TeerMaybe not the MMRCA itself, but obviously the attempt by Dassault to sideline HAL would not have gone unnoticed…
Bad blood yes, but lets face it HAL doesnt have many other options. It can’t really sulk because if IAF says it wants the MMRCA and HAL is designated to build it, HAL has to.
Also, IAF has been on a warpath with HAL over the past few years. HAL was pretty blase about the IAF being a captive customer & IAF struck back by constantly leaking to the press, complaining to the MOD.
Things were so bad that the current CEO of HAL (retiring now) was parachuted in from another org. To his credit he has restored the relationship somewhat. HAL had to take a lot of measures, including provisioning spares (at its cost) for service programs like the ALH, making extra investments into picking up Su-30 spares and overhaul work in India etc.
They even hired a HAL baiter, ex IAF dude as an advisor.
Things aren’t still hunky dory. IAF asked for & got permission to even have its Avro replacement program (56 airframes) run only by the private sector with a stated aim of having a competitor to HAL. That program has run into rough weather thanks to HAL lobbying but more so, because of the limited number of airframes (MOD thinks its fiscally hard to manage, easier to just buy C-130s I guess).
My point – somewhat long winded is – HAL won’t mess up the MMRCA even if it feels Dassault shortchanged it. It can’t afford the IAF to be upset with it.
A prospective rival has already sort of emerged. Tata Groups Aviation subsidiary..
TeerHAL has no incentive to delay or mess up the MMRCA btw. Its performance is completely transparent to the MOD (which owns it) and the IAF which has a representative on the HAL board & also has IAF appointees regularly visit HAL and apprise it of whats going on. HAL was given such a whacking by the IAF that even its next chief was from outside HAL, and did a decent job of turning it around & getting the IAF to feel its concerns were taken onboard.
HAL was also counting on the MMRCA to give it a boost up in its aims of becoming a truly modern aerospace firm (beyond just an assembly house) and get technology which it could understand and leverage.
Dassault did two things which HAL (and even the Indian MOD) regarded as bad faith. One, play fast and loose about committing to getting HAL the required TOT per an agreed upon timeline. The number of excuses thrown up – the latest of which is “Dassault does not own all the French firms who are suppliers to the Rafale”, in which case how were you advertising the TOT as guaranteed in the first place? Next, getting Reliance in as the primary integrator as versus HAL. This was seen as a double dip. Reliance would get paid, pay Dassault the royalty for a so called TOT, but in reality import mostly finished assemblies from Dassault which would not just get royalty payments but also continue to have work packages. Neither has won it any accolades. The third thing, which has also been called out is the “price escalation”. The deal has escalated almost 100% in price from what was mentioned initially. This is stated to be the same as was done in the Scorpene and T-90 contracts, whether by accident or deliberate is open to interpretation. Necessary items marked as “ancillary” and then added on later.
All in all, its not looking good for the Rafale. Parrikar, the new DM, is a tough sod. All the arrangements Dassault had with the erstwhile UPA Govt are also off.
TeerOpening a western technology stream was certainly a major impetus behind MMRCA, but not I think because Russian technology was seen to be inadequate. Rather India sought to wean itself from over-dependence upon Russia both for strategic reasons*, and also in order to improve the nation’s bargaining power in future negotiations. Regardless of what happens with MMRCA (or Tejas or AMCA), Su-30MKI and other Russian aircraft (MiG-29/K, FGFA) will form the backbone of India’s airborne combat strength for the next generation.
* Although a distant and unlikely prospect, it is not inconceivable that Russian and Indian interests could clash at some point, most plausibly in relation to India’s interest in energy security and Russia’s interest in maintaining its traditional sphere of influence. More credibly, Russia’s position as a valuable partner both for India and her major strategic rival going forward, China, is problematic. Russia’s relations with Pakistan are also on an upswing (for reasons that have nothing to do with India). There is no reason why these potential concerns should become manifest, and every reason to think that Russia and India have a long and mutually beneficial relationship ahead of them (to match the one behind them), nonetheless the interests of the two nations will not always align, and it is therefore in India’s interest to hedge against potential issues in the relationship.
