MRCA News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 03 Oct 2009 14:44

Excellent pics of MiG-35.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Gaur » 03 Oct 2009 15:19

^^ Nice pics. :)

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 03 Oct 2009 15:46

My heart loves Mig 29 for its supermanuverability, beautiful shape & the best IRST in the world.

But my mind loves Ef2k for its 60kn drythurst engines, for its 90kn afterburning power. For having smaller Radar signature. For the continuous growth prospects for being in the air force of 4 + 1 countries.

For:
a.) Highest percentage of composites, if....if complete tot happens and we get full capability to manufacture our own composite that will be a big spinoff for MCA, LCA Mk. 2
b.) Because of its big nose Ef2k can have 1500 TRMs. Maybe biggest amongst all the contenders barring Mig 35.
c.) TOT on GaN which would be best base for the AESAs. Even if the semi cooked CAESAR has 30% capability of SH I think it's fine for next 6-7 years. By then our own superpower in sofwares can take over and develop further.
d.) Political package offered by the consortium whatever it means whether Kashmir or Chinese regarding AP.
e.) Most important if.........if....O how this jingo wishes....it can happen: total tot on EJ200 including the Single Crystal. Not to mention 60kn of dry thurst in the engine with 30% of growth possibility. We can use the same for our MCA.
f.) Impressed the hell out of Indian pilots in Indradhanush.
g.) Supercruise: Could be scrambled quickly to NE in case the forward airbases are damaged.
h.) 2nd most manuverable jet after Mig 35.
i.) This could bring new trainings and strategies from the 2 most experienced and the successful warfighting countries in last 300 years (Britain, Germany).

2. Minuses:
a.) Completely new infrastructure would be needed.
b.) Totally new missile inventory would be needed. Which brings additional cost + more inventory. I would prefer Python 5 + Meteor +
c.) SUPEREXPENSIVE, while IAF has stated its not giving any brownie points over the parameters they have given, so if any cheaper AC jumps those parameters then it's kaput for EF.
d.) lack of commitment from the partners, italy saying its not interested in the AESA even in T3 they are going for MESA. UK is dying to wash its hands of the whole thing.
e.) lack of air to ground capabilities.

BurhanGabaji
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 17 Sep 2009 11:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby BurhanGabaji » 03 Oct 2009 16:49

[quote="Manish_Sharma"]My heart loves Mig 29 for its supermanuverability, beautiful shape & the best IRST in the world.

2. Minuses:

Another important minus factor is that, Incase of any decision making it would take a long time as it is a consorium.This would delay lot of proceedings.
The best european bird would be Rafale.

BurhanGabaji
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 17 Sep 2009 11:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby BurhanGabaji » 03 Oct 2009 16:51

Igorr wrote:Excellent pics of MiG-35.

Excellent Pics. The best deeal would be by breaking the deal between Rafale & Mig or Super Horny & Mig.

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby dorai » 03 Oct 2009 17:14

The new Gripens have additional engine cooling besides the WWC. This can be seen on the Gripen NG Demonstrator and Gripen Thailand in the form of a a new air intake on the rear underside.

Another point is the US engine where the proposal to Brazil and comment to India see how GE is really with them...

http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations ... brazil.htm

A comprehensive Technology Transfer

* Full maintenance capability in Brazil for the Gripen NG engine.


Saab signalled the same for India during a recent interview.

http://www.stratpost.com/gripen-hardsells-new-aesa-radar-low-cost-for-mmrca

Gripen rubbishes reports that a large part of the aircraft is US-made and also denies that the GE 414 engine will be subject to us technology transfer or End use Monitoring conditions. “We have about thirty five percent in the C/D. We have a lot less in the Gripen NG. A lot less than thirty five per cent. As we understand it, it’s related to very advanced technology, bought under the FMS (Foreign Military Sales) case, where you buy the stuff directly from the US government. And that goes for US weapons for instance, so if the Indian Air Force buys US weapons, I’m sure they’re going to be subject to End Use Monitoring. But the rest of the equipment, the Direct Commercial Sales, as we understand it, is not subject to End Use Monitoring, “he elaborates, adding, “It’s an American engine. And General Electric have provided a very comprehensive technology transfer package, so I don’t see that being affected.”


http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations/News/2007/070702_GEengine.htm

During his visit to Sweden last week, when he met Swedish Deputy Prime Minister Maud Olofsson and senior executives at Investor AB, General Electric (GE) Managing Director Jeff Immelt commented on the GE’s industrial partnership with Saab on the Gripen Demo programme. “Gripen is a very important programme for GE, as we want to sell aero engines outside of the US” he said.


