PAK-FA and FGFA: News & Discussion - June 2014

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 24 Jan 2016 22:00

https://www.rt.com/news/329964-pak-jet- ... on-russia/

The final primary batch of PAK-FA fighter jets is almost complete and tests will be finished in 2016, top military officials told the media. The Russian Air Force hopes to start regular production of the new 5G jets soon, with the first planes coming in 2017.
The PAK-FA (Perspective Air Complex of Frontline Aviation) fighter jets are being manufactured by the KnAAPO (Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production Association) in the Russian Far East. Part of Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation, the KnAAPO is the country’s largest aircraft-manufacturing company, producing both military aircrafts and civilian planes like the Sukhoi Super Jet.

Air Force Commander-in-Chief Viktor Bondarev, who recently visited the KnAAPO production facility, has told RIA Novosti he is extremely pleased with the pace of the PAK-FA’s (also known as the T-50) development.

Read more
Russian Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA jet fighter (Reuters / Maxim Shemetov)'Better than US-made 5G': PAK-FA fighter to engage sea, air & ground targets
“The eleventh T-50 aircraft is on berth and is 60-70 percent ready. This aircraft is going to be the final one in the test series,” Bondarev said, adding he is 100 percent sure the jets will pass government testing by the end of 2016.

“Next year the aircraft goes into serial production,” he told RIA.

Bondarev said that the PAK-FA’s operational engine will be ready for testing next year and is likely to go into production in 2018. At the moment, the PAK-FA is powered with two AL-41F1 engines which enable it to fly at a supersonic cruise speed, have a 2,600 km/h top speed, and a range of 5,500 kilometers (with two drop tanks).

The next-stage engine, currently dubbed ‘Type 30,’ is expected to have better speed and fuel economy characteristics.

The Air Force commander recalled the incident in which a PAK-FA #5 caught fire at Zhukovsky Airfield near Moscow, where the 5G (fifth generation) fighters are being tested.

“The aircraft has been restored and it is flying. This serves as proof the aircraft is highly maintainable, we do need such machines,” Bondarev said.
...

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 24 Jan 2016 23:12

^

Still don't think PakFA will be inducted in IAF until much later, after the new engines have been installed. I think in the first half of the 2020s. Engines were supposed to be in testing by now. Still not looking good for pre-2020 inductions.

member_24684 · Post by **member_24684** » 25 Jan 2016 08:34

.

Ahem, Col Ajai

Last month Indian and Russian negotiators achieved a major breakthrough, agreeing to develop the FGFA at a lowered cost of $4 billion (Rs 27,000 crore) in India. That would open the doors to building of 250 FGFAs to replace the Sukhoi-30MKI.

Since 2008, the project was estimated to cost India and Russia $5.5 billion (Rs 37,000 crore) each. Adding inflation, that would be $6 billion (Rs 40,500 crore) each.

Now negotiators from Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Sukhoi - the development agencies; have agreed to do this 40 per cent more cheaply, for $4 billion spread over seven years. In the first year after signing, each side would pay $1 billion (Rs 6,750 crore), and another $500 million (Rs 3,380 crore) in each of the following six years.

Sukhoi is already test-flying the FGFA's precursor, which Russia calls the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or "Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation"). The FGFA project involves improving the PAK-FA significantly to meet the IAF's specifications. The IAF wants some 50 improvements to the PAK-FA, including a 360-degree radar and more powerful engines.

The proposal for a $4 billion research and development contract (R&D contract) will now come before a defence ministry "cost negotiation committee", and then to the Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar.

The R&D Contract visualises a prototype fighter flying in India within three years. In total, 11 prototypes would be built - eight of these PAK-FAs for the Russian Air Force, and three FGFAs for India.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2016/01/i ... ee-on.html

Last day I heard the Russians assembling the 11th and final PAK FA

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Jan 2016 10:57

Our prototypes if they arrive by 2019/2020 will take another 3-5 years of testing before series prod begins. We may get a .sqd. or two of Ru std. aircraft in the interim,just as we did with the SU-30s earlier.That would be the fastest way to acquire the bird. At the moment,due to dev delays,the Russians are building a large amt of Flanker derivatives (SU-35s,SU-32/34s) for themselves and exports.About 120+ are on order keeping prod facilities filled until 2020.That would be when Ru T-50/FGFA production takes off from Flankers.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Jan 2016 11:08

If the news report from AS is true, no wonder IAF was not holding out for FGFA. And pressing for Rafale.

