MRCA News and Discussion

[GeorgeWelch]

- not very impressive in the air superiority role since it was clearly designed as bomb truck for a force that would deploy it after bringing to bear overwhelming air superiority

This is not true, aircraft carriers are designed to operate in isolation. If the navy could rely on the air force to provide air superiority, well what would be the point of carriers?

The USN is confident in the capability of the SH to take on ANY threat in the world today, including flankers.

- Then there is the issue of cost, esp. when it comes to infrastructure, the IAF simply does not have any experience with the americans. They'll have to start from scratch, a v.pricey affair esp. if the FAB deal is any indication.

All the planes (even the MiG-35) will require new infrastructure, this is a nonissue.

Considering this, I'd rather have seen the U.S. offer a truly exclusive deal for India with an F-16 XL type.

Except the whole point of the MRCA is to be an INTERIM type to keep the numbers up until FGFA/MCA/LCA get on their feet.

As such, they need a turnkey system that is ready to go immediately with no development time or development risk.

Not something where 'by the end of the year we hope to create a roadmap that will lay out our course for AESA'.

[kit]

I dont know how some people can justify the F18.The problem is not with the aircraft but with the country that makes it.Washington has effectively neutered India in the field of nuclear weapons, making it far less threatening to it .. or using Arun s words , a nuclear vasectomy. I dont think there will be much of military or political independence left in India after that mega deal goes to the Americans.Militarily it is going to look like an inflated elephant that can be punctured easily., or doing its masters bidding.When madam and her prime minister are done with the country,which coming government will be able to undo the damage ? Keep in mind Shakti 2 would never have happened had it been a congress govt.The only weapons that can effectively deter your stronger opponent is nuclear and nothing else.Why barter away your air capabilities as well ?

[Cain Marko]

So if we had to really rate a/c on a variety of criteria @ around 2014 when they will start coming in-

Range, Payload, EW?, S-fusion/MMI, Radar, Kinematics, IRST, Weapons

Rafale | Raf | F18? | Rafale? | EF | EF-2k | Rafale | F18/RafGrn/16/35
Gripen | f18 | Raf? | Shornet? | f18 | MiG/Raf | MG/E2k/16/Grn | EF
EF-2000 | Ef2k | E2k? | F-16/EF? | MiG/Grn | Grn | Shornet |
Shornet | F16 | Grin? | Grin/Mig? | Raf/F16 | F16
MiG-35/ | Mig | F16? | Shornet
F-16IN | Grin | MIG?

Scored as 1 = best, 6= worst. ? not scored.

It is v.hard to rate any a/c on EW and MMI. Who knows how capable they are?

The Rafale comes out on top @ 10
EF2k @ 12
Gripen, F-18 E/F @ 17
MiG-35 @ 18
F-16IN @ 20

Before people jump on me for putting the Rafale/F-16 low on radar cap, i do so based on the fact that they have the smallest noses and hence the least potential to stuff TRMs. The Gripen is rated higher for its innovative swashplate idea that overcomes the small FOV of AESAs.All these ratings are based on circa 2014.

Weapons integration and variety, each get 1 point, while the Ef gets 2. While the shornet and the mig-35 perhaps have the greatest variety with a slight edge to the shornet, saab offers to integrate weapons of any make, a distinct disadvantage of the teens. The rafale has some unique variations in the AASM and Mica IIR. The Ef-2000 has the least.

As I always thought the Eurocanards are probly the best. The Gripen/Shornet in the middle and the fulcrum falcon at the bottom. So it will boil down to offsets, costs, TOT, clout, future development potential and so on.

CM

[Cain Marko]

This is not true, aircraft carriers are designed to operate in isolation. If the navy could rely on the air force to provide air superiority, well what would be the point of carriers?

So you are saying that strikes by cruise missiles and B2s do not soften targets first? Btw, what real opposition does the USN have today? If they faced china today, rest assured, it'll be the B2s and F-22s which will go in first. The CBGs will take over only after relative NFZs are imposed. Point is, india does not have this luxury.

