Vnomad^^ You seem to be making case of We Should Buy F-35 because we have no option :eagerness:
I’m making the case that with the J-20 going into serial production (with Chengdu probably gearing up to built it at a ‘Chinese scale’), the IAF has exactly two options available for an IAF counterpart. Only one of which is close to being ready. As a plus, its cost effective, extensively tested, builds upon the F-22’s cutting-edge avionics and will deliver the kind of standards of reliability and availability that one expects from a Western aircraft.
There is really a process laid for selection of a new type that including RFI/RFP Tendering , Flight Testing Done in India under all condition IAF flies , Negotiations of TOT , Lic Production and with recent DPP Emphasis by MOD for Make in India and Indiginisation this has become more complex and time consuming as can be seen even with Rafale deal.
Flight testing is not mandatory as the P-8I acquisition proves. An RFP can be issued without taking years. ToT again, isn’t mandatory though some degree of it will be available (read: South Korea). And if all deals were to be driven by the objective of indigenization to the exclusion of other models, they wouldn’t have scrapped the MMRCA deal with Dassault.
There is no really short cut for such process , F-35 offically has not started or has come for discussion at MOD as a replacement for any thing …..We will come to know when that happens if that ever happens …..We know this will be a long drawn out process and wont be an easy one either.
For timeline, I’ll again refer you to the P-8I purchase. (In the C-17’s case they signed the contract within six months of short-listing it.)
If this is just an academic discussion why IAF needs F-35 then it is fine , I wont mind having such discussion on why Why IAF needs B-2 or IN needs Virginia Class Sub , I wont mind them having all of these 😀
Any serious process to such with procurement of F-35 we will have to wait for MOD to get some RFI going in first place.
We’ve already got both the IAF chief and MoD chief on record talking about alternative fighter options. The fighter manufacturers have started making their pitches again, this includes Saab, Boeing and Eurofighter. But mention the F-35 and suddenly we’re in the realm of unserious ‘academic discussions’. If so, then a lot of people (including many at the MoD) haven’t got your memo. 😀
VnomadGiven the stringent requirements India has put on both function and cost, the F-35 simply would not pass.. The bird ain’t ready yet..
If ordered next year, deliveries would presumably begin in 2020, delivered in a very ready configuration. As for cost, its true that’s not bottomed out yet. Its competitive today but won’t convincingly beat the larger Euros until 2019. So if India decides to opt for it, it could wait until the the block buy takes place for a flyaway cost of $80 mil or less.
Head-to-head its arguably already offering better value for a customer today than the EF, Rafale & SH. As for the Gripen, looks like the IAF is moving to quash that option.
Not the most reliable of sources and the IAF’s reasoning comes off more as an excuse to junk it, but anyway –
Making Gripen fighters in India not favoured by IAF
Swedish defence major Saab plans to Make its Gripen fighter in India has roadblock with stiff resistance coming from Indian Air force said well-informed sources close to idrw.org. IAF is not in favour of ordering 4.5+ Gen fighter jet, even though SAAB has offered India technical help in the development of indigenous AMCA 5th generation fighter aircraft in lieu of orders for its Gripen fighters which lost out of Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft tender in 2011 which was won by French Rafale fighter jets.
At present India is negotiating with France for procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets out of 126 requested by Indian Air Force under Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft tender and Defence minister Parrikar already has confirmed that by end of this year another vendor will be selected who will make up to 90 fighter jets in India with active participation from Private sector company with major transfer of technology .
Saabs Gripen which belongs to same class as indigenous Light Combat Aircraft Tejas is finding no takers in IAF which now considers Tejas a better product compared to Gripen due to endless customization options offered by the indigenous fighter jet for which IAF has already placed first mass order for 106 jets with upgraded Avionics over previously 20 already ordered and according to many defence analyst numbers will finally touch 300 + with production line chunking out upgraded LCA -Tejas over next few years which will replace all retiring Mig-21s and Mig27s and is clearly not interested in placing orders for aircraft in same class as LCA .
VnomadYou are assuming lot of things there and I am using the last trials of MMRCA as the bench mark that IAF used for selection , Even these aircraft are years in service in host country yet they had to go through these trials which
See no reason why any other new type wont have to go through similar trials
More inferences than assumptions, based on the records of previous FMS acquisitions.
You are using the MMRCA (follow up to the Mirage), intended as a work-horse, as a benchmark for a type that’ll serve in a specialized tip-of-the-spear role. Its not going to be competing against any other type.
Also its debatable US would allow F-35 to be hardwired for nuclear role , If you have Stealth then you need Nuclear Bomb for Deep Penetration
Eh? You can most certainly do deep penetration strikes without a nuclear bomb. Also, even when equipped with a free-fall nuclear weapon, the aircraft would have to overfly the target and well.. its stealthy, its not invisible.
