TeerYes, that’s correct. And that’s in no way different to what will happen if you chose the Rafale, the Gripen or one of the American birds. A 100% ToT doesn’t make you a partner. It just allows you to build it on your own. Each of them will charge you an arm and a leg for crucial updates or assistance beyond the original contract.
If you really want to get access to the new features or even more influence on what will be available in the future the Eurofighter would be your best option. EADS is willing to make you a real partner. You wont get that from any other contender.
Yes! Which brings me back to my original point. 🙂
That despite the 100% TOT, there is a degree of reliance on the OEM, and which means India shouldnt rely just on ONE OEM for almost all its fighters!
Also you can’t compare the MKI to the MMRCA. There is no 100% ToT agreement for the MKI, is there?
Yes there was moreorless, not 100% but a deep license with 90% and above manufactured in India.
The current plan is to get the Phase 4 MKIs into the desired indigenization phase.
But my point was to compare the MKI to the MRCA as they are the nearest in terms of “agreement details” and overall plans vis a vis local manufacture. The lessons from the MKI project are germane to the MRCA.
TeerMine does not stink 🙂
Oh it does – each time you open your mouth.:)
IA is not the only force that uses it. So what IA says or does only matters for the IA. It is a BR in many other armed forces.
The discussion was clearly about the IA thanks to your statements about the Ak being the BR for the IA, which it clearly was not. So nice try at wriggling out…but a failure.
No and if you are trying to look as if knowledge shines out of your ass be my guest. There are a lot of things I know that you do not. I just do not brag about them. 🙂 Even with regards to aviation there are many people here who know certain things better than others and vice versa. 🙂
No, the point is you were pretending as if knowledge shone out of your… when you clearly knew nothing of the topic under question and would not admit it.
My questions merely confirmed it.
The point is to make posts which rely on substance, and not gas and not try to pass off gas as fact. Please learn that.
Oh wow, then most people in this forum will not be able to discuss any weapons either. Especially our british friends who have fire arms banned in their country. While every one in America can get an Assualt rifle if they have money. So ‘holding a fire arm hardly matters, You can be researching about guns and not actually fire one in countries which have gun control laws, and can be a truck driver and still get an assault rifle in countries which don’t have gun control laws. So big deal.
A long way of saying “no, I havent” and “I was talking through my ass about a topic I dont understand”. You could have just said that, and been done with it. No need to bring in the United States and UK to cover your faux pas.
Really stop being an idiot. Stop defining terms in Indian way only and for heavens sake go to some dictionary or google up NCO. Non commisoned officer means a recruit soldier who is below officer rank ie. anything below the rank of second lt. in most armed forces.
I think its clear who was the idiot. You used the term NCO without realising what it meant, googled it up, and are now spinning away. LOL at your spin & backtracking.
I refuse to believe everything everyone says. As some one has explained here correclty, no one really believes everyhting that is said by people who test and make a product how ever good their reputation is, that is why we have a discussion forum here.
In other words your entire life so far has been a waste since you relied on a language invented by others, used products made by others and fed like a parasite on knowledge gleaned by others.
Do me a favour and crawl back to your stone cave. Or acknowledge your hypocrisy and your selective belief in sources ONLY when they support what you want. And not when they puncture your bombast.
and what are you a keyboard knight in golden armour ? Seriously you seem to have as much time to waste as you accuse me of having.
Surprising, you sure seem upset when somebody pays you back in your own coin.
What happened to all the claims of stalking me forever, that even if you were banned you would be back after reregistering under a new IP? Not being afraid of playing hard ball and what not?
Could it be that you let (as usual) your mouth get the better of you? Could it be that you dont like others treating you the manner in which you threaten others?
Oh wonders.
I am not hiding behind anyone. Swerve and I have had more disagreements and arguments than most people in this forum. But I respect him because he keeps to the topic and never resort to personal insults. He pointed out clearly that the AK is indeed a battle rifle.
You are hiding behind Swerve and it is clear that by yourself you are unable to refute anything I say.
Sucking upto Swerve or other posters wont compensate for your lack of domain knowledge.
Running behind others to compensate for your insane statements about Generals, to aircraft in general just makes you look even more foolish than you already are.
Stalk you ? Any one who has ever followed our posts know that it has been the other way around with you talking **** about me after every post I make.
Lets see, I ignored you in the other thread and you started it off in this thread.
Add all the self aggrandizement about stalking me that you said earlier, your fanboy braggadacio that if you were banned, you’d come back and stalk me by reregistering under a new IP and what not, why bother with a defence now?
You are getting what you wanted – my replies, since you couldnt leave well enough, alone!
As for me contributing to this forum, I have contributed my fair share either way. What have you done since your first post other than providing your views (which most users do) have you posted any item of interest ? Now don’t try to min mod and be a member like the rest of us. I know it hurts when you work hard for yoru bread and see a man earn much more while working less. Its a sad world. And no market dynamics do not apply to research. Your enconomic sense is pretty weak.
If contribution is defined by volume, then I am sure you can stake a claim to be amongst the biggest gasbags on any forum – not just this one.
As far as work is concerned, I am proud to work – it is the fundamental difference between you and me. I like working hard as well.
You apparently dont – and that merely corroborates you being a slacker.
Market dynamics do apply to research and almost all renumerative activities in this world- without there being a need, there would be no research.
I understand you lack an understanding and and you are basically sponging off your mom and dad’s hard earned cash, but do try and appreciate work, it will make you feel proud.
We have a new forum god. Bow down and worship him and he may judge you well.
No, I am not. However, I will respond to your risible stupidity as and when necessary.
Stop this and I stop. Otherwise..
A job is there to put food on your table and provide for your family. The cold reality is that I can do that while not working my ass off like you do. Its a hard world aint it ? You are probably a keyboard warrior from a call centre.
Even if I were working at a call center (which I am not), I would be proud that I am working. Even if I were a janitor and doing night school, I would be proud.
The fact is you wont understand it till you actually do and stop sponging off your parents.
Unfortunatley my ability to post serious stuff is hindered by trying to refute your attempts on charecter assasination. Stop being a prike 🙂
Given that so far you have contributed almost nothing of import or even remotely serious, I sincerely doubt you will do so in the future as well. And no, your character (or lack of) is clearly shown by your posts.
I will stop being a “prike” when you stop being a meow-meow.
