Just recently the IAF Chief gave a date of March 2011 for a short list so this may be unconfirmed rumours. But given the byzantine bureaucratic processes of India’s MoD, anything is possible, including further delays.

Typhoon and Rafale both are twin-engined. Obviously their per hour costs will be greater than those of other single engined fighters. Comparing them to other twin engined fighters of a previous era or today’s, will be more like comparing apples to apples.

Russia and India finalise preliminary design contract for the PAK-FA. Not sure if $250 million is the cost of the contract from the Indian side or the total cost of the preliminary design contract for both sides itself.

1.5 years later they will begin detail design on the definitive PAK-FA design (or FGFA?)

PAK FA initial design contract for $250 million

Russia and India have agreed the estimated cost of a design contract for their joint fifth-generation fighter project at $295 million, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) Chairman Ashok Nayak said in an interview with RIA Novosti.

“The cost of preliminary design is estimated at $295 million. The work is expected to be complete within 18 months,” Nayak said.

Russia’s Sukhoi holding and India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) agreed in early 2010 to jointly develop a fifth-generation fighter jet based on the prototype T-50 design. India confirmed that it had finalized a draft contract at a meeting with Russia in early October.

Nayak said the contract could be signed by the representatives of India’s HAL and Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) during a visit by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to India on December 20-22.

The two sides agreed to develop both a single-seat and a two-seat version of the aircraft by 2016, focusing on the single-seat version in the initial stages of development. The costs will be shared equally between Russia and India.

The “third generation” EWS to being fitted currently has DRFM, can jam multiple threats & has multiple transmit/receive apertures. It combines both radar warning & jamming features and is being standardized across the IAF fleet.

Hi Teer,

If the new EW system combines RWR and jamming then is the Tarang RWR going to be replaced or will the interfaces be changed and the cockpit display of the Tarang be removed and information shown on a MFD instead ? The MiG-27 in the picture shows it carrying the Tarang..

Apart from the upgraded Mirage 2000’s & MMRCAs which will come with an OEM specific suite, every other IAF aircraft will be using the DRDO’s radar warning and jamming suite.

This will replace the earlier ELTA EL/L 8222 Self Protection Jammer which was hitherto the standard countermeasure system for IAF aircraft & will continue to be in service on aircraft such as the MiG-21 Bison. The new EWS is several times more capable than the ELTA pod.

With the airframe integrated systems though, more pods should be available for extra support as required.

So will the MiG-29UPG carry out integration tests for this afterwards ? I’m asking this since a couple of IAF MiG-29s were sent to Russia to act as templates for the rest of the fighters to be upgraded in India.

It’ll be good to replace the Elta El/L-8222 pod since it uses up a station on all the fighters that use it. The Bison especially would’ve been a good candidate for it with just 4 pylons. But maybe it really lacks internal space for an internal EW suite?

Note that the article says ’18 F-2000′. I guess they mean Mirage F-1s upgraded by the Astrac consortium to the MF-2000 version. Considering that Iraq used to have a considerable number of Mirage F-1s that would make a lot of sense.

Yes and they were looking for a return of some of their fighters (Mirage F1s?) that were sent for overhaul to Serbia or someplace and never returned.

A big difference that was exposed to me about two years ago by a rafale pilot (for the celebration of a century of french aeronautic in paris) who attended red flag along with the mki is sensor integration/fusion.

While russian jets are impressive the level of integration and fusion of all sensors is totally different and the weapon system architecture is more simple. The result is that russian jets are more work intensive and you don’t enjoy the god eye view of the battle field. This is true even without link 16 according to him. So in a complex environment it is at a disadvantage.

In a one on one scenario or with a precise focus planned objective the russian jet can be deadly for sure.

Another anecdote from a rafale pilot from Paris airshow 2009 about russian jets he told me that while more “rustic” (less sophisticated) one should not overlook them as what is more “rustic”/simple can work fine when properly used.

exactly. I would’ve said the same thing- that the level of “fusion” of sensor data on the Euro canards is perhaps superior to that on the newer Su-30 series of fighters. But then again, every Su-30 variant has 2 pilots and with the division of tasks, the workload is lower and hence may actually even out the advantage.

Again, Su-30MKIs in Red Flag had several rules, most of which were self-imposed, which greatly handicapped the Su-30MKIs and that skewed some of the results.

Again, with new datalinks and AWACS support, an IAF Su-30MKI will be a handful on its own turf.

Indeed, feel sorry to see these Harriers being retired especially since they did a good job in Afghanistan, proving their worth. I guess the next issue of AFM will be dedicated to these iconic jets and their history in the RAF. I must admit I was a bit unhappy with their coverage of the Jaguars when they were retired early.

Mirage 2000s were designed right from the beginning to have low maintenance costs and time. Dassault utilised prior knowledge from operational experiences on its previous programs to make it a very highly available and easily maintainable fighter. This was further improved on the Rafale, where the Rafale was designed with Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) methodology and had very strong involvement of Users and Support Specialists at the requirement definition and development phase. All of which was done to keep Life Cycle Costs for the Rafale as low if not lower, than that of the Mirage-2000.

Also, I read somewhere here that someone said that the F-16 is cheaper to operate per hour as compared to the Mirage-2000 and that is not true. The Mirage is cheaper to operate per hour at around $ 2700 per hour as compared to $3600 per hour for a F-16.

The source is available here