There is also the fact the IAF thought it was in a candy shop and could purchase anything and everything it wanted. Its senior leaders had started thinking they could purchase anything and everything, logic be darned. Raising Su-30 serviceability and focusing on Tejas were more pragmatic options, but the Rafale/MMRCA had their primary attention, costs be darned.
Teerfrom what’s been written, they never asked the same level of liability from Sukhoi nor MiG
And therein lies the issue.
HAL learns from its mistakes and if it didn’t, it had the CAG (India’s GAO equivalent) to remind it.
For your information, the CAG has rapped HAL for not making sure contracts with ROE were airtight & hence ensuring ROE issues did not delay overhaul and license production both of the Su-30 MKI. Similarly, BAe’s issues in providing jigs & equipment had HAL in deep water with the IAF, had it cannibalize units from other CKDs just in order to meet IAF production quotas. It then charged BAe with expenses (which BAe didnt contest either, despite its PR campaign to put all the blame on HAL initially).
Seeing both issues, the MiG upgrade as part of offsets has a) investments in IAF/HAL production infra b) has to maintain a repair and overhaul facility in India operated by MiG
Dassault is hence being asked to ensure timely delivery of spares and kits from its side to ensure there are no production delays. It has to guarantee it will accomplish TOT & other aspects in a timely fashion without quoting stuff like documentation unavailable, eqpt not available etc which India has suffered from repeatedly in the Su-30 and T-90 deals and other issues with the Scorpene and Hawk deals.
India simply does not want to be taken to the cleaners again, midway through the contract by Dassault or any other vendor.
That is the crux of the issue & guarantee sought by HAL/MOD. Not that Dassault has to certify everything on its own @ its expense etc. That is rubbish put out by an incompetent media.
There was a delay of 66 months thanks to ROE in the Su-30 deal.
CAG hence notes:
Suitable clauses may be incorporated in the contracts with foreign
vendors to safeguard the interests of Indian counterparts in respect of
delay in meeting contractual obligations to customer.
HAL is just doing what it should have done earlier. Dassault is not being singled out.
Also, there is ample evidence to suggest that Dassault too played fast and loose (trying to get Reliance in) and also the cost escalation with essential items out of the tender but costed separately is another issue of concern. Parrikar – the new Defense Minister, is hence not just engaging in idle banter when he notes the MOD is not going to stand for all this. The question is why did D do these two things? That I fear has more to do with the prior GOI and their tendency to let things slide for their own considerations.
TeerYeah, by who or when was the thrust of RD-93 increased to no less than 10 tons, when the CURRENT russian standard RD-33MK is rated at 9 tons and the improved MKM is said to be 9.5 tons ? I could have sort-of bought that the RD-93 as delivered to China would be some improved version based on MK and rated at 9 tons, but TEN? I don’t think do. It may well be that the chinese WS-13 might go to 10 tons, but as far as one can make out, the series production of this engine has not even started yet.
Also, as i understand it there is NO BVR missile operational for the JF-17s produced so far (as stated SD-10A is still in testing/ integration), some pakistani sources allege that the earlier SD-10 have been integrated, but i think this statement is rather fishy (anyone seen a JF-17 on QRA with SD-10?). I guess there’s some salt grains to be taken in regards to certain statements coming from the pakistani side…
Well the PAF side needs newer airframes to replace the older Mirages and F-7s. Online defense enthusiast claims aside, looks like Block 2 will be BVR whereas Block 1 was more for familiarization and light strike.
TeerPAF’s charter is to defend. Albeit by attacking, but defend nonetheless. And its plans call for having around a third of the fighters that IAF can throw into the air. Its comfortable with those numbers to deny IAF air superiority.
