'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 19 Feb 2017 23:15

Nick_S wrote:Vishnu Som commented on Keypub -

In having followed the now scrapped MRCA and MMRCA programmes for more than a decade, I do believe the Gripen E/F has a fighting chance at winning an order now for 200 jets. This will depend, almost entirely, on the industrial partnership being offered by SAAB which, by all accounts, is fairly impressive.

That said, I do not see a Sea Gripen variant being inducted into the Indian Navy - they have a stated requirement for a twin engine fighter ... they are seeking 57 of them. Whats more, the government remains committed to an LCA Navy Mk-2 aircraft, a sanctioned project that continues to be developed - this was clarified to me by Commodore Balaji (retd), the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) Chief a few days back. Thanks

A quick observation ... I was lucky to be flown onboard the LCA Tejas and the Gripen D on consecutive days last week and have a small observation to make. The Synthetic Aperture mode of the PS-05 V3 (possibly V4) on the Gripen was markedly inferior to the resolution provided by the Elta EL/M 2032 set onboard the Tejas while looking down and ground `targets. However, the air to air range on the Gripen's radar (not disclosing numbers here) was singularly impressive - meant to take advantage of the phenomenal range of the Meteor missile. Cheers.

So the great news is that 2032 has excellent resolution for ground mapping work!! The next AESA radar chosen from the HAL tender will probably have same or better resolution for ground work. That is going to be a large part of LCAs workload!!

The LCA pilot probably did not market the full range of the radar probably due to secretive nature and Vishnu is just another Jurno, why tell him anything about the true range of radar. He doesn't need to know. If Derby-ER is being tested on Tejas, then the ranges will be same or similar for all practical purposes. (http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show- ... formance-0)

On the other hand, Gripen folks do care about marketing efforts and willing to tell everyone and sundry the true++ ranges of their radar. And marketing always promises more than what the item can deliver!! That is what they get paid for!

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 19 Feb 2017 23:23

negi wrote:^ Abe kitna fenkta hai ye ; who shows a Radar in active A2A mode publicly like that ? What did they even use for ranging ? Crows flying over the dump-yard in outskirts of Bengaluru ?

There are too many details involved when one talks about Radar ranging, detection and tracking ; this cricket commentary that XYZ has better 'range' than LMN is a joke ; what does one mean by range ? Range at which target is detected or tracked what sub modes were employed i.e. was it in RWS, TWS, LRS , MTT or some other mode (usually there are 5) they all will plot a different image on HUB as distance at which you detect/search/track varies .

+1 Thats a great point. Hopefully the off the cuff remark doesn't take a life of its own. Hopefully you can engage with Vishnu here and on Keypub.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Feb 2017 18:50

With a second prod. line being built at HAL Blr. to make another 8/yr,we will be able to build 16/yr by 2020 at least,not the 3-4 /yr as is being dome right now. If one allows the pvt. to also sector to start another line...for export,we will be able to meet the numbers required without setting up yet another line for a firang fighter.This exercise would be far less costwise than another firang line,the idea so clearly meant to satisfy Yanqui thirst for Indian dollars and a strategic foothold on our aerospace industry,which will strangle any desi/indigenpous development .

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 20 Feb 2017 21:17

Philip wrote:With a second prod. line being built at HAL Blr. to make another 8/yr,we will be able to build 16/yr by 2020 at least,not the 3-4 /yr as is being dome right now. If one allows the pvt. to also sector to start another line...for export,we will be able to meet the numbers required without setting up yet another line for a firang fighter.This exercise would be far less costwise than another firang line,the idea so clearly meant to satisfy Yanqui thirst for Indian dollars and a strategic foothold on our aerospace industry,which will strangle any desi/indigenpous development .

Duuuude, it's 8/9 in the current setup. 5 year on primary line and 3/4 on secondary line. Please don't selectively keep posting what you think is reality.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Feb 2017 05:34

‘Make In India’ Was the Key Focus of Aero India Show

During the show, Saab Aeronautics head Ulf Nilsson told an Indian business daily that the Swedish company is talking about an Indian partnership to the Adani Group, which wants to build a 200-acre aerospace factory at Mundra.

