BlackArcherThe Tranche 1s are in the position now because the UK MOD are too stingy to dish out funding for upgrades, or to keep them in service at least, as they sometimes are with other projects, in addition to lacking the vision of the future. However, it must be realised that Tranche 1 units were never meant to be multi/swing-role machines anyway, they were meant to be purely air superiority aircraft with initial A/G capabilities being introduced to Tranche 2 units and beyond, so there is a little bit of sense in why they’re in such limbo right now. However yet again, while it’s technically feasible to keep them up to date with the likes of Captor-E and CFTs et al, it’s the cost of doing so and that’s where the issues lays. Try sticking Captor-E and CFTs on the MIG-21 fleet and watch the costs rocket.
Saying that, they have been used rather extensively as opposed to their Tranche 2 counterparts with apparent insignificant costs, albeit not low yet not overwhelmingly high one must stress, with incredible availability ranging between (if memory serves correctly) 96% and 100%. Which ever way one wants to look at it, that’s a brilliant achievement for a batch of aircraft that were originally intended for air superiority purposes only.
I find it hard to believe that such expensive fighters like Typhoons, even if they’re of Tranche 1 vintage would be parted out or retired rather than be upgraded. But the British MoD does make some rather hard to understand decisions. We know that the T1’s can be upgraded even if the cost of upgrading those will be non-trivial. The feasibility was demonstrated at this Farnborough itself, with an upgraded T1 Typhoon with AESA radar and Pirate IRST being displayed. I’m pretty sure that being used in A2A profiles, those T1 Typhoons wouldn’t have been flogged too hard, meaning that there must be adequate fatigue life still in the airframes themselves to last beyond 2019.
If those T1s aren’t upgraded and put up for sale, they won’t really be attractive options for countries which will balk at the very high operational costs for the Typhoons (and likely ownership costs as well, even when bought second hand), with limited A2G and non-existant anti-shipping or SEAD/DEAD capability and the fact that those Typhoons will be at a dead-end capability wise with no affordable T1 upgrade available.
At least the MiG-21s are damn cost effective and can be very economically upgraded to be capable multi-role fighters like the MiG-21 Bison at a fraction of the cost of the T1 Typhoon. When you consider the cost vs capability, those upgraded MiG-21s will be very competent vs the T1 Typhons.
Meanwhile, the French don’t seem so intent on selling off or retiring their older Rafales.
BlackArcherThe MKI is hampered by the sole sourcing arrangements currently agreed upon between India and Russia. India could have opened up competition between vendors to at least diversify their fleet. It is sole sourcing that will always kill any independence of the MKI squadron operations. Their availability will always ebb and flow as the Russians see fit. Let’s face it, even Tejas has been an effort dependent on imports. Until the Indian government allows the military to operate more freely to acquire technology, they will always be dependents.
What India needs is competition. MRCA was supposed to supply that. But apparently their democracy is eating itself from within and MRCA is dead in the water.
The Tejas is more dependant on imports than the MRCA??
Do you see the flaw in that logic at all??
BlackArcherGuys … you are all talking about as if this “thing” would become operational within the next few years !!! :highly_amused::highly_amused:
To admit I find it amusing to follow these discussions here regarding the configuration, the small size, its pro and cons regarding aerial combat against possible opponents like the “much larger” J-20 – which is even if some don’t want to notice, not larger than a Flanker – … but all simple neglect that this tiny lettle beast is yet nothing more than a demonstrator.
IMO it seems as if You would compare the X-29 or X-31 which are all about the same size with the Raptor or PAK-FA !!
I do not want to downplay this effort – one that should be done much more to test, explore and verify new technologies also in other countries – but until something like an upscaled F-3 would become operational, there are still many hurdels to overcome and here most of all I’m sceptical about the ability to develop a 15 t powerplant (not from the technical side) and most of all COST !!
Just my 2 cents.
