BlackArcherI personally would be careful taking Indian figures as a face value. They seem to have some issues with the SNECMA M53 reliability, as well. Can’t say whether it’s some fundamental flaw in the IAF maintenance system or something else.
They do? What’s the source of this info? I’ve never heard of any issues with the Mirage-2000’s engines..and its quite convenient isn’t it? Blame the customer if the product doesn’t work the way the manufacturer advertised it and you’re trying to defend the product..and if there were issues with the IAF’s maintenance system, then why did Saturn have to introduce 9 technical improvements to the AL-31FN to fix those engine failure issues?
This reminds me of the RD-33’s horror stories..I’m sure you’d say that perhaps even those were somehow the IAF’s fault. Read this and it won’t come as a surprise that the IAF (not the IN) never ordered more MiG-29s. The institutional memory is such that even recently when I was talking to an ex-IAF pilot on the Fulcrum, his first point was that it was an aircraft that gave a lot of maintenance headaches to the IAF, whereas the Mirage-2000 was a lot easier to maintain and far more reliable. Sure, it was a beast in the air, but on the ground, maintainers weren’t enamoured of it.
The point is that the IAF is more transparent than most other air forces (thanks to audits by the CAG and those audit reports being made public) and the media is very active in publishing news stories on these troubles. Most other nations that operate large numbers of Russian equipment don’t have the transparency or media that publish these kinds of reports.
There were extensive problems encountered in operational and maintenance due to the large number of pre-mature failures of engines, components, and systems. Of the total of 189 engines in service, 139 engines (74%) failed pre-maturely and had been withdraw from service by July 1992, thus effectively shutting down operations. 62 of these engines had not even accomplished 50% of their 300 hours first overhaul point. Thus the desired serviceability showed a steadily decreasing trend.
Engineering reports mainly attribute RD-33 failures to design/material deficiencies causing discolored engine oil (8), cracks in the nozzle guide vanes (31), and surprisingly, foreign object damage (FOD). The eight material deficient engines (discolored oil) were repaired by the contractor under warrantee provisions, but the engines had to be recycled to the manufacturer. The thirty-one engines with cracks in their nozzle guide vanes were fixed in the field by contractor teams and adjustments were made to the entire engine fleet. But even though the incidents reduced the occurrences of the cracks, they continued. But the FOD situation is the most interesting, especially after the inlet FOD doors received world press coverage, but there were other concerns about production quality control that led to problems.Since the Indian Air Force received early model Fulcrum A’s, some just after the 200th production article, there were quality control deficiencies that resulted in numerous pieces of FOD (foreign object damage) and tools being left behind after final construction inside of the aircraft. Remember that the Fulcrum skeleton is made first and then the skin is riveted over top, in the way aircraft were made in the fifties and sixties in the West. Nuts, bolts, tools, etc. all made their way to the engine bays and inlet ducts and when they were loosened up after accelerations they damaged engines and equipment.
On top of all this, it was discovered that the unique FOD doors on the MiG-29’s inlets were not stopping material from getting into the engine ducts. Since the doors retracted “up” into the inlet, debris that was kicked up by the nose wheel lodged on or at the bottom of the door seal and then was ingested into the engine when the door opened during the nose gear lifted off the ground during takeoff.
This problem was known from the earliest days. After the first four MiG-29 prototypes were evaluated, the nose gear was moved further back, but nose wheel “mud-flaps” or guards were still required to protect the engine from flying debris. It took until 1988 before all delivered aircraft were so equipped, therefore the initial batch of InAF aircraft had to be locally retro-fitted with mud guards and that activity was not completed until June 1992. All costs were supposed to be re-imbursed by the contractor but Mikoyan reneged and left the InAF with $300,000 in liabilities. In subsequent MiG-29K/M models the FOD doors were replaced by screens that closed “down”, forcing any debris out of the louvers repositioned to the lower side of the inlet duct..
The Indian Air Force procurement contract was concluded in September 1986, and the first engine was expected to go into overhaul in 1989. However, four engines prematurely came up for overhaul and no repair facility had been prepared. As time went on, 115 of the 122 engines (94%) prematurely failed and had to be re-cycled through engine depots in Russia at great cost. Backlogs were created and only 79 (65%) engines returned on schedule. Even when a regional Indian repair facility was completed in August 1994, the high failure rates continued and the majority of broken engines had to be sent back to Russian depots. Self-sufficiency was achieved in 1994, only after the operations tempo was significantly reduced on a permanent basis. In the process of refurbishing failed engines, the total technical life of most of the engine fleet was effectively reduced from 800 hours / 8 years to 400 hours / 4 years, at a minimum.[/b]
BlackArcherThere is a thing I am missing here.. the well known problem of using different maintenance philosophies which render a direct comparison almost impossible..
