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

[SaiK]

FGFA back on-track :: Moscow and Delhi to invest $8 billion in 5th gen fighter jets

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



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.

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.

However, with the agreement reached between India and Russia and Rafale's projected astronomical cost, the spotlight could go back to the Indo-Russian fighter, according to spokesman from India’s Ministry of Defence.

[NRao]

Russia learns stealth warplanes are hard to do

David Axe, now that the JSF is flying all over the place, he is after the PAK-FA. So enjoy the one who incubated an entire Turkey thread on BR.

After confronting serious technical and economic difficulties, Russia has dramatically cut back its air force program to field its first radar-evading “stealth” fighter jet. By delaying large-scale acquisition of the Sukhoi T-50 fighter, the Kremlin is tacitly acknowledging a truth that the U.S. military learned decades ago — and that China might also learn in coming years: developing stealth fighters is hard.

But fortunately for the Russian Air Force, and unfortunately for Washington and its allied air arms that are Russia’s chief rivals, Moscow has a backup plan. Instead of counting on a new stealth jet to outfit its fighter squadrons, the Russian government is buying heavily upgraded versions of older planes — an approach the Pentagon has dismissed as wasteful. It could, however, help Russia maintain its aerial edge.

The T-50, like practically all stealth aircraft before it, has proved expensive to develop, although exactly how expensive remains a closely guarded secret. Radar-evading warplanes require careful design work, extensive testing and exotic materials for their construction — all features that can double or triple their cost compared to conventional, non-stealthy planes.

Even with their high cost, air forces all over the world are scrambling to acquire stealth aircraft because their ability to avoid detection can, in theory, offer a big advantage in air-to-air combat and during bombing runs.

But a competing theory of aerial warfare argues that stealth is overrated — and it’s better to buy greater numbers of cheaper, non-stealthy planes. Moscow’s troubles in developing the T-50 have compelled it to adhere to the competing philosophy.

Russia arrived late to the stealth-warplane party. The U.S. Air Force fielded its first radar-evading warplane — the F-117 attack jet — in 1983. It added the B-2 stealth bomber to its inventory in 1997 and then the F-22 stealth fighter in 2005. The U.S. Marine Corps, meanwhile, was the first American military branch to introduce the latest F-35 stealth fighter, in July 2015. The U.S. Air Force anticipates declaring its own F-35s operational in 2016.

The F-117 retired in 2008, but the Pentagon still possesses hundreds of stealth planes and plans to acquire hundreds more in coming years via large-scale purchases of F-35s and the new Long-Range Strike Bomber, a successor to the B-2. Its economy and military crippled by the Soviet Union’s 1991 collapse, Russia didn’t begin serious work on the T-50 until 2002. The first prototype took off on its inaugural flight in January 2010, a year before China’s first stealth prototype — the J-20 — made its debut.

All the U.S., Russian and Chinese stealth aircraft possess special features for minimizing their detectability on radar and other sensors. These include rounded or angular shaping that can scatter radar waves, plus special materials that absorb radar instead of deflecting it.

Stealth plane design is a balancing act. The aircraft must be able to avoid detection while also flying fast and far enough, and carrying a big enough payload, to make them militarily useful. They cannot be so expensive that an air force can’t actually afford to buy them in meaningful numbers. In the 40 years it has been working on stealth technology, the U.S. has never stopped struggling with this balance.

The B-2 is hard to detect and flies well, but at more than $2 billion each, it proved too expensive for mass purchase. The U.S. Air Force managed to buy 21 of the bat-shaped planes from manufacturer Northrop Grumman. Lockheed Martin designed the F-35 to be affordable, but that compelled the company to cut back on the fighter’s stealth features. In any event, developmental difficulties have driven up the F-35’s cost to more than $100 million a plane — hardly cheap.

Neither the Russian government nor Sukhoi, the company that makes the T-50, have said how much the twin-engine, single-seat supersonic fighter has cost to develop or how much it might cost to buy once the design is complete. It’s safe to say, however, that development could consume tens of billions of dollars. And each plane could set back the buyer $100 million.

And that’s assuming the T-50 actually works. There are signs that it doesn’t — at least not very well. In six years, the six T-50 prototypes have completed just 700 test flights, according to a recent article in Combat Aircraft magazine by Piotr Butowski, an expert in Russian military aviation. By comparison, Lockheed and the U.S. Air Force built eight F-22 test planes and flew them 3,500 times between 1997 and 2005. It looks like the T-50s aren’t even reliable enough to undergo intensive testing.

That was dramatically apparent on June 10, 2014, when the fifth T-50 prototype — then less than a year old — suffered a catastrophic engine fire while taxiing on the ground. The damage was so bad that Sukhoi had to halt production of the sixth prototype and use its parts to rebuild the burned plane. The Indian air force, which is considering buying a version of the T-50, complained of “shortfalls in terms of performance and other technical features.” {Wow, Axe quoting IAF?}

Events overtook the T-50’s slow and costly development. With many foreign governments imposing sanctions in the wake of Russia’s 2014 annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea, and oil prices plummeting amid a global supply glut, in 2015 Russia entered a recession that saw its economy shrink 3 percent in one year. Perhaps not surprisingly, in March 2015, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov announced that Russia would reduce its order. The Kremlin said it would buy just a dozen T-50s by 2020, instead of the 60 it originally planned.

By then the U.S. should have more than 500 stealth planes in frontline service. China finished the first production-standard J-20 in December 2015 and is expected to acquire dozens more in the next few years — though it’s unclear how much the J-20 costs and how happy Beijing is with its performance.

