IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Oct 2015 18:49

IAF wants over 100 Rafale or similar jets

New Delhi, Oct 3

Indian Air Force today said it would need at least six squadrons comprising 108 Rafale or similar jets to shore up its capabilities as it hoped that the contract for 36 French fighter aircraft would be inked by year-end.

Noting that two squadron of 18 Rafale jets each might not be enough, Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha said his force would like to have at least six squadrons of the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA).

He hinted that even though the Rafale is the front- runner, India may go in for another aircraft with similar capabilities "if the deal is good".

"Definitely, we would like to have MMRCA variety of aircraft.

At least about six squadrons to my mind.

Let us see, there may be some other alternatives as well," Raha said addressing a press conference ahead of the Air Force Day on October 8. He was replying to questions about the possibility of India Air Force wanting more than the 36 Rafales under a government to government deal announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his trip to France in April.

Asked if the additional four squadrons of aircraft will be Rafales or if there is a possibility of other players getting into play, Raha said, "I may wish to have Rafale.

But there are equally good aircraft.

So if the deal is good and the government decides we need to have six of similar squadron.." "There are alternatives.

I cannot say I only want Rafale.

I want capability of Rafale type aircraft.

So the government will have a look at it and based on urgency and the type of contract is signed with Dassault Aviation, further decisions may be taken by the government.

I cannot predict," he said.

Admitting that the IAF is currently "short" in terms of authorised strength of 42 squadrons, Raha said more aircraft are needed to replace many more squadrons in coming years.

"The need is there.

As Air Force, we will like to have more of these (MMRCA) but it will have to be viable in terms of cost, in terms transfer of technology and in terms of Make in India policy that the government is trying to implement.

"So if those terms and conditions are good, then I am sure we will be able to get more.

But as of now we are looking at 36," he said.

With the government cancelling the multi-billion tender for 126 MMRCA, there is renewed hope in the aviation industry that India may go in for fresh bids to fill up the gaps.

From Swedish firm Saab to US' Lockheed Martin and the France's Dassault Aviation, most of the global aircraft manufactures have offered their jets in line with the government's push for 'Make in India'

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Oct 2015 19:32

If IAF wants 5 more squadron with Rafale like capability then they put their money where the mouth is and invest in 5 squadron of Tejas Mk2

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 03 Oct 2015 19:33

Rafale is a heavy for France. Eurofighter is heavy for UK, Germany, Spain Italy, Saudi
Gripen NG is Light/Medium/Heavy for Sweden and Mig 35 is light for Russia. F-16 is Light for USAF and
F-18 E/F is Heavy for USN.

All these aircraft were lumped together is "Medium" MRCA for IAF. Makes one really wonder, whats with the obsession of IAF with Light,Medium and Heavy fighters.

PLAAF has a J-10 and J-11/Su-30 combo
PAF has a F-16 and a JF-17 Combo.

Why is the IAF then still willing to go for a circus of Medium(actually heavy) jets ? That they are willing to consider yet another type apart from rafale is mind boggling.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 03 Oct 2015 20:02

chetak wrote: He hinted that even though the Rafale is the front- runner, India may go in for another aircraft with similar capabilities "if the deal is good".

Asked if the additional four squadrons of aircraft will be Rafales or if there is a possibility of other players getting into play, Raha said, "I may wish to have Rafale.

But there are equally good aircraft.

I cannot say I only want Rafale.

I want capability of Rafale type aircraft.

I cannot predict.

Why the hell are they talking about Rafale-like jets??!! Why not just say we want more Rafales? Surely that makes more sense. Unless... they're edging back from the current deal.

Hmm.. I wonder how much sightseeing the chief did when he visited Nellis Air Base in May.

Maybe I'm just kite-flying but can someone offer a more logical explanation for what would otherwise be lunacy?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Oct 2015 20:20

You are a funny guy sometimes Viv, if the AF would say we want more rafale wonlee, jingoes would be frothing at the mouth saying look at iaf shamelessly clamoring for imported birds at even the expense of negotiation power....the no plan B ronadhona redux.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Oct 2015 20:24

is Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha anywhere retirement??

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Oct 2015 20:27

Austin wrote:If IAF wants 5 more squadron with Rafale like capability then they put their money where the mouth is and invest in 5 squadron of Tejas Mk2

5 sqd of LCA, whatever mk, I doubt can match 5 sqd of Rafale capability, esp. In terms of range / payload

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 03 Oct 2015 20:43

Tejas Mk1 is MIG 21++,
Tejas MK 2 will be M2K++
and
AMCA will be Rafale ++

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Oct 2015 20:55

^ yes, that is the idea

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 03 Oct 2015 21:35

chetak wrote:is Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha anywhere retirement??

31st December 2016, about one year and three months and 27 days.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 03 Oct 2015 22:08

ViV-S , that post to too long to be quoted. However I would reply as follows:

MP is not saying that he would junk 36 Rafale. If you remember the timeline , he was giving press conference junking MMRCA deal in India when NaMo was assuring to buy 36 in France.

Hence whether it makes sense or not 36 is on the table for Dasaault to take under G2G deal. SU30MKI is not in lieu of those 36 just because we care discussing pricing being too high. We do have choice to order SU30MKI , that is a given should the need arise.

I am ot aware of any report that MoD was even considering scrapping the deal. Is there any press release from MoD in this regard? In fact IAF fully backed Rafale purchase till regime changed. It was Tainted Saint which developed leg crimps when file went to him for approval and he asked to discover true L1 blah blah. In fact NaMo has been very appreciative of IAF requirements and hence agreed for 36 instead of 18 as was in MMRCA deal. Any other Govt and deal could have been scrapped without providing alternatives.

I am not sure if pricing details are in public for Rafale. but what I know of tendering process, I can say that each and every distinct item is quited separately and then net price per piece is indicated. Cost of each item of maintenance per year with breakdown is also given with maximum net chargeable per year per piece is also give. In fact you will have cost of spares broken down to minute details. If it is not reflected, clarifications are obtained as IAF technical team would be well versed in these matters. So yes, we would have detailed costing available on the table and we can proceed from there.

