MRCA News and Discussion

kidoman · Post by **kidoman** » 19 Oct 2009 02:38

saptarishi wrote: Israeli aerospace companies have reportedly entered the fray, offering to upgrade the Mirage-2000 for half the price being quoted by Dassault. The MoD, however, is not inclined to accept that offer...

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... er/373419/

Any specific reason why the Israeli offer of upgrading at half rates is not being considered?
We all know how good they are!!

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Oct 2009 02:41

Asit

after reading the interview regarding SU 30 production - you realise how far off we are

Unless we are in a position to withold critical parts in a JV - its still one sided and subject to pressure

And we are not even discussing the bits and pieces supply chain which works like one of the shops tucked in the gala at Saki naka.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 19 Oct 2009 02:59

Surya wrote:Unless we are in a position to withold critical parts in a JV - its still one sided and subject to pressure
.

Ofcourse we are susceptible to pressure and we shall continue to be in the same state, as long as we don't start producing high end weapon systems indigenously. However, as of now, India has no option but to choose in between the Americans, the Europeans, the French and the Russians.

Since Russia has stood by us in the thick and thin of action, and since our strategic relationships with them are much stronger than our relationship with any other country. So the perceived risk associated with Russia is much lower than the perceived risk attached with other countries. This definitely gives an edge to MIG 35.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Oct 2009 03:30

and thats where you , shankar and some will differ from me and some others.

You cannot cut risk by putting all your eggs in one basket.

move the Mig 35 production line - lock , stock and barrel (including supply chain) to India and we have a deal??

If the Russians love us so much I am sure they would not be averse to that after all we will be the largest Mig customer.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 19 Oct 2009 04:01

At present there are atleast 100 plus mIG 29s in storage in Russia if not many times more . At say 35 million a piece we can buy the whole lot 3.5 billion and quickly induct with new engines and radars that will give us close to six operating squadrons in one go .As the Mig 35 production ramps up we can replace upgrade stage wise just like we did with Su 30k

What makes you think that russia would give them to Inida? Plus most of those migs were found to have structural flaws.

sourab_c · Post by **sourab_c** » 19 Oct 2009 04:40

b_patel wrote:
Plus most of those migs were found to have structural flaws.

The issue with MiG 29s has already been discussed here, what exactly are you trying to achieve here stating such a statement?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Oct 2009 04:46

boss

thats shankar for you

Didn;t you know 100s of aircraft shoved in corners of various desolate airfields (I mean stored!!) can be easily pulled out and 60 pilots thrown in them and voila - we have 3 new squadrons??

Our Russian friends out of love and feelings for us had carefully greased them, shrink wrapped the aircraft, , and put them in nice dry toasty shelters because they knew sooner or later we would need them. Didn;t you see how easily the Gorshkov was quickly brought into IN service??

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 19 Oct 2009 05:25

Surya wrote: You cannot cut risk by putting all your eggs in one basket.

It is better to keep the eggs in one basket which is reliable than putting them in several baskets which have high chances of breaking down.

For decades our inventory has been dominated by the Russian systems. With an exception of Jaguar and Mirage 2000, our Air Force has always been a MIG heavy force. When it was not risky to rely on the Russians in the past, I don't think it is risky to rely on them even today.

At a holistic level, the track record of Russia has been very good. They gave us MIG 29, when it was not fully operational in their own Air Force. They allowed us to tweak with SU 30 and make it more advanced than anything which they had in their own arsenal. I don't think any other country in the world will give us so much of lee way. Add to this, their help in building INS Arihant, leasing of nuclear submarine, co-development of Brahmos, PAKFA/FGFA etc.

Can you think of any other country with whom we have had the same level of strategic ties?

Surya wrote: move the Mig 35 production line - lock , stock and barrel (including supply chain) to India and we have a deal?? If the Russians love us so much I am sure they would not be averse to that after all we will be the largest Mig customer.

So much of expectations from Russia!! Why don't we have even half the same expectations from the Americans or the French? I wonder if they would even let something like this happen.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 19 Oct 2009 05:27

The issue with MiG 29s has already been discussed here, what exactly are you trying to achieve here stating such a statement?

Read my entire post, it should be pretty obvious what im trying to say!

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Oct 2009 05:35

I am sure risk management depts would love to follow your philosophy

Ever wonder why the IAF always had a couple of western aircraft even when our global position was much worse than what it is now??

