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.
Locked
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by NRao »

Well, educating others is getting to be rather expensive.

No one said that IN/IAF "dislikes the Russian weaponry".

the person said:
IAF may want western weapons this time
from that you took it to IN and then to a policy then "dislike" and now "Rafale". Amazing!!!

Even IF India buys non-Russian equipment it does not mean that India "dislikes" Russian equipment. It just means that India either has a better option at that moment or wants to take a different route for whatever reason. And, selecting Russian stuff means (perhaps) that it is the best selection at that point in time. It is as simple as that.

Wonder what the question would be when India relies on herself!!!
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Indranil »

Raveen wrote:
Because the Rafale is catapult launched whereas the rust bucket doesn't have a catapult
As valid as your point might be, why use such derogatory nomenclature?!! Aviation experts the world over have the highest respect for the Mig-29UB.

it is still a fact that a Mig-29K is a potent fighter and at "US$46.25 million including spares and support" is pretty cheap for the package!

Igorr, frankly I don't think you are asking the right question. You know that at the time Gorshkov deal was being considered India didn't have the cash it has now. Rafale was not even established as a potent naval fighter (As far as I can remember, they were included in the French Navy only by 2002)! Also as Raveen points out, Gorshkov would have needed even more changes. At that point of time, India did not have the geopolitical clout (just out of Pokhran) to go anywhere but to Russia, and why not? Mig-29K in my opinion is a very good fighter, leaving aside it's short legs!

I don't think many are sceptical that Mig-35 will be one of the cheapest fighters in the MMRCA. But it is a fact that Russia is no longer the USSR. There is no difficulty in accepting both. Is there?
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by NRao »

education 101. Found this - #1 on google:

Nov 22, 2009 :: Indian Navy keen to buy newer generation aircraft
The Ministry of Defence and industry sources indicate that the RFI, issued recently, is of a “generic” nature, looking for newer platforms and airborne technologies and what is on offer from some of the well-known manufacturers. The US Boeing and French Dassault have confirmed receipt of the RFI for their respective F18 Super Hornet and Rafale.
So, there you have it!!!!!!! Rafale for you.

And, to make matters worse (I suspect):
.................. the new generation aircraft will be in addition to the 45 Mig-29Ks the navy is buying from Russia, ...............
So the "new generation aircraft" IS considered to be better than the MiG-29K. Wow, what a revelation. That too in the last 6 months or so!!!! Wow.
As valid as your point might be, why use such derogatory nomenclature?!!
OK. A reconditioned rust bucket.

The fact of the matter still remains that there are FAR better options for India going forward. We ALL have to recognize the fact that what has happened has happened. India has made the best decisions based on what she had in front of her. AND, that she will continue to make decisions that are best for India - as in the case of Arjun, etc.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by arthuro »

As the discussion slept toward naval fighter I post these recent picure of the rafale M F3 deployment onboard the Truman :


http://www.strategypage.com/military_ph ... 11719.aspx
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=86568
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=86570
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=86627
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=86565
Truman, French carrier practice joint air ops
NavyTimes , june 8



Onboard the USS Harry S. Truman — A brace of French Navy Rafales flying from the Charles de Gaulle carrier roared down to perform touch-and-go landings on the vast deck of this Nimitz class carrier, in a show of interoperability between the two navies.

The cross-deck operations included a Rafale landing on the U.S. carrier June 4, being taken down in one of the maintenance hangars and having one of its engines removed and refitted, U.S. Rear Adm. Patrick Driscoll told visitors Tuesday. “This is another brick in interoperability,” he said.

The Rafale engine refit was a proof of concept intended to test the technical details of moving the French strike fighter around and below deck in the precise choreography of carrier operations, Driscoll said. The tools needed for the engine exercise were sent over from the Charles de Gaulle.

The two initial low passes and six touch-and-go landings were “the basics of naval interoperability,” said Rear Adm. Henri Bobin, commander of the French Fleet Air Arm.

Such interoperability could serve in emergencies, where a Rafale might need a safe haven at sea, he said.

The French Fleet Air Arm invited the Truman to take part in celebrations to mark the 100th anniversary of the service. To underline the military-to-military cooperation, the U.S. carrier docked at Marseille on June 8 as part of the anniversary events.

