization" if their world-class aircraft is rejected for active duty by the IAF because the top officers are corrupt and receiving bribes from the Russians/French/British/Swiss. The first step is to stop blaming everybody but the PSUs themselves for their productivity over half a century.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jan 2014 04:43

Boffin resignations: The remedial measures spelt out in the report show very clearly what the young scientists have wanted.A future.Better opportunities to study further,keeping abreast of tech. as it develops,plus opportunities to rise rapidly in the organisation.There is considerable reorganising going on after AC took over,DRDO "clusters" with empowered heads who will be responsible for success or failure,not committees, and a seriousness to getting back to core considerations farming out tech developed to pvt industry to manufacture,instead of slow-coach DPSUs.

However,the Q still remains,"who's in charge of aircraft design and development in India,and who should be in charge?" Is it the ADA,HAL or the IAF? There was a post some time ago critical of our approach to aircraft design where those most experienced,the end users,the pilots and aviators themselves are not embedded in the critical design teams.As far as the IN is concerned,it designs its warships not MDL or HSL,etc. But here,we are still witnessing turf wars being played out,with pvt. industry also wanting a share of the juicy bone snapping at the heels of the MOD.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Jan 2014 05:37

All have equal participation from stake holder perspective.. ADA has the design experience, HAL from manufacturing, and of course IAF must be bang on from the beginning to define exactly the wants, and participate like a user who wants everything perfect yesterday.

of course there are certain things in such large project one can't source everything from a single place.. it should be spread across institutions, edus, private and public cos.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Jan 2014 05:55

A little nugget about composites component in the T-50/FGFA from this report about Russian composites for the Indian market.

http://indrus.in/economics/2013/08/19/h ... 28591.html

Harder than rock: Russian composites on their way to India
August 19, 2013 Alexandra Katz, specially for RIR
Russian Composite Holding Company is focusing on the Indian market for carbon fibre composites, super-strong and light material used in various industries from aerospace to construction and automobile.

One of the first projects where Composite HC products can be used is much awaited fifth-generation T-50 PAK FA jet fighter the export version of which is jointly developed by Russia and India. Up to 70 percent in the body skin of the fighter and 40 percent of the entire structure are made of composites. It allows the T-50 to not only carry more weapons but be virtually invisible to radars. The export version of the T-50 fighter for which New Delhi has allocated almost $25 billion is expected to be ready in five years, the same period which Russia’s Composites HC is taking to secure its presence in the Indian market.

http://indrus.in/economics/2013/11/04/i ... 30563.html

Indian engineers and designers should be able to get a 50 percent share in the work, according to leading military expert Igor Korotchenko.

India’s share in research-and-development work for the joint Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project with Russia is currently limited by India's domestic industrial capabilities but will gradually increase with the project’s implementation, a Russian military expert said.

The Economic Times recently reported that Indian military officials were concerned over the country’s work share in the FGFA project, which is currently only 15 percent even though New Delhi is bearing 50 percent of the cost.According to the paper, India’s defence minister is expected to raise that issue during his visit to Russia beginning November 15.
пустым не оставлять!!

Indo-Russian military aviation projects on schedule: HAL executive

“The figure cited by the Indian side reflects current capabilities of India’s industry, in particular the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited [HAL] corporation,” said Igor Korotchenko, head of the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Global Arms Trade.

“With the progress in the implementation of this project, we expect the Indian engineers and designers to approach the share determined in the [Russian-Indian] agreement: 50 percent,” Korotchenko said in an exclusive interview with RIA Novosti.

Russia will certainly provide all necessary knowledge and logistics support to Indian specialists, but developing skills and acquiring experience in design and development of advanced fighter aircraft takes a long time and substantial effort, the expert added.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jan 2014 06:30

Philip wrote:A little nugget about composites component in the T-50/FGFA from this report about Russian composites for the Indian market.

http://indrus.in/economics/2013/08/19/h ... 28591.html

Harder than rock: Russian composites on their way to India
August 19, 2013 Alexandra Katz, specially for RIR
Russian Composite Holding Company is focusing on the Indian market for carbon fibre composites, super-strong and light material used in various industries from aerospace to construction and automobile.