Wonder why the IAF would like the get the A330 tanker even though logical sense to get more IL tankers??

Please lets not go through the "they gave us so much " again - previous pages of this thread cover that.

M2K production line was an option -

The F16 production line is also a possibility

Its doubly important in Russias case because the supply chain is functioning in fits and starts.

m mittal · Post by **m mittal** » 19 Oct 2009 05:43

Someone always keeps deleting my messages without any follow-up.

I think some consider that BR forums are only their property and any views which don't sound the same note as theirs are deleted.

This is ridiculous and is not a behavior which projects democracy.

I have been a staunch follower of BR for almost 4-5 years as of now. Last year I had a email address which finally allowed me to join BR and I was so excited.

BUT I am very disappointed and I am quitting BR.

Newcomers beware, some guys in here consider these forums as their personal property.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 19 Oct 2009 06:18

Surya wrote:I am sure risk management depts would love to follow your philosophy

And who are you to speak on their behalf? Speak for yourself and not for some one else please.

Surya wrote:Ever wonder why the IAF always had a couple of western aircraft even when our global position was much worse than what it is now??

And have you ever wondered as to why did we always have the domination of the Russians in our arsenal? As far as couple of western aircrafts are concerned, we would have LCAs in the near future and MCAs in the distant future, performing the same function of mitigation of risk which the western aircrafts have been performing as of now. Moreover, Mirage is not going to get phased out tomorrow. Even they would be operational for quite some time.

Surya wrote:Please lets not go through the "they gave us so much " again - previous pages of this thread cover that

I have read them all. And don't you think that your theory of putting all the eggs in one basket has also been covered in the previous pages of this thread? So may be you could peep in your own collar before lecturing others.

Surya wrote:The F16 production line is also a possibility

There is a huge difference in between 'possibility' and 'guarantee'. The American help in developing the naval version of LCA was also a possibility. But the outcome is for all to see. Talking exclusively in terms of possibility, MIg 35 production lines in India is also a possibility.

Forget about lip service. Lets have a look at the actions. The Russians have imported several components of Sukhoi 30 from HAL inorder to export them to third countries. Have the Americans imported any component of F 16 from any of their allies for the same purpose?

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 19 Oct 2009 08:12

Surya wrote:The F16 production line is also a possibility

There is a huge difference in between 'possibility' and 'guarantee'. The American help in developing the naval version of LCA was also a possibility. But the outcome is for all to see. Talking exclusively in terms of possibility, MIg 35 production lines in India is also a possibility.
Forget about lip service. Lets have a look at the actions. The Russians have imported several components of Sukhoi 30 from HAL inorder to export them to third countries. Have the Americans imported any component of F 16 from any of their allies for the same purpose?[/quote]

Actually they have, and set up non US production lines for the F-16, not that I'm a supporter of the Viper......
From Wikipedia:
On 7 June 1975, the four European partners, now known as the European Participation Group, signed up for 348 aircraft at the Paris Air Show. This was split among the European Participation Air Forces (EPAF) as 116 for Belgium, 58 for Denmark, 102 for the Netherlands, and 72 for Norway. These would be produced on two European production lines, one in the Netherlands at Fokker’s Schiphol-Oost facility and the other at SABCA’s Gossellies plant in Belgium; production would be divided among them as 184 and 164 units, respectively. Norway’s Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk and Denmark’s Terma A/S also manufactured parts and subassemblies for the EPAF aircraft. European co-production was officially launched on 1 July 1977 at the Fokker factory. Beginning in mid-November 1977, Fokker-produced components were shipped to Fort Worth for assembly of fuselages, which were in turn shipped back to Europe (initially to Gossellies starting in January 1978); final assembly of EPAF-bound aircraft began at the Belgian plant on 15 February 1978, with deliveries to the Belgian Air Force beginning in January 1979. The Dutch line started up in April 1978 and delivered its first aircraft to the Royal Netherlands Air Force in June 1979. In 1980 the first aircraft were delivered to the Royal Norwegian Air Force by SABCA and to the Royal Danish Air Force by Fokker.[23][28][29]

