'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Jun 2017 00:39

Paris Air Show- LM commits to building F-16 in India

Lockheed Martin has committed to manufacturing the F-16 in India should it win the air force’s single-engined fighter competition, and has signed a deal with Tata Advanced Systems to carry out this work in-country.

A letter of intent was signed between the two companies at the show, which could lead to manufacture of Block 70 variants of the fourth-generation fighter. It is being pitched against the Saab Gripen for the programme, which expects to see multiple hundreds of units purchased.

Orlando Carvalho, executive vice-president of Lockheed’s aeronautics division, told Flight Daily News: “We have been working with our government and the Indian government on the recapitalisation of their fighter force.

“As part of that, what we are offering to the Indian government is to build the aircraft in India. We believe it makes sense to move the F-16 production line there.”

Lockheed and Tata already have a joint venture to develop the empennage for the C-130 transport in India, which Carvalho says has so far “gone very well”, adding that “we’re now looking to extend that into the F-16 market”.

At the end of 2017 Lockheed will finish deliveries of Iraq’s 36 examples, at which point the company will move manufacture of the F-16 from Fort Worth, Texas, to Greenville, South Carolina, allowing production of the F-35 at Fort Worth.

“We will use this until we can move the F-16 production line over to India,” Carvalho says. “The fact that we’ve done this so many times before [transfer of F-16 production], we feel very comfortable doing this in India.”

Other tangible requirements for the F-16 include Bahrain, Colombia and Indonesia, all of which have expressed interest in new-build examples that could be built via the proposed Indian deal.

Bahrain is the most promising of these, with the necessary authorisations currently being worked through the US State Department, Carvalho says.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 20 Jun 2017 00:42

Its just a teaming agreement for the single engine program. Apparent the MOD is looking at 2018 for a decision. Lockheed won't be making anything unless selected.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Jun 2017 15:17

FWIW

Lockheed: Trump's 'buy American' emphasis unlikely to thwart potential F-16 production in India

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 21 Jun 2017 23:55

Is f16 going to be the oldest new fighter that the IAF is going to induct, especially compared to the ones that we have assembled in India in the past? Jaguars, Su-30s, Mig-21 appear to have been inducted into service within 10-15 years of it being inducted by the originating country's air force. For the F-16 it will be a gigantic 40+ years.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 22 Jun 2017 02:24

brar_w wrote:Deleted.

Brar, whats your take on us selecting a fighter that has reached end of life.
It was inducted by USAF almost 40 years ago now (is that correct).

Should we doing this ... or what would you suggest ?
I know you like the F-18SH.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jun 2017 03:04

Khalsa wrote:
brar_w wrote:Deleted.

Brar, whats your take on us selecting a fighter that has reached end of life.
It was inducted by USAF almost 40 years ago now (is that correct).

Should we doing this ... or what would you suggest ?
I know you like the F-18SH.

Neither at this stage. The F-16 makes no sense. The F-18SH would be a contender for the naval aircraft but I don't see a reason to look beyond the Rafale and LCA at this stage. For the Navy the calculus may be different but I don't see any significant benefit at this stage of building 100-200 Gripen-Es or F-16's.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 22 Jun 2017 04:00

Not an expert on F-16 but I am sure you all have seen these links on F-16 Block 70:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/produc ... ck-70.html
http://lockheedmartin.com/us/who-we-are ... 1498084035

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jun 2017 06:58

tsarkar: I am not discounting anything you are saying. You are bang on. But here is the problem - the IAF and GoI/MoD are hell bent on acquiring at least 100 new foreign single engine fighters. Now that this variable has been defined, I can only see what is the best way going forward.

Gripen E: I think cybaru posted a very good cutaway of the aircraft's subsystems that are sourced from various countries around the globe. I don't see what value the Gripen offers to the IAF, other than the fact that it shares the same engine as the LCA Mk.2

F-Solah, Block 70: Allow me to ask this question and I have asked this before. What viability does this aircraft stand against a J-20, a J-31 or another stealh platform coming from China in 2030? Same for Gripen. Very easy to sit behind a keyboard (not you!) and make fanciful claims that the Block 70 will be more than enough to handle anything coming out of China's stables. But who here wants to sit in a cockpit of Block 70 and face a J-20 or a J-31? As I have said before, maybe these Chinese planes are pieces of sh!t, but who here is willing to risk their life to find that out? And if you are not willing to risk it, then how can we aks IAF personnel do the same?