P-8I is not a fighter aircraft and fighters operates over varied climatic conditions in India
Unlike the MMRCA, there’s no Plan B alternative to the F-35A, if can operate out of a mountain base with only 7 tons of fuel instead of 8.5 tons. Nor is that enough to scrap the purchase either. Not with the PAK FA having quite a few years to go before it matures enough for regular service.
That said, in terms of climatic suitability, the F-35 has been tested quite thoroughly, in dynamic conditions (regular crews, servicing, full power extended engine runs), from -40 to 50 deg C, to intense rain and hail. (F-35 Climatic Testing)
There is nothing to say that IAF wont operate 1-2 squadron of FGFA with Stage 1 117 Engine , That remains to be seen , Indded there was news that India will import 1-2 squadron PAK-FA directly
The IAF according to most news sources is trying to put it off. No doubt worried about the serviceability issues brought on by a new and well.. insufficiently tested type – the USAF standard for weapon system maturity is 100,000 total flight hours (the F-35 has flown 50,000 hours so far). According to the most recent article, the order has been downsized (for now) to about 60 fighters. Its highly unlikely that that consists of a substantial no. of interim variant aircraft.
Aside from that, fact is, even a ‘Stage 1’ PAK FA won’t be export ready before 2021 (if not later), with deliveries beginning 2023-24. For the first couple of years, they’ll still be carrying out modifications based on feedback from operational crews and writing up the training manual for the jet.
And then there are the political aspects – with follow-on Su-30 orders almost sure to be placed, the MoD would be considering the implications for its policy of diversification.
In any case there is no initial discussion from MOD or IAF for F-35 , So its more like hearsay stuff ……as they say in Hindi Khayali Pulav 😀
To be fair, this is Keypub not an MoD financed think-tank restricted by specific guidelines. We’ve been discussing all options for the IAF including the Gripen E, Super Hornet & Eurofighter. I see no reason to exclude the F-35 from that.
And its not like its a wildly fictional or otherwise implausible scenario.
– We know the MoD has considered the type for other roles (naval RFI for the F-35B & F-35C).
– We know the Rafale deal has gotten bogged down on the cost front and the MoD has all but capped the acquisition at two squadrons.
– We know the IAF has been examining ‘alternatives’ and has explicitly refused the obvious follow-through on the Rafale.
– We know the DM has very recently made statements about acquiring another Western fighter.
– We know the PAK FA is running several years behind schedule and the RuAF has downsized in the preliminary order to just 12 fighters, in favour of more Su-35S. (With the ongoing economic crisis, over the short term prospects aren’t expected to significantly improve.)
VnomadNegotiation with Indian MOD is a long drawn out and complex process as you must have realised by now ( torturous is the right word as Dassault would have realised by now 😀 ), Lets assume if India puts its need for F-35 as single vendor G2G program , there would be a long phase of testing the F-35 in India ( just look at MMRCA Flight test program which was very comprehensive ) , Over and above that there would be Negotiations on TOT , Local Assembly ,Offsets Indiginous systems integration etc finally the negotations on Price if every things gets agreed.
Not necessarily. For one, the FMS system is already a streamlined mechanism that the Indian govt is quite comfortable with, perhaps in contrast to the ad hoc govt-to-govt arrangement with France.
Plus, much of the customization is either unnecessary or already available. No Litening 4 for example, while the Spice & Python 5 are already being integrated by Israel. Similar situation with the data-links where it could piggyback off the Israeli customization program (the IAF’s ODL has been developed by IAI). Also given the typically cheaper costs of US munitions, I don’t think the IAF will be as insistent on finding alternatives.
The flight testing process is preferred (especially in a multi-vendor purchase) but it is not mandatory, as long as the service is reasonably satisfied with the viability of the proposed configuration.* Unlike the MMRCA process, its not being measured against a check-list of required characteristics.
And thanks to the gargantuan scale of the F-35 program, if required, LM could deliver two full squadrons in a span of 5-6 years (compared to the 9 years specified for the current Rafale deal). Even if they wrapped up negotiation only by 2018, the IAF could still receive all their aircraft in the same time-frame.
*I’m using the P-8I purchase as a model. Short-listed in late 2007. Contract negotiations began in Jan 2008. With the contract signed in Jan 2009, before the P-8A’s first flight (Apr 2009). Customized with locally built IFF, digital radio, data-link & satcom. Deliveries began in 2013 and ended in 2015.
They are much better of funding the Tejas Mark2 and procuring more of it and buying more MKI/SuperMKI atleast that would come in reasonable time frame that IAF would want to have in near and medium term and high degree of Self Sufficiency and Indiginisation achieved on both programs
Buying more Su-30s and developing the Mk2 is solid idea. But with the IAF’s ‘second-stage’ PAK FA/FGFA available only after 2025, there will remain a significant capability gap at the higher-end of the spectrum. Especially for deep strike, deep recce, SEAD, anti-AWACS type missions.