Since then, a further production line has been established at Ankara, Turkey, where Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) has produced 232 Block 30/40/50 F-16s under license for the Turkish Air Force during the late 1980s and 1990s, and has 30 Block 50 Advanced underway for delivery from 2010; TAI also built 46 Block 40s for Egypt in the mid-1990s. Korean Aerospace Industries opened another production line for the KF-16 program, producing 140 Block 52s from the mid-1990s to mid-2000s. If India selects the F-16IN for its Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft procurement, a sixth F-16 production line will be established in that nation to produce at least 108 fighters.[

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 19 Oct 2009 11:02

If India selects the F-16IN for its Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft procurement, a sixth F-16 production line will be established in that nation to produce at least 108 fighters.[

Hopefully this does not happen

And the Production line is set up for the EF

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 19 Oct 2009 13:15

Perfection of the avionics ((BREhO)) was chosen as the fundamental way to increase the MiG-35?s combat effectiveness. In particular, it distinguishes this aircraft from other airplanes of the new unified family ? MiG-29M/M2 and the MiG-29K/KUB. In the distinctions bear an evolutionary nature: the share of fifth generation systems and instruments is increasing from model to model.

On the whole, according to the integration of the engineering onto the aircraft, which pertains to the fifth generation of fighters, the MiG-35 has no equal among European airplanes.

The splendid aerodynamic concept of the MiG-29, the potential of which still has not been exhausted, has allowed concentrating on the electronics. It perfection has made it possible with the design of the new family based on the MiG-29 to increase internal fuel approximately 50 percent and more than double combat payload. External fuel tanks and an in-flight refueling system (including from the same time of airplanes) increase the MiG-29K/KUB and MiG-35 operational radius to the level of heavy fighters.

The MiG-35 maximum takeoff weight in comparison with the MiG-29 has grown by 30 percent and reached 23.5 tonnes. In fact, it has gone from the lightweight class to the medium. For maintenance of some and improvement of other performance, a number of improvements have been introduced into the design. For example, the wing?s lift properties have been improved and the reliability of construction increased.

The power plant has been revamped. Now it includes RD-33MK engines, which have thrust increased by 10 percent, a smokeless combustion chamber, increased reliability and greater radius. The RD-33 and its modifications have been developed by St. Peterburg?s OAO Klimov and produced in series in Moscow at MMP Chernyshev.
Upgraded RD-33 with all-aspect vectored thrust are being offered as an option for the MiG-35. Numerous visitors of the two last years airshows, in which the MiG-29M OVT has participated, have seen what the ultramaneuverability they provide means
The radar provides real a real multifunctional capability, the conduct of aerial combat outside of the direct field of view and the ability of simultaneous attack of several airborne and ground targets.

The ?Zhuk-AEh? has a greater detection range than radars of modern generation ?4+? fighters. It is able to operate in mapping modes, including with synthetic aperture. The radars capabilities allow picking out moving target and identifying their type by secondary features, and also determining the number of targets in a group.

RSK MiG and Fazotron-NIIR see prospects for the ?Zhuk-Aeh? radar?s improvement owing to an increase of the number of reception and transmission modules by more than one and a half time. This will allow improving practically all the radars performance, including detection range and number of targets tracked and attacked.

The MiG-35 is Europe?s first fighter on which a radar has been installed with an AFAR. This is no accident. A quarter of a century ago, MiG was the pioneer in thintroduction onto fighters of radars with electronic scanning. The MiG-31 with a passive phased antenna array surpassed competitors from the U.S.A., France and ote her countries.

The MiG-35?s modern optronics provides for aerial combat by day and night within and beyond the limits of sight. The detection range of aerial targets has reached several dozen kilometers. The OLS-UEh and OLS-UEhM systems which have been installed correspondingly onto the MiG-29K and MiG-35, have television, infrared and laser channels. They provide detection, recognition and automated tracking of targets, and also the determination of range for them and the generation of targeting to precision weaponry.

They will achieve progress, in comparison with optronics of the previous generation, owing to the use of technologies which were not used earlier in aviation. Correspondingly in the cooperation of the developers of the unified family of fighters, the precision instrument building scientific research institute (NII PP)), which is included in the Roskosmos system and creates the most complex optical and electronic equipment for space systems, has been engaged.
Fulfilling the requirement of a real multirole capability, RSK MiG designers installed the OLS-K optical electronic system onto the MiG-35 which resolves the tasks of navigation, weapons target designation and reconnaissance. The placement of the system into a conformal pod has allowed encompassing all the lower hemisphere and simultaneously saving one of the 11 external hard points and improving the airplane?s aerodynamics.