Deino
Were it not possible to develop the IHI powerplant with 50% more thrust than the F-414, then the only option may be to scale it down to a Typhoon/Rafale size fighter with 2 F-414 or EJ-200 variants in its place.
BTW, a demostrator is the first step- it will be used to validate technologies that will flow to the F-3. Nevertheless, it is a huge step in the right direction, and wtih Japan finally shedding decades of self-restraint in the arms development sphere, we may see a resurgent aerospace industry more in step with Japan’s technological prowess.
I personally feel that India should look into the possibility of a partnership with the Japanese on the AMCA- F3..Not necessarily the same fighter, but with sharing technology and development costs for similar technology/avionics that may be used on the 2 fighters.
BlackArcherwho use radar jamming in exercises?. rather the ancient radars of F-15C could not see the ram painted MIG-21 at sufficient distance.
the Bisons did- they used the Israeli Elta EL/L 8222 self-protection jammers in the Cope India 2004 exercise.
BlackArcherRooivalk’s point is that a smaller airframe, all other capabilities being equal, has an advantage over larger aircraft due to being harder to see. I cede that point, but I disagree with everything else.
The J-20 is a canard-delta airframe that should have maneuverability in WVR at least comparable to that of a Rafale. In its current incarnations, it is not slated to use TVC, but later versions of the WS-15 are likely to be TVC-capable. However, even without TVC, the canard-delta set-up provides many of the maneuverability benefits of WVR systems, as can be seen in dogfights between Rafale and F-22; even though the F-22 is highly superior at BVR ranges and is very competitive in WVR, the Rafale is agile enough to point its nose at the F-22 and kill it with IR-guided dogfight missiles.
Haven’t seen anything yet of the J-20 to suggest that it would be able to match the Rafale in terms of maneuverability. OTOH, it seems that the J-20 is optimised for strike, not for air superiority, so while it may not be a lumbering fighter bomber like the JH-7, it is unlikely to possess the kind of instantaneous turn rates that the Rafale routinely displays. But yes, HOBS close combat missiles with HMDS does even out the odds a great deal in WVR even for the less nimble fighters.
In the ATD-X’s case, my assessment is that the Japanese aren’t being very serious about their aerospace capability this time around. The overall airframe, as others have mentioned, resembles an F-15, which is an airframe more than 30 years old. Outside of capabilities granted by subsystems, like advanced radars and TVC engines, the ATD-X is fundamentally antiquated and would not be competitive with Chinese fifth gens.
pray tell, what are those features that the Chinese J-20 or the J-31 have displayed that the ATD-X hasn’t, to make the ATD-X uncompetitive against the Chinese designs? In fact, you yourself go on to point out the ATD-X’s design features that are 5th gen like, so what would make a scaled up F-3 that follows on from the ATD-X uncompetitive? Add canted tails, and clearly the ATD-X is a promising enough technology demonstrator.
The ATD-X has two advantages, though. First, it has a relatively large radome, when properly scaled up. Bringing it up to F-22 or J-20 sizes, it would enjoy a radar aperture comparable or even superior to that of the J-20. Second, it appears as though a lot of effort has been put towards minimizing the size of the intakes. The end-result is that the ATD-X intakes will have a relatively smaller RCS contribution than intakes on other aircraft, meaning that the ATD-X will be likely designed for Raptor-level stealth than F-35 level stealth.
BlackArcherIn the real world MiG-21 stand no chance against F-15s. Yes you can construct unrealistic scenarios where the F-22 can be shot down by a biplane but what is the relevance? Real world air battles are primarily BVR engagements supported by AWACS.
so you’re assuming that the scenarios in which the F-15s were shot down (which actually mimicked the general tactics followed by F-15s till then- line abreast formation) while defending a high value target cannot happen in the real world? That AWACS support is a given, even though its widely accepted that the AWACS will be targeted and will consequently be on the defensive?