Since the currently quoted ballpark figures are in the realm of speculation in absence of any authentic data, I would say no further. Apparently we might conclude the deal by December. If it fails we would know that conditions or pricing was not right.

Attack Helis, ... yes, the total number that we would eventually operate will be minuscle in comparison to mainstay fighter planes and their roles would also be specific. So I don't see how that would be relevant in comparing with fighters. If they ditch on attack helis, we would have quick alternatives in that. but for fighter planes , any sanctions would cripple the force. Too big a risk to take on unreliable partner.

True our country is not for rent. But US can not seek to make much headway while paying pakis 30bn dollah and hope to make that payment by earning the same from India. And even if they supply to us free or whatever we are not going to use it as per their requirement. We would not agree to such conditionalities. CISMOA is one such example. Anyway it appears that they are even not able to enforce EULA on Bakis. And I doubt that pakis utility for USA would cease after withdrawal from AF-PAK. I think it would continue in some form or other. Bonds are too deep with bakis then with India. Weren't they threatening India in '71 and then after POK-II. Sanctions on ISRO , DRDA and other sister companies, CSIR labs, MTCR and Dual use techs,Cray-XMP, 26/11 case and what not. We have faced it all and it would not be easy for US to erase all that suspicion in absence of any credible and visible change in their policies to consider them as reliable partner. Traders , as they are, would be treated as traders.

Pakistan relies on China and rightly so. But it does not have money to run and buy whaever it wants from anybody unless it is given free. I would not bother too much unless Russia enters into Defence cooperation treaty and finances the deal with Pakis.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 03 Oct 2015 22:09

Austin wrote:You buy from DCS or FMS or Dassault or Sukhoi , Large production numbers translate to larger profit for these companies not lower cost.

Companies are there to make profit and not reduce its margin , They invest a lot into R&D , Manufacturing and building Supply Chains etc and initially no compaies makes profit depending on how much they have invested into.

They will just translate the large production number into higher profit and skim the cream.

IF larger production number translated to lower cost then F-16 after thousands of production numbers would be available at much lower cost like $30 million and not $60 and C-17 wouldnt cost us $4-5 billion for the large orders churned out earlier.

Its just marketing talk and fallacy that companies specially those private ones who love to loose their profit in order to lower cost , does not happen in real world

As usual, you make claims entirely based on your own prejudices. Almost all western MICs are publicly held and the profits they make are openly available. I had posted actual numbers before, in response to another one of your claims elsewhere. Here it is again - [url=https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NYSE/ ... fit-Margin[/url]. That has comparisons to its competitors and the defense sector in general. Compare this to Facebook, apple, google and you'll know what fat actually means. But I'm sure you'll be back to passing of your prejudice as fact in no time.

IF larger production number translated to lower cost then F-16 after thousands of production numbers would be available at much lower cost like $30 million and not $60 and C-17 wouldnt cost us $4-5 billion for the large orders churned out earlier.

Exactly where are you coming up with those numbers from - 30 instead of 60 ?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 Oct 2015 22:25

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5092&p=1909958#p1909958

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Oct 2015 02:22

IF larger production number translated to lower cost then F-16 after thousands of production numbers would be available at much lower cost like $30 million and not $60

True. If the 2010 F-16 was exactly the same version as the one from 1975 or so and without inflation, etc, it would cost much less.

Economics threads only provide partial and at times biased information. And then there are good posts deleted because they are "OT".

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Oct 2015 02:48

Cain Marko wrote:
Austin wrote:If IAF wants 5 more squadron with Rafale like capability then they put their money where the mouth is and invest in 5 squadron of Tejas Mk2
5 sqd of LCA, whatever mk, I doubt can match 5 sqd of Rafale capability, esp. In terms of range / payload

Solution lies in acquiring more Su-30MKIs on top of more LCA Mk.1. Together they would fulfill the IAF's needs.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Oct 2015 05:30

NRao wrote:
IF larger production number translated to lower cost then F-16 after thousands of production numbers would be available at much lower cost like $30 million and not $60
True. If the 2010 F-16 was exactly the same version as the one from 1975 or so and without inflation, etc, it would cost much less.

Economics threads only provide partial and at times biased information. And then there are good posts deleted because they are "OT".

Well not only that but cost is the production of optimum production rate to support an optimum supplier base. Unfortunately the F-16 production rate has shrunk considerably from the 80's and 90's and is at a trickle at the moment. The F-18E/F program was operating at a much higher production rate and the USN got Super Hornets much cheaper despite the heavier weight, and twin engines than export customers got Vipers. Viper production rate was supported largely by NATO and USAF orders, once those were dropped the supplier base shrunk to scale for a much lower sustained production rate where it exists now. If it were to double or triple the F-16 would cost pretty much the same plus modern systems adjusted for inflation, and the reverse would happen if Lockheed had to reduce production further and that is why they'd rather shut it down rather than drop to below the threshold because when you do that, you jack up the cost and that leads to a cycle where demand further shrinks...Unless you have a strategic interest to protect the line (as in the case of Dassault) there is no getting out of that in a competitive environment.

In the Super H, when production volume on that program drops to a trickle when Boeing moves to a 1.5 a month production rate its price would obviously go up as well. More details in the International Thread.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Oct 2015 18:39

Collating info from today's media reports on the Raffy,and chief's statements,it is clear that the Raffy deal has passed the can do stage and that's why he is now saying that he never said "only Rafale,etc.etc.". He wants another 6 sqds. of med. "Rafale type" aircraft.Why he can't get Rafales is obvious.Price.That's why the Typhoon is out. The other news from one report that LCA MK-2 has been scrapped,probably in favour of the AMCA 15 years from now.The major worry is still aircraft prod rate in India.MKI prod rate was supposed to be 16/yr,HAL can just about make only 8! Serviceability just 50% says this report but we've recent reports about increased serviceability rates. Now even if we order 100-200 LCAs of whatever avatar they come in,with such a miserly prod rate we will neverbe able to bridge the gap of 11 sqds of MIG-21s and MIG-27s that are being retired..FGFA news is that 60+ may be bought outright just like the Raffy deal and it is only govt. intervention now if the earlier JV collaboration concept is to stay.