7 years from today means 2023. That is again if we close everything in 2016. I'd easily add a buffer of 3 years to this development timeline. Make that 10 years. And we're looking at FGFA entering service not less than 2025.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Jan 2016 11:16

Indian, Russian negotiators agree on FGFA development: Cost of project reduced to $4 billion each

The Indian Air Force (IAF), once an ardent backer of the proposed Indo-Russian fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA), has for the last two years sharply attacked the project. Critics say the FGFA is on the back burner to clear the way for the French Rafale fighter.

President Francois Hollande of France, who arrives in Delhi on Monday, has talked up the sale of 36 Rafales to India for an estimated $9 billion (Rs 60,000 crore).

Yet the FGFA remains alive. Last month Indian and Russian negotiators achieved a major breakthrough, agreeing to develop the FGFA at a lowered cost of $4 billion (Rs 27,000 crore) in India. That would open the doors to building of 250 FGFAs to replace the Sukhoi-30MKI.

Since 2008, the project was estimated to cost India and Russia $5.5 billion (Rs 37,000 crore) each. Adding inflation, that would be $6 billion (Rs 40,500 crore) each.

Now negotiators from Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Sukhoi - the development agencies; have agreed to do this 40 per cent more cheaply, for $4 billion spread over seven years. In the first year after signing, each side would pay $1 billion (Rs 6,750 crore), and another $500 million (Rs 3,380 crore) in each of the following six years.

Sukhoi is already test-flying the FGFA's precursor, which Russia calls the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or "Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation"). The FGFA project involves improving the PAK-FA significantly to meet the IAF's specifications. The IAF wants some 50 improvements to the PAK-FA, including a 360-degree radar and more powerful engines.

The proposal for a $4 billion research and development contract (R&D contract) will now come before a defence ministry "cost negotiation committee", and then to the Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar.

The R&D Contract visualises a prototype fighter flying in India within three years. In total, 11 prototypes would be built - eight of these PAK-FAs for the Russian Air Force, and three FGFAs for India.

Each country has already spent $295 million (Rs 1483 crore) on a "preliminary design contract" (PDC), Parrikar told parliament on August 4, 2015. The PDC, which spelt out the fighter's detailed configuration, was completed in June 2013.

The R&D contract should have followed immediately, but the IAF came out against the FGFA. As Business Standard reported (January 21, 2014, "Russia can't deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF") top air marshals alleged during a high-level ministry meeting in New Delhi that the FGFA would fall short of Indian expectations.

According to the details of that meeting, IAF objections to the FGFA were: (a) The Russians would not share critical design information with India; (b) The PAK-FA's engines are inadequate, being mere upgrades of the Sukhoi-30MKI's engines; and (c) Paying $6 billion to co-develop the FGFA would mean that "a large percentage of IAF's capital budget will be locked up."

On January 15, the IAF renewed its attack in a ministry meeting meant to review FGFA progress. It said the FGFA's engine was unreliable, radar was inadequate; stealth features were poor, India's work share being too low, and the price being too high. In a letter to the ministry, the IAF vice-chief raised 27 different objections to the FGFA.

Yet, in a baffling volte-face last year, the IAF proposed the PAK-FA be bought over-the-counter, rather than co-developing the FGFA. There was no official response to questions over why the IAF was willing to buy a fighter it had roundly criticised.

This resistance to the co-development also scuppered a Russian offer to co-develop a more powerful, fifth-generation engine for the FGFA. After roundly criticising the PAK-FA's AL-41F1 engines - upgraded versions of the Sukhoi-30MKI's AL-31FP engines, with 25 per cent more power - the IAF was ready to buy them in an over-the-counter sale.

The FGFA was once the IAF's future. Former defence minister AK Antony rebuffed the US-built fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, saying India would have the FGFA. Indian planners viewed the FGFA as a launch pad for India's fifth generation fighter, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Now, with the Rafale's astronomical cost, a cheaper R&D Contract for a "Make in India" FGFA could turn the spotlight back in the Indo-Russian fighter.

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 25 Jan 2016 11:53

If negotiations break down on Rafale, I hope funds go into FGFA and AMCA.

Rafale is an outdated design, and it will be a generation behind what our enemies will be fielding in 10 years time. I don't see why IAF is so adamant about acquiring such an overpriced fighter, wasting precious reserves.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 25 Jan 2016 12:14

Very well said Chakra.

Honestly I would go for the cheapest option right now from the MMRCA. Whether it was Mig-35 or the Grippen.
Focus on the AMCA and FGFA with resources and money.