It is of course also possible to order spare parts in advance based on operational use.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 03 Oct 2009 17:20

BurhanGabaji wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:My heart loves Mig 29 for its supermanuverability, beautiful shape & the best IRST in the world.

2. Minuses:

Another important minus factor is that, Incase of any decision making it would take a long time as it is a consorium.This would delay lot of proceedings.
The best european bird would be Rafale.


Rafale with Peeny tiny nose, and wimpy 50kn engines? Huh no way!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21053
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 03 Oct 2009 17:50

I think that the costing of the rivals I gave much earlier is being borne out by recent revelations,such as the Brazilian order.If the IAF wants to be super-smart,rather than being merely smart and aim or demand a major combat aircraft inventory of 1000+,it needs to acquire both quality and quantity.The quality we have in the SU-30MI,to be even surpassed in the next decade by the 5th-gen fighter.It is in the quantity dept. that we lag behind and as the saying goes,"there's safety in numbers",especially when we have to plan for and deal with a probable coordinated Sino-Pak military mischief.The quanttity we can get by acquiring the most cost-effective fighter of the lot,easiest to assimilate into the IAF as well,the MIG-35.With the money saved here,we could also acquire a western tech aircraft that has a future in its technology,which will give us some extra tech (apart from that developed for the 5th-gen fighter) for developing our future MCA.Producing more Jaguar UGs and LCAs too will add to the numbers also in a very cost-effective way and the IAF will be able to have a comfortable numerical and qualitative advantage over Pak,while being able to ward off any challenge from China.

However,unless the defence budget is raised to 4% of the GDP at least,in a decades time we will be so far behind China,which has indigenised through begging,borrowing and stealing technology,that it will be impossibloe to catch up.Furthermore,Sino-Pak defence cooperation will take a quantum leap especially if China transfers to Pak its latest cruise and ballistic missile technology.As one defence commentator said a few days ago on telly,"POK has become COK,Chinese Occupied Kashmir".In fact,Pakistan will be transformed into a military bastion of China from where it can dominate the entrance and exit of all Gulf shipping.This is its aim as I've been saying for two+ decades.Its new infrastructure being built in POK indicates that it plans to transfer large numbers of troops from Tibet through Pak as part of its long term plans.

Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 03 Oct 2009 19:02

Ajatshatru wrote:Don't remember the exact source now but had read somewhere years back that IAF needs approx. 62 squadrons for an effective power projection.

Not 62, it is 42.

Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 03 Oct 2009 19:36

Ajatshatru wrote:Jamalbhai, not 42 but 62 was the figure stated for a real effective power projection.

IAF fighter squadrons to rise to 42 by 2022: Antony
Sir,
Govt has sanctioned 39.5 for effective power,but we would be 42 by 2022

rajeshks
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 22:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby rajeshks » 03 Oct 2009 22:02

Jamal K. Malik wrote:
Ajatshatru wrote:Jamalbhai, not 42 but 62 was the figure stated for a real effective power projection.

IAF fighter squadrons to rise to 42 by 2022: Antony
Sir,
Govt has sanctioned 39.5 for effective power,but we would be 42 by 2022



We should also consider when this 39.5 sq strength was approved and what kind of machines were available at that point of time. Now the quality of machines improved and we can even do with less num of machines. But then its better to have atleast 50 sq, few for foreign deployment:)

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 03 Oct 2009 23:29

Jamal K. Malik wrote:
Ajatshatru wrote:Don't remember the exact source now but had read somewhere years back that IAF needs approx. 62 squadrons for an effective power projection.

Not 62, it is 42.


