'Make in India' Single engined fighter

[Pratyush]

Amit let go,. The mmrca is dead. In its place we have a farce that is this single engine fighter deal.

What I am unable to figure out is that the amount of time taken for the finalisation of this deal and the time taken to deliver the first aircraft into IAF. The mk2 comes into service if all the focus is placed on it. While the AMCA is still 15 years away.

If the numbers have to be maintained then the F35 is a better choice any day of the week. What with an order of 400 aircraft for 37 billion dollar. If the indian costs are double that with sustainment over the life time . It will still be cheap per jet when compared with impending french purchase.

So why persist with this farce.

If I try to make sense of decision making of the MOD.



Then the only thing that makes sense is that the mod is not confident that it will be unable to secure engine for mk 2. But then it makes even less sense to go for any design that uses a khan engine.


The last para by me is desperately trying to make sense of actions of MOD with open source information.

[Rakesh]

The scenario that is being constantly painted of the aging F16s going up against and being shot down by super dooper Chinese 5th generation planes at some future point seems to me rather funny. This pre-suppses two things. One is IAF does not have/will not have a 5th generation fighter in place to counter Chinese 5th generation fighters and that all Chinese planes would be 5th generation (wow, even the 50 centers would be impressed!). The second is that somehow it is fine if the Tejas MK1 goes up against the J20s. I think jingos would be kush thinking the Tejas will spank the Chinese planes but can IAF plan that way?

So let us answer those two pre-supposes;

1) The IAF does not have/will not have a 5th generation fighter in place
Which fifth generation fighter is the IAF working on right now?

PAK-FA? As of May 31, 2017...this is where it stands;

India, Russia 5th Generation Fighter Jet Deal is 'Lost'
http://thediplomat.com/2017/05/india-ru ... l-is-lost/

Indian officials in May announced that the deal would not include tech transfers. “We are co-developers. There is nothing called technology transfer in this project,“ a government official said.

AMCA? See Below. Replace FAA with Babu and it is apt. Jokes aside, I believe it is still in the final design stages.



So I ask again....Which fifth generation fighter is the IAF working on right now to counter the fifth generation planes coming out of China's stables? Which is the only fifth generation plane out there that is in active service right now? The F-35 is the only one, apart from the F-22 which is not available to anyone. One can argue that 4th and 5th generation are just terms and an upgraded 4++ generation fighter can take on a 5th generation plane. Going by that logic, instead of building F-16s or Gripens, the IAF should just reopen the 3rd generation MiG-21 line and churn out BISONs. I am sure the 3rd generation BISON (upgraded with 4th generation avionics) can handle its own against the Chinese Su-35s which are 4th generation by design and have 4++ generation avionics.

2) somehow it is fine if the Tejas MK1 goes up against the J20s
The F-35 (or any other 5th generation plane) will serve as the tip of the spear. Take out the enemy's offensive capability. As ACM Naik (Retd) once said, "See First, Shoot First, Kill First." All this visual dogfighting means diddly squat in a real war. Future air battles will almost always be like what the Air Chief said. Once you demoralize the enemy, or as a IAF pilot called it dadagiri, you take out his ability to control the airspace. YOU basically sanitize or control the airspace and NOT him. If you enter the sanitized airspace, you will be shot down. Once you control the airspace, you then bring in Tejas Mk.1/1A/2 or whatever else and it will have a field day. That is exactly why the Rambha is called an Air Dominance Fighter in the IAF, because it dominates the airspace.

The point remains that the MoD and IAF are looking at this platform for a quick increase in squadron strength with a workhorse (something the Rafale was supposed to be) with the Tejas and MKI looking after the low end and high end requirements as well setting up a second aerospace centre in the country. As long as the new line doesn't impact Tejas I'm not too sure what the hullabaloo is about. I don't think this potential deal is about new tech infusion save for what the Tatas may learn about producing complex piece of machinery in a time bound manner.

Since you brought up the issue of a quick increase in squadron strength, please tell me how many F-Solahs do you envision joining the IAF by say 2020? A decision is only expected by next year (downselect or L1 if one wants to call it), then negotiations and factory site location and building the factory, which will take another year or two. Do you know what is going to happen by 2020? The IAF is at 32 squadrons now. Another 3 - 4 squadrons will be retired by then. How many F-Solahs do you think the factory will churn out in 2021?