Thats it ... screw the french

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Jan 2016 12:22

The IAF seem to have no proper "perspective plan" for the future! It is all ad hoc acquisitions as one can see.But the major share of the blame must go to the MOD and DPSUs for failing to take decisions when required and delivery on time. Nevertheless,how has the IN managed so well with the same MOD and babudom and with the smallest share of the defence pie?! This shows a lack of clarity of thought within the IAF,forward thinking and crisis management with alternative options at the ready.

In retrospect,it is the price of ordnance delivered upon the enemy that ultimately matters,getting the most bang from the buck.Here,smart munitions,newer LR cruise missiles and other PGMs,could save sending in v.expensive aircraft in harm's way. The era of the drone/UCAV is several years old.Looking at our principal adversaries,Pak and China ,that too is a probable JV,or a scenario where we will be unable to transfer assets from the Chinese front to neutralize Pak more easily,numbers will be crucial.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jan 2016 12:33

we should avoid the word TOT and use the more correct word TOMK (transfer of manufacturing knowledge) which in its fuller aspect means the machinery and raw materials also to make the part from scratch. knowledge resides in people's heads and secret data banks that are never for transfer.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 25 Jan 2016 14:51

But even with this new USD 4 Billion dollar contract, we don't know:-

What is our % Share in R&D, where R&D will take place- Russia or in India? It strongly seems that we are paying Russia to develop an Indian version of PAKFA to satisfy the bloated demands of IAF.

What it the degree of Indigenisation? Will we again do limited metal beating or we will get sensitive technology for full indigenous manufacture of engines, radars, avionics, ejection seats, landing gear, actuators, hydraulics etc?

Will be able to manufacture spare in house, upgrade ourselves, so maintenance and or repair or will have to run to Russia for every small thing and then cry when the spares are delayed?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jan 2016 15:11

well you already know the answer -whether its france, usa,israel or russia...the degree of onwership of the design and future upgrades and mods will be always less than domestically owned projects like tejas, arjun or dhruv.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 25 Jan 2016 15:28

and we end up paying through our nose and do not want to purchase Indian systems even if they are good for India(LCA) and even better (Arjun) then imported maal.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jan 2016 15:37

people want stuff that "just works"(steve jobs) than work with OEM to polish and refine the last 10% of first tranche and improvements in future tranches.

so like the iSheep we get sheared for a high price in every update cycle and ~~apple~~ foreign OEM gets rich

IAF has a long way to go vs the usaf which has numerous program offices to interface with the MIC. the engineering and design side need scaling up.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jan 2016 17:00

I don't see why IAF is so adamant about acquiring such an overpriced fighter,

PMO is, not MOD. If reports are to ve believed, MOD stated that MOD cannot afford the plane.

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 25 Jan 2016 17:57

Chakra.in wrote:If negotiations break down on Rafale, I hope funds go into FGFA and AMCA.

Rafale is an outdated design, and it will be a generation behind what our enemies will be fielding in 10 years time. I don't see why IAF is so adamant about acquiring such an overpriced fighter, wasting precious reserves.

If the FGFA/pakfa is such a generational shift, the Russians would be buying it in numbers despite the cost. Imho the fact that they appear to be reducing the initial purchase speaks volumes for the capability and maturity of the product.... The IAF would have also been pressuring the Govt to close the deal if the capabilities are better than the "outdated" rafale.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 25 Jan 2016 18:11

More of the same but with a difference. FGFA followers should track this.

https://www.rt.com/business/330026-indi ... -aircraft/

Moscow and Delhi to invest $8 billion in 5th generation fighters

The Indian Air Force (IAF) and Russian aircraft manufacturer Sukhoi have agreed to develop an Indo-Russian fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA). Negotiators made a breakthrough last month deciding to lower investment cost to $4 billion for each country.

The deal opens the prospect of producing 250 FGFAs to replace the multirole Sukhoi-30MKI fighter, according to the source in India’s Ministry of Defence as quoted by Business Standard.

The 2008 deal is projected to cost each country $6 billion, adjusted for inflation. India’s state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics and Russia’s Sukhoi have agreed to cut costs by 40 percent to $4 billion each over seven years.

READ MORE: Moscow won't abandon aircraft sales talks with Tehran - Russian aviation source

The countries will invest $1 billion in the first year and another $500 million in each of the following six years.

In the meantime, India is negotiating with France on buying 36 multirole Rafale fighters for a price yet to be negotiated. French President Francois Hollande arrives in Delhi on Monday to sort out the financial details.