Have you even heard of a RAND report that looked at whether the USAF would be able to hold off hordes of PLAAF fighters with a far smaller number of F-22s? That the first to go would be the high value assets like AWACS and tankers, which would be attacked by large numbers of fighters and once they were out of the fight, the odds wouldn’t be so stacked against the PLAAF attackers..eventually the F-22s would expend their missiles and then, they’d be shot down too. And amidst all this, the AMRAAM doesn’t even have a Pk of 100%..far less in fact. So quite a few fighters with jammers will escape and get into WVR range where the odds would even out even further with modern close combat missiles.
The only handicap that the F-15 fighters in Cope India 2004 had was that they were limited to simulating AIM-7 Sparrows against a numerically larger formation of mixed strikers (MiG-27s), embedded escorts (the Bisons) and air superiority fighters (Su-30Ks). The radar jamming of the Bisons surprised the F-15s, they proved to be hard to engage (they chose to engage or disengage as they wished), so did the fluid tactics that were displayed where on a single call, the entire IAF formation would change tactics rather than go with a rigid tactic to be followed under any circumstance.
None of which would be possible in the real world according to you. I guess your bias is the root cause for dismissing those results out of hand. F-22 shot down by a biplane indeed.
BlackArcherModi govt. looks to increase cooperation with Israel and introduce new govt.-to-govt. deals to avoid delays associated with open competitions.
India-Israel discuss increased defence cooperation
India and Israel may reach a new level of defense cooperation under the new government in Delhi, with both sides discussing a list of defense items that could be supplied to India on a government-to-government basis.
..“The move to strike government-to-government tie ups with Israel, as was done with the United States, is aimed at fast pacing the procurement of weaponry and avoiding the open competition route, which has been time consuming and laced with controversies” said Nitin Mehta, a defense analyst here.
The weapons wish list includes unspecified numbers of Sword Fish high-powered radars for ground tracking, and purchase of unspecified numbers of 1,000-kilogram new generation precision guided munitions, and a variety of missiles.India also wants to purchase two additional airborne warning and control systems from Israel, in addition to the four already contracted in 2005.
..
Swordfish radars for the BMD program? Teer may be able to give more info on that.
the new Mirage-2000-5 upgrades involve the addition of Crystal Maze PGMs, so perhaps the new 1000kg PGMs being discussed include large numbers of those and other PGMs for the rest of the fleet.
Regarding the 2 more Phalcon AWACS, that deal was in the cold storage with no news of it moving forward. the new govt. may fast track that purchase as well.
BlackArcherModi Govt. eases standards on company blacklisting. Something one could only dream of while the UPA govt. of Manmohan Singh was in power with AK Antony as Def Min.
Finally, they’re making the right moves to undo the damage done by St.Antony’s blacklist trigger happy regime. This was earlier one of the easiest ways in which companies that lost, or enemy states could thwart any procurement-simply raise allegations of impropriety and without any solid proof, the company would get blacklisted and in single vendor situations, the entire procurment would come to a halt.
New Indian Govt. eases standards for company blacklisting]
India’s newly elected government will not cancel defense contracts or blacklist overseas defense companies until charges leveled against them are proved by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), a Defence Ministry source said.That decision came in the form of a directive from Indian Defence Minister Arun Jaitley during a recent meeting of senior MoD officials.
Between 2005 and 2009, the ousted United Progressive Alliance government had barred Singapore Technologies Kinetics, Israel Military Industries (IMI), Zurich-based Rheinmetall Air Defense, Corporation Defense Russia and South African company Denel from doing defense business in India for the next 10 years.While the CBI recommended barring these companies, none of the charges that they received kickbacks have been proved.
Even the chiefs of the Indian Army, Air Force and Navy who had met Jaitley criticized the blanket blacklisting and cancellation of orders of some overseas defense companies, the MoD source added.
In addition to blacklisting, outgoing Defence Minister A.K. Antony had sent about 100 complaints to the investigating agencies.