Jamal this number of btween 62 to 63 has been mentioned as ideal against both China and Pakistan. On this forum and many other places. I have also heard it.

bhavik
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 26 Aug 2009 02:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby bhavik » 04 Oct 2009 00:54

russia is reliable partner?
sales do matter as do its sales to china/porkistan for JF-10 or JF-17 engines ... which may be same Mig35 "RD33" Klimov engine ...

remember most of chinese planes are russian copies like porkis nukes are chinese copies?

Mig35 should be out of race .. its not even i production yet and without our order it wont even have a production line ..

sourab_c
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 14 Feb 2009 18:07
Location: around

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby sourab_c » 04 Oct 2009 02:11

rajeshks wrote:
We should also consider when this 39.5 sq strength was approved and what kind of machines were available at that point of time. Now the quality of machines improved and we can even do with less num of machines. But then its better to have atleast 50 sq, few for foreign deployment:)




An increased squadron strength of 2.5 by 2022 is not an ambitious plan at all, especially considering the additional southward deployment of the IAF in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. As far as the quality of the planes go, we have to consider that we will be up against more advanced opponents too. Not to mention that we will be fighting on two fronts simultaneously.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby prabir » 04 Oct 2009 20:48

I think 2 vendors will get the deal -

Scenario 1 -

1> F-18, so that LCA program can get help with GE 414 engines and other help
2> Mig 35, so that India and Russia can jointly export LCA with RD 33 engines

Scenario 2 -

If US talks too much on CTBT, NPT and does not co-operate with LCA program, then, we can have a combination of Rafale and Mig 35.

We cannot ignore Mig 35 as it will be easy to induct and India can get very good help in making next generation engines.

vivekmehta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 82
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 18:19
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vivekmehta » 04 Oct 2009 21:22

two types are out of question, i think Russia already have got 50 more MKI + 29 Mig29K order in kitty now that should keep them happy. surprise horse may be rafale only if they price it right .....

Mihir.D
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 08:50
Location: Land Of Zero :D !

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Mihir.D » 04 Oct 2009 21:46

prabir wrote:I think 2 vendors will get the deal -

Scenario 1 -

1> F-18, so that LCA program can get help with GE 414 engines and other help
2> Mig 35, so that India and Russia can jointly export LCA with RD 33 engines


Instead of the Mig 35 we should just go for the Mig 29k. That plane is already in production and the production can be pumped up to supply the IAF too. If we can have the f-18 E/F contending for the competition why not the Mig 29K ?
The Russians should have thought about this earlier. All or many of the features in the Mig 35 should have been incorporated into Mig-29K instead of going for a completely new fighter like Mig-35. What could have been better then having the IAF and Navy flying the same fighter.
Also at around 45million a piece it would have been the best deal.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 02:01

bhavik wrote:russia is reliable partner?
sales do matter as do its sales to china/porkistan for JF-10 or JF-17 engines ... which may be same Mig35 "RD33" Klimov engine ...

remember most of chinese planes are russian copies like porkis nukes are chinese copies?

Mig35 should be out of race .. its not even i production yet and without our order it wont even have a production line ..
India every time can achieve better engine , than China. THe most money, need to develop new more powerful engines, comes to Russia from China. Could be said, Russia keep the Indian advantage over China, paid up by China. It's only a method to save Indian money, instead taking the needed money as a return of overpricing engines sold to India.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Gaur » 05 Oct 2009 03:34

^^ Igorr, I am a staunch supporter of Russia. I believe they have helped us more than we could have hoped from any one else. And I want Mig-35 to win MRCA. But lately even I could not help being miffed at certain things. I get that Russia sells arms to China. I may not like it but I can understand that Russia needs funds. And as you said they always sell superior weapons to India. But what has really miffed Indians is the sale of rd-33 for JF-17s jointly developed by Pakistan and in serial production there. It is supplying weapon systems to a country which we are currently and constantly at military conflict with.
Think it like India supplying weapons to Chechen Rebels or Georgia. I do not need to say how that would be recieved in Russia.
But enough said, this is getting way OT.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 04:18

