TeerNo only Mike model but to be fair that is a very good missile, in combination with a HMD a worthy combination for the Block 52 F16 and a threat not to be taken lightly in the merge!
Anyway the Pakistan airforce is more interested in the capability that AMRAAM will deliver closing a capability gap that developed in respect of India.
Its a very exciting period for the PAF! AMRAAM, F16 Block 52, JF17, AEW and Tankers.
The Mike model is, TBH, obsolete versus todays missiles and lacks HOBS capability to exploit the capabilities of the HMDS. The AIM-9M-8/9 modifications were reportedly fielded back in ’95. IMO, funds permitting the PAF will try to acquire an OTS HOBS missile, because its a key capability the PAF is lacking so far.
TeerGood thing about SAAB is you can go both ways with it. If you want to get along with the US, just go with original SAAB/GE setup.
If you want more independence, maybe SAAB and EuroJet can be made to adapt EJ2X0 for Gripen NG. It certainly fits as it is now (size) and delivers comparable thrust (EJ200/GE414).As for Gripen armament, it’s compatible with both, US (cheaper) and Euro (more expensive) weapons, so again you can go both ways. OTOH, US fighters aren’t compatible with EU armament and would require considerable effort to certify EU weapons for their fighters, if ever. Just check UAE experience on that.
So, who needs EU weapons when US has cheaper ones?
Well, US weapons are less advanced by comparison to EU’s since it’s doctrine incorporates stealth aircraft which can (theoretically) come closer to target and so weapons can be of more rudimentary design (flying bombs and such).
EU on the other hand developed highly sophisticated systems (Taurus, StormShadow, Kongsberg ASM, DWS39, ALARM, etc…) which are more expensive, but more likely to get the job done as well, while launched from less sophisticated platform at that.Since AFAIK, India doesn’t plan to integrate LO aircraft with this acquisition, I think the weapons choice would be of paramount importance here.
SDBs and such are great (at least for static targets), but it’s illusionary to expect of Su-30 or F18 to come within 40km of defended target to begin action. This is where EU’s weaponry comes in handy.
US’ LO planes/dumb weapons strategy is good for fighting war (when you actually launch weapons), but EU’s approach is cheaper for peace time conditions (when you use weapons for deterrence).Same goes for AA weapons, too.
Good post.
What about the cost of EU weapons..any numbers?
TeerThe Gripen Demo (which SAAB have recently started calling the NG, now it has the ES05 radar) has been flying for 18 months, & IIRC the development programme has been on schedule, on cost, & very smooth. It’s an NG airframe, with an NG engine, & now has most of the NG avionics. Demonstration of meeting milestones as planned is a lot more than “development aims”.
Its been smooth so far..but has it demonstrated all the avionics capability SAAB has stated in its presentation briefs? How many targets has the ES-05 tracked, locked under what conditions etc? The list of questions go on.
Basically, just because the development schedule has been smooth in the beginning is no indication it will continue to be so.
The Norwegians, for all the back and forth & controversy, made a point that the NG’s avionics fit was quite ambitious & they were not certain things would be as simple as SAAB had stated.
I’d believe the same as well, given that the Block 60 with a Northrop Grumman system & drawing on a substantial pool of avionics experience is still facing issues (ARES Blog) or was at least taking enough time that the UAE were bothered.
So, right now compared to the Rafale & the EF & the US pair, what SAAB does have are development aims. They are yet to demonstrate the fully kitted out avionics system or even airframe. Theres lots to do yet. And the same holds for the MiG-35, which too draws upon a lot of legacy tech & systems like the NG does, but also stands far behind the other MMRCA competitors in terms of overall system maturity. I dont doubt it will be finished, but it will take time and elbow grease, which I am not happy about from the MMRCA viewpoint. I’d rather have a system which is ready from the day of delivery (relatively speaking).
Even after development, given the rawness of the product, for all intents and purposes, its a brand new derivative, there are likely to be enough teething troubles and niggles to keep a customer occupied for some time.
I’d rather prefer the above 4 in that respect, they are seeing upgrades which are of a far more limited aspect & not an entire new refresh. In fact, the UAE are asking for performance guarantees from the Rafale team for the tech refresh given the engine, radar change etc. And well, they might.
TeerWhy are you looking at a munition like a Pakistani ballistic missile for the MRCA? It does not make any sense to me.
Possibly early deliveries of Meteor will be expensive, but the same goes for AIM-120D. But if India is to buy expensive BVR capable fighters with AESA radars, why be cheap and buy missiles that cant exploit all its capabilities?
Recent estimates of Meteor suggest its already more expensive than the AMRAAM-120D. Do you have any estimates for the overall volume production cost?
If India wants a cheap missile for MRCA, why not go for ASTRA? I dont know its price, but it should logically be the cheapest, possibly cheaper than even old versions of AMRAAM.