TeerI have the feeling that the Rafale will lose too. It seems there is attrition with Dassault, not a good sign. Also, the costly upgrade of the Mirage, expensive weapons and spares sure don’t help. Because one starts thinking… The M2000 was in effect a successful exporter , for not being american aircraft. Still, the numbers weren’t so big to cut down enough prices of missiles and spares. And now that the time to upgrade has come, it costs too much. You can’t help yourself thinking, how this will translate in the long run with the Rafale, counting also that this is most probably the last “Dassault only” creation. It’s like buying a car, knowing that it’s the last one before the company closes. It’s not the current Rafale that is cause of worry, it’s mostly the Rafale in 25 years from now that is more cause of worry. How much will the spares and upgrade cost then?
Exactly!!
From what I can make out Dassault/Thales have put their foot down and insisted that only a Dassault approved fit ie Thales supplied Mirage 2000-V RDY, EW,etc fit is acceptable.
This killed the chances of getting Elta, Elbit/Elisra into the deal and doing a customized upgrade (at cheaper cost).
Now the deal is in infinite cost negotiation – its been stuck on price for far too long.
TeerForgive me if I’m mistaken. Wasn’t one of the main purposes of the whole tender to have an aircraft that is eventually produced in India, by Indian companies? I’m talking about the 100% ToT and the plan to only really import the first very few planes. How does that make you dependent on Russia or anyone else for that matter?!
Wilde,
A long post follows…
100% TOT is a myth unless you are willing to go to extraordinary lengths (like the PRC has gone with “certain” Russian aircraft – wont go into detail there because I dont want a flame war with our resident PRC posters).
What happens is thus – you get assembly knowledge and design data, you then start getting some sourcing lists + raw material assistance (if possible), and finally – if it is 100% TOT, the design data to build spares from the aforesaid material.
In the ideal case.
What happens then is you can maintain your existing stuff with local spares.
So far so good.
But then what happens when you want to integrate some new weaponry or change some basic crucial component of your aircraft? Guess what, that design data is almost never supplied, you end up having to go back to the OEM and bring them back.
Bingo, cash for them. This is what occurs.
We want Brahmos on the MKI, we are still “understanding the MKI” – and 2 Su’s are in Russia for structural work.
Now in the MKI, India paid a hefty amount, went and put its own electronics where it could to get some ability to make those changes, and we are doing so.
But it will easily take several years more before we can master most of the basic design (not just build it, but know “why” not just “how”) – in this I mean modifying the basic design itself, making our own super Flanker etc.
So despite the “ideal” 100% TOT, there is always some dependence on the original supplier.
And if ALL your fighters are already from that supplier guess what happens when he gets more money, (unlike MiG now) is doing well, and decides to withhold TOT ONCE you have already purchased your fighter, built up logistics…
You compromise.
Thats what happened in the case of our MiG-21 Upg. India was supposed to originally get TOT and even supply kits for export.
Sokol said NO! And midway, the contract changed! 🙂
I dont blame Russia – its the same with anyone, France, UK, US etc.
Many OEMs are also smart – they put clauses saying modify the design, if it breaks, your issue, pay us more to fix it.
Now who will mess around extensively with a basic design with that kind of risk.
In my opinion, 100% TOT is good for fleet maintenance (ie spares), and some degree of local improvement, but it nowhere gives you the level of independence obtained from your own aircraft, like the LCA etc.
Thats the entire point of the LCA program and the IAF has (finally) understood it, if the clearance of the MCA is any indication.
TeerThe Indians are the customer getting the most advanced Russian a/c exports in the world. And the “looking to the West” seems to be a forum myth. Strangely though nobody even cared to hoax it into Wikipedia. ;).
I would say we are not looking to the west, but looking to the best.
And as Aspis put it, the “best” depends on the weights assigned to different specifications by the IAF, plus the cost & political factors.
All said and done, we have a variety of agreements with Russia which will continue irrespective of the MRCA.
Its just that a single supplier situation in any situation comes with limitations that should be avoided, so its prudent we do not go for the MiG-35. In my opinion, the IAF’s entire fighter fleet (bar the LCA) being dependent on just one supplier is far too great a risk.
TeerIIf you are not bothered then why reply.
Its the same as taking a cra*p – you end up doing it even if it stinks.
And no you said it is not a battle rifle 🙂 .
Yes I did, and I am right – it is NOT a FBR per the IA definition. Go ask any regimental unit which transitioned from the Ishapore and you’d know. But you didnt even know what the Ishapore was and where the Aks were and are being used.
Know what a GPMG is? Or what a fire team is? Tell me, what is the equipment with a typical IA COIN unit and what it uses where?
I doubt whether you have even fired a single firearm. But you talk about them as if you know ’em all – fanboyism yet over again.
Heck – you know none of these things. Not even what the term NCO means or what its used for in the Indian armed services. You talk of generals as if they were some cardboard cutouts from a board game and send men to their death in a callous manner. Talk about the services & service decisions in a silly manner without even a days worth of service or toil & sweat.
What is worst is you have no interest in the topic beyond your mouth and ego. Refer you to people who have done the work – they are “biased”, people with far more experience than you, whom you should learn from – you dismiss them.
What else is this but absolute foolishness. You are a wannabe!
Net, hiding behind Swerve and asking him to salvage your honor wont get you far, fanboy.
Fool in the eyes of who ? You may be but I am not interested in what you think about me. I will badger you with what you percieve as my idioicy (actually i reply against your outrageous claims and insults). As for the jobless part why should I work when i am paid more than you are to do my research. 🙂
Fool in the eyes of whomsoever reads your attempts to stalk me and wonders whether you have nothing better to contribute. You defame yourself with the statements you make.
People are judged by the quality of what they contribute – and you simply dont have anything of the level of what an Ankush et al bring. And yes, if judged by the quality of what you write, you are “jobless” – you are either not working (since you waste so much time) or you are not productive. Coming to pay, if your posts are indicative of the quality of your research, you are in likelihood paid equivalent to that research would command in the open market (which is not much).
Let me rate you so far on your posts – knowledge of the topic, any topic so far on defence – next to nothing, ability to string together a coherent arguement- likewise, time spent on stalking – infinite, productivity – apparently zero. So if you were truly of import, you would be worried about the real world, not bragging about being banned and reregistering with a new IP, or stalking me.
In other words – you “are” jobless in the actual sense. You have no life outside the internet. Your ego is defined by what happens here on this forum. Your respect flows from that.
It is the classic case of an internet wannabe. You want to change this image, be something on your own, post something worthwhile, not 1-2 liners without even googling! Build up a rep of someone worth listening to, not someone worth dismissing.
TeerTeer the Egg in one basket point is overstated many a times , where do we stand now aleast 75 % of our existing defence product are Soviet/Russian made , so where is the cause for worry , we lived with nearly the same or more % for 50 years.
Austin, it is NOT overstated. The 75% issue makes us bend for Russia in many issues and live with many many problems in our supply chain planning which we pay through our nose to resolve. It is and has been an issue for a very long time. The only difference was earlier we used to get items virtually free, now we pay market prices and the problem remains.