The detection range of ground (surface) targets with the aid of optical electronic stations is dozens of kilometers. The NII PP optical electronic systems allow tracking several targets which favorably distinguishes them from existing counterparts.
On the whole, the capability of the MiG-35 optronic systems corresponds to Western systems which have been planned for adoption into the inventory of fifth generation fighters or upgrade general ?4++? airplanes.
The MiG-35?s combat capabilities have been contemplated to develop sequentially owing to the expansion of the aircraft?s arsenal. Among the armament will be introduced the newest developments of Russian firms which for the time being have not been presented in public. However, one already can say that the fighter will get missiles which allow destroying ground targets from a greater distance while not entering an enemy?s air defense zone.
The radically improved service characteristics of the new MiGs is a serious trump card in the struggle for the worldwide marketplace which to an ever greater and greater extend is oriented at airplanes with a low life cycle cost. Besides other factors, this trend is linked with the rapid growth of prices for aviation fuel.
The optimization of the service characteristics is especially productive when it touches on not individual airplanes, but the whole aviation fleet. From the point of view, the MiG-35 is the best decision both for Russia?s air force and for the aviation of many other countries who have early variants of the MiG-29 in the inventory.

http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-45145.aspx

with compliments -Shankarosky

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 19 Oct 2009 15:44

Stop trolling.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 19 Oct 2009 16:04

deleted.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 19 Oct 2009 16:26

khukri wrote:Actually they have, and set up non US production lines for the F-16, not that I'm a supporter of the Viper......

Perhaps I was not very clear in my last post. Let me try once again. Russia did not just set up the production lines of MKI in India, but it also imported many components from HAL for the MK series of aircrafts that were exported to countries like Indonesia, Malaysia etc. On the contrary, USA may have set up off shore production lines, but those production lines catered to the needs of the host country only. To the best of my knowledge, they were never used for importing components for aircrafts that were exported to third countries like Singapore.

In other words, even in terms of production lines, Russia would be more flexible and accommodating than other nations. So there is no need for us to be apprehensive about the production lines of MIG 35 in India.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Oct 2009 17:49

Russian eqpt. used by India proved their worth in both '65 and '71.Ask any member of the armed forces,they admire Russian eqpt. for being very tough,being able to take much abuse,especially in Indian conditions and come at reasonable prices.In addition,as some members have said,Russia has given India frontline systems which India "tweaked" and improved.No nation either offered or provided us with a nuclear sub,Chakra, a new Akula-2 as its successor to arrive shortly,plus enormous help in the ATV project,apart from Brahmos,5th-gen fighter,etc.

In comparison what have the Yanquis offered us? The EUM clause for all defence sales! 3 decade old hags like the F-16 (which Pak already operates and the F-18).No JSF,no Raptor either.A rust-bucket LPD that killed several Indian sailors in an accident,which supposedly had happened before when in US service.The US is touting us buying the C-17,when it quietly uses in lease arranegment the Russian AN-124,one of which was recently stopped at Bombay airport with its load of marines off to Bangkok! IFVs which are being blown to bits in Afghanistan by IEDs and the unreliable and expensive Patriot missile,when we have developed and are developing our very own alternatives like Akash and the PAD.As we are seeing with the on-going US land and air exercises,all the US wants is for the Indian armed forces to be integrated into that of the US's global adventurist mercenary forces like those of Oz,ready to kill anybody anywhere without remorse.

The MIG-35 is by far the most cost-effective option for the IAF and will be the easiest to assimilate into the IAF's structure and operations.If one of the key criteria is to acquire a western technological alternative to those being developed by the Indo-Russian 5th-gen project,then the options narrow down considerably and the Gripen could be dark horse.The IAF needs an inventory of around 1000 combat aircraft and a component of that could be around 120+ MIG-29s UG/MIG-35s with the 35s replacing all the earlier 29s eventually.This would be apart from any other aircraft chosen for the MMRCA deal.300 SU-30MKI Flankers,two sqds of SU-34s for strategic strike,a sqd. of MIG-31s for anti-AWACS duty,120+ Jaguars UG,60/80+ MIG-27sUG,40+ M-2000s (no major upgrade thanks to outrageous French costs),120MIG-21 Bisons,120+ MMRCAs and 40+ LCAs which will replace older aircraft as the MK-2 version comes on stream,the MCA to eventually replace Jaguars and MIG-27s and the 5th-gen fighter replacing older M-2000s etc.,will ensure a smooth transition from old to newer aircraft as well as keeping numbers healthy.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 19 Oct 2009 18:06