But concerns about possible changes in U.S. technology transfer policy clouded Lockheed Martin’s pitch for Indian-based production of the F-16V version of the Fighting Falcon.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 21 Feb 2017 07:20

@Rakesh ^^^. I did not realize I had so many paragraphs that needed such detailed rebuttals. So hats off to you for considering them valid and a tip of the O'Shanter to Amadeus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCud8H7z7vU

" The only spoiler in this entire scenario is the geopolitical angle and Unkil has FULL exclusive rights on that issue. With that issue under its belt, it is an absolute certain win for LM and the US Govt to offer the F-35 instead. You don't even need a competition."

The irony here is that in 2005 LM did offer the F35 as part of the MMRCA competition. But the Indian stipulation was that it had to be an a/c in service. Hence LM proposed that it could be 180 (at that time) F-16s which could be traded in for F-35s.

Any, the decision is fraught with geopolitical weight. Just as Pence is out there telling NATO right now that they must spend more on defense, so also the undercurrent indeed, over current in the DTTI talks is that we buy LM/Boeing. It is the gateway to everything from the engine co-development to EMALs to strategic support vis a vis PRC.

The IAF may be in love with the Gripen E (which actually does not yet exist in service) but if that choice is made against the backdrop of the 2005 decision against the F35, I can assure you (and I have no special inside tracks on this), we will need the Swedish Bikini Ski Team to ramp up and come to our rescue when PRC realizes that the US won't come to our support.

Politically, this is a big deal in the US Congress. Personally, I would order as many off the shelf F35s as we could afford and work with the Israelis to customize. No MII line for the f35: it would cost $350MM unit for the initial orders and it does not make sense at all. Simultaneously, get Boeing to JV the AMCA going.

This is the best of all possible worlds at the moment. If we could go back and revisit decisions....who know? A LCA that was the size of an F-16 with a F132 engine? A LCA MK2 like the M4K with 2 F132s?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Feb 2017 12:31

Even a nut or bolt from the US comes with a heavy price ,sanctions threat,inspection regime,etc.,etc. It would give the US an unprecedented ability to crack both Indian and Paki heads by cutting off their mil supplies at crucial times. Since we have China also to deal with,we must have our independence,unfettered firang acquisitions/JVs,whatever,from proven,reliable suppliers who've never let us down.Remember how the LCA was screwed by the US,Sea King spares,etc.? How many programmes suffered and how many years did we lose? This is why the nation thus far has shied away from contracting with the US key weapon systems ,coming with the achilles heel of sanctions,etc.,that would cripple us in the event of war.Why our cutting edge systems are still mainly Russian like MKIs,BMos,Akulas,Arihant/N-sub assistance, S-400s (to come),etc.

If the commitment is there,the LCA still is the best option by starting new prod. lines in the pvt. sector.This will also be the cheapest way to go. various avatars of the LCA for diff. tasks like close-support/GA,limited CAP,recce, and strike ops within its combat radius/endurance parameters.In VAYU,Prof. Das writes that much of the avionics/eqpt. in firang/western fighters is becos of their hostile environment/Arctic conditions,etc.where they need these extra aids/eqpt. These aircraft also have an expeditionary role to play in supporting global conflicts. In the Indian context,where we know where the battles will take place geographically,we do not need as much eqpt. and much weight-saving is poss. for the LCA.Lockheed he says,found that for a kilo increase in weight in avionics,it required 5 kilos extra in wiring.
Examples given,weight-saving methods described to make the LCA fighting fit.Advanced versions,MK-2,etc. with new engines,etc. could perform more exacting missions.

There is av.strong argument in favour of large numbers,as experience from our past conflicts showed that in the first week alone,we suffered huge losses. Ground fire/AA accounted for most. V.interestingly,the Gnat was the aircraft that suffered least damage,with v.few returning with battle damage,despite hundreds of sorties. he gives this fact as a reason to pursue LCA dev/production so that the bulk of the IAF's fleet comprises variants of the LCA. However,given the apparent attitude of the "establishment",another firang fighter is a certainty,let's hope that it is the Gripen as we'll have less support issues with the Swedes. After all,we're now manufacturing Bofors guns under the Dhanush label!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Feb 2017 17:15

Latest F-16V

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f16.html

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Feb 2017 17:51

"Bye,bye blackbird...",what?