It is very difficult to project acquisitions for PAF as they like to spring surprises, but a safe assumption, imho, by 2025 would be:120 f-16s
250 jf17
40 J-31s (depending on how these mature)Thats roughly around the 400 mark fleet that PAF likes to maintain. Keeping the 1:3 ratio in mind, unless IAF fighters cross the 1200 mark by 2025 (which they wont by a wide margin) , PAF wont be losing any sleep.
Regarding deterrence by acquisition, both PAF and IAF will be in the same boat by 2025. Relying on acquisitions as they currently do.
Problem with those numbers is they are wildly optimistic. Where is the money for 250 JF-17s when the PAF has struggled to fund even its second JF17 block? 120 F-16s again, there are some 80 odd in service/ordered.
J-31- again, where does PAF have the money to finance this new type when its struggling with far fewer aircraft?
Yes, IAF will overstate PAF threat in order to get more aircraft and funds.. and its the PLAAF its concerned about (hence the clamor for MMRCA) but the PAF is not in the same league as a threat.
TeerParity is not necessary to achieve an effective deterrent. Nor does Pakistan face India in isolation, but rather with China in the picture as well, drawing much of India’s strength away. Also, one of the reasons for Pakistan’s decline relative to India is that, as a proportion of GDP, Pakistan now spends on its military less than half what it did 25 years ago, and this is surely something to be applauded.
That deterrent failed as recently as 2008 during the Mumbai attacks, when it was the IAF that was raring to go, whereas the IA wanted more time to build up its warfighting stocks. After the new Govt, the renewed focus on the military as versus the deliberate neglect during the previous regime (who didnt want a strong military which could retaliate strongly on its own and hence scupper MMSs desire for a Nobel prize) is obvious. The growth in economic and military strength is pretty much going to happen with a renewed focus on using hard power, not merely talk, and “dossier diplomacy” or running to Uncle Sam at every opportunity.
TeerThese were a complete surprise for everyone except perhaps the people in intelligence community.
And how can ypu know what the IAF and Indian intel knew? The IAF does not depend on the online enthusiast community from Pak def fora to judge what PAF can or cannot do. They have access to both internal and external domain experts plus the usual espionage, arms vendors info etc etc.
If Pakistanis are able to integrate their air launched cruise missile on JF-17 (I understand range over 350km) along with Chinese CM-400 missiles that will give them a standoff capability to attack targets deep inside India so the question of whether they are as good as Indian fighter jets is maybe not as important.
If If If.. the IAF is already overhauling its concentric BADZ with modern SAMs and radars. Depending on some ALCMs to get through all the opposition as the answer is not optimal.
On a strategic level what India needs to understand is just like in the climax of action movies, when you are about to face the big villain (China in India’s case) even a single stab in the back from their henchmen can prove to be very costly.
Taking your analogy to the logical conclusion, when the main protagonists face off, its the henchmen who get beaten up badly much before hand.. neither of the main folks spare much thought for them and actually use them to prove their point.
Teer2030? Hand on heart had a Pakistani had told me 15 years ago that they will have the following, I would have laughed at their face.
– 4 Air to air refulers
– 5+ AWACS from 2 countries
– 70+ F-16s including Block 52s
– Air launched cruise missiles
– Ground Launched cruise missiles
– 500+ BVR missiles
– 100 New Anti radiation missiles
– Tactical nuclear weapons (Nasr? etc)Each and every purchase above has been a surprise. And if Indians are only preparing based on the assumptions in the last few posts, than god help them.
It has been a surprise to the online Pakistani defence enthusiast community no doubt, but the Indian Air Force, not so much. India built up its capabilities keeping these in mind.
In most cases above, the stuff you are quoting is barely equal to capabilities India operationalized first & has trained extensively on & even moved beyond the first level.