The USN is confident in the capability of the SH to take on ANY threat in the world today, including flankers.

Thats the keyword - "today". What about tomorrow - 20 years down the road? They'll rely on the JSF for that not the Shornet.

All the planes (even the MiG-35) will require new infrastructure, this is a nonissue.

New infrastructure yes. But to what extent? Some more so than others. The shornet will require much more setup costs than the fulcrum and probly the rafale.

Considering this, I'd rather have seen the U.S. offer a truly exclusive deal for India with an F-16 XL type.

As such, they need a turnkey system that is ready to go immediately with no development time or development risk.Not something where 'by the end of the year we hope to create a roadmap that will lay out our course for AESA'.

Well, the IAF sure wants it quick. But it won't be before 2011 for the contract to be signed. So the U.S had some time - 2005 - 2009 to bring back the XL. They had 2 prototypes in storage i thought. Also, much of the flight testing/weapons integration was done. All that remained was the avionics/sensor package. Here it would be no different from the other MRCA birds. Still, no point crying over spilled milk.

CM.

[Austin]

The Mig-35 is the only aircraft in the MMRCA category that offers end to end logistics advantage for the IAF , be it engine , overhaul facility for the Mig-29 and aircraft , spares , training , weapons.

When the IAF upgrades its existing Mig-29 it will get better and the Mig-29K of the IN will similarly gain from IAF existing infrastructure for Mig-29.

It is a low cost option for MMRCA to meet IAF needs.

I find it amusing when people say Rafale has logistics advantage , does M2K uses the same engine , are they the same aircraft or same avionic suite ? the only thing that applies to Rafale is the weapons specially after M2k upgrade where Mica and other stand off weapon is proposed else Rafale will be in the same league as other aircraft.

We need to be very conscious on how much we spend , if we can get something for 50 -60 percent of the cost and it does 80 to 85 % of the cost then its good enough for boosting squadron strength and meeting IAF requirements.

[m mittal]

But the cost factor which looks favourable with Russians will be marred by serial cost escalations and delays.

Have you considered the financial effect of delays and cost escalations???

[Austin]

But the cost factor which looks favourable with Russians will be marred by serial cost escalations and delays.

Have you considered the financial effect of delays and cost escalations???

What kind of delay and cost escalations ????

[KrishG]

Ajai Shukla's has written a very good article on MMRCA in his blog------

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/08/ ... s-out.html

At the end of the flight-testing next May, predict experts, the IAF might have four or more aircraft that comply fully with the MoD’s tender. In that case, the cheapest bid will win, with the MoD evaluating costs on a “Life Cycle” basis. That includes all the costs over a 30-40 year life-cycle, adding the per unit purchase price to the costs of technology, indigenous manufacture, infrastructure, repair and maintenance, operating expenses, and a host of other hidden costs. The IAF calls it “Cost of Ownership”; this method of calculation is being adopted for the first time by India for a capital equipment purchase from abroad..........Western vendors, whose military equipment has traditionally had higher ticket prices, claim that the “Cost of Ownership” calculation will tilt the equation in their favour, especially when compared with Russian equipment that they accuse of being maintenance-heavy, demanding vast quantities of spares, and spending more time on the ground than in the air.

The MiG-35 might be a cheaper option but when life cycle costs are taken into account, I really doubt it. RuAF will most probably not be inducting any MiG-35s. So, we could end up with spare shortages and other things as IAF will be the only airforce operating them. Western aircraft are built with reducing life cycle cost in mind.

[Austin]

The MiG-35 might be a cheaper option but when life cycle costs are taken into account, I really doubt it. RuAF will most probably not be inducting any MiG-35s. So, we could end up with spare shortages and other things as IAF will be the only airforce operating them. Western aircraft are built with reducing life cycle cost in mind.