To make up for the cuts to Russia’s T-50 program, the Kremlin has boosted production of the Su-35 and Su-30, the latest upgraded versions of the Cold War-vintage Su-27, a powerful twin-engine fighter whose various models are now the standard warplanes of the Russian, Chinese and Indian air arms. The Su-35 and Su-30 aren’t stealthy, but they are fast, far-flying and capable of carrying heavy payloads of missiles and bombs.

The Su-35, in particular, is a very capable warplane. Moscow ordered 48 planes in 2009 and is widely expected to soon place a second order for another 48. “It would be fair to describe this aircraft as the pinnacle of current conventional-fighter design,” wrote Carlo Kopp, an analyst with the Air Power Australia think tank, “blending a superb basic aerodynamic design with advanced engine, flight control and avionic technology”

Based on a proven design, the Su-35 is reliable. It’s also comparatively cheap, as low as $50 million a plane. Which is half as much as a T-50 or F-35. An upgraded classic fighter is at a disadvantage compared to a stealth plane in one regard: the ability to avoid detection under certain circumstances. But the classic fighter actually holds the advantage over a stealth plane when it comes to reliability and cost and some performance parameters, including maneuverability and payload.

Whether the stealth jet’s advantage is worth its disadvantages is a philosophical question for military planners. The Pentagon decided in favor of stealth planes, even cancelling upgrades to older F-15s and F-16s to free up more money for more F-35s. In Russia, circumstances largely settled the issue, forcing the Kremlin to bet on classic fighters over their stealth counterparts.

The world might never know who’s right unless Russia and the U.S. go to war against each other — a proof of concept no one actually welcomes.

[member_29294]

^ I wouldn't trust that.

IAF has actually never gotten a chance to ride in PakFA. What they know is only some paper specs give by Sukhoi. However, if Russia cannot deliver on the promised new super-cruise capable type-30 engines then PakFA will probably never fly in Indian colors. As far as I can tell, that seems to be the main sticking point with the IAF.

[brar_w]

Russia learns stealth warplanes are hard to do

David Axe, now that the JSF is flying all over the place, he is after the PAK-FA. So enjoy the one who incubated an entire Turkey thread on BR.

Axe and his pals are idiots who think thhe can do better than most about anyone out there based on absolutely zilch in technical prowess or actually reporting experience on technical matters. But hey, on the blogosphere he is as the reincarnation of Jack Northrop..His tribe has figured out the extremely polarized world of think tanks, national defense policy and the power struggle between the various forces in the US defense establishment and do a fairly good marketing exercise in playing one side against the other. Unfortunately, they run into trouble when they themselves start to believe these sort of things and start linking back and forth to each other and calling themselves experts. Another popular blogger out there that gets the most amounts of website clicks is in the food industry (hot dogs and ice cream floats) and is only a national defense and aerospace commentator on the side ...

[member_28990]

India Looking At 60 FGFAs As Russia Reduces Price, Final Talks On

http://armingindia.com/India%20Looking% ... s%20On.htm

NEW DELHI, FEB. 3, 2016: India and Russia are in final negotiations in New Delhi to settle the contributions for the development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) at a reported $3.7 billion from both sides, Arming India has learnt from diplomatic sources. An early conclusion of the agreement is expected.

Development costs are to be paid in seven years, starting with an initial payment of $1 billion. The breakthrough follows a price reduction by Russia last month.

India's contribution for development costs would entitle it to extensive transfer of technology and include delivery of three prototypes. Subsequently, the entire lot of FGFAs for the Indian Air Force (IAF) are intended to be made at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited's 'Russia complex' in Nasik, Maharashtra.

The cost of each series production FGFA is initially pegged at a whopping $225 million apiece, which is about two-and-a-half times the estimated current price of the Su-30MKI, currently India's frontline fighter.

Sources disclosed that a reluctant IAF has finally been made to come around on the FGFA. But it has reduced its requirement to just 60 fighters, or three squadrons. This is being interpreted as a lack of enthusiasm for the proposed fighter, which is yet to prove true fifth generation capability.

The initial numbers were pegged around 220, which were later brought down to 120, and now have dwindled to half of even the reduced numbers.

Indeed, the Russian Air Force itself has committed itself to just 12 of these proposed aircraft, known in Russia as PAK-FA. These 12 aircraft will comprise a trial squadron.

But Russia is hopeful of persuading India to eventually commit to far more than the initial lot of 60 FGFAs.

India will have no major contribution to design and development, and the project is being re-modeled on the Su-30MKI lines, wherein India substantially paid for the development cost, paving the way for assembly line production in India under transfer of technology.

The initial concept of India having a substantial work share in the design and development of the fifth generation fighter in order to boost indigenous capability has been abandoned.

The rapid headway on the under-development FGFA is in stark contrast to the stalemate in price negotiations on the curtailed order for 36 flyaway French Rafale fighters, which are reportedly stalled at a level of over $11 billion, according to top Indian Defense Ministry sources.

The FGFA will very significantly enable Russia's military industrial complex to extend its pre-eminence in India by ensuring a follow-on to the Su-30MKI production line.

Informed observers see this as a shot in the arm for the Russia, which they reckon could impact immediately on French and American interests. A renewal of commitment to Russian aircraft will limit the number of Rafale fighters for India, and also reduce the possibility for Americans to sell a fighter aircraft to India.

Boeing Company Chairman James McNerney in October 2015 announcing in New Delhi that his company was ready to set up a manufacturing facility for its F/A-18 fighters, which also have a naval variant, in India.

Lockheed Martin leadership too had in the second half of 2015 made a pitch for selling its F-16 fighters to India, while Swedish Saab made a counter offer to make its Gripen NG fighters.