I can't see how this massive gap,to meet the massive Chinese buildup which the chief has spoken of,beign filled in wuith desi production.It's just not possible.Extra imports of even MKIs,whatever have to be on the cards if the IAF achieves even part of its planned modernization plans.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Oct 2015 20:02

Philip sir, Hence talk of second line....and of swedes and lockmart in delhi I suppose, but it could, one hopes, also be for more tejas at an expedited rate

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Oct 2015 08:48

Yes,CM,but Tejas will only replace the 11 sqds of 21s/27s. The chief has asked for another 6 "Rafale type" sqds. That's another aircraft,or extras of existing ones,more likely instead of inducting yet another new type,since the LCA MK-2 seems to have been shelved in favour of more MK-1As.I think that the GOI has accepted a Rafale buy so that we get our hands on the latest French tech. Comparing it with the best Russian and our own advancements to leverage an AMCA for the future which will replace the jags and other med. sized aircraft now upgraded to last another 15+ years.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 05 Oct 2015 13:25

Karan M wrote: Not to forget:
Another interesting factoid. The gents involved in this august venture included Gurmeet Kanwal, father of journalist Rahul Kanwal.
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-dn ... ts-1799803

Karan,

We are forgetting the wheelbarrow's 3rd wheel Field Marshal Klaw.

Gets a job in the state TV in return for the Track2

As regards SSM, this is what a very senior general and former Siachen brigade commander wrote about his tenure as NSA.

Interesting narration by SSM (Shiv Shankar Menon). But the moot question is isn't it good to keep China and Pakistan guessing when both of them have teamed up against us on all fronts? SSM is also mum what was the UPA's policy when he was the NSA. Don't we know that it was he who personally briefed the selected trio of the now infamous Indo-Pak Track II, to recommend India withdraw from Siachen?

Besides, don't we know the pusillanimous Indian reaction against grave provocations by China and Pakistan while he was NSA? In fact, both he and SK (Salman Khurshid) were bending backwards.

SSM was also responsible to drastically curb what assistance was sought and we could have given to the erstwhile Afghan Government. Additionally, isn't SSM guilty of neglecting India's immediate neighbourhood, China's periphery and Central Asia was the NSA?

Sorry, folks this cat has no whiskers worth the name ! His strutting around as Dr Know All now doesn't impress in the least.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Oct 2015 16:50

>>the selected trio

so kanwal, tyagi and field marshal klaw?

MarcH · Post by **MarcH** » 05 Oct 2015 19:41

The only medium aircraft fitting the budget are MiG-29's. Russians ordered some SMT's last year for 20something mill a pop. Make that 25 mill for UPG's and you'll get a medium capability using existing infrastructure and logistics.
Not as shiny as Rafales, but affordable and easier absorbed.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 05 Oct 2015 20:42

chaanakya wrote:ViV-S , that post to too long to be quoted. However I would reply as follows:

....
True our country is not for rent. But US can not seek to make much headway while paying pakis 30bn dollah and hope to make that payment by earning the same from India. ...

..I would not bother too much unless Russia enters into Defence cooperation treaty and finances the deal with Pakis.

Russia wants/needs hard cash. They can only finance pakis by doing the same thing as the US: rip us off and use the proceeds to finance the sale. It is not in our interest to be overly reliant on them.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Oct 2015 07:11

the only two cheaper options than rafale would be
- new build Mig29
- retired USAF block40/50 F-16

with 100+ JSF already inducted, they might retire some of the F-16 squadrons earlier

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Oct 2015 08:46

IF you check the interview carefully IAF chief mentions similar capability and not similar aircraft.

Similar capability as Rafale can come with Tejas MKx or Su-30x type both are made here , IAF would most likely end up buying both in some numbers that comes to 5 squadron of Rafale , Ofcourse assuming Rafale gets restricted to just 36

I see no reason why they cannot add more Jags with Darin 3 and EL 2032 radar to tide over 3 squadron of 27 by end of decade , Jags too are made in India.

IAF is not short of aircraft they can purchase built in India , They got Tejas , MKI and Jags to juggle with

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 06 Oct 2015 14:42

Singha wrote:the only two cheaper options than rafale would be
- new build Mig29
- retired USAF block40/50 F-16 with 100+ JSF already inducted, they might retire some of the F-16 squadrons earlier

The last bit (Bold) isn't going to happen, because there are plans to induct 1.5 squadrons of F-35's per year between 2016 (IOC) and 2018, and 2.5 per year between 2018-2022. The remaining jets will be doing testing work, pilot training, certification and getting concurrency changes incorporated on their way to be fully cleared for block 3F and all the post-production changes required to be handed over to frontline service. Moreover, the transition (f-16 to F35) is already 5 years behind schedule and those F-16's have been pretty much in combat rotations through the last 10-12 years and are useless for anyone looking them from a long term perspective. The more younger F-16's won't be retired till the middle to end of next decade. The F-16 market for used jets is pretty much for those combat air-forces that cannot afford new fast jets of any type (even the cheapest ones) but still want the capability. With combat deployments, the USAF (and I would assume a lot of NATO as well) jets have been used quite hard blowing past the fatigue and sustainment models built for them in the early 90's.