100 ARMs for instance – these are barely sufficient for any full scale war, given the expenditure for concentric AD and that they don’t have loitering capability. India inducted ARMs eons back & has now moved to UAVs/drones like Harop which have loitering capability & are hence far more capable (you’d need many salvos of ARMs to accomplish the same).
The point is that if “deterrence” via acquisitions is what PAF is after, that ship has sailed a long time back. Both in quantity & tech, India is now ahead in most respects. Since the economic gap is widening year on year, the PAF will remain behind as well. Modern tech is frightfully expensive.
TeerWell, the truth hurts. Resources are scarce for the PAF and they’re being used to scrounge for every possible second-hand F-16 available..and that’ll continue into the future too, just like they did with the Mirage. Now, is the IAF supposed to be worried about F-16 Block 50s in 2020? or 2025? When they’ll have a vastly larger and superior fleet of FGFA and Super-30s along with MRCAs that will be joining the fleet? I hardly think so. 🙂
As for the JF-17, it basically allows the PAF to bulk up on the cheap. Capability wise, it’s ok. But well if you have a really limited budget then you make do with it and try to improve upon it. Which is what the PAF is doing since there is no other real choice as of now.
So where is the great qualitative jump for the PAF in 2025 that we all are supposed to be in awe of?
Exactly. PAF will be lucky to continue with at least its JF-17s.
TeerBlackarcher
Again you seem to type a lot but actually communicate very little in the above. As per usual, you make out a best case scenario for the IAF and worst case for the PAF. Again making assumptions that are clawed in order top present a picture that fits in with your reality.
..followed by..
You say for instance J-31 may not be exported whilst Aviation Week and Defence News indicate it may have been developed for the very purposes of export.
…assumption#1: J-31 will be developed and made available for export followed by assumption 2: Pakistan can afford it.
Here is not a time to talk about what the IAF will be fielding, but to suggest PAF will definately be facing numbers of MRCA and FGFA when you and I both know that there is a possibility production deals for these may never be signed at all considering how badly both procurment projects are being run. The whole “Pakistan cant afford it” argument was the same one used just before PAF inducted 8 AWACS planes, 4 refullers and SPADA 2000 Air defence systems, so really hard for me to take it seriously.
Right now PAF is actually in the process of manufacturing the Block II version of the JF-17 and has finalised what Block III will be about.
Yet it can’t even afford the J-10.
By 2027 PAF will still have very large numbers of F-16s and JF-17s, I already mentioned that, but to think somehow they will have a “procurement holiday” is not accurate at all
Finances decide procurement. When your entire forex reserve is less than the average single deal procurement, there is only so much available.
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/10/03/pakistan-economy-reserves-idINL3N0RU4W12014100
PAF will be lucky if it continues to get JF-17s and F-16s (given recent comments on Pak from US strat thinkers and politicians even that relationship is fraying & the arms pipeline to Pak needs to be addressed..)
TeerYet as of right now PAF operates the most advanced fighter plane in South Asia….
LOL
Cool story bro 
TeerMountain posted this on another thread and it got me curious..what is the likely orbat of the PAF in 2025-27? The obsolete Mirages and F-7P/PGs will be gone by then and the main force will comprise of JF-17s and F-16 Block 50s many of which would be nearing the last quarter of their service lives. JF-17s will be up for MLUs.
What is the PAF planning for its fighter force for the coming decade? Obviously being a funds constrained air force, F-35s will be out of the question and doesn’t seem like the Gripen E will ever be offered for export to Pakistan (not that they could afford them in any substantial numbers), so that leaves only the Chinese options backed with credit..
as of now it seems that the J-20 isn’t up for export..leaves the J-31 as the only serious option, but even those won’t come cheap..but with even the FC-20 being unaffordable and ending up as an abandoned acquisition effort, just how many J-31s will the PAF be able to afford assuming a unit cost in the $50 million bracket, which is dirt cheap for a 5th gen fighter? Being twin engined, their operational costs will be higher than those of the current fleet and so will the support and acquisition costs.
