Is this for real? I wouldn’t have thought someone senior in the DRDO would take this seriously, but then again….

Its a boilerplate response – ‘we’re open to all ideas’. They aren’t funding the chap’s powerpoint presentation or in any way competing with him, no point in publicly rubbishing his ideas.

I disagree. MTA is nedeed in Russia. A while ago people were saying that Russia wouldn´t developing a 5th generation fighter because economic reasons but they did because they nedeed the aircraft, it´s the same situaton here. Lots of old transport aircraft in need of replacement in the near future not to mentiom export costumers. For how long Russia will be operating the An-26 safely? Not to long. I agree it´s taking forever for this aircraft to take shape but I don´t believe that when it does it´ll be garbage.

That’s precisely the point. The Russians needed the PAK FA, they’re developing the PAK FA. If they decide they need the Il-214, they’ll buy and develop the Il-214. Doesn’t make either the FGFA or the MTA any less of a farce.

For what its worth, after a lot of violent bucking, some sense seems to be finally but slowly permeating the upper echelons of defence management in India. Whether it takes hold remains to be seen.

5th-gen jet, mini missile on agenda as Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoygu heads to Delhi

One of the most important deals in the works between India and Russia at present is the FGFA. A Russian team was in the national capital last month to discuss the deal and iron out any differences.

India has said that the basic prototype of the plane is already flying and the Indian version had just a few variations, hence a full-fledged R&D contract would be a waste of time and resources, official sources said.

The preliminary design agreement on the FGFA had been signed in 2010 between HAL and the Russian Sukhoi Design Bureau to build the jet for use by both countries.

But the final R&D contract, which was to be signed by 2012, is still to be finalised. The contract would pave the way for prototype development and flight testing.

Despite Putin’s visit, two pacts on military aircraft still in doldrums

The deadlock over the MTA, which were initially envisaged to gradually replace IAF’s ageing fleet of the medium-lift AN-32 aircraft, seems to be much more serious. India now wants to ascertain the cost viability of the twin-engine transport aircraft in comparison to similar planes available in the market.

There are also questions about the MTA’s “predicted timelines for delivery” as well as its failure to meet the high-altitude requirements, which need to be answered before India even thinks of inking the full-scale contract for the project, said sources.

Seems that, from what I’ve read, as they build a larger Suez Canal, they want to ensure safety over it. It is of strategic importance to Egypt, and, as pretty anything really advanced from the US is not available (with Israel right across the border) they have to look elsewhere and Rafale comes as a really good candidate.

Why would a larger Suez Canal be significantly more vulnerable than what exists today? Also, while violence in the Sinai continues, Egyptian-Israeli relations have remained fairly stable since the Morsi govt lost power. No unusual threat from that quarter.

Do we have a confirmation on the Rafale sale? Because they’ve also reportedly been negotiating with UAE for surplus Mirage 2000s and with Russia for the MiG-29/35. The latter would probably be very competitive thanks the Ruble’s plummeting value.

1990 –

POLAND:

Per capita GDP: $1,700

UKRAINE

Per capita GDP: $1,550

____________________

Post Cold War, Poland looks West towards the EU, Ukraine looks East to Russia.

____________________

2014 –

POLAND

Per Capita GDP: $13,500

UKRAINE

Per Capita GDP: $3,900

(The Ukrainian economic crisis is often mocked in the Russian media. Ironically, the state of the Ukrainian economy is to a large extent a result of political choices made in past. Choices they’re trying to rectify now.)
____________________

Until the end of 2013, a clear plurality of the Ukrainian public supported membership in the EU (and a far stronger majority strongly opposed membership in the NATO).

What happened after is a subject of dispute.

– Most in the West believe Putin ‘prevailed’ upon Yanukovich to step back from the EU association agreement, thus preserving his own pet project i.e. Eurasian Customs Union. Yanukovich was deposed by an infuriated public. Russia responded to that by annexing Crimea. Emboldened by the West’s weak response, it then expanded its focus to East Ukraine where its been supporting dissidents/rebels in a de facto civil war. After which the West escalated with a full range of economic sanctions that unfortunately for the Russian govt happened to (broadly) coincide with a plummet in oil prices.

– Russia’s public position as close as I can tell is that Yanukovich was deposed by ‘fascist’ forces supported by the US, that the events in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine were entirely spontaneous and that Russia has sanctioned no military assistance to the rebels.

In my view, It’s a little bit more than that:

By sending a long range bomber, they force the entire Nato force to scramble nimble fighter all along the way to monitor them. This imparts maintenance, readiness and the overall cost of the fleet of fighter. And Putin, even if he only reads the Key Pub forum, should known that there are some faults line to enlarge here.

Not really. Keep in mind, expenses incurred by NATO forces are shared among several countries. Most of whom can probably afford the expenditure more than Russia can.

Ka-52 is already flying with everything the Mi-28NM will have.

And although it doesn’t have the mast rotor, it has a larger and more powerful array than Apache or Mi-28 will ever have on their masts.
The co-ax rotor system is a big advantage by itself IMO. Can carry a better payload than any other attack helo out there, with armor shy of only the Mi-28 as well.

A larger range only goes so far given that the helicopter will continue to be horizon limited in most attack profiles. And the nose-mounted radar will have a limited FoV.

I don’t think the pop-up attack is useful. It relies on VERY compatible terrain, and to be frank I have serious doubts you will be able to maneuver yourself effectively that the enemy will only be to see the rotor head, and not the rest of the helo.

It workable tactic everywhere save in flat deserts. Even if the aircraft isn’t perfectly shrouded its still far better than being entirely exposed to AAA, mobile SAMs and MANPADs.

I am just not buying that the capability is usefull in practice. In combat Apaches have almost always used moving tactics, not hovering from behind terrain.

That’s because they have been used mostly in COIN scenarios and for infantry support rather than to attack mechanized columns on the move. Only time it saw significant action in the anti-tank role was over the flatlands of Iraq (and that too before the Longbow became operational).

I would trade that happily for a much more powerful radar that can only see the frontal arc. Ideally you would also have a smaller top up top for no compromise awareness.

That would be useful it its intended to double up as a pseudo fighter/attack aircraft to operate at upto medium altitudes, in which case it ought to also be equipped with radar guided missiles and munitions.

how about AH-1Z and T129? , they both have DIRCM, both have radar and they are also smaller and more agile than AH-64, Mi-28

Not mast-mounted. Wouldn’t allow the pilot to shoot from cover like the Longbow would. Also, limited FoV. So it wouldn’t have the kind of situational awareness that the Apache pilot would.