Astra will be integrated but its good to have another system as well of equivalent/better capability at a reasonable price that does not break the bank.
TeerMatt, I think you are unaware of how much technology goes into a modern jet turbofan of the class we are talking about & what it all requires to be made ready for LSP, let alone series production. It encompasses R&D, painstaking and repetitive (read expensive) CFD simulation, materials development to keep the weight down, and finally manufacture. All in all, its an effort in its own right. There is a reason only a few firms/consortiums manufacture turbofans for long range missiles & the like. And each is regarded as a strategic asset.
Furthermore, when you state a lot of these technologies are available off the shelf – no, they are not. Not if you need systems which can give you an accurate weapon and not a poor mans/terrorists cruise missile jury rigged from OTS systems. The MTCR exists for a reason, and is a very effective piece of legislation in preventing a range of technology from being shared, even dual use and not purpose designed contracted from specialized firms.
No modern military target is going to be taken out with poorly designed, jury rigged weapons systems of the kind you are talking about nor will the ADS be fooled. These weapons, eg the advanced Katyusha type “spray and pray” weapons are only good versus population centers for the most part.
Add the risks of collateral damage in the bargain, and no military would touch this.
India needs a long range system which can accurately target and take out key nodes, radar systems of a SAM network etc, which is also reliable enough that mission planners can count on it getting airborne on a first day of war scenario. If it fails, then thats a huge loss.
Theres a reason why we spent so much on the Brahmos as well especially its MK2 variant. But its key limitation is range. Its high speed ramjet system is ~300 km. What I am talking about is a lance, an accurate weapon which is in the 500-1000 km class. Something which can be launched well within Indian territory to keep the launching airframe out of the S-300 PMU2 envelope, yet target PRC installations and the SAM network itself. That means breakthroughs in engine technology to field such a system.
Otherwise volume production, in the substantial numbers necessary for an intense conflict is not possible.
About the private sector and what it can and cannot make, suffice to say the DRDO is funding an entire pvt ind. cluster, to develop fundamental UAV technologies, and the group is yet to demonstrate that as a production ready system, let alone long range munitions.
Cola,
INS is not the make or break factor for India. We make the nav-attack systems for the Brahmos, and a bunch of INS systems for long range ballistic missiles, all the way to 3K Km & a 5K Km missile is in development as well. And of recent vintage is a new RLG INS system that is now being productionized. Incidentally, even the Astra nav attack system is being made locally.
TeerImpressive really, by 2017, Mectron hopes to have an entire homegrown portfolio of WVR AAMs, GPS/INS guided bombs, ARM & AShM.
TeerSwerve thanks – found this as well.
Appears to be stuck from the 90’s thanks to funding shortages – happens everywhere I guess. Range of around 20 miles (nautical?) against 5Sq Ft A2A targets, double that versus ground targets (from the comments).
Anyways, a good basic first step.
NE, agree – Mectron is an interesting firm with some fairly decent products. Some are here:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=94268
http://www.aereo.jor.br/2009/09/28/cronograma-dos-projetos-da-mectron/
I used google translate.
TeerThere could be a stepped acquisition with an intermittent radar until AESA is developed fully. Gripen is already sold to many countries and not like they are developing everything from scratch.
Which defeats the purpose of the MMRCA as its primary aim was to field a mature, ready to go fighter which the IAF could take to war ASAP. Not have another development program.
Despite having lot of off-the-shelf components and avionics at least it would bring the knowledge of control laws etc for FBW of LCA, MCA. With a totally sealed box, what does F18 SH add to the learning curve?
Thats presuming that SAAB have offered India a role in FBW development for the Gripen NG, which is most probably wrong, unless there is a source to the contrary.
What I am alluding to is not just learning from the aircraft itself, but the OEM offering India sweeteners for other programs. Theoretically all the OEMs in the race could offer this, but so far only EADS, Dassault and RAC MiG have gone on record stating either complete technology access (Dassault, MiG) or assistance in other programs (EADS).
If SAAB were to openly pledge its support for the LCA MK2 and MCA, it could really score valuable points.
Sign, you may be right, Viper trials in India, reportedly went smoothly.
TeerIrisT is an alternative and aready seen in Pakistani expo’s. Already integrated.
When did IRIST get integrated on any PAF airplane? Being seen in expos is no guarantor of purchase. I mean, just because meteor gets shown in an expo in East Asia, that does not mean East Asian AFs are buying it! Or because AIM-9X is seen in the US pavilion at AeroIndia, does not mean the IAF has already purchased it!
TeerOne issue is that the Gripen NG is as raw as the MiG-35, all we have so far are development aims from SAAB, and as can be seen in multiple programs worldwide, these aims take a lot of time and money to fructify, the first ie time is especially a problem as the IAF needs mature fighters.
I wont write off SAAB though, especially if they contribute, in whatever limited amount to the LCA, MCA etc but there has been very little from their end on such cooperation, correct me if I am wrong.