Secondly, why is the IAF investing billions in another 4th generation platform when the only platform that we should be inducting are fifth generation platforms. But that begs the question....which 5th generation platform is actually available right now? PAK-FA? Nope. F-22? Not going to happen! The only new 4th generation platform that the IAF needs to be inducting in large numbers is the LCA Mk.1A and the follow on Mk2. But going back to my earlier question, which 5th generation platform is actually available and operating with other air forces right now? The answer is the F-35. Yes the F-35 has intial operational deficiencies. But then again which new combat plane does not? Show me one. And I am confident those problems can and will be resolved. Too much has been invested in the program for it to fail now. All three variants of the F-35 (especially the A and B variants) can slot in with the requirements of the air force and the navy, if importing is the only way the GoI, MoD and the IAF sees in improving squadron strength.

Thirdly, I do not believe the snake oil sales pitch that purchasing the F-16 or the Gripen E will somehow magically improve India's expertise in production. Since we are assembling the plane from parts, all we will do is take Part A and put into Part B (and so on and so forth). What will we actually learn, since we are not building this plane from the raw material stage? Parts are going to fly into the F-Solah factory in India and Indians will assemble them. How will we learn how LM NEGOTIATES with Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 suppliers with regards to the F-16? The same is true for the Gripen. Allow me to use this example. Let us say you are building your own home and you need bricks and mortar for the walls, windows for scenic view, roofing materials so your home keeps you dry when it rains, plumbing equipment, appliances, kitchen cabinets, tiles, carpet, paint, etc, etc, etc. I can go to Home Depot (a home hardware store popular in North America) and buy all the above and build my own home. However there is a significant markup cost that Home Depot will charge me. Neither will I learn who supplies all this material to Home Depot. I am basically at Home Depot's mercy. So apart from getting all the materials in one central location (which improves my ability to build my home faster) what have I learned really?

Fourthly, I also do not buy this theory that this deal is about creating jobs. If we Indians need a minimum of 100 foreign fighters to reduce our unemployment rate...then may the Almighty help my country, because it is doomed. I am sure we can generate an equal number of jobs if Tata or any other private firm is willing to invest in a second Tejas production line. But for that orders have to be assured. No private firm will invest in the absence of orders.

Since the GoI, MoD and the IAF is insistent on inducting a minimum of a 100 new fighters, it makes far better sense to invest in a FACO (Final Assembly & Check Out) line for the F-35. The other two FACO lines in Italy and Japan are doing the following;

- With the Italian FACO line, LMT is completing orders for the European market - assembling Italian F-35s and is scheduled to assemble Dutch F-35s in the future - and will serve as the European Maintenance, Repair, Overhaul, and Upgrade (MROU) Center of Excellence for the F-35.
- The Japanese FACO line has also been chosen as the North Asia-Pacific regional heavy airframe Maintenance Repair Overhaul & and Upgrade (MROU) facility. That indicates that Japan will not be the sole F-35 user in the region. Taiwan? Phillipines? Indonesia?
- A theoretical Indian FACO line can do the same. Instead of selling F-16s to Bahrain via India, LMT can sell them F-35s via India. Laugh all you want, but that is very possible. A theoretical Indian FACO line can also serve as the regional MROU Center.

By the way, if the Block 70 is the cutting edge why is the USAF not buying them? Isn't it because they have invested everything in the F-35 program? What does that tell you? If we are destined to import, then please go in for a 5th generation platform that has viability and survivability. Please not the Gripen or the F-Solah. Our enemy is not Somalia (no offense to Somalis). China ain't no pushover.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jun 2017 06:59

geeth wrote:IF a decision is made on the purchase of F16, it is because Uncle has a firm grip on our nuts by way of F404 & F414 engines...No point barking up the wrong trees like HAL DRDO etc....till the time we master majority of tech necessary, someone or other will always keep sqeezing our nur nuts either for money or pleasure or both. So..stop wailing.

Uncle has our nuts in his grip on many things. C-17, C-130, P-8I, AH-64 Apache, Chinook helos...the list goes on. All Amreeka has to do is squeeze and we will squeal. Squeeze & Squeal. Squeeze & Squeal. Squeeze & Squeal...Repeat It Like a Mantra! That is why they are Amreeka and we are India.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jun 2017 07:00

Indranil wrote:
Rishi Verma wrote: What you want to learn? How to make 4 LCAs per year or how to make 400 F-16 per year.
And who is teaching us how to make 400 F-16s per year? We would be churning our F-16s at roughly the same rate as the LCA. FACT.

I am glad you said this and not me.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jun 2017 07:08

ArjunPandit wrote:^^^As i said, we are expecting serum (F16 ) from Dr Erskine (US) to convert us (Steve Rogers) into captain America. The only difference being, Dr Erskine underneath the mask is Dr Zola.