....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_apO2y9 ... outu.be&a=

[youtube]_apO2y9cRWo&feature=youtu.be&a=[/youtube]

habal · Post by **habal** » 25 Jan 2016 18:29

what rankles me is that we are spending such a sh!tload of money on combat aircraft, and then crying ourselves hoarse that there are some camps across the border. IAF policy seems to be 'desi maal bikega toh commission kahan se banega'. We either need to buy desi mall, which may be compromise on something in bulk and stick to just one single platform of elite foreign maal in case we need specific requirements from those. Like the Chinese get imported Su-35 and Su-27s. And those are the only imports they have. Because buying and investing in multiple foreign platforms is going to push the desire and finances to develop purely Indian tech further behind. Pyaase ko paani milta hain .. similarly .. bhooke ko engine tech milta hain .. FSU designed and developed their engines from a series of low tech till MiG-29 arrived on scene similarly we should also be prepared to face such a grind.

Here we are out to purchase Rafales, out to purchase M2K from Qatar and Korea, FGFA from Russia, MiG-29 from Russia, Su-30 from Russia. Do we have either one of these platforms in thousands, no. One is 36, another is 78+29, then another is 59 of another and then some 50 FGFA. Yeh ek bhonda sa mazaak hain. These are not doings of a serious force.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Jan 2016 19:27

Everyone has piece of advise on what IAF should do and opinion on whats wrong with it.

Why don't people spend a bit more effort to put together a more coherent analysis of where we are, where we should be and how'll we be there? Something like X squadrons presently, Y to be retired by xyz years, production & induction schedule of replacement and all that.

Easy to write a diatribe and claim the moral high ground and pretend to be know-it-all...99.9% wouldn't know what's the IAF's actual composition is but that doesn't stop anyone from making comments.

And of course, the only patriots who exist on face of this earth are on BRF, everybody else in the uniform is a bloody 'chor' out to undermine the country who thinks of nothing but his commission, country be damned!

What a bloody joke...

habal · Post by **habal** » 25 Jan 2016 19:50

when was the last time this force of X varients of combat aircraft see actual combat. It is a joke excactly because this is not going to see any combat. Neither is FGFA going to see real combat, nor are the Rafales, MiG-29Ks, Su-30, M2Ks.

These kind of systems had a place when India used to send IPKF to Sri Lanka and did a 'tour-de-force' in Maldives. Do you think these are going to be replicated.

Yes, there is a solution to this, both IAF and IA should be send to 'tour of duty' to distant lands. Go to Afghanistan, Syria, Gilgit Baltistan then these kind of force mix makes sense. Here the cry is 'camps across the border'.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Jan 2016 20:16

habal wrote:when was the last time this force of X varients of combat aircraft see actual combat. It is a joke excactly because this is not going to see any combat. Neither is FGFA going to see real combat, nor are the Rafales, MiG-29Ks, Su-30, M2Ks.

These kind of systems had a place when India used to send IPKF to Sri Lanka and did a 'tour-de-force' in Maldives. Do you think these are going to be replicated.

Yes, there is a solution to this, both IAF and IA should be send to 'tour of duty' to distant lands. Go to Afghanistan, Syria, Gilgit Baltistan then these kind of force mix makes sense. Here the cry is 'camps across the border'.

If that be the case, might as well disband all the Services!

And while we're at it, what use is it wasting time and bandwidth on BRF...close this forum as well. As it is, we've hit the bottom of barrel where people make completely idiotic statements w/o batting an eyelid or bothering to do some ground work....As long as you can wrap it up in cover of 'nationalism', make loud claims of supporting 'indigenous' product, you're allowed to spew whatever BS you wish like. Facts be damned! A bit of research be damned!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Jan 2016 20:21

Philip wrote:The IAF seem to have no proper "perspective plan" for the future! It is all ad hoc acquisitions as one can see.<SNIP>

Your lamenting about lack of perspective plan seems to come out only when IAF is looking for fighter a/c or weapon system from a source other than Russia. If by chance, IAF was to announce plan to induct more Mig-35 or Su-30MKI instead of Rafale, you'll come out singing hosanna about what a great decision it is!

I don't question your POV which pushes for closer ties with Russia or more Russian weapon systems but don't start throwing muck at the Services because they think differently about the Russians or a particular weapon system.

Will · Post by **Will** » 25 Jan 2016 20:21

Well at least the IA has made a start towards an indigenous approach with plans of setting up an in house design bureau like the IN. Wonder when the IAF will get some brains.