One of the first projects where Composite HC products can be used is much awaited fifth-generation T-50 PAK FA jet fighter the export version of which is jointly developed by Russia and India. Up to 70 percent in the body skin of the fighter and 40 percent of the entire structure are made of composites. It allows the T-50 to not only carry more weapons but be virtually invisible to radars. The export version of the T-50 fighter for which New Delhi has allocated almost $25 billion is expected to be ready in five years, the same period which Russia’s Composites HC is taking to secure its presence in the Indian market.

Hmmmmmm...............

One of the gripes India had with the PAK-FA was low composites.

India's strength is composites!!!!!!!!!!

srai · Post by **srai** » 23 Jan 2014 06:40

^^^

So the Russians are trying to push their own composites instead of trying to source Indian composites. Says a lot about this JV!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jan 2014 06:50

Well............... go one step further. Google Russia and composite (you get the picture)!!!!

But, it should suffice to take note of the fact that India, very clearly, stated that the PAK-FA had low composites.

.............. ????????

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 23 Jan 2014 06:54

India hates Russian stealth aircraft?

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/d89b9ce721de

I guess long, sleek russki ac has problems?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jan 2014 06:56

TSJones wrote:India hates Russian stealth aircraft?

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/d89b9ce721de

I guess long, sleek russki ac has problems?

David Axe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK, I will read it.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jan 2014 08:31

The IAF's objections seem to be based on current specifications of the T-50 prototype.

You could be right. At least David Axe seems to imply that.

The airframe is poorly built, with serious implications for the jet’s stealth profile.

The one interesting stuff is and I would not be surprised at all about it:

Press reports in 2013 indicated that Sukhoi was having problems with quality control in the T-50 effort. At least one of the prototypes needed patches on its wings to keep from falling apart during high-stress maneuvers.

And, of course:

The Indians’ complaints illustrate the yawning gulf between stealth warplane design and the actual production of radar-evading jets. In other words, it’s one thing to sketch an advanced warplane on paper. It’s quite another to build one and get it to work.

Along with testing, production was one more area where India had to gain from a foreign vendor.

If such things are true, I just do not see Russia being able to resolve them in the near future. Not possible. As an example not possible to upgrade the quality of production in a year or so.

Wonder if the gripe about the engine goes beyond the current one. Is the IAF saying that funds allocated for the 5th Gen engine are not worth investing?

There is more in that article but nothing of essence. However, something that I had always thought to be true:

Sukhoi is working on two variants of the T-50—one for Russian use and another for the Indians. The Indian air force has ambitions to purchase 144 of the stealth jets, and the money from this sale underpins the entire T-50 development effort. New Delhi is also kicking in $6 billion for design work.

Without the Indians’ cash, there wouldn’t be a T-50. And Russia would have basically no hope of acquiring a stealth jet to counter the Americans’ F-22s and F-35s and Chinese J-20s and J-31s.

The FGFA, IMHO, is a pure business transaction to the Russians. And, they intend getting the very last penny possible - which is OK, nothing to be ashamed about.

srin · Post by **srin** » 23 Jan 2014 10:08

I will re-iterate the question I posted yesterday - given that ADA is the agency that has designed a real fighter jet, why isn't it or DRDO involved in the FGFA and only the HAL ?

vic · Post by **vic** » 23 Jan 2014 10:15

I think PAKFA-FGFA is a good aircraft but there is hardly any contribution from the side of India in the R&D of either airframe, engine, radar, or avionics. My fear is that manufacture of FGFA will again be screw driver assembly without deep indigenisation of engines, radar, avionics or airframe. IAF is hitting back at HAL for leaking holes in IAF Pilatus buy through Ajay Shukla. The honesty of IAF decisions is well revealed by Agusta westand and Pilatus buy.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Jan 2014 18:02

FGFA for India will be PAK-FA with customization ..much like Su-30MKI is customised for India but is built on same airframe like Malaysian MKM or Russian SM.