HAIL HYDRA!

Nice to know we have Marvel fans on BRF. I am waiting for Avengers: Infinity War, Black Panther, Spiderman: Homecoming, etc to all come out!

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Jun 2017 07:14

Rakesh wrote:
Indranil wrote: And who is teaching us how to make 400 F-16s per year? We would be churning our F-16s at roughly the same rate as the LCA. FACT.
I am glad you said this and not me.

Besides the orders are for 100-120 only ... why would someone make 400/year

ranjan.rao · Post by **ranjan.rao** » 22 Jun 2017 07:45

Rakesh wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:^^^As i said, we are expecting serum (F16 ) from Dr Erskine (US) to convert us (Steve Rogers) into captain America. The only difference being, Dr Erskine underneath the mask is Dr Zola.
HAIL HYDRA!

Nice to know we have Marvel fans on BRF. I am waiting for Avengers: Infinity War, Black Panther, Spiderman: Homecoming, etc to all come out!

poor me is unsure if its a warning shot from webmaster, so playing deadpool and not putting further to bring DC here.
Net net, we have an interesting situation here. We have a plane that has demonstrated take off from Leh, passed tough winter trials and this is being overlooked to procure a plane which failed (F16 didnt take off from Leh during MMRCA, i hope people remember that, i found that going through the past on BR).
ArjunJi,
in case you didnt watch Captain America: winter soldier, it had a falcon too

and he had one of his wings clipped by Bucky

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 22 Jun 2017 09:34

Lockheed Martin spilled the beans on their own brochure ...

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/d ... y_2017.pdf

On page two of this above brochure it says F16 Block 70 becomes the new F16 Baseline. Guess what that means?

....Everyone (including the Pukis) who operates F16s will get this version in the future, courtesy of Indian manufacturing.

LM would just buy or barter airframes and subsystems manufactured in India and re-sell it or more likely gift it to the Pukis. How is that for helping out our enemies?

Is this a joke or what?

Schmidt · Post by **Schmidt** » 22 Jun 2017 09:35

Is there any legal way ( through the courts / PIL ) to force the IAF to buy LCA and dump this idea of foreign fighters

Where they are forced to give reasons for ditching a home grown product and go for a 40year old fighter that is being discontinued in its home market

Can the CAG play a proactive role in dissecting these decisions before any hanky panky occurs rather than doing a post mortem analysis

Any way to persuade our forces to consider desi products like Tejas/Arjun and shed their infatuation with foreign maal ??

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 22 Jun 2017 10:08

There is an advantage to the single engine fighter deal , namely when the AMCA comes on line we have some sort of infrastrutcure and technical hands so that a private line can be launched alongside HAL line, Hopefully that is written somewhere in the contract if and when it is signed.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 22 Jun 2017 10:48

i still don't understand why GOI is ok with 100-125 single engine fighters. Is it for make in India? Is it for LCA not coming in as expected? Deter china over the next 15 years? Or is it some other arrangement - like India sending troops to AFG and this is the price to pay to uncle?

juvva · Post by **juvva** » 22 Jun 2017 10:50

Deccan Chronicle article:

US dumps ageing F-16s on India?

http://epaper.deccanchronicle.com/artic ... id=8391425

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 22 Jun 2017 11:19

120nos single engine fighter in 2020-30 timeframe @12/year plus maybe 44 nos more rafale in 2022-27 timeframe @ 8/year and 123 LCA by 2025 @16/year and maybe 80more LCA in 2025-30.

For the Su30 mki line will close down in 2020 after 272nos production run and FGFA may be only on by 2027 or later @12/year.

IAF force in 2030 will be at most 40-42 sq.

Su 30- 14sq
Rafale-4 sq
Single engine MRCA-6sq
LCA- 10sq
Mirage 2000-2sq
Jaguar-4sq
--------------
Total-40sq

and maybe 2sq FGFA if it is on by 2027.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Jun 2017 13:17

Luxtor wrote:Lockheed Martin spilled the beans on their own brochure ...

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/d ... y_2017.pdf

On page two of this above brochure it says F16 Block 70 becomes the new F16 Baseline. Guess what that means?

....Everyone (including the Pukis) who operates F16s will get this version in the future, courtesy of Indian manufacturing.

LM would just buy or barter airframes and subsystems manufactured in India and re-sell it or more likely gift it to the Pukis. How is that for helping out our enemies?

Is this a joke or what?

Well it shouldnt matter if they make that a baseline verison as IAF would get its own customised version in F-16IN.

Even MKI is baseline version for MKM , SM models etc.

