^^^
How much would CVF cost for India? I assume not less than USD 5 Bn! Too expensive.

If not JSF, what else?

I understand there are problems with JSF. But nobody is pointing out a viable alternative! rafale, typhoon, gripen all share the problems of JSF. Only Gripen is assured to be lower cost than JSF.

If JSF can be produced at a flyaway cost of ~90 Mn USD, it is quite good value for money. There are no other 4.5 gen fighters other than Su-35 and Gripen NG which can be produced cheaper than that.

Now, somebody in this forum was saying J-10 was better than J-11. Is that person still posting?

AMCA is home-grown and would use kaveri engines. Kaveri engine should be easily maintained in India while a foreign engine would need components imported from other countries.

Any ship that has a radar cant be stealthy! however, the aim of all theses designs are to reduce RCS and are successful to varying degrees. Also wrt ships reduction in acoustic signature is a main criteria and those specific measures are not visible externally.

Talwar class had the lowest RCS when they were inducted among all capital ships in IN.

F35 may detect F22 first, however but the missiles wont be able to lock it! Also F22 may also be able to outrun the missile launched by F35 due to its kinematic advantages

Ok, then let me correct the terms used so that it doesn’t confuse.

I think, the usage of “recover” was a mistake. Let me change it to the proper term – revenue.
As you know revenue =/= profit…
And revenue = profit, only from the Break-Even point, which is why it is the most valued term for any business venture or a products commercial success.
That is why I never used the term break-even point in what I wrote as I don’t know how much of a margin will be there….

So what I meant is @$50million/unit, a sale of 12-13 MTAs will generate a revenue equal to the sunken cost and 8-4 MTA will do the job if it is priced at $80million/unit. w.r.t the profit margin and the break-even figure you mentioned, I’m not sure if your figures are correct mainly due to the profit margin you took.

Let me base some figures on the Tu-214 unit price which I suppose is/was around $33-$35 million/unit.
So if I’m to consider that MTA can be produced @ $33-$35 million/unit, instead of $9miliion you mentioned, we are likely to see nearly $15million/unit in terms of margin, which gives us the following figures….

@ $50million/unit, 12-13 MTAs will give a profit of $180million – 195million
Or, if we talk that in terms of breaking-even, it will come from the 41st MTA rolling out and not with the 67th or 68th aircraft.

@ $80million/unit, the margin would be $45million/unit, in which case the break-even will happen from the 14th MTA produced.

And if Russia can sell MTA in an open tender against C-130J by clinching it for $120million/unit against $160million/unit of its competitor, the profit margin is going to be huge…

All the above are on speculative figures, so take it like that only and is meant to give just an idea… but the point I was making earlier or wanted to make was that even if India pulls out of it, it is not going to affect Russia or UAC. They can do much better without the JV which will only be putting a cap on their margins in the long run.

Also, w.r.t to capex you mentioned, in the case of Russia, it will be basically the R&D fund (that we are talking now) & the material/production cost. There won’t be any need for capex on fixed asset as the aircraft will be produced in Aviastar-SP @ Ulyanovsk which already have undergone some sort of revamp/up-gradation in the past years….
http://www.aviastar-sp.ru/aviastar_en/gallery/year30.htm

If you assume a higher margin, the breakeven will happen at a lower production number, that is given.

I can assure, you something; you will not make 45 mn profit on each plane. A 20% margin is reasonable; something which should make any aircraft manufacturer happy. If you see the valuation of cessna when it was transferred/sold compared to revenues, you would understand the low margins.

There is something you need to factor – increase in actual capex compared to estimates; almost all projects in aircraft industry exceed budgets. That is where India may face a problem. it would be cheaper to buy 45 planes off the shelf than invest , say 500 mn and a seperate assembly line and raw material/labour cost. Only if you are gaining some technological inputs would this make any sense.

MTA is in different category than C-130 J; so no competition there.

As we see from the figures itself, Russia is going to be the biggest user of this aircraft and IAF needs only 45 aircraft (for now, though it can in crease in the future). And no one in the open market gets work share or technical capability for just 45 aircraft. That is why I mentioned, it is/was too good in favor of HAL. If the deal is cancelled/torpedoed, the biggest looser will not be Russia, it will only be HAL & India.

Neither Russians or Indians are fools….. but there is a saying in/w.r.t Russia, which goes something like this – Russia’s greatest sorrow are its idiots & roads. And what is true for Russia is true for India as well!

And we see the living examples of that in various projects/plans that is happening in both Russia & India due to the idiots in the system.

I agree that bureaucracy is quite high in both Russia and India.
Regarding numbers, if the design is successful, I believe India would procure more as the requirement is there.