Meanwhile, F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, practiced touch-and-go landings on the Charles de Gaulle, which is sailing nearby as the French carrier undergoes qualification after a 15-month drydock for refit of its nuclear propulsion system.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy was due to visit the French carrier June 10, with Defense Minister Hervé Morin.

As part of the American and French carriers’ joint exercises, Super Hornets and Rafales flew “intercepts,” to pit their systems against each other and diversify flying training of the pilots.

“The Rafale is a very capable aircraft,” Driscoll said.

The American pilots also took part in close-air support training exercises with British and French forward air observers at Canjuers, the French Army training base in the dry, scrubby countryside behind Toulon, Bobin said.

Although NATO procedures in English is the common standard among allied forces, the training with the British and French forces allows the American pilots to familiarize themselves with different accents, which may be the ones that will call for support of their ground troops in Afghanistan, Driscoll said.

“Interoperability is all,” said Nick Witney, senior fellow at think tank European Council for Foreign Relations. “It is certainly a good thing to take the opportunity to reinforce interoperability.”

The engine exercise on the Truman was representative of cross-deck operations prepared in advance, though it was not in the same sort of category as arming, refueling and turning round an allied aircraft between missions. Other operations might include repairing damaged equipment or recalibrating the radar, which would require a higher level of technical interoperability, he said.

In terms of interoperability, the French carrier operates three E2C Hawkeye airborne radar aircraft. These have been progressively upgraded to be compatible with those operating on the Truman, including the eight-bladed propeller, which has proved more reliable than the previous four-bladed version, Bobin said.

Northrop Grumman was due to make a presentation to French officials of the Hawkeye 2000 on June 12 as a potential replacement for the present Hawkeye E-2C. The 2000 version has a new mission computer and a glass cockpit.

The Charles de Gaulle also was “more compatible” with U.S. carriers as its steam catapult launch system aligned it more closely to American ships. The French Foch and Clemenceau carriers used a disposable catapult sling which was jettisoned with each launch.

The Truman is headed to join the 6th Fleet sailing off the Pakistan coast, in the Indian Ocean, where its F/A-18s will support troops in Afghanistan. On the way, three of the destroyers in the carrier group will peel off to carry out anti-piracy patrols off the Somali coast.

Cooperation at the military level has always been good, even when political relations between Paris and Washington were tense over the Iraq war, Bobin said. The improved trans-Atlantic links provided a warmer backdrop for cooperation.

A French pilot on exchange with the U.S. Navy flew an F/A-18C Hornet while his American counterpart flies a Super Etendard on the Charles de Gaulle. Those were less-advanced versions of the respective aircraft fleets.

The cross-deck cooperation was symbolic of the ambitions of Sarkozy in bringing France fully back into NATO, Witney said.
[...]
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Indranil »

NRao wrote:
.................. the new generation aircraft will be in addition to the 45 Mig-29Ks the navy is buying from Russia, ...............
So the "new generation aircraft" IS considered to be better than the MiG-29K. Wow, what a revelation. That too in the last 6 months or so!!!! Wow.
As valid as your point might be, why use such derogatory nomenclature?!!
OK. A reconditioned rust bucket.
Sorry for the OT.

I am not too much of an expert in aircrafts, but this classifying of planes by generations is clearly not my cup of tea (we were discussing the F-35 few posts back)! The Migs can be upgraded to the "Rafale-generation" without much ado, can't it be? and yet it will twice as cheap!

For the Gorshkov and IAC-1 (by size), I can't think of a more potent fighter on deck, rather than the Mig-29K. Any other alternatives, on mind?

Just my point of view, we can certainly let this slip. But calling the Mig-29K a reconditioned rust bucket. All I will say is, everybody is entitled to his ideas :).
Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Raveen »

indranilroy wrote:

Just my point of view, we can certainly let this slip. But calling the Mig-29K a reconditioned rust bucket. All I will say is, everybody is entitled to his ideas :).

There seems to be some confusion what I meant when I said 'rust bucket' as is evident from the post above and below:

indranilroy wrote:
Raveen wrote:
Because the Rafale is catapult launched whereas the rust bucket doesn't have a catapult
As valid as your point might be, why use such derogatory nomenclature?!! Aviation experts the world over have the highest respect for the Mig-29UB.

it is still a fact that a Mig-29K is a potent fighter and at "US$46.25 million including spares and support" is pretty cheap for the package!