The link you posted on F-16Block 70 , The capability in Avionics and Weapons is quite impressive .

If they can get the numbers built up quickly in the US then it would be a big boon for our Squadron Starved IAF.

IAF wants 42 squadron and we are like 10 short of that as of today , if you add the older Mig-21 Bison and Jags/27 then practically IAF is at ~ 27 Squadron , Short fall of nearly 15 squadron in next 10 years to reach 42 squadron.

Add 5 squadron of F-16IN , 3 of Rafale already under order and 7 Squadron of Tejas ( which I think they are already doing it by 2025 )

Chinmay · Post by **Chinmay** » 22 Jun 2017 13:25

This may be a noob pooch, but is the 42 squadron requirement irrespective of platform? An Su-30 or Rafale is far more capable than a single MiG-21 or Jaguar, so we would need less of the former to perform the same role as the latter.

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Jun 2017 13:39

Chinmay wrote:This may be a noob pooch, but is the 42 squadron requirement irrespective of platform? An Su-30 or Rafale is far more capable than a single MiG-21 or Jaguar, so we would need less of the former to perform the same role as the latter.

The budget is only so much. If the IAF/GoI are looking at 42 squadrons as the quantity to reach, then cheap fighters, like the LCA ($26 million Mk.1), need to be bought in numbers. We already found out that costly Rafale-sized 4th-Gen are beyond the financial means for the Indian defense budget. $8 billion bought only 36 Rafales when the original plan floated for MMRCA was to buy 126 for $8-$10 billion. Different reality. The ones that are retiring MiG-21/27 were very very cheap.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jun 2017 13:59

In an article in the latest IMR,a pitch is made for more MKIs to meet the numbers/capability shortfall.Salient points:

Rafale too expensive at $200M+ There is an option for another 18,but they too would come in at the same price.Modernised MKIs are available at just $65-70M a pop. They're being built in India,serviceability has gone up significantly,and it is superior to anything other than arguably stealth birds.

F-16s on the other hand are yesterday's favourites,having reached the evening of their career. Secondly it will make us heavily dependent upon the US.We were lucky to have escaped the clutches of US N-plants/fuel deal,which would've given it a stranglehold on Indian N-power,etc.There would be too many intrusive clauses,etc. Transferring the entire plant which is just moving in the US from Fort Worth to S.Carolina,yet again to India is v.unlikely in a Trump administration.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/bus ... ades-texas

After building F-16s in Fort Worth since the 1970s, Lockheed Martin has finally decided to move future production of the aircraft.
Greenville, S.C., is the location chosen for the future F-16 assembly line, said Ken Ross, a spokesman for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in Fort Worth.
At this point, future F-16 production will likely be limited to some overseas demand. The bigger program is staying in Fort Worth.

The Gripen is a far better bet and only its engine is from the US.The Swedes are offering us everything TOTwise,including AESAaar tech, incomparison.
LCA second plant plan,still exists only as a plan,numbers unlikely to rise significantly
Modernised Super-Sukhois with BMos will be qualitatively far superior to the US equiv of the "Amby" of yore!

After Super Sukhoi-30 Upgrade India’s Su-30 MKI will be superior to Chinese Sukhoi-35
BY DEFENCEUPDATE · PUBLISHED MARCH 19, 2017 · UPDATED MAY 6, 2017

India and riussia on firday signed two key agrement for long term maintenance and technical support for russia made su30 mki jets to indian AirForce and now dtails have emerged of the major upgrade planned For the Indian Air Force Su-30 MKI Fllet next by HAL and Russia

Under super-30 Updgrade program IAF Su-30 MKI will be upgraded to SU-35+ standards which will be far superior to the SU-35 currently been operated by Russian and Chinese Airforce

Sukhoi modernize program is the another Long delayed Air force project, the Super sukhoi project is a Trending project during the early 2010, after announcing the MMRCA tender and winner most of them almost forget the modernise program, but still which not being considered as first priority, The Su 30 MKI is the Backbone of the Indian Air space protection, where recent troubles in Engines and Service availability also irked the issue.

While most other airforce’s ramming up their primary fighter, Like pakistani’s comes up with Latest F 16 Block 52 Fighter, and Chinese also in effort and Successfully fitted AESA and home grown EW systems in thier flankers, they also in talks with Russians to buy more advanced 117S jet Engines, to power their Flankers.

