Spitfire9ok, now, one question: why restart the process? they reviewed all the available aircraft types that may be suitable for their needs and have chosen two of them as finalists.
If you cancel the process, what do you do? the needs haven’t changed, so, basically, the response will again be the same, unless you wait for the next generation of “compatible” aircraft to become available (say some 20-30 years from now)… what they do until then? glue feathers to their arms and try to learn to fly?
If Rafale and Typhoon were excluded on grounds of cost, other contenders could be reconsidered. One can assume that a single engined aircraft is going to be cheaper to buy and operate than a twin, so perhaps F-16IN and Gripen could be reconsidered.
OR
Going back to basics, (a) IAF squadron level is seriously under strength (b) IAF needs to replace 100+ MiG-21’s within 5 years. If current Tejas Mk1 capability is judged to exceed MiG-21 capability then by definition it is suitable as a replacement, so why not order 100+ extra Tejas Mk1 for delivery within 5 years?
Cost of an extra 100 Tejas Mk1 beyond the 40 already ordered? Around the $3 billion mark (first 5 production Tejas reported as costing about $31 million each in 2009*).
Advantage of ordering Tejas Mk1 if MMRCA cannot proceed on cost grounds at this point:
– it’s cheap
– solves the MiG-21 replacement problem
– helps maintain squadron numbers
– being Indian, provides political sovereignty over use
– little foreign currency required
– low risk (IOC already obtained)
– already in production
– training, logistics etc already being implemented
– would only require a small proportion of the funds allocated for MMRCA, allowing the balance to be applied to accelerate MCA/buy TOT for MCA/buy more Sukhois
* http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/08/28/india-defence-fighters-idUSDEL38704020090828
Spitfire9Every passing week I believe more and more than the tender will be cancelled. They may just be looking for a least embarrassing option to do it.
It might be an idea to remember that it was only 2 weeks ago that a defence ministry spokesman said that there was no timetable for making a decision on MMRCA.
Perhaps the winner has already been selected but is too expensive so the MOD is saying nothing until an attempt has been made to raise the extra funding required?
Spitfire9They are taking so long in announcing the deal I wonder if they are contemplating its cancellation.
the farce has gone on for so long I wouldnt be suprised if they did. As they have in the past witht he artillery.
What would be the grounds for MMRCA cancellation?
If MMRCA were cancelled, what would be done to replace the MiG’s nearing the end of their service lives?
Is it realistic to think an effective AMCA could be developed without the TOT envisaged in the MMRCA deals under consideration?
Spitfire9What about a joint Sweden/UK (+ possibly Brazil) Sea Gripen? Offer Brazil a share in the design and production of parts of the aircraft + the assembly line if they scrap FX-2 and join up with SAAB and BaE instead.
RN would get a passable interim low cost aircraft with very low flying and maintenance costs and a large number of weapons integrated; BaE Systems would get design and production work; SAAB would get a Gripen E order likely to grow substantially with re-orders; Brazil would get design, production and assembly work.
Spitfire9I suppose, prior to the French problems in the UAE we would be jumping up and down waving our little Typhoon flags.
Now we have to act all mature and mutter about it not being a done deal until the fat pilot sings (or until a contract is signed at least).
It’s not a done deal. It’s a request for proposal. That’s right at the beginning of the procurement process, isn’t it? Not that I have followed this closely, from what I have read here, it seems that Oman has now decided on its future air force configuration and this will go through. I see the fat lady getting ready to sing…
Spitfire9If there is still no decision in two weeks, we must assume that both offers are unworkable for India in terms of costs. Any thoughts?
If the approved finance for the deal is Rs 42,000 crore, that will not cover 126 MMRCA + extras. Perhaps background talks are being held with the ministry/ministries concerned in an attempt to raise the budget. An announcement that either aicraft has been selected seems pointless if there is insufficient funding authorised to order it. I imagine that funding needs to be increased by 50%-100%.
Spitfire9Once the winning bid is announced, the MoD will convene a ‘Contract Negotiation Committee’ to negotiate a final price. MoD sources indicate that price quoted by both vendors is significantly higher than the Rs 42,000 crore the Union Cabinet cleared for this purchase.
By my calculation @ exchange rate $US 1 = Rs 50
Rs 42,000 x 10 million x 0.02 = $US 8,400,000,000 ($US 8.4 billion)
That sum would not buy 126 flyaway airframes, let alone spares, training, logistical support for them and technology transfer.