Parijat Gaur wrote: And as you said they always sell superior weapons to India. But what has really miffed Indians is the sale of rd-33 for JF-17s jointly developed by Pakistan and in serial production there. It is supplying weapon systems to a country which we are currently and constantly at military conflict with.
Think it like India supplying weapons to Chechen Rebels or Georgia. I do not need to say how that would be recieved in Russia.
What I can say, the Chinese sold it to Pakistan AGAINST the initial end user agreement. Then has been started a conflict about this issue. However, after the feverish negotiations (my only hope India was involved in) Moscow gave the permission retroactively. Putin was involved personally in this decision. Don't think, it was the best decision. However, the alternatives are not good too: the Pakis would buy more F-16 instead (what US always wanted indeed and pressured them for this). Now at least they are roped by the less advanced Chinese program.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Neshant » 05 Oct 2009 05:44

almost certain that russian approval would be needed to sell the rd-33 to anyone.

no way chinese would have just sold it as is.

suits russian interests however as they hope to sell more wares to India and hope India will buy it. they might protest publically but privately agree.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 05 Oct 2009 05:58

I do not any problem Russia selling RD-33 to any one who needs it , does India guarantee to Russia that they will not buy arms from US , France or some one else ?

India is free to buy arms as it desires , much the same way Russia is free to sell arms as desired , but Russia has been cautious not to sell big ticket item to Pakistan , considering the sensitivity of India to it

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Oct 2009 07:05

What am I still missing.

Russia sells India the RD-33, ToT and more. One report states in 2005, and another says in 2007. Never mind that, since India has got to KNOW this engine.

And, YET India wastes time diddling with the GE and EADS engine?

Then India goes back to Russia to check out the RD-33XXX? The same engine that it KNOWS about?

Wastes time, money and the induction of the LAC potentially by a few more years.

What am I missing?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 05 Oct 2009 09:18

both hands are playing pocket billiards just looking at russkie beauties. they have a reason too for that, in that whenever they try to remove the hands out of the pocket, the beauties threaten to boycott displays and other hairborne exercises.

the ddmite abstractness to specializations have been now totally maximized by invading russkies.

Daedalus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 42
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 00:57

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Daedalus » 05 Oct 2009 09:42

Mihir.D wrote:Instead of the Mig 35 we should just go for the Mig 29k. That plane is already in production and the production can be pumped up to supply the IAF too. If we can have the f-18 E/F contending for the competition why not the Mig 29K ?
The Russians should have thought about this earlier. All or many of the features in the Mig 35 should have been incorporated into Mig-29K instead of going for a completely new fighter like Mig-35. What could have been better then having the IAF and Navy flying the same fighter.
Also at around 45million a piece it would have been the best deal.


Let me try and explain why we should not go for Mig 29k and instead go for Mig 35.

1. Through the Indian MRCA competition IAF is looking for a medium aircraft by MTOW (Maximum Takeoff Weight) which is around 24 tons according to the requirements. The weight of Mig 29K, Mig 35 and F-18 is as follows:
Mig 29K : 24,500 kg (54,000 lb) - Is almost a medium aircraft by MRCA requirements.
Mig 35 : 29,700 kg (65,500 lb) - Is a medium aircraft.
F-18 : 51,550 lb (23,400 kg) - is almost a medium aircraft.

2. The Mig 29 is a point defense aircraft with only air to air and no air to ground or any other roles. The Mig 29 in IAF service is used as an interceptor and escort for Jags etc. Now the Mig 29K is a modified Mig 29 with 13 hard points capable of carrying bombs etc, it also has a updated 4-channel digital fly-by-wire flight control system but it does not mean it is capable of Multi role missions in the truest sense.

3. More over Mig 29K and the KUB are for carrier operations and has structural changes for that. Why should IAF buy these over weight and strengthened AC which will not suit them.

4. There are also small but important and effective changes structurally and other wise, like the redesign of the intakes etc.