The plan is to upgrade the first 80 Su-30MKIs to the level ‘Super Sukhois’ which will have highly advanced radars and weapon systems, IAF sources told PTI
The sources said the plan involves equipping the aircraft with long-range stand-off missiles up to the range of 300 km and a request for information (ROI) was issued recently for procuring such a weapon system from global vendors.Also under a Program the HAL and DRDO working to integrate Brahmos A missile with the MKI, a 44 of the Su 30 MKI can be modified to carry the Brahmos A missile, a Nuclear warhead is on the option. which may be fall under SFC,

READ HAL LCH:- India's indigenously built multi role Light Combat Helicopter
The Possible Upgrades to the MKI is adding more effective Multi role, like Multiple ejector Rack, AESA radar, more powerful EW and Jamming systems, along with High performance Engines,

The missiles with a range around 300 kms would be in addition to the 290-km range BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles which would be carried by around 50 aircraft of the force.The same also integrating Anti armour missiles into Su 30 MKI to perform CAS missions, for doing anti armour and CAS missions, the fighter comes to very low, and need a visual identification before striking,

The aircraft would also have the highly-advanced Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar along with the latest avionics systems. India have wide options of AESA, ERDE already developed a AESA multi mode radar with the support of Israeli Elta, which is unveiled in Aero India 2015, which can be fitted into MKI, while it was originally designed for MK2 Tejas, a modified version can be used in Su 30MKI, also variety of foreign options also available, we can buy from either Israeli’s, Americans or French,

Another major aspects is the Engines, the engine issue in Su 30 MKI is a Major problem, while it comes with Dual engines, even one fails the other can bring the fighter to home base, the 117S engine from Russia seems good, who also power the Su 35, otherwise we may go for west for good Engines, but Better Idea is a Joint venture with some Foreign, a Engine for Indian projects must needed, we already have a Joint venture with General Electrical with an Indian private company.

READ ‘India, Sweden strategic ties will take-off with Gripen deal’
Amid all this, the Indian defence establishment is also trying to ensure “maximum operationally availability” of the existing fighters at any given time. Defence minister Manohar Parrikar, for instance, says serviceability of Sukhois has jumped to 60% now from an alarming 46% earlier.

“The aim is to achieve 75% serviceability. This has been done with an active tripartite dialogue among Russia, Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) and IAF to ensure better availability of spares and maintenance for the Sukhois,” a source said.

This, in turn, has led to renewal of the plan to upgrade the jets into ‘Super Sukhois’, with advanced AESA (active electronically scanned array) radars and long-range stand-off missiles. “The technical requirements should be finalised this year, with the contract being inked next year,” said the sour

The Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will work with the Russian help under a project expected to cost around Rs 10,900 crore for upgrading the Su-30 MKIs.Also cost can be increased to $12 billions dollar.
If all the above options are considered and Quickly established we may see the Upgraded MKI before 2020, and the Initial batches comes by 2025.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jun 2017 14:47

Transferring the entire plant which is just moving in the US from Fort Worth to S.Carolina,yet again to India is v.unlikely in a Trump administration.

At least make an attempt to be correct. They are moving some equipment to continue final assembly in South Carolina (at a smaller scale) where they already operate a facility and are likely to see a reduction in footprint, coupled with an increased demand on their Fort Worth real estate on account on another program ramping up to more than 120 deliveries a year in the near term.

This will then be moved to India to support the same there. This appears to be their plan as per their internal agreements with TASL.

The Gripen is a far better bet and only its engine is from the US

Which is arguably the most important aspect of a combat aircraft and one that is perhaps the toughest to swap form an integration and T&C perspective.

he Swedes are offering us everything TOTwise,including AESAaar tech, incomparison.

The swedes are making a claim to offer a radar they have in the lab, but one that has absolutely nothing to do with the Gripen-E they intend on operating, the Brazilians intend on operating, or that SAAB intends on offering to India or any other export customers that are looking into Gripen-E which does not use a Swedish radar.

Essentially a dead end radar that they have made, but don't themselves use and one that won't even be put into a flight test program is being offered for an unrelated project. Who is going to support the software development and long term sustainment and upgrade of a sensor that no-one is buying for their aircraft? The South Koreans rejected it too and it does not appear that the Turkish are interested. SAAB is not a big player in the airborne fighter jet FCR market and they don't have, to the best of my knowledge any project that they can leverage commonality with to support this radar. Their airborne, fire control radar portfolio simply is empty.

IAF is unlikely to pick it for the LCA given the advantages the Israeli sensor enjoys, so exactly what use, and what future is there for such an orphan sensor that Sweden does not intend on use on the Gripen E or Gripen C it operates?