Assume that the Indian factory churns out the exact same number that LM did in the 80s, of 30 aircraft per month. So in 3.5 months, the IAF will have easily achieved the magic number of 100 aircraft. But there is a teeny, weeny problem. Who is going to fly these planes, as there is an acute shortage of pilots - fighter, helo, transport - in the IAF? It takes 3 - 5 years to fully train a pilot from propellor trainers to intermediate jet trainers to advanced jet trainers to type conversion to syllabus completion. So sometime in mid 2020, when 100 fighters are inducted but a number of them are sitting on the tarmac, because nobody is there to fly them.

Also folks here worry that F16 will kill Tejas despite a substantial order on hand. I don't see the same worry of the F35 killing the still paper plane called the AMCA? I find that rather strange.

Choose One - Kill a ten year old living, breathing, healthy child or Burn a Picture of a Child? Pick One. Go Ahead. It would truly be strange if you choose the former and framed the latter on a wall. That would be strange indeed.

[Pratyush]

Are you certain that the F35 is on offer and tranches are available for India after satisfying the needs of the launch customers? Also folks here worry that F16 will kill Tejas despite a substantial order on hand. I don't see the same worry of the F35 killing the still paper plane called the AMCA? I find that rather strange.

No I am not. But no harm in asking for it. I am quite clear that any F 35 purchase will the AMCA.

But I am also trying to arrive at the best possible fighting force for the IAF. With the capital ependiture budget that is likely to be available with the IAF for the next 30 years.

I am also quite open to kill the LCA if it means getting the F35 by 2020. In place of f 16.

But if the choice is 16 or LCA. I say LCA.

[amit]

Pratyush,

Instead of trying to look for convoluted reasoning why don't you look at it as a short term fix to shore up squadron strength and in the process hopefully seed a private sector player with some manufacturing expertise on which, hopefully, they will be able to build on. Remember HAL also started its journey the same way.

It's my experience that the straightforward explanation is usually the correct one and over analysis doesn't get anywhere.

But your right to lets let it go and watch the developments. I'm personally confident that the IAF, MoD and the government know what they are doing and have much greater access to strategic information than we would ever get. There must be a reason behind this move.

[Rakesh]

We have had this discussion before. Even DM Parrikar asked a question why more Su-30MKI wouldn't do instead of the expensive MMRCA. Mix of LCA and MKI would do the job.

Once the Raksha Mantri got the answer, he approved 36 Rafales, single engined fighter + 83 Mk1A.

He's got the mix right. We need a Shiv Saar-esque dissection on what went on behind the decision.

Wrong. Narendra Modi told Manohar Parrikar that only 36 Rafales will be bought. That surprised even the latter.

[Rakesh]

No F-16 deal during Modi’s visit to US
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2017/06/n ... to-us.html

New Delhi has even turned down Washington’s proposal to mention the possible “Make in India” of F-16 fighters in the joint statement that will follow Modi’s meeting on Monday with President Donald Trump in the US capital. “We are not expecting any announcements [related to the sale of F-16s] in the next six months”, says an official who is aware of US-India negotiations.

Fuelling speculation over Saab’s continued relevance in the fighter procurement, Modi phoned up his Swedish counterpart, Stefan Lofven on Wednesday morning. Following what he lauded as a “good discussion”, Modi tweeted: “I deeply appreciate Sweden’s support for Make in India.”

Should'nt this phone call have been the other way around?

If no new buyer emerges for the F-16, a line transferred from Texas to India would have to shut down after building India’s requirement.

[nirav]

Amit let go,. The mmrca is dead. In its place we have a farce that is this single engine fighter deal.

What I am unable to figure out is that the amount of time taken for the finalisation of this deal and the time taken to deliver the first aircraft into IAF. The mk2 comes into service if all the focus is placed on it. While the AMCA is still 15 years away.

If the numbers have to be maintained then the F35 is a better choice any day of the week. What with an order of 400 aircraft for 37 billion dollar. If the indian costs are double that with sustainment over the life time . It will still be cheap per jet when compared with impending french purchase.

So why persist with this farce.

If I try to make sense of decision making of the MOD.



Then the only thing that makes sense is that the mod is not confident that it will be unable to secure engine for mk 2. But then it makes even less sense to go for any design that uses a khan engine.


The last para by me is desperately trying to make sense of actions of MOD with open source information.

Saar you are talking about 'all the focus' on mk2 !?

You think ADA/DRDO HAL didn't give full focus on mk1 till now?
It was HAL who btw kicked mk2 further down an uncertain road and got Mk1A in just to keep the line warm.

We have had a great deal of kicking of deadlines down the road. 15 years is an optimistic timeframe for mk2 foc.

