It means you choose a cheapish maintenance model.. A purely reactive one, aimed to saving a buck.. whenever anything gets broken, you put the aircraft aside, order spares and wait.. even worse, you cannibalize other aircraft, you don’t keep your own stock of parts, don’t perform proactive maintenance based on statistics.. many forces do this, for example Poles were often criticized for their maintenance concept on the F-16.. their readiness rate were so poor that it is illegal to publish true numbers.. and I don’t think that either the Falcon or LM are to blame..
And I’m assuming that you have proof that India chose a “cheapish maintenance model”?
India and Russia set up a maintenance related spares depot as part of the MiG-29K contract.
Moscow, Aug 23 (UNI) Russia’s MiG Aircraft Corporation and the Indo-Russian Aerospace Ltd (IRAL) have signed a contract to build a spare parts depot for MiG planes in India. The depot is intended for supplying spare parts and materials to customers on short notice. The project will also allow for maintaining a high level of airworthiness of the Indian Air Force fleet. The basic list of parts was drawn on the strength of the indicators of reliability of MiG-29 planes in Russia, and an analysis of India’s Air Force requests for spares and its recommendations, Itar-Tass reported.A buildup of the infrastructure for maintenance works is envisioned by the contract to supply to India ship-borne MiG-29K/KUB fighters, concluded on July 20, 2004. However, the depot will provide for all the MiG planes which are in service with the Indian Air Force.
..
In addition, India also invested in upgrading the IAF’s Base Repair Depot specifically for the maintenance of the MiG-29 fleet.
IAF upgrades MiG-29 maintenance facility
NEW DELHI – The Indian air force has upgraded its facilities for maintaining MiG-29 aircraft, according to a service official. The Base Repair Depot at Ojhar, near Mumbai, “has now taken up the indigenous development of highly complex avionics modules and mechanical items,” the official said. The upgraded facilities will cut the cost of MiG overhauls, the official said, and will enable the installation of western avionics and armament.
..
To me it appears that blaming the customer for the issues is the excuse that Russian posters are looking at. India appears to be paying the price for being the launch customer AND having the largest worldwide fleets for both the Su-30MKI and MiG-29Ks. Most major issues will obviously surface with those who most heavily utilize their fleets and the IAF and IN have very respectable (compared to NATO) yearly utilization targets which means that the aircraft are flown more, requiring more maintenance and with some related issues appearing. This is not unique to only the IAF and other large air forces that will have relatively immature fleets of aircraft will see issues that won’t necessarily pop up with smaller users. In the case of the MiG-29K fleet, it appears that there are reliability issues that haven’t yet been completely sorted out since there is such a small fleet of those fighters world wide. The fleet will eventually be more mature, most issues will be sorted out, and reliability figures will improve.
Blaming the IAF or the IN for having issues in the first place, seems to validate those people who think that going with US equipment that is in large scale service with all these types of issues already resolved, is the better idea than going in for customized variants specific to India.
I am not sure how to interpret these figures.. Is the low serviceability of the MKI related to the aircraft itself? Or rather to Irkut? Or is it fault of Indian way of maintaining the things like not willing to pay for spares?
not willing to pay for spares? What the heck does that mean?
Big news!
India’s Rustom II MALE UAV lifts off this month