Igorr, frankly I don't think you are asking the right question. You know that at the time Gorshkov deal was being considered India didn't have the cash it has now. Rafale was not even established as a potent naval fighter (As far as I can remember, they were included in the French Navy only by 2002)! Also as Raveen points out, Gorshkov would have needed even more changes. At that point of time, India did not have the geopolitical clout (just out of Pokhran) to go anywhere but to Russia, and why not? Mig-29K in my opinion is a very good fighter, leaving aside it's short legs!

I don't think many are sceptical that Mig-35 will be one of the cheapest fighters in the MMRCA. But it is a fact that Russia is no longer the USSR. There is no difficulty in accepting both. Is there?


The 'rust bucket' that I refer to is the Gorshkov and not the Mig...and if there was any doubt, it should have been clarified by the fact that I mentioned that the 'rust bucket' in question doesn't have a catapult. It is the aircraft carrier that doesn't have a catapult (there is nothing known as a catapult on any aircraft) so I am not sure why there is such confusion. In defence of my nomenclature, I will point out that at the point in time when we purchased it it was an actual 'rust bucket' as described by both the Indian and Russian side. There should be no shame in accepting the fact that we are reconditioning/spit-shining a 'rust bucket' due to reasons listed by NRao saar.
Misraji
BRFite
Posts: 401
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 11:53
Location: USA

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Misraji »

indranilroy wrote: Just my point of view, we can certainly let this slip. But calling the Mig-29K a reconditioned rust bucket. All I will say is, everybody is entitled to his ideas :).
Sigh!! ... The Rust-bucket nomenclature was NOT meant for Mig-29k but for Gorshkov.
How is Mig-29k even supposed to have a catapult?

~Ashish
PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by PratikDas »

Guys, please. Say what you can defend about all the MRCA candidates but leave Vikramaditya out of this. Vikramaditya is not Gorky and it will be fundamental to the Indian Navy for years to come.
Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Raveen »

PratikDas wrote:Guys, please. Say what you can defend about all the MRCA candidates but leave Vikramaditya out of this. Vikramaditya is not Gorky and it will be fundamental to the Indian Navy for years to come.
When we decided to buy it, it was the Gorky covered in rust and it is yet to become the Vikramaditya we all desperately await; now let's get back to the MRCA.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by NRao »

indranilroy wrote:Sorry for the OT.
.....................................

For the Gorshkov and IAC-1 (by size), I can't think of a more potent fighter on deck, rather than the Mig-29K. Any other alternatives, on mind?

.....................................
That Gorky and IAC-I will play a role is great.

BUT, what is even greater is the era AFTER Gorky AND IAC-1.

We have to get over that older era - which has been great.

IF the IAC-2 (onwards) comes to fruition and I have no reason to believe it will not, what is this Gorky AND IAC-1? With all due respectS.

India is on the move, IAC-2 onwards WILL be way different than what we have today. And it will be for the better (for India).
Guys, please. Say what you can defend about all the MRCA candidates but leave Vikramaditya out of this. Vikramaditya is not Gorky and it will be fundamental to the Indian Navy for years to come.
I really doubt it. Technology has advanced so fast and will do so, that both the Vik and IAC-1 will be fairly easily out dated. IAC-2 is already being considered for a nuclear plant!! And a cat.
Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Raveen »

NRao wrote:
indranilroy wrote:Sorry for the OT.
.....................................

For the Gorshkov and IAC-1 (by size), I can't think of a more potent fighter on deck, rather than the Mig-29K. Any other alternatives, on mind?

.....................................
That Gorky and IAC-I will play a role is great.

BUT, what is even greater is the era AFTER Gorky AND IAC-1.

We have to get over that older era - which has been great.

IF the IAC-2 (onwards) comes to fruition and I have no reason to believe it will not, what is this Gorky AND IAC-1? With all due respectS.

India is on the move, IAC-2 onwards WILL be way different than what we have today. And it will be for the better (for India).
Absolutely NRao sir, especially if they have a catapult launch (there was word of the IN wanting catapult launched carriers from IAC 2 onwards) since this will open up a greater supplier base for naval airplanes.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Indranil »

Raveen and NRao sahab, completely my mistake ... "silly mistakes" have been my bane from school years :).

