Vote for the MRCA

[andy B]

I have a question regarding the IRST tank on the S.Hornet. Given that it sits under the belly of the aircraft doesnt that limit the FOV of the sensor?

I mean compared to the F 16 or any of the Migs or Sukhoi or the Eurofighter where the IRST sits smack on the nose where it has nothing above it or on the sides whereas in the F18 it has the fuesalage right on top so compared to the IRST of say a Sukhoi which has a clean FOV this things wont be able to track targets once they move above the aircraft or beyond certain angles

[Nandan D]

I voted F-18 Super Hornet, though Rafale would be an excellent choice too.
I don't think the F-16 will be a good choice, but, (and this is absolutely no criteria for selection) , if the IAF chose the VIPER , it would be absolutely devastating to the PAF morale.

With any other choice (however superior) the Pakis could always kid themselves , by saying that their F-16 is better. But when the indians have a decisively better version, in larger numbers, it would be devastating for their morale and H&D.

[GeorgeWelch]

> India is not a partner on any level like a bunch of other countries.

That would be because they've never indicated any desire to buy it.

To say that India would be a partner like the NATO allies if it buys more of US products is a laughable assertion.

And comparing Israel to any other NATO ally of the US itself, leave alone India, just doesn't make sense

If you will go back and look at the context, we were discussing being an F-35 partner.

VijayKumarSinha was asking how all these other countries got to be partners in the F-35 program and India didn't.

The answer is simply that India didn't want to be an F-35 partner.

[govardhanks]

The answer is simply that India didn't want to be an F-35 partner.

Not to continue the previous discussion. my opinion.
There is nothing India does't want to be a partner of, when it comes to Science and technology (ethics of course).
We want F35 too but we don't want to further increase the already set arms race.(It may clearly bring some kind of status to India, which it is not yet ready).
If we see the F35 program and partners, India is not yet ready for such a thing. It still has so many other problems to solve.
It signed the 5th gen a/c contract with russies because it wil not bring any new status.

[Katare]

Anyway, somehow no one takes offense when France supplies top notch weapons (like AIP equipped Agostas) to Pakistan for use against India without any restriction/EUM. But when Swede (AWACS), Germans (Subs) and US (F16) does the same people have a different Maapdand (standard). Even Russia has started supplying Pakistan like RD33 engines for its aircrafts and Mi helicopters.

No one would be so worked up if the US sold the weapons to the pakis instead of gifting them. Check out the link and quote that I posted in page 3 from the CRS report, where it states that billions of US dollars went to arm Pakistan for fight against India, and none of those weapons were the kind that could be used against militants.

If the pakis wasted their meagre resources to purchase super-expensive arms, like the old SU, then they would be on their way down by now. But US propping it up and gifting away arms to the pakistan which can be used against India only is enough indications of how much the US "cares" about India.

And as for people who claim that US gifts to pakistan doesn't alter the military balance, why should even one Indian citizen die due to these gifts from US to Pakis? Will the US accept it if India sells any arms to Cuba? Why did it even protest selling of arms from Russia to Venezuela?

Ravi,

No one gives nothing, to nobody for free. If you think USA doesn't extract a good price for its goodies from Pakistan than you are mistaken. The cost may not be in hard cash but that would be being very generous to pukes.

Infect when Pak wants to buy anything from USA with "cash only" it has been simply refused the option. Even paid for F16 were refused to it. Pakistan pays heftiest possible cost to USA for those weapons. And they get those weapons only when US wants to use nation of pakistan as a condom to screw someone in that part of the world.


Still not very convenient or comforting to India but other countries have their interests and some times they don’t match with our interests. We always cooperate with Iran, Arabs and Russia regardless of what USA/West thinks/wants. We did get our nukes and missiles against the wishes and interests of western world.

So my theory is cooperate where interests converge, watch the grey area and defend where our interests diverge with any country.

[Kartik]

And they get those weapons only when US wants to use nation of pakistan as a condom to screw someone in that part of the world.

[arunsrinivasan]

France has sold a lot of arms to TSP, & it is actively trying to lift the arms embargo on China, so far without much luck. Why does everyone on BR treat it with kid-gloves?

edit typos

[negi]

Mig-35

[putnanja]

Ravi,

No one gives nothing, to nobody for free. If you think USA doesn't extract a good price for its goodies from Pakistan than you are mistaken. The cost may not be in hard cash but that would be being very generous to pukes.

Infect when Pak wants to buy anything from USA with "cash only" it has been simply refused the option. Even paid for F16 were refused to it. Pakistan pays heftiest possible cost to USA for those weapons. And they get those weapons only when US wants to use nation of pakistan as a condom to screw someone in that part of the world.

Katare, that might be US' intention, but that is not fully true. The US expected pak to fully root out the taliban in its NWFP. However, the pakis have done precious little there. And all of us have read reports from the US ground commanders in Afghanistan on how the talibunnies run across the border to pak with the paki guards bing mute spectators.

