mattIt’s a good thing in the end that nobody bought this thing.
EADS came with a trainer plane that cost the price of a 5th gen fighter and with specification they didn’t not know how to actually build.
Reminds me of so many other projects 😀
I am not so sure about the price being that high! Also the MAKO could have been a very good competitors in smaller markets as a light fighter aircraft or a LIFT. Once the production development had been sorted out it would have been a relatively cost effective aircraft with some modest stealth features
mattI am not sure if this has been reported here or not but Russia will sell of Su-30K’s given back by India to Belarus for a price of $15million each which is 10 million for aircraft and 5 million for an upgrade/extension. not a bad price.
mattwhy would Australia invest in any military program with a potential future enemy? The best option was F-22, second best F-35. we’re getting F-35, thats it
Australia would be better served by doubling the Super Hornet, KC-30 and C-17 acquisitions, scrapping MRH-90s and buying more CH-47Fs and buy new/ upgrade S-70As….with some dedicated pave hawks for 171 sqn…
those aircraft wont help Australia if it has China and India as potential future enemies..
mattYeah, the Hawk is a fine jet trainer & with upgrades with the likes of avionics, weapons etc its up there at the top, however it lacks supersonic speeds & reheat to get a more of a feel for frontline supersonic jets. Enter the Mako.
If India are interested in the Mako, then it makes the Typhoon bid that bit more of what already is the better offer in my view.
MAKO should have got into production years ago… just a shame no one had wanted to use it for their airforces…
mattSomething not directly related to the MMRCA competition buy maybe worth a mention:
NEW DELHI: India is swiftly moving towards inking another major deal for training aircraft to teach rookie pilots the intricacies of combat flying before it stitches up the over $10.4 billion (Rs 42,000 crore) project to acquire 126 top-notch fighters.
The Rs 2,900 crore deal for acquiring 75 Swiss Pilatus PC-7 turbo basic trainers is in the final stages now, with the “note” prepared for the Cabinet Committee on Security being “vetted” by the finance ministry at present, say defence ministry sources.
***
IAF, of course, is also progressively inducting British Hawk AJTs (advanced jet trainers), 123 of which were ordered in two contracts inked in March 2004 and July 2010 for a total of around Rs 16,000 crore, but they are meant for advanced combat training.
The article also states that the contract for the MMRCA will likely be signed by January-February.
With regards to an advanced jet trainer; it was mentiond in Combat Aircraft Montly that with EADS’ inviting India to become the 5th Eurofighter partner nation, it may involve India in the likes of the Mako supersonic jet trainer – as well as UAVs.
MAKO makes a lot of sense for India, the hawk is old hat and needs to be updated…. good news if true..
matttoo early about AMCA..
what if in the end AMCA has heavy Russian input like on some of the Indian Naval ships, would Australia be okay with that?
Also can HAL avoid another LCA-style delays here (bar the sanction issues)?maybe Australia might have better luck teaming with Japan on the I3 fighter instead.
Well it would be a good idea for japan to work with India and Australia and South Korea etc etc to develop the stealth fighter. does not make sense for any of those countries to go it alone they all have the same threat.
mattThe Russians have had one boat of the Nanuchka class refitted with 2×6 P-160 (3M55) “Onyx” anti-ship missiles, replacing the original armament of 2×3 P-120 “Malakhit” (4K85) or P-20 “Теrmit” anti-ship missiles. Note however that Algeria recently opted to riefit it’s ships with 4×4 launchers anti-ship missiles 3M24E “Uran-E” instead of P-20
2×6 Brahmos could be a possible upgrade for the Veer and Khukri classes, although given the fit of the lastest 2 units of the Veer class (INS Prabal K92, INS Pralaya K91) and of the Kora class, there is also a good case for refitting each with sixteen 3M-24E (SS-N-25) AShMs. That is, if the old hulls still have enough life in them for any kind of refit to be worthwhile….
Thank you for the detail and reply, I like the idea of fast and small with a few missiles for hit and run. I hope the IN can stick something like these on interceptor boats… would make for a nice bite.
mattPrivatisation is a wrong word, what is needed are reforms. While you are at the contention that organisational reforms can be achieved only via change of ownership, what I am trying to put across is that change of ownership will not bring about a ground of change unless the policies governing the sector are corrected.