Beyond that the deal will be similar to Rafale with gradual localisation through TOT/LIC Production over time , source code/Design availability etc .... gradual build MRO and Spares for all level of support except for major upgradation..... ofcourse these thing will come over 15-20 years time for both aircraft depending on how fast our industry can absorb and how fast HAL and its associated organization can absorb and build........... unlike Rafale deal where some pvt players will be involved ( Reliance ) I think FGFA will be full built by HAL much like they do with MKI.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 23 Jan 2014 19:23

the reason i laughed with 3 smilies will soon be revealed to all.. i only wish fgfa is from scratch all new design. high hopes for people who think these two projects are like 100% different. i'd say, 90% of everything in it would be the same.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 25 Jan 2014 10:39

On fox news site:-

www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/24/russia ... om-moscow/

Russian rubbish? India reportedly disappointed with stealth fighters from Moscow
by Maxim Lott, foxnews.com
January 24th 2014

Is the Russian arms industry getting soft?

Despite initial high expectations, the Indian Air Force appears to be souring on a joint development deal with Russia for a new fifth-generation fighter jet, according to the Business Standard, a major Indian business publication. The Russian prototype is "unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered,” said Indian Air Force Deputy Air Marshall S Sukumar at a Jan. 15 meeting, according to minutes obtained by the Business Standard.

That contrasts sharply with high hopes voiced by the Indian government when the joint project, to which the Indian government has contributed $6 billion, began.

“[The new plane] will have advanced features such as stealth, supercruise, ultra-maneuvrability, highly integrated avionics suite, enhanced situational awareness, internal carriage of weapons and Network Centric Warfare capabilities,” the Indian government said in a December 2010 press release. Those are all hallmarks of “fifth generation” aircraft.

The Indian Air Force did not respond to a request for comment.

But it is hardly surprising that the invisible-to-radar Russian fighter planes don't quite live up to the billing, according to defense experts reached by FoxNews.com.

“The Russians are certainly not up to speed in avionics,” Robbin Laird, who has served as a consultant to the Marine Corps and Air Force and started the website Second Line of Defense, told FoxNews.com. “For them to pull off a stealth airframe, and for it to actually be stealthy, the engine technology has to be very good. Americans have done it with the F-22 and F-35. But it’s not easy to do. No one has done it but ourselves.”

India is the largest arms importer in world, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, and its military import large amounts from both Russia and western countries.

“The Indians for a long time have split their fighter industry between western work and Russian work,” Laird said.

“Clearly they want to go more Western because they recognize that the Russian stuff just isn't up to the western standards. You only have so much money to go around, and like everybody else they've got financial pressures,” he added.

Other security experts said that India has a history of incompetence when it comes to military procurement, and so it did not necessarily reflect badly on Russia.

“India has had so many problems absorbing modern equipment and supporting it that it’s difficult to know whether it says anything about the Russian systems at all,” Anthony Cordesman, who has served as a consultant for the State and Defense departments and who holds the Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told FoxNews.com.

Laird said that the Indians may be souring on the Russian deal in part to save funds so they can build more French-designed Dassault Rafale fighter jets, which can be built relatively quickly, unlike the still-to-be-designed “fifth-generation” planes under development with the Russians.

“The Rafale is a very nice aircraft, and they'll look at all the stuff the French are putting on that aircraft, and they'll look at the Russian stuff and say, why am I going down that path? Do I trust the Russians really are going to reach to the standards we set?”

Laird said that India would be best off purchasing the already-developed fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-35 – but that the United States government had not given permission for such a sale, even though Indian officials had asked several times to be able to consider the plane.

“If they get a chance to really look at the F35, they would want it," Laird said. "The Indians have requested 3 times to talk to people about the F-35B, which is the true revolutionary aircraft -- and the administration never answered the mail, they've blown them off, it's typical of the Obama administration. We love our allies except if you want anything.”

He added that India may in fact not be at the level where it should be trusted with F-35s, however, so the administration would be right to turn them down. But he argued that the F-35 is ahead of what Russia has.