15 years for AMCA !? It's wishful thinking honestly,considering the complexity of the task at hand.

You are wayyy overestimating the capabilities of the platform and the designers.
The designers too have been doing it all these years.

The intent of latest and the best - state of the art is noble and admirable.

The delivery on the intent in a time bound manner is severely lacking.

[amit]

Rakesh has it occurred to you that maybe the F16 is the litmus test that would open the door to the F35? Like I wrote earlier, every single F35 launch customer is a long standing user of US fighter aircraft? There could be wheels within wheels for all we know. We allow LM to keep in its sustainment program for F16 with the promise of future F35? The Naval fighter requirement is still up in the air.

[Pratyush]

Amit, I agree that the simplest explanation is the best explanation.

But in this case the quickest course of action will still take 5 to 8 years to produce the results.

While the LCA line can be scaled up within the next 2 to 3 years from the decision to do so. With an established ability of the IAF to train the flight and ground crew. Which can be expanded with minimum effort. Now tell me which is better option.

[Rakesh]

Amit, has it occurred to you that we should not be wasting valuable FOREX reserves on another 4th generation fighter, when we should get a 5th generation fighter instead? Do you want to spend $10 billion on 100 4th generation fighters or spend $15 billion of 100 5th generation fighters?

Buying a 5th generation fighter, keeps the door wide open for the Tejas as well. No more importing 4th generation fighters, when we have a perfectly good one at home.

Secondly, LM will be laughing all the way to the bank, if they open a FACO line in India. They can capture the IAF requirement, the IN requirement and export additional F-35s to the Middle Eastern market.

This competition is LM's to lose and I don't want them to lose, if the GoI is insisting on importing.

[Pratyush]

Rakesh has it occurred to you that maybe the F16 is the litmus test that would open the door to the F35? Like I wrote earlier, every single F35 launch customer is a long standing user of US fighter aircraft? There could be wheels within wheels for all we know. We allow LM to keep in its sustainment program for F16 with the promise of future F35? The Naval fighter requirement is still up in the air.

If the ability of the US to supply hardware is in question, then it makes no difference what hardware is sought.

But the US participation in the MMRCA should have answered the queries in this respect. No.

[nirav]

Amit, I agree that the simplest explanation is the best explanation.

But in this case the quickest course of action will still take 5 to 8 years to produce the results.

While the LCA line can be scaled up within the next 2 to 3 years from the decision to do so. With an established ability of the IAF to train the flight and ground crew. Which can be expanded with minimum effort. Now tell me which is better option.

We have 20 odd permanent waivers on the ASR of the 80s for a Mig21 replacement.
Had this been a Chinese effort, we would have trolled and mocked them till eternity.

The LCA certainly will be updated. Current proposed update is Mk1A.

It still is a fine aircraft. We can't ask UnObtanium from it by expecting it to do a bigger fighters job. It would take radical engineering to get the LCA to Solah range payload capability.the Mk1A just can't match this capability of the Solah.

So how many should we go in for, considering that the light and cheap fighter is costing almost 90 million USD and still doesn't comply fully with ASR of the 80s?

[Pratyush]

You need to acquaint your self with the performance or the 16 during the MMRCA evaluation and then comment regarding the waivers given to the LCA.

It will comply with more points then any of the options sought in this deal.

[nirav]

You need to acquaint your self with the performance or the 16 during the MMRCA evaluation and then comment regarding the waivers given to the LCA.

It will comply with more points then any of the options sought in this deal.

Sir,
Maybe I am not acquainted with the solahs performance.
You genuinely think IAF isn't aware ? Your implication almost sounds like it.

They have tested the Solah, Gripen thorough.
Same can't be said for the LCA though at the moment. Are you aware of the inducted LCAs being put through the paces by the IAF ?

You btw are ignoring hard facts, permanent waivers as a non critical issue. There is no way we can be privy to that information to dismiss it just like that.

And if we do an unbiased Solah BLK 70 vs the LCA Mk1A/Mk1A, there is no way the LCA outperforms the Solah.

Range/payload are actual and real metrics. You can't dismiss a superior platform and say it's not that important.its blind fanboyism.

[Pratyush]

Nirav, I am aware of the waivers and I am thinking that if they were deal breaker then the waivers would not have been issued.

So that is a settled argument.

Having said so, what is not settled is the made in india single engine fighter.

Most people have ruled out the grippen in favour of the 16. I am saying if it is going to be 16 then take the LCA which in mk2 configuration will be a serious competitor to any 4th gen jet.

But if single engine jet becomes F35 then I will say kill LCA kill AMCA if we can start getting it by 2020.