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/18532/ ... K1_8dJ96M8

IDEX 2017: Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA
Our Bureau11:54 AM, February 22,

Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA IDEX 2017: Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA - A +
Future customers of F-16 fighter jets will get them shipped from the USA, a Lockheed Martin executive said implying an end to licence-manufacture of the aircraft in foreign countries.
Rick Groesch, Lockheed’s regional vice president, was quoted as saying at the IDEX 2017 show in Abu Dhabi yesterday, "The next customer that we sell F-16 to we will build them in the US."
Lockheed Martin has in the past assembled F-16s in Turkey, Belgium and the Netherlands in the past. However with the arrival of the Trump administration with its focus on keeping American jobs at home, US companies have to rework their export strategies.
The policy shift puts a big questions mark over Lockheed Martin’s and also Boeing’s pitch to manufacture the F-16 and the F/A-18 aircraft in India under the ‘Make in India’ Program. Both companies are in contention to manufacture single engine (F-16) and twin engine (F/A-18) jets in India to meet Indian Air Force requirements as well as to export them from India.
While Lockheed has offered to shift its F-16 plant to India and use up the space to meet growing demand for the F-35, Boeing has offered to set up modern plant in India provided it gets an order for around 100 aircraft.
Lockheed Martin is eyeing to upgrade F-16 aircraft with Middle Eastern customers such as UAE and Egypt besides completing the supply of 5-6 planes out of a 30 aircraft order meant for Iraq.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Feb 2017 21:02

Philip wrote:"Bye,bye blackbird...",what?

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/18532/ ... K1_8dJ96M8
IDEX 2017: Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA
Our Bureau11:54 AM, February 22,

Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA IDEX 2017: Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA - A +

The policy shift puts a big questions mark over Lockheed Martin’s and also Boeing’s pitch to manufacture the F-16 and the F/A-18 aircraft in India under the ‘Make in India’ Program. Both companies are in contention to manufacture single engine (F-16) and twin engine (F/A-18) jets in India to meet Indian Air Force requirements as well as to export them from India.

Even after India is made a US defense partner it does not really matter much
LM still has to get all clearance and agreement from the US govt to come to India for selling F16
All defense HW will subject to close congressional approval

Now for other exports from US, export control laws are applied. This requires that the product is certified and other fine prints are applied

For software export such as used by Indian govt in Adhaar and biometric tech , there is seperate export control laws and they cannot be trusted software.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Feb 2017 22:19

Philip wrote:"Bye,bye blackbird...",what?

You Sir - of all people - should not gloat. Not a single one of your beloved Russi planes have had stellar after sales support in the IAF. Some like the MiG-29K are pure hangar queens. Do not gloat. Total waste of time.

An interesting article that needs to be read in its entirety. Don't jump to conclusions yet. The only known and proven variable in this entire tamasha is this MII single engine fighter purchase is going to take time. More on that later.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 22 Feb 2017 23:24

Well that means no F-1X/35, no Mig-35, focus on LCA MkX.

ranjan.rao · Post by **ranjan.rao** » 23 Feb 2017 00:33

ragupta wrote:Well that means no F-1X/35, no Mig-35, focus on LCA MkX.

"one man's nightmare is another man's dream"-Bryan Adams: In the heat of night.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 23 Feb 2017 08:39

Interesting q&a about the Gripen bit of floundering when it comes to the naval version which we all know is a damn farce!!!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Feb 2017 13:32

Look at how MKI production with desi material has reached 80% and support /availability has jumped up after requisite measures were taken.The setting up of support entities with local partners who can directly interact with Ru OEMs (Russia amended its laws) will ensure a far better after-sales regime for Ru milware.

Anyway,the point Trump is trying to make is the same that PM Modi is."make in India" to give Indians jobs.Trump is saying the same thing. One can't blame him for doing so and he means what he says.