Let me tell you an additional fact – the Su-30 MKI deal is probably the only one in recent times which went well. Almost each and every other one has had some really sh*tty stuff happen. You know the initial batch of Tunguskas we got – they were used, and with patched bullet holes, Russia actually tried to force them on our guys!
You know why we went for newbuild T-90S? One of the reasons was that the T-72S they showed us were used, repainted and tried to be pushed off as new- when the evaluators were veteran Indian T-Series tankmen.
Dont get me wrong. This does not mean Russia is evil or bad – it just means that if you have ONE single supplier and you are too lazy (by you I mean us, ie India) they will be fools not to take advantage.
In 1998 or was it 1997, MiG tried blaming the IAF for MiG-21 crashes saying MiG-21 is such a good design, IAF is to blame for buying bad spares.
This is when reality was that IAF had submitted a huge procurement plan to MiG for over several years, and they were unable to even supply several items.
So when you are in a single supplier situation, no matter how many good people there are in Russia, there will always be a “screw you, you dont have any other choice” element as well.
The Su-30 MKI deal is one exception, but I will not go into how hard the guidelines were set by the IAF to make it happen, and the personal involvement of Irkut top brass including Fedorov to make sure this kind of stuff did not happen.
And looking at the purchase in the pipeline that % will stay there for a long time to come
No Austin, it will not.
That % has been declining steadily even if media etc do not notice it.
In mid 80’s almost entire Indian air defence (ADGES and BADZ) was Russian, we used Tin Shield radars, Pechoras, Geckos with their radar systems and finally Iglas. The non French equipment was limited, to a handful of high power THD radars and PSM series derivatives made at BEL.
Today, it is almost entirely being replaced by combination of Indian, French and Israeli radars.
The SAM systems in mid 80’s to present were almost all Russian both in IAF and CADA of Army. Now the IAF SAM network is moving to Indian (Akash), Indo French (SRSAM) and IndoIsraeli (Barak). There is literally no input from Russian end,
For higher strategic systems, again we looked beyond S-3XX systems and are developing own units.
So you see, the % has been declining – this has to do with a very simple reason.
Even earlier we wanted to diversify and buy the best, but we simply didnt have the money to finance local R&D OR buy from a variety of choices.
The Russians gave us items free (literally) in return for other commodities and diplomatic issues, and we took it.
Point is times have changed, they need hard cash, and we are repaying our Soviet era debt as well, buying what is BEST is required, not what is Russian or American.
I hope you understand my point…
I have simple point in favour of Mig-35
> A modern 4th Gen fighter design with good close combat agility and BVR performance , its airframe and aerodynamic performance compares well with the US F-16 and F-18
It is no longer just the ability but the integrated avionics. Lets look at the Falcon Edge IEWS on the Block 60, about the MMI and sensor fusion on all other competing fighters, about the SEAD ability using geolocation and HTS (Harm Targeting System coupled to Sniper) as on Teen series fighters!
The MiG-35 does not have these features. To develop them in India and put them back into the MiG-35 as we are doing for the MKI is very expensive and time consuming!
> It is a good strike fighter and can carry most of Russian A2G and A2A weapons , these weapons can be integrated with ease on MKI , Mig-29upg + Mig-29K , Bison , 27 to a lesser extent but without political restrictions we can integrate the same weapons with Tejas , Jags , Mirages
Austin, the current gen of Russian A2G and A2A weapons can be matched or even exceeded with those on MKI. If we can integrate third party Israel items on MKI, we can integrate other systems as well. There is nothing to stop us.
Jaguars can carry Paveway bombs. MiG-27s have Griffin LGBs from IAI. etc – who is stopping us?
In todays world, OEMs are looking for every customer they can find.
But tell me – did the LCA get the R-73E just like that? We had to do that on our own.
So even the Russians dont lead in the integration debate.
Compare that with lets says F-18 , can we integrate AMRAAM with MKI ? Can we integrate with ease and no strings most of the standoff and PGM A2G weapons with other indian fighter in IAF service.
Why not?
Pay enough money, and you will get Meteor forget AMRAAM.
If the answer to the above is no then we really have a specialized fighter for a specialized task which means special airbase and infrastructure needs to be create and build from scratch to operate these US fighter making it an expensive and less flexible option for the IAF .
Why are you assuming here, my friend, that the answer is no. Let us wait to see what happens.
I will say this – all OEMs are the same – they will sell you ANYTHING provided they can. Its the Govt to Govt issue which is an issue.
IOW, we will get this if the GOI can leverage it with the USG. Raytheon or Alliant Tech will themselves be too happy to put their weapons on anything that flies.
Its just money.
It is the Govt of each country which puts trade restrictions, protects IP to a high degree etc in the majority of these cases.
To operate these fighter in any of India’s FAB we will have to invest a good amount in infrastructure to operate the teens , something we have sunk in the many decades behind us to operate Russian fighters , Mig-35 will obviously gain from these and its ability , flexibility and independence to operate from most Indian AB including FAB remains unchallenged
> Talk about Maintenance Facility ( Engine/Aircraft ) , BRD , Skilled and Trained Crew , Pilots who are already familiar with the 29 , most of all our long experience in operating and using Russian fighter is the most important asset we have build over a long period of time and substantial investment.
Our maintenance facilities and infrastructure are built up for MiG-29 9.12A’s and B’s but the point is to look towards the future!
Till 2030 and more!
Why be the single customer for an unproven type?
Also, if only existing infrastructure was the criteria, why did we buy the Mirage 2000 or the Jaguar or the Su-30 MKI or any new fighter?
We should only have bought derivatives.
Even when we bought the MKI we bought it INSTEAD of the MiG-29 Advanced versions.
For the teens every single infrastructure needs to be build from scratch , we have ZERO experience in operating and maintaining a US Fighter for a reasonable period of time compare that to the depth and variety of Russian fighter we have operated.
The long term and sustained investment that IAF will have to make to build the above mentioned facility even to a reasonably degree to operate the Teen fighter will be phenomenal.
Remember we dont buy an aircraft , we have to make reasonable investment projected over its period of operation which is Tomb to Grave.
Very well put and nobody can disagree with any of the above statements.
But in terms of investments, we have done so before, and we can do so again.
Everytime we buy something new we invest likewise.
The MKIs are being supported by an extensive network of SSCs service support centers throughout India.
And finally – heres an additional datapoint – that offset criteria can be adjusted against this – these contracts can go to Indian firms and set up many of the facilities & the amount goes back into India.
