BlackArcherEmbraer and DRDO looking at the export potential of the EMB-145I AEWACS being developed for the IAF
Sources confirm to Express that the Brazilian aircraft manufacturer Embraer has approached the Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS), a Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) lab, for the joint development of AEW&C system for exporting it to South American countries.The AEW&C system is being built on a modified Embraer EMB-145I aircraft with two planes currently undergoing flight trials in India with the third and final one expected to arrive from Brazil in December.
The Indian Air Force (IAF) is expected to induct the first eye-in-the-sky platform next year, making it a force multiplier during reconnaissance missions. Sources confirm that both Embraer and DRDO have already signed a non-disclosure agreement to initiate interactions for taking the idea of exporting the prying plane forward.
With an eye on export, the DRDO had exhibited the plane during an air show in Bahrain early this year.
“In Bahrain, a couple of West Asian countries had shown interest in having the AEW&C system from India. We can confirm that special interest have been shown by UAE, Oman and Russia. Embraer is keen that we join hands with them for the joint development of the system for South American countries,” said an official. He said internationally, similar systems will cost between $100-$110 million and put the cost ratio between Embraer and DRDO to the order of 40:60
…
The EMB-145I AEWACS has been meeting and even surpassing original design goals (I got this from a source very closely involved with the development) and the flight and system trials are on target, time wise. Cost wise, this may be cheaper than the EriEye AEWACS which is in the same class. once in service with the IAF, teething issues will emerge and need to be resolved, which should lead to further orders and make it a more attractive to other nations looking for a cost effective AEWACS.
BlackArcherNo flaw in my logic. Your reading comprehension might be mistaking what I said. Tejas is simply tainted by imports, not more so. MRCA would compete for resources, giving the Russians reasons to pick up efforts to gather in the funding by offering superior service or whatnot. The lack of competition for limited funding has stifled MKI potential.
name one other non US, Russian or EU fighter that doesn’t require an imported engine or even radar for that matter..engines are the achilles heel for almost all jets or even props produced by nations that historically haven’t produced complex systems like aircraft and don’t have the entire supply chain of suppliers and R&D in related fields. It is not something that is limited to the Tejas alone..even today, with massive investments, China remains dependent on the Russians for engines, South Korea uses American engines on their T-50 family, as does Sweden for the Gripen. And it’s not like the Tejas isn’t in service because of import issues, so really what you said -“Tejas is simply tainted by imports” is true of a host of other airplanes too.
BlackArcherFWIW..Dassault, HAL, MoD and IAF officials to meet today and tomorrow to try and finalise the final details of the MRCA contract.
In a move that is being viewed with much anticipation, starting tomorrow, officials from French firm Dassault Aviation, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and Indian Air Force (IAF) will engage in 48 hours of negotiations in Bangalore over the deal to acquire 126 Rafale fighter jets under the long-standing Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) contract. The conclusion of this round is likely to land the IAF just one step away from concluding the entire set of negotiations and thereby, signing the deal.
A senior Ministry of Defence (MoD) official said, “We expect total closure of negotiations over Transfer of Technology (ToT) from this round. With that done, we will have completed negotiations by sub committees on ToT, offsets and maintenance.” He added, “What will remain will be the overall cost and there too, 75 per cent of the work has been completed.”
Sources indicated the IAF believes that Contract Negotiation Committee (CNC) could complete its entire gamut of work before December this year, following which the matter will be placed before the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), after consultations with the Finance Ministry. “We are not being ambitious if we say we expect the deal to be signed before the end of this financial year,” said a source.
BlackArcherBlackArcherBlackArcherBlackArcherTry and have some balance and facts, MIG-21s did perform well but keep in mind the below too
First of all, the lack of the advanced active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar on their F-15s. Second, the air engagements typically involved six Eagles against up to eighteen IAF aircraft with no chance to simulate any beyond visual range (BVR) missile shot (due to the Indian request of not using the AMRAAM).Furthermore, the Indians had sent their most experienced airmen to fight against the Americans whereas the latter belonged to a standard squadron (hence there was a mix of experienced and less experienced pilots).
http://theaviationist.com/2014/05/02/cope-india-2004-results/
not all of the 18 aircraft of the IAF mixed formations were MiG-21s or Su-30Ks..they were MiG-27s that were tasked with strike and they had MiG-21s embedded as escorts.