The two American aircraft manufacturers and the Swedish firm were competitors in the 2007 Indian tender for 126 medium multi role combat aircraft, which was won by French Dassault Aviation's Rafale fighters. The only close competitor to Rafale was the then Cassidian's Eurofighter Typhoon, which is part of the Airbus Group. Only Eurofighter Typhoon campaign, led by the Germans, has openly stated that it is all over for it in India for the Air Force's need for a combat plane.

Significantly, the latest development in the FGFA talks between Russia and India also signals that the public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will continue to be Russia's major partner in India, and its engagement with emerging Indian private sector in defense production will be marginal.

Just a month ago, Russia rejected the possibility of trying out an alliance with the private sector Reliance Defence on the production of 200 Ka-226T light utility helicopters for the Indian armed forces by opting for HAL to be the production agency in India.

[member_28990]

^ still think the FGFA remains our best hope to get a fifth generation air superiority platform at the earliest

[maitya]

India Looking At 60 FGFAs As Russia Reduces Price, Final Talks On

http://armingindia.com/India%20Looking% ... s%20On.htm

NEW DELHI, FEB. 3, 2016: India and Russia are in final negotiations in New Delhi to settle the contributions for the development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) at a reported $3.7 billion from both sides, Arming India has learnt from diplomatic sources. An early conclusion of the agreement is expected.

<snip>

India's contribution for development costs would entitle it to extensive transfer of technology and include delivery of three prototypes. Subsequently, the entire lot of FGFAs for the Indian Air Force (IAF) are intended to be made at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited's 'Russia complex' in Nasik, Maharashtra.

The cost of each series production FGFA is initially pegged at a whopping $225 million apiece, which is about two-and-a-half times the estimated current price of the Su-30MKI, currently India's frontline fighter.

<snip>

Sources disclosed that a reluctant IAF has finally been made to come around on the FGFA. But it has reduced its requirement to just 60 fighters, or three squadrons. This is being interpreted as a lack of enthusiasm for the proposed fighter, which is yet to prove true fifth generation capability.

<snip>

India will have no major contribution to design and development, and the project is being re-modeled on the Su-30MKI lines, wherein India substantially paid for the development cost, paving the way for assembly line production in India under transfer of technology.

The initial concept of India having a substantial work share in the design and development of the fifth generation fighter in order to boost indigenous capability has been abandoned.
<snip>

Now wrt the highlighted text above, the following are the key points:
1) How is $225mil "whoppingly" high - compared to 4+gen Rafale being pegged at $250mil etc?
A gen-ahead (all aspect stealth, may not be in F-22 class etc, but atleast "stealthy"), weight-class ahead, capability-ahead platform but at a same price!!
Starkly brings out the cost-to-be-paid for supplier-diversification argument again etc.


2) So this $3.7billion is for ToT for assembly-line setup related tech-transfer ... sort of "Royalty Fee" to partially offset the dev cost the Russia may have incurred, without any risk of design/development/testing technology transfer of the product development itself.
The actual cost of Raw Materials, Machinery, Test setup and also more-offsetting of the design and development cost of the parent program would be hidden in that $225mil/unit cost.


3) The low number, 60 means, almost entirely SKD kits (pure screw-driver assembly) and maybe some (at most 15-20) in CKD kit assembly.
Which means entire sub-systems imported to be assembled here and some component-level verification testing - that's about it really.


4) Wrt no design/development/testing IP sharing etc, IAF may rant and rave, but that is what is expected from any sane production agency - all weather friend cliche etc aside.
Point is you want the design details of a "next gen stealthy platform" to be able to tweak/customise it any whichever way you like in future and tailor it to your requirement, well then you need to design/build/test your own.

So ball is firmly in IAFs court - bite the bullet and participate and support in it's entirety in the MRCA program and maybe even accept a product which may have not met all the specification etc
OR
sit at the sidelines and enjoy the tamasha (with all accompanying Tut-Tuts etc for all failures/road-blocks that are bound to crop up a la LCA program) -but be ready for more imports at much higher prices (and thus lower number of units) but without any flexibility to "Customize" etc in a decade+ from now.


5) FGFA is the heavy-component of the IAF doctrine - so the market is for atleast 300 (~Su-30 numbers) platforms. Russia has done well and get it's toehold in it - next 15-20 years revenue-stream is more or less secured.
More so, without any risk of IP sharing etc - as when next incremental tranche gets negotiated, this same template would be used to "quickly" get the platforms isn't it. And then a low platform number would preclude any higher price-point that would be inherent in any reasonably-deep-but-additional ToT even for the manufacturing aspects (let alone design/development/testing life cycles).

Well, done!!

[SaiK]

How many times it has to be told? It ain't rocket science to understand IPRs and product blueprints and designs. No nation including India can be dumb to give away.

Billion times told about building Kaveri engines and not dump it.

Somethings are really in the rear end for analysis.

[NRao]

Bad move, especially with their own AF reducing orders.

Then the real engine has yet to arrive. After which they will need to test all over again.

Not to speak of no one in India has a real in-depth picture of this plane. All news is from Sukhoi.

This, again, is I bet, a PMO out-of-the-box purchase. Very bad use of funds with both the French and Russians.

In both cases India will get techs she does have, but not the latest and greatest. Neither of them have such techs to give.

[prahaar]

NRaoji, is the following interpretation of your posts correct?
High technology (which neither FGFA nor Rafale) can bring is available from US at significantly similar terms and conditions
Rafale and FGFA are both PMO's requirements and not the forces, what is the basis for such assertion.

No plan B other than Rafale was said by IAF - is it your suggestion that it was said at the behest for PMO?