Unless we have decided( politically and militarily ) that in long term we will be purchasing more of US fighters(types) and in substantial numbers the cost to purchase and maintain a single Teen type for MMRCA is not justified and is a criminal waste of money from India’s Tax payers pocket.
I disagree here- because the same issue would apply to the Rafale and Typhoon (my preferred options) and I dont mind the investment as it would amortize over 30-40 years (the lifetime of these fighters in service in the IAF).
Most of my argument for the Mig-35 and against the Teens equally apply to the the Typhoon and Rafale , the only difference is these ladies will cost you substantially more than any Teen fighter.
I dont know about the cost substantially more part – to be honest.
I think their costs will come in terms of integration costs & other expenses. There is so much FUD out there over their flyaway costs, program costs that its hard to say that F/A-18 E/F is much cheaper than the Rafale/Typhoon or vice versa.
Where the costs will differ is definitely in the weaponry (Euro stuff is very expensive) and integration expenses. Also, in Life cycle costs & operating expenses, the Typhoon/Rafale being a new design may be =/< than the F/A-18 E/F but the single engined F-16 should be cheaper than all the other 3.
The risk part is least of the concern here , Russia is a politically strong and militarily a reliable partner , to an extent that we have made this relationship from a buyer to co-developer and there are couple of strategic project that Russia is helping India and some strategic asset it will lease.
So unless Russia vanish mysteriously from the face of this earth the risk is manageable
The risk aspect is always there. Russia’s economy can tank, its next leadership can be more pro Russia anti India (Yeltsin anyone?) and things can change on a dime.
In fact, everything I am saying has already occurred once.
Yes that is a problem , IAF want ADA to deliver the moon and then complains it cant deliver on time and budget and goes shopping , ADA promises it can deliver the moon and later complains IAF asked for the moon in a short time and budget and expects to deliver.
My argument is let us be practical and work towards what is possible and can be delivered on time and budget for most part.
Designing , Developing and Delivering a Rafale plus fighter is possible and within our reach in the next 15 years from now , based on Tejas experience with far more indigenious content ( > 80 % ) and which is capable enough to replace the Mirage and Jags both from a Technology and Industrial POV.
Agree fully with you – but what is the point?
Neither of us heads the IAF or the MOD, to make this approach work.
As it stands today, ADA has to do what the IAF asks, and the IAF wants a stealthy fighter.
Had we been an operator of the many teens since 50’s the same argument would have applied to US or any other country , it makes business sense to buy what is cost effective to purchase and operate and for which I have a reasonably well developed infrastructure.
My argument for Mig could have well applied to the Teen fighter had we been a long term operator of teens , why buy the ubber new Su-35BM , when a resonably new F-15 type can provide most of what a 35 can and I have a stable political relationship with US and have the ground infra and trained crew to back it up.
Austin, we were not an operator of anything the complexity of the Mirage 2000 – we purchased it.
The Jaguar was a wholly new experience for India, apart from the manufacturers name and country of origin, there was almost nothing in common with earlier fighters. We license manufactured it.
Nothing of the level of the Sukhoi ever existed in India or even its complexity.
We are making 230 of them.
What if LM , Boeing or Dassult does it ?
Man you cant give me your worst nightmare type of argument and then debate based on it.
Hello! 🙂
That is my ENTIRE point. If LM, Boeing or Dassault do it, you have the Russians to fall back on. If Russia does it, whom do you fall back on if you have bought the MiG-35? Nobody!
And yes, business continuity risk assessment is EXACTLY based on seeing the risk possible and mitigating it!
And no – its not my worst nightmare, its happening everyday- surely you are seeing the Gorshkov issue or what happened to the T-90S?
Tell me, where is the TOT for the T-90 or the Smerch?
These things have already happened Austin, it would be very foolish of India not to consider these factors.
Yes but I dont see a risk , and we have made a decision to rationalise our fleet , is this a serious initiative of the IAF and GOI or a lip service paid by IAF to keep its audience happy which then opts to go for a new Type
Austin, fleet rationalization is one of those laudable things that could have happened but did not.
When the IAF asked for 120-200 Mirage 2000-V’s to replace the MiG-23, oldest MiG-21s and some Jaguars, what did the GOI do? It slept.
Now because of fleet retirals, the IAF has to upgrade and keep aircraft in service throughout, and one way or the other it will have 4-5 types in service.
LCA, MRCA, MKI, PAK-FA and now MCA. In between you will have the Jags, Mirage 2000s, MiG-29s, MiG-21s, MiG-27s all of which will finally retire to leave us with 4-5 types.
And the MiG-35 is NOT common with the MKI, so one way or the other there is a new type in service!
Those were extraordinary circumstance when the SU broke up no body thought it would happen then not our GOI.
No – this is the exact reason why I posted the flame tube burn issue – it happened when Soviet Union was going along merrily! Even then we had to ground the fleet for a couple of months at a time of tense relations while MiG finally got its act together!
Such things happen all the time – that is why you diversify relationships!
We were resonably happy to get what we wanted for almost lowest possible cost spread over 20 years cheap credit to top.
Those times are gone!
Now you pay with hard cash, preferably USD or Euro.
The spares issue can be overcome by building what is economical in India by our industry and considering we have a reasonably large fleet of 29 and if 35 is purchased it will go up further we can produce most of the components in India and manage the risk well.
Provided they let you! What happened with the T-90 deal TOT?
What happened to the original plans of license manufacturing the Smerch in India?
What happened to the Igla-S production plans?
Let me tell you – in each and every case, Russia’s decision makers decided to play hard ball and cancelled the offer.
Putin’s Russia is not a shrinking violet. It is a proud nation, and occasionally a hard nation.
I do not grudge them from making their decisions, but their TOT interests and ours do not coincide at times.
By that logic if we purchase US fighter , and if France , UK and Russia somehow manages to dissapear from the face of Earth , we still have US fighter to bank on is it 😉
As a nation we need to be confident and the best way to beat any sudden disappearance of US , Russia , France and UK is to develop things ourself .
Yes, we need to make things ourself. But by the time MCA comes, the IAF cannot keep waiting for it. We need an interim system between the LCA, and the MKI, that is the MRCA and which is why I prefer the Euros.
France especially – they see the money and they sell, few political issues.
Hence opting for a cost efective fighter and putting the money where it matters like Tejas Mk2 and MCA is the way forward here.
And I dont think putting in a new type in IAF fleet will help us in any way.
Austin, the decision has already been made – money is being put into the MK2, and the MRCA is ALSO being purchased. Its kind of a moot point sayign – “this should be done”, whatevers being done has been decided already and we cant change it.
A new type will enter the IAF fleet one way or the other, I just wish it is European, and if it *has to be* US, the F/A-18 E/F.