Whatever cost that the US thinks the pakis are paying is of no use to India. And from India's perspective, the pakis got free weapons for doing little in NWFP/Afghanistan. So it is India which has ended up paying a huge cost and not Pakistan. The US as usual got hoodwinked by the pakis and is now in a trishanku position.

It is only when the cost paid by pakistan leads to more destability/implosion of pakis that it would really help India. Otherwise, the cost paid by pakis will help US but not India.

[SShah]

Looking at the size of this acquisition and the stakes involved, the contract must go to a couple of vendors rather than just a single vendor. Also, the number of the MRCA aircrafts should be increased to at least 150+. All geo-political situations suggest that UPA government is all set to award this massive deal to Boeing for the Super bugs, such move will only start a new era of US dominant and US influenced India. Foreign, military, social and economic – all decisions of future Indian government will have US influence – (huge, just a little or negligible). Are we ready to relinquish our rich and unique aptitude and sustainability of past while making strategic decisions? Putting all eggs in one basket to a single vendor is not my vote. Anyone arming Pakistan won’t get my vote either.

[bhavik]

I do not care what the political / other aspects of selection of MRCA as long as we able to use it in time of war

If we focus only on needs of IAF & how can deploy various strategies/ roles with selected a/c and cost (if it is a constraint more valuable than winning wars) it gives different perspective.

I think it is mostly said by US aviators...
"For any given role or situation or mission there is a better plane than F18
but for all the roles / situations / missions no plane is better than F18"

F18) is known to play multiple roles at flick of switch -- can be operated on carrier decks.... has "growler" variant... can be used over sea / land. And it is truly multi-role. F18 can fill many shoes at IAF. I do hope based on US navy experiences... "Super Hornet" needs lesser maintenance.

So my vote goes to F18E/F.(Super Hornet and not the earlier smaller F18's

[Sandipan]

Though I voted for Rafale, but just for the sake of argument I think SU 35BM can be a very good choice. I dont know why it was not included in the RFQ, but it is a single pilot fighter with lot of commonality with SU 30 MKI.

[GeorgeWelch]

Putting all eggs in one basket to a single vendor is not my vote.

That eliminates Russia.

Anyone arming Pakistan won’t get my vote either.

That eliminates everyone else.

[PratikDas]

Putting all eggs in one basket to a single vendor is not my vote.

That eliminates Russia.

Anyone arming Pakistan won’t get my vote either.

That eliminates everyone else.

Since only the US insists on the EUMA and our ability to possibly use an American MRCA against Pakistan could be met with heavy resistance thanks to Pakistan's Non-NATO US-ally status, that would be one great reason to exclude American MRCAs, right?

[GeorgeWelch]

Since only the US insists on the EUMA and our ability to possibly use an American MRCA against Pakistan could be met with heavy resistance thanks to Pakistan's Non-NATO US-ally status, that would be one great reason to exclude American MRCAs, right?

The EUMA has nothing to do with being used against Pakistan.

India is a more important US ally than Pakistan.

If for some reason the US wants to apply pressure, they can do so regardless of which fighter is picked. It's not like this one choice will make India either immune or utterly vulnerable to US pressure. For one, it's less than 20% of India's combat fleet. For another, India has many pressure points besides fighters.

Fortunately the US has no desire to make life difficult for India and wants to become friends. The last embargoes were imposed because it was required by law, not because they necessarily wanted to. Now that the law has been changed I doubt you will ever see a repeat.

Not to mention there has been a geopolitical/economic shift and India is now far more important to the US than it had been.

[vasu_ray]

George, appreciate your persistence

if F-18 is selected, do you think there will be TOT on F-414 including single crystal blades? likewise if the F-16IN is selected, TOT on its engine will be transferred as well?

It would be hard for the Rafales and Euros to do engine TOT losing on their long term competitive edge, if we were interested in the Russian ones, we would have gotten them by now. Your quiver of gas turbines seem to have more options.

that move might as well erase some of the bad karma earned by embargoing the LCA development

[PratikDas]

GeorgeWelch thanks for your feedback.

FWIW, I was defending progress with the EUMA and the TSA as a means for Indian scitech industry to move forward and I still maintain that view. My mistake was choosing the MRCA thread for it and the spectacle of yours truly getting smacked around is available with a few clicks.

My opposition to some of your non-technical comments emphatically stating a positive future is the result of me being unable to find any hard evidence in support of your statements.

[GeorgeWelch]

My opposition to some of your non-technical comments emphatically stating a positive future is the result of me being unable to find any hard evidence in support of your statements.

Well of course there's no such thing as hard evidence of the future

By it's very nature, statements about the future are based on belief and interpretation.

But here is some 'hard evidence' about why I am excited about the future of US-India relations

Economic:
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5330.html

1998 exports: $3,564
1998 imports: $8,237

2008 exports: $17,682
2008 imports: $25,704

The United States is India's largest trading partner and largest investment partner

Earlier trade with India was hardly a blip on the radar, but it is now becoming a significant factor. And as economic ties become rapidly stronger, pressure to avoid confrontation goes up dramatically. A lot of companies (and hence jobs and hence voters) depend on good relations with India. If something goes south, there will be intense lobbying to get it fixed.