I got emotional about Mig-29k and rafale and that rafale would have needed to be catapult launched bla bla bla. Anyways, the point for the MRCA is that Mig-29k though a "generation" behind Rafale, might not be that bad a fighter.

AFA Gorki goes, it was a rust bucket when we bought it, no questions raised about that from my side :)
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1793
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by sunilUpa »

IN did evaluate Rafale, there is a photograph of Admiral Arun Prakash flight testing Rafale.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by NRao »

sunilUpa wrote:IN did evaluate Rafale, there is a photograph of Admiral Arun Prakash flight testing Rafale.
All sites I checked state that he "flew" the naval variant in 2004 - "hen he was Western Naval commander". I doubt it was because they were considering it for the Vik - cannot find any link that states that.

Furthermore, (this is getting to be bad OT here) the 2009 article (posted above) clearly states that the MoD has a RFI for the F-18 and the Rafale for post-Vik+IAC-1.

I would not be surprised at all if the IAC-2 onwards the complement of air crafts would be much larger. Directly linked to the economic progress and the NEED for better def-techs. IF India really fields a third AC by 2017 I do not think it will host the MiG-29K or even a MiG-35K (IF one exists or is even planned).
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1793
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by sunilUpa »

As I said IN 'evaluated' Rafale, found it unsuitable for STOBAR. I didn't mean to imply that Mig-29K was selected because it is superior.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Hist ... rakash.pdf
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

Igorr wrote:I see after Gorshkov problems they went to generalization. To be fair I never heard about T-90 price renegotiation. On the contrary I'm educated very well about the Hawk delivery and ToT problems, American radar tech support and Scorpena manufacturing delay.

Personally I can expect MiG-35 with AESA and TVS $2-5 millions higher then MiG-29K, not more.
Please do not bring Gorshkov inside this as the case was different. The T-90 Tanks had to be re-negotiated. It happened only few months back.

HAWK had problems and India is calling for a different tender.

Scorpene, I will explain you the delay:

The MDL has problems getting it right the first time. But once they get it right, they will keep up with the end delivery date of the final delivery.

Don't sound as if I am anti Mig-35. I am very pro to whoever gives the best deal to India.
Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Raveen »

sunilUpa wrote: As I said IN 'evaluated' Rafale, found it unsuitable for STOBAR.
=
Raveen wrote: Because the Rafale is catapult launched whereas the rust bucket doesn't have a catapult
:)

P.S. On a side note, everyone discussed the Rafale and 'rust bucket' matter except for the member who questioned NRao saar who hasn't made an appearance since
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Igorr »

NRao wrote:Well, educating others is getting to be rather expensive.

No one said that IN/IAF "dislikes the Russian weaponry".

the person said:
IAF may want western weapons this time
- OK, the question we discuss is whether IN/IAF (and especially IAF) look specifically towards Western weaponry with some neglect to the Russian. If such neglect really appeared to be, the argument of kapilrdave ("IAF may want western weapons this time. If so, that factor also goes against Mig".) would be valid. Otherwise if IAF as usually wants both Russian and Western weapons, the argument of kapilrdave doesnt work of course, since doesnt reflect any inclination to specifically Western weaponry versus Russian.

I yet see a valid support for the kapilrdave's argument. The willing to have on ADS a next gen fighter proves nothing since it doesnt express any inclination towards specifically western partners here. Yes, it can be a 5th gen fighter, FGFA for example. Sorry, but still dont see any sign of running from the Russian weaponry to a western. The traditional policy of India was always trying to have both. If the argument was the following diversification, I would accept it (BTW I always accepted it), but 'want western weapons this time' I cannot do, since there is no signs that India goes away of its traditional balancing policy and old aspiration for diversification.
kapilrdave
BRFite
Posts: 1566
Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by kapilrdave »

^^^^ All I said is this ....

IAF may want western weapons this time.
If so, that factor also goes against Mig.

Why is it so difficult to understand?
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Igorr »

kapilrdave wrote:^^^^ All I said is this ....

IAF may want western weapons this time.
If so, that factor also goes against Mig.