[quote]My simple argument is lets not make IAF a circus of many different type , tax the taxpayer further and make IAF life difficult in long run by not going in for rationalization of fleet.[.quote]
The circus has already been decided, MKI, LCA, MRCA & PAK-FA with the MCA the latest entrant (with IAF wanting the same).
That relying on one country is something we got as a legacy , 200 more fighter will not make it worse.
Of course it will make it worse, one company, one country supplying almost your entire fleet!
Try acting smart with them or hard negotiations – they have too much leverage!
What will make it worse is relying on a 4th one and a new type , the best way to beat this is rely on ourself
We are relying on ourselves but it will take time and a decision has already been made to go for a 3rd (or 4th type if youi include the PAKFA). I only hope it is from a different supplier.
Which is fine if you want to bring in a Rolls Royce and Santro for the same deal and then think because Santro is present RR will reduce its cost or vice verse then that not going to happen.
Of course it happens – i get a better negotiating ability versus the other guy, he meets me at least halfway. Compare the present position of the IAF versus being reliant on a single vendor deal (check Mirage upgrade).
What will happen for sure is the one who looses out will burn his finger badly for no fault of his , its the weird IAF RFP which is to blame here.
Thats not the IAFs fault – if it was that bad, no competitor would have taken part. Think it through my friend, $ 10 billion is not peanuts, second, check the cost of the original MKI and what it is now. Everyone nows once they are selected, more bells and whistles can be added and cost will be adjusted.
Define Great , if you expect a Mig-35 to bring in Rafale like strike capability , F-18 like operational experience and Typhoon like AD capability with the cost of Mig-35 this will not happen for sure
Thats exactly the point – it brings nothing!
The Rafale and F/A-18 E/F are better in strike
The EF, Rafale, F/A-18 E/F and F-16 have a better EW capability
The EF, F/A-18 E/F will have more powerful radars (considering an AESA Captor-E)
In kinematics for BVR, the EF is better
….
Of all the contenders, bar the Gripen (which too has certain advantages over the MiG-35 as far as paper specs go), the MiG is the most underwhelming!
It is the jack of all and master of none! The only consolation is – “its cheap”. But how long will that “cheap” tag remain when the IAF says “oh c**p the SEAD capability sucks, let me ask DARE for a new EW system and the Israelis for a new PGM developed for us” etc. The costs keep adding up, they just keep adding up, and so does the time.
It defeats the entire purpose of the quick, ready MRCA ready to kick some butt.
There is a further development of R-77 with AMRAAM C7 like capability and as per one of the detailed report by Janes IIRC some time back this should be out by 2009 , The A2G capability is quite extensive with JDAM and Stand off capability on offer.
Many things “in development”, but will they all be available at the time of the MiG-35 purchase? I have some doubts.
If they were, we would hear a lot more about them. I can assure you that MiG would tom tom it to the roof.
Does it have the advanced features available by 2012 I linked in the PDF? Geolocation? SAR images being datalinked to strikers?
Or how about the EF’s stuff? Automated cues for missile avoidance & EW support?
What about the Rafales stuff – multiple AASM in one single pass?
Then Antiship capability comes in form of Klub and at lower end KH-35.
Antiship capability is not such a biggie – the MKIs have Kh-31s and the Jags will have an ASHm.
There are new developments in BVR and WVR in progress both as an add on to existing ones ( incremental block upgrades ) and new type for 5th Gen fighter , all this can well be integrated with Mig-35.
So the capability is there and some are in the pipeline , we will not go to war tommorow and going by past experience we will never fight a war no matter what we have.
Can be & will be fine – I take your word for it, its a reasonable statement. But its not the best choice versus “is” as on the US fighters, and surely will be on some capabilities on the Euro systems.
We are just fond of taking punches and then complaining to the whole world how bad the other guy is for turning our cheek black and blue.
🙂
I will wait for the real Mig-35 to come up before making a judgement , Mig is keeping its card close to its chest , the Electronics , EW , SEAD , A2A and A2G capability should be reasonable atleast by and large as good as the MKI.
I sincerely doubt it. The MKI is moving ahead by leaps and bounds, and is nowhere near the MKI it was when we bought it. The simplest thing is size matters, we can leverage it far more than the volume limited MiG-35.
Then why did we custom built the Su-30MK ? If the IAF want this and that from 3 different countries it gets it , yes time is a factor but its we who have made this requirement,
That was then. We made the choice (partly political, partly cost, partly had to since PRC bought Su-27) for the Sukhoi and have spent nearly 6-7 years building it into our dream fighter and are still adding stuff to it.
We dont have the time for our MRCA to go the same path. It should come with some ability straight away, not be like the Su-30 K then we wait for the MKI.
Mig-35 can get operational in the least possible time because of long operational experience of its earlier variant and it will have least possible trouble in integration.
Sorry, not possible- because the MiG-35 is all new and integrating third party systems takes a lot of time and effort.
And the MiG-35 lacks a lot of capabilities the IAF will require and will have to add on its own.
The IAF wont complain , when it goes to MOF (defence ) you will hear the complains coming and yes CVC will poke its nose.
The IAF has complained about MiG, why do you think MiG-27 UPG went to HAL and remaining MiG-29 UPG are being done with Russian kits in Nasik/Ozhar/ BRD – check the amount of fuss over the Bison.
No its no red herring , considering the current global situation Indias GDP will take a hit in the next 2 – 3 years , and money will be more of a critical factor 3 years from now than it is today
I really doubt it. None of the critical defence purchases have been even deferred let alone cancelled!
It has not reached a stage where the whiners will take a central role , wait for the files to reach MOF (defence ) and we will hear from them
With PC in charge, the whining would have been sky high already – but it hasnt.
Frankly, with defence at ~2.5% of GDP, its not such an issue.
Lowest among the rest in the race and its not the initial cost but the infra and maintenance cost which will hurt and hit us , the purchasing cost is a small one time investment.
Maintenance and spares facilities can be built up in India as well. One way or the other, we would have to do it to varying degrees for all competitors.
Offsets can be banked against this as well – its reinvesting in India.
The MRCA comes with a 50% offset.
Depends what the IAF wants integrate and if it wants to integrate , if the integration is Indian and Russian system only it will be sooner and cheaper , if IAF wants the best of Israel Radar , combined with best of French EW and Avionics component combined with weapons of France and Israel it will make is expensive.
All depends what the IAF wants and needs are.
IAF needs are very simple to predict – MORE, MORE, MORE. They have not changed in 60 odd years of independence and will not change as well. Better to buy an integrated system of systems off the shelf than spend money trying to meet IAF specs through the development cycle, repeated in India.