Which then gets me to your absurd claim of them offering "everything TOT-wise". What exactly is 'everything' in your definition? The radar on the Gripen-E is not Swedish, neither is its IR sensor, and the engine is American. Most of the weapons suite is not designed or made in Sweden either. This leaves a smaller number of mission systems and that's really about it. So again, what is on offer with TOT? A GE F414 engine that is made in the USA? what about a laser pod made in Israel? Or the MAWS sensors also made in Israel? What about a Leonardo radar? Non swedish BVR and WVR weapons?

The only thing of significance from a TOT perspective that SAAB makes on the Gripen-E is the Electronic Warfare suite...which hasn't yet flown but they intend on flying with the third prototype that will enter a full XXXXX test point program that essentially begun a week or so ago.

The facts is that there is no significant TOT to be gained from this endevour. Not with the F-16 blk. 70, and not with the Gripen-E.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 22 Jun 2017 15:12

Rakesh wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:^^^As i said, we are expecting serum (F16 ) from Dr Erskine (US) to convert us (Steve Rogers) into captain America. The only difference being, Dr Erskine underneath the mask is Dr Zola.
HAIL HYDRA!

Nice to know we have Marvel fans on BRF. I am waiting for Avengers: Infinity War, Black Panther, Spiderman: Homecoming, etc to all come out!

I lost my son to the transformers.... dammit !!

Chinmay · Post by **Chinmay** » 22 Jun 2017 15:59

srai wrote: The budget is only so much. If the IAF/GoI are looking at 42 squadrons as the quantity to reach, then cheap fighters, like the LCA ($26 million Mk.1), need to be bought in numbers. We already found out that costly Rafale-sized 4th-Gen are beyond the financial means for the Indian defense budget. $8 billion bought only 36 Rafales when the original plan floated for MMRCA was to buy 126 for $8-$10 billion. Different reality. The ones that are retiring MiG-21/27 were very very cheap.

Thats my question. What is the 42 squadron requirement based on? 42 squadrons of MiG-21s are not comparable to 42 squadrons of Rafales. We don't need equivalent numbers, so lower numbers of far more capable platforms should serve the purpose as well. Or am I missing something?

rohiths · Post by **rohiths** » 22 Jun 2017 16:09

The 42 squadron requirement, division between heavy medium and light fighters simply does not make sense. We should have requirements based on current and future threat perception as well as the capabilities desired

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 22 Jun 2017 16:19

In my opinion at the time of war numbers will matter and especially when its on two fronts. The comfortable strength for two front war is suppose to be around 60 squadron if I am right and this 42 is the minimum requirement. And the best way to increase numbers is to build locally developed Aircraft and not import

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 Jun 2017 17:13

1 Su 30 can't be in 6 places, but 6 Tejas can be.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jun 2017 18:39

True,but how many Tejas aircraft will be available? We will be very lucky if even ONE Tejas sqd. is available in full (20) aircraft before 2020. At a rate of just 6/yr,it is ludicrous to expect Tejas to fill any meaningful role in the IAF's battle order. This entire SE charade is only becos Tejas has failed to arrive,even in less-than-perfect performance with the Mk-1.Expecting the F-16 which was rejected by the IAF 5 years ago to suddenly become the magic bullet of the IAF is a monstrous scam,where vested interests are hell-bent upon sacrificing Indian interests for that of the US. The Ind. Express in its editorial likened it to buying the "Hindustan Ambassador". The Deccan Chronicle has also been critical of the deal. Many more voices against such an absurdity will be heard

Since the MKI is under production,serviceability vastly improved of the bird,and it is arguably the best air dominance fighter flying,available at around the same cost as any vintage F-16-which even if the deal is inked tomorrow will only arrive around 2020,acquiring more MKIs the best aircraft in the IAF's inventory is the most constructive way forward.

http://www.asianage.com/opinion/oped/22 ... india.html

US dumps ageing F-16s on India?

Abhijit Bhattacharyya
The writer is an advocate practising in the Supreme Court. The views expressed here are personal.
Published : Jun 22, 2017,

The Indian and US companies signed an agreement during the ongoing Paris air show.

The news of the Tatas and Lockheed joining hands to build F-16s in India looks encouraging. The Indian and US companies signed an agreement during the ongoing Paris air show. It transpires that Lockheed would transfer its technology and manufacturing facilities from the United States to India. ...

It is time to look into the genesis of the F-16, its development, the present and future market prospects for the “new” manufacturers in India. Begun as a prototype programme of General Dynamics F-16 for US Air Force’s lightweight fighter (LWF) in 1972, the first F-16A to enter operational service was delivered to the US Air Force’s 388th Tactical Fighter Wing (TFW) on January 6, 1979. This was followed by delivery to Belgian Air Force on January 26, 1979.

...

