quadbikeWhy did the UAE buy Black Shaheen? And why did it buy Mirage 2000-9, after ordering F-16E? Because the USA would not sell JASSM,
A reduced-range JASSM may be on offer for India. I believe it was in one of the F 16IN models in the Lockheed stall at Aero India 09.
F 18 stall had this big picture of F 18s underbelly showing the JASSM among other weapons.
quadbikethey haven’t gone for anything yet, they’re still looking at it
Just not official yet thats all. C 17 is going to be our heavy lift. 😉
quadbikeI wont write off SAAB though, especially if they contribute, in whatever limited amount to the LCA, MCA etc but there has been very little from their end on such cooperation, correct me if I am wrong.
Transfer of Technology (TOT)
Saab is willing and able to provide ToT, that exceeds the requirements, to the Indian Government
The level of ToT will enable India to manage all aspects of the life cycle including design
Access to all levels of technology
Saab is willing to enter a joint venture with Indian Aerospace Industry
with the aim to develop the next generation of fighters (MCA)
http://www.gripen.com/en/GripenFighter/the_future_is_gripen_ng/Gripen_NG_for_India.htm
but it’s illusionary to expect of Su-30 or F18 to come within 40km of defended target to begin action. This is where EU’s weaponry comes in handy.
The Su 30s are going to be equipped with the Brahmos. The EU’s stand off weapons will have to be range reduced before being sold to India. There are comparable weapons in the American stable as well.
quadbikeWe need to talk on things based on facts! Pride can be a thing that makes them do that. Some Russian engineer just used assumption to jump to their conclusion.
The Russian may also under the instruction of their superior to strain relation between US and Israel.
The fact, it cannot be verify by Janes might be just a makeup story to sell their issue for that month. Actually no such Russian engineer make that comment. Pure rubbish!
We need facts! U shall know the rules of the game! :rolleyes:
China is not a democracy and because of that there will never be an official admission than J 10 was based on the Lavi. If some officer does that his head is going to roll. 😉
quadbikeHm, according to this file, Rafale’s program price was 170m$, back in 2006. Today with no foreign customers and inflation it can only be higher.
How does India plan to get 126 MRCA with a (correct me if I’m wrong) 10b$ budget??
With such budget, India may get at best ~60 Rafales and that’s without a single gun round, or a drop of JP.
With EF the situation is even worse and it’s only Gripen and Mig that have any theoretical chance to fit that equation.
The contract is worth 11-12 Billion USD. IIRC more funds will be available if required. The F 18 price is repeatedly stated as only marginally higher than single engined competitors. If there is a price issue it will only affect the bigger Eurocanards.
quadbikeCentre okay with Boeing aircraft to replace ageing IL-76 fleet
New Delhi: Keen on replacing the ageing Russian IL-76 transport aircraft in the Indian Air Force (IAF), the ministry of defence has approved in principle the purchase of the US-based Boeing’s C-17 heavy-lift Globemaster III. The deal is worth over $2 billion.
“The C-17s have been short listed after IAF carried out a thorough study on its capability to take-off and land on short runways with heavy loads. The defency ministry has sent a letter to the US administration seeking a formal offer for these machines,” highly placed sources on conditions of anonymity told FE. This development comes ahead of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the US.
Sources said the C-17 deal was discussed and cleared at a recent meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council chaired by defence minister AK Antony. The deal, likely to be inked in few months, will be discussed during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the US.
Initially, the IAF will place an order for 10 C-17s through the US government’s foreign military sales (FMS) route, and may later go in for a follow-on order, sources said. “For an FMS contract, the US administration, after receiving a letter of request from the MoD, will seek Congressional approval before making a formal offer.”
“If accepted, the aircraft should be inducted in about three years after the contract is signed,” sources added.
Most of IAF’s transport aircraft were acquired in the 1980s and the air force is keen to acquire new generation aircraft to replace and augment its fleet.
The US ambassador in New Delhi, while pitching for robust India-US military ties, has reportedly said, “America is ready to support India’s drive to modernise its armed forces.”
India has ordered for six C-130J aircraft (from Lockheed Martin) for its special forces operations and these aircraft will be based at the Hindan air base in Ghaziabad.
C-130J Super Hercules is an American four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft made by Lockheed Martin capable of carrying 20 tonne or 92 fully armed airborne troops.
C-17 Globemaster is a larger Boeing-made military transport aircraft capable of carrying 75 tonne or 135 troops.