“The Russians are good aircraft designers, and they know how to build an agile aircraft, and [the new plane they are working on] is a step forward the path of more agility and flexibility, but the problem is -- it's not all about the frame, it's about what your put in it. The F35 can see around itself, 360 degrees, can see a missile take off 820 miles away, it has a radar that's extraordinary, and the systems are integrated. The Russians I think are nowhere near that at this point.”

Laird admitted that there was a kind of “ho-hum” aspect to those types of features, but said that the information they provide to pilots and commanders would pay off in a combat situation.

Cordesman also said that he was unsurprised by the Indian complaints, given what he knew about Russian air capabilities.

“They’re very good at building airplanes,” Cordesman said. “The problem that Russia, since the collapse of the former Soviet Union, has been putting out the military equivalent of show cars. They look good, but it isn’t always clear how practical they are and how many of the specifications they can actually meet.”

The author of the piece can be reached at maxim.lott@foxnews.com or on twitter at @maximlott

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jan 2014 20:02

Very interesting article

anmol wrote:On fox news site:-

www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/24/russia ... om-moscow/

Russian rubbish? India reportedly disappointed with stealth fighters from Moscow
by Maxim Lott, foxnews.com
January 24th 2014

The Russian prototype is "unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered,” said Indian Air Force Deputy Air Marshall S Sukumar at a Jan. 15 meeting, according to minutes obtained by the Business Standard.

Track-able items, in quotes.

That contrasts sharply with high hopes voiced by the Indian government when the joint project, to which the Indian government has contributed $6 billion, began.

Not contribnuted yet. Seems like they would like to if India got 50% input. TBD, should be done.

But it is hardly surprising that the invisible-to-radar Russian fighter planes don't quite live up to the billing, according to defense experts reached by FoxNews.com.

“The Russians are certainly not up to speed in avionics,” Robbin Laird, who has served as a consultant to the Marine Corps and Air Force and started the website Second Line of Defense, told FoxNews.com. “For them to pull off a stealth airframe, and for it to actually be stealthy, the engine technology has to be very good.

India is the largest arms importer in world, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, and its military import large amounts from both Russia and western countries.

“The Indians for a long time have split their fighter industry between western work and Russian work,” Laird said.

“Clearly they want to go more Western because they recognize that the Russian stuff just isn't up to the western standards. You only have so much money to go around, and like everybody else they've got financial pressures,” he added.

Other security experts said that India has a history of incompetence when it comes to military procurement, and so it did not necessarily reflect badly on Russia.
Americans have done it with the F-22 and F-35. But it’s not easy to do. No one has done it but ourselves.”

* Russian avionics: The FGFA will have Indian avionics (India to customise Russia's FGFA planes)

" ................... Our version will also have more advanced Indian-made avionics,” Mr. Subrahmanyan told The Hindu at the Moscow Air Show-2013. He is leading a HAL delegation to the biannual air show being held this year from August 27 to September 1.

“Thanks to these improvements we will get a better and more powerful platform,” Mr. Subrahmanyan said.

* and for it to actually be stealthy, the engine technology has to be very good: This indeed is a very interesting co-relationship. IAF has complained about the PAK-FA engine and everyone agrees that it is not the right one - that the 5th Gen engine is being built. IF this statement that the engine has some impact on the stealth of a plane is true, then the PAK-FA tests being conducted, from a stealth plane PoV, are virtually useless. The Russians will have to re-conduct every test once the real/5th Gen plane arrives. And, since the FGFA is dependent on the PAK-FA (someone here posted 90%) it makes sense to be very, very, very concerned about the FGFA.

The IAF also has concerns about the quality of the prototypes.

On the composite front, from the above posted article:

“While the Russian version of the FGFA is all-metal, ours will have wings and empennage (vertical and horizontal stabilisers) made of composite materials,” said S. Subrahmanyan, Managing Director of MiG Complex at HAL.

“The use of composites will reduce the plane’s weight and give it lower signature.

Since that interview, this in Nov, 2013:

Russian manufacturers developed an all-composite airframe for advanced fifth-generation PAK FA fighter, ARMS-TASS reports with reference to a source close to Rostech Corporation.