Why is it so difficult to understand?
No problem, dude. I can guarantee everybody understood you very well :)
My point: there is no shift overall in Indian purchasing policy. Very simple. LCA - is another example, will have both Russian and Western weaponry (at least planned).
kapilrdave
BRFite
Posts: 1566
Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by kapilrdave »

My point: there is no shift overall in Indian purchasing policy.
You forgot to prepend it by "IMO" :wink:
The fact could be opposite also.

LCA is indigenous product and IAF would want all (possible) type of weapons integrated to it.
Whereas they may want a western platform for western weaponary this time.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by NRao »

Igorr,

I disagree.

Too much to post at this time - perhaps some other time. But, one thing is for sure that the issue of a Rafale being part of the equation for the IN has come into the picture only in 2009. Not earlier.

On the "policy" topic it has changed - we HAVE to expect it to change and expect it to change even further. THAT, my dear friend, is GREAT for India and that is all there is to it. Those among us that think OR expect things to remain the same are plain dreaming (nothing wrong with that - I dream too).

Also, at this time, let me go out on a limb, even the Indo-Russian effort of FGFA (Not PAK-FA) will NOT meet expectations.

I for one, here on out, would urge other nationS to think Indian while peddling technologies to India. That would make life easy for all of us. Else ...............................

On the M/MRCA I would like India to reform the RFP to include newer and functioning technologies - even if the cost goes up (I expect it to). The issue should be functioning or proven technologies for the Indian needS and not based on what we can expect. That way India can negotiate the price for what she is getting rather than pay for an expectation!!!!!!!!
Anthony Hines
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 16 Jul 2009 22:09
Location: West of Greenwich

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Anthony Hines »

Looks like a bunch of Lawyers have descended on the forum. What the heck - this is entertaining. :lol:
nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 579
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by nrshah »

even the Indo-Russian effort of FGFA (Not PAK-FA) will NOT meet expectations.
Would be really thankful, if educated on what parameters it WILL NOT MEET expectation... and why does such feeling come in the first place?
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by arthuro »

A very interesting article in relation to the MRCA competition with a possible mirage 2000 sell instead (at least France, UAE, and quatar push for it)
The Rafale in Abu Dhabi will be expensive for Paris
La Tribune , June 15


The cost of developing the modernized fighter aircraft according to UAE wishes would be 4-5 billion euros.

The sale of 60 Rafale United Arab Emirates (UAE) is likely to be costly to France. If Paris acceed to all the wishes of Abu Dhabi, the cost of developing the modernized fighter aircraft would reach, according to several sources, between 4 and 5 billion euros, some people felt closer to 5 billion. With slightly more than 1 billion for the engine to move from 7.5 to 9 pounds of thrust, at the request of Abu Dhabi. [...]

To date, manufacturers and Gov. did not despair to persuade Abu Dhabi to reduce the bill, including revising downward their wishes. However, work on the specifications of the aircraft is almost complete, one says to "La Tribune". "We keep the schedule, the pace of negotiations is steady," . Because Abu Dhabi has put all its purchase teams from the Department of Defense on this issue, a priority since the beginning of the year. So, Paris and Abu Dhabi could conclude the sale of the rafale itself before the end of July. Currently, both parties begin to discuss the financial aspect.

Serious lead in Qatar

Who will pay? The UAE will finance a part of these developments. "at best the client will pay only half " one says to "La Tribune". "The remainder will be paid by the Ministry of Defence and the industrialists who will share in proportion to their participation (Dassault Aviation 37.5%, Thales 37.5% and Safran 25%). According to our information, the Ministry of Defense will anticipate developments planned later in the current law on military programming (LPM) to modernize the Rafale for the air force and naval aviation. The aim is to bring the aircraft to the F4 standard in 2015-2020, whereas currently the Rafale is now moving to F3. "Some applications for UAE match developments which are a part of the LPM. We merely advances a number of projects," one says at the ministry. But to date, future specifications of the Rafale for the AdA are not yet fixed.