With Asia becoming a global economic engine, India’s interests have surpassed her own boundaries to regions stretching from the Straits of Hormuz to the Straits of Malacca, the northern Indian Ocean Region, and to central Asia. The IAF plans to replace and augment nearly 100% of its fighter, transport, and helicopter fleets due to age and performance deficiencies.”Demands on the airlift fleet are growing due to enhanced national and international commitments that will only increase in the future,” said a senior IAF officer.
According to the former Air Chief Fali Homi Major, “… with India emerging as a global economic power, it is necessary that the IAF enhance its capabilities to fulfill new responsibilities. And, to meet these new security challenges, the IAF needs strategic reach, there is a necessity to build up our strategic assets …”…
quadbikeMiG-35 – modern, cheap and from the trustworthy ally Russia. Also the Navy will fly the MiG-29K so it is in service any way. – The best coice.
1. Putting all your eggs in one basket.
2. Lack of support for the platform in its home country.
3. The cost of upgrades bearing down on IAF.
If India do not want anything American then the best choice for me is the Rafale. It has a few more problems than you mentioned though.
1. Expensive Weapons.
2. Upgrade will be costly, look at the IAF Mirage situation.
quadbikeYa, but whats the range & how deep can it go into PRC w/that fit.
Plus, like I said, the Meteor is tres expensive. Dont’ get me wrong but this is a typical case of a PR loadout unlikely to be seen for deep strike, that thing would need a lot of gas w/that fit.
They say weapons of our Choice. AMRAAM or MICA anyone ? R77 may be stretching it a bit too far. 😉
then you dont need a multirole meduim fighter, only more MKI with more AtoG diversity.
Exactly my thought a Mix of Gripen and Super Hornet in a 200 AC order will not be bad either (esp if the Mirages are taken out of service so number of types do not increase)
quadbikeIs Pakistan getting AIM9x with its Block 50/52s ?>
quadbikeEven if Isreal had some input into the J10 in the early stages -this hardly qualifies the J10 as ‘ stolen Russian Fighter ‘. I can’t see anybody claiming intelecual property rights for J10 ….. other than China ofcourse.
Its not stolen. Its an American derived/funded Israeli design that they sold to China, It is not an exact copy either, the Chinese also had their inputs. 😉
quadbikeMy point is we need a fighter which is able to do both ie A2A and A2G, ie a mixed role with sufficient payload (because its carrying both types) and at range. Thats the problem here. For every mission, if India needs to allocate a mix of Su-30MKIs and NGs, the NG is simply not good enough. And the more NGs allocated to a mission, the greater the wear and tear, and issues in an intense conflict with number of available airframes.
And it should be non sanctionable and come with a potent weapons fit. Now see the problem here with the NG, for a decent off the shelf MRAAM, we only have the AMRAAM – which is American. The NGs in display have been shown with the Derby, which is far less ranged. And the Meteor is too expensive to buy and deploy in bulk.
The same goes for A2G. Also, the basic NG itself is full of US kit. The problem here is that if India is ok with this, it might as well take the Viper or F/A-18E/F then, one of which is likely to be cheaper & is more proven, mature etc. and the other more capable, as an allround striker than the NG.
Which is why I prefer the Rafale and Typhoon. They offer more capability (albeit at much greater cost) and are relatively sanction free..
Like I said – its cost. Two pilots, and a heavy fighter with substantial logistics added to it. India needs a “medium” which can do most of what a heavy can. The problem is the NG approaches the lower end of the medium spectrum (weight, capability) whereas what I am talking about is a medium which punches close to the MKI in certain areas or can even replace it in missions.
For peacetime, the NG will be brilliant – high optempo, low costs etc. But at wartime, given the amount of pressure on the IAF in a two front war case, we need every bit of operational advantage possible.
That apart, the NG is similar to the LCA MK2 in terms of some technologies, capabilities from the MIC point of view. I’d rather SAAB & ADA work on the next gen MCA (bigger, more capable) than buy the NG.
From the Rafale to Brazil thread.
http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/gripen-ng.jpg
Now thats a decent A2A/A2G mixed load out that Gripen is carrying.
quadbikeAll along is rubbish russian media making the accusation of illegal copy.
As far as i know Mr.Pogosyan do not work for any Russian media.
As for the J 10. They can deny it all they want and since the Israelis and Chinese are embarrassed about it they are unlikely to officially confirm it. However I will give you an interesting read thats several years old.
quadbikeAnd I don’t want to be banned, do I ?
So I am wondering how much $ the new flight test campaign will cost to get those loadouts ops ?