And no, the IAF didn’t send all experienced pilots to the exercise. The IAF has always mixed the numbers with some highly experienced pilots with some novices and some pilots with medium level experience.
I already mentioned that the F-15s were restricted to simulating AIM-7 Sparrows (basically semi-active missiles) – there was no restriction on not using the AIM-7 as BVR missiles, but they would need constant radar illumation which is a handicap.
The idea was the IAF was looking to validate its own tactics against the PAF, which back then did not possess any AMRAAMs.
And if you want to mention how the F-15Cs lacked AESA, then well, the IAF didnt’ field the Su-30MKI with the BARS PESA radar either- they were the Su-30MK and Su-30Ks with the older cassegrain radars. So, clearly, IAF didn’t possess much better kit either.
What the exercise showed is the value of flexibility of tactics, not underestimating your enemy (they expected IAF pilots to be reliant on GCI, which they were not) and that over-reliance on BVR would come back to bite you in the back. IAF pilots who trained heavily for WVR combat expecting BVR combat to not be all encompassing.
BlackArcherso bison had jammers in 2004. when they were integrated?. how was the power supply and aerodynamic testing.
how the hell is that even of consequence as to how the power supply was provided to them or how the flight testing was done? they were integrated and were in use during Cope India 2004.
BlackArcherThose T1 Typhoons should be good for at least another ten years, & probably a lot more if given a decent MLU. The French are being more rational. They’re not in a hurry to retire older types that are still effective, are buying Rafales as slowly as they can while still keeping the line viable, & making it clear that they intend to keep ’em until they wear out. Even the ten F1s, which were put into storage due to incompatibility with the rest of the fleet, were put into an upgrade programme in 2010. Expensive – but cheaper than buying completely new aircraft. We have 50 or so T1 Typhoons, which is a hell of a lot of perfectly good aircraft to throw away after no more than half (& probably a lot less) of their service life. It’d make more sense to put new aircraft into store as a reserve for the future, to extend the lifetime of the type, & run on the T1s.
I sometimes despair at the UK MoD’s bizarre combination of profligacy & penny-pinching. It’s a prime example of penny wise, pound foolish.
People keep going on about very high Typhoon operational costs, but rarely back it up with credible numbers.
First person to quote the NAO £80000 an hour or whatever it was will be shot. That was total cost of ownership, including development & purchase costs, divided by a rather low number of flying hours, NOT an operational cost figure.
The Typhoon operational CPH may not be anywhere near that ridiculous figure, but they’ll be high anyway, as they are with the Rafale, F-22, F-35 and other high end medium or heavy 4th or 5th gen fighters. Which means that you’d better be getting a seriously capable piece of kit to justify such costs..a T1 Typhoon with limited capabilities becomes unattractive precisely because its too expensive for a simple air-policing role, which it’ll perform easily. Austria being a classic example of that..The list of nations that’ll be willing to consider second hand T1 Typhoon then grows small, since few nations have budgets large enough to be able to operate so many of such high performance fighters for a mission that other types will be able to perform at a lower CPH.
Which is why Eurofighter Gmbh itself needs to come up with a truly cost effective upgrade for those T1 Typhoons to make them a viable option either for the parent air forces or for export nations looking at second hand airframes. Otherwise, I’m afraid the only option may be to donate the airframes to some country or put them in long term storage (which has associated costs) or use them for spares, but even spares commonality may be an issue from that perspective. But as someone pointed out, EF Gmbh is hardly interested in cost effective solutions for the partner nations- they want more T3 Typhoons to be built instead.
As for managing the fleet hours and using T1s more while conserving life on the T2 and T3 Typhoons, that seems like common sense if the MoD has decided to retire the T1s by 2019. But then common sense would’ve dictated keeping those T1s and upgrading them to T3 spec as a cost effective way in which to keep the RAF’s combat numbers high enough.
The French have indeed been more rational in their approach to the problem of obsolescence and the rate at which their Rafales are manufactured..may drive up the cost compared to larger production batches, but it allows them to draw out the manufacturing long enough to find an export order as well as allows them to have smaller number of fighters with obsolescent avionics and electronics.
The sad part for the RAF is that the MoD doesn’t seem to learn from its past mistakes at all..take the example of the Jaguars that were retired after having received some updates and having life left in the fleet..or the Sea Harrier FA2s that were retired without replacements that had similar capabilities. or the Nimrods that were scrapped after having spent a fortune on developing them. And they now look set to continue with the T1 Typhoons.
Sign In