However,my fundamental reason for not wanting either of the Yanqui birds is that they're very long in the tooth,and are gasping for breath to linger on ,designs 4 decades old,just as the venerable MIG-21 has lasted for 5+ decades with the last avatar, the 21-Bison. Another problem with the F-16 is that it has been stuffed with so much xtra baggage,to give it a chance against more modern fighters,that it has lost the plot.Same with the F-18,but to a lesser extent as its primary role was strike. Here,the LCA if pursued with a vengeance must be the top priority for us. We have to develop the attitude that "there is no other alternative". How did we win in '71? Did we have top of the pops fighters? We didn't, We had the best of Soviet fighters,but no heavyweight like the SU-24s,etc.,which they kept for themselves.We were yet able to defeat the Pakis with their Mirages,etc. 200-300 LCAs of incremental upgradation will give us the numbers required to swarm the skies. We need at least 900-1000 fighters to meet the challenge from China and Pak.300 heavyweights -the MKIs,100-150 FGFAs,150-200 medium fighters and 200-300 LCAs will give us the numbers and qualitative edge.

The big Q here is whether any of the single-engined birds is the equiv of the Rafale? This is because we cannot afford 120+ Rafales and are trying to make up for the balance numbers by this quest. The firang bird will also have to make up for LCA prod. woes,in essence it will have a foot..sorry,"wing" in both directions,towards the light requirement and the MMRCA one. Can the Gripen manage that? If it fits in only for the light role,then apart from it the only options left are to induct more Rafalesa- at extreme cost,or more MIG-29UG/35s since the bird is already in service with the IAF and IN.
This is what MP said in a recent statement that we may have to induct yet another type for the med. role!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Feb 2017 05:33

Not directly related to this thread, nonetheless, a good number of data points:

Trump Talk Rattles Aerospace Industry, Up and Down Supply Chain

“Let’s hit it with a two-by-four and see how it reacts, then get a plan,” said Bob Bishop, the chief operations officer at SmartCells, describing Mr. Trump’s hard-charging style. “That doesn’t always work.”

The anxiety, said Mr. Bishop, 46, a former deputy county sheriff who voted for Mr. Trump, centers not so much on politics as economics, specifically the intense competition with the French airplane maker Airbus, which competes toe to toe with Boeing for jet orders in countries around the world in a delicate game of narrow cost differences and giant contracts.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Feb 2017 06:00

andy B wrote:Interesting q&a about the Gripen bit of floundering when it comes to the naval version which we all know is a damn farce!!!

Saar, the entire plane (the E variant) is a farce. The naval version is like a fart in the wind. I watched the youtube video. All I missed was some popcorn. Amazing entertainment.

Meanwhile, not directly related to MII of single engine fighter, yet another example of the delay in the SP model.

https://twitter.com/zone5aviation/statu ... 9715877888

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Feb 2017 09:07

Cosmo_R wrote:The IAF may be in love with the Gripen E (which actually does not yet exist in service) but if that choice is made against the backdrop of the 2005 decision against the F35, I can assure you (and I have no special inside tracks on this), we will need the Swedish Bikini Ski Team to ramp up and come to our rescue when PRC realizes that the US won't come to our support.

Neither do I have the inside track either, however in a border war - which will likely happen - no one will come to India's rescue. We are on our own. 200 F-16s, F-18s, F-35s or not, the Khan will not risk it. Our lackadaisical attitude to defence preparedeness has led to this mess. And it will be the Swedish Bikini Ski Team (literally) who will have to save the day.

The only saving grace is reading Hakeemji's posts in the China Military thread and the Latest Chinese boast thread, that the Chinese threat appears to be more bark than bite. Don't get me wrong, I am not underestimating their ability to wage war and likely win...but what they parrot to the world on what their capability is does not equate with reality.

Not that this makes my assumption of the IAF's love with the Gripen E any more real or that Vishnu's reporting on this issue is accurate, but FWIW...I am reproducing what BRF member Nick_S posted on page 65 of this very thread.