I am only wedded to the LCA. Don't give a damm about the 16 or any other potential competitor. Unless it is F35.

[nirav]

Ok saar. I'm not going to continue this further.
I do understand where you are coming from..
Last time i happened to make a few posts critical of the lca some posters wondered about my motivation of making those posts when the program was on the 'cusp'

If only Lockheed were paying me some dawlars

My takeaway from the single engined fighter Competition is that we did Not repeat our Marut mistake. That's a big win for me at least.

[Pratyush]

Indeed

[amit]

But if single engine jet becomes F35 then I will say kill LCA kill AMCA if we can start getting it by 2020.

I am only wedded to the LCA. Don't give a damm about the 16 or any other potential competitor. Unless it is F35.

Here's the thing. I'm asking several posters but not getting any reply. But what the heck, here's the question again: Is the F35 on the table?

Can India get it by 2020 or 2025 if it is willing to spend the necessary money? If it ain't then bringing it up time and again becomes a strawman argument.

Note: I remember during the MMRCA competition LM offered F16 with a sweetener that choosing the F16 would offer an upgrade path to the F35. Is history repeating itself? Is Modi's apparent snub to the F16 deal announcement during his visit the result of a lack of clear guarantees in this regard?

Points to ponder IMO.

[Manish_Sharma]

If the idea is to be on the perpetual look out for sugar daddy then I say get the F 35 and be done with it.

You don't understand F16 is being used to sabotage Tejas and our learning of production.

The F35 will be used to sabotage AMCA.

Dalal and Babu lobby is after AFF "Any Foreign Fighter"

That's why in MMRCA, from grippen to shornet everything was "Medium"

[nirav]

[Kakarat]

Amit, I agree that the simplest explanation is the best explanation.

But in this case the quickest course of action will still take 5 to 8 years to produce the results.

While the LCA line can be scaled up within the next 2 to 3 years from the decision to do so. With an established ability of the IAF to train the flight and ground crew. Which can be expanded with minimum effort. Now tell me which is better option.

We have 20 odd permanent waivers on the ASR of the 80s for a Mig21 replacement.
Had this been a Chinese effort, we would have trolled and mocked them till eternity.

The LCA certainly will be updated. Current proposed update is Mk1A.

It still is a fine aircraft. We can't ask UnObtanium from it by expecting it to do a bigger fighters job. It would take radical engineering to get the LCA to Solah range payload capability.the Mk1A just can't match this capability of the Solah.

So how many should we go in for, considering that the light and cheap fighter is costing almost 90 million USD and still doesn't comply fully with ASR of the 80s?

You are not sill getting the point Tejas is a Light category and F-16 is Medium category their Range and capability will never match, they are not same category just because both are single engines. the main soviet competitor for F-16 are Mig-29 which is a twin engines aircraft and the power of single engine of Mig-29 is similar to Tejas engine (just for rough comparison) how do you expect the range and payload capability to match?

You are still to elaborate on the capability that F-16 brings in which IAF doesn't have?

@ToT, for now all we can do is speculate. But I doubt even after a contract is signed, we in the public domain would be aware of the exact nature of ToT. We still don't know how deep was MKI ToT. Yet we paid extra for it. Iirc there were reports that HAL built MKIs were expensive compared to Russian built ones. We still persist with it.
There have been suggestions that the ToT aspect is about 'jobs'. I disagree with it. The focus on 'jobs' is a western protectionism thing. Our thing has always been the ToT aspect.

The Javlin missile did not go through because USA denied source codes, do you think a country which did not give codes of a antitank missile going to transfer technology of a fighter aircraft? allowing to just build from drawings is not TOT. TOT is not just about jobs, Make in India could be about jobs. TOT is about building a Indian Industrial capability. No country will transfer technology or no company will want to create a future competitor, Indian Industrial capability will grow only through Indian designed and made products and investing on research

@composite %ages - it doesn't make sense to get into this comparison simply cause the Solah carries more and farther than the LCA.

Composite manufacturing is today's technology and its not about just carrying more and flying further. There are many more advantages like radar cross section reduction e.t.c

We haven't crossed the point to avoid Marut mistake yet

I don't think you get paid by LM just to express your opinion in a forum that can in no way influence the gov

[Manish_Sharma]

We have 20 odd permanent waivers on the ASR of the 80s for a Mig21 replacement.
Had this been a Chinese effort, we would have trolled and mocked them till eternity.

How many waivers needed for failed mmrca f-16?

