By all means, these two designs are roughly a decade apart when it comes to delivery terms. Evtl. integration of French systems into the FGFA would postpone the project by another four-five years.

If the Rafale contract is signed by next year (which is looking increasingly doubtful), the deliveries would begin only by 2017. With the FGFA appearing more and more indistinguishable from the PAKFA, you could arguably have the first KnAAPO built units delivered to the IAF even before the end of the decade.

MMRCA is complex multi vendor contract? Rafale is selected almost two years ago. and it is nothing compared to establishing industrial supply chain of 5G fighter. Again there is practically zero evidence of any talk of PAK-FA sale to IAF.

Two years is on longer side when it comes to negotiating a contract but so what? How long the Swiss competition take? When will the UAE and Brazil contracts be signed? And what does any of it have to do with a single vendor situation as in the case of the PAKFA?

look at long lead times for 4 planes delivery.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheed-awarded-long-lead-items-contract-for-japanese-f-35s-383933/

Contract awarded in 2013 for aircraft being delivered in 2016. Five years huh? Perhaps next time you could read the article before posting it.

Evidence is clear from Chinese aviation industry progress. They are even importing titanium from Russia for ARJ-21/MS-21 and obsolete engines for Y-20.
and you think they can create 5G fighter with $60 to $100b of R&D in countries which already capable of making things alot of things right. 5G fighters by definition are heavier and draggier. just look at internal volume for fuel, weopons and electronics. and than add high performance G suits, and newest weopons. Just engine R&D will be in $20b if you take real commercial value of that. as it is opportunity cost for engine manufacturer to put there best engineers on non Civil project.

I asked for evidence about the J-20 and J-31 being expendable programs, not a soliloquy on the Chinese aviation industry.

Those 15 countries fighter will not super cruise nor it will have suprememe agility of TVC. and above all these countries policy will confirm great extent to US. They have no say in design, customization, upgrade or even use of that fighter. There first LRIP units are tested inside US.

Doesn’t change the fact that every major air force in the world, except for the AdlA and Luftwaffe, will share the ‘privilege’ of operating a fifth generation fighter.

It is every obvious 144 is too small a number for any joint R&D or license.

Produce evidence please. Further add evidence of the order being capped at 144 units.

It is solid evidence based on past trends and big future budgets.

So you can predict the direction of the commodities market over the next twenty years, which is closely linked to growth of the Russian economy, which in turn determines the size of the Russian defence budget? Because so far your ‘solid evidence’ amounts to “X number of aircraft have been ordered in last four years, therefore the total PAKFA production over the next 25 years will be ‘several times larger’ than the Indian one”.

Try again.

Again very misinformed opinion. procurement costs are small part compared to long term sustainment of F-16/F-18/F-15 fleet for next 30 year. It starts with simulators to pilot training to maintainance. infact this costs are so huge that US air fleet is smallest now since 1945. JSF operational costs will be way higher.

Once again, you’re off on a tangent. I did not mention operational costs, procurement costs, training or maintenance anywhere in my post. Read it again, when you’re sober.

I stated a simple fact – the F-16 and SH are not in production for the US military anymore and the F-35 will form the core of its future force profile. Only you could interpret that as a ‘very misinformed opinion’.

If the industrial agreement on the PAKFA doesn’t pan out, it becomes of a case of acquiring an aircraft off-the-shelf. And nowhere is it written that the aircraft purchased must supercruise or have TVC, thus bringing the F-35 into contention. Like I said before, if they had to the IAF and IN could comfortably ‘manage’ with the F-35.

you do realize that complicated plane like 5G fighters need 4 to 5 year lead time. there is simply no order or funding from India. India is not even negotiating about actual planes. India is only negotiating about R&D that will lead to a single prototype. This thing has practically nothing to do with inducting finish plane into service. how many years is MMRCA in negotiating sttge and when it is going to inducted?

I repeat, please produce evidence about India being reluctant to induct it before 2022.

And since you’ve mentioned it, please go ahead and produce evidence of production lead time for fifth generation aircraft being as long as 5 years.

The MMRCA is a complex multi-vendor contract. It has nothing to do with the PAKFA.

China has started alot of programes but it has to crawl back to Russia. China will create prototypes but it does not mean it is actual 5G fighter. There is 30 year gap going from 4G to 5G fighter.

Please produce evidence of the J-20 and J-31 being expendable programs.

Entry into 5G fighters is privilege.

15 countries will share that ‘privilege’ before the end of the decade, so spare me the asinine sermon.

That is only granted when there is overall value in relationship & shared interests. (i gave Algeria example). you are dangling some vogue orders that we dont even know the production rate per year as low production can make the whole thing unprofitable.

Please produce evidence that the proposed induction rate will be low enough to make it unprofitable.

I gave you past 5 years trend line of orders. now extrapolate that trend line into next 20 years.

Produce evidence about the Russian order for the PAKFA being ‘several times larger’ than the probable Indian one, not silly extrapolations based on cherry-picked data.

F-16/F-18 are also good enough for next 30 years in USAF/USN. they are also cheaper. but did India selected them for MMRCA?

