Lokeive been following the MMRCA requirement for some time, and i would like to chare my thoughts:
the least possible winner in my book are F-16IN, basicly deu to the fact that its an aircraft thats over 35 years old, compared to the F/A-18, the F-16 hasnt changed much over the years (well, outside atleast).
the biggest reason is that by the time Inia will get its first F-16, other users will be retiring there’s. even with an upgrade, the F-16 is still outdated. the aircraft has no future (Lockheed will stop production soon (after 2014) in favour of F-35)from what ive seen in a Indian News report on Youtube, the MIG-35’s engine appeast to be underpowered, i dont know if its true or not. but the MIG-35 in my eyes is the same as the F-16, only it has 2 engines and TVC, but TVC is yet to prove itsself in combat.
the Gripen-NG is a good aircraft, its fast, decent capabilities, low aquasition and maintainance costs,… but i heared that they were offering it without an AESA radar (same news report). if you want to sell something, recent technology such as AESA is a must have.
that leaves the F/A-18E/F, the Rafale and the typhoon in the top-3. the F/A-18 is a good competitor, as the aircraft can operate from both land bases by the IAF and Aircraft carriers by the IN. same goes for the Rafale (Rafale B, C and M variants). but compared to the Rafale, the Typhoon and Superbug gives more bang for your buck. btw Eurofighter is offering the Typhoon with full tech-transfer.
hoping for France that the politicians dont screw up another export sale (as they did with UAE, Morroco and Saudi Arabia) by saying all the wrong things at the wrong time. to bad that Dassault was so dumb to withdraw the Mirage 2000 from the market in favour of the rafale. it was a cheaper aircraft with lot of export and upgrade capabilities, just like the F-16. but i dont think it had a chance in MMRCA anyway, same reason as the F-16.
A lot of people are putting F-16 low on the list, for various reason. The F-16 is old however it remains a very potent a/c. A lot of Indians are telling me it’s out because Pakistan got F-16. I don’t know if that’s true or not, it may be.
I doubt the MiG-35 would be underpowered but I may be wrong.
NG is offered with an AESA, however it is not operational yet. Neither is the AESA of Eurofighter, MiG-35 and Rafale (although the Rafale AESA has, according to French sources, entered production). Only the SH and F-16 have operational AESAs as of today.
LokeFrom all official statements MMRCA will not be splitted and I doubt that IAF alone will go for so many fighters. IF this figure is true, it included the IN order, not to forget that there is an interest of SFC also.
LCA MK2 & Rafale & Su 30 MKI fits better.
mk2, NG and SU-30 fits even better — it fits into your pockets 😉
LokeWhy shouldn’t it, higher thrust engine, more internal fuel, inflight refuelling and as I told you before, at most of the specs, the LCA already is very close, if not superior. The payload and MTOW have to evolve of course, but same happened at Gripen, the difference is only, that LCA versions are somhow in between.
Gripen A
LCA MK1
Gripen C
LCA MK2
Gripen NGFor the low end of IAF, LCA MK2 will be good enough and there is still more potential, but I’m afraid ADA and HAL will hype the AMCA development instead.
What, are you saying that the payload of mk1 is between that of A and C?
That’s wrong.
We also know that it has many other issues than just low payload… Apart from the avionics it is clearly inferior to the A.
LokeAt the end of the day all six are 4.5 gen fighters, same generation, and roughly on the same level, when it comes to capabilities.
Therefore the logical thing would be to pick the one with the lowest life cycle costs…
😉
Lokeso the maximum Tejas payload seems to be 3.5 tons then. Gripen A could carrry 20% more, Gripen C 50% more and Gripen NG will be able to carry 105% more.
It will be interesting to see if they can make the jump from an a/c that is (from a kinetic point of view) inferior to the A, past the C and all the way up to NG level.
I still doubt mk2 will be comparable to NG but then again, I believe HAL will get assistance from EADS(?) so perhaps it will after all. On verra.