[Austin]

No, the F-16 Isn’t About to Be Built in India Just Yet - Saurabh Joshi

https://www.thequint.com/india/2017/06/ ... ocialshare

Twitter was excited on Monday over a Reuters report about the conclusion of an agreement between US defense and aerospace giant Lockheed Martin and Indian conglomerate Tata for the production of the iconic F-16 fighter aircraft in India.

The report gave the impression that the F-16 would be produced in India following this agreement. Admittedly, this is not the first time media has reported that the F-16 will be built in India with the Tatas.

But let’s back up a little bit.

A statement from Lockheed Martin said on Monday:

Lockheed Martin and Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL) signed a landmark agreement affirming the companies intent to join hands to produce the F-16 Block 70 in India.

This intention was apparent last year. But this tie-up does not mean anything, by itself. At any rate, there’s the minor matter of getting an order from the Indian Air Force (IAF).

An agreement between Lockheed Martin & Tata to build F-16s should not be mistaken for an order.

Not only was there no tender when Lockheed Martin first announced its intentions last year, the process for manufacturing new fighter aircraft in India has also been since laid out.

This process was published last month in a document known as Chapter 7 of the Defense Procurement Procedure of 2016 (DPP 2016). The idea is to promote private industry in India.

Chapter 7 outlines a process for the domestic manufacturing of four sets of defense systems – fighter aircraft, submarines, helicopters and armoured vehicles.

This chapter is a departure from the usual acquisition process under the DPP and requires the prime vendor to be an Indian company, which will be a strategic partner to a foreign Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM), such as Lockheed Martin.

This chapter dictates two parallel processes that will culminate in the production of a fighter aircraft. The first is a tender or Request For Proposal (RFP) to evaluate and select a fighter aircraft. The second is an RFP to select an Indian company to become the strategic partner for the production of this aircraft.

Both selections will be carried out by the Indian defence ministry.

An agreement signifying intention – like the one between Lockheed Martin and Tata – is nothing more than a statement of preference at this point.

And the process stipulated above has not even been initiated, yet.

The defence ministry has to float Requests For Information, Expressions of Interest and the Requests For Proposal for both these parallel processes. The ministry will then mandate an ‘arranged marriage’ between a foreign OEM and an Indian domestic company.

While other Indian companies will be competing to become the Indian strategic partner for fighters, it is not inconceivable that the companies ultimately selected by the defence ministry might well be Lockheed Martin’s competitor, Saab, and Lockheed Martin’s partner today, Tata. Sweden’s Saab manufactures the Gripen fighter – the other option in this two-way contest.

As things stand, Lockheed Martin expects to deliver the last F-16 on order in the third quarter of this year. The company is also reported to be moving its F-16 production line from Texas to South Carolina.

Given all of this, the excitement over India-made F-16s is premature, not to mention talk of exporting the fighter from India. It is important to remember that any exports from India require an Indian assembly line, which is contingent upon an Indian order.

This agreement comes a few days before Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets President Donald Trump on his first visit to the US under the new administration, and might bring attention to a possible deal on the F-16 between the two countries.

In context, the PM’s surprise decision to formally request the sale of 36 Rafale fighter aircraft on his first visit to France in April 2015 is not difficult to remember.

Agreements in Paris might be happenstance, but care should be taken to allow India’s own processes to run their course.

[srai]

^^^

Let's see how long before the whole process (RFI, EI, RFP, Selection, "Arranged Marriage", Price Negotiation, etc) itself will take. It hasn't even begun yet. It's a long road ahead. No MII fighters are coming until after 2025 at this earliest. Anyone tell me it will come sooner?

...
And the process stipulated above has not even been initiated, yet.

The defence ministry has to float Requests For Information, Expressions of Interest and the Requests For Proposal for both these parallel processes. The ministry will then mandate an ‘arranged marriage’ between a foreign OEM and an Indian domestic company.
...

[Manish_Sharma]

Srai ji, the deals with US seem to materialize suddenly out of thin air. Remember C-17?

[Manish_Sharma]

Rakesh has it occurred to you that maybe the F16 is the litmus test that would open the door to the F35? Like I wrote earlier, every single F35 launch customer is a long standing user of US fighter aircraft?

By that logic we should also buy predecessor of f16, as a litmus test for f16....

Americans have a saying "customer is always right..."

But these yearly euma / eula inspections where our bought naval and air assets are lined up for inspection by gora US as if we Bharatiya people are slimey thieves is so humiliating.

And US is the most trigger happy as far as sanctions are concerned, what mood US is in at the time of next war we don't know.