The F16's are pretty much out, and I doubt the IAF will look at them seriously given the MK1 is back in favor and will be inducted in decent numbers. Once the LCA enters frontline service, in large numbers the critical mass within the IAF in terms of opinion on the product would ensure follow on orders as long as HAL lives up to expectations. Between more LCA MK1's and perhaps 20-30 more MKI's (that you can perhaps sell mid life ) you can cover the medium term needs for squadron recapitalization as the MK2 and AMCA are developed.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 06 Oct 2015 15:57

INTERVIEW: IAF CHIEF (PART-1)

Rafale Induction Will Arrest Draw-Down of Combat Fleet: ACM Arup Raha

By Arming India Correspondent

NEW DELHI, OCT.2, 2015: India's air force has placed its bets on the Rafale combat plane induction in the near future to stem the rapid depletion of its combat strength and is hoping that the contracts for the French aircraft are signed at the earliest. It also envisages achieving the sanctioned strength of 42 combat squadrons by 2027, to be ready to meet a possible two-front war threat.

The Indian Air Force is also working alongside the Defense, Home Affairs and Civil Aviation ministries to work out a regulatory mechanism for unregulated flying objects that pose a threat to the safety and security of vital installations in India, a full 15 years after the 9/11 attacks in New York, says Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha in an exclusive interview to Arming India.

Here goes the part-1 of the two-part interview given ahead of the Air Force Day on Oct.8:

Q. We’ve recently witnessed the 50th anniversary of the 1965 Indo-Pak War. It’s also provided a moment of introspection. What are the priorities which need immediate attention of the decision-makers in the context of current challenges? What are the challenges and shortfalls which need immediate attention?

A. IAF is a technology intensive organization and skill development is a long drawn process. Our major challenge has always been to synchronize these two for optimum results. As a result of our critical self-analysis, we, as an organization are focusing on processes rather than events. Our operational capability is dependent on five verticals, namely equipment, training, procedures, infrastructure and force application, based on knowledge and in-depth analysis. Our capability at any instance is governed by the vertical least developed. Therefore, our endeavor is to keep all the verticals moving up in sync. We are aggressively pursuing our acquisitions and simultaneously changing our training philosophy and operational procedures to exploit our equipment profile fully. While infrastructure is being developed on ground to assist aerospace operations, minds are being trained for holistic capability development.

Q. Similarly, what are the emerging future security challenges, say 20-30 years from now, for the IAF that your crystal gazing is throwing up, and what are your thoughts on how to counter these future threats? After the 9/11 attacks in New York, the possibility of an aerial asymmetric warfare by either state or non-state actors became a reality? What’s the next big threat today, in your assessment?

A. Security challenges are extremely dynamic in nature and so are the responses to them. Instead of crystal gazing to assess ‘likely threats’ over a period of 20-30 years, we undertake a process based enhancement of our capability. IAF is focusing on ‘Men, Machine and Methods’. It has constantly believed that by making wise investments in these three areas, we will not only be ready for the existing threats but will also be well prepared to anticipate and respond to future challenges including those from non-state actors. The threat from un-regulated flying objects and machines has emerged very clearly. The MoD/IAF is coordinating with MoCA and MHA to establish proper regulations and control to counter the threat.

Q. How would you compare IAF’s combat, air defense, military transport, ISR capabilities with that of Pakistan Air Force and Chinese PLAAF? What would you suggest should be the Indian strategy to match capability or to counter the threats arising out of India’s traditional rival’s capabilities?

A. Threat and security assessment is a natural and on-going process for a country to ensure its national security. We are enhancing our capability to meet various multi-dimensional threats that we may have to address in the future. Our modernization plan and infrastructure development is in sync with our endeavor to retain a ‘Combat and Capability Edge’. IAF’s focus is on its Capability Enhancement and is not country-specific

Q. The Air Force’s fighter squadron strength, which is one of the parameters to measure the air power that India wields in the region, is at a low. It may not, at present, be at an all-time low vis-à-vis the sanctioned fleet strength. But in the due course of the next five to seven years, it could actually touch an all-time low. Is this a fair assessment? Could you please explain how this process of force level depletion is happening? What would be its effects on the Air Force’s ability to perform its role in the overall security architecture of India? Also, how do you plan to mitigate the situation? What are the likely impediments to the mitigation process?

A. Presently, IAF has 35 active fighter Squadrons against Government authorized strength of 42 Squadrons. The reduction in the strength of fighter Squadrons is due to obsolescence over a period of time. The shortfall in fighter aircraft strength is planned to be made good through induction of the remaining contracted Su-30 MKI, LCA, Rafale and other suitable fighter aircraft. We are also ensuring higher availability of aircraft through better maintenance and logistics management. The Government is aware of the need and the right decisions will be taken to meet our defence requirements. The IAF expects to achieve the sanctioned strength of 42 Fighter Squadrons by the end of the 14th Plan period.

Q. What are your force accretion plans? When and how would you achieve a stage when force accretions will begin to happen? How would you sustain that pace of growth of the combat fleet for the long term, say 2030, 2040 and 2050? What’s your desired end-state in terms of your combat fleet strength? How would you maintain those force levels after you have achieved it?

A. Force accretion is a process which is already in progress as part of the long term capability enhancement vision of the IAF. The capability building of the IAF has received a boost during the current Plan period and I am sure that we will be able to sustain the rate in future as well. We aim to achieve the authorized strength of fighter Squadrons by the end of the 14th Plan period. The sustenance of any fleet is undertaken by following the best maintenance practices and supply chain management. We also undertake mid-life upgrades on fleets in order to enhance their operational capability and relevance. The desired end-state is the capability to undertake full-spectrum operations in the most effective manner in a networked environment. The Government and IAF are committed to ensure that the capability build-up and its sustenance are met through indigenous sources to the maximum extent possible.

Q. Against the backdrop of the retraction of the 2007 MMRCA tender after a long-winding haggling process since Rafale was selected as the L-1 in 2012, what are your expectations from the 36-Rafale government-to-government contract that India is negotiating with France, in terms of how quickly the negotiations could be completed, the deal signed, and the deliveries begin? What are the specific issues that are currently under discussion between the two nation’s negotiation committees? Could you elaborate on the key issues under discussion?