What process is required to raise the budget and how long might that take? Could a deal be signed and proceed without full financing being agreed in advance?
I am thinking about how India avoids any further delay in acquiring new fighters and lack of cleared funds looks like a possible source of further delay. If an MMRCA contract is ready for signature mid-2012 but is then held up for several months for lack of approved funding, when will the first locally produced aircraft be completed? What would be highly undesireable would be for the contract to be so late in activation that it then needed to be adjusted at the last minute for 30-50 aircraft to be delivered from Europe rather than the 18 envisaged.
Spitfire9If it loses in India neither Brazil nor UAE or any other country wouldn’t touch the Rafale with a barge pole. Therefore 2012 could also be the last year of Rafale as a viable fighter project.
Why would an aircraft that met the performance criteria of the IAF (where several others did not) suddenly become completely undesireable to other countries if India did not order it? Price, politics and TOT also govern the selection of an aircraft for the IAF. Political considerations are inevitably different where Brazil, UAE and any other country are concerned; TOT requirements vary from country to country – UAE, for example, has no company producing military aircraft; where price is concerned, Dassault does appear to misjudge the price at which to sell Rafale – you can get a sale at 1% or 5% or 10% less than the highest price the customer will pay but you cannot get a sale if the price exceeds by any degree the highest price the customer will pay.
Spitfire9Then there is the need for greater amounts of testing that results from growing complexity.
overall, most around here will agree with your post, yet, LM (the guys supposedly knowing what thry’re doing) is guilty of ignoring the very basic and obvious principle I just copied from your post when they claim being able to start deliveries before finishing the initial testing…
+1
If LM get paid so long as the development and testing program continues, what disadvantage do they suffer financially for painting an unrealistically optimistic picture of development prospects? None, overall, it would seem, provided the project is not cancelled.
I’m not suggesting it is possible to get the design of an ambitious aircraft so close to “right” that there will be no problems encountered in the development process. I am suggesting that there is something wrong with LM’s assessment of the magnitude of F-35 problems when resolving them persistently takes longer than forecast (incidentally increasing the amount of work LM can bill?).
Spitfire9The Pentagon is gearing up to restructure Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program for a third time in three years, sources said, with production of more than 120 more planes to be postponed to save money and allow more time for development
A little bit of common sense!
It is all well and good for some non-US LRIP orders to be placed (for evaluation/familiarisation, I presume) but I think just about the last thing that customers want is to buy aircraft that will need to be returned for modification of faults found in testing.
Anyone know if LM is liable to pay for fixing faults? With less than 25% of testing points covered so far, it is extremely likely that a number of faults will be identified.
Spitfire9Apparently, the US is applying pressure on the Indian Govt. to cancel the MRCA and go for the F-35, but it isn’t likely to happen.
If neither Dassault or Eurofighter get the deal, that would be due to unacceptable cost. I don’t see F-35 having any chance. Too many problems:
– cost
– program history of failing to meet schedules
– high risk of delay (not yet tested)
– lack of TOT
If IAF cannot afford the L1 shortlisted aircraft but urgently need to equip more squadrons Gripen would seem to be the least worst option.
Spitfire9What is the likelihood of Indians saying that ”Both fighters are so expensive that we can’t afford them at this stage and therefore we delay deciding about this until/after 2015 ”
Could IAF wait another 5 years or more for new aircraft with squadron levels already a long way below what they would like and MiG 21’s in urgent need of retirement? I imagine they would need to consider ordering more Sukhois and Tejas Mk1’s – always assuming Tejas Mk1 was acceptable. After that would there still be an interest in MMRCA with Tejas Mk2 and PAK-FA coming into the frame?
Spitfire9Thanks for that. Unfortunately no source other than Press Trust of India is given. PTI has published articles before incorrectly predicting the date the winner would be announced.
Spitfire9We’ll find out on the 24th January next week….Apparantly.
Source?
Spitfire9Re: the arrestor hook failing to engage the wire
“Unlike conventional land-based aircraft, naval aircraft don’t flare on landing. While the landing is on a more precise spot, it causes the tail-hook to oscillate vertically- which increases the chances that it won’t catch a wire, Burbage said. The dampening of that motion has to be tweaked, he said.
The shape of the hook itself also has an effect on the probability of catching a wire, he added. All of these are being tweaked to increase the chances that the F-35C will catch a wire on a carrier’s deck.”
Would alteration of the oscillation characteristics of the wire be difficult to achieve? What about encasing the wire with 2 lightweight cylindrical dampers outboard of the landing path?
Sign In