Last section of the folder, the resale of UAE Mirage 2000-9. A very sensitive issue in the UAE, which do not want that Paris sees to it. According to reports, Abu Dhabi and Qatar have done, with the benevolence of France, a joint proposal to sell their 72 Mirage 2000 (60 for UAE and 12 for Qatar) to India. This would open a serious lead for the Rafale in the very francophile Qatar . Nicolas Sarkozy had praised the qualities of the aircraft to the Emir of Qatar at the Elysee Palace this year. India could therefore find themselves at the head of a fleet of more than 120 cheap and efficient Mirage, counting the 51 Mirage 2000 it already has, to be upgraded by Thales and Dassault Aviation, finally convinced. This led some to say that India could then take his time to manage the call for tenders for 127 new generation aircraft it has launched
vardhank
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 17 Feb 2007 15:16
Location: Mumbai

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by vardhank »

^^ would be perfect if it works out... this is exactly the plane the IAF wants... and better to get it cheap and quick, instead of wasting time and money getting new fighters that are just a stop-gap until the LCA Mark II and extra Su-30s anyway. And saves a heck of a lot of headaches on logistics.
How can India push for this?
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5873
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Kartik »

Arthuro, whats the source of that article ? I'm asking because of the fact that in the recent past we've heard that Iraq may also be offered the Mirages..is this source who claims that the 72 Mirages will be offered to India, authentic ?
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by arthuro »

It comes from "La tribune" which is equivalent to the Wall street journal or the financial times in france.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

72 M2K-5 , How much French would charge us for this $ 5 billion ;)
Danell
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 44
Joined: 26 Sep 2009 15:14

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Danell »

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Indranil »

vardhank wrote:^^ would be perfect if it works out... this is exactly the plane the IAF wants... and better to get it cheap and quick, instead of wasting time and money getting new fighters that are just a stop-gap until the LCA Mark II and extra Su-30s anyway. And saves a heck of a lot of headaches on logistics.
How can India push for this?
Even if India goes for this, I don't think the MMRCA will be cancelled. May be it will be capped to 126, depending on when the Mark-2 arrives.

But yes, if India does go for this, it will have 3.5 squadrons in a flash!
saurav.jha
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 16 Dec 2009 20:53

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by saurav.jha »

not in a flash..they wont come as a whole 3.5 squads at a time..
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5873
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Kartik »

arthuro wrote:It comes from "La tribune" which is equivalent to the Wall street journal or the financial times in france.
thanks. There have been so many guesses made on the Mirage-2000-5/-9 sale destination that we cannot say for sure which is most likely..there were reports that the AdA would buy back and use the -5/-9s and then India was mentioned, and later Iraq..

one would think that Taiwan would've been happy to get them considering how badly they need new aircraft, but China wouldn't allow that sale and there have been reports that they're not thrilled with the support that France provided for their Mirage-2000-5 fleet and that it costs significantly more to operate these than the F-16 fleet they have.

I wonder if Pakistan would put forth its begging bowl and ask the UAE to transfer these to them at "brotherly" prices..they were reportedly interested in Qatar's 12 Mirage-2000-5s..
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Indranil »

saurav.jha wrote:not in a flash..they wont come as a whole 3.5 squads at a time..
:rotfl: nice one and rightly so. Not that naive my friend. I meant relatively!
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Indranil »

Kartik wrote: I wonder if Pakistan would put forth its begging bowl and ask the UAE to transfer these to them at "brotherly" prices.
:rotfl:
Kronop
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 11 Jun 2010 13:58

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Kronop »

First of all i'd like to say how much I have enjoyed reading this thread, it is probably one of the most well informed discussions avaliable on the net when it comes to fighter evaluation and procurement in general.

In todays local newspaper in Linköping Sweden there was an interview with Mr Pushpindar Singh on the topic of Gripen chanses in India.

Mr Singh estimates that there is 70% probability that Gripen will be chosen as it is the best overall package in his mind. He also goes on saying that the F18 is to big and that going for the F16 would equal to political suicide given that Pakistan is operating F16.
Article in Swedish: http://www.corren.se/ostergotland/linko ... =&menuids=

As I have come to understand Mr Sing is well respected in the Aerospace communinty, but I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

My own take on this is that he is being polite to the Swedish reporters more than anything else

Being an aerospace proffesional myself I am well aware that the winner of this contract, just as any other fighter deal, will be a political desicion more than anyting else and objectively comparing all parts of each contenders offer is not an easy task.