Vishnu Som commented on Keypub -

In having followed the now scrapped MRCA and MMRCA programmes for more than a decade, I do believe the Gripen E/F has a fighting chance at winning an order now for 200 jets. This will depend, almost entirely, on the industrial partnership being offered by SAAB which, by all accounts, is fairly impressive.

That said, I do not see a Sea Gripen variant being inducted into the Indian Navy - they have a stated requirement for a twin engine fighter ... they are seeking 57 of them.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 24 Feb 2017 09:52

@Rakesh, the Gripen-E is most definitely not a farce. It is in fact a highly capable upgrade to the Gripen-C and takes the design to its logical end of the road as far as growth is concerned. SAAB had slick marketing when they claimed they are rapid int heir designs, and even faster in their testing. Yet, for a product that was being marketed in the early 2010's if not earlier, the aircraft wouldn't actually see operational usage till closer to the mid 2020s. Still a capable aircraft if you ask me especially given that it is based on the Gripen.

I still remember articles from Bill Sweetman on how SAAB has found a way to bend the design curve that was pushing design and systems integration to longer and longer durations. None of that has actually materialized in terms of delivery schedule.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 24 Feb 2017 22:12

brar_w wrote:
TSJones wrote:the f-16 nick name used by US Air force pilots when first introduced was "yard dart" for obvious reasons.
Yup not the first Lawn Dart. They kept producing aircraft as UTC developed changes to their propulsion to add reliability. Same with the mission systems. The early blocks were not even as capable in mission scope as the customers wanted but they kept producing them anyway. When the block 30 arrived they had to retrofit something like 1500 aircraft that had already been produced earlier without meeting the combat requirements. They couldn't even deploy the Sparrow Missile which had at the time become standard in the USAF. The F-16 program at the hight of the cold war was the epitome of concurrent production. They were producing variants and sometimes changing sub-variants within months of sanctioning the last one. The idea was to get a tremendous number of 4th generation aircraft out into front line service and then make necessary changes to get them full combat capable.

A casualty of this was the NEP (Not to Exceed Price), standardized block that met combat system requirements of the warfighter (that did not really come until block 30). They would have done the same with the F-35 had the cold war not ended and we would have had hundreds of block 2 aircraft, a hundreds of block 3I aircraft flying today. Instead they delivered around 150-160 block 2B aircraft including the few dozen that will never see operational use (testing, and training squadrons) and production ramp up only occurred once the contractor began delivering block 3I capability.

This is absolutely true. There are similar stories of the Mig-29s, Su-27s and any other legendary aircraft that is out there. We should remember these lessons to define what is truly "Make in India".

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 07:02

brar_w wrote:@Rakesh, the Gripen-E is most definitely not a farce. It is in fact a highly capable upgrade to the Gripen-C and takes the design to its logical end of the road as far as growth is concerned. SAAB had slick marketing when they claimed they are rapid int heir designs, and even faster in their testing. Yet, for a product that was being marketed in the early 2010's if not earlier, the aircraft wouldn't actually see operational usage till closer to the mid 2020s. Still a capable aircraft if you ask me especially given that it is based on the Gripen.

I still remember articles from Bill Sweetman on how SAAB has found a way to bend the design curve that was pushing design and systems integration to longer and longer durations. None of that has actually materialized in terms of delivery schedule.

Saar, I am not discounting anything you are saying. However we have been led to believe that there is an acute shortage of fighter planes in the IAF. And the Gripen E is expected to have her first flight not anytime soon, so when is the IAF planning to induct the Gripen E in large numbers if Saab is indeed given the red rose?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 07:13

Philip wrote: http://www.defenseworld.net/news/18532/ ... K1_8dJ96M8
IDEX 2017: Future F-16 Fighter Jets To be Made in USA

I read through this article and if true, the Trump phenemenon has hit home for LM.

I came across similar articles, which I am posting below...

LOCKHEED MARTIN HOPEFUL FOR NEW F-16 SALES AND UPGRADES IN THE MIDDLE EAST MARKET
http://quwa.org/2017/02/23/idex-2017-lo ... st-market/

As per Lockheed Martin, future new-built F-16s will be manufactured in the U.S. This contrasts with earlier statements, where Lockheed Martin had committed to raising a manufacturing line in India. It is unlikely that Lockheed Martin can effectively compete by scaling back the entirety of its technology transfer and local support offer, though it may moderate offsets involving third-party contracts.