A. The contract negotiations for the 126 MMRCA had reached a stalemate and the process was not making any headway for almost two years. Realizing the ‘Critical Operational Necessity’ of fighter aircraft in the IAF and likelihood of further delays in concluding the MMRCA contract negotiations, the Government decided to procure 36 Rafale aircraft from France through an Inter-Government route. The induction of these aircraft will assist the IAF in arresting the draw down in the number of combat squadrons. The negotiations for the procurement of 36 Rafale aircraft along with Weapons, Sensors and Counter-measures packages are in progress with the French.

Q. Air Force’s requirement under the now-terminated MMRCA tender was 126 aircraft with an option for 63-plane follow-on order. Are these the present requirement too for this class of an aircraft in the Air Force fleet? If yes, how do you plan to make up for the numbers? If no, then what is the number you are looking to procure? What are your alternative plans if you intend to stop the Rafale fleet at 36 planes?

A. The present case is for the procurement of 36 Rafale aircraft. The Government is aware of our requirements and would take a decision on induction of additional fighter aircraft in due course.

Q. There have been references to Su-30 MKI’s capability shortfall in an one-on-one dogfight during a close air combat vis-à-vis Pakistan Air Force’s F-16 C/D, primarily due to the latter’s EW strength? Is that assessment correct and if so, doesn’t this situation pose a limitation on Indian Su-30 MKI fleet countering the PAF’s F-16 fleet? What’s IAF’s counter within its fleet to that capability in the rival’s fleet?

A. Su-30 MKI is a potent platform and is capable of meeting all our operational requirements including those in a one-to-one combat scenario. Our forces have been participating in international exercises with friendly Air Forces against front line state-of the art fighter aircraft, which has provided insight into their capability and operational philosophy. The Su-30 has always performed well during such bi-lateral and multi-lateral Air Force level exercises.

Q. What’s going to be the final number of Su-30 MKI squadrons in the Air Force? How are inductions keeping pace with your plans? Have you overcome the issues of new Sukhoi bases not having shelters for the aircraft that are being deployed in the North East, such as in Tezpur or Chabua?

A. We intend to have a total of 13 squadrons equipped with the Su-30 MKI aircraft. There are certain slippages in delivery but they are not alarming and are being addressed through measures at the appropriate levels.

Q. Would the IAF consider procuring some of the other contenders in the now dead MMRCA tender, such as F-16, Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab or MiG-35 to meet the gap in the combat fleet requirement?

A. These aircraft are state-of-the-art fighters being operated by several Air Forces the world over. However, the IAF is not considering any such proposal at the moment. The Government will take a decision on induction of additional fighter aircraft in due course of time.

Q. Is a light, single-engine combat aircraft requirement of the IAF real? If so, could you confirm if the IAF is examining the offer from Saab for Gripen or Textron for the Scorpion or any other plane in the category to meet this requirement?

A. The IAF fighter fleet will be a mix of light, single-engine aircraft and multi-role twin-engine aircraft that will enable us to prosecute air operations across the entire spectrum of conflicts.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 06 Oct 2015 15:58

INTERVIEW: IAF CHIEF (PART-2)

Defense Space Agency Coming Up As An Interim Before Aerospace Command: ACM Arup Raha

By Arming India Correspondent

NEW DELHI, Oct.2, 2015: India is establishing a Defense Space Agency (DSA) as an interim arrangement ahead of the government approval for setting up of the ambitious tri-services Aerospace Command, on the lines of the U.S. Air Force's Aerospace Command. The Headquarters of the Integrated Defense Staff (HQ IDS) is working out the charter of responsibilities of the DSA, even as the Narendra Modi government is actively considering the setting up of the Aerospace Command.

Indian Air Force (IAF) is also seriously considering a combat role for its fleet of BAE Systems' Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers (AJTs) that would number about 126, including the 20 that would be operated by the Surya Kiran Aerobatics Team. This will happen after the Hawk fleet goes through an avionics upgrade program, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha said in an exclusive interview to Arming India here ahead of the Air Force Day on Oct.8.

Meanwhile, the India-Russia Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) program is in trouble over differences between the two sides on the aircraft's technical features, costs and delivery schedule. IAF also plans to have just three attack helicopter units to perform all envisaged roles, including support to the Indian Army.

The IAF has, finally, agreed to have the HAL-built HTT-40 basic trainers in its fleet and it would get 70 of these indigenous planes. Following the changes in the trainer fleet, IAF has changed the rookie pilots training program into a two-stage training, instead of the previously three-stage training, and the first batch of trainee pilots are going through this changed training schedules already.

Here is the part-2 of the interview:

Q. During the AeroIndia-2015, the BAE Systems came to the show with a static display of an armed Hawk AJT. Is the Indian Air Force considering weaponizing the Hawks and if so, what are the combat roles you think you can use this sub-sonic trainer for?

A. We already have an operational role for the Hawk Mk-132 aircraft. A proposal for avionics upgrade of Hawk Mk-132 aircraft that will give the aircraft enhanced combat capability is under consideration at Air HQ.

Q. How is the negotiation with Russia regarding the FGFA progressing and has India whittled down its requirement for the FGFA? How many number of FGFA would form part of the Indian Air Force’s combat fleet? Have issues such as work share resolved on the FGFA program? What all has been achieved in the program till date and what more work is required to be completed on the FGFA? What’s the next step in the FGFA agreement?

A. The Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) for development and production of FGFA was signed on Oct.18, 2007 between India and Russia. The IGA had envisaged equal participation and funding by Indian and Russian sides in this project. There are certain issues involving technical features, cost and delivery timelines, which are being addressed at the highest level.

Q. In January 2015, the HAL handed over a LSP version of the Tejas to the Indian Air Force. Have you flown the aircraft and checked its performance? Is the Air Force satisfied with its performance? When would the first and the second LCA MkI squadron be raised? With the Air Force having no control over the LCA program’s progress, how do you get the HAL to meet the schedules of the Tejas MkII development? How many squadrons of LCA MkII do you envisage having in the IAF? What are the operational limitations that the MkII of the aircraft may come with?