India’s first unmanned air system intended for an optional strike role is all set to make its long anticipated first flight. The indigenous medium altitude long endurance (MALE) multirole drone Rustom-II is finally ready to lift off likely by the end of this month at the Chitradurga airfield about 200 km outside Bengaluru, India’s aerospace development hub. The team developing the Rustom-2 has faced weight reduction and systems issues that have delayed a debut flight by over two years. Livefist has learnt that the team has achieved all levels of confidence necessary to put the Rustom-II into the air and get a rigorous phase of flight trials going.
In September 2013, the Rustom-II began full power taxi trials at the Kolar airfield near Bengaluru. Powered by twin NPO-Saturn 36MT turboprop engines, the Rustom-II is being developed as a long endurance surveillance platform capable of deploying precision weapons. As Livefist revealed in 2011, the DRDO is also developing an extended range version of the HELINA air-launched anti-armour system as a possible primary weapon for the Rustom-II.
U.S. firm Honeywell has consulted with the team at the Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) over the last two years, fine-tuning the Rustom-II and helping design the critical flying trials phase. The Rustom-II in its final configuration will sport a combination of sensors, both indigenous and sourced from abroad, including electro-optical payloads, targeting payloads and kits for communications intelligence.
..The team working on the Mk.1 version of the Rustom-II has already begun work on signature management of the platform, and will be looking to significantly shave away signature for a potential Mk.2 version of the aircraft in the future. Improvements to the drone will include greater endurance and service ceiling, in addition to the ability to deploy a wider variety of weapons. The Indian Army, IAF, Navy and Coast Guard have all expressed strong interest in the Rustom-II, though firm orders will clearly only land during advanced flight testing.
The Rustom-II is being developed with an indigenous data link that will be extended operationally across platforms by the DRDO when it achieves a level of maturity. The Rustom-II at stated operational envelope will without a doubt fill a major and pressing void in Indian defence — that of long endurance surveillance. India’s IAI Heron drones with the armed forces are a tiny drop in a large and expanding bucket of area the country needs to keep near-constant tabs on. A void, incidentally, that the Indian Air Force and Navy are looking to address in the near term by possibly importing Predator XP drones from the U.S.
..
All true, but both the F-16IN and V are based on some of the modifications of the block 60 without the UAE specific equipment like: Falcon Edge, AN/ASQ-28, and both feature the new mission computer and cockpit. Using the block 60, any prospective buyer would have to pay UAE royalties. The F-16IN proposal included the APG-80 and -132 engine as well as ground avoidance and recovery systems of the block 60.
The cockpit was to be modernized with newer displays and a new mission computer. The IN was to have a dedicated IRST in place of the AN/ASQ-28. The F-16V grew out of the F-16IN proposal, keeping the new cockpit and mission computer, replacing the APG-80 with the -83 and keeping the -129 or -229 engines in commonality with most of the worlds F-16 fleet as the F-16V is marketed as a rebuild or upgrade path for existing F-16’s.
Sure, same airframe, engine, CFT, and radar, perfect for the flight testing portion of the MMRCA contest too. The F-16IN would have new cockpit displays, computer, and not have included the UAE specific equipment.
Yes, the new offer will probably be for a more F-16V based airplane, to tackle some of the obsolescence issues of the F-16 Block 60. If it’s available for around $80 million apiece, which is approximately what the F-16 Block 60 cost, it would be definitely be one of the stronger contenders for the second fighter line in India.
They could offer the F-16IN with DSI..:cool:
As we all know, once it has DSI, it’s basically super advanced. 😉

True on first part, but F-2 is a bad starting point. The F-2 was the AGILE project gone wrong. Larger wing area, reduced sweep, larger tail and vertical stab, and increased weight with the same power as a block 50/52. In the end, inferior to the latest falcons, with added structural issues, all for a price tag north of 110 million.
The F-16IN offered to India would have been similar to the F-16V, without having to pay for the block 60 variants additional equipment and fees to UAE.
The F-16IN that was offered to India featured the APG-80 AESA radar, similar to the F-16 Block 60, not the SABR that the F-16V is supposed to have. There was a program known as CARTS for mid-air refueling using a probe and drogue system on CFTs that was also a feature meant to feature on the F-16IN. That wasn’t on the F-16 Block 60 or the F-16V as far as we know. This was specifically aimed at Israel and India

They basically put a F-16IN sticker on a F-16 Block 60 and flew it at Aero India

There is no nose mounted radar. That is the radio antenna for the Shturm/Attacka. They now use laser channels.
The radar is on the mast like on the exported Mi-28NE, though apparently is a new (modernized?) set.
Expect further changes with other experimental frames.
Thanks for the info. So basically this will be the production standard for all new Mi-28Ns after this modified version completes all testing? And will the new Mi-28NM be able to use the existing radio guided Ataka missiles if the radio guidance antenna is deleted?
Nah, the NM has been laid out back in 2008.. The main difference shall be adaptation for network-centric conditions and global data transfer system, as well as integration with UAVs.
So why does that necessitate a change in the nose mounted radar?