5. Mig 35 is also open architecture enabling IAF to add more goodies from different sources later on.

Let me also state my opinion about this competition. Out of the 6 AC in this competition the Mig 35 is the best and the IAF should go for it just because it has better aerodynamic properties and has a good engine. I could not find if Mig 35 is made of composites or not, I hope this is the case since it will make the airframe stronger enabling the AC airframe to pull more gs. One more thing, I saw a video of F-18 doing lot of stunts etc, FYI it is an advertisement from the manufacturer. I believe almost all of the western competitors have some kind of promotional videos and never seen Russian companies having these kind of videos except for at airshows, I guess they are new to the whole capitalism business :D.

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby kmkraoind » 05 Oct 2009 11:24

It seems clear that the MRCA is going to US teens. With apparent bullying China, India does want to take chances. If follow up of 50 SU-MK1 and 29 Mig-29K is right then, Russia has no qualms in ordering US the MRCA. The way India is going to order Javelin anti-tank missile through govt-to-govt order seems that India does not want to take any chances with regards to China. Since we are not numerically superior to China, at least we need a decisive quality over what China fields against India, which are only guaranteed by Western birds. Since EF and Rafael are damn expensive and does not give any additional geo-political benefit, the choice lies with US teens. I have a question to seniors, in the following 2 options, which is more potent and lethal.

128 EFs or Rafaels (100 million x 128 = 12. billions)
or
128 F-18s or F-16 plus 4 Awacs plus 6-8 refullers (80-55 million x 128 = 10-7 billions + 4 billions)

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 12:19

Neshant wrote:almost certain that russian approval would be needed to sell the rd-33 to anyone.

no way chinese would have just sold it as is.

suits russian interests however as they hope to sell more wares to India and hope India will buy it. they might protest publically but privately agree.
I don't think it was a wise consistent decision to allow re-export RD-93 to Pakistan , especially I remember, how it was run then. It was a sequence of contradicting steps, doing by Russians, when the issue has been disclosed. Seemingly there are some interest groups struggling between them.

If comparing the Pakistani problem for India with the Chechen rebels problem for Russia is needed to say Pakistan is openly supported by two strongest world economics, one of them is the military strongest state. So, let be realistic in our expectations how it could be solved. Let's imagine Russian doesn't sell weapon to China at all, including the engines for hermetic prevention reexport to Islamabad. What will happen then? I'm sure next day the relations between Russia and China will be deteriorated and EU will sell China the weapons and the engines, like they already do so in 70-80th. Why they will not, while the most strategic problem for EU is all time Russia, not China. And instead of RD-93 JF-17 would have EJ200, why could not? In such a case India would chose an upgraded RD-93 with TVN for sure, but strategically the situation were not shifted in India's favor, were it.

Judging by this logic Russia will not stop selling China defensive weapon and dual-used materials like engine. This is clear. I have only the questions about the contradicting RD-93 to Pak story, because I think how it was made Russians were pressured by Chinese and lost prestige.

NRao wrote:What am I still missing.

Russia sells India the RD-33, ToT and more. One report states in 2005, and another says in 2007. Never mind that, since India has got to KNOW this engine.

And, YET India wastes time diddling with the GE and EADS engine?

Then India goes back to Russia to check out the RD-33XXX? The same engine that it KNOWS about?

Wastes time, money and the induction of the LAC potentially by a few more years.

What am I missing?
You wrote wright, India doesn't need additional request of proposition to know RD-33. So , they didn't send it to Klimov. But how could they compare it with the Western engines before they know them well? For sure they can do it only now, after the thorough evaluation.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 12:28

Daedalus wrote: I believe almost all of the western competitors have some kind of promotional videos and never seen Russian companies having these kind of videos except for at airshows, I guess they are new to the whole capitalism business :D.
Hmm.. some videos the Russia today channel has http://rttv.ru/A/search?q=MiG-35&x=0&y=0

abhi.enggr
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2009 11:57

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby abhi.enggr » 05 Oct 2009 12:38

hi gurus
can anyone tell wether the thurst vectoring technique which is there in mig-35 (optional) is an advantage in air combat.
my understanding goes this way..
it is very good for maneavourability but will this be any help in case of evading incoming missiles etc.
also in present and future wars i believe BVR capacity is more important and most wars will be won without doing actual dogfights and close combats if that is so will the thurst vectoring will be a major bonus for mig-35.
commnets awaited.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 12:56