"PAK FA is made of composites: airframe, wing and empennage. The components are manufactured by a company of RT-Khimcomposite Holding", - the source said.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jan 2014 20:50

Jan 23, 2014 :: The Hard Politics Of Fighter Aircraft: India, Russia, and the PAK FA

The Indian Air Force looks away from Russia for its fifth-generation fighter needs.

The announcement in the Business Standard that the Indian Air Force was less than interested in continuing its relationship with Russia over the PAK FA came as a major surprise. Notwithstanding Indian interest in generation 4.5 fighters such as the Rafale, collaboration with the Russians on the PAK FA was intended to deliver India a fifth generation stealth fighter, as well as a variety of technology transfers. The Indian Air Force had a multitude of complaints, ranging from poor technology to bad engines to sloppy construction.

One lesson is that all advance defense programs have trouble, including the Russian ones. The endless series of difficulties with the F-35 are less the exception that the rule (even granting that the F-35′s troubles may be truly exceptional). We know less about these difficulties because the Russian procurement system isn’t nearly as open to scrutiny as the American one. Russian secrecy doesn’t approach that of Soviet times (Sukhoi recently published a set of patent applications associated with the stealth features of the PAK FA), but it’s not surprising that the problems with the PAK FA have emerged as result of collaboration with India. Indeed, this development lends further support to the idea that the real disciplinary force in fighter acquisition and innovation will be the increasingly sophisticated export market.

From an American point of view, the reassuring part of this story is that every fifth generation fighter project is likely to suffer from significant problems. We’ll know less about the teething problems with the J-20 and the J-31 than of those with the F-35 because China’s defense sector remains closed, but any plausible analysis must take into account the likelihood of technical difficulties. Indeed, given that the Chinese defense industry is considerably less experienced with cutting edge aircraft than even the Russians, it’s almost irresponsible to assume that the PLAAF will avoid operational and procurement pitfalls.

While it might be emotionally satisfying to crow over the deficiencies of an adversary fighter, air forces and navies actually have incentive to do the opposite. A more fearsome opponent serves to drive investment and procurement, while a realistic appraisal of enemy capabilities could result in corresponding cuts. For example, the Department of Defense worried that the MiG-23 was a world-beating fighter, before it tested out a few copies and determined that it was a deeply troubled aircraft. Even after reliable information about the Flogger emerged, it took a long time for assessments of its capabilities to filter through the U.S. defense community.

Granting the complexity of the fifth generation fighter project hardly absolves the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin, but it does put the experience in some perspective. Further, while the problems of the F-35 have surely strained ties with some partners, few have been as vocal about rejecting the aircraft as the Business Standard story suggests of the IAF. Moving forward, the question becomes whether India will use this incident to leverage a better deal out of the Russians, or if it will look elsewhere for its fifth generation fighter requirements.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 26 Jan 2014 21:01

When did western news agencies take Indian news report seriously. This is fake reporting
The IAF viewpoint is not their official position, but merely creative writing on the part of the author. The Business Standard article is just an article. The IAF has not “rejected ” the PAK-FA.
Some of the Indian media is a lifafa of the various interest groups including the arms lobby.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jan 2014 22:07

Jan 24, 2014 :: Gunning for the PAK-FA: What the IAF really wants

by: Rakesh Krishnan Simha

The Indian Air Force’s ack-ack salvo at the Russian-Indian PAK-FA stealth fighter programme has surprised defence industry watchers. But the spat is hardly unique and in fact mirrors the difficulties the United States and its close allies are experiencing over the troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The IAF has five major complaints: the PAK-FA is too expensive, its engine unreliable, radar inadequate, stealth features badly engineered, and finally that India’s work share is too little. These complaints have an uncanny parallel to the issues dogging the American stealth programme, which has been blasted by the media, future customers and US lawmakers.

Technology: It’s a work in progress

Fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) programmes everywhere are experiencing serious teeth problems. The F-35 might be a uniquely disastrous project but even its big brother, the F-22 Raptor, is not out of the turbulence zone entirely. While the Americans claim the stealth interceptor is the best fighter ever created, several pilots have been spooked by performance issues beyond the F-22’s potentially deadly oxygen problem.