A. The documents for the first series production LCA Mk-1 were handed over to IAF on 17 January 2015; however, the aircraft is yet to be delivered to IAF. We will be in a position to form the first LCA Squadron after receipt of the first four LCA, which is now expected in 2016. The LCA Mk-2 was envisaged to overcome certain shortfalls related to performance, self-protection suite and maintainability aspects of LCA Mk-1. The LCA Mk-2 is at the D&D stage and delivery timelines cannot be estimated at this stage.

Q. The present Indian government seems to be moving ahead with the plan to establish a tri-services Aerospace Command and the Air Force seems to be the one that would steer this Command. What capabilities would be at the command of this higher formation in the Indian defence establishment? What sort of operations would it conduct?

A. Government is actively considering setting up of the Aerospace Command to look after the critical requirements of the Armed Forces. The proposals are being processed through HQ IDS and MoD. After its approval from the government, this Command will be established in due course of time. However, in the interim Defence Space Agency is being set up at HQ IDS and its Charter of Responsibilities are being worked out.

Q. How seriously are you considering having ISTAR aircraft from the U.S. in your fleet, as it was suggested during U.S. Defence Secretary Ashton Carter’s visit to India earlier this year?

A. The IAF is serious about procurement of ISTAR aircraft. Various options are under consideration.

Q. What’s been the progress on the Air Force’s requirement for more AWACS, beyond the three that you already have mounted on the IL-76 platform? What is your assessment on the requirement for such platforms, including the AEW&CS for the Indian Air Force? Do you foresee the use of more Aerostats and such airborne radars in ISR roles and what could be your ISR platforms requirement, say in 2030?

A. We have already inducted three IL-76 based AWACS and are in the process of procuring another two. The Embraer based AEW&C aircraft is nearing completion of its flight testing. The indigenous AWACS programme, AWACS (India), is currently at contract negotiation stage. We had inducted two Aerostat systems in May 2002. A case is being processed to procure additional Aerostats.

Q. The Air Force’s program to procure the Apache attack helicopters and the Chinook heavy lift helicopters have gone through and you have signed the contract. What could be the possible requirement of the IAF for more attack helicopters, if the Indian Army’s Aviation Wing would henceforth have their own attack helicopter fleet for close air support roles? Could you provide an estimate of what the fleet strength of the attack helicopters is, including the two existing Russian platforms?

A. The IAF’s requirement of the attack helicopters is independent of the Army Aviation Wing’s procurements. Our attack helicopters have a clearly defined role in our operational plans. Support to the Army is one of these roles. We intend to have three helicopter units equipped with attack helicopters to meet all envisaged operational roles, including AD against slow-moving aircraft during peacetime.

Q. The Air Force is said to have recommended the termination of the IJT program by HAL. This gap in the need for a Stage-II trainer jet will plague the Air Force for some time to come. What are the alternatives you are looking at to meet the rookie pilot’s Stage-II training, apart from the continued use of Kiran HJTs?

A. The Pilatus PC-7 Basic Trainer Aircraft and Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer are already fully integrated into the IAF’s training pattern. Both these trainer aircraft are supported by their respective Simulators. Hence, IAF has initiated the process for conducting a flying training pattern based on two aircraft types: viz PC-7 Mk-II and HAWK AJT, to replace the ‘three aircraft – three stages’ programme that had so far been in place. Limited numbers of flight cadets have already started training on this pattern, i.e., Stage II (Fighter Stream) on the PC-7 and the number of trainees will gradually go up with increase in the number of PC-7 Mk-II aircraft.

Q. Considering the possible force accretion to match the sanctioned fleet strength, would the IAF have a requirement for more Basic Trainers and Advanced Jet Trainers to train rookie pilots? How have you been managing your pilots training programs and schedules, despite the shortages in the Stage-I, II and III trainers? How are delivery scheduled for the PC-7 Mk II and the Hawk AJTs keeping pace? Are you still interested in HTT-40?

A. IAF has a requirement of 183 Basic Trainer Aircraft (BTA). 75 Pilatus PC-7 Mk-II BTA have already been contracted and all aircraft will be delivered by October this year. Additional 38 Pilatus PC-7 Mk-II aircraft are being procured under the Option Clause. HAL built HTT-40 is planned to meet the requirement of the remaining 70 BTAs for the IAF. The first flight of the HAL-built HTT-40 that was earlier expected in June 2015 has now been re-scheduled to December 2015. The requirement of Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT) aircraft is being met through the Hawk Mk-132 aircraft of which adequate numbers have been contracted. Considering the excellent performance of the PC-7 Mk-II BTA and Hawk Mk-132 AJT, IAF has initiated a process for conducting two-aircraft flying training pattern on the PC-7 Mk-II and HAWK AJT, instead of the three aircraft–three stage programme in place till now.

Q. Since you have begun phasing out the MiG-21s and MiG-27 squadrons already, would this affect the training schedule of rookie fighter pilots on supersonic aircraft? What is the aircraft you have in mind to introduce the rookie combat pilots to train on supersonic aircraft?

A. After training on Hawk AJT, the majority of the young fighter pilots are posted to certain earmarked operational training Squadrons of IAF. Supersonic training is part and parcel of operational training in all these Squadrons.

Q. The Air Force’s plans to procure more mid-air refuelers hasn’t been heard of for such a long while, even after selecting a platform that suits your requirement nearly three years ago. What do you intend to do with that procurement plan? How increasingly do you feel the need for more midair refueller fleet, considering that your combat planes keep flying out of the country to participate in bilateral air exercises with several nations these days and even for training and other actual missions?