[amit]

^^^

Let's see how long before the whole process (RFI, EI, RFP, Selection, "Arranged Marriage", Price Negotiation, etc) itself will take. It hasn't even begun yet. It's a long road ahead. No MII fighters are coming until after 2025 at this earliest. Anyone tell me it will come sooner?

Srai,

For all you know this whole thing could be some elaborate noise being orchestrated by the government for some objective that we may not even be aware of.

However the fact remains that IAF squadron strength remains way below requirement and nobody on this forum at least can give a date on when that issue will be addressed. And what we will do in case of a two front war breaks out in the next 10 years.

Questions like when will Tejas get FOC, when will MK1A fly and get FOC and when will MK2 fly and get FOC need to be answered. A clearer knowledge of these dates would automatically dampen talk about another plane production line IMO.

If you ask me, this is a classic Catch 22 situation. Would be funny even if the consequences weren't so serious.

[Rakesh]

^^^ then perhaps you have missed the numerous posts in this very thread. Squadron strength is not going to be addressed anytime soon. It will take at minimum of a decade to begin to address the shortfall. And that is true whether you induct F-16, F-35, Gripen or Tejas. The IAF is paying the price for the Babus being lax.

What is funny is pushing the F-16 deal as if it is a holy grail solution for the IAF, when no poster can address at what rate F-16s will be inducted into the IAF. Just repeating the LM media spin that large numbers will be inducted quickly. One poster even commented that a few squadrons will join the IAF before 2020! Now that is funny.

[srai]

Let's look at what is being inducted by 2020 and beyond:

• LCA
• Su-30 MKI
• Rafale
• MiG-29 UPG
• Mirage-2000 UPG
• Jaguar UPG

Why not order more of them (last three second-hands)? Except for Rafale, all are MII in one form or the other. Continue to induct them post 2020. Support Infrastructure is there (or is being built up). Situation won't be as dire unless no further orders and production ends (or no more airframes) even for these. This approach would give breathing room, which would allow for saner decisions can be made (i.e. not a panic purchase).

[shiv]

From time to time I have seen a degree of enthusiasm for used military aircraft on BRF. I think it is important for enthu-cutlet jingos like us to read about the issues that aging aircraft face. Plenty of material on the web. Here is one pdf
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/p014059.pdf

Some easy to read info here
https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Age ... al_Failure


here's a 220 page book. for the masochist
https://www.sto.nato.int/publications/S ... -$$ALL.pdf

[Will]

The F-16 Block 70 is not crap, atleast when you consider that it is more technologically advanced than any fighter in IAF service today. Though that doesn't mean buying them will be a good decision.

Right now it may not be crap. But look at the timeline it will be joining the IAF and then it will be crap. In that timeline 5th gen fighters will be proliferating in the neighbourhood. But the most important part is putting your b***s in uncle sams hands. Things in the US change all time. With the Obama administration things were on the up swing. With Trump in things are at a standstill. Just shows how dangerous it's being dependent on the US.

[srai]

So much for "ToT"

No F-16 deal during Modi’s visit to US

...
Lockheed Martin has waged an aggressive, American style campaign to push the F-16 -- employing media briefings, sponsoring think tank papers and, at the ongoing Paris Air Show, announcing a joint venture with Tata Advanced Systems Ltd (TASL) to build the F-16 in India on an integration line transferred from Forth Worth, Texas.

At the Paris Air Show on June 20, Lockheed Martin’s vice president, Orlando Carvalho, told DefenseNews that the Trump administration, notwithstanding its commitment to keeping jobs in America, was not opposed to transferring F-16 production to India. Carvalho stated: “We’ve briefed various members of the administration on the program, on what that program would mean for the United States and what it means for India, and throughout all of the briefings and discussions that we’ve done, we haven’t seen any resistance to the program by the administration.”

A key reason for this is that Lockheed Martin does not envisage transferring more than a few hundred jobs to India, of workers involved in final assembly of the F-16 at Fort Worth. Meanwhile, some 6,000 American jobs connected with producing assemblies and sub-assemblies for the F-16 would get a lease of life. Without an Indian order, these jobs would be lost, since there are no other buyers for the F-16.

While Lockheed Martin is pitching to India the opportunity to build F-16s for all future purchases worldwide, DefenseNews quotes Heidi Grant, deputy under secretary of the US Air Force, as stating that interest from potential F-16 buyers was directed mainly towards the used F-16s of countries that were upgrading their fleet to the F-35 Lightning II.

If no new buyer emerges for the F-16, a line transferred from Texas to India would have to shut down after building India’s requirement.
...