The quoted figure for MTBF is quite up there for Mig-35.
“Quoted” != real, my friend!
Quoted MTBF for the Kopyo has never been realised in reality!
In contrast, the F/A-18 EF, Rafale, EuroFighter, F-16 all come with many thousands of hours of actual operational hours and predicted MTBF based on reality.
Not like the MiG-35 which is still being built, and airframe apart, uses all new components from Russia, done for the first time!
You cant complain much for original Mig-29 as we got what we paid for ( or bartered for ) , still over a period of time we just made the MTBF and Engine life much better with Series 3 and other improvements , the 29 upgrade should make that picture look better,
Point is we HAD to do it. It was NOT our job.
MiG made it our job. They failed to take our needs into account and we had to manage. This is not how it should be done.
And MiG-29 Upg is good but will it be equal to the MRCA level, I think we can do better.
Dont make IAF a circus i say ,go for cost effective fighter with existing infra and put the money where it matters
The circus has already been decided, with the COAS as ringmaster, we are just debating which animal will pull in the most crowds (give bang for the buck ;)) and last the longest!
That is a fundamental difference between our views , I see MMRCA more as a cost effective way to bump up the numbers and with a long term view of rationilisation of IAF fleet with one less new type to deal with
Austin, but your view is not that of the IAFs. The IAF wants the best tech possible and not just “bump up the numbers”.
Claim is one thing even Mig claims the Mig-35 has the lowest clean RCS of all the Mig-29 types , which is fine ok point taken , but with external payload it does not matter , your RCS will spike up.
Lets leave this – its irrelvant to the discussion.
If money is not a factor , then I would have gone for Rafale and Typhoon blindly no arguments 😉
So would I.
Point is Teer money will always be a factor and a decisive one that is , hence I see Mig-35 as the best bang for the buck compared to what is on offer
It is here where I disagree (again! ;)) – I think the money wise thing will give the edge to the F-16 or the Gripen NG!
Yes it will be a special fighter for specialised task operated from few selected special airbases , and with good $$$$ to pump in each years spread over many years it will serve us well.
So will the Rafale or Mig-35 , but I have a larger and stronger argument in favour of Mig-35 .
My money is still on the US fighters (we know who is in power) but my heart is with the Euros (and so is my belief, which cannot come around to a single vendor acceptance :))
Teer^^^
Well my only hope is the US State Dept doesnt screw over india with the threat of sanctions if things heat up between India and Pak.
Thats my only worry against a Viper or Hornet purchase.
Otherwise, well stated points.
I do hope we get as much as possible of what is seen here:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2007psa_apr/gaddis.pdf
The other thing:
IA and AIm-120D
Are these on offer with the MRCA?
The PAF received the C5.
I was thinking we’d be lucky to get the C7 at best.
TeerNo not yet its not, but what do you expect? Its a new aeroplane, did you expect the Typhoon to have all the bells & whistles from the day it was introduced? Did the F-18 have all of its bells & whistles when it was introduced? No. Besides, thats not what I was getting at, I was pointing out that the Typhoon’s weapons stations are better laid out than the F-18’s. Don’t get me wrong, not taking anything away from the F-18, the Typhoon has the better airframe anyday of the week.
Agreed!
If cost were not such an issue, the Typhoon or the Rafale would definitely be the best choice for a MRCA.
BringitOn,
Any idea of how much space the F/A-18 E/F has left in that airframe of its for additional avionics?
Also, any details of what has been export cleared for EW?
TeerTeer
Well why blame the Russians if MKI and PAK-FA went to them ,what was the other option , the only other country US developing F-22 or F-35 would not have made us the Tier 1 partner for F-35 , of course F-22 is out of question.
At best we would be given the Tier 3 or 4 status and would have to be content with export variant sanitized stealth.
So obviously Russia was the logical choice since they were developing it and were ready to develop a custom built variant for the IAF.
Its simple logic – you dont put all your eggs in one basket.
And frankly, your post offers no conclusive counterpoint to this basic point.
I really dont care if its Russia – my answer would have been exactly the same if it was France and we were buying just Dassault or Sweden & SAAB.
Its a basic fact of business – you manage your risk!
Certainly the only better option was to develop a 5th gen aircraft on our own , and I think we are long way from that.
I am of the opinion that the MCA variant instead of developing something stealth , with internal weapon carriage etc etc , lets be practical and develop a Twin Engine Advanced variant of LCA , which is something like Rafale , which can carry few semi recessed payload and can be powered by Kaveri.
This so called 5th Gen Minus aircraft which can be better or as capable as Rafale and can replace M2K and Jags in strike role , with a IOC time frame from design to IOC in 12 – 15 years.
This may be practical Austin, but its quite clear that is not enough for the IAF. The IAF clearly wants more from the MCA and the ADA has to meet them or at least attempt to meet them.
Otherwise, they’d be happy enough churning out simpler, pure LCA derivatives for a willing AF.
This is something doable , lets leave the 5th Gen to FGFA and focus on something which can be achieved in a specific time frame to replace the Jags and M2K by 2025.
MKI is certainly an unqualified success when you look at the system integration work and it has prove its worth in all the Exercise IAF held with other countries.
As far as putting our eggs in one basket , has Russia ditched us in time of war or politically imposed sanctions or denied us Top Notch technology ?
Wasn’t the leased Charlie in late 80’s or Akula lease or help in ATV program and who knows which other program of strategic nature Russia helped us .
And I dont say so lets give them MMRCA no , but atleast lets not call them unreliable to be fair
Austin its not about Russia being bad or good — do you or do you not put your eggs ALL in one basket and source them from one company?
What are you going to do tomorrow if UAC hits a huge roadblock, hikes prices and acts unreasonable?
The entire point of India’s dual sourcing strategy was to avoid this issue.
In the late 1980’s, the entire MiG-21 fleet was grounded (ask IAF people of the flame tube burn issue) but we had the Mirages, and Jaguars to compensate. In the 90’s, the SU collapse meant spares supply for the MiG-29s and 23’s (non HAL) had to be hoarded for a couple of years – again, we had western suppliers to back us up viz our Jags, Mirages in case the balloon went up.
And it works the other way too. If Mirages and Jags are grounded we have the MiGs.
Its a simple fact of life – dont be overdependent on one supplier alone.
You yourself make the point that it will take quite some time before the MCA etc mature. Till then you want to be reliant on one country alone for practically ALL your fighter fleet, bar the LCA?
Its simply untenable.
But comparing Eurocanards and Mig-35 is not a right comparison, the former is superlative in Air Defence combat while the latter is good enough for Strike and Air Defence , what about the cost factor ?
Why not compare Eurocanards with like Su-30MKI that would be a more fair comparision.