May be , May be not , but the IN Mig-29K for e.g. to quote BR page

The maintenance plan during operations on a 'technical condition' basis, includes scheduled maintenance every 300 flight hours and technical condition checks every 1000 hours or every ten years; in other words the MiG-29K/KUB will have only three major checks during its lifetime. A switch to the technical condition' maintenance system cuts operating costs per flight hour by nearly 40%. A special warehouse for spares stocking is to be built in India for supporting these aircraft. This will reduce spares delivery time to maintenance personnel at the units, at a maximum of 72 hours, thus ensuring a fleet serviceability rate of 80 - 90%.

So the argument of operating cost or life cycle cost may have been a valid one during SU times , but may not be as valid now as the Mig-29K quote shows there is tremendous improvement in that area.

But then without having factual figures in hand for Mig-35 , F-18 and others there cannot be any valid argument , except for oh I think this or that might be the case.

[Sanku]

Since our Russian friends have now demonstrated that, at times, when it suits their convenience they simply dispense away with niceties like honouring written contracts etc (just not reliable to deal with), some members here whose heart may bleed for Russia kindly assure us:.

That is incorrect, if people really wanted exit clauses could be exercised. The reality is that we badly need it and they want to make sure they meet their commitments but without having to play the benefactor (as in the SU days)

All said and done, price was not a concern for Groshkov, delay was, and CNS is on record complaining about the delay but also on the record saying that he was satisfied with the price.

Shit happens -- its not necessarily intentional, both sides did not do a good requirement vs cost analysis to begin with. Buying Gorky in 2000 in the condition it was in the quick fix manner was essentially a political move.

And yes its giving us good returns. (Massive involvement of Russians in Arihant, various long term partnerships like Brhamos, Akula etc etc)

Gorky evaluation was a honest mistake on both sides.

[pankajs]

In the long run, instead of being caught being the devil (Russia) and the deep blue sea (USA), better to go with France as this has the minimum/least risk involved as far as the MRCA deal is concerned....

In the long run, the only alternative to being milked by all and sundry is indigenous technology and indigenous production. So get the immediate needs fulfilled but start on the MCA or its equivalent immediately.

[Philip]

We also have the words of Gen.Utterback of the USAF praising the virtues of our Flankers- SU-30MKIs, as also being very reliable.Things have changed much in Russia since the Yeltsin days,Putin with his KGB background has tightened the screws in Russia,and the OAK,or United Aircraft Company,which has amalgamated all the major Russian aircraft manufacturers into one conglomerate with the formidable Pogosayan as its head,has turned the fortunes of the Russian aviation industry back into the black.We eagerly await the arrival of the 5th-gen fighter to be seen later this year,as we have a vitalk stake in its development for our own selfish interests.

[Singha]

I just saw a vague grey 3-engined jet miss its approach badly to HAL airport from
the east, then swing around for the second attempt with wheels down and land.
too small to be a MD-11/KC-10 could be a lockheed tristar.

it was swinging around so slowly almost at stalling speed. by the time I got my
binos it was too far away to make out the tailfin logo.

could this be related to the F-athrah finally arriving in town this jet is bringing
in the support staff and officials?

[NRao]

I dont know how some people can justify the F18.The problem is not with the aircraft but with the country that makes it.Washington has effectively neutered India in the field of nuclear weapons, making it far less threatening to it .. or using Arun s words , a nuclear vasectomy. I dont think there will be much of military or political independence left in India after that mega deal goes to the Americans.Militarily it is going to look like an inflated elephant that can be punctured easily., or doing its masters bidding.When madam and her prime minister are done with the country,which coming government will be able to undo the damage ? Keep in mind Shakti 2 would never have happened had it been a congress govt.The only weapons that can effectively deter your stronger opponent is nuclear and nothing else.Why barter away your air capabilities as well ?

The US will push her weight no matter what. Kargil is an example. They have issued travel advisories even without India doing anything - just because Pakistan acted stupidly. For all I know - going by arguments on this thread - the US may apply more pressure if India does not buy US stuff. Fear is a strange thing and acting out of it is even stranger.