Gripen A:
Wing Span – 8,40 m
Length – 14.10 m (14.80 m two-seat version)
Height – 4.70 mEmpty Weight – 5,670 kg
Maximum Take-off Weight – 13,000 kg
Maximum Armament Payload – 4,200 kg
External Tanks Capacity – 2,400 l
Minimum RWY Area – 800 x 14 m
Maximum G-load Factor- +9 g / -4 gPowerplant – 1x Volvo Aero RM 12
Maximum Thrust – 54 kN
Maximum Thrust With Afterburner – 80.5 kNMaximum Speed at High Level – 2,130 km/h
Maximum Speed at Sea Level – 1,225 km/h
Range Radius (2,000 kg payload) – 700 km
LokeRespecting your opinions but, overall, going by what I’ve read through – through various sources etc, Eurofighter have the better offer on the table where aircraft performance, growth potential, ToT, partnership, share of future sales for India etc as far as I’m concerned & I’m not just saying that because I’m rather fond of the Typhoon, I’m just as fond of the Rafale and Gripen but as I say, Eurofighter offer the better deal. And since the IAF don’t have Aircraft Carriers then, well its not a requirment in this particular competition so its hardly worth talking about.
Other than that, the RAF have had at least two excercises with their Typhoons and IAF’s Sukhois in the UK and in India & I believe there is another exercise with the same types due very soon. And correct me if I’m wrong, the other contenders…Haven’t?
If I “were” the IN and had a choice of aircraft to choose from to fly off my Aircraft Carriers, I’d certainly look into a Navalised Typhoon, see if it’ll work and see if I could get sale shares from it if the RN/MoD chose to buy & operate them. Saying that, I’d probably have to go for the Rafale as my first choice, its a rather fine peice of kit and once its recieved a few more gizmos and what not, it’ll be right at the top as far as Navalised Aircraft are concerned.
And about that article, if the US or whom ever really did say those words then they’re really not doing themselves any favours, are they…
On a seperate note, maybe this question has been answeared already but, why didn’t the US bring the latest version of the F-15 to MMRCA competition?
Well I did not state who I think should win but rather who I think is the most likely to win, and that’s the SH, mainly due to politics, but also because it a mature, quite cost-effective fighter with overall quite decent performance (in particular with those EPE engines). In additition it comes in a carrier version.
The reason why I mentioned carrier capability is because I have noticed (as I am sure also you have) that both Saab an Eurofighter have presented carrier versions as a “possible solution for India” — now why on earth would they do that? I think there is a reason, and I suspect the reason is that Boieng and Dassault are trying to push hard the idea of lowering the number of fighter types in the Indian defence forces. True the MMRCA is IAF and that’s not Navy but still… I don’t think they present those plans without a reason.
Typhoon is great but the support from 4 big EU countries have been not very impressive to say the least… It actually needs some work to get to where India wants it to be. And it is quite expensive. It does not offer the “independence from the US” that Rafale does. It does not offer the low price of Gripen or the (IMHO) shorter and quicker route the a marinated version.
Becoming an Eurofighter partner may seem very attractive, but then again with all that bickering… and with 5 partners it becomes even worse!
The F-15 was not asked for AFAIK, and also that would definitely be too close to the SU-30MKI…
Still I may be wrong, and yes I have noticed that a lot of people disagree with me and believe Typhoon is the front runner.
Anyway since quadbike presented his wish list:
2. Rafale
3. Typhoon
4. SH.
And number one? Do I really need to tell you? 😉
LokeUS doubts over India jet fighter partner
The US government has expressed doubt about the suitability of corporate partnership with an Indian state aerospace company as Boeing and Lockheed Martin bid to supply New Delhi with 126 strike fighters.
[…]
After a visit to the company’s plant in Bangalore in February 2010, he described India’s aviation industry as “two to three decades behind the United States and other western nations” despite advances.
Complete story
I would not put too much emphasis on this, still it is interesting to read what the US ambassador is thinking about different things….
I still think SH have the biggest chances.