A. In the future, most of the combat aircraft in the IAF inventory will be Air-to-Air Refuelling capable. Hence, procurement of additional FRA will significantly enhance the capability and reach of the IAF within our area of interest. The case for the procurement of additional Flight Refuelling Aircraft (FRA) is at the contract negotiation stage.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 06 Oct 2015 16:49

Attack Helis, ... yes, the total number that we would eventually operate will be minuscle in comparison to mainstay fighter planes and their roles would also be specific. So I don't see how that would be relevant in comparing with fighters. If they ditch on attack helis, we would have quick alternatives in that. but for fighter planes , any sanctions would cripple the force. Too big a risk to take on unreliable partner.
quote]

Too big a risk to take on an unreliable partner? But we are about to order well over 400 LCA Tejas flying on US engines. You're getting old dude, to think France is any more reliable than the US is naive. All it took was a call from Unkil and the French had to halt the Mistral floating to Russia. The French have their balls squarely in Unkil's hands. You need to wake-up and understand that India is not shying away from buying American, had one of the US birds passed the trials, they would have won this deal long time ago with deliveries underway by now. Finally the French are not giving an TOT and they are bitching at every turn in negotiations. While the US at least the negotiations can be done clearly and they have clear lines on what can be shared and what can't.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 06 Oct 2015 21:20

Last time I heard we were only dreaming about 400 LCAs..and who knows what engine will be there finally. And IAF Chief said Rafale is about to be concluded by year end. If unkil has french balls in its grasp why did it not ask rafale to be withdrawn. In fact sanctions are good in one way, if scientists are up to it. Remember cryogenic saga. Who is the winner there. And for your friendship with unkil in military matters vis a vis bakis, proof of pudding lies in eating and right now their pudding is with bakis, free of cost. So your wet dreams of India having some F--XYZ is not going to come true bacche.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 06 Oct 2015 22:29

Actually, I am not averse to getting the Mig-35 assembly line, lock stock and barrel to India.

1. Mig will probably agree to sale the same, and there is a good chance it will be cheaper than the 36 Rafales

.
2. The design is not the problem. It is the support. Hopefully if things are made in India, the situation will be much more manageable.
3. Mig can be made into a consultant into the AMCA program. I am pretty sure they would like to be part of a fifth gen program, much more feasible than their LMFS program (which have no takers as of yet). Their expertise in flight control from the OVT program (flight control with TVC, landing gear etc.) and LMFS program may greatly speed up the AMCA project.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 07 Oct 2015 05:52

indranilroy wrote:Actually, I am not averse to getting the Mig-35 assembly line, lock stock and barrel to India.

1. Mig will probably agree to sale the same, and there is a good chance it will be cheaper than the 36 Rafales .
2. The design is not the problem. It is the support. Hopefully if things are made in India, the situation will be much more manageable.
3. Mig can be made into a consultant into the AMCA program. I am pretty sure they would like to be part of a fifth gen program, much more feasible than their LMFS program (which have no takers as of yet). Their expertise in flight control from the OVT program (flight control with TVC, landing gear etc.) and LMFS program may greatly speed up the AMCA project.

Agreed. Excellent airframe, plus everything can be customised to our needs.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2015 06:12

Trading in a Rafale for a MiG-3? So, you want to pay for a mistake since you think the other one is too expensive.

While at it, trade in the FGFA too.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Oct 2015 09:13

indranilroy wrote:Actually, I am not averse to getting the Mig-35 assembly line, lock stock and barrel to India.

1. Mig will probably agree to sale the same, and there is a good chance it will be cheaper than the 36 Rafales .
2. The design is not the problem. It is the support. Hopefully if things are made in India, the situation will be much more manageable.
3. Mig can be made into a consultant into the AMCA program. I am pretty sure they would like to be part of a fifth gen program, much more feasible than their LMFS program (which have no takers as of yet). Their expertise in flight control from the OVT program (flight control with TVC, landing gear etc.) and LMFS program may greatly speed up the AMCA project.

Congratulation! You're have just graduated to next level - 'Best friend of Philipovsky'!!!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2015 10:40

Actually, I am not averse to getting the Mig-35 assembly line, lock stock and barrel to India.

Just for kicks, did MiG resolve the issues with the dash 35 that had made the RuAF postpone further purchases? I have not followed the situation, but it was serious enough to make them do that.

I would be very cautious and observe the limp the RuAF has developed in favor of the Su-30 family in general. they had also favored the dash 29 too.

Dunno. IMHO you are making a terrible mistake with the MiG-35 when it comes to trading in the Rafale.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 07 Oct 2015 11:24

I am not averse to any imports till LCA gets adequate orders and full suport. The problem with IAF/Army is that they kill indigenous products at conception stage itself while Navy has slowly & consistently been growing indigenous capability.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2015 11:39

^^^^^

Understandable.

However, circumstances - nothing to do with logic or a change of heart - are forcing changes for the good. And, India, even with a humming economy, will not have sufficient funds to support too many imports - not even possible. Check of the Navy thread (Float, Propulsion and Fight categories for the Navy - something like that). Day is not too far when IAF and IA has to make a similar model work.

What is very strange to me is that the AMCA is not even in the peripheral view. I think the lines between the LCA and the AMCA should start blurring very soon. I would start moving a good deal of the efforts to the AMCA.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Oct 2015 11:54

Philipov,not "povsky"!

Glad to see more rational ,objective arguments in favour of the MIG-29/35.It is the best cost-effective multi-role med. fighter around. 120 MIG-29UG/35s will not cost more than $5B,the latest fig for the 36 Rafales. The last Russian order recently for extra MIG-29s came in at just under $30M each.This is the best way in which the numbers of aircraft and sqds. of the IAF can be raised to 45.Nevertheless,another sqd. of Rafales would be advisable,to a total of at least 60 aircraft.That may eventually happen ,funds permitting .

At an Aero-India,a Typhoon pilot who had flown almost everything around,said that "..nothing flies like the MIG-35 (WVR combat)".A good suggestion about bringing in the MIG bureau as consultants for the AMCA.Their I-42 stealth bird tech is still available.Sukhoi had more clout and barring the MIG-25/31,have always been tasked with the lighter fighter designs,Sukhoi the heavier birds.