Western type maintenance dictates daily basic visual inspections, then advanced inspections on an installed engine (filters, borescope inspection etc.) and then a major overhaul in a depot every 1,500-2,000 hours of use (diagnostics, replacement of worn parts, etc.) At the end of the service life (6,000-8,000 hours) it is still “the same” engine but with most core components having been changed 2-3 times.
Russian depot maintenance assumes running the engine as you run your car – without replacements, only basic field diagnostics and changing liquids. After three overhauls (after each 1,000 hours) it is replaced by a new engine and no one cares or bothers to inspect whether it’s still good or not.
The Western approach is less material intensive as you are reusing the old good parts again and again.. But it is more labor intensive as you need to do more diagnostics, more inspections, more overhauls, more disassembling and reassembling and more part changing.
Only problem being, as seen with the IAF’s experience with its AL-31F engines, they don’t actually last 1000 hours between overhauls. Engine failures were so frequent that some were getting overhauled within 500 hours of use itself, i.e half the advertised manufacturer specified period. Another case of a difference between advertised brochure specs and real world experience.
BlackArcherPakistan’s export variant of J-10s is powered by AL-31FNs with 124 kN thrust.
What export version? There is no such Pakistan specific variant since it never went beyond talks.
BlackArcherUAE restarts Rafale talks with France
PARIS — The United Arab Emirates has restarted talks on ordering the Dassault Rafale, with a planned major upgrade of the fighter jet in contrast to the off-the-shelf deals for Egypt and India, said an Arabian Gulf official source familiar with the issue.
“Yes, there are renewed discussions,” the gulf source said April 14. The talks could take some time “to reach an understanding” that meets the needs of the UAE Air Force, the source said.
..The fresh talks are looking at requirements rather than reviving discussions for 60 Rafales and it is too early to say how many aircraft would be purchased for how much, .
…
The UAE Air Force has focused on an upgrade of the systems and engine of the Rafale, including active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, frontal sector optronic and an electronic warfare suite, systems supplied by Thales, and a 9-ton-thrust M88 engine, uprated from the 7.5-ton engine that powers the French Air Force and Navy fighters.
French industry has said the 2011 Libya air campaign showed there was no need for a higher engine thrust on the Rafale.
The potential UAE version, dubbed M88-9, could deliver nine tons of thrust by “increasing the entering airflow from 65 kg/s to 72 kg/s and the compression rate from 24.5 to 27,” according to News, the Rafale blog, which in 2011 ran a story from weekly magazine Air & Cosmos.
That would require the air intake to be enlarged, a costly “structural modification” that had been a stumbling block in talks with the UAE, the 2011 report said.
On Dec. 30, France launched a program worth some €1 billion (US $1.06 billion) to upgrade the Rafale F3 to the F3R standard by 2018. The new version will fire the MBDA Meteor long-range air-to-air missile, a laser version of the Sagem Armement Air Sol Modulaire powered smart bomb, and carry a Thales new-generation laser targeting pod, dubbed Talios, to succeed the present Damocles. The AESA RBE2 radar and Spectra electronic warfare system will also be improved.
Egypt will receive the F3R version, Trappier said.
..Qatar is now seen as slipping down on the list of prospective Rafale buyers after having been near the top, a parliamentary official said. Negotiations for an order of 24 fighters and an option for a further 12 was reported in February to be in the final stage.
Trappier declined to comment when asked about Qatar at the company’s annual results press conference on March 11.
BlackArcherThat would be very dumb. The Rafale is the better platform. The MKI was nice in 1995. Not so much 2025.
Primarily due to cost. the MKI offers superb bang for the buck and with all the infrastructure already set up to train, maintain and operate the 272 contracted Su-30MKIs, it will be the most affordable fighter to get quickly to offset MiG-27 retirements. And the Super-30 upgrade (whenever it happens) will make it relevant even into the 2030s, not just 2025.
BlackArcherBlackArcherThere are rumours that an additional 30 Su-30MKIs will be ordered now..and that the Rafale purchase will be for an additional 18 follow-on jets and that will be it
Indian rethink leading smaller Rafale deal
The new Indian government’s decision ‘in principle’ to buy 36 Rafale combat aircraft direct from the Dassault production line in France, announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on April 10, appears to spell the end of the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) acquisition process. Speaking on Indian television two days later, defense minister Manohar Parrikar acknowledged that the protracted delay in closing the MMRCA deal, caused largely by difficulty in agreeing terms and conditions for licensed production of the Rafale in India, had not served India well.
..
Now, the IAF will form only two Rafale squadrons, with a possible third to follow if an option for 18 more jets is taken up. The new deal is worth $4.25 billion, according to Dev Mehta, an analyst with London-based Strategic Defence Intelligence (SDI), although “various design and pricing issues need to be worked out,” he continued...