Its a myth that PSUs are not profit oriented. Yes, they lack the ruthlessness and have their own inertia but most of them run in black. Personally i am in favor of government dissolving several defence related manufacturing units and developing/recruiting vendors that can innovate, but the core development/design/procurement of every project should be managed by a government agency so that ultimately the complete project is audited thoroughly by CAG or any other competent government appointed auditors.
It is not the policies but the incumbent and entrenched management that needs to be edited/changed in very institutionalised organisations. This is not only India specific but can be seen the world over where former government companies have difficulties setting performance goals
mattIAF’s 5th C-130J on its way to India, being delivered ahead of schedule..really refreshing to read about some defence article being supplied ahead of schedule !
Well its not suprising considering they have had many years in PD of the C-130J and that it is not manufactured/assembled by HAL.
mattCant find source, maybe aviation week, but Russian think tank has done a study showing that there is a potential on the market for a 1000 T-50 aircraft. including sales to Iran, Syria, China.
well lets see…
mattQumf, i did a bit of a search and found your post on the scientific forum, I think the best thing you could do is to build a small working model of the turbine you propose. You do not need to worry about longevity or durability so may get away with relatively inexpensive materials and lot fabrication costs.
matthave the USMC already sacrificed the MV-22 or is it still in their need list? Maybe they can sacrifice that for hte F-35B which may have more customers.
mattYou should take this to a university, I am sure there are people on this forum who think they know what they are talking about but you need an independent assessment from a professor or a expert engineer.
be careful about IP!
mattWhat ?
No some US Senator from Ft Worth is demanding no more money be spent on Super Hornets from the F-35 program to protect his hopeless voters or he wont santion Ashton Carters nomination as deputy for Defence. I don’t think you will find the existing top up order of Super Hornets cancelled as then the Boeing pet Senators would raise up a stink.
Actually the fate of the Naval variants falls to a range of studies instigated by Robert Work to investigate the best use of Naval Warfighting Aviation over the next 12 years in terms on cost benefit analysis based on three diferent level of budget cuts. We won’t hear what their conclusions are till Feburary as it will depend on the level of cuts they will have to face.
maybe i got the wrong end of the stick Geoff, have a look at this report in the link below.
I agree with the author that going in for a UCAV solution and purchasing F/A-18 at the cost of F-35 is not sensible.
Sen. Chambliss Attacks Purchase of More Super Hornets
(Source: Lexington Institute; issued September 1, 2011)
(© Lexington Institute; reproduced by permission)
SNIP—-
In a letter to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Chambliss argued that if the Pentagon failed to move out smartly on purchasing the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter for the Navy and other services, “we run the certain risk of ceding tactical air superiority in future conflicts.”That’s pretty strong stuff. What Chambliss is in effect saying is that if the Navy doesn’t get F-35s, then there’s not much point to operating aircraft carriers because the principal tactical aircraft they currently host will not be able to assert U.S. control of the skies over future battle zones. His views on the matter are undoubtedly influenced by the fact that Georgia has a big stake in the success of F-35 — parts of the plane are manufactured in Marietta — but the senator is reflecting a view shared by a fair number of military experts. They contend that airframes lacking the integrated stealth and situational awareness of an F-35 don’t have much chance of surviving in the future, so even though the Super Hornet looks world-class today its days are numbered.
Navy leaders continue to support purchase of the F-35C, the carrier version of the Joint Strike Fighter, but they don’t seem quite so alarmed about the future threat environment for their tactical aircraft. Even if they were, there’s a school of thought that says the sea services should be moving out more smartly on unmanned combat aircraft, because no U.S. aircraft driven by human pilots is likely to have the legs and longevity to operate effectively in places like the Western Pacific 20 years from now.
snip–
Have deleted a lot as i did not want to copy the article verbatim on here
mattUnstable platform would be equally suitable for a strike aircraft as it would for a fighter, in fact the canard configuration might also improve aerodynamic efficiency to inch out that extra mile.
Just because the DF-21 flies hypersonic or has a large range does not mean that the J-20 would have to be the same, by virtue of its stealth or VLO features and low level flying it could create a similar effect.
Remember the idea is not about a replacement for the DF-21 but a fall back incase the DF-21 kill chain is compromised which is very likely and i would say fragile.
Put this case against a backdrop by which the USN aviation wing is the size of most airforces around the world and its reputed ability to detect targets at long range. If anyone has the greatest chance of detecting stealth aircraft or having such technology it will be the US.
Going only with the DF-21 as a kill option would be foolish the PLAAF are clever enough to have a fall back incase the bluff fails.
Sign In