[NRao]

No plan B other than Rafale was said by IAF - is it your suggestion that it was said at the behest for PMO?

"No Plan B" predates Modi/Parrikar and is related to the old MMRCA framework.

The moment Modi said "36", he killed the MMRCA old MMRCA framework (Parrikar said that immediately after) and so did "No Plan B". In fact, "No Plan B" was replaced by "more MKIs" (Parrikar) and then the LCA MK1A.

[member_28990]

There was a lot of hai hai when India opted for the Su 30 MKI also - look what we got in the end. I have a suspicion that with Indian inputs to the avionics etc. the FGFA that we will ultimately get will be a beast.

[NRao]

High technology (which neither FGFA nor Rafale) can bring is available from US at significantly similar terms and conditions
Rafale and FGFA are both PMO's requirements and not the forces, what is the basis for such assertion.

Multiple answers in this rather complex question.

So, what exactly are the French/Russians giving to bring the US into this simple picture?

My read is that the PMO made a decision based on some broad parameters (which is OK), but then left it to the MoD (and FinMin) to clean up, not working out the deeper implications.

Tell me, who exactly is happy with the situation? IAF? No. MICs? No. MoD? No. FinMin? No. PMO? Perhaps.

And, the 36 Rafale, with something called "Offsets" is now more expensive than when the MMRCA started at $5.5 billion. And getting very close to the $20 billion for 126.

So, again, what exactly is India getting, outside of some very expensive planes and the great satisfaction of funding a foreign R&D.

[NRao]

There was a lot of hai hai when India opted for the Su 30 MKI also - look what we got in the end. I have a suspicion that with Indian inputs to the avionics etc. the FGFA that we will ultimately get will be a beast.

Very true. Outside the IAF and a few Indian Labs, there were none that had the confidence - including some at Sukhoi.

However, two totally diff situations.

India did NOT "opt" for the MKI - India designed the MKI and said this is what we want. MKI was an Indian dream, that even some Russians laughed at (understandably). With the MKI, India was willingly taking the risk and had calculated it up front. Indians knew what they wanted and what they were getting into.

Not so with the FGFA. The PAK-FA is not a plane that is as mature as the Su-27 was then AND Indians know very, very little about the PAK-FA, outside of the fact that it still needs an engine. Besides, Indians are FAR more mature about aerospace as compared to the mid-90s.

So, while the MKI was an integration challenge, the FGFA is a R&D challenge. The risk with the FGFA is HUGE - worst case you get a PAK-FA, so why not buy the PAK-FA first and then tinker-tanker to your heart's content later? ANS: Russia does not benefit, they have to still pay for their own R&D. The PAK-FA is not a complete plane - it needs a lot of work and for that they NEED Indian funds. RuAF may say this and that, but I bet they will back of. Remember the PAK-FA was a Sukhoi funded effort, Russia stepped in much later. And, now Russia is unable to support it (much as France cannot support the Rafale - both NEED other sources to keep them alive).

So, let me know what can either France or Russia actually give so that Indians do NOT go back to them in 10 years.

[NRao]

BTW, neither France nor Russia is cheating. Both are protecting their own self interests as each nation should do.

Just wish India would do it too. Just do not see it happening right now.

[member_28990]

There was a lot of hai hai when India opted for the Su 30 MKI also - look what we got in the end. I have a suspicion that with Indian inputs to the avionics etc. the FGFA that we will ultimately get will be a beast.

Very true. Outside the IAF and a few Indian Labs, there were none that had the confidence - including some at Sukhoi.

However, two totally diff situations.

India did NOT "opt" for the MKI - India designed the MKI and said this is what we want. MKI was an Indian dream, that even some Russians laughed at (understandably). With the MKI, India was willingly taking the risk and had calculated it up front. Indians knew what they wanted and what they were getting into.

Not so with the FGFA. The PAK-FA is not a plane that is as mature as the Su-27 was then AND Indians know very, very little about the PAK-FA, outside of the fact that it still needs an engine. Besides, Indians are FAR more mature about aerospace as compared to the mid-90s.

So, while the MKI was an integration challenge, the FGFA is a R&D challenge. The risk with the FGFA is HUGE - worst case you get a PAK-FA, so why not buy the PAK-FA first and then tinker-tanker to your heart's content later? ANS: Russia does not benefit, they have to still pay for their own R&D. The PAK-FA is not a complete plane - it needs a lot of work and for that they NEED Indian funds. RuAF may say this and that, but I bet they will back of. Remember the PAK-FA was a Sukhoi funded effort, Russia stepped in much later. And, now Russia is unable to support it (much as France cannot support the Rafale - both NEED other sources to keep them alive).

So, let me know what can either France or Russia actually give so that Indians do NOT go back to them in 10 years.

we get birds in hand, of a quality that is vastly beyond our current means. Sometimes that is necessary too, otherwise we will only be left with vaporware and crumbled dreams. Becoming self sufficient is very expensive (that is why most countries dont do it), and until we get necessary competence in designing and mass manufacturing our own aircrafts, we need to fork out the moolah for both R&D and so called "costly imports".

Our own RD is very badly funded, infrastructure lagging behind, brain drain, infighting among services and developers, import dalals sabotaging deals - all agreed, and need to change. But equally, if not more important, is the fact that we need to keep maintaining our combat edge. So there will always be a period where RD costs and import costs will overlap, and it will feel like a stinker. But that is unavoidable simply because national security is paramount. Will these imports become money down the drain if our local products succeed - may very well be and that is the BEST CASE scenario. That is why our Airforce Chief says that there is no Plan B - the Rafale/FGFA ARE THE PLAN B, until PLAN A - LCA + AMCA is fully operational.