Also on a side note I spent the better part of a month in New Dehli some years ago on business in connection with Bharti Airtel and found the whole India experience most enjoyable.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5873
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Kartik »

saurav.jha wrote:not in a flash..they wont come as a whole 3.5 squads at a time..
quite right Saurav. the UAEAF at least (less sure about the QEAF's 12 Mirage-2000-5s) will only likely hand-over the Mirages to whoever purchases them, in batches, and most likely beginning with the oldest of their Mirages that were upgraded to the -9 configuration. In UAEAF service they'll be replacing them with the new Rafales start that will start trickling in but since Rafales won't arrive at one go, the Mirages won't be sold at one go.

They have recieved all of their 80 Block 60 Desert Falcons but will be unlikely to hand over all their Mirages at one go due to the Black Shaheen being integrated with that fleet alone. This is their main long range cruise missile and giving away the entire fleet in a short time will mean that some other aircraft with a similar long range strike capability must be available to them. Till Rafales with Black Shaheen integrated and tested with the AESA RBE2's arrive, they will not part with the entire Mirage-2000-9 fleet completely. and considering the UAE's demand for new M-88-3 engines, and a host of other new requirements from the Rafale, this new F4 or F4+ version of the Rafale won't enter service till 2014-15 at the very earliest, so expect them to keep the Mirages in some numbers till then.

Which makes me wonder whether the IAF will be able to convince the MoD, MoF and CCS that it requires these Mirage-2000-9s as an urgent gap-filler. There are several arguments that make it seem like these Mirages would be a good purchase if they can drive a hard bargain..

One might think that they'll be quite costly (going by the upgrade costs for our 52 Mirages), although the relatively small number of Mirage-2000 operators world over means that they have very few potential buyers who have the infrastructure set up already and if UAE links the sale of Rafales to the sale of its Mirages then France will be desperate to arrive at some solution. Peru has a very small Mirage-2000 fleet and cannot possibly afford a multi-billion $ deal. Egypt's 10 odd Mirages hardly constitute a serious force and they've only recently gone with 24 new F-16 Block 52s and are reportedly interested in the JF-17. Taiwan is unlikely to be a customer for these due to the Chinese pressure on the French, and their own poor experience with the French after sales support. Greece is as good as out of the question thanks to the massive credit crunch they're facing. Other Mirage operators that Dassault would've hoped would've become Mirage-2000 operators mostly happen to be in Latin America. Ecuador is looking to curtail its Super Tucano purchase so it can fund buying some 12 ex-SAAF Cheetah-D fighters so they're not really going to be able to afford any major number of these Mirage-2000-5/9s. Argentina's economic situation is still not improving and Brazil is no longer looking to add any Mirage-2000s after the second-hand Mirages it bought from France. Iraq may present an opportunity but Unkil will muscle France out of this deal for sure with F-16s.

India is the only one that fits the bill in terms of need (squadron numbers can be made up), money and it already has made the investment in both basing (Maharajpur AFS can house close to a 100 Mirages since the IAF set up initial infrastructure there hoping to get that many and more) as well as overhaul, maintenance facilities (HAL is the only facility outside France that does overhaul on its own for the Mirage-2000s). Or else the French will need to adopt these middle-eastern Mirages as their own and possibly retire their older Mirage-2000Cs (not the -5F) earlier.

UAE basically bought its Mirages in 2 big buys- 32 it bought in the mid-late 1980s (1986 onwards) and then 30 Mirage-2000-9s in 1999. The oldest Mirage-2000 airframes in UAEAF service have close to 20-24 years on their airframe, so they're of nearly similar vintage as the IAF's Mirages. I'm not quite sure about how heavily they've been used but my guess is that they're not flogged like NATO fighters are..its likely that they have nearly 40-50% of their service life remaining. They've been upgraded to -9 level only recently though, with the last having been received in 2007. So they have top notch avionics and weapons and are on par with the F-16 Block 50s except for no engine changes.Having fewer hours on their airframe those should be worth less than the newer 30 Mirage-2000-9s that the UAE bought from France in 1999.

Qatar's recently reported evaluation of the Shornet indicates that they're serious about replacing their Mirage-2000-5s..the MoD really snubbed them the last time with a very low offer but this time around, a respectable offer could seal the deal.