All in all the Indian armed forces dont really seem to have a long term plan. Procurements are haphazard. One really needs to sit everyone down and formulate a long term integrated defence plan.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Jan 2016 20:26

Will wrote:Well at least the IA has made a start towards an indigenous approach with plans of setting up an in house design bureau like the IN. Wonder when the IAF will get some brains.

We can recommend your name to the IAF. I'm sure you can guide them better. And there are some other worthies on BRF who could be seconded to IAF. I don't think they'll mind giving up on some of their quality time to steer IAF in the right direction.

habal · Post by **habal** » 25 Jan 2016 20:34

rohitvats wrote:
If that be the case, might as well disband all the Services!

And while we're at it, what use is it wasting time and bandwidth on BRF...close this forum as well. As it is, we've hit the bottom of barrel where people make completely idiotic statements w/o batting an eyelid or bothering to do some ground work....As long as you can wrap it up in cover of 'nationalism', make loud claims of supporting 'indigenous' product, you're allowed to spew whatever BS you wish like. Facts be damned! A bit of research be damned!

dear sir, I am not saying this to irritate you or anyone else. Just today I saw Hollande sleeping in the metro, sitting next to Modi looking lost. No country takes us seriously. They take North Korea seriously because North Korea has 1*1000.

You can have one platform, and then get 2000 of just that platform, and the world takes you seriously. Because they know we mean business. If Russia was our sole supplier, then we can take on USA, France, Britain, Germany, Japan, China, Korea, Aus.

But if we buy weapons from Russia, France, USA, Britain, Germany, Korea, Japan, Brazil then it basically means we will not act against interests of our suppliers. Then what the hell do we do with these weapons.

Similarly if we buy weapons solely from France, then we can take on all the east bloc countries like russia, china, North korea, pakistan and so on.

but when we diversify so much .. ab phir baaki bacha kaun hain. Kiske saath pange lene ke liye yeh sab khareede jaa rahein hain. Pakis are sponsoring teams from across the border and we will not fire at them anyways. Because we have to think of economy, politics, international politics, college admissions, IT company contract renewal,

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 Jan 2016 21:59

quote="Austin"

Indian, Russian negotiators agree on FGFA development: Cost of project reduced to $4 billion each

The Indian Air Force (IAF), once an ardent backer of the proposed Indo-Russian fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA), has for the last two years sharply attacked the project. Critics say the FGFA is on the back burner to clear the way for the French Rafale fighter.

President Francois Hollande of France, who arrives in Delhi on Monday, has talked up the sale of 36 Rafales to India for an estimated $9 billion (Rs 60,000 crore).

Yet the FGFA remains alive. Last month Indian and Russian negotiators achieved a major breakthrough, agreeing to develop the FGFA at a lowered cost of $4 billion (Rs 27,000 crore) in India. That would open the doors to building of 250 FGFAs to replace the Sukhoi-30MKI.

Since 2008, the project was estimated to cost India and Russia $5.5 billion (Rs 37,000 crore) each. Adding inflation, that would be $6 billion (Rs 40,500 crore) each.

Now negotiators from Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Sukhoi - the development agencies; have agreed to do this 40 per cent more cheaply, for $4 billion spread over seven years. In the first year after signing, each side would pay $1 billion (Rs 6,750 crore), and another $500 million (Rs 3,380 crore) in each of the following six years.

Sukhoi is already test-flying the FGFA's precursor, which Russia calls the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or "Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation"). The FGFA project involves improving the PAK-FA significantly to meet the IAF's specifications. The IAF wants some 50 improvements to the PAK-FA, including a 360-degree radar and more powerful engines.

The proposal for a $4 billion research and development contract (R&D contract) will now come before a defence ministry "cost negotiation committee", and then to the Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar.

The R&D Contract visualises a prototype fighter flying in India within three years. In total, 11 prototypes would be built - eight of these PAK-FAs for the Russian Air Force, and three FGFAs for India.

Each country has already spent $295 million (Rs 1483 crore) on a "preliminary design contract" (PDC), Parrikar told parliament on August 4, 2015. The PDC, which spelt out the fighter's detailed configuration, was completed in June 2013.

The R&D contract should have followed immediately, but the IAF came out against the FGFA. As Business Standard reported (January 21, 2014, "Russia can't deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF") top air marshals alleged during a high-level ministry meeting in New Delhi that the FGFA would fall short of Indian expectations.

According to the details of that meeting, IAF objections to the FGFA were: (a) The Russians would not share critical design information with India; (b) The PAK-FA's engines are inadequate, being mere upgrades of the Sukhoi-30MKI's engines; and (c) Paying $6 billion to co-develop the FGFA would mean that "a large percentage of IAF's capital budget will be locked up."