Still a good deal?

[Rakesh]

F-Solah lovers will call the above fake news

[Pratyush]

I say no deal is a good deal.

[Manish_Sharma]

Cross posting from LCA thread :

There are some structural issues with HAL and we are reluctant to air them.

HAL has serious flaws but that is not the point of contention here ; thing is HAL is like a malnourished kid of a low income household who at the end of the day is still family's own, our criticism of our institutions is driven by the intent to reform them not to subject them to scrutiny against established players from well fed economies who anyways play with a loaded dice . Since this is LCA thread the only relevant context around LM's JV with Tata is the fact that as a country we might do to the LCA what we did to the Marut .

Important thing to take away from this discussion is how no one is not complaining about LCA's deficiencies anymore just like no one talks about secularism anymore to me that is a great thing, people know that Tejas is pretty good (sure there are areas to be improved upon) but the goal posts have now been shifted and the new point of contention is 'manufacturing' . Now manufacturing a fighter AC at scale is not HAL's forte not if the numbers at which MKIs were churned is unacceptable (I personally have no strong views on this ) however the point being discussed here is we have completed the most arduous phase of fighter AC development (except the engine) so why should we now not confront the manufacturing problem head on instead of switching our focus from the Tejas to an older generation platform which if and when inducted will not only drain money and resources from Tejas and it's successors but will keep India from achieving self reliance in this space for an additional decade or two .

We are seriously one fckd up country I mean who the fck goes out shopping for an AC of similar capability as home grown one just because one cannot manufacture it at high enough rate ? Manufacturing 'rate' should be least of our worries , hire men, throw resources and crack a whip first batch will have issues but then subsequent ones will come out alright that is how UK, US, Germany and RU produced planes during WW II after that it was all a routine for them , here we are just arguing about HAL's deficiencies as if there is a commandment carved on stone which states that Tejas has to be produced by HAL and only HAL alone.

[Austin]

Scaling up production is not easy as hiring men and whipping them to boost up production number , it's a multi year work involving industry , design bureau and end users and billions in sunk cost , if things were that easy hal would be making 50 mki in a year and 100 dhruv at its plant !

IAF will face a squadron shortage of 15 squadron in next 8 years either due to mass obsolescence or withdrawals .

They either be content with adding few quality aircraft at decreased sq numbers or import teens or pins to build up number with state of art fighters , it's as much as political and financial decision as it is military / geopolitical one.

IAF is in a situation where a desperate man looks for desperate solutions and no good exists

[Cain Marko]

How will IAF face shortage of 15 sqds in next 8 years, 2025?

At present, they have
5-6 bison
12 MKI
6 Jag
6 M2K + M29
2 M27
TT: 32 sqds

They should have
5-6 LCA
14 MKI
6 Jag
6 M2K + M29
2 Rafale
34 contracted sqds.

Net increase by 2 sqds without any additional orders, and that too of higher quality. . If they are going for sanctioned strength of 39.5 sqds, there is a shortage of 5 odd sqds, and if they are aiming for the oft quoted figure of 42 sqds, there is shortage of 8 sqds. But nowhere can I see this need for 15 sqds in next 8 years.

The biggest danger lies in next 2-4 years imvho where there is a possibility of going below 30 sqds. And this can be addressed in short order by either increasing mki -
medium cost, Rafale - high cost or mig29smt - low cost orders.

Frankly , I think MOD is going to let IAF hang in there at around 32 sqds and take its time on the decision of how to go further.... Fgfa, jsf, Rafale, solah etc.

I would think that a couple of pakfa orders Improving on the mki model will setup the future nicely, especially if complemented with another 6 lca to be produced by 2030. Either pakfa or some jsf which would mean even less tot and flexibility. But, no point in producing around 100 odd imported legacy jets when a. You have local alternative, and b. when 5G birds will proliferate the neighborhood.

[Vivek K]

IAF needs to get all the Mig 29s it can lay its hand on and upgrade them itself with HAL. Stop wasting money on the PAKFA, or the F-35. Channel all the saved money into the AMCA developed properly with IAF involvement and PMO/RM coordination at every step. The goal being to develop the prototype and then involve a private entity to learn the ropes every step of the way and setup mfg lines with the selected entity. IAF can also look at any M2K frames like the Qatari ones.

[Kakkaji]

I agree with the points amit has put forward.