They’ll have to make do with JF-17s and hand me down F-16s for the most part. Expect a struggling PAF in 2025-7, given the pathetic state their overall funding is in & that the US no longer needs them once the Afghan drawdown picks up. J-31s etc? Hardly. They couldnt even buy J-10s
TeerIs there really much that much call for small AEW aircraft when you can operate larger ones? I always thought the main point of the program was for DRDO to gain the relevant expertise on a small scale before moving on to a larger platform (which by all accounts they are now doing) rather than delivering an operational capability. A limited production would be justified to fill certain niches and improve surveillance capabilities in the interim, but not twenty I think!
Large AEW aircraft are very expensive to acquire and operate in the numbers required for 24/7 ops. This is the reason Israel offered India the Bombardier based AEWCS as a follow on to the current Phalcon. Less radar range, but higher availability for a given amount.
The DRDO program was meant for TD and operational capability both, but with a focus on larger platforms too as you noted hence the limited initial projections (2 for IAF, one to remain as test bed) but given the exorbitant costs to acquire and operate a Phalcon, only 5 Phalcons are planned for now. These allow the IAF to at best monitor two zones but the numbers rise rapidly given the operational needs. So 20 smaller AWACS may be overkill but another 5-7 more, possible.
This is not a test bed alone by the way, but has a very comprehensive sensor suite – Radar/SSR, ESM, CSM, datalinks + tactical ASP operations capability (it can monitor and plot intercepts and direct fighters/recovery ops), SATCOM. Brochure here: http://indiandefence.com/threads/awacs-developed-by-drdo-to-roll-out-in-january-2011-flight-tests-in-2011.1714/ Look at page 6 and 7 in particular for stuff beyond the hardware.
In short designed to IAF operational requirements. Embraer noted that it packed far more than the usual picket/pocket AWACS class systems, hence they upgraded the electrical generation system.
It can remain 150kms within Indian territory and look the same distance into Opfor territory, which is a fairly large area when considering the IAF’s traditional opponent (Phalcons can be reserved for the PLAAF).
The follow on program is Project India but it will be several years away as its going to be a step up from Phalcon class (incorporate offboard sensor feeds) based on IAF requirements.
TeerA big breakthrough for affordable surveillance for the IAF.. 300 km range for small fighter aircraft, 500 targets TWS, 16 simultaneous intercepts with 32 fighters…
DRDO ready to deliver AEW&C to Air Force
Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is ready to deliver the Brazilian Embraer aircraft-based, indigenously built Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) to the Indian Air Force as soon as it is ready to receive it. At the moment, the IAF is training its personnel who can operate the systems of the aircraft, at Bangalore-based Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS). The process should be over by February of next year.
Dr K Tamilmani, the director general of aeronautical systems and Dr S Christopher, programme director (AEW&C) and director, CABS said on Thursday that the laboratory has developed an indigenous Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar that has been fitted on the aircraft and is actually functioning for almost a year. The air-to-air function of the radar has been tested and certified, while air-to-sea functions are being tested.
Christopher stated that the ‘technical readiness level’ of the AEW&C is of the order of eight on a scale of ten. In a crowded environment, the aircraft system can ‘correlate, identify, classify and threat response of 500 airborne targets can be tracked, out of which 16 enemy targets can be simultaneously designated.’
There are five work-stations where operators can sit and work, with one being solely for dedicated for ‘communication support measure.’ The aircraft can loiter for five hours independently and with refueling, another four hours can be added to the sortie. It will need some friendly fighter aircraft support, with satellite communication link directly to Vayu Bhavan, IAF headquarters.
The Embraer system has data links, voice communication facility, 32 fighter aircrafts can remain connected while in air, and the ‘air support picture’ created by the operators. It can reach altitudes of 25,000 to 30,000 with a range of 300 kms. Significantly, the AESA radar will have ‘look down’ ability. The radar has 1,257 amplifiers.
Sign In