That is screwdrivergiri a.k.a. assembly

Lockheed talks F-16 sales and upgrades with region’s forces
http://www.thenational.ae/business/tech ... ons-forces

The company plans to keep future production of F-16s in the US, he said. Lockheed has created F-16 assembly plants in Turkey, Portugal, Belgium and the Netherlands in the past. "The next customer that we sell F-16 to we will build them in the US," said Mr Groesch. The Trump administration has criticised US companies that have factories and assembly lines overseas and has vowed to create US jobs with his "America First" motto.

How is this going to fly in conjunction with MII? Oh yes, buy them off the shelf...same as MII. Parts, Parts, Parts!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 07:20

India’s fighter aircraft building capability to get big push?
Saab offers 100% ‘Make in India’ for Gripen E jet
http://www.financialexpress.com/india-n ... 16/555656/

“What differentiates us from the competition is that when people talk about ‘Make in India’, you hear a lot about transferring assembly lines and manufacturing. Manufacturing is a tiny part of what is important – what India must have for its air power sovereignty in the future is the ability to design, develop and own those aircraft – not simply metal mashing and making somebody else’s airplane. The idea is to make an airplane for India,” Hewson, the Vice President, Head of Communications told FE Online.

“It is not just about being able to manufacture, but you must also have the skill, knowledge and control of all the critical technology – from the radars, weapons, systems, data links – all that makes a modern fighter. We are talking about building an entire fighter technology eco system so that India can build Gripens that are Indian aircraft for today – you can take those aircraft and build an airplane without any strings attached to us,” he elaborated. “The huge range of design and development skill and understanding for different components would feed into new projects for the next 40 to 50 years,” Hewson added.

So, what percentage of the Gripen E, if chosen by India, would be made here? “All of it, if India is able to absorb the learning,” quips Hewson. “We want to create India’s Gripen. Our objective would be that pretty much all the entire aircraft be made in India. We are offering the real secret stuff that makes fighter combat systems. This is a long and complex process, it will not happen overnight. This will be as much Indian as India wants, as much as India can handle, and as soon as India is ready. We are using the same philosophy in our Brazil programme as well,” he said.

While his theory is correct and he is singing the tune alright, he cannot offer 100% ToT of the Gripen E because the engine (just one of key components that are not Swedish in origin) is an American one. But he is singing to the choir, in the hopes that the GoI will fall for the tune.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 27 Feb 2017 07:21

Nor is the radar or the weapons! How can they assure TOT??

Wait whats the IOC or FOC date??

2023 and 2026

Correction in the picture, the radar is not made in sweden. Its also made in UK/Italy (Leonardo)
Plus all the cockpit displays and other stuff is probably all made elsewhere too.

There are more parts from more sources since they have access to these and didn't see value in reinventing the wheel themselves. Making in India is going to be more screwdriver in India. It won't be any different than the F-16/F35 method.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 07:31

Very good picture Cybaru! Excellent post! See people...see the truth above. So much for 100% ToT.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 07:35

So here is where we stand as of today....

It appears that LM has divorced the idea of assembling F-Solahs in India (Thank You President Trump!) and the Gripen E looks like the United Nations, which plane is India going to buy?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 27 Feb 2017 07:40

Yell Cee AAy!!

Bheeshma · Post by **Bheeshma** » 27 Feb 2017 07:43

Second that !!! No f-16 or gripen ever. Tejas always!!

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 27 Feb 2017 07:50

Another picture, the radar portion needs updating since they went with the raven-05 ps a

They don't even make their own landing gear, how are they going to make one for the sheGripee n project they keep talking about?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 08:31

Would you buy a car that no one else operates?

Why would the GOI consider a fighter plane - which is far more complex than a car - that no other air force operates?