abhi.enggr wrote:hi gurus
can anyone tell wether the thurst vectoring technique which is there in mig-35 (optional) is an advantage in air combat.
Overall yes, and is depending of the kind of mission. Enough to say F-22 has TVN too. While the 'Klimov's KLIVT TVNs are even more advanced since they are all aspect. It's especislly worth for one-engine plane however. Look here:
'The RD-33MK will be used as a base model for future improved jet fighter engines. In particular, it may be equipped with Klimov’s proprietary thrust vectoring nozzle that enhances combat efficiency by 12-15%.'

KLIVT TVN was developed as a part of the canceled MiG's own 5th gen fighter program. However, I don't think in case of MiG-35 India will be too interested in TVNs since it already has Su-30MKI as a top notch fighter and MiG-29K is coming without TVNs. But the KLIVT TVN is much more logically to see on LCA\N-LCA, since it would give it a clear advantage over JF-17 in close maneuverable combat.
Last edited by Igorr on 05 Oct 2009 13:02, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Oct 2009 13:02

You wrote wright, India doesn't need additional request of proposition to know RD-33. So , they didn't send it to Klimov. But how could they compare it with the Western engines before they know them well? For sure they can do it only now, after the thorough evaluation.


The EADS I agree, the GE I do not. DRDO/ADA/IAF KNOW the GE engine very, very well.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 13:04

NRao wrote: DRDO/ADA/IAF KNOW the GE engine very, very well.
f404 but not the f414, dont they? As to the last development around RD-33 they did go to Chernyshev plant for this probably. I expect some enhanced variant was shown for them.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Oct 2009 13:15

It is my understanding that the "IAF" has two very well understood relationships: Sukhoi (via the MKI) and the GE team (via the IN version of the F404). True there is a difference between 404 and 414, but what still confuses me is such a late entry of the Russian engine. This is very late in the LCA engine saga - do you agree?

Anyways, let me move to a different topic WRT the Russian engine. Do we have a rough time-line for it? Do you see it being a totally different variant of some existing engine? I would hate for the LCA engine to get into the Sitara/HJT-36 like situation. I understand that new technologies need time to develop, etc, but God, this is getting to be a circus where the animals are just running around.

Mihir.D
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 08:50
Location: Land Of Zero :D !

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Mihir.D » 05 Oct 2009 13:41

Daedalus wrote:
Mihir.D wrote:3. More over Mig 29K and the KUB are for carrier operations and has structural changes for that. Why should IAF buy these over weight and strengthened AC which will not suit them.

Dude,
The F-18 E/F are as much for carrier operations as 29k and Kub, so why not 29Ks.
The Mig-35 is only going to be ready for production by 2013 by which time we could have a couple of squadrons of the Mig-29K already in service since the 29k are already being manufactured. Not to mention commonality with the navy 29k would be a great positive.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 620
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Igorr » 05 Oct 2009 14:16

NRao wrote:True there is a difference between 404 and 414, but what still confuses me is such a late entry of the Russian engine. This is very late in the LCA engine saga - do you agree?
Anyways, let me move to a different topic WRT the Russian engine. Do we have a rough time-line for it? Do you see it being a totally different variant of some existing engine?

1) If they didn't do it publicly , it does not mean they didn't evaluate it in silence. RD-33 was never rejected officially like M88 was. Since we can see only a publicly projection of the reality, we always have to assume we don't know something.
2) They have already RD-33MK variant in the pocket with bottom gear placement, 9t wet thrust, 9.4 t taking-off mode and the TVN. What is needed more? Looking retrospectively on their progress with RD-33 I can predict 10 t on taking-of regime in some years if needed.
Mihir.D wrote:
The Mig-35 is only going to be ready for production by 2013 by which time we could have a couple of squadrons of the Mig-29K already in service since the 29k are already being manufactured. Not to mention commonality with the navy 29k would be a great positive.
If so, the development would be rather close to Su-30MKI program, based initially on the carrier based variant, even in its designations:
Su-30K , MiG-29K - Korabelny i.e. 'maritime' -->
Su-30MK, MiG-29MK - modernizirovanny korabelny i.e. 'modernized maritime'
Su-30MKI , MiG-20MKI- modernizirovanny korabelny indiyskiy i.e. 'Indian modernized maritime' :rotfl:

rajeshks
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 22:43

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby rajeshks » 05 Oct 2009 16:53