[Prem]

Will India be able to incorporate some of the 5thG technologies into MKI upgrade to operate huge fleet of 4.75G platforms? All 270+80 of them.

[NRao]

So, let me know what can either France or Russia actually give so that Indians do NOT go back to them in 10 years.

we get birds in hand, of a quality that is vastly beyond our current means.

Multiple issues here.

Which bird? And, you say "quality that is vastly beyond our current means". IAF disagrees, they have clearly stated that the PAK-FA does not meet their requirements. On the FGFA too the IAF has been clear - the engine that the IAF wants is not even there. So, again, what exactly are you buying? The $5.5 billion - now down to some $3.75 is for R&D and 3 prototypes. The "bird" you speak of will come out of those prototypes.

Sometimes that is necessary too, otherwise we will only be left with vaporware and crumbled dreams. Becoming self sufficient is very expensive (that is why most countries dont do it), and until we get necessary competence in designing and mass manufacturing our own aircrafts, we need to fork out the moolah for both R&D and so called "costly imports".

True.

However, especially WRT Russia, it is very clear that Russia needs funds for R&D, they have the brains and are trailing badly in R&D. So, again, what exactly are you getting, that the IAF has missed. Forget me.

No idea what the rest of it is about. AMCA is hardly vapor ware or a dream. IIRC it has been funded to the extent the FGFA has been so far - that is solid $ figures, funds allocated. And, they want to ask for billions for it too. So, why are Indians funding Russia and not India? Need an explanation there. Also, the US seems to be helping with an engine - supposedly for the AMCA, hardly a dream project.

If at all the PAK-FA is more of a dream project. IF India does not fund it, it may not survive contrary to what the Russians say.

Our own RD is very badly funded, infrastructure lagging behind, brain drain, infighting among services and developers, import dalals sabotaging deals - all agreed, and need to change. But equally, if not more important, is the fact that we need to keep maintaining our combat edge. So there will always be a period where RD costs and import costs will overlap, and it will feel like a stinker. But that is unavoidable simply because national security is paramount. Will these imports become money down the drain if our local products succeed - may very well be and that is the BEST CASE scenario. That is why our Airforce Chief says that there is no Plan B - the Rafale/FGFA ARE THE PLAN B, until PLAN A - LCA + AMCA is fully operational.

None of that explains what India will do in 15-20 years. Will you suggest India go back to France/Russia?

This is not rocket science. Funding is a proper, simple science. You have to manage the risk - which is what the French and Russians are doing. All I am suggesting is that India does the smae: manage risk (it includes all the -ves you mention - which is there in other nations too, just ask the Russians)

[vishvak]

Actually, it was Russians who designed Mig 27/Su 27/Mig 29 and then Su 30 in that order. IIRC, Russians struck goldmine with benefits of Su 27 high manoeuvre design, while Indians invested in MKI.

As far as 'designing' goes, AMCA project, like LCA earlier, is ongoing now. LCA, AMCA is where our design capabilities are/will be developed.

In America, there is a saying - if it ain't broken, don't fix it. In fact, Americans have invented & developed the American tech base step by step. As long as engines for point defense LCA or transport A/C are concerned, it is ok. After that, it is slippery slope into mixture of alphabet soup contracts and star wars satellites. However, for a Paki at receiving end, what is the difference between bomb trucks with star wars guidance on one hand, and a desi fighter jet with a stop watch with pilot.

The latest offer of erstwhile top dog F/A-18 assembly will prolly ask for protocols of stop watch too, just in case it is used as a standard.

[NRao]

This article was posted earlier, posting just the high lights:

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.

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

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.

Two things to note.

1) The $4 billion is the "develop"ment cost. It is some $30 billion for the 250 figure Shukla has
2) "replace the Sukhoi-30MKI". As a reminder by 2030 they will be retiring the MKIs, the ones they are upgrading today

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.

So, that provides the cost aspects for R&D. How did they manage to reduce the price is beyond me, but .............




Now THE real fun part:

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.

So, the PAK-FA does not hold water per IAF. And, that engine? will not be ready till 2018 - with their recent history ............

Another kicker:

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

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.

So ........................... as I have been saying ...............................the PAK-FA is *really* not good enough. That the Russians NEED another - at least $8 billion (it was $12 billion till this deal) - to complete the *real* PAK-FA (not the ones that are flying around). So, India will fund the R&D, get a few things out of it, actually get to build a 5th Gen plane in India.

The question I still have is would this be the end of Indian need to approach foreign vendors for future planes.

[vishvak]

PAK-FA is for RuAF is all it means, and FGFA is about IAF specifications. 8 prototypes will be built for RuAF, which is not totally independent of the program, with 3 prototypes for IAF requirements. The link does not state anything on the lines of 'PAK-FA' does not hold water per IAF, or that India will fund (all of) R&D alone.

To say that India will only get a 'few' things out is incorrect either way when IAF will have 3 prototypes.

[Suresh S]

I have to say in this I am with NRao. Money is not unlimited at least not at present. If we continue down the same path as in the past, funding other nations our future is not going to be much different than now in defense matters.
I strongly feel that India should liberally fund the development of it,s own LCA and AMCA. That can only happen if huge amounts are not spent on other nations companies.
I wonder if Russia is strong arming India behind the scene as literally they have us by the balls, however much I love them. Two big ticket items both in the airforce and army , MKI and T-72 and T-90 are from Russia and we are dependant on them for service and spares inspite of all the progress we have made to make spares here in India.By opting for foreign made instead of made in India from scratch we will be repeating the same mistake with the same result in the future.
I feel we must take the risk with indigenous products and the time is now. No risk no gain.