TeerGripen NG has nevertheless more range in A2A then any of the contenders, or any SC capable a/c for that matter, and with the general move to PGM these days, less is needed to haul around so it will compare favorably range-wise in A2G as well.
Does it have more range in A2A than any of the contenders? Any data to state that for sure – besides which, there is but a prototype right now and no definitive NG yet. And about less to haul around, theoretically yes, but long range munitions like the Shaheen etc are what I am looking at.
QB,
They say weapons of our Choice. AMRAAM or MICA anyone ? R77 may be stretching it a bit too far.
AMRAAM is American. Mica is quite expensive and shorter ranged than the AMRAAM and RVVAE. I wish Europe had its own MRAAM cheaper than the Mica.
And the IAF has already stated they will not divide the order into two types.
TeerRegarding planes like F-22, MKI, typhoon, Rafale etc., they have their promary advantage in BVR. If their opponent survives BVR (for whatever reason) and enters WVR with a decent missile/HMD combo, the outcome would be far from certain. Every ounce of manuverability helps the pilot when it comes to survival, but modern missiles have become a lot manueverable than their opponent, i.e. fighter aircrafts.
Agreed, but the TVC + HOBS/HMCS really helps when it comes to WVR, giving the MKI an edge, versus aircraft not similarly equipped.
The next time Americans arrived in India, they brought the improved F-16.
“This fighter jet is smaller and lighter than our Su-30,” says Simonov. “Thus, logically, it ought to be more manoeuvrable and win in close combat. But everything was exactly the opposite. Su-30MKIs were used. The defeat was unquestionable.”
#2 – http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/11/a-final-word-from-india-on-you.html
IvIs were flown only at Mountain Home AFB. In none of the IvIs were the Su-30MKIs ever vulnerable, let alone shot down. As all exercises were flown with ACMI, the situations are recorded and available to substantiate this aspect…….
….it is understood that the kill ratio (at Mountain Home AFB) was 21 : 1, in favour of the Su-30MKIs
There was an interview with a MiG pilot now flying Su-30 MKIs who demonstrates how the TVC dramatically shortens the radius of turn & with HOBs gives it an advantage in WVR. Might be on YouTube.
Quadbike,
DSCA notifications only state the AIM-9M as part of the F-16 package. But they are getting HMDs, effect is somewhat limited though since these are not HOBS missiles.
TeerI am not asking HAL to start a basic trainer project now!My angst is against the very sad(or maddening?) state of affairs that compels us to buy even such things as the basic turboprop tainer which is at the lower end of the spectrum and really a very “basic” requirement for any airforce.Its been 25 years since HPT 32 entered service!What were they thinking..that it would carry on indefinitely!!!By this time they should have had a new bird atleast in the advanced stage of development!
Here we have the HPT 32 entering service 25 yrs back(around 1984) and then we have that HTT 35 in 1994 (which I had posted earlier here and here) and after it literally vanished of the screens theres not a thing to suggest that anybody was too worried about it![Hell the IAF had not showed interest to the HTT 34 even]
And now we have to buy that too , designate it HTT 40 or something and licence produce it,when we could have had our very own homegrown bird developed from scratch if somebody (IAF anyone??)had even batted an eyelid in that direction!! I dont blame HAL!After all they are good at licence producing stuff!!
HAving said that , now though, HAL really have their hands full.Its imperative that they deliver on those first!
Yeah well thats the issue right, the IAF should have raised this thing a long time back & got it attended to. And on HALs part, they went off with the IJT etc. My point is there should be a national aerospace group etc with all stakeholders – HAL, IAF,IA, IN,DRDO, MOD, FinMin and representatives from CII, to do perspective planning well in advance and monitor what goes on. Otherwise you have incidents like this occur. Of course, there is no such group. Its just everyone working individually.
You know whats even funnier :p – since only 60 odd are being ordered, and there are 125 odd HPTs to be replaced, they may be thinking of a split purchase between an import and a local design from HAL. Brilliant from the logistics POV. 😀
Rahul
I am getting old so dont make fun of the aged. :p:p
I actually find your idea of the pvt sector thing brilliant – Taneja or a consortium should actually take this up. I dont see why they cant license manufacture another 60 odd aircraft or even more, as the IAF wants it, or even a HAL design.
TeerFurthermore, what inhouse technology capabilities does the UAEAF have, to benchmark what the vendor/OEM claims against what is reasonable?
Brazil has Embraer & a strong technology group..
India has HAL/NAL/DRDO/IAF tech team..
Japan has MHI/many vendors/JAF R&D team..
SoKo has KAI/Samsung/Thales-techwin etc etc..
I think that is another problem which they probably face..
TeerBTW, I’m part Danish, & have Indian relatives. I’m biased in favour of both.
Chicken curry loving Viking with blue eyes. 🙂
Sign In