Considering that the Russian aerospace industry is smaller and less experienced than the Americans in designing and manufacturing high performance stealth aircraft, it’s almost certain they’ll face all sorts of issues as work progresses. But what’s also certain is the Russians – and their Indian partners – will sort out these glitches at various prototype stages.

So what’s the IAF getting paranoid about?

In India, the military does not dictate defence procurement policy – the civilian bureaucracy at the Ministry of Defence (MoD) does. So when a highly disciplined organisation such as the IAF uncharacteristically slams its own future fighter, then you can be sure the IAF brass is trying to put pressure on the MoD.

Fighter envy

A professional fighting force such as the IAF is surely keeping a close watch on the Chinese J-20 and J-31 stealth aircraft programmes. The two Chinese aircraft have an uncanny resemblance to the American F-22 and F-35. This is because Chinese intelligence managed to steal the technology and blueprints relating to both aircraft.

The IAF’s worry is that the Chinese aircraft could end up being better than the PAK-FA. That would indeed be a disaster because the IAF will end up facing superior stealth aircraft on both the Western and Himalayan borders, assuming Beijing sells these fighters to Pakistan.

The IAF is hoping the MoD will send a clear message to the Russians: we don’t mind being second best to the United States, but we certainly don’t want to be second best to China or Pakistan.

The IAF’s fears are understandable. The arrival of the MiG-29 and the Sukhoi-30 MKI in the 1990s has given it a fearsome qualitative advantage over the Pakistan Air Force. For the first time since the 1960s – when the PAF acquired the F-104 Starfighters and F-86 Sabres from the United States – the IAF has aircraft that is a generation and a half ahead of the PAF. Ceding that advantage would be undoubtedly painful for the IAF.

Share of work: Too little or too much to handle?

India had earlier complained that Sukhoi is giving it only 15 percent of the R&D work share despite India paying half the development cost. It has expressed interest in developing some of the aircraft’s computers, software, guidance systems and other systems, as it did for a similar project with Russia producing a locally-made variant of the Sukhoi Su-30MKI strike aircraft.

The problem is Sukhoi may have its own legacy systems it wants to sell.

There is another parallel here – France’s Dassault, which had promised (or rather over-promised) it would offset 50 per cent of the Rafale fighter work to India, is now backtracking. Its argument is that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), which is India’s leading aircraft maker, is not capable of absorbing the technology.

While the French are known to be a crafty bunch, and clearly want to welch on their promise, what’s undeniable is HAL has its limitations. Last year the public sector company reportedly offered to surrender 35 percent of its 50 per cent work share in the PAK-FA project.

HAL’s copout had left the IAF fuming. Putting pressure on the MoD – which runs HAL – is perhaps the IAF’s insurance policy to ensure HAL does not spring such a nasty surprise again.

Costs: Expect prices to balloon

If the American stealth aircraft programme – or for that matter any weapons project – is an indicator, then the PAK-FA is likely to overshoot its budget. It’s almost a rule that big ticket weapons programmes come with cost overruns.

The project could end up costing India over $35 billion over the next two decades from the original $30 billion. With India paying $6 billion to co-develop the FGFA, a large percentage of the IAF’s capital budget will be locked up.

Perhaps the thinking at Air Headquarters is to fast forward the Rafale purchase by freeing up some cash earmarked for the PAK-FA. The stealth fighter being a project of strategic importance will get more cash anyway. Something along the lines of the Gorshkov aircraft carrier refurbishment, which India kept feeding until the costs ballooned from under a billion to more than $3 billion.

Synergies are the key

While the IAF’s urgency is justified, there’s no need to panic – as yet. The PAK-FA project may indeed be rocket science but both Russia and India have the means to see the project through. Russia has the technology and India has the cash. More importantly, both countries have a pressing need for a stealth fighter. If necessity is the mother of invention, then this is the time.