Mihir.D wrote:Dude,
The F-18 E/F are as much for carrier operations as 29k and Kub, so why not 29Ks.
The Mig-35 is only going to be ready for production by 2013 by which time we could have a couple of squadrons of the Mig-29K already in service since the 29k are already being manufactured. Not to mention commonality with the navy 29k would be a great positive.


Mig 29K was for CBG air defence but MMRCA is for a different purpose altogether. We are buying not just for numbers. SH has a lot of additional capabilities which makes it a good candidate. Again Mig35 has a lot of additional capabilities compared to Mig 29K.

Daedalus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 42
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 00:57

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Daedalus » 05 Oct 2009 17:24

rajeshks wrote:
Mihir.D wrote:Dude,
The F-18 E/F are as much for carrier operations as 29k and Kub, so why not 29Ks.
The Mig-35 is only going to be ready for production by 2013 by which time we could have a couple of squadrons of the Mig-29K already in service since the 29k are already being manufactured. Not to mention commonality with the navy 29k would be a great positive.


Mig 29K was for CBG air defence but MMRCA is for a different purpose altogether. We are buying not just for numbers. SH has a lot of additional capabilities which makes it a good candidate. Again Mig35 has a lot of additional capabilities compared to Mig 29K.



Amen to that.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Oct 2009 18:12

Thanks Igorr.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby srai » 06 Oct 2009 01:47

Jamal K. Malik wrote:
Ajatshatru wrote:Jamalbhai, not 42 but 62 was the figure stated for a real effective power projection.

IAF fighter squadrons to rise to 42 by 2022: Antony
Sir,
Govt has sanctioned 39.5 for effective power,but we would be 42 by 2022


Let's see how this adds up:
Known
12 sqdns MKI (230 a/cs)
7 sqdns MRCA (126 a/cs)
7 sqdns LCA (2 MK.I and 5 MK.II) (~130 a/cs)
3 sqdns MiG-29UPG (~60 a/cs)
3 sqdns Mirage-2000UPG (~ 50 a/cs)
5 sqdns Jaguar UPG (~ 90 a/cs)
-----------------------
Total: 37 sqdns
Note: MiG-21s and 27s retired by 2022.

Probable
3 sqdns MKI (50 additional a/cs as reported recently)
3 sqdns MRCA (60 options exercised but likely only after 2022 or like MKI manufactured directly in the country of origin because slow deliveries by HAL for the 108 a/cs)
2 sqdns PAK-FA (just getting productionized and inducted)
-----------------------------
Additional Total: 8 sqdns

By 2022, Jaguars, MiG-29s, and Mirage 2000s will begin to be number plated and likely be all retired by 2030. So these 11 squadrons will be gradually replaced by the 3 sqdns of MRCA options (or even more ordered subsequently - 2 sqdns) and new squadrons of PAK-FA. It is not yet clear if more orders of the LCA will take place around 2020 after the 5 sqdns of MK.II planned.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8100
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 06 Oct 2009 03:10

Igorr wrote:... If so, the development would be rather close to Su-30MKI program, based initially on the carrier based variant, even in its designations:
Su-30K , MiG-29K - Korabelny i.e. 'maritime' -->
Su-30MK, MiG-29MK - modernizirovanny korabelny i.e. 'modernized maritime'
Su-30MKI , MiG-20MKI- modernizirovanny korabelny indiyskiy i.e. 'Indian modernized maritime' :rotfl:


Doesn't the "K" stand for "Kommercheskiy" meaning "Commercial". i.e. Export Version?
AFAIK Su-30MKI stands for "Modernizirovannyi Kommercheskiy Indiskiy" not "korabelny" as you are suggesting.

EDIT: Ok, now I realize that you were joking. :oops:


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests