MRCA News and Discussion

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 07 Feb 2010 19:34

Rafale goes full throttle with offer to Brazil....

If approved, a deal with France will lead to the delivery of 28 single-seat Rafale Cs and eight B-model trainers built to Dassault's F3 production standard, plus armaments including MBDA MICA IR/EM and Magic II air-to-air missiles, and Sagem AASM precision-guided bombs.

The Rafale's wings would also likely be manufactured in Brazil, along with modules for its Thales RBE2 active electronically scanned array radar.

Wow.. AESA modules, wings manufactured in Brazil.. Looks like Brazil's getting its moneys worth..or is it?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 07 Feb 2010 19:48

HAL manufactures parts for F/A-18.

The public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has begun supplying fuselage parts for the formidable Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter jet in what is seen as global recognition for the Indian aeronautical industry.

HAL has already sent five sets of the Super Hornet’s gun bay doors (GBDs) to Boeing and 13 more are under manufacture as part of an initial contract

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/bus ... 16253.html

Boeing playing its cards well...

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 07 Feb 2010 19:54

shukla wrote:HAL manufactures parts for F/A-18.

Boeing playing its cards well...

It is good that HAL is getting some offshore projects..but it would be sad if any of Khan's birds win the competition...atleast for me..!

kit · Post by **kit** » 07 Feb 2010 22:44

sumshyam wrote:
shukla wrote:HAL manufactures parts for F/A-18.

Boeing playing its cards well...
It is good that HAL is getting some offshore projects..but it would be sad if any of Khan's birds win the competition...atleast for me..!

The numbers are too low.One wonders whether the HAL manufacturing in small numbers is a publicity stunt ?? Does Boeing actually use these to build their F18 s ?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 08 Feb 2010 01:03

kit wrote: The numbers are too low.One wonders whether the HAL manufacturing in small numbers is a publicity stunt ?? Does Boeing actually use these to build their F18 s ?

Of course they do. There is even a picture in the latest edition of Boeing Frontiers that shows a Boeing Asia Pacific Supplier Quality team leader with 3 HAL engineers inspecting an F/A-18 gun bay door. HAL also manufactures wire harnesses and Boeing is sharing its Lean+ and Program Management principles with HAL.

BTW, this is not new for Boeing and HAL. Previously, HAL was the sole supplier for every overwing escape door for all 757s ever manufactured and that dates back to the 1980s. Among all the aerospace companies participating in the MRCA contest, Boeing has got a closer business relationship with Indian companies than any other except EADS and MiG (because of its history of having had fighters built in India). Certainly compared to LockMart, the Boeing presence in India is very strong. "How could I not meet with the Boeing Company?" the Air Chief Marshal (at that time was it Tyagi or Major?) is reported to have said to Chris Chadwick as he welcomed him into his office.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Feb 2010 01:16

Boeing is sharing its Lean+ and Program Management principles with HAL.

More important than the doors and harnesses I would imagine. That is perhaps the best news I have heard and really hope India makes use of it.

Also, as stated earlier, the supply-chain aspect a potential US MRCA in actually incalculable.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 08 Feb 2010 01:18

Airbus also manufactures stuff in India.

Most of the stuff Boeing and Airbus manufacture in India is to showcase their commitment to the country in the hopes India will buy their planes. However most of the stuff is rather low tech. e.g. doors of airplanes, wiring harness..etc. Stuff of no real importance.

Its not any ground breaking R&D.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 08 Feb 2010 10:47

Rahul Bedi, Indian correspondent for the Jane's defense weekly speaks on India-US military ties..

He sheds his thoughts on the MMRCA deal amongst a host of other defense and procurement related issues.. Says US will be in the drivers seat if India signs the CISMOA.

If we agree to certain agreements like the CISMOA, the order of 126 multi role combat aircraft deal could go the US way. The demand of 126 aircraft could be increased to 200 if it suits India.

(I have always felt that would be the case, I thought that was one of Robert gate's priorities on his trip to India..but India understandably apprehensive bought some more time..)

Currently, the trials of jet aircraft are on. It will take some six months for six participants. Then, the trial report will be assessed by the technical team. Then the short-list will be made. And, then the negotiations will start. By 2012 or 2013 the deal will be signed. After that another 54 months will pass before the actual delivery will start. That is, we will take almost five years to get the aircraft. So, the last of the 126 aircraft will be inducted in 2022! By that time it will be outdated technology. This schedule is possible only if everything goes according to the plan!

Wow.. thats even a few years after the PAK-FA starts induction (if everything goes well)... Unbelievable! Hail Indian procurement system.. Wonder if the LCA MK-2 would still be in the process of "fine-tune & seeking operational clearance" (as usual) or actual induction.

And it might be 2022 before IAF has full sanctioned squad strength and more with all the (250 odd) Su-MKI's, (at least 126) MMRCA's, LCA's, a few PAK-FA's, upgraded (by Israel?) Mirages, Mig's, Jaguars,.... Things look good in the next decade, but in this one......................

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 08 Feb 2010 11:38

Wow.. thats even a few years after the PAK-FA starts induction (if everything goes well)... Unbelievable! Hail Indian procurement system.. Wonder if the LCA MK-2 would still be in the process of "fine-tune & seeking operational clearance" (as usual) or actual induction.

And it might be 2022 before IAF has full sanctioned squad strength and more with all the (250 odd) Su-MKI's, (at least 126) MMRCA's, LCA's, a few PAK-FA's, upgraded (by Israel?) Mirages, Mig's, Jaguars,.... Things look good in the next decade, but in this one......................

As long as we are so heaviliy dependent on Phoren Maal , the procurement process is not entirely in our hand . Procuction line of original suppliers and time taken to set up facility in India itself are major bottle necks.

All said and done , I still don't think it'll take 54 months after contract is signed for first deliviries , maybe late 2012 should be a realistic timefram for first ready to fly models to arrive.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 08 Feb 2010 16:40

India's HAL supplies parts for US fighter jet

New Delhi. In a first of sorts, an Indian company has started supplying fuselage parts for the formidable Boeing F/A 18 E/F Super Hornet fighter jet.

The state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd has already sent five sets of the Super Hornet’s Gun Bay Doors (GBDs) to Boeing, and 13 more are under manufacture as part of an initial contract.

that means eighteen f-18s are made with Indian metal, but why only eighteen

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 08 Feb 2010 18:05

More details on the Boeing-HAL partnership... Brief interviews with Dr Vivek Lal (Boeing Co. India Head) & Ashok Nayak (HAL Chairman and Managing Director), who also sheds light on other offshore projects...

http://indiastrategic.in/topstories475.htm
(with pic)

Also, link to Rahul Bedi's full interview... (quotes from which I had posted earlier..)

http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2010/ ... rdware.htm

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 08 Feb 2010 18:18

Samay wrote:
India's HAL supplies parts for US fighter jet

New Delhi. In a first of sorts, an Indian company has started supplying fuselage parts for the formidable Boeing F/A 18 E/F Super Hornet fighter jet.

The state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd has already sent five sets of the Super Hornet’s Gun Bay Doors (GBDs) to Boeing, and 13 more are under manufacture as part of an initial contract.

that means eighteen f-18s are made with Indian metal, but why only eighteen

The MRCA contract stipulates that the first eighteen aircraft should be delivered in a flyaway condition by the manufacturer.

But I'm sure the numbers are just a coincidence.

negi · Post by **negi** » 08 Feb 2010 19:44

Gun Bay doors <> 'Aircraft'.

Having said that yes F-18's chances are good for MoD can very well read above as a transfer of technology (may be this is how ToT has been interpreted by the MoD until now ).

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 20:04

what gtre/hal needs is that GE's CMM process specifically defined for the high precision engineering processes and production engineering and management.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 09 Feb 2010 06:54

France is willing to fight at UN to get a SC seat for Brazil -all for 36 fighters

.It is willing to share nuclear technology and almost everything at its disposal

.

In all it seems like, though India is buying 126+74(optional) failing to get such deals which might be worth the money?

MOD seriously needs a renovation

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 09 Feb 2010 10:28

Rafale's, not JSF for UK Navy?

One of the British defence analysts in a British daily, proposes an option of buying Rafale's instead of the F-35's for UK Navy for its new aircraft carriers, as an option for cost cutting measures..

The defence review could decide that Britain needs to retain the expeditionary capability that comes with having at least one aircraft carrier, but cannot afford the JSF. In that case it would be entirely possible, and politically advantageous if Britain wants a new entente cordiale, to buy the French Rafale jet. The Rafale is much cheaper than the JSF and compatible with our proposed carriers if they are built for catapult-assisted take-off. The Rafale has a service life until 2040.

That would be a serious coup for the Rafale's, if it ever materializes... (but I doubt it would really happen)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 012820.ece

bodhi · Post by **bodhi** » 09 Feb 2010 11:18

^^^

which will mean that UK does not have enough faith in the proposed Sea Typhoon

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Feb 2010 11:47

they dont have $$ to invest in land typhoon and you are asking for a new variant and expensive years of testing ?

they will go with 20 VSTOL JSF eventually, after selling off/canceling one of
their CVF carriers. if they retain two carriers, I expect SSN/SSBN inventory
nos current and future will face a drastic cut. they might even not retain any
SSN because of no immediate naval threat, no sea-denial needs the USN
cannot do and SSBNs do not use SSN escort for deterrence patrols.

wherever the CVFs deploy for expeditionary wars, it will be a NATO effort
and USN CVNs and SSNs will be in vicinity.

but due to loss of face/shame issues look for both UK and France to watch
who blinks first and goes that route, after which the other will quickly follow.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 09 Feb 2010 11:52

shukla wrote:Rahul Bedi, Indian correspondent for the Jane's defense weekly speaks on India-US military ties..

. Things look good in the next decade, but in this one......................

We tell the world not to attack us in this decade. We will have a war in the next decade only

K

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 09 Feb 2010 14:42

How does an APG 79/80 radar be more useful when all sides IPC (Indo-pak-China) have and will use their AWACS in any conflict ? Gyanijan , please share some gyan on this.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 09 Feb 2010 15:25

More on flourishing Boeing-India partnership....

Boeing is no longer just selling airplanes to various airlines, but also buying products and services from Indian companies, doing research and development work, partnering with universities and institutes, and investing in education. As Boeing India President Dinesh Keskar puts it: “The company in India is now a microcosm of what it is in the US. Everything Boeing is doing there is being replicated here and that is the big message that most people don’t know.”

Keskar admits one of the key reasons for Boeing getting a lot of work done in India is because the Indian government is buying products from it — both on the civil and defence sides. The government requires that any contract awarded to a foreign defence company have a 30 per cent offset clause. “Our current obligation is to buy goods and services from India worth $2.3 billion. That’s a lot of money which can help build the aerospace industry in the country,” says he. “Of course, India has the aspiration to build its own 50-seater, and someday 100-seater, airplanes. Boeing is helping it achieve that.”

With the improvement in Indo-US relationship, Boeing has had a door opened in the defence business. Last year, the largest Indo-US defence order went to Boeing with the sale of eight P-81 maritime reconnaissance strike airplane worth about $2.1 billion. And last month, the Indian government sent a request to the US government to buy ten C-17 large cargo military transport airplanes. Boeing is also in competition for fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force where its F-18 multi-role combat aircraft contests with five others, including Lockheed Martin’s F-16. Boeing has also submitted bids for its Apache attack helicopters and Chinook transport helicopters. “We think Boeing has products which can potentially be worth about $31 billion for India in the next 10 years,” says Keskar, adding, “Not many people know that we sell some of the finest military aircraft here in India. The ad brings forth our defence capabilities and talks about a trusted partnership in this sector.”

Boeing works with all the Indian Institutes of Technology and has a strategic partnership with Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. The company provides scholarships and conducts design competitions. The aim, says Keskar, is to get students interested in aerospace at an early stage when they are in college. For instance, students from IIT Kanpur demonstrated a robot that can be sent to an earthquake-ravaged site that humans cannot access. The robot, equipped with a camera and a GSM card, can take pictures through a remote control.

Full article...

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... rs/384999/

Gosh.. I think Boeing's right up there with its chances for the SH..

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 09 Feb 2010 17:18

durgesh wrote:How does an APG 79/80 radar be more useful when all sides IPC (Indo-pak-China) have and will use their AWACS in any conflict ? Gyanijan , please share some gyan on this.

Any L-Band radar (i.e. those on the AWACS systems) will not be able to provide accurate enough range and angular resolution for weapon employment. So with AWACS the wide-area situation awareness and "dynamic" mission planning etc will improve but can't really be used for weapon deployment - that will have to be still done by the weapon platform sporting X-band radars and weapons.

Plus with an AESA radar, purely from tracking PoV (and there are other advantanges), you will have several monopulses (instead of a couple in a planar array) resulting in,
- instantaneous target tracking establishment - so track range is almost same as the scan range (and not typically about 70-75% of the scan range in modern planar arrays)
- 3 to 4 fold increase in automated target tracking
- simulataneous tracking over a much larger scan area
- interleaving between SAR and traditional Air-to-Air modes
yada yada yada ...

All of the above have certain tactical advantages and ways and means of counterg them (or atleast blunting them), so an exact positive/negative answer is impossible.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Feb 2010 18:18

Gosh.. I think Boeing's right up there with its chances for the SH..

It is a good air craft too.

And, unlike the F-22 - which was designed in the early 1980s, it is a newer design too.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Feb 2010 18:31

NRao wrote: unlike the F-22 - which was designed in the early 1980s, it is a newer design too.

on the same count, can we say our MCA will beat the raptor hands down?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 09 Feb 2010 18:55

^^
Unfair comparison IMO. All jingoism aside, India does not nearly have the same history of Fighter Design as Russia and US. Also IMHO, all Soviet fighters have been superior to their American counterparts. So HAL cannot be realistically compared to Sukhoi(or Mig)

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 09 Feb 2010 19:12

NRao wrote:
Gosh.. I think Boeing's right up there with its chances for the SH..
It is a good air craft too.

And, unlike the F-22 - which was designed in the early 1980s, it is a newer design too.

I am not complaining.. SH is my favorite!

In an ideal world, state of the art SH's and throw the E/A-18G's in the mix, as well as possibly SH's for the Navy.. The idea is mouth watering... (Of course depends how much tech & TOT we can get out of the American's is going to be crucial and possibly the KEY). I quite like the idea of the MKI, FGFA at the top end, SH, LCA, Mig's, Mirages (Israeli upgrades). I quite like the sound of where the Sh would sit in the scheme of things..

But for starters, I am quite keenly looking fwd to what the shortlist will look like and see who drops off the race first up... Going by our Italian FM's statement at least one will be left out (if not 2).. any guesses?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Feb 2010 19:31

but isnt the F18 outclassed in A2A regime by Rafale/GripenNG?/Eurofighter/Mig35.

its a good and proven networked bomb truck with aesa and vast range of munitions if you have the network, F15 for protection and full-spec aesa which we dont

if we have to eat at khan's kabila, the F16 is probably more adept at A2A raw performance, while matching in A2G, lesser ground crew needed to service a single
engine, cheaper, has a smaller aesa(con) and fires the same weapons.
the israelis have some Sufa exp on it and sher khan might be willing to throw in a
few bones by replacing the non-exportable gold-std EW gear with Elisra kit which
we can program. in due course we could even have a batch with EL2052

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 09 Feb 2010 20:09

Singha wrote:but isnt the F18 outclassed in A2A regime by Rafale/GripenNG?/Eurofighter/Mig35.

its a good and proven networked bomb truck with aesa and vast range of munitions if you have the network, F15 for protection and full-spec aesa which we dont

The USN does not have F-15s for protection. As of now the SH is their only fleet defence fighter. As for the Eurocanards the Tiffy people still haven't decided what AESA radar to install. Rafale does not have an HMS and its better high speed aerodynamic performance might be useless against an SH with JHMCS and AIM-9x. Mig35 can probably fly circles around all of them but I'm a little skeptical about the capabilities of the ZHUK-AE and Russian avionics. We might have to customize it like the Rambha and we don't have time for that. F-16 airframe has maxed out. There is no space for improvement. Gripen looks like the best bet all things considered if that new Selex radar is as good as it seems. I don't agree with people who say its too close to the LCA in capability. Its not. But if the GOI decides to buy the SH for whatever reason it might not be as bad as people think.

negi · Post by **negi** » 09 Feb 2010 20:22

Maitya saar based on my rudimentary knowledge of relationship between frequency of operation and resolution , L Band itself does not seem to be a constraint when it comes to tracking airborne targets specially when even our Swordfish LRTR operates in L Band.
Reason for AWACS not being used as a FCR for missiles might be more to do with other aspects . As for airborne fighter AC they have no choice but to employ Radars which operate in and around 'X' band as aperture size for L/S band radar antennas is pretty huge.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Feb 2010 20:30

The USN does not have F-15s for protection

correct. but looking back at last 20 yrs, when has the USN fought a deep sea war
against Backfires and Mig31s - presumably out of land based air support?

afghanistan, iraq1, iraq2, kosovo, libya (F-14).....

all with heavy presence of land based air on-demand.

F18SH will have a tough time surviving 1:1 basis against a EF/Rafale when these
get similar radar and meteor which they will (caesar etc). HMS cant the thales
top-x or israeli helmet be integrated and slaved to python5/asraam? its not a
difficult issue. the limitations of F18SH airframe however will remain forever.

I will readily admit the F-18SH is a more complete and ready-to-go pkg today
but we looking at MRCA induction minimum 4 yrs out.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 09 Feb 2010 21:04

Singha wrote:The USN does not have F-15s for protection

correct. but looking back at last 20 yrs, when has the USN fought a deep sea war
against Backfires and Mig31s - presumably out of land based air support?

Well there hasn't been a war with the Russians. But surely the USN must have prepared for it. And they made a conscious decision to retire the venerable F-14 instead of upgrading it and switched to Superhornets. They obviously felt it was enough. Even now the much delayed JSF will be replacing the legacy Hornets not the SH for the time being. Anyway why do you think the Mig-31 of all the aircraft would have posed a serious threat to the SH?

Its not really known for its maneuverability is it?

F18SH will have a tough time surviving 1:1 basis against a EF/Rafale when these
get similar radar and meteor which they will (caesar etc). ]HMS cant the thales
top-x or israeli helmet be integrated and slaved to python5/asraam? its not a
difficult issue. the limitations of F18SH airframe however will remain forever.

I fully agree that Tiffy or Rafale equipped with good AESA radars and other gizmos present on the SH will completely outperform the SH on any day.
But when will that happen? And at what cost? As you say the SH is a complete package now and has been in serial production for some time. I am inclined to believe it might actually fall within the IAF's budget rather than the still-not-completely-developed Eurocanards except the Gripen ofcourse, which being a smaller single-engined aircraft will probably still cost less.
There is no way we can buy 126 Rafales or Typhoons (fitted with AESA ityadi) for $10 billion. The SH may not fall within budget either. But if it does its a really good buy instead of spending extra for the Rafale or tiffy. That is why I love the Gripen. No problem with cost and still comes with all the electronic goodies. I only hope the the Gripen which is being tested by the IAF is very close to the NG version.

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 09 Feb 2010 21:55

negi wrote:Maitya saar based on my rudimentary knowledge of relationship between frequency of operation and resolution , L Band itself does not seem to be a constraint when it comes to tracking airborne targets specially when even our Swordfish LRTR operates in L Band.
Reason for AWACS not being used as a FCR for missiles might be more to do with other aspects . As for airborne fighter AC they have no choice but to employ Radars which operate in and around 'X' band as aperture size for L/S band radar antennas is pretty huge.

negi, true ... however, without going into too much of details(e.g. pulse compression etc), thumb rule is higher the freq, narrower is the beam, so smaller is the tracking gate - so X-band is better for tracking.
However it doesn't mean you can't track using a L-band radar - you certainly can - each and every modern L-band antenna's have a TWS mode anyway. Just that they are not "accurate enough" for missile guidance for the range of the most AA missiles.
The time required to progress from a typical acquisition gate to a tracking gate of, say, 0.1deg (and at what range) a typical resolution required for weapon employment, is just too much for using those L-band systems for weapon employment. You can still guide a missle to a generic area of the target but after that (given you have sufficient range left and the manoeuvring target is still within the boresight of the tracking radar), you'll require to switch on ot the narrower beamwidth (of higher freq radars like X-band) to achieve the required tracking resolution to home-in close enough.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Feb 2010 00:03

Singha wrote:but isnt the F18 outclassed in A2A regime by Rafale/GripenNG?/Eurofighter/Mig35.

its a good and proven networked bomb truck with aesa and vast range of munitions if you have the network, F15 for protection and full-spec aesa which we dont

if we have to eat at khan's kabila, the F16 is probably more adept at A2A raw performance, while matching in A2G, lesser ground crew needed to service a single
engine, cheaper, has a smaller aesa(con) and fires the same weapons.
the israelis have some Sufa exp on it and sher khan might be willing to throw in a
few bones by replacing the non-exportable gold-std EW gear with Elisra kit which
we can program. in due course we could even have a batch with EL2052

Nahi, nahi saar! The Blk 60 is hardly more adept at anything vis a vis the shornet imho. You are mistaking it for the blk 50 or 30 in terms of raw A2A performance (aerodynamic wonlee). The blk 60 has its advantages over the previous models only in terms of avionics/sensors but as a platform, it is probably the worst of the lot! It is has grown fat and heavy resulting in a poor wingloading and internal fuel capacity (poor fuel fraction), and when the CFTs are on to increase fuel loads, the TWR and wingloading are severely compromised. IOWs, the younger solah was a great platform vis a vis other single engined birds such as the M2k-5, and Gripen; however, in face of large twin engined birds (shornet, 35, rafale etc), it comes up quite short one way or another.

correct. but looking back at last 20 yrs, when has the USN fought a deep sea war
against Backfires and Mig31s - presumably out of land based air support?

afghanistan, iraq1, iraq2, kosovo, libya (F-14).....

all with heavy presence of land based air on-demand.

F18SH will have a tough time surviving 1:1 basis against a EF/Rafale when these
get similar radar and meteor which they will (caesar etc). HMS cant the thales
top-x or israeli helmet be integrated and slaved to python5/asraam? its not a
difficult issue. the limitations of F18SH airframe however will remain forever.

+1, makes sense. Caveat - the SH offered to india was with the EPE engines, which imho will require some mods to the airframe (none of those straightwinged, canted pylons would do with the overpowering thrust imho). So, the Shornet will have to evolve in IAF service - and the USN is already looking at an evolutionary path for it - good promise.

I will readily admit the F-18SH is a more complete and ready-to-go pkg today
but we looking at MRCA induction minimum 4 yrs out.

Agreed, but still better than the Solah, which will probly be retired by the ARabs by 2020-5. Nobody is thinking about doing anything new to it (other than hooking up AESAs).

CM.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Feb 2010 00:22

nachiket wrote: Well there hasn't been a war with the Russians. But surely the USN must have prepared for it. And they made a conscious decision to retire the venerable F-14 instead of upgrading it and switched to Superhornets. They obviously felt it was enough. Even now the much delayed JSF will be replacing the legacy Hornets not the SH for the time being. Anyway why do you think the Mig-31 of all the aircraft would have posed a serious threat to the SH? Its not really known for its maneuverability is it?

Nachiket, at the height of SU power, most important locations had plenty of things to deal with hornet/SHornet, and even F-15 types - from a layered GBAD including S300s to GCI controlled point defense fighters like the fulcrum. not to mention an occasional flanker or two. No, the USN would've never stepped in to the fray in the initial stage, not if they could help it. They would have of course stepped in once GBAD was sufficiently degraded after the use of a multitude of B2, B52, B1 runs and LACM attacks. An initial strike by hornet/shornet/eagle etc would've been close to suicide imho.

There is no way we can buy 126 Rafales or Typhoons (fitted with AESA ityadi) for $10 billion. The SH may not fall within budget either. But if it does its a really good buy instead of spending extra for the Rafale or tiffy. That is why I love the Gripen. No problem with cost and still comes with all the electronic goodies. I only hope the the Gripen which is being tested by the IAF is very close to the NG version.

I am sorely tempted to say that I'd rather have fewer a/c with an option for more so long as the birds have some potential to evolve and mate with the MCA program. The Rafale (as it currently stands) is more than enough to deal with present IAF threats (noises from the UAE certainly suggest this), buy a few of these upfront (40-60) and the option to integrate it well with upcoming indian/european programs (Astra, meteor, Kaveri ityadi) and the MCA. IOWs, developing the rafale into a stealthy version - MCA is a nice approach imho. If all of this costs $ 10 billion so be it. At least the MCA will have a cutting edge base not to mention the need for quick numbers will also be catered for. JMT

CM.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Feb 2010 01:09

Cain Marko wrote:Nachiket, at the height of SU power, most important locations had plenty of things to deal with hornet/SHornet, and even F-15 types - from a layered GBAD including S300s to GCI controlled point defense fighters like the fulcrum. not to mention an occasional flanker or two. No, the USN would've never stepped in to the fray in the initial stage, not if they could help it. They would have of course stepped in once GBAD was sufficiently degraded after the use of a multitude of B2, B52, B1 runs and LACM attacks. An initial strike by hornet/shornet/eagle etc would've been close to suicide imho.

CM I was responding to Singha's assertion of the SH being outclassed in AtoA and having F-15 for protection. I was talking strictly in terms 1 vs 1 air combat capability. What you have said is of course very true.

Cain Marko wrote: I am sorely tempted to say that I'd rather have fewer a/c with an option for more so long as the birds have some potential to evolve and mate with the MCA program. The Rafale (as it currently stands) is more than enough to deal with present IAF threats (noises from the UAE certainly suggest this), buy a few of these upfront (40-60) and the option to integrate it well with upcoming indian/european programs (Astra, meteor, Kaveri ityadi) and the MCA. IOWs, developing the rafale into a stealthy version - MCA is a nice approach imho. If all of this costs $ 10 billion so be it. At least the MCA will have a cutting edge base not to mention the need for quick numbers will also be catered for. JMT
CM.

Cutting down numbers of the MRCA to 40-60 and spending the same amount of money?

The FinMin and the IAF will both go nuts if something like that is suggested. Not to mention the media and netas. Nah, I think we should keep this simple and the MRCA and MCA programs separated (apart from using what we learn from the ToT in the MCA program). A jingo's delight would be SDRE's reverse engineering the APG-79/RBE-2 or that Selex Swashplate AESA, whatever we get.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Feb 2010 02:06

As per the latest issue of AW&ST the weapons trials for the MRCA candidates has already begun ! I'm amazed that no media report in India picked this news up. Anyway, I'll spell out the main points of this report

the F-16 was the first one to go through the weapons tests, which began last week in California. The process is to conclude in April, with the Typhoon being the last one being tested. The F-18E/F is to go through this process soon, and the tests will be done at NAS Lemoore, California.

the OEM's are speculating that based on the results of these trials, the field could be cut down to 4 fighters in place of 6, and then a further cut down to 2 finalists is possible before the final choice is made for 126 fighters.