[member_29294]

As far as I can tell PakFA/FGFA will have nearly x2 the range and x2 the internal weaponry capabilities as AMCA.

I don't see how AMCA can replace it. They are two different classes of fighters.

PakFA at least seems inevitable. But FGFA I still don't know about. What is that $4 Billion even buying? Last time I checked India helped to make Su-27 into Su-30MKI, it turned into one of Russia's most popular exports plus their own Su-30SM and India bought 272 of them. Seems like India is paying Sukhoi for something they should be doing anyway. I am not fond of India subsidizing Sukhoi development again, 90s were a different time.

[member_28990]

In these matters risk is the last thing we should take. Until our own products are mature enough, we will have to pay for both foreign maal and our own RD. That is the price of wanting admission to superpower club.

[Suresh S]

In these matters risk is the last thing we should take. Until our own products are mature enough, we will have to pay for both foreign maal and our own RD. That is the price of wanting admission to superpower club.[/que]

Truth is a just the opposite of what you are saying. No body became a super power by buying weapons from others. To become a super power you have to make your own weapons . It is a absolute must .And there is never a good time for starting anything. How many times I have taken exams in life and thought if only I had a few more days I would ace the exam . There is never a perfect time for the exam.

[member_28990]

Please read my post again - RD and weapon acquisition has to go hand in hand, in parallel. One cannot stop for the benefit of the other.

[NRao]

1. Sukhoi, especially, is very found of confusion. So, there are a few prototypes flying around, they are known as PAK-FA. The version as a result of spending a total of $8 billion is ALSO being called a PAK-FA. Clearly - the article also states it - they are not the same, as the PAK-FA that is flying will be used to as he foundational plane to build the FGFA and the new PAK-FA. Bottom line, they are spending $8 billion for R&D (which is not completed)

2) The idea is not to replace the FGFA with the AMCA. The idea is to spend the same amount for the R&D phase for both and if India lacks funds, then all on the AMCA

3) Both are as risky - the AMCA and the FGFA. In fact, the AMCA may be less risky - it is totally Indian, so the risks should have been computed and therefore in control. The FGFA will not afford the same, it cannot being Russian

4) "What is that $4 Billion even buying?" R&D of course. It was supposed to have bought Design too, but the plane has been designed. Now comes the fun parts - those they did not have funds to complete. I am sure that the Russians have things in mind - they cannot be doing anything ground up. So, IMHO, India is funding what their needs are and by-the-way if there is something you need let us know, provide the funds and we will deliver it to you. Which is why India had specified that the team will be equally distributed between India and Russia and all stuff kept on servers in both nations

5) "maturity": Yup, that is why Russia wants $8 billion, to make the PAk-FA mature

6) "5th Gen" means totally diff things to diff AFs. RuAF and IAF absolutely do not see eye to eye on this plane - which is OK, not a knock. But that will influence the communication and the outcome. How on earth is the same team going to cater to two diff masters is beyond me - one is bad enough. Main reason why I have major fears. The new PAK-FA nad the FGFA will be two diff planes, perhaps with the same skin

[Cain Marko]

Well...we want a 5gen bird, that too with ability to tweak it here and there, and don't want to pay for it - Pakfa MKI = FGFA aint it? Ayyo how this is working? IAF can complain about it but what design inputs can it expect when India joined the movie after the interval and cast et al., had already been determined - in such cases you can only get role of extras, or at most a stunt double here and there. Even worse, wasn't it HAL that reduced its workshare from original requirement?

Bottomline is we have to balance operational needs with inhouse development. I'm wondering what kind of $$s support domestic R&D agencies have received after Namo has come to power? Better than UPA one hopes. BUT it needs to be a lot better.

One gets the feeling that Namo has lost some confidence in certain desi programs' ability to bring about products in the near term. He is meeting urgent operational requirements by making PMO level decisions wrt Rafale and FGFA. Weren't they looking at the S400 as well?

Wonder if he can lean on IAF and HAL to get more LCA orders?

[vishvak]

During earlier negotiations, there have been discussions about why, or how much, India allocated funds for RnD phase. Now there is a complaint if funds are for prototypes? In some time, a comment would be about why is India purchasing off the shelf planes only, and then complaint would be about why not the best and the most economic.

All this is OK, but now there are comments about engines too, and in due time when it comes, there will be more comments about why are we funding Russian RnD, instead lets purchase the best because the sunk consts are already factored in etc.

So why complain first about RnD efforts?

By the way, let me ask a tangential question. How many countries could do what Russians did independently in Syria ie bombing Islamic Sultanate rabid dogs in Syria?

A more relevant question is, what would a country do in case it is to bomb the Islamic Sultanate with American bomb trucks and star wars satellites. Point is about strategic independence, and not "we want no war, only peace" in times of revolutions, all the political restrictions included. We are probably reaching there even without American weapons, so what would such a country do during war, with alphabet soup restriction clauses at the back of mind.

In the scenario of two front war, wherein we can use some mil ware only against China but not against Pakistan, can we destroy Paki state as default outcome of two front war? So what is victory then if we can not destroy enemies even in face of two front war while Pakis can openly terrorize.

[NRao]

when India joined the movie after the interval and cast et al.,

Cracking me up.

So, remind me, why exactly does Russia want India to invest $4 billion (down from $6 billion) AFTER the interval? And, India is foolish enough to do so?