If you compare the Mig-35 with F-18 E/F , F-16IN and Gripen , Mig-35 is upto the task and cost factor is very favorable.
Irrespective of whether it is unfavorable, the point is they are all in the MRCA contest.
Cost factor apart- which I repeatedly mentioned, the MiG-35 brings nothing great to the table.
Russia has similar comprehensive weapons package in some areas it has better capability in some areas it lacks , but by and large they are there
Sorry, they dont, where are the AIM-9X, latest AMRAAM, JDAM and other equivalents in mass production at the cost the US has amortized over many many production runs? The systems are simply not there at the level of finesse the US has developed.
Take a look at the manner in which both the F-16 Block 60 and F/A-18 E/F use SEAD tactics, and geolocation ability being fielded – does the MiG-35 have anything similar?
The EF, Rafale, F/A-18 E/F and F-16 all have much better well integrated EW suites – the MiG-35s appears to be a jury rigged one, combining an Italian ECM with “xyz” RWR, newly developed MAWS…I would pick the proven systems anyday.
A fighter is MORE than the sum of its parts. Just sticking a radar in, a third party EW suite from Italy and saying Okie dokie is not good enough! Thats my point.
You try to bring this upto the level of the already integrated systems, you pay in money and time. And that is what we dont have, and goes against the entire need of the MRCA to get an operational fighter in, ASAP.
That is *the* crucial factor , what is the main intent of MMRCA to beef up the rapidly depleting squadron strength with a capable fighter.
Now if you opt for F-18 E/F or F-16IN or EF you solve one problem and add a bigger and more expensive one called new supply logistics chain
Over a period of 30 years thats going to squeeze the money from IAF budget with just a small tactical advantage which would again be nullified with the entry of FGFA.
The IAF clearly feels its budget will be kept apace to manage whatever it purchases, otherwise it wont purchase.
The budget bit is a bit of a red herring to be honest, as by the same standards in the mid90’s nobody would have believed a 230 Flanker fleet in IAF colors. But it was done.
The IAF till date has not even once mentioned an issue with financial allocation, in this regard.
The advantage i see of even selecting Rafale or Eurofighter is short term at best a decade but the drain it will cause in maintaining a new type ( when we have already commited for 2 to 3 new types i.e TejasMK2 , FGFA and perhaps even MCA ).
Where does it leave the great idea and hope of fleet rationalization for IAF ?
I am excluding the political factor like sanctions and assuming hence forth no country would sanction us.
Even the MiG-35 will be expensive Austin.
Almost all its avionics and systems are new and it will need a corresponding investment. Integration costs, time hassles (Again a cost).
Not to mention the MTBF issues which have always affected the MiG-29 fleet in IAF service and caused us to keep more consumables and spares at hand.
Yes we want more , we want the best of Western , Indian system integrated on a Russian frame , isnt this a time consuming task in itself ?
The more complicated an aircraft is with so many 3rd party components the more time it will take to integrate , test and qualify it.
If we dont need any systems we better take what is on offer as part of the deal
Which is my point exactly. Dont buy the MiG-35 but go for an off the shelf western fighter!
Well the IAF needs to be clear what it wants , top of line medium to heavy class true 4.5 Gen fighter or a light to medium fighter , you cannot let the F-16IN , Gripen and Mig-35 compete in the same race with Rafale and Typhoon , unfair for the others , if price is not a factor
There is a serious flaw in this whole MMRCA race.
Its already been done Austin – argueing this is a moot point. Its like harping on the unfairness of it all, when the deal is done, and the decision made.
The point is all of these fighters are in already, and where do you get maximum bang for your buck! And that IMHO, is NOT the MiG-35.
RCS of these fighter are just of academic value , as in a practical scenario with AWACS coming into play and external payload this low RCS advantage will quickly dissapear.
If you need True Stealth then you need to walk the last extra mile and put in lot of mulla and to achieve such capability is not every nations cup of tea
Did I say anything different? I just said, all 3 claim to have lowered RCS claim (clean)
Yes sure but show me the $$$$ , if we have that $$$$ well why not
Agreed , but my answer is the same show me the $$$$ , if we have that kind of money to import such a fighter in the numbers and TOT then we want them to deliver , I dare say we are a 1st world country.
Again- read what i wrote – I said if money was NOT a factor then the above 2 would be chosen.
In other words, you are agreeing with me and saying, No! I agree with you! 😉
Super Hornet is a big joke , shoved up at USN throat , if its a choice for US fighter with no choice left I will opt for the multipurpose single engine F-16 a good enough fighter for strike and air defence.
Disagree – I tend to think the F/A-18 E/F is a fine “system” which will serve many years to come.
Yes, it has some issues with airframe drag & lower dash speed, but it offsets these with a very good avionics architecture, a first class sensor suit and a wide range of operationalized weaponry.
With the MKI, the F/A-18 E/F will provide India a very good strike capability and back it up superbly.
And unlike the Viper – my definite belief is that it will have lower attrition.
The Viper @ full warload is going to have some severe challenges in India’s messy operating conditions, both climate wise & the social challenges (bird hazard).
TeerTeer did you check the locked thread ? Your claim that AK 47 was not a battle rifle was shown up.
No actually it was not – my reply was specific to the Indian context, and I have verbatim quotes from IA/Paramil soldiers to know the reality & quite frankly, I am not even bothered with a reply since the entire issue is out of context anyways.
Second, do stop making a fool out of yourself by begging me for a reply and stalking me post to post. This is quite frankly the third or fourth time I have asked you to stop badgering me with your idiocy & its getting tiring. All it displays is that you are essentially jobless and without anything productive to do.
TeerID,
The C-130s were attractive precisely of the equipment they came with – they are not just addon’s but part of the entire mission suite of the aircraft. EG the C-130 comes with a well balanced package including mission planning, onboard defensive aids and avionics systems which are frankly, not found yet in the Russian/other systems on offer. The IAF would have to integrate these with no guarantee of equivalent performance. So the C-130s are doubtful vis a vis procurement if we strip out the avionics & support that make them stand out.
The MRTA will be a more capable system than the original AN-32. You can find the tentative specs online. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/hal-and-irkuts-joint-tactical-transport-project-02931/
Original MRTA specs:
http://www.irkut.com/en/services/research/irta/
compare with:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-32
It will be a more modern system, but of course, more expensive as well. We got our AN-32’s dirt cheap and procured them in the dozens exactly because of that. These airframes still have life in them, there is an extensive logistics setup in India for the same, and they will be kept around for quite some time to come.
Yes, the MRTA will be basically a transport – my point was that the AN-32 upgrade can allow a delay in the MTA development, but it will not compensate for the lost sales in “other areas” which the MTA could have also picked up!