On January 15, the IAF renewed its attack in a ministry meeting meant to review FGFA progress. It said the FGFA's engine was unreliable, radar was inadequate; stealth features were poor, India's work share being too low, and the price being too high. In a letter to the ministry, the IAF vice-chief raised 27 different objections to the FGFA.

Yet, in a baffling volte-face last year, the IAF proposed the PAK-FA be bought over-the-counter, rather than co-developing the FGFA. There was no official response to questions over why the IAF was willing to buy a fighter it had roundly criticised.

This resistance to the co-development also scuppered a Russian offer to co-develop a more powerful, fifth-generation engine for the FGFA. After roundly criticising the PAK-FA's AL-41F1 engines - upgraded versions of the Sukhoi-30MKI's AL-31FP engines, with 25 per cent more power - the IAF was ready to buy them in an over-the-counter sale.

{Looks like a tactical move by IAF because the PAKFA cannot fight! Needs more development work to be sold.}

The FGFA was once the IAF's future. Former defence minister AK Antony rebuffed the US-built fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, saying India would have the FGFA. Indian planners viewed the FGFA as a launch pad for India's fifth generation fighter, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Now, with the Rafale's astronomical cost, a cheaper R&D Contract for a "Make in India" FGFA could turn the spotlight back in the Indo-Russian fighter.

[/quote]

So PAKFA to be the advanced technology demonstrator via the PDC.

R&D Contract:

FGFA to cost $8 B spread over 7 years. $2B ($1B each state) in first year and then a $1B ($0.5B each) each of the 6 years.
Total 11 prototypes: 3 built in India and 8 in Russia.

They already have the tooling for the PAKFA and will be doing more of the testing so makes sense.
The 3 prototypes in India for Indian conditions.
First milestone First Indian prototype to fly in 3 years.

So we can create a program plan and track progress.

Third year will be critical for India.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 25 Jan 2016 22:54

Will wrote: All in all the Indian armed forces dont really seem to have a long term plan. Procurements are haphazard. One really needs to sit everyone down and formulate a long term integrated defence plan.

There is one. It is called the long term integrated planning and procurement (LTIPP). Not public but there is one. It is from this plan the 5 year defense acquisition plan is planned for funding.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 25 Jan 2016 23:38

Singha wrote:well you already know the answer -whether its france, usa,israel or russia...the degree of onwership of the design and future upgrades and mods will be always less than domestically owned projects like tejas, arjun or dhruv.

Well Done Singha

Well Said....

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Jan 2016 00:00

habal, What India spends on Armed Forces is very low insurance for the consequences. So just think before posting.
After POKII the conventional threshold has to be high and credible.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 26 Jan 2016 00:56

^^ I just wish that instead of (say) one Rafale, India allocates that procurement for NVGs and TIs for infantry. Garuds have put out a RFI for 100 NVDs. How many Garuds are there? The services seem to be obsessed with big ticket purchases over the smaller ones which have greater operational urgency. Whether it be 100's of T-90s when 90% of force is without credible NVG/BPJ or a single Rafale deal which eats up all the capex while spares, munitions, force multipliers for existing airframes deserve priority.. list goes on and on..

member_29294 · Post by **member_29294** » 26 Jan 2016 03:30

Bharadwaj wrote:
Chakra.in wrote:If negotiations break down on Rafale, I hope funds go into FGFA and AMCA.

Rafale is an outdated design, and it will be a generation behind what our enemies will be fielding in 10 years time. I don't see why IAF is so adamant about acquiring such an overpriced fighter, wasting precious reserves.
If the FGFA/pakfa is such a generational shift, the Russians would be buying it in numbers despite the cost. Imho the fact that they appear to be reducing the initial purchase speaks volumes for the capability and maturity of the product.... The IAF would have also been pressuring the Govt to close the deal if the capabilities are better than the "outdated" rafale.

If you are going to talk orders, just look at how many nations are buying Rafales. Look at how many potential export nations have passed it up for F-35s, Gripens, Sukhois, or Eurofighters. It has absolutely struggled in the exports market. Now we obviously know why, the price is outrageous for a last generation fighter. Countries with budgets comparable to IAF and serious defense needs like Japan, UK, and Turkey have all opted for the F-35 which is cheaper and a full generation ahead.

Yes, PakFA has had teething problems...just like the F-22 and F-35, because that is evidently what you get when you jump a generation in air-fighter capability. But fast forward 10 years to 2025, when China has large numbers of J-20 5th generation fighters and has given soft loans for Pakistan to purchase them. Can Rafale really go up against a fully mature 5th generation fighter? Red Flag and other joint exercises says nope.