Defence Industry Daily has an excellent take on the Russian-Indian project. “Russia wants a 5th generation fighter that keeps it competitive with American offerings, and builds on previous aerial and industrial success. India wants to maintain technical superiority over its rivals, and grow its aerospace industry’s capabilities. They hope to work together, and succeed. Will they?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Jan 2014 22:16

it does not make sense to invest in pak-fa when we are serious about amca. now there are quarters who vehemently and politically opposed to amca, on the grounds of certain weakness in the core engine areas and stealth areas of r&d. if these are nailed, then iaf should blindly see amca > pak-fa in terms of needs in the future.

so, there is a big stakeholder politics, and vested interest politics in this relationship. i don't care if it is russia or usa who would like to chew us.. a chew is a chew, no matter where it comes from. so, deep down thinking, we should focus on requirements and qualitative requirements.

Hari Sud · Post by **Hari Sud** » 26 Jan 2014 22:57

This all discussion started when Business Standard (Paper Written by Ajay Shukla) pretended having read the minutes of meeting of a highly confidential discussion.

I refuse to believe Ajay Shukla. - He is a paid agent of arms lobby in India (which one I could not tell). He made up the story of having access to a confidential meeting discussion.

I do believe that somebody gave him a gist of those discussions.

Yes, IAF has set its sight on F-35 instead of PAK-FA. Hence they have been finding faults with it. Moreover the Russians are not outsourcing enough work to IAF/HAL/Others in India to co-develop the plane. The forgoing does not help, even if we are paying half of its developmental costs ($6 Billion).

The PAK-FA probably is 10% may be 20% inferior to American F-22 or F-35. But it is far superior to Chinese version of stolen technologies and less than perfect manufacturing techniques. Do not believe Chinese propaganda. They develop and destroy everything in a closed environment without letting independent observers access to it, hence to assume that Chinese have a superior product is foolhardy. That part is Ajay Shukla's creation. He definitely in my opinion bought out by somebody.

There is something good going to emerge from all this hoo-haa.

The Russians would take note of it. They want that money which India is going to pay for its development. Moreover Sukhoi is a much better airplane designers as close as possible to American "Skunk Works". Their SU -27/30 series are best fighters which even the Americans acknowledge. How could they be bad in building a good quality PAK-FA based on so many of their own superior technologies. Soon they will outsource more work to India.

In addition India has option to put its own avionics (Israel or French or Indian). Russian are developing a new engine for it. Its stealth visibility is a bit high as compared to F-35 or F-22, but it is at half the price. At that price it is two generations superior to China.

If you balance all the factors then it is a commotion created by Business Standard and Ajay Shukla, paid for by a few interests. Whether IAF is involved in the background, one can never tell.

In short Ajay Shukla is not trust worthy. His sources are always the worst ever. He lacks the understanding to evaluate the situation and jumps on the band wagon of getting to the press sooner than later. This episode seems to be that case.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 27 Jan 2014 00:30

Hari Sud wrote:This all discussion started when Business Standard (Paper Written by Ajay Shukla) pretended having read the minutes of meeting of a highly confidential discussion.

I refuse to believe Ajay Shukla. - He is a paid agent of arms lobby in India (which one I could not tell). He made up the story of having access to a confidential meeting discussion.

I do believe that somebody gave him a gist of those discussions.

Its been a week, the story has been widely quoted (by other media and elsewhere) and there's been no denial of the report whatsoever, from the officer in question (DCAS) or from any IAF spokesman.

The evidence suggests that the minutes of the meeting support the report by Ajai Shukla.

The PAK-FA probably is 10% may be 20% inferior to American F-22 or F-35. But it is far superior to Chinese version of stolen technologies and less than perfect manufacturing techniques. Do not believe Chinese propaganda.

A. There is no Chinese propaganda. They have an insular system and haven't begun marketing the J-31 to the world yet.

B. Regardless, you hope for the best, plan for the worst.

They develop and destroy everything in a closed environment without letting independent observers access to it, hence to assume that Chinese have a superior product is foolhardy.

Their SU -27/30 series are best fighters which even the Americans acknowledge. How could they be bad in building a good quality PAK-FA based on so many of their own superior technologies.

FYI, the Su-27 was developed by the Soviets and in the same 'closed environment' that you've just derided. And even Russians aren't nearly as forthcoming about their defence issues as the West or India.