Philip wrote:
The MIG-35 is by far the most cost-effective option for the IAF and will be the easiest to assimilate into the IAF's structure and operations.

two sqds of SU-34s for strategic strike,a sqd. of MIG-31s for anti-AWACS duty,

ok...Sir..It is good with Mig-35s..but do we have Su-34 or Mig 31..??? or we are going to buy them too...

!!!

Anthony Hines · Post by **Anthony Hines** » 19 Oct 2009 18:48

If the Indian Leadership had the strategic foresight and not depended for everything on the Russians, it is quite possible that India would be self sufficient in many ways than it now is..

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 19 Oct 2009 18:53

Asit P wrote:
khukri wrote:Actually they have, and set up non US production lines for the F-16, not that I'm a supporter of the Viper......
Perhaps I was not very clear in my last post. Let me try once again. Russia did not just set up the production lines of MKI in India, but it also imported many components from HAL for the MK series of aircrafts that were exported to countries like Indonesia, Malaysia etc. On the contrary, USA may have set up off shore production lines, but those production lines catered to the needs of the host country only. To the best of my knowledge, they were never used for importing components for aircrafts that were exported to third countries like Singapore.

You didn't read the boldfaced text clearly - Dutch produced components were imported and incorporated in Norwegian, Belgian, Danish and Dutch aircraft. Turkish produced components were incorporated into Egyptian aircraft.

BTW - do you have a source for this import of components from HAL for Indonesian and Malaysian aircraft?
What components were these specifically?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Oct 2009 19:10

To asit

As I said if you think its logical to put all your eggs in one basket - good luck to you

Like creationists - the argument goes no further

and we can leave it for others to decide which makes more sense.

production line possibility implies its up to us to negotiate and get it. Just like the M2K option we could always decline it.
As I said if the Mig 35 line is moved lock , atock and barrel along with its supply chain - I am fine with it. lets see if the Russians will dothat

As for components etc. there is some level of trade in the private dealings with HAL and if offset clauses are enforced that makes it a lot more viable.

Who do you think is in a position to absorb more?? The Russians who produce one off pieces for orders of 10s or the Lockeeds, Boeings, EADS etc??

Hmmm

Phillip

And I am sure you will find Jag and M2K boys extoll the virtues of their aircraft??

Point?? we are talking about essentially ending up vulnerable to one country's whims. Another Yeltsin down the line and we would dead in the water. Would you in all your other work rely on one source, one vendor etc???

And you really want to go down the path of comparing equipment blown to bits????

And whats the point of comparing C 17s with An 124s??

On the Gripen - I agree wholeheartedly - glad we agree on one thing

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 19 Oct 2009 22:29

sorry for trolling,sorry shankar

bhavani · Post by **bhavani** » 19 Oct 2009 23:22

I agree that Gripen is the best choice

F-Series - Unkle Khan has never been a good reliable friend. As simple as that

Migs - just for the sake of it and diversity sake, no more Migs

EF- No Fighters from Ukistan

Rafale - Uber costly for the capabilities if offers.

BTW An-124 is not a bad comparson with C-17. We can get New build An-124's also with all the nice gizmos. But WRT to Price and the capabilities it offers C-17 is Expensive.

Only reason is C-17 looks great and has a nice marketing campaign it has been able to achive limited export success. INfact it has never been a great export like C-130

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 19 Oct 2009 23:30

AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC ATTACK pod
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Oct 2009 23:50

bhavani

The AN 124 is in a diff class (carries about 40 tons more).

The C 17 is more closer to the IL 76 -

THe AN 124 is closer to C 5A and is really used for outsized cargo (generally)

Its a bit like comparing the Chinooks to the MI 26.

The operating costs and roles of the C 17 are diffferent than the AN 124.