Vnomadlocal maintainance for the Rafale can include pretty much anything they may want to do with it.. unlike the JSF.
It “can include” local production as well (as was specified in the now-defunct MMRCA). Question is, what does it include now, aside from regular maintenance and overhauls (a la HAL-Mirage), because that’s something the even LM can offer.
In any case, you can push your stance as much as you want, the F-35 is on offer for export… until now, India kept showing interest in Rafale, even without MMRCA conditions. in the same time, they did not seem to show interest in the F-35. they obviously have their reasons
Nope. Once the MMRCA was scrapped and a two squadron purchase initiated, only the Prime Minister was really pushing the issue, (partly because it was a high-visibility deal and he was personally invested). The MoD offered some lip-service in the initial days which faded later while the IAF starting publicly talking about ‘alternatives’ to the Rafale. With the cost negotiations resulting in a stalemate, if you’re taking the sale for granted, you’re probably in a minority.
VnomadWhat I say, as said previously, is that the US have a history of blocking countries actions even if these have bought weapons, France, not so much, and, as a result, India is less vulnerable to producers change of position with the French, than with the USA
And yet the list of countries buying defence equipment from the US… includes France!
Unless you’re suggesting that the US govt merely tosses a coin before making decisions of this nature, India is clearly less vulnerable to a ‘change of position’. The US has a core strategic interest in ensuring that India’s military capabilities vis a vis China, remain robust and the bilateral relationship strengthens with time (an initiative that is being reciprocated by India).
France on the other hand, has no similar constraints, which is why its been trying to get the EU to lift the arms embargo on China (presumably so it can sell Rafales there as well). In July 2010, France was in talks with Libya to sell Rafales to Gaddafi. Six months later it was bombing Gaddafi with the same Rafale (and using the footage/news in its marketing campaign for the fighter). Does that not count as a ‘change of position’?
not to speak of the necessity, if they bought “that opther fighter”, to do important maintainance in another country, be it in peace time or when at war…
Local maintenance can be carried out to the same level as the Rafale.
VnomadEgypt was just one example.. with India, who can tell how relations between China and the USa will evolve? China is a strong economic partner, and also owns a good chunk of US debt… Imagine if India and China become a bit more agressive against each other, what may be the position of the USA there?
transports, engines, or (relatively) low impact weapons like helicopters are one thing, strike fighters may be a bit more of a problem in the strategic view of things
What will be the position of the US vis a vis France? Which one is more likely to go eye-to-eye with China? Which is one is running FoN patrols in the SCS? Which one has a ‘Pivot to Asia’ as the driving policy of the military-economic-political strategy? What is real objective behind the trilateral & quadrilateral naval exercises involving the US, India, Japan, Australia in the Indian Ocean? When the chips are down and India urgently needs 100 AShMs and 1000 PGMs delivered quickly and quietly (or publicly, for that matter), which state is more likely (and able) to respond in say… 2025?
Using Egypt, UAE, or whoever else you have in mind, as a datum, is a fundamental flawed approach that ignores the strategic equations in play in Asia. ‘Who can tell how relations will evolve’.. well there are plenty of cues available if look hard enough. And in any case, ‘nobody knows the future’ doesn’t help make the case for the Rafale. After all, you can’t say for certain that ‘strings’ won’t emerge in the future from China via France, can you?
With regard to the other point – are the P-8 & S-70 ‘low impact weapons’? They will comprise the core of the IN’s ASW capabilities for the next 20-25 years; hostile subs being the primary threat to IN ops in the IOR. If they can live with that, I imagine they can live with a 2-3 squadrons of US-origin in a 40+ squadron (objective) fighter fleet. Also keep in mind, the entire Tejas fleet (of 8-10 squadrons over the long term) will be powered by a US engine.
Vnomader, tell that to Egypt, for example, who had its F-16s blocked for a long period… they, all of a sudden were “unblocked” once the first Rafales were delivered… can you imagine that?
With the Rafale, Dassault can really bring lots of stuff to you, they even “deliver” F-16s… 😀
Something for Egypt’s neighbours, like perhaps Jordan to keep in mind. However, if you think India is in the same shoes as Egypt, so may wish to step back for a minute from that Middle-Eastern centric viewpoint and take a closer look at how the situation is evolving in the Asia Pacific region. The Indian state’s position on the matter is becoming pretty clear; and remains unchanged even after the formation of a new govt.
Vnomadno, for me it is “once delivered”…
as for orders, it happened before a few times, like Mirage IIIs for Israel.
but once they are delivered, the customer dies what he wants
Limitations of the equipment also imply that the customer is also forced to do the best he can. For Taiwan, for example, that meant having to forgo the Aster and develop a local alternative to it. The IAF meanwhile will have to pay steep prices for upgrades, support & weapons while taking far higher risks on deep strike-type missions.