Su-30MKI was a G2G deal last I heard with IAF once again not interested, and that turned out amazingly well. We would barely even have had an airforce today if that deal didn't go through. I hope that MoD can work the same magic again. IAF has suffered more than IN and even IA as far as operational capacity and taking ownership of indigenous projects. I think it needs to accept firmer direction from MoD. Tejas orders were a good start. Hopefully IAF will take ownership and see AMCA and FGFA until completion.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 26 Jan 2016 10:29

habal wrote:when was the last time this force of X varients of combat aircraft see actual combat. It is a joke excactly because this is not going to see any combat. Neither is FGFA going to see real combat, nor are the Rafales, MiG-29Ks, Su-30, M2Ks.

Habal, why did Fiza'ya stay out of Kargil conflict? Do you remember the BVR missile locks after which F-16s stopped their patrolling?

Do you realize that our investment in IAF & IN capabilities has resulted in PAF telling PA that they can offer no more than localized air cover for limited duration of time, and & PN having only sea denial capabilities via its submarines.

PA does not factor PAF & PN in its plans, and the Pakistani strategic doctrine has moved from conventional conflict to other opposite ends of the spectrum. The Pakistani doctrine now focusses on sub-conventional conflict and tactical nuclear strike. The conventional conflict space they've ceded to India.

They no longer talk of armoured thrust inside India supported by PAF. That is because of the investment in IAF & IN that deters Pakistan from conventional conflict like Gibraltar & Grand Slam.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 26 Jan 2016 10:45

OT for this thread

I understand everyone is frustrated on the lack of response on sub conventional conflict. It is the escalation of conflict via more terrorist attacks that deter our leadership.

In my personal opinion, there are more & more attacks year on year. Our lack of response creates a perception of soft state in the tribal minds of Pakistani leadership and increases the attacks.

Our response should be that every sub conventional conflict, we will retaliate massively conventionally, and even one tactical nuclear strike will be met by a full nuclear strike.

I would rather launch a Brahmos or Shourya with a thermobaric warhead, without any fanfare, wherever Hafiz Sayeed or Masood Azhar is holed up or holding his next meetingand have Pakistan collect the fragments and prepare dossiers.

I would love to see the Pakistani's respond with their non working Ghouri and Chinese controlled Shaheen. Let Raheel Sharif digest the thought of Lahore, Peshawar & Karachi being obliterated.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Jan 2016 11:08

tsarkar wrote:OT for this thread

I understand everyone is frustrated on the lack of response on sub conventional conflict. It is the escalation of conflict via more terrorist attacks that deter our leadership.

In my personal opinion, there are more & more attacks year on year. Our lack of response creates a perception of soft state in the tribal minds of Pakistani leadership and increases the attacks.

Our response should be that every sub conventional conflict, we will retaliate massively conventionally, and even one tactical nuclear strike will be met by a full nuclear strike.

I would rather launch a Brahmos or Shourya with a thermobaric warhead, without any fanfare, wherever Hafiz Sayeed or Masood Azhar is holed up or holding his next meetingand have Pakistan collect the fragments and prepare dossiers.

I would love to see the Pakistani's respond with their non working Ghouri and Chinese controlled Shaheen. Let Raheel Sharif digest the thought of Lahore, Peshawar & Karachi being obliterated.

+1000

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 26 Jan 2016 13:06

tsarkar wrote:OT for this thread

I understand everyone is frustrated on the lack of response on sub conventional conflict. It is the escalation of conflict via more terrorist attacks that deter our leadership.

In my personal opinion, there are more & more attacks year on year. Our lack of response creates a perception of soft state in the tribal minds of Pakistani leadership and increases the attacks.

Our response should be that every sub conventional conflict, we will retaliate massively conventionally, and even one tactical nuclear strike will be met by a full nuclear strike.

I would rather launch a Brahmos or Shourya with a thermobaric warhead, without any fanfare, wherever Hafiz Sayeed or Masood Azhar is holed up or holding his next meetingand have Pakistan collect the fragments and prepare dossiers.

I would love to see the Pakistani's respond with their non working Ghouri and Chinese controlled Shaheen. Let Raheel Sharif digest the thought of Lahore, Peshawar & Karachi being obliterated.

+10^6 in agreement.