Now if you want you can argue or compare IL 76 vs C 17s (and here is some material for that http://boeingc17.blogspot.com/ ) - but thats a matter for a different thread

PrithviRajChauhan · Post by **PrithviRajChauhan** » 20 Oct 2009 00:35

Good, people are waking to the fact the Gripen is a good fighter and has the potential to win MMRCA contract. After the Dassault harakiri ,I guess suddenly MiG 35 too is making some sense. But let me share my POV very briefly:
1. F18 offer is good but more than planes it is the notorious US congress and administration that worries India and hence before buying anything critical and offensive from unkil one needs to think atleast 1000 times. Lets not talk about F16s.
With least amount of ToT and numerous visible/invisible strings attached, the Yankees do not sound that attractive

2.The Russians are the most reliable in the pack but this deal is not meant for any other Russian stuff. There is nothing extra we could extract from Russia when we already have agreement on FGFA. Doesn't make any sense.

3. When we consider the above two points, the only option left is European.
a) Rafale was one of the favorite to win MMRCA but the logic defied tactics of Dasault puzzles everyone here.The stubborn
nature of French may (although I am sure) not go well with IAF and MoD.
b) Eurofighter is one of the most advance fighter available but the cost is a big deterrent. Its way too expensive.
c) Gripen is the most suitable Fighter as per the original RFP (assuming IAF was very inclined to buy more Mirages initially) and TCO too acts in its favor but the only negative point is its Yankee engines. Don't know why SAAB did not went for Eurojet engine.

Just my 2 cents !

bhavani · Post by **bhavani** » 20 Oct 2009 00:40

Surya wrote:bhavani

The AN 124 is in a diff class (carries about 40 tons more).

The C 17 is more closer to the IL 76 -

THe AN 124 is closer to C 5A and is really used for outsized cargo (generally)

Its a bit like comparing the Chinooks to the MI 26.

The operating costs and roles of the C 17 are diffferent than the AN 124.

Now if you want you can argue or compare IL 76 vs C 17s (and here is some material for that http://boeingc17.blogspot.com/ ) - but thats a matter for a different thread

Surya sir,

This is one place i really beg to differ. lets take this to another thread and i will post it there.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 20 Oct 2009 01:48

khukri wrote:You didn't read the boldfaced text clearly - Dutch produced components were imported and incorporated in Norwegian, Belgian, Danish and Dutch aircraft. Turkish produced components were incorporated into Egyptian aircraft.

I am sorry, my bad. I stand corrected on this one.

khukri wrote:BTW - do you have a source for this import of components from HAL for Indonesian and Malaysian aircraft?
What components were these specifically?

Ofcourse I have a source. I did quote it few posts above. However to make it simpler for you, here it goes again:-

"We are already supplying navigation and communication equipment for installation on the Su-30MK series of fighters exported by Russia to other countries," GM of HAL's Nasik based Aircraft Manufacturing Division, V Balakrishnan said on sidelines of the International Aerospace Show-MAKS-2009.

The new agreement would provide for expanding the inventory to include the supply of airframe components for the multi-role jets to be exported by Russia, he said.

Russia has supplied Su-30MK series fighters to Malaysia and Indonesia and there are plans to export this powerful weapons platform to Algeria and Venezuela, media reports said.

"Next year HAL will achieve 100 per cent indigenisation of the Sukhoi aircraft - from the production of raw materials to the final plane assembly. We're currently testing the locally produced engine for Su-30MKI and are planning to launch its production in 2010," Balakrishnan said

Source: http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... a/71226/on

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 20 Oct 2009 02:02

Surya wrote:To asit
As I said if you think its logical to put all your eggs in one basket - good luck to you
Like creationists - the argument goes no further and we can leave it for others to decide which makes more sense.

Makes sense. Otherwise you will keep on saying that there is no sense in keeping all the eggs in one basket. And I will keep on saying that it makes more sense to put the eggs in the basket which is reliable, rather then splitting them into 2-3 baskets which are not reliable.

Let IAF decide. In the meanwhile let us agree to disagree and move on. Cheers

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 20 Oct 2009 02:09

b) Eurofighter is one of the most advance fighter available but the cost is a big deterrent. Its way too expensive.