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 27 Feb 2017 09:23

The only thing they make is the EW system and they already bid for the LCA ew systems with that. They sold the only thing they make! What do you want from them now?

http://saabgroup.com/Media/news-press/n ... tejas-lca/

1. They integrate stuff from other buyers. Which means they have to get clearances to manufacture from each component owner. Low chance they manufacture it. They procure everything from external vendors probably the same ones that LM/Boeing do. If they procure and sell it to us, it will add large margins to it and fluff up the price. This won't really add anything new to our industry.

2. The HAL tender for AESA radar will open in a month. By then we will choose a radar either from Israel or from france. Not sure if we will get new tech or just ready made end units. But we will have an AESA, plus there is Uttam which is coming of age.

What capability does Gripen add that we do not possess today? How important is it? How will it change the aerospace industry for us if we add Gripen line in India. How have such efforts like Hawk/Mig21/27/Jaguar/MKI changed the industry. Will it be at the level of MKI, is that even possible?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Feb 2017 12:02

The good Prof. Das made sev. observations about the quest for a new light fighter.He says that the IAF's "heavy.med.,and light" fleet mix is fundamentally sound,preferrign the largest % of light fighters,300+ is what he'd like (Tejas).

The first Q to be asked is why another "lightweight"?
A: Becos,hundreds of MIG-21s and 27s are retiring.
Next Q: What were their roles?
A:Mainly close support.Prof. D gives our past air war experiences,where most of our losses were due to AAA fire.Therefore,using expensive birds like MKIs,etc.for this role would be asinine. Analysis: Western light fighters like the F-16 have been overloaded with ept,become obese affecting their earlier virtues of combat capability.Losing these (now) expensive aircraft in our environment is again foolhardy.

The reason for the multi-role nature of western aircraft is given as their global expeditionary agenda,where they may have to perform anywhere on the planet. Secondly,our wars are well defined ,limited to the subcontinent and its environs.We know from which direction the threats will come and do not need over-stuffed aircraft ,which makes them more expensive and leading to heavier losses in times of war for the more mundane job of close support,GA,limited strike,point defence,etc. In our previous conflicts,we lost approx. 70+ aircraft in the first week alone.mostly due to AAA fire. The little Gnat which made hundreds of sorties was hit just once by bullets and survived!

A point he didn't mention which I'm doing is the emergence of UCAVs (drones).Hundreds of drones over the battlefield in support of ground ops,carrying munitions like Brimstone ,will be a cheaper alternative to manned aircraft in dispensing munitions. Das also makes the point that the camel drivers of the desert fighting NATO,etc.,(my descrip.) cannot be compared with the Paki and PRC forces,far more capable and deadly.The "colonial" wars-as he puts it,aren't a true picture of the conflicts.There's been no deep analysis of the performance of PGMs,etc. Modern anti-air warfare uses layered systems such as light and heavy AA guns,MANPADS,far more sophisticated today ,as well as short,med. and LR SAMs.Mobile SAM systems are quite deadly like the Ru BUKs,etc.,shown in the recent UKR conflict.[Those lost due to hostile fire included: 10 helicopters (five Mi-8s and five Mi-24s), seven combat planes (one Su-24, four Su-25 and two MiG-29) and three transport planes (a An-26, a An-30 and an Il-76).]

Hence the need for large numbers of aircraft in the light' segment of the IAF. This is best met by Tejas variants. he gives brief descrips of the variants and approx. numbers for each.300+ is what he advocates. I add to this the req. for hundreds of UCAV/dromes,both for the IAF and IA.They too could be of sev. variants from HALE,MALE,etc.The drones being smaller than aircraft would be harder to shoot down and if shot down do not involve any pilot casualties. Since the little Gnat performed so well in this role earlier,perhaps armed Hawks could take up some of the slack,or would sentimentalists want a stealthy Gnat proto for "tech-demo" purposes! Unlike many other nations,and probably due to miserly funding by the GOI/MOD of the day,we have few experimental programmes worth talking about.We have a sub-launched BMos,but no sub to test it on..that too the missile was developed ovr a year ago. No experimental subs,mini-subs,X-type aircraft,etc.There was an X-tank developed sometime ago which never found favour (will Arjun go the same way?), Nevertheless,the GOI must demarcate sufficient funding for X-projects allow the creativity and innovative minds of Indian scientists to have full expression.