DefAero:
India to Begin An-32 Fleet Upgrade in 2009
In an effort to infuse fresh life into its trusted workhorse. the AN-32, the Indian Air Force (IAF) will begin an upgradation programme for over 80 aircraft it has, in its inventory, early next year.With this upgradation, the An-32s, which are nearing at the end of their service life, would be able to fly for another 15 to 20 years.
The upgradation programme is currently in negotiation stage and several vendors, including the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM), Ukraine-based Antonov, have been approached for modernising the fleet.
“The avionics of the aircraft were up-to-date when it was inducted during the 1980s, but is quite crude compared with today’s requirements. The programme will involve major improvement of its avionics systems to give the aircraft a new lease of life,” an IAF official told a news agency in Agra.
“With the upgrades on-board, we will have better flight management system, glass cockpit display, landing system and other equipment to improve accuracy and lend a multi-role operational edge to the aircraft,” he said.
The aircraft’s airframe will also undergo some changes to improve its landing capabilities.
The pre-upgrade surveys of the aircraft fleet have been initiated in all eight functional units having the An-32s.
“With special operations being the focus of the Air Force in the days to come, the upgraded aircraft will be used increasingly for operations involving tactical transport.
“The improved on-board avionics will facilitate night operations and even search and rescue,” Agra Air Station’s Air Officer Commanding Air Commodore Shouvik Roy said.
Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major had in his annual media interaction before the Air Force Day announced that the An-32s were in for a major upgradation.
A Parliamentary Committee in 2000-01 had first proposed upgrading the An-32 fleet of the IAF. Thereafter, the government had held several rounds of discussions with Antonov. Israeli company, Elbit systems, is expected to assist Antonov on the project.
Thereafter, further modernisation will be conducted by India’s blue chip Hindustan Aeronautics Limited’s transport aircraft division in Kanpur in a phased manner.
IAF’s Parachute Training School (PTS) at Agra has An-32s, which are used by paratroopers to carry out their jumps.
The aircraft are used for dropping troops over enemy territory and also for airdropping relief material over flood affected areas.
The aircraft is a major platform for air maintenance of army troops guarding the 72-km-long Siachen Glacier. It is used to transport men and material there.
IAF would also be using US-made C-130J Hercules aircraft for special operations after their delivery by the United States to India starts in 2010.
The immediate post Mumbai needs may get a few more aircraft – but to be honest, I am very wary of the UPA Govt moving fast on anything related to defence. The only “positive” vis a vis the MRCA (for instance) is that it is an intensely political contest, and it may involve a quid pro quo to the US for the nuclear deal.
They are center-left when it comes to idealogy and that seriously impacts the priority they give to defence.
Let me give the example of one of the leading decision makers – PC:
A few years back, PChidambaram was on record at a public event stating that he saw no reason why the defence budget was hiked post Kargil. He has also been critical of any urgent modernisation requests submitted to the GOI. I do hope that his stint in the Home Ministry continues and he wakes up to what the real security scenario is, and not what his politics/wishes dictate!
All in all, talk aside – I would wait for them to walk the talk, and not just gas.
In a couple of years, 26/11 will be just one more of the long line of events that have happened and been forgotten double quick till the next city is hit, and the same problems crop up, all over again! For instance, I am yet to hear about what happened to all the proposals to get the NSG their own dedicated airlift to the airport itself and avoid the highway – easily saving valuable time, or even post Mumbai decision making changes if such an event were to repeat. Only some ad hoc announcements on NSG deputation to diverse cities have been made pre election & of course, as always in India, the implementation progress has been neatly sidestepped.
TeerThere is indeed a huge demand for transporters of similar size with the paramilitary forces, some C-130j have been ordered, now that the setup has to be raised for them, they can serve with other services.
If i am correct the transport aircraft development between Russian and Indian firms is supposed to target similar requirement, hence the demands of several branches of the armed forces could be delayed.
1. The C-130 J’s ordered are for the IAF- its presumed they will be farmed out by the IAF as necessary but will not be in other services yet.
They dont come cheap – the general perception is that the IAF has paid through their nose for them & the IAF may procure more only once the initial batch earns its operating spurs.
They have been procured in line with a special requirement for Special Ops capable aircraft.
2. The MTA or MRTA is not intended for the same requirement per se, but to supplement and complement the An-32 fleet in IAF service.
The oldest ones will be retired while the overall fleet still will soldier on for some years to come with engine upgrades, airframe overhaul and an avionics modernisation.
The MTA program has – finally- been funded by the Russian side. HAL refused to commit funds till the financing on the Russian side was cleared up.
Its not yet clear whether the “Russian financing” will actually be a re-adjustment of Soviet era Indian debt.
3. The MTA is not just going to be a transport – plans for derivatives/ add on kits include IFR, ELINT, MPA/SAR and even a tentative role as a weapons launch platform – the weapon of choice has not been identified, but initial presentations showed a Brahmos.
Most of these systems are available within India or via COTS procurement.
The MPA/SAR role is of particular interest as its widely acknowledged that the present “planned” procurements of the IN including the handful of P8-I’s followed by the next tranche of medium-class MPAs are not sufficient for its needs.
The Navy has also been the most pragmatic of the services and has picked up many Do-228’s for NavAir surveillance.
If there is a MTA program & once its ready, the IN will surely be interested, as will be the IAF in specialist EW & special role aircraft.
They have been managing so far using a mix of local/imported kits on tactical aircraft such as the (now retired) Canberra to the MiG-21, including a handful of aging transports which were actually fitted out with Indian systems of older vintage.
In fact – tie in the systems being developed for the AEW&CS & those procured for the Phalcon, and the scalability is apparent.
4. The key thing of course is if HAL and their Russian partners realise the importance of speed in such matters.
Given the current orderbook enjoyed by HAL, its equally likely they & their partner may take their own time with the development, after the protracted negotiation to begin the project itself… and end up giving further easy wins to international OEMs like Dassault/ ATR/ Embraer (for the MPA) or Embraer/Dassault etc (for the ELINT etc) roles.
TeerJawad- relying on a Prasun Sengupta report is opening yourself to trouble. Very little he writes is accurate, but mostly guesswork. I’d suggest you wait to see if any actual orders are placed by the PAF before taking Prasun at his word.
TeerSF,
India chose to make a new one since it could leverage what it had via its Prithvi systems.
But the differences between the Bastion-P and Brahmos will go beyond just the launchers, to the command posts, and even the missiles themselves where the Russian kit will replace Indian ones. I’d say we’d have heard by now if the Bastion used any Indian kit, as it would have come out in parliamentary submissions or media reports.
Sign In