More than 38 years have gone since the F-16 started its journey. What is the scenario now? According to Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft: In Service 2016-2017, a total of 4,588 F-16 of various types have been sold and are being used by 24 countries, including the US Air Force, Navy and Lockheed. However, the US-produced fighter aircraft appears to be in its last legs. After all, how many fighters of the West are in use after close to four decades, and with little possibility of a renewed sale boost? No wonder “1 Lockheed Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76108” appears keen to “transfer the ageing F-16 production line from Texas to India”. The heyday of the F-16 is certainly over. That is understandable. If India was in the position where the US is now, surely New Delhi too would have done the same. After all, its arms bazar of military hardware fetches money worth billions and employment to thousands!

...

Despite optimism, certain points need clarification and explanation on the future plan vis-à-vis Made in India F-16s and its potential marketability. It transpires that from the time of full-scale development of the F-16 in 1976 to 1995-1996, 3,964 aircraft were ordered by 18 countries from five continents of Asia, Africa, Europe, North America and South America. Thereafter, however, it dropped drastically. This means that while orders were received for only 624 aircraft in the past 20 years (between 1996 and 2016), the first 20 years (1976 to 1996) saw a sale of 3,964 aircraft. Can it therefore be referred to as the law of diminishing returns?

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 22 Jun 2017 19:12

Like I said earlier stop everything and surrender India to Russia, once a part of Russia nobody will touch us so no war
What do you say Philip?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jun 2017 19:14

The F-16 block 70 should become the F-70 so that it can be called a brand new fighter like say the MiG-35 which the IAF should buy in the interim while it contemplates which other Russian aircraft to buy

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jun 2017 19:49

Ask the IAF chief which is the best aircraft in his inventory,why around 300 MKIs are being acquired,and at what cost?

Also ask him why the F-16 and F-18 were rejected in the MMRCA contest,not even shortlisted,

The MIG-35 is a new variant of the 29,which we've upgraded at very low cost,just under $!B for 60+ aircraft compared to the ongoing upgrades of only 40+ M2Ks,for over $2,5B. It would be a great interim choice for the IAF to make up numbers,more of the same,with AESA radars,etc, to boot,at very low cost,half the price of an MKI,good enough to deal with the PAF,but then there's China with its huge inventory of Flankers too,SU-35s arriving,why more Super-Sukhois will be most welcome. Former DM MP,also wanted the IAF to acquire more MKIs instead of hugely expensive Rafales.But then India is richer even than Qatar according to some vested interests in the MOD who want hugely expensive deals to buy antique relics .I suppose age brings with it that extra cost what?!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jun 2017 19:58

Philip: for the umpteenth time, please DO NOT post entire articles in the forum. All it takes is one legal-happy organisation to shut the forum down or worse, face legal infractions. Please edit your post. Keep a few snippets, but always acknowledge the source, the author and provide a link.

Admins: If you see this before Philip does, please edit his post. IMHO, the last two paragraphs of that article are the most relevant.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jun 2017 20:35

Philip wrote:The MIG-35 is a new variant of the 29

And the Gripen-E is a new variant of the Gripen family, and the F-16 block 70 is a new variant of the F-16C. So what's the point exactly? The block 70 has an optional up-rated engine option in the F110-GE-132 (compared to blk50/52), a new AESA radar, and a completely overhauled avionics suite that includes new mission computers, infra-red search and track sensors. It also has multiple digital electronic warfare suits to choose from, from US and israeli suppliers. Same with weapons (nearly all Israeli A2A and A2G munitions are or will be integrated).

The Gripen-E is larger, and has an uprated F414 engine, plus a completely overhauled avionics suite compared to the Gripen-C.

So yeah much like the MiG-35, the blk. 70 F-16, and Gripen-E are improved variants of an old 4th generation aircraft. Just because MiG changed the designation of their new variant to -35, it does not make it a new aircraft altogether much the same way the SUFA, block 60 or the new block 70 offering of the F-16 did not make it a new aircraft.

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 22 Jun 2017 20:58

Austin wrote:
Luxtor wrote:Lockheed Martin spilled the beans on their own brochure ...

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/d ... y_2017.pdf

On page two of this above brochure it says F16 Block 70 becomes the new F16 Baseline. Guess what that means?

....Everyone (including the Pukis) who operates F16s will get this version in the future, courtesy of Indian manufacturing.

LM would just buy or barter airframes and subsystems manufactured in India and re-sell it or more likely gift it to the Pukis. How is that for helping out our enemies?

Is this a joke or what?

Well it shouldnt matter if they make that a baseline verison as IAF would get its own customised version in F-16IN.

Even MKI is baseline version for MKM , SM models etc.