MP remarked that the team working on the HTT-40,was the youngest age wise and had succeeded.If you add the potential of pvt. industry to the resource pile,the results could be astonishing.

ranjan.rao · Post by **ranjan.rao** » 27 Feb 2017 14:12

^^http://profprodyutdas.blogspot.in/2017/ ... s-and.html

It is refreshing for Prof das to sense which way the wind is blowing, and he has changed his tune slightly to suit the way things are moving on LCA by saying it will help LCA achieve large numbers.

He still believes all is not well on LCA
and Mig 29 is great (completely ignoring issues that plague it and just stating the move to shift away from russians, which again is not untrue)

As always he has detailed information to beat most of so called defence analysts and articles we see otherwise.

Contrast it with this
http://profprodyutdas.blogspot.in/2014/ ... eview.html

Not sure if he hasnt got a chance to read any statement from IAF test pilots claiming it to be better than MIrage 2000

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Feb 2017 15:37

Looks to me that the F-16 deal is, at the very least, comatose, if not out right dead.

I would be interested in the outcome of the USN-Ambani deal that was recently announced. Per Trump rules that should be re-visited and perhaps cancelled.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 22:02

I am reproducing a post (not the whole) - by Austin - from the Tejas thread in here. When the project & technology director of the Tejas tells you this, please explain why we need another single engine fighter again. Look at the timelines! License production of components is a far better bet, than license producing an entirely new fighter.

Austin wrote:‘LCA Tejas is superior to France's Mirage and China's JF-17 fighter jets’
http://www.indiatvnews.com/politics/nat ... ets-370263

"Every year, 16 Tejas aircraft will be built on two assembly lines. By 2024, all the aircraft will be inducted in the IAF whereas Tejas Mark 2 version will be ready by 2021," Siddesha was quoted as saying by Times of India.

ashbhee · Post by **ashbhee** » 27 Feb 2017 22:36

When do you think the final decision on F 16 or Gripen E will be made?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Feb 2017 22:49

IF a foreign single-engine air craft is not coming (and it looks like it will not - IMVVHO), then the LCA production HAS to be increased to 40 crafts a year. Start two more lines, get a pvt entity involved, get two pvt entities involved, what ever, but 16 a year will not do.

On the AMCA/5th Gen project, it has ALWAYS had a separate director - Dr. A. K. Ghosh. I just hope they do not push him aside. Dr. Ghosh is to the AMCA what Prashant Singh Bhadoria is to the HTT-40. I do not think there is anyone more authoritative than Dr. Ghosh when it comes to talk about the AMCA.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 27 Feb 2017 22:55

I don't think the Air force has ever been in a better shape than it is today. New weapons, extremely high uptimes compares to the last 3-4 decades, more load carrying capabilities, more force multipliers, better training, more simulators. Plus there is almost 20 new planes being (12 MKI + 8 LCA) inducted this year and which will change to 40 ( 12MKI + 16LCA + 12 Rafs) soon. We will have the ability to retire/induct two squadrons a year soon.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 27 Feb 2017 22:58

Rakesh wrote:Would you buy a car that no one else operates?

Why would the GOI consider a fighter plane - which is far more complex than a car - that no other air force operates?

We are famous for having the Amby (AKA Morris Cowley) that no one else wanted. The breakdown of the suppliers ^^^ (graphic) is what I meant earlier when I said the Gripen and any US ac are all potentially and equally sanctionable.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 27 Feb 2017 23:11

ashbhee wrote:When do you think the final decision on F 16 or Gripen E will be made?

Who knows? The Trump phenomenon has affected everything with regards to this purchase. This purchase may still happen, lot of variables at play and still unknown. And like I said before, whatever we say or wish on a forum has no bearing on what the GoI will do. Regardless, let this serve as a stark reminder to everyone as to how fickle minded American policy is. See how the tune changed from one administration to another and as a result, LM had to do the same. Saab will have to follow suit. It has no choice, but to.