So,

On 11 September 2010, it was reported that India and Russia had agreed on a preliminary design contract, subject to Cabinet approval. The joint development deal would have each country invest $6 billion and take 8–10 years to develop the FGFA fighter.[11] In December 2010, a memorandum of understanding for preliminary design of the Indo-Russian fighter was reportedly signed between Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), and Russian companies Rosoboronexport and Sukhoi.[12][13] The preliminary design will cost $295 million and will be complete within 18 months.[14] On 17 August 2011, media reports stated that the new fighter will cost Russia and India $6 billion to develop, and India will pay about 35% of the cost.[15][16]

$295 million for "design". Check, India spent those funds and out came a "preliminary design". Of what? IF a PAK-FA, with prototypes flying, is already there, what did the Indians AND Russians "preliminary design"? So much for "after interval". Note that $295 produced a "preliminary" design. So, the real design is still needs to be completed. So much for "cast"ing.

Boss, nothing is done. The prototypes produced till now are underfunded machines. Sukhoi funded the PAK-FA and built the first prototype. After i flew Russian MoD spent some funds, and much like the French told Sukhoi to get funds from elsewhere. Which is what Sukhoi's director Mikhail Pogosyan desperately tried - India. (Recall his N number of stories.)

Nope. The PAK-FA is a near dud (as a complete "5th Gen" plane). Even the RuAF has reduced the order to some 18 planes - shows uncertainty. And, of course the IAF has made it very clear too.

Normally I do not get involved is such questions, nut:

How many countries could do what Russians did independently in Syria ie bombing Islamic Sultanate rabid dogs in Syria?

Iran is funding them and Russia is protecting her interests, as she should. So, nothing really unusual. But it did provide her with a great POC ground.

Pakfa MKI = FGFA aint it?

No.

1) India paid to integrate various systems in the MKI
2) FGFA is a "design" and "build" effort, a far more involved effort
3) It has been stated umpteen times PAK-FA and FGFA will no even be close (neither were the Su-27/30 and the Su-30 MKI). The IAF has made it very clear from day 1

[vishvak]

Iran is funding them and Russia is protecting her interests, as she should. So, nothing really unusual. But it did provide her with a great POC ground.

So Iran and Russia, out of which Iran is on the funding side only. My question was on technical side. What is contribution of Iran in it, on actual war fighting, out of Iran and Russia as far as air operations are considered.

Russia are fighting a war and even Russians would think twice - even to begin the operations - if there were alphabet soup restriction clauses to adhere to - in the situation of an actual war. In other words, no war and the Islamic sultanate would be on ascent with all kind of scum vying to be emir/sultan.

[NRao]

So Iran and Russia, out of which Iran is on the funding side only. My question was on technical side. What is contribution of Iran in it, on actual war fighting, out of Iran and Russia as far as air operations are considered.

No funds, nothing happens.

True, Russia has showed a LOT of stuff. Impressed. That is what I said earlier: POC. Great proving ground and I think they delivered.

On Iran fighting, they have lost a LOT of people - in fact there was a point when Iran felt Russia was getting all the glory, and IMHO they were right. So have Lebanese lost a lot of people. Syrians have not really been on the real fronts till the end. One has to admire what Iran and Hezbollah have done. I very much doubt Russia would have got some much out if this deal without Iranians and Lebanese on the ground.

That is my impression, I am sure there are others who are better informed.

[Cain Marko]

when India joined the movie after the interval and cast et al.,

Cracking me up.

So, remind me, why exactly does Russia want India to invest $4 billion (down from $6 billion) AFTER the interval? And, India is foolish enough to do so?

To become an extra or perhaps even a stunt double wonlee...if you now (2010) want to become a lead/hero, get your own movie going (AMCA)

On 11 September 2010, it was reported that India and Russia had agreed on a preliminary design contract, subject to Cabinet approval. The joint development deal would have each country invest $6 billion and take 8–10 years to develop the FGFA fighter.[11] In December 2010, a memorandum of understanding for preliminary design of the Indo-Russian fighter was reportedly signed between Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), and Russian companies Rosoboronexport and Sukhoi.[12][13] The preliminary design will cost $295 million and will be complete within 18 months.[14] On 17 August 2011, media reports stated that the new fighter will cost Russia and India $6 billion to develop, and India will pay about 35% of the cost.[15][16]

$295 million for "design". Check, India spent those funds and out came a "preliminary design". Of what? IF a PAK-FA, with prototypes flying, is already there, what did the Indians AND Russians "preliminary design"? So much for "after interval". Note that $295 produced a "preliminary" design. So, the real design is still needs to be completed. So much for "cast"ing.

Boss, nothing is done. The prototypes produced till now are underfunded machines. Sukhoi funded the PAK-FA and built the first prototype. After i flew Russian MoD spent some funds, and much like the French told Sukhoi to get funds from elsewhere. Which is what Sukhoi's director Mikhail Pogosyan desperately tried - India. (Recall his N number of stories.)

1) India paid to integrate various systems in the MKI
2) FGFA is a "design" and "build" effort, a far more involved effort
3) It has been stated umpteen times PAK-FA and FGFA will no even be close (neither were the Su-27/30 and the Su-30 MKI). The IAF has made it very clear from day 1

All this is fine...but my whole point was that if India intends to get a deeply customized 5Gen bird from outside, it had better be ready to fork out some very, very serious cash. Afterall, even the 4.5 gen Rafale was supposed to cost $ 20 billion plus with some TOT for 126. Expecting to get an FGFA (with all that involvement you point out) for that price would be rather ridiculous.

The Russkis will always do what they are good at - make cheapo offers and then it is like pulling teeth to get them to fork over. That is the price to pay for cheapo bird. You want topnotch support, service, cooperation etc., better be ready to shell arm, leg, kidney and anything else you can spare....how much would say a Rafale based AMCA would cost?