Pakistan may be tempted by such a large number of capable jets which makes a more compelling business case for setting up a brand new infrastructure to support these jets. in the 1990s they evaluated and liked the -5 but basically with their empty pockets they had no chance of getting any since France doesn't do military aid like the US and China do. their ACM has already gone on record as stating that the French will be selling their avionics and weapons to them as part of a JF-17 package despite press reports to the contrary, so they will complement each other in a way. But as mentioned before this Mirage deal is only possible for them if the UAE cannot find buyers and they have to dispose them off at very liberal credits..
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5873
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Kartik »

Kronop wrote:First of all i'd like to say how much I have enjoyed reading this thread, it is probably one of the most well informed discussions avaliable on the net when it comes to fighter evaluation and procurement in general.

In todays local newspaper in Linköping Sweden there was an interview with Mr Pushpindar Singh on the topic of Gripen chanses in India.

Mr Singh estimates that there is 70% probability that Gripen will be chosen as it is the best overall package in his mind. He also goes on saying that the F18 is to big and that going for the F16 would equal to political suicide given that Pakistan is operating F16.
Article in Swedish: http://www.corren.se/ostergotland/linko ... =&menuids=

As I have come to understand Mr Sing is well respected in the Aerospace communinty, but I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

My own take on this is that he is being polite to the Swedish reporters more than anything else

Being an aerospace proffesional myself I am well aware that the winner of this contract, just as any other fighter deal, will be a political desicion more than anyting else and objectively comparing all parts of each contenders offer is not an easy task.

Also on a side note I spent the better part of a month in New Dehli some years ago on business in connection with Bharti Airtel and found the whole India experience most enjoyable.
welcome to BRF, Kronop. We have a couple of other Swedish posters here too, like Dorai and Wickberg. I read the translation of that article you posted, and it was on Keypub forum. Pushpinder Singh Chopra is a legend among Indian aviation writers. He's a reputed author on the IAF and its aircraft and you can get an idea of how knowledgeable he is when you read his writings (for e.g on the Su-7, just google "a whale of a fighter", possibly one of the better descriptions of a rarely mentioned fighter). It’s a well researched, excellent piece that describes the aircraft in depth, its drawbacks, its advantages in both technical and lay man terms. His analysis is crisp, descriptive and based on a lot of inputs from operational pilots but it is almost like that of a test pilot. Its certainly way more technical and in-depth than what Shiv Aroor or Ajai Shukla (our most prolific defence correspondents) would ever be able to write but in their defence they are writing on different topics too. Its indicative of his technical background and subject knowledge. Contrast that with Shiv Aroor's coverage or writings. Its almost exclusively non-technical. For instance, Saab gave Shiv Aroor a trip to Linkoping, and a flight on board a Gripen D and all he was able to come up with was some lame descriptions to make a 15-20 minute show for TV. It was less about the aircraft and more about show. Pushpinder on the other hand, knows his aircraft stuff. And he has a lot of IAF contacts, which is why he was able to repudiate the nonsense that Col. Terrence Fornhoff was spouting about the IAF and its MKIs after Red Flag. When he says something, its very likely based on a deep understanding of what the IAF wants, and a fair deal of conversation with IAF contacts who've been either directly involved or are aware of the MRCA evaluations. What he must be stating is likely based on that cross-section, not the ruling political cross-section though, which is currently very tilted towards the US. It also takes into consideration the likelihood that this might well be a tender that may be awarded to the bidder with the lowest up-front acquisition costs and (if they do consider it), then lifetime costs as well. MiG and Saab alongwith LM are likely to be in the forefront there and if they make the final cut, then they're likely favourites to win. if the IAF's aim is to diversify from a heavily Russian fleet in the future (MKI, PAK-FA) then the MRCA has to be a western fighter and the Gripen IN may be the cheapest of that lot.
shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by shukla »

Kartik wrote: I read the translation of that article you posted, and it was on Keypub forum.
Thanks for the insight on the writer Kartik. Would it be possible for you to post the translation here (or let me know how to find a translated version or do you have a web link to the translatd forum)?
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5873
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Post by Kartik »

shukla wrote:
Thanks for the insight on the writer Kartik. Would it be possible for you to post the translation here (or let me know how to find a translated version or do you have a web link to the translatd forum)?
you're welcome Shukla. The link to the translated article is given here
Locked