Mehta said the new Rafale deal “has given the IAF much-needed breathing space while keeping other options open. It is likely to free up funds that can partly be used for scaling up production of the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft [LCA] and the faster induction of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft [FGFA] in collaboration with Russia.” AIN has learned that an additional 30 Sukhoi Su-30MKIs will be ordered in the meanwhile.
BlackArcherINS Vikramaditya to get Barak 1 SAM and CIWS from a soon to be decommissioned warship of the Godavari class
New Delhi: India’s largest warship INS Vikaramaditya will finally get its own air defence system, courtesy of another ship that may be decommissioned soon.
The Navy plans to transfer an Israeli Barak missile system from a Godavari-class ship to the aircraft carrier that was bought from the Russians.This will be a shot in the arm for the over Rs 15,000- crore aircraft carrier that has been without a defence system, since it joined the Indian Navy in November 16, 2013.
“We have a plan to install a system from one of our ships, which perhaps may be decommissioned at a subsequent stage. The system is operational and we have certain plans,” Vice-Admiral AV Subhedar, Controller of Warship Production and Acquisition told reporters here.
The aircraft carrier does not have any self-defence weapons on board, barring a chaff and flare system. An escort group of warships had been sent to Russia to bring the carrier to India.
The new installation will take place during the ongoing ‘short refit’ that is been carried out on the carrier at Karwar.
Interestingly, it does not even have a close-in weapon system (CIWS) to shoot down incoming air attacks at very close range.
Sources said a CIWS, again from a Godavari-class ship, will also be installed on it during the ongoing refit.
..
BlackArcherSupposed to be delivered to the IN in July 2018, so kitting her out will take 3 years. Some details on the P-15B INS Visakhapatnam destroyer
..
There are some important differences between the Navy’s Kolkata class destroyers and the Visakhapatnam class though they share the same hull-design and Ukrainian-built Zorya gas turbines.
The Visakhapatnam will be armed with a 127 mm main gun while the INS Kolkata has a 76mm Super Rapid Gun Mount (SRGM). Both classes share the AK-630 close-in anti-missile gun system.
The sonar of the Visakhapatnam will be bow mounted and will feature a a revised bridge layout.
The design of the mast, which features the main radar has been revised. The Visakhapatnam will provide its crew greater protection in a nuclear, chemical or biological warfare scenario.
She also features a rail-less helicopter traversing system to secure the helicopter she carries in heavy sea conditions.
Central to the Visakhapatnam is network-centric layout. She is equipped with a Ship Data Network (SDN), an Automatic Power Management System and a Combat Management System. Essentially, all information critical for the operation of the warship during all operations is available to key officers through the SDN which the Navy describes as a data information highway.
The Visakhapatnam is being launched on April 20 and will be delivered to the Indian Navy in July 2018. The remaining three ships will be delivered at an interval of two years each.
BlackArcherSelex wins contract to provide IRST for Swedish Gripen E
Selex ES has signed a contract with defence and security company Saab for 60 Skyward-G infra-red search and track (IRST) systems. The systems will be installed on the Gripen E fighter aircraft for the Swedish Air Force.
..
BlackArcherMajor question would be – has the J-10 even been offered for export really?
The closest it seems to have gotten to a sale was the sale of 36 J-10As to Pakistan, but Pakistan probably couldn’t afford the J-10 and hence stuck to buying more JF-17s..there was some talk that they were holding out for the more capable J-10B, but now there seems to be no interest in the type from Pakistan..Argentina may be interested in the type, but frankly, considering their financial condition, the JF-17 may be a more likely option.
BlackArcherNaval LCA NP-2 prototype undergoes hot refueling.
✈Anantha Krishnan M✈ @writetake · 13m 13 minutes ago
#NLCA NP2 undergoes ‘hot refuelling’ at HAL facilities in Bangalore recently. Hit https://www.facebook.com/Tarmak007 for details
BlackArcherIf you have no first hand experience of working with Indian companies / workforce and are prepared to attempt to dismiss first hand experience as “anecdotal” I’ll mark your opinion down as rather moot.
Versus you who have worked with every Indian company and all Indian workers. If this isn’t a racist remark, I don’t know what is..or are we now free to make comments on people of a particular nation based on real or faked experience??
BlackArcherThe Su-30MKI yes, but all the rest are single contract deals with options for more aircraft (at a fixed cost). As per most reported information, follow-on orders for the Rafale in contrast will be negotiated independently. So they lose the cost benefits of a larger purchase and also lose the constant price gotten through an ‘option’ on the contract.
According to the DM, all future Rafale orders will be negotiated directly with the French govt, thus excluding HAL-Dassault/Reliance-Dassault licensing/ToT deals from the reckoning.
The deal hasn’t been fully negotiated or signed. The French have indicated that by June it will be ready. Wait for the terms of the agreement to be announced then. I’d be really surprised if the Indians don’t include a clause for a follow-on purchase, through the same Govt-to-govt mechanism, for more Rafale fighters.
Sign In