[NRao]

Back peddling?

To become an extra or perhaps even a stunt double wonlee...if you now (2010) want to become a lead/hero

All that after interval? What happens before the interval?

Max Mueller syndrome. Fit history into ones own beliefs.

The FGFA, if you read up, could be bigger than the Russian version. Earliest thinking had it as a dual seater, so that one was totally different.

Even now India had identified 50 differences.

So, again, what exactly are they asking the $4 billion for? Per you being an extra. If that is true then dump the FGFA.
Which is what you seem to be saying. And follow the real hero.

[NRao]

OK, hopefully my last post, till something new arises.

My thinking is that modi needs the economy to grow, for which he needs FI and for the energy sector reactors. Both France and Russia are more than capable of delivering on the reactor front. But in order to give india reactors, they need India to keep alive some aspects of their economies. Thus the PMO thinking-out-of-the-box and essentially kicking the can to the MoD/FinMin.

IF that is true then it is the best path, provided the economy really grows and provides stability within India.

[Cosmo_R]

... But in order to give india reactors, they need India to keep alive some aspects of their economies. Thus the PMO thinking-out-of-the-box and essentially kicking the can to the MoD/FinMin. .

They are not "GIVING" us any reactors. We are going to "BUY" them on commercial terms when practically no one in the world is building them on the scale we are. We are going to keep their nuke sectors alive because we need electricity. We are not in the business of keeping their inefficient defense businesses alive. We already keep our own inefficient defense PSUs alive at a great cost to national security.

[NRao]

We are going to "BUY" them on commercial terms

True, but do we know with what restrictions, techs, etc? I know I am making an assumption. However, outsiders are very aware of why India wants what or what will really help India. So, they are probably asking India to help out too. Look at it from a larger perspective. Makes sense on a bilateral basis. The devil is in the details and that is what the MoD/FinMin are finding out. Wait till the reactors are also negotiated for. Bet they will also provide some fireworks. Part of the game that needs to be played.

Post response to this in appropriate threads and post url here.

[Cain Marko]

Back peddling?

Seriously? Is it that hard for you to understand a simple premise sirji?

All that after interval? What happens before the interval? ...
Max Mueller syndrome. Fit history into ones own beliefs.

Please can the smart stuff - I really don't have time for it.

The FGFA, if you read up, could be bigger than the Russian version. Earliest thinking had it as a dual seater, so that one was totally different.

You make it sound as though the FGFA was never supposed to be based on the Pakfa....and the further removed it will be from the Pakfa, the more $$$s it will cost - that at least should be obvious.

So, again, what exactly are they asking the $4 billion for? Per you being an extra. If that is true then dump the FGFA.
Which is what you seem to be saying. And follow the real hero.

Yes....I doubt the FGFA is even going to be what the SU-30 was to the 27 unless India forks over some very serious monies - I'd be mighty surprised if $ 4 billion is going to cut it for anything of that scope - but if they do succeed, I for one will be pleased considering the going rates in the fighter market.

[NRao]

Please can the smart stuff - I really don't have time for it.

For the sake of the discussion - apologies.

You make it sound as though the FGFA was never supposed to be based on the Pakfa

Now you are wasting my time.

IF there is a PAK-FA that can contribute to a FGFA, why are the Russians investing $4 billion to build a new PAK-FA? You have not explained that - why are the Russians interested in investing in a plane supposedly that can produce a FGFA? I would think the RuAF would order 126 PAK-FAs and tell India to buy the PAK-FA (which is what the IAF wanted to do).

The answer is - and you have not answered my previous questions - there is a plane, but it needs a LOT of work. Which is why the RuAF has reduced their order. Then there is a list of complains from the IAF and the 50 items to improve the PAK-FA. BUT, the Russians ALSO want to invest $4 billion and improve on the PAK-FA. Why is THAT escapes you?

The answer is rather simple: Russia wants $8 billion for R&D. There is no PAK-FA. ?????? You need to answer the basic questions: why $8 billion if a PAK-FA exists? Why has RuAF reduced its order? Why has the IAF spoken against the current PAK-FA?

If you do not have an answer, it is OK, let it slide. I just do not consider the current PAK-FA to be a mature platform - BOTH the RuAF AND Sukhoi agree, which is why they want $8 billion!!!!!!!

Thx.

[member_28990]

I think we are going round and round complicating a very very simple scenario.

1. India wants a stealth bird.

2. There are only two "proven" stealth programs in the world, both managed by uncle - of these the good one is unobtanium, the other is still under evaluation

3. PAK FA and the chinese maal are the only other "stealth" prototypes flying - both are programs with considerable question marks hanging over them

4. BY all available information (or lack thereof) the assumption is that the AMCA is still on the drawing board - priority is still getting the LCA right

5. The AMCA is not a heavy class bird in any case

6. Where will heavy class Indian stealth bird come from?

a) Uncle - wont give good stuff, kiss your strategic independence goodbye, untrustworthy Paki backers
b) Start another program with ADA - not happening from what we know
c) Modify AMCA parameters - implies ditching whatever we HAVE done for AMCA so far, which might be worth it if the program hasnt moved (again, i dont know details) - 90% of zero is zero after all
d) Get bird from China
e) Forget about heavy stealth fighters - again that flies against the IAF force mix doctrine from what I know
f) FGFA/PAK-FA/Sukhoi - cough up the dough and invest in the ONE program that hits the sweet spot - stable supplier, strategically not at odds, has required MI base. The drawbacks are cost, loss of absolute control, maybe delays, maybe some technical compromises. But at the end, this is the quickest and safest path to getting something close to what we need.