The link you posted on F-16Block 70 , The capability in Avionics and Weapons is quite impressive .

If they can get the numbers built up quickly in the US then it would be a big boon for our Squadron Starved IAF.

IAF wants 42 squadron and we are like 10 short of that as of today , if you add the older Mig-21 Bison and Jags/27 then practically IAF is at ~ 27 Squadron , Short fall of nearly 15 squadron in next 10 years to reach 42 squadron.

Add 5 squadron of F-16IN , 3 of Rafale already under order and 7 Squadron of Tejas ( which I think they are already doing it by 2025 )

Austin, I don't think it is a good idea for India to buy the F16 & production line and all and prolong the life of a legacy fighter that is, for all intents and purposes, on life support in the near to long term. If we buy the F16 line, then the Pukies may indeed end up buying the Gripen to replace their F16s because that is the only Western fighter that they can afford. On the other hand if India buys the Gripen & production line, this may dissuade the Pukies from buying the same for various reasons such as H&D, strategic/tactical as they may not want to operate a fighter that their enemy is flying. The F16 then will die of old age and the Pukies will end up with no capable, higher performance Western fighter affordably available for them. The idea here is to let a line of fighters die off that your enemy relies on as their premier front-line fighting aircraft. The Pukies' F16 operations may not end right away but the hand writing will be on the wall. They will find it more and more expensive to procure new and used F16s and spare parts as time goes by.

The Americans are trying to be too cleaver, as they always are, in trying to dump the F16 on India and continue to make tonnes of money of it for years to come when otherwise the F16 well will run dry soon as USAF not going to buy any more and other AFs that currently fly it are not going to buy something that is going to be put out to pastures soon.

But if India does buy the Gripen then the Pukies may approach the Russians in desperation for MiG 29/35 or SU-30 line of fighters. If India can persuade the Russians not to sell to the Pukies, then the Chinese may step in and rub the back of their tearful friend and sell their licensed/ripped-off versions of SU-30 or any of their own designed fighter. Not sure what India can do about that, probably not much.

Also, if F16 comes, then there will be very little room for the Tejas. It wouldn't make any economic sense. Tejas will be killed off just like what happened to the Marut in the 70's/80's in favor of Russian fighters.

Although, as a compromise and in deference to the F16 offer from the Americans, India should try to buy/absorb the technology that goes into the F16 Block 70 and use it on the Tejas and procure our own home-grown fighter in large numbers.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jun 2017 21:20

The Gripen-E is not a cheap aircraft or a simple one unlike its predecessor. It is a major developmental program and a major T&C effort that SAAB and its partners will be spending the next 5+ years conducting. Its complexity aside, the final assembly and production of certain parts is spread out in interest of offset agreements signed to secure its first and so far only export customer. Couple that with a sub optimal secured set of order, it is not going to be a CHEAP fighter that the Pakistan Air Force can afford. You aren't going to be picking one up in the export market for less than 90-100 Million a pop in the next decade and given their lack of access to Israeili munitions they won't be able to afford a lot of the European munitions in quantity. Their best bet is still likely the J-10, and someday the FC-31.

Also, if F16 comes, then there will be very little room for the Tejas. It wouldn't make any economic sense. Tejas will be killed off just like what happened to the Marut in the 70's/80's in favor of Russian fighters.

If anyone wants to kill the Tajas both the F-16 and the Gripen are an equally effective tool for achieving that end. In fact come to think of it, Gripen-E is essentially what AdA and HAL are trying to do with the LCA-MKII.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 Jun 2017 21:45

Philip wrote:This entire SE charade is only becos Tejas has failed to arrive,even in less-than-perfect performance with the Mk-1.[

Tejas not Failed, it's our goddamned scotch / Stoltchnaya loving babu's fail to give big order for Tejas

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 22 Jun 2017 22:17

Even if tejas failed (Which it hasnt) it is our responsibility to bring it on track.
With all due respect to philip, sometimes I think what is being referred to when he posts we or ours.

srin · Post by **srin** » 22 Jun 2017 22:36

So, let's say LM shuts down the F16 assembly line in massa and TASL builds one here to assemble all F16s (provided IAF buys it of course). Good for LM - they can now focus on F-35. But is it good for us ?

If ten years later, the USAF F-16s develop a problem with radar or engine or display, will they come to TASL ? My presumption is no - because supply chain is still in the massa, and all the knowledge is with PW or GE or Raytheon and others.
Now, if ten years later, the IAF F-16s develop a problem with radar or engine or display, will they go to TASL ? Again, my presumption is no, because after all, how much can TASL absorb (even if they are shared with us).

So, what exactly are we gaining with this ?