However I am reconsidering the chances of Rafale — Lokes current hotlist for MMRCA:
1. SH
2. Rafale
3. NG
4. Eurofighter
Why Rafale ahead of the Typhoon? Because it already has an aircraft carrier version. But why NG before the Typhoon? Because it’s much cheaper than the Typhoon, and because it will be much simpler and less costly to deliver in a carrier version.
Loke@Rayrubik,
thank you for the images about the Kh-59 on the Su-30MKI.@Loke,
NSM has been stated in combination with the Typhoon, maybe they were proposing an air-launched weapon back then, while it didn’t exist, before they started development of the JSM version for the F-35.@Quadbike & Swerve,
that images dates back to 2002 or earlier. It’s just a number of weapon options proposed, but that’s it. What weapons will be integrated depends on the customer’s requirements and it’s certainly possible to integrate all of those, albeit it’s more than unlikely that we’ll see all of them. Possibly a fraction of that.
Is there an updated chart? If it’s from 2002 then fine, calling it the NSM back then was OK as you indicate. But probably not today in 2011.
LokeThe Vixen 1000ES, a collaborative programme with SELEX Galileo, SAAB Microwave and SAAB Aerosystems, builds on established technology from the European leaders in AESA radars and has a clear route map to future capability.
You see, they are the leaders in Europe!!!
(Just kidding).
Seems to me that both Thales and Selex/Saab have great capabilities and great engineers and the main problems are with none of these companies but with the slow funding from the politicians.
Anyway I will be looking forward to the first European AESA operational in an European fighter (the Formidable Rafale!), and at the same time the second European operational fighter radar (After the Selex Vixen, thank you Swerve for reminding us… 😉 )
LokeThe NSM does not exist as it is not operational anywhere. It will, but it is not today.
The major difference? Are you kidding me, the guidance system perhaps?
I can think of many differences between NMS and RBS-15 and yes the guidance system seems to be one of them.
The NSM missile guidance system will be based on an INS/GPS navigation system with an imaging IR homing head for the terminal phase and in-flight data-link.
http://www.deagel.com/Anti-Ship-Missiles/NSM_a001123001.aspx
The RBS15 guidance system consists of a GPS/INS and radar altimeter navigation system and a terminal phase active radar seeker
http://www.deagel.com/Anti-Ship-Missiles/RBS15-Mk3_a001097001.aspx
Or did you have something else in mind?
LokeJobim confirmed that price of rafale F3 (tot+full equiped) will be the same as the Gripen NG!
Source please.
LokeIt does´nt exist at all ATM. But that is a non issue.
There is a mayor difference between NSM and RBS-15 etc, guess what?
What does not exist at all?
And what is the major difference between NSM and RBE-15?
Loke“Rafale fanboy” is a trademark of Jockonimo and using it: you expose yourselelf to copyrights 😉
Corrected! (I would not want Jackonickos lawyers after me…)
What happened to J by the way? Haven’t seen him for quite some time now.
Loke@Rayrubik,
options proposed wrt ASMs include the NSM and Rbs-15. The Penguin Mk3 and Harpoon has both been mentioned in conjunction with the Typhoon as well, but the NSM and Rbs-15 appear to be more likely options, though the latter only of the Norwegians would sell them.
AFAIK the NSM does not exist as an air launched version but only in ship and ground launched version.
Kongsberg is working on a missile derived from the NSM; this is the JSM, specially designed to fit into the F-35 weapons bay. I would assume this would be the one that would be relevant for Typhoon and other a/c.
The fact that they state NSM and not JSM make me wonder how serious they are about that drawing…
It also seems the JSM is not yet completely funded (only “prefunded”? 😉 )
LokeAnd the next Gripen “supporter”, claiming things! I never commented about the diameter, so please don’t search for fake arguments.
Please accept my deepest and most profound apologies for this terrible mistake! It seems I have mixed you up with another Rafale “supporter” (there are so many, I can’t keep track of you all).
Sign In