Firings in the US include the AIM-120 AMRAAM, and (probably) AIM-9X Sidewinder II, as well as LGBs. Of the other fighters, the Typhoon and Gripen could include AIM-120 firings. Typhoon trials may also cover MBDA Asraam IIR missile and MBDA weaponry will figure in the Rafale trials too.

Importantly, not all of the air-to-air missiles or air-to-surface weapons which India is interested in are included in the tests. Several systems such as the rocket/ramjet Meteor remain in development (first time I've read that India is interested in the Meteor). For some weapons, Indian military expectations have had to be managed carefully by the manufacturers. ASRAAM is already being pitched for the IAF's Jaguar aircraft as part of an upgrade; concievably, New Delhi could be the launch customer for a new version of the weapon. Alongside the ASRAAM, Rafael's Python V is believed to be a contender. MBDA is continuing to work on in-house imaging infrared seeker tech applicable to ASRAAM. The current seeker has significant content from Raytheon, which means that the US will have a say on the exportability of the weapon.

Washington's support to LM and Boeing has been viewed as critical for their success in the MRCA competition. But Vice Adm Jeffrey Wieringa says, regardless of the outcome, the US has left no stone unturned to put the US competitors in a strong position against their EU rivals. Wieringa is the director of the Pentagon's Defence Security Cooperation Agency.

All the issues that need to be addressed for India have been, says Wieringa, including clearing the Super Hornet for 9G maneuvering and enabling the F-16 to conduct probe and drogue refuelling. Talks on bilateral agreements are progressing but some security accords have yet to be finalised.

US industry execs involved in the program admit that the Indian Govt was initially worried about the change in administration in the US, however renewed US political engagement appears to have assuaged these concerns.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 10 Feb 2010 03:43

Cain Marko wrote:Caveat - the SH offered to india was with the EPE engines, which imho will require some mods to the airframe

I think you're confusing the SH with the LCA

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... hrust.html

Despite the dramatic thrust increase, the EPE would not require enlarging the F/A-18E/F's engine inlets to enable increased air flow, Gower said.

"We are not modifying the mould line of the aircraft," Gower said. "The current inlet gives us enough [air] in-take."

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Feb 2010 04:37

Kartik,

Thanks for that recap. I wonder if the noises coming out of MiG, Boeing, and EADS recently (them being optimistic and what not) had something to do with this:

the OEM's are speculating that based on the results of these trials, the field could be cut down to 4 fighters in place of 6, and then a further cut down to 2 finalists is possible before the final choice is made for 126 fighters.

The Gripen and LM folks seem to have cooled off a bit and of course, Dassault has been cool ever since the competition was opened up.

CM.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Feb 2010 04:48

D-assault has been cold ever since advent of Khan craft and EF.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Feb 2010 04:50

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Caveat - the SH offered to india was with the EPE engines, which imho will require some mods to the airframe
I think you're confusing the SH with the LCA

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... hrust.html

Despite the dramatic thrust increase, the EPE would not require enlarging the F/A-18E/F's engine inlets to enable increased air flow, Gower said.

"We are not modifying the mould line of the aircraft," Gower said. "The current inlet gives us enough [air] in-take."

No real confusion - have they hooked up the engines on any airframe yet? If not, I wouldn't be surprised if they sang a different tune during flight tests, thats a LOT of extra thrust. And I am not speaking of the inlets specifically. IIRC, the Shornet had some wing-stress problems, vibration issues and has pylons/weapons canted outwards - what will a dramatic increase in thrust do to a somewhat already draggy setup?

THis is of course speculation since I am no aero-engineer. but it seems to me that higher thrust during ACM would result in far greater G loads and stresses on the airframe, which seems quite beleaguered already, in any case, I've always hoped for a wing redesign on the shornet.

CM.