Political:
From a US perspective, India isn't so closely tied with Russia.

GeoPolitical:
The rise of China is absolutely a factor. The US desperately wants (my opinion) India to become a superpower capable of counterbalancing China in the region. A weak India does the US no favors.

[Drevin]

Ok I was finally able to vote!!! (wasnt gettin option till today)
voted for rafale.

because its got low rcs, got an aesa in production, and is twin engined.
lifetime costs will be cheap even though intial capital investment wll be high.
The 10ton payload capacity also is best-in-class.

[MarcH]

Well, if it's only about foreign investments, tech cooperation and trade volume the combined numbers of Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK beat the US by a healthy margin.

[GeorgeWelch]

Well, if it's only about foreign investments, tech cooperation and trade volume the combined numbers of Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK beat the US by a healthy margin.

The point of the discussion was whether there is reason for optimism about the future of relations between the US and India (ie the US isn't going to try to screw with India), and I believe there is.

edit: Nevertheless your assertion doesn't seem to be true

http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=51058

Trade 2007-08
(Rs. In crores)
USA 168013
Germany 60335
UK 46909
Italy and Spain don't make the list (sub 35000)

[putnanja]

Trade by itself doesn't matter much. Isn't china the biggest trade partner of both US and EU?

The US also needs to determine what type of relationship it wants with India. There is a trust deficit with US, and the new Obama administration is not proving to be as India friendly as the previous administration. They seem to be shifting to a more china-centric policy. And their pakistan policy hasn't made any sense for decades. The US DoS is still staffed by the cold-war NPA centric bureaucrats and the new appointees by Clinton/Obama aren't any different in their thinking. Appointment of people like Robin Raphael to the region isn't good tidings for India.

Does the US really have any plan of long-term relationship with India ? No one seems to have told the Obama administration about it.

[Mahesh_R]

I was just thinking if Indian government puts a new clause saying
" MRCA vendor will NOT sell the same product to any of the Indian neighbours ( though it should be Pak and China...)"

What are the chances that we can sell this policy to the vendors at this point of time...

I am not sure abt others but Mig will surely accept this condition...

what do you say guys ?

[MarcH]

Trade 2007-08
(Rs. In crores)
USA 168013
Germany 60335
UK 46909
Italy and Spain don't make the list (sub 35000)

I only had a look at the latest published numbers from may 2009. Maybe that blurred the picture a little bit. But I guess the British tea consume alone will make a huge contribution to Indias foreign trade.

[Drevin]

With the capability to carry 10ton Rafale would be the best candidate for an indian hypersonic alcm.

I heard rafale may be the platform for a future yet to be named hypersonic alcm (even though this is of no use to us as mtcr exists). however rafale's airframe is a likely candidate as test bed. Another feather in the cap maybe. (Rafale F3 already uses ASMP-A mach 2.5 500-600km alcm)


MBDA sets up hypersonic test facility::mach 7.5

[GeorgeWelch]

With the capability to carry 10ton Rafale would be the best candidate for an indian hypersonic alcm.

The SH handles larger loads better than the Rafale.

[Drevin]

George I have no idea about the SH. But if u say so thats great.

[shiv]

The SH handles larger loads better than the Rafale.

The Rafale may be better for Indian nuclear weapon delivery, while the SH may be better for power generation

[Gerard]

Poll closes today

[kit]

I vote for the Typhoon.

[SagarP]

L'Eurofighter : supériorité aérienne (air superiority) Vs. Le Rafale : polyvalence avant tout (multi role fighter). IMHO the eurofighter is better suited for IAF's doctrine (defensive role) with MKIs in the offensive. I voted for Typhoon which will pack lote of punch with Meteor BVRAAM....

[PratikDas]

Its interesting to see that the vote ranks of the aircraft didn't change all that much after the first few days of voting. The ranks did see-saw a bit sometime in the middle but then settled back to those ranks.

Thanks Gerard for starting this thread.

[Cain Marko]

Didn't really need to vote, my parties took both majority and largest minority positions. My vote would have been for the Rafale or the 35 or the EF-2000 or even the Gripen. Just couldn't make up my mind.

CM.

[Nandan D]

i know it is a long way away, but any ideas on how the final selection will be made?
Meaning will the govt/ IAF decide aircraft X is what they want, or will there be multiple choices (X and Y) and then the government will launch negotiations?

[Patrick Cusack]

All the media both US and Indian reporting Pakistan has moded Harpoon to attack land sites in India. Also, some are also mentioning Turkey and Saudis as proxies for Pakistan to procure weapons. Pretty scary situation for India.

My questions
1) Will MRCA have ability to shoot down such missiles?
2) How fast are the Hapoons?

[Patrick Cusack]

Forward airfield deployment capability is very important and Gripen is the only one with this ability. A turn around of 20 minutes in battlefield is amazing.