1- http://www.serve.com/vhold/hellcats/posts/gripen_ng_front.jpg
2- http://www.skycontrol.net/UserFiles/Image/MilitaryAviation_img/200808/200808-gripen-ng-next-generation-1.jpg
3- http://defesabr.com/FAB/Gripen_NG.jpg
4- http://lh3.ggpht.com/_S1Gu2hX9S6c/SlKYiCW8JPI/AAAAAAAALi0/LmfkfdPv3yE/s800/gripen-ng-2.jpgand my favorite :
5- http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/gripen-ng.jpgor may be only the first one is really planed ?
do you think the “?” is big enough for me not to called a flamer ?
For a small bird the Gripen can seriously haul some heavy **** 😎
quadbikeDefence offsets cross Rs 8000 crores
Since 2005, when the Ministry of Defence mandated that every foreign defence purchase above Rs 300 crores would impose on the vendor an offset liability of 30% of the contract value, global arms majors have scurried to tie up partnerships with Indian defence manufacturers.
Today, for the first time, the MoD revealed exactly how much business the defence offsets policy has generated. Satyajeet Rajan, the chief of the Defence Offsets Facilitation Agency (DOFA) revealed that, since 2007, foreign vendors have signed up for offsets worth about Rs 8000 crores.
In 2007, a mere Rs 243 crores worth of offsets were firmed up. The figure rose tenfold to Rs 2598 crores in 2008. And in 2009, DOFA has already okayed Rs 4870 crores worth of offsets and counting.
These values are of planned production; actual production has still to begin in all but a handful of offset partnerships that were tied up over the last three years.
Interestingly, 94% of all planned offsets are in the aerospace sector; the remaining 6% covers the manufacture of naval systems. Apparently the MoD’s Rs 42,000 crore tender for the purchase of 126 medium fighters has been a major driver in encouraging offsets partnerships. Most of the six vendors competing in that contract have been identifying potential partners within India’s private sector, as well as with public sector aerospace giant, HAL.
Foreign vendors are currently permitted to discharge their offset obligations in three possible ways. Defence products, purchased from India’s defence manufacturers for export are eligible for offsets credits. So too are investments in India’s defence industry. Finally, investments made in Indian R&D facilities will be counted as offsets.
So far, the investment into Indian R&D has been negligible. And in choosing Indian partners, foreign arms vendors have preferred private companies to the public sector. So far, 40% of all offsets have gone to MoD-owned entities: factories of the Ordnance Factory Board and the eight defence PSUs. 33% of the offsets have gone to large private companies and a healthy 27% have gone to small and medium sized manufacturers.
The potential value of offsets business is enormous. India currently buys foreign weaponry worth about Rs 50,000 crores annually, a figure that is rising. Taking the minimum offsets liability of 30%, about Rs 15,000 crores worth of offsets must be discharged annually. In fact, the figure is higher; the medium fighter tender specifies an offsets liability of 50%.
The global arms industry complains bitterly about offsets; the United States government officially frowns at offset demands, but allows its companies to meet the conditions of buyers. But India’s MoD insists that global defence contractors actually derive commercial benefits from partnering Indian companies in defence manufacture. The DOFA chief points out, “Offsets requirements force foreign vendors into looking for Indian companies to partner. But this is for the present; 10-15 years down the line, we will not need offsets at all to galvanise Indian defence manufacture.”
Offsets were first demanded by European countries in the late 1950s, when the US was arming NATO against the Soviet Union. But the practice gathered momentum only in the last two decades. In 1990 only 20 countries demanded offsets as a part of arms purchases. Today offsets are demanded by over 130 countries.
In India, defence offsets were first approved by the Defence Minister in 2004 and included in Defence Procurement Policy of 2005 (DPP-2005). This was amended in DPP-2008, which permitted “offset banking” and the waiving of offsets in “fast track” purchase. This year, DPP-2009 permitted a long-standing request by foreign vendors, allowing them to change offset partners.
Today, indicating that more changes could be legislated in DPP-2010, DOFA Chairman Satyajeet Rajan asked the private sector to suggest useful changes to the offsets policy.
Distribution of offsets
40% : Ordnance factories and DPSUs
33% : Large private industry
27% : Other private industry
Offsets business year-wise
2007 : Rs 243 crores
2008 : Rs 2598 crores
2009 : Rs 4870 crores
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/11/defence-offsets-cross-rs-8000-crores.html
quadbikeFirstly,J-11 is not stolen.
Partly true J 11 A not stolen. J 11 B stolen :). Lavi Original Concept bought (not stolen) but has significant Chinese inputs.
Source to Scooter’s story : http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/19-11-2009/110601-china_russia-0
Sign In