UGH!! People need to get over this stupid notion that the Eurofigher is too expensive for India to purchase. The Rafale costs even more, posters conveniently overlook it.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Oct 2009 21:30

what makes typhoons more interesting is there offer to partner with us for future tranches, starting with Tranche-3 with AESA, plus they announced if they win, they would "MOVE" entire avionics to India, from Germany. That is some thing.. and if EJ200 happen to be the choice against GE414s, it makes a killing.

imho, the heat is between EF2K vs. Rafale.. Rafale offer of software source code became not so interesting after EADS's offer. Whereass Gripen, SH and other teens have no such offer at all.. They all are screw driver driven TOTs.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 21 Oct 2009 00:26

what makes typhoons more interesting is there offer to partner with us for future tranches, starting with Tranche-3 with AESA, plus they announced if they win, they would "MOVE" entire avionics to India, from Germany. That is some thing.. and if EJ200 happen to be the choice against GE414s, it makes a killing.

Exactly, India wants the tech know-how. I think EADS, BAE, Alenia are more than capable of giving the tech India desires. The most attractive thing about the EF offer is the ability to participate in future EADS programs like UCAVS etc. Also the EF would be the quickest to induct into the IAF. The partner nations would be more than willing to shift production slots of the Tranche 3A EF to india (did it with SA).
http://www.eurofighter.com/po_bl.asp?id=163
I don't know how much to believe in this article about the MRCA order being split 60/40 for the EF and SH. Even though the info comes from a German newspaper its on the EF blog. I've never seen them make stuff up in their press releases before. I don't necessarily believe it but it would ensure the IAF getting squad level up as fast as possible. And the planes would share a lot of similar weapons and it would allow india to get rid of the Mig-21/27 a lot faster.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Oct 2009 04:01

Why EADS is a better partner because, they have done it, and they have it and they are capable of doing it again.

The russians have it, but slightly lower on the tech.. still charge us, but when it comes to delivery, we still have complaints that they have not really helped us on the tech, but only gaves the screw drivers.

France will not part with tech.. they may give some integration source code APIs (clever eh!~). For that matter even for Kaveri, they force us to use their core.

EADS is very promising.. even the MAWS, they will export all over the world, keeping India as the mftrg hub.
I am sure, typhoon tranche 4 will be exported from India, if we believe in this partnership.

they mean it!

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 21 Oct 2009 04:59

SaiK wrote:what makes typhoons more interesting is there offer to partner with us for future tranches, starting with Tranche-3 with AESA, plus they announced if they win, they would "MOVE" entire avionics to India, from Germany. That is some thing.. and if EJ200 happen to be the choice against GE414s, it makes a killing.

Can you provide a source for this? I was hoping for a similar offer, but was discouraged by the last visit of EADS chief to India.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Oct 2009 05:10

Shankar wrote: http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-45145.aspx

with compliments -Shankarosky

Shankarji,

That is from 2007!!

Any improvements since? Or is the 35 only as good/great?

TIA.

shiv wrote:Just saw a MiG 35 landing..

You mean it was flying?

JK.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 21 Oct 2009 07:24

Can you provide a source for this? I was hoping for a similar offer, but was discouraged by the last visit of EADS chief to India.

Here's the link you were looking for.
http://www.livemint.com/2009/08/1023195 ... d.html?h=B

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 21 Oct 2009 09:43

^^^^
Well, I read the same, but left with a distinct impression that it whole lot of BS with no real meat. That was the source of my dissapointment.

For example, I am looking for terms in unqualified way.. plain and simple ToT, partnership etc. But what I hear is a whole lot of fudging and ton of caveats, nothing that remotely hints at building Tranche 3 with AESA from India.

I could not offer something now in addition to what we already offered. We submitted our bid in April last year.

We will transfer workload from Germany to India. The products which will be produced in the first step of this joint venture are not related to the Eurofighter. However, we can use this technology later for the Eurofighter.

It’s not only that we are doing the support for the LCA. We are also hiring engineers in India and we will employ these engineers in our EADS/Airbus engineering center in Bangalore. What will happen? We will transfer a kind of technology or knowledge to Bangalore. We will employ, in the next two years, roughly 200 engineers in this engineering centre that is related to the defence aerospace business. In reality, we will shift workload from Germany to India in the area of avionics.

avionics can also be for Airbus.

We prepare ourselves and we prepare the Indian industry that they are already prepared in a very early stage to absorb the needed technology for the Eurofighter.

jai · Post by **jai** » 21 Oct 2009 13:27

Trust our RFP specifies production in India for all aircraft except for the ones' to be aquired in Fly away condition, so EF does not seem to have a choice around not manufacturing EF here - if they win.