[NRao]

We also have the words of Gen.Utterback of the USAF praising the virtues of our Flankers- SU-30MKIs, as also being very reliable.Things have changed much in Russia since the Yeltsin days,Putin with his KGB background has tightened the screws in Russia,and the OAK,or United Aircraft Company,which has amalgamated all the major Russian aircraft manufacturers into one conglomerate with the formidable Pogosayan as its head,has turned the fortunes of the Russian aviation industry back into the black.We eagerly await the arrival of the 5th-gen fighter to be seen later this year,as we have a vitalk stake in its development for our own selfish interests.

I guess if another US general says good things about the M2K we should bring that plane production lines back to life.

On Russia, I have been saying that they are technically bankrupt. Turns out (something I did not realise till a few days ago - until I read it) that a some/lot of the "their" technologies went with the break up of the Soviet Union. That, in addition to that drunk Yeltsin, sealed their fate. The Russians are now playing catch-up (not a knock - more later). I think their true capabilities will show up in THEIR PAK-FA (sounds like the Indian FGFA will be dramatically different from the PAK-FA, will see). Having said that it will not be easy for them to produce in the time they have - again, not a knock on them, just a statement of observation (I could be totally wrong - but the PAK-FA will expose one of us).

On the PAK-FA, I am not too confident that the one/s that is expected to fly this year will be even close to the one they intend fielding. Just because of a lack of newer technologies in Russia.

On FGFA let us wait for a year or two .................. we just may have a few surprises. But the PAK-FA IMHO would not be a good indicator of things to come for the fGFA.

[Austin]

Technically Bankrupt ?

Well PAK-FA or no PAK-FA , if you look at their other aviation project like MKI , 34 , Su-35 , Air Defence system etc the list is long .......

What makes you feel they are technically bankrupt , what did you read that made you say that ....can you share with us.

If they are technically bankrupt........then looking at what we have achieved by your yard stick we must be in stone age

[GeorgeWelch]

So if we had to really rate a/c on a variety of criteria @ around 2014 when they will start coming in-

Range, Payload, EW?, S-fusion/MMI, Radar, Kinematics, IRST, Weapons

Rafale | Raf | F18? | Rafale? | EF | EF-2k | Rafale | F18/RafGrn/16/35

It was difficult to interpret your chart so my apologies if I misread it.

But it looks like you have Rafale at the top for IRST.

Rafale does not and will not have IRST.

It had the OSF but that is obsolete and no longer being produced.
The new OSF-IT/NG won't be ready for a few years and is optical only.
The Rafale can use the sensor in Mica missiles, but that is so limited I hesitate to call that IRST.

Also French pilots have admitted the SH actually handles a larger payload better, which only makes sense if you look at the difference in size of the planes.

[GeorgeWelch]

This is not true, aircraft carriers are designed to operate in isolation. If the navy could rely on the air force to provide air superiority, well what would be the point of carriers?

So you are saying that strikes by cruise missiles and B2s do not soften targets first?

Cruise missiles (in the quantity the US has) and B-2s do not give air superiority.

Btw, what real opposition does the USN have today? If they faced china today, rest assured, it'll be the B2s and F-22s which will go in first.

In the typical China/Taiwan scenario, China's massive ballistic missile barrage destroys all of Taiwan's airfields and possibly US ones like Kadena and Guam if they are feeling ambitious. Regardless, the F-22 would be very limited by basing choices and long sortie durations.

The brunt of the fighting would definitely fall on the carriers.

The CBGs will take over only after relative NFZs are imposed.

Completely false. Carriers are designed to kick the door open. If they had to rely on the USAF to pave the way for them, there wouldn't be any real need for them.

They are used in 'peacekeeping' operations now, but that is simply to share the load with the USAF, not because that is what they are limited to.

If that was all they were good for, it would be far cheaper and more effective to simply scrap the naval air wing and transfer all assets to the USAF.

The USN is confident in the capability of the SH to take on ANY threat in the world today, including flankers.

Thats the keyword - "today". What about tomorrow - 20 years down the road? They'll rely on the JSF for that not the Shornet.

ALL of the MRCA competitors will be obsolete against 5th generation planes, so worrying about that seems silly. The MRCA is stopgap measure targeted towards TODAY, and against today's threats the SH is very potent.

As such, they need a turnkey system that is ready to go immediately with no development time or development risk.Not something where 'by the end of the year we hope to create a roadmap that will lay out our course for AESA'.

Well, the IAF sure wants it quick. But it won't be before 2011 for the contract to be signed. So the U.S had some time - 2005 - 2009 to bring back the XL. They had 2 prototypes in storage i thought. Also, much of the flight testing/weapons integration was done. All that remained was the avionics/sensor package. Here it would be no different from the other MRCA birds. Still, no point crying over spilled milk.

You don't understand how much development work goes into getting a new plane ready.

The US has about 5 F-35's flying TODAY and the production line ALREADY EXISTS yet it still won't be ready for the MRCA deadline.

To think you can start up a totally new aircraft in the time given is absurd.

[NRao]

Austin ji,

I need to drive to Urbana-Champaign. So, will respond when I get back later in the afternoon.

[nachiket]

Technically Bankrupt ?

Well PAK-FA or no PAK-FA , if you look at their other aviation project like MKI , 34 , Su-35 , Air Defence system etc the list is long .......

What makes you feel they are technically bankrupt , what did you read that made you say that ....can you share with us.

If they are technically bankrupt........then looking at what we have achieved by your yard stick we must be in stone age

As far as the MKI is concerned we replaced many of the key avionics with French/Israeli/Indian ones. So except for the radar the IAF did not seem too impressed with Russian avionics then. What makes you think they are any better now??
Even the radar has a big question mark on it. And I don't think the IAF is in the mood for customizing the Mig-35 with western avionics and stretch the induction timeframe.

[pankajs]

Technically Bankrupt ?

Well PAK-FA or no PAK-FA , if you look at their other aviation project like MKI , 34 , Su-35 , Air Defence system etc the list is long .......

What makes you feel they are technically bankrupt , what did you read that made you say that ....can you share with us.

If they are technically bankrupt........then looking at what we have achieved by your yard stick we must be in stone age

As far as the MKI is concerned we replaced many of the key avionics with French/Israeli/Indian ones. So except for the radar the IAF did not seem too impressed with Russian avionics then. What makes you think they are any better now??
Even the radar has a big question mark on it. And I don't think the IAF is in the mood for customizing the Mig-35 with western avionics and stretch the induction timeframe.

Aviation is different from avionics.

MKI is built around the SU-27/30 airframe and Russian engine and there has been no debate on their performance. All Russian components may not be the best is the world but that does not mean all they produce is sub-standard.
Another aspect that must be considered is cost of ownership of the product over the full lifecycle.

[Igorr]

Have made a brief AESA radars review in my blog. May be usefull for this discussion too.

[nashCS]

Saw two f 18E/F and a KC 135 tanker/ support aircraft land at HAL airport at 5.30 PM. Is this the beginning of the tests?

[Shameek]

That might have been them coming in for the tests. You guys will get to see the whole lot come and go! Keep watching the skies.

Were you able to make out if both were 2 seaters?

[nashCS]

Yep. They looked twin seaters, gray colored and a full bubble canopy. The KC 135 looked pale gray

[nachiket]

As far as the MKI is concerned we replaced many of the key avionics with French/Israeli/Indian ones. So except for the radar the IAF did not seem too impressed with Russian avionics then. What makes you think they are any better now??
Even the radar has a big question mark on it. And I don't think the IAF is in the mood for customizing the Mig-35 with western avionics and stretch the induction timeframe.

Aviation is different from avionics.

MKI is built around the SU-27/30 airframe and Russian engine and there has been no debate on their performance. All Russian components may not be the best is the world but that does not mean all they produce is sub-standard.
Another aspect that must be considered is cost of ownership of the product over the full lifecycle.

I wasn't commenting about their aerodynamic performance. With its 3D tvc the Mig-35 could well match if not outperform the EF-Typhoon. That is not my point.
But a fighter jet is more than just extreme performance. I was wondering if the russian avionics match up to the western ones since their importance in the battlefield is just as important as the capabilities of the airframe and engines. In the case of the MKI the IAF wasn't impressed and opted for Israeli,French/Indian stuff instead of buying the aircraft off the shelf. The might not be able to do that in the case of the Mig-35

[nachiket]

Saw two f 18E/F and a KC 135 tanker/ support aircraft land at HAL airport at 5.30 PM. Is this the beginning of the tests?

Has to be. There is no other reason for F-18s to be at HAL airport I guess.

[Sontu]

Technically Bankrupt ?

Well PAK-FA or no PAK-FA , if you look at their other aviation project like MKI , 34 , Su-35 , Air Defence system etc the list is long .......

What makes you feel they are technically bankrupt , what did you read that made you say that ....can you share with us.

If they are technically bankrupt........then looking at what we have achieved by your yard stick we must be in stone age

As far as the MKI is concerned we replaced many of the key avionics with French/Israeli/Indian ones. So except for the radar the IAF did not seem too impressed with Russian avionics then. What makes you think they are any better now??
Even the radar has a big question mark on it. And I don't think the IAF is in the mood for customizing the Mig-35 with western avionics and stretch the induction timeframe.

Russians are technolgically bankrupt

I some where read that combination of HMST and R-73 in East German Mig-29s SLAUGHTERD
US's best fighter advanced F-16 and those F-16's were defeated every every Air combat !

Russian R-73 with very high off bore-sight limit , thrust vectorng and longer range scared the all western aviation giants and hence came the ASRAAM ,IRIS-T and Sidewinder-9X to match the capability of R-73.

Again US rejected the idea of IRST in combat planes in 70's and only inducted in F-14.
Later came Russian supreame IRSTs on Mig-29s and Su-30s and the now the US and entire world again started to develope the IRST, as they understood the impact of this passive technology that Russians have developed...so much so the all latest Fighters from Gripen to Rafale, F-16, F-35 and even F-18 is going to have a podded IRST mounted on a Fuel Tank

Few examples of Russian technology which can be termed as Game Changer..that's why the entire western world is following the same route...

Let's wait for PAK-FA to enter the production phase..I would expect to grow the list longer

[Austin]

But a fighter jet is more than just extreme performance. I was wondering if the russian avionics match up to the western ones since their importance in the battlefield is just as important as the capabilities of the airframe and engines.

Check on Su-35 for Avionics , Electronics , EW , MMI etc etc they are as good as any other there , the Mig-35 seems quite good if not better.

[putnanja]

Except the whole point of the MRCA is to be an INTERIM type to keep the numbers up until FGFA/MCA/LCA get on their feet.
...
ALL of the MRCA competitors will be obsolete against 5th generation planes, so worrying about that seems silly. The MRCA is stopgap measure targeted towards TODAY, and against today's threats the SH is very potent.
...
...

No way does India go in for interim options. I will bet my bottom dollar that whatever aircraft India chooses will be in service for at least 20 years, if not more. India doesn't have the luxury of spending billions of dollars every 5-10 years. The MRCA is not a stopgap measure.

If India purchases the used Mirage fighters from Oman, that is a stop-gap measure. Not the new MRCA aircraft.

One key aspect for MRCA contenders is that they should have future room for growth. That automatically eliminates F16. The Rafale is a good aircraft, but in the absence of major users might hamper future upgrade paths. Same would hold true for Mig-35 too, especially if the RuAF doesn't order them in significant numbers. The Eurofighter appears to be better placed in that case. With the SH, as you have to depend on US for all future upgrades too, it is not worth going for it. And in typical american fashion, lock in a customer and you can wring out the last cent out of him. At least with other aircraft, we have the option of integrating and upgrading avinics and other stuff as we did for jaguar , mig-27 and mig-29.

[pankajs]

In the case of the MKI the IAF wasn't impressed and opted for Israeli,French/Indian stuff instead of buying the aircraft off the shelf. The might not be able to do that in the case of the Mig-35

If we get involved early in the project there is no reason we can’t crunch the timelines to incorporate non-Russian equipments. When MKI was being re-configured for IAF, we were starting with a blank slate in terms of experience in selection of equipment, integration and testing. Now, some 9 years later and having worked on MKI, LCA, upgrades on Bison, etc shouldn’t we be in a position to wrap up the same faster?

[Singha]

so the dog and pony show has finally hit the road ! hallejulah !

I am almost 100% now that I spotted the KC10 extender
http://www.aviationexplorer.com/Commerc ... tanker.jpg

so if you saw a 4 engined kc135 they brought 2 tankers for whatever reason.

[nachiket]

In the case of the MKI the IAF wasn't impressed and opted for Israeli,French/Indian stuff instead of buying the aircraft off the shelf. The might not be able to do that in the case of the Mig-35

If we get involved early in the project there is no reason we can’t crunch the timelines to incorporate non-Russian equipments. When MKI was being re-configured for IAF, we were starting with a blank slate in terms of experience in selection of equipment, integration and testing. Now, some 9 years later and having worked on MKI, LCA, upgrades on Bison, etc shouldn’t we be in a position to wrap up the same faster?

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the flight trials which are beginning soon, all equipment aboard the aircraft will be evaluated as well. So if much of the avionics are to be changed later on it makes no sense to conduct the flight trials now. IMHO if the IAF buys the Mig-35 it'll be the same version as fielded in the trials with all Russian equipment on board. Lets see if it stands up to IAF expectations. Hope it does, since its the cheapest available. But I'm skeptical.

[nashCS]

You are right. it was a three engined aircraft. my identification of the tanker is wrong.

[pankajs]

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the flight trials which are beginning soon, all equipment aboard the aircraft will be evaluated as well. So if much of the avionics are to be changed later on it makes no sense to conduct the flight trials now. IMHO if the IAF buys the Mig-35 it'll be the same version as fielded in the trials with all Russian equipment on board. Lets see if it stands up to IAF expectations. Hope it does, since its the cheapest available. But I'm skeptical.

Another option might be to follow MKI model. The delivery started as SU-30 followed by SU-30 MK and lastly SU-30 MKI standard. The initial batches where retrofitted and brought up to the MKI standard later. The above may not be exactly how it worked out then but near abouts.

[Singha]

sounds like the two hornets landed, the kc10 flew on slowly, turned left and went in again to land from the east.

so the eagle has landed in the coop. gee my skin is being irradiated by the APG79 already...I feel smarter...more networked....

[kit]

sounds like the two hornets landed, the kc10 flew on slowly, turned left and went in again to land from the east.

so the eagle has landed in the coop. gee my skin is being irradiated by the APG79 already...I feel smarter...more networked....

I guess its all those smart nanobots coursing in your blood

[AmitR]

sounds like the two hornets landed, the kc10 flew on slowly, turned left and went in again to land from the east.

so the eagle has landed in the coop. gee my skin is being irradiated by the APG79 already...I feel smarter...more networked....

You are bugged now. Mods delete this members account immediately before he spreads the virus.

[Singha]

blr being home of ASTE, the raw performance and avionics part of test would surely be done here , while uptime & ACM performance more likely to be tested in Leh and Jodhpur typical field conditions.

I feel different...a mouse scurrying through the grass in jayanagar is so loud in my ear....Aaargghhh...I am changing..becoming a tx/rx node part of the Hive Mind array...

[nachiket]

Does anyone know if they'll be testing one aircraft type at a time or there will be two teams testing two different types simultaneously to speed up the process?
Probably depends on how many test pilots and evaluation staff is available.