When the IAF is so loath to perform close-support ops for the IA,it is meaningless to give them just 24 Apaches,each at around $70M a pop! Either they acquire tough aircraft like armed trainers for the job,Hawk,SU-35 type,whatever,even Jags.One has no cost estimates for Jags,but surely they would do a better job than an Apache and one would get at least 3 Jags for one Apache! These Jags could replace the old MIG-27s,except that the MIG-27s have better armour protection for the pilot. The IA should be given all the attack helos and our own LCHs could be built in the hundreds along with other armed Dhruvs,MI-17Vs and even the LUH/Kamov-226.

Some time ago I suggested what NR has just said. Since the MK-2 is no longer in favour-no idea when it will fly and how long it will take to perfect,leverage tech acquired/developed for the LCA along with whatever is coming with the FGFA and get moving on the AMCA. With a 15 yr. deadline,it should be achievable with concentrated effort Too much time has elapsed for the LCA MK-2 to be relevant by 2030 as many newer types are in the works globally,almost all with a stealth element.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 07 Oct 2015 13:30

xposted from LCA

srikven wrote:http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/pm-mo ... 48132.html

reuters lifafabaazi

Modi turns down IAF's request for more foreign fighter planes, nudges it to accept 'obsolete' Tejas jets
Posted on: 01:32 PM IST Oct 07, 2015 | Updated on: 1:57 pm,Oct 7,2015 IST
Reuters

More+

New Delhi: The government has turned down the military's request to expand the acquisition of 36 fighter planes from Dassault Aviation SA to plug vital gaps, officials said, nudging it to accept an indigenous combat plane 32 years in the making.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's decision, in line with his Make-in-India policy to encourage domestic industry, is a blow for not only the French manufacturer but also others circling over the Indian military aviation market worth billions of dollars.

The push for India's struggling Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) also comes at a time when the air force is at its weakest operational strength since the 1962 war against China, which is causing anxiety within military circles.

Since it took over in 2014, the Modi administration has repeatedly said its overriding goal is to cut off the military's addiction to foreign arms which has made it the world's top importer.

The air force wanted the government to clear an additional 44 Rafale medium multirole aircraft on top of the 36 that Modi announced during a visit to Paris in 2015 that are to be bought off-the-shelf to meet its urgent requirements.

But a defence ministry official said that Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had told the air force that there weren't enough funds to expand the Rafale acquisition and that it must induct an improved version of the indigenous Tejas-Mark 1A.

"The IAF (air force) needs to have a minimum number of aircraft at all times. The LCA is our best option at this stage, given our resource constraints," the defence official said.

"The Rafale is our most expensive acquisition. The LCA is our cheapest in the combat category."

India's air force says it requires 45 fighter squadrons to counter a "two-front collusive threat" from Pakistan and China. But it only has 35 active fighter squadrons, parliament's defence committee said in a report in April citing a presentation by a top air force officer.

With the drawdown of Soviet-era MiG 21 planes under way, the air force would be down to 25 squadrons by 2022 at the current pace of acquisitions, it told the committee.

Cleared by the government in 1983, the LCA designed by the government's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was meant to be the backbone of the air force due for induction in 1994.

Instead, it suffered years of delay and chaos with scientists trying to build the world's most modern light combat aircraft from scratch, including the engine.

Eventually they scrapped the engine, turning to GE Aviation and lowering their ambitions for a state-of-the-art fighter. So far, only one aircraft has been produced and even that is awaiting final operational clearance, now delayed to early 2016.

"In January this year, they had given one LCA ... which had not completed its flight testing. They handed over the papers to us. We do not make a squadron with one aeroplane. That is where we are," said an air force officer speaking on condition of anonymity.

SAFETY CONCERNS

An independent investigation by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India into the LCA programme identified 53 "shortfalls" in the plane. In a report in May, the auditor said that the plane wasn't as light as promised, the fuel capacity and speed were lower than required and there were concerns about safety.

Retired Air Marshal M. Matheswaran, a former deputy chief of the Integrated Defence Staff, said the LCA was obsolete.

"It is a very short-range aircraft which has no relevance in today's war fighting scenarios. If you are trying to justify this as a replacement for follow-on Rafales, you are comparing apples with oranges."

He said the plane was at best a technology demonstrator on which Indian engineers could build the next series of aircraft, not something the air force could win a war with.

"We would like to have the MMRCA (Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft) variety of aircraft. At least about six squadrons, to my mind," the head of the air force, Arup Raha, said at the weekend, referring to the Rafale class of fighters.

But K. Tamilmani, the DRDO's aerospace chief, said the modified version of the Tejas addressed most of the air force concerns. These included electronic warfare system, flight computer, radar and maintenance problems.

"Almost all the problems get solved with the 1A. There will always be scope for improvement, but there are no flight safety issues," he said.

State-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited would be able to ramp production to 16 a year by 2017 to meet the air force's demands, he said.

"We Indians are extremely good at blaming each other - at blaming it all on Indian production."

Dassault declined any comment on the government's decision to cap the Rafale fleet.

A source close to Sweden's Saab, which has been pushing its Gripen light fighter, said that it was respectful of India's decision to try to develop its domestic military base.

"There's still a huge gap that needs to be filled. We are marketing it (the Gripen) under the Make-in-India umbrella," he said. "Even if you add the seven squadrons of the Tejas, there is still a requirement (with MiGs retiring etc). It’s a question of timing. Can they build these for when they need them?"

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 07 Oct 2015 13:36

chaanakya wrote:New Delhi: The government has turned down the military's request to expand the acquisition of 36 fighter planes from Dassault Aviation SA to plug vital gaps, officials said, nudging it to accept an indigenous combat plane 32 years in the making.

If this is true, then this is truly a glorious day for the indigenous MIC.