A majority of the charges against overseas defense companies were leveled by competitors during the procurement process, and Antony would halt the entire program and forward the complaints to the investigating agencies, the MoD source said.“There will be no immediate impact on any ongoing weapons procurement program due to the directive by the new government not to rush to blacklist overseas defense companies,” said Nitin Mehta, a defense analyst based here.
..
The MoD is identifying measures that can be initiated in the next few months to remove bottlenecks in weapon procurement and boost defense preparedness. The exercise is being undertaken by the ministry at the directive of the prime minister’s office, the source added.
In addition to the decision about blacklisting companies, the MoD is considering what kind of inducements to offer — possibly in the form of tax incentives — to encourage overseas defense companies to bring sophisticated technology into tie-ups with domestic defense companies, the sources said.
The prime minister’s office has also asked the MoD to make a list of defense projects that have been pending for more than five years.
…
BlackArcherIndia reworks defence licencing categories
India has made major changes in its defense production policy that will enable foreign manufacturers to set up production in India without going through the cumbersome process of seeking licensing.
Under the changed policy, several defense products will no longer require licensing from the Defence Ministry. Only procedural approvals to set up any ordinary industrial unit will now be required for these products. Obtaining licenses for products is a cumbersome process involving security clearances.
….
The move to de-license several defense items is the first major move by the new Narendra Modi government to help boost the domestic defense production base, as more production units will be set up. However, there is lack of clarity among domestic firms and analysts over whether the new notification will allow 100 percent foreign direct investment (FDI) by overseas firms to produce the select list of defense products for which license is no longer required.
MoD officials declined to answer questions that would clarify the ambiguity.
The new compulsory license categories are now:
■Tanks and other armored fighting vehicles.
■Aircraft, spacecraft and parts.
■Warships.
■Arms and ammunition and allied items of defense equipment and their parts and accessories.
The items removed from the compulsory license list are: computers, avionics, software systems, infrastructure development, combat management systems, engineering services including validation and design, wire harnesses, avionics design, civil aerospace castings and forgings, surveillance suites, training services including simulators, bullet proof jackets and vehicle armoring, weather radar and display systems and components.…
BlackArchergood news on the ASRAAM buy. Is that a follow on order?
No, the first one. 384 ASRAAMs for a fleet of 100+ Jaguars
BlackArcherAlthough if the RAF could sell of some T1 and extend T3 production who is the loser there?
and who would want to buy the Tranche 1 Typhoons when the user nations themselves are eager to get rid of them so soon due to obsolescence creeping in? I mean, those T1 Typhoons will become white elephants, hard to upgrade, costly to operate, with limited A2G and A2A capabilities and not necessarily cheap to acquire either.
All in all, not a good proposition for any customers out there.
BlackArcherIt does suggest that just two MI sqds based in southern India (nowhere near the Pak or Chinese borders) will be the total sum of what happens to the Tejas MK1.
In a 42 squadron (sanctioned strength) air force
8 less than the total number of Block 1 JF-17s..
which means what? That the JF-17 Block I is a dud and doesn’t meet PAF requirements?
As for the Sulur base- the IAF has consciously decided to have more peninsular bases. There is a Su-30MKI squadron to be raised in the near future at Thanjavur AFS in Tamil Nadu, which is even farther from Pakistan and China than Sulur.
Add to that, HAL and ADA are based out of Bangalore, which is a lot closer to Sulur than to any of the IAF’s forward bases in the north, north west or east. It helps to have the OEM close by to support the induction of the first of type, get teething issues resolved and assist the squadron for maintenance. Plus, with ASTE based at Bangalore, it will be easier for IAF test pilots and squadron pilots to work with ASTE pilots on evolving new tactics for the Tejas Mk1.
None of which implies that its been based there because it doesn’t meet requirements. But knowing Mountain, all this explanation is a waste. It’s meant more for the other readers.
Sign In