The last F-16 was delivered to the USAF in 2005 and the last F-18E/F to the USN in 2011. Deliveries to both have ceased. Both forces which have remained the strongest of their kind since 1942, are banking upon the F-35 being the cornerstone of their future fleets. So if they had to, the IAF and IN could ‘manage’ with the F-35. After all, a fifth generation aircraft is a ‘privilege’ to be bestowed upon the blessed, not a commodity acquired in exchange for hard cash.

The point is India hasnt shown any intention of buying PAK-FA before 2022. first India has to deal with MMRCA.

There was no reference to the PAK FA in the MMRCA’s RFP. Nowhere doesn’t it say that the contracts with regard to the latter need to be concluded before the PAKFA’s acquisition can begin.

As for intentions, please produce evidence about India being reluctant to induct the PAKFA before 2022.

It is not about wanting to buy but rather forced to buy PAKFA. you have to look around Chinese aerospace industry failings. start with helicopters & trainers.

Please produce evidence about the J-10 & J-31 being expendable programs.

Again it is about overall value to UAC. I gave you 5 years worth of trend lines. i am not even including minor things like Yak-130 or signed IL-476 orders for Ruaf. India simply dont bring that much value that it want to bargain for PAK-FA tech access.

India isn’t there to provide value to UAC. Its there to negotiate industrial commitments in return for placing a large order with UAC. And we’re not discussing drones, trainers or transports.

It is the production rate and time line. I am going to bet on that PAKFA order for Ruaf will be several times larger and quicker induction.
India induction are way into the future that will have no bearing on negotiations for next 10 years. see example of creating 20 Ton drone from PAK-FA project. that is the priority.

Your bets mean nothing. Please produce evidence of Russian order for the PAKFA being ‘several times larger’ than the probable Indian one.

how so F-35 is eligible alternative with its shorter range and lower performance. It is not a high altitude Mach 2+ fighter.

If its good enough for the USAF and USN, its good enough for the IAF and IN.

you dont have any evidence of Algeria operational security being less than India/Turkey. so why you are assuming it is less? when that government has taken very strong stands. so i think they take there security seriously.

You’re talking about evidence?

What evidence do you have that the first PAK FA deliveries to India will happen only in 2022? What evidence do you have that the level of customization requested will hurt Sukhoi’s profitability? What evidence do you have about the Chinese abandoning their domestic programs and ordering a substantial number of the PAK FAs? What evidence do you have about Russia using exports to China as a bargaining chip in negotiations with India? What evidence do you have about a Russian domestic order so large that it completely eclipses the aircraft’s potential exports?

i said China issue is similar to Iran. where Russia threatening to supply more advance weopons further its bargaining position.

Evidence please.

that was 2003 now it is 2013. Highly unlikely those kind of deals will be cheap even for yesterday technology. since it will not cheap so customers will tend to avoid it.

Evidence please.

Chinese are commited to alot of things. End up buying refurbished IL-76 and ordering obsolete engines in hundreds for obsolete airframes. (airframes are designed around engine weight).

Evidence about buying PAK FA in lieu of J-20/J-35 please.

They shared these ideas thats why you have these long negotiations on R&D phase. that 144 aircraft market is post 2022. so there is nothing to share so ahead of time. US cannot be that much dismissive of export partners as i believe some export partners bring critical R&D at lower cost. so far there is nothing to suggest that Indian R&D will make PAK-FA better or cheaper.

They could have had these negotiations in 2020 if your bright ideas held any appeal. The US doesn’t need foreign input into the F-35 anymore than Russia does. Accepting Indian participation is not to make it ‘better or cheaper’ but as a quid pro quo for substantial production orders. That’s an obvious fact that even you should be able to comprehend.

why Algeria has weaker operational security than Turkey (providing some parts to JSF) or India?.

Turkey’s been a member of the NATO for over 60 years. And the IAF has fought in two full scale conflicts and actively trains for war against two modern adversaries. So yes, it would not be surprising to find out that they’re more concerned about operational security than Algeria.

there is also bargaining element ( like S300) by threatening to supply it to China/Iran. very favorable outcomes can be achieved.

A sale to China is significant to India only if the IAF operates the PAKFA. Not otherwise. (Also FYI India isn’t a part of the coalition against Iran).

India is very small market for PAK-FA if you look at induction rate of Su-30.

Yes lets take a look at the Su-30 orders –

Russia – 75
PR China – 100
India – 270
Others – 125

China has at least two stealth fighter programs in the pipeline and isn’t going to order significant numbers of the PAKFA. Algeria, Malaysia and Vietnam have expressed no pressing need for an expensive fifth generation aircraft. With India out of the picture, the PAKFA order book is bound to be hit hard.

Will the ban extend to only India_Specific components or to the entire aircraft? It would bring quite a significant financial impact if Sukhoi were unable to export the jet to its traditional customer base especially to one of its largest defence buyers.

The concern is probably with regard to possible exports of the aircraft to the PRC, which would jeopardize a PAKFA heavy IAF fleet facing the PLAAF. Or to countries which have weaker operational security protocols (Venezuela/Algeria?).

There are no separate seeker and motor contracts.

Raytheon is the Prime Contractor. The USG pays them and they pay all the subcontractors (motor, seeker, etc).

So how is the Lot 27 cost explained then?