As far as the politics of the matter is concerned, apprehensions about US-sourced weaponry have clearly eased over the last decade which basically means that the Rafale’s ‘no strings’ appeal isn’t as relevant to the current geopolitical reality in Asia.
VnomadSo what’s the use of having more AoA than 30 in actual combat, except to bleed speed? Next thing you know the Cobra will be the be all & and all of dogfighting capability.
As umpteen accounts, sources, references attest to, including this recent one by Major Hanche, it results in better nose pointing authority for tight WVR shots.
VnomadI said: “once delivered” 😉
Now now.. I’m betting that used to be ‘once ordered’ before the Mistral episode.
Also, don’t forget forget Taiwan, where France, after losing a rather public corruption case and receiving a $875 mil fine, retaliated by closing down its military liaison office in Taipei.
France said it would close a low-key military liaison office in Taiwan in retaliation over a ruling in a controversial arms deal, local media said yesterday. The Chinese-language Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper) reported that the office, which arranges visits by military personnel and facilitates Taiwan’s acquisition of French-made weaponry, would be shut down next month.- Taipei Times
Without French support, Taiwan’s Lafayette frigates are vulnerable. The air force’s spare parts problem is also bound to become more serious. However, what’s most alarming to many Taiwanese is that the French withdrawal effectively leaves Taiwan’s arms supply almost solely in the hands of Washington.
.
Since France hasn’t sold its shipboard weapons to the Taiwanese, the Lafayettes have been relying on relatively unsophisticated domestic and US-made equipment. Air defense capabilities are believed to be too poor to withstand a Chinese attack coming from more than one direction. Software that has been developed by the Taiwanese navy to connect the French systems of the craft with the domestic and US-produced onboard weaponry still has major flaws.These problems were almost solved. France was about to equip the Taiwanese Lafayettes with the highly effective Aster air-defense system that was initially developed for the French and Italian militaries. However, together with the withdrawal of the technical team, these plans were scrapped.
As is the case with the navy’s Lafayettes, the fate of Taiwan’s Mirage-2000 heavily depends on cooperation with France. The fleet of more than 50 planes that is stationed at Hsinchu air base protects Taiwan’s industrial heartland. Although the Mirage is Taiwan’s most advanced fighter jet, there have been myriad technical problems. Taiwan needs France for the continued supply of spare parts and for training and testing. – Link
as for probabilities… it is a matter of “who said what”… how the two will compare IRL will be seen once they are there… for now, it’s only communication and speculation
Maybe when it comes to the secretive EW systems (I’d give the F-35 a big edge, especially vis a vis the threat library, but one can dismiss that as a subjective judgement). The difference in the airframe’s VLO capability is however indisputably stark.
VnomadYou are saying all those planes have no AoA limiter?
I’m saying their FCS doesn’t limit the flight envelope to 30 deg AoA.
VnomadWhy?
Did you read (and understand) the first sentence YOU quoted from my post when you first replied to me in this thread? That’s why.
Because they’re not relevant, huh? Which raises the obvious question – why do the F-22, F-18, SH, Su-27/30/35, PAK FA not have similar limitations?
Vnomadfact is, India buys stuff, weapons and whatnot… France delivers and once in Undia, they do what they want.
Unless want they want to do, is to send a fighter aircraft for deep strike into PLAAF-held airspace, where the Rafale has a signficantly lower probability of getting the job done and bringing the pilot back alive (vis a vis the F-35).
There are nulerous examples of USA blocking action of other air forces when they feel like that. If you look at french record, the only thing you may find is stopping deliveries of exocets to Argentina once they attacked UK territory (UK being a close ally of the french, in case you firget it 😉 )
So uhh.. when can Russia expect its Mistrals delivered? 😉
Meanwhile seeing as France itself hasn’t stopped buying weapons from US, I’m guessing it’ll find it hard to convince India to that. Not least because of the growing strategic congruence between the US & India.
Vnomadthe problem with “some other plane” regardless of its qualities, are all the strings attached to it 😉
C-130J, C-17, AH-64E, P-8I, Chinook, S-70, M777, GE-F404, GE-LM2500, EMALS, Harpoon, CBU-105, Triton, Predator-C… does it look like they’re losing sleep because of ‘all the strings attached’?
With the Rafale, once they bought it, they are completely free to use it any way they like
Err.. except that India has no plans to find creative uses for weapons or engage in adventures in the Middle East or Africa or elsewhere. These are military purchases that will be employed in a predictable fashion.
Will France risk China’s wrath by rushing in (unscheduled) supplies of weapons, aircraft or spares if there is stand-off (or god forbid, a war) between India and China?
Sign In