I also think that, if the F16 deal goes through, a few squadrons (older than Block 70) would be provided immediately by the USAF to the IAF on lease, and the first couple of squadrons of new Block 70 for the IAF will be built completely in the US, before the production line is dismantled and transferred to India. This would quickly address the falling squadron numbers of the IAF, before the MII F-16s start coming off the production line in India, when the aircraft on lease from the US will be returned. Something like what happeend with the MKI.

This is the aspect that Sweden cannot match. They cannot quickly provide several squadrons of aircraft from their own stocks.

I also think that, if the F-16 deal goes through, then eventually a certain number of F-35 will also be purchsed by the IAF, perhaps under a FACA setup in the same Tata plant in India, after the orders from the current F-35 customers are satisfied.

All this is speculation out of Musharraf on my part. If it has to mterialize, it will require close political cooperation between the GoI and GOTUS. It would have happened under Obama. Under Trump, it is doubtful as the Trump GOTUS is incapable of long-term planning and finesse in strategic affairs.

Also, I don't think the LCA program will be impacted by the F-16 deal. Otherwise Parrikar would not have pushed for it. The success of the LCA is now totally in the hands of HAL, and ADA. Whatever was the past, the current GoI has provided all the support and finances. The IAF has placed orders. Now HAL needs to execute. The IAF cannot wait forever.

JM2c

[Cain Marko]

Following up on my previous post, as a flip side, let us try to make some sense of out this need for a SE fighter deal that the MOD/GOI/IAF seem to be so gung ho about despite it making so little sense to most BRFites including yours truly - for reasons previously discussed. The following reasons come to mind as to why the above entities are pushing this deal:

1) To reduce HAL's monopoly in this industry and get private players on par with HAL so as to force better industry performance in the future. Basically invigorate a high tech, low cost aerospace manufacturing industry, an area where there should be plenty of growth in the coming decades. So, set India up as this aero manufacturing hub not too different from the software manufacturing hub that it is today.
2) Hedge against delays and slow pace of LCA production and iterative development.
3) Give the IAF a western, reliable, high uptime, daal roti fighter, which it wants as a hedge against Russian hardware failing to give desired results in said areas.
4) Bring the force levels to a respectable 39.5 - 40 sqds by 2026ish.
5) Bring in some esoteric technologies not only in terms of hi-tech manufacturing, but also cutting edge development in areas like GaN based radars.

I think $ 10-12 billion is not being considered as too high a price with the economy projected to continue at 7% gains p.a. Now the question is, which of the two players provides a better deal?

F-16:
It already has a leg up having set up production facilities in other countries. Question is - how much real and substantial know how will actually be transferred? Will India in time be able to produce critical components locally? Will jobs be transferred gradually to India? etc. Performance wise, this is an off the shelf, ready to go, experienced khiladi. And the system is a well oiled and smoothly functioning machine, period. You can expect quick deliveries, high uptimes, great and powerful machine capable of lugging 8 tons of varied US hi-tech weapons with CFTs helping with range issues. As an A2A player, without the CFTs, it will be quite agile and certainly more powerful than the Gripen. One can also expect a lot of cheaper Israeli inputs in the machine.

Gripen-NG:
More desperate and therefore more willing to transfer high end technology inputs such as GaN based radar, which will find applications/spinoffs in a variety of platforms. One can imagine a 2000 TRM GaAN dish on the MKI - no wonder there have been some noises with the Italians (Selex-Galileo/Leonardo) wrt the MKI upgrade program. A similar radar might find its way on the LCA mk1A and mk2 as well - since AFAIK the radar has not yet been selected for these platforms. Probably greater flexibility in customizing the product with local weapons as they become available.
Performance is a bit of a question mark since this is a new product although Saab has been demoing some of it for the last 7 odd years. Claims are pretty high and smooth - e.g. supercruise, which might very well be possible considering that this was achieved by the earlier versions. WIde variety of weapons which are supposed to be integrated quite easily - everything from the USA/Europe/Israel and India. Upgrade path seems to have greater potential here vs. the Solah. For e.g. in time a GE-414 EPE could be hooked up along with CFTs for more range/payload - it is still not a fat truck unlike the F-16, which seems to have reached the end of its airframe development with the UAE's blk 60. Additionally, it potentially offers massive commonality with the Tejas in terms of engines and possibly, radar. Of course, there is always the danger that this bird might somehow magically morph into the Tejas Mk2! Then there might be the advantage of not having to clear things with Congress or debating restrictions on use or kill switches and inspections by helicopter mom (although I think these are issues that have been sorted out by circumventing US equipment in their platforms).

Which is a better deal? All depends on what can be negotiated with each country and company.

JMTP