And for the record, whenever the PAK FA and J-20 enter service, it'll still have been over a decade after the F-22.

Soon they will outsource more work to India.

One can only hope we're not paying $6 billion for 'outsourced' work.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Jan 2014 02:55

Shukla did provide a direct quote, IIRC, from an IAF person at the meeting. We can think what we want, but there is something that is not perfect out there - and it is not anyone's fault per se.

I think the Simha article I posted is fair.

And, this being teh first attempt by the Russians one should expect a lot of teething problems - it is natural.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 27 Jan 2014 04:24

http://www.businessinsider.in/The-F-22- ... 423504.cms

Problems have plagued the F-22 Raptor since its inception.

Flaking, toxic stealth coating with equally toxic glue. International dateline software glitches. Pilots nearly passing out from lack of oxygen and the feared "Raptor Cough."

So the jet went through a battery of extensive tests, over many years, only for one general to suggest something completely unrelated to the configuration of the plane's innards: Maybe human beings just weren't physiologically equipped to max out the attributes of this total sky carnivore.

I think shukla writing against pakfa/fgfa is a good sign. As shukla has already exposed himself marketing f 35 and visiting boeing kaarkhana to which side he supports. Shukla coming out with this shows that pakfa is showing promise and some countries/people are threatened by it. So they plant stories like these.......

As I said seeing rafale as strongest contender some countries had planted stories of it being ousted 4-5 years ago. So take it as a good sign!

As we see amrika isn't teething problems-proof either:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-0 ... r-missions

koti wrote:P8 gets a non satisfactory review.

Link
Thats surprising.

That too after production and supply has started.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 27 Jan 2014 04:35

My 2 naya paisas.

1. I think this report of to and fro between IAF/HAL/MoD/Irkut is legitimate. In my eyes it is welcome too. All of you guys are up in arms against IAF when they do things which hampers building up of indigenous design and production capability. Yet, this time when IAF is asking HAL why it is indulging in mere screwdrivergiri, you guys seem to blame the IAF (and the messenger)! If India is to spend 35 billion dollars (make no mistake the bill will grow), then we should get more than screwdriver giri, and the more the better. I am happy that at least IAF is fighting for that in this case!

2. Make no mistake, PAKFA is going to be a wonderful plane, a true world-leader. Unlike the The J-20, it's avionics, radars and engines are truly world class. PAK-FA does have ch1nks in its armor. There are things that I am not worried about. PAKFA is not an all aspect stealth aircraft (The J-20 is worse with huge canard and ventral fins, none of which are aligned). But this seems to be a design decision, maybe considering feasibility studies. The comment from the IAF in the minutes about the radar coverage comes as a true surprise to me. Clearly he has not followed the reported and displayed progress, or the Russians are showing capabilities they don't possess. Coming to the structural strengthening of the wings. I noticed the strips not only on the wings, but horizontal stabilizers long time back (as seen in the picture below). From their positions it was clear that they are to provide additional strength. Strengthening of the wings, control surfaces can be taken care of before series production. The thing that I am really worried about is the build quality. For low RCS of fifth gen planes, fit and finish is absolutely critical. This is not a strong point of Russian aircraft industry. Secretly, this is the part which I am hoping is learnt from the Rafale experience, bettered and incorporated on our FGFA. We can do better than Russia in this aspect along with composite content on the plane.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 27 Jan 2014 13:35

It would be better for the IAF to climb down a little, get off their high horses and do the following, if they really feel that FGFA is not the way to go.

1. Forget about the Tejas Mk. 2 and go all out for 200 of Tejas Mk. 1 with improvements if they need (which can come in tranches) as long as improvements are not structural which require FCS changes and subsequent lots of testing.
2. Cancel FGFA.
3. Put their full weight and money where their mouths are and go all out on the AMCA. Full focus should get us an AMCA in 10 years from start point. So if they start in 2015, you can get it in 2025. In squadron service. We will not get FGFA until 2020 at least so just another five years will get them a home grown proper stealth platform.
4. For numbers and to tide over the situation get the Rafale with the understanding that Rafale should be the last fighter that IAF buys from abroad.