But as you and I know quite well, nothing of that sort will ever happen given the type of political leadership we continue to choose for ourselves.
(and no, the current one is not very far better than the last one wrt these type of thinking etc, the dimensions of certain anatomy notwithstanding - though it's certainly much superior in terms of "perception management" aspects of the general public and some window-dressing here and there).

So these will remain our collective "day-dreams", never to be fulfilled, ever ... so until the next attack and the usual programming of lots of teeth gnashing, the spin of usual bhakts desperate to uphold their respective favorite-regimes no-action weaknesses and after a few days back to days of kirket/IPL/whatever ...

Do hold on to your breathe though, to get the above labeled as a "whine", as when there's noway to defend rank cowardice that's what usually people resort to.

Sorry for the digression, carry on pls ...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Jan 2016 14:53

I've mentioned this in the Raffy td. Get France to sign a JV for future dev. and export marketing for the LCA. They don't have a small single-engine fighter in their portfolio and did very well with the Mirage-3,etc. They have good connections with most states around the world and know how to "market" their wares.Several billions can then be deducted from the final price of the 36 Raffys,as the cost of Franc acquiring the LCA tech! "You want to sell your raffys to us ,then you must pick up the LCA too!".The famous "quid pro quo".

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jan 2016 18:01

tsarkar wrote:OT for this thread

................................

I would rather launch a Brahmos or Shourya with a thermobaric warhead, without any fanfare, wherever Hafiz Sayeed or Masood Azhar is holed up or holding his next meetingand have Pakistan collect the fragments and prepare dossiers.

I would love to see the Pakistani's respond with their non working Ghouri and Chinese controlled Shaheen. Let Raheel Sharif digest the thought of Lahore, Peshawar & Karachi being obliterated.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1971552

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 26 Jan 2016 23:40

It seems that idea is to drag out the development of FGFA (version of PAFKA) and postpone first deliveries to 2025 to create a gap of 10 years which would be required to be filled by Rafale. Why would anybody buy Rafale ? if even limited version FGFA/PAKFA is available simultaneously? Thus, Why not structure PAKFA like Su-30MKI? Manufacture around 100 PAKFA in next 8 years and then switch to manufacture of 200 FGFA in next 20 years. Off-course dump Rafale. For a gap of couple of years order 20-60 more Su-30MKis. This would mean that we can concentrate on LCA, AMCA, UCAV as one line and Su-30MKI, PAKFA and FGFA as second line rather getting diverted into dead end super costly Rafale.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 27 Jan 2016 01:22

Philip wrote:I've mentioned this in the Raffy td. Get France to sign a JV for future dev. and export marketing for the LCA. They don't have a small single-engine fighter in their portfolio and did very well with the Mirage-3,etc. They have good connections with most states around the world and know how to "market" their wares.Several billions can then be deducted from the final price of the 36 Raffys,as the cost of Franc acquiring the LCA tech! "You want to sell your raffys to us ,then you must pick up the LCA too!".The famous "quid pro quo".

As much as I would like that to wrap up things... thats all that will accomplish. Wrap up the gift.

We have done the hard yards creating the LCA, now lets learn everything about it.
India is entering a new era where it must stop behaving like a saathi to the big boys around the block.

We must act like ourselves, i am sick of all the PMs and even NaMO trying to woo the phoren leaders.
Lets do what we do best, work hard like no one else. Time for us to make INDIA shine again.

All these cross agreements will create a massive distraction in our industry.
Lets keep it down to the following.

LCA - 100 % Domestic Effort (i am aware of the consultation part)
AMCA - 100 % Domestic Effort (just like the LCA)
FGFA - the so called 50/50 with Russia. Someone tell Ivan that they leave most people with a bitter taste in their mouth.
Rafael- OTS Purchase and be done with it like the Mirage 2K- send the aircraft back to Dassault for MLU and Overhauls. No thank you I do not want to learn about making or maintaining Rafael or even changing the oil or cleaning the windscreen. I wanna send my best IAF engineers to bases where they maintain and overhaul the LCA, AMCA and FGFA.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Jan 2016 02:55

Unfortunately, not possible:

We must act like ourselves, i am sick of all the PMs and even NaMO trying to woo the phoren leaders.
Lets do what we do best, work hard like no one else. Time for us to make INDIA shine again.

India does need a LOT of help, from financing projects to importing technologies. However, this should not interfere with the efforts like the LCA or what the Navy is doing. What is good - a window for which has opened - is that there is a general understanding that a few nations do need to gang up on China and thus there is a loose cooperative effort. What India cannot do, is to depend on this for too long. Within that small window India should take advantage of it and make as much progress as possible.