There is an available, simple and affordable Gefest&T upgrade for Tu-22m3, like the Su-24 one. Anything more substantial would be complicate, expensive, and with an uncertain time frame.

On the other hand, if we are talking about sea denial, then all you need is the appropriate weapons and integrate them.

Do you have any pics for the same? For instance, does it have a glass cockpit to replace all those dials and printout machines?

Seriously speaking, Tu-22Ms for India will remain within the realm of internet speculation because they’d be far too expensive to operate in any significant numbers. Simply finding spares is a challenge and has forced the RSAF to retire and cannibalise nearly half the fleet it inherited from the Soviet Union.

And the PAK-DA is both too far in the future and possibly too expensive(Given the cost of a new Tu-160, how much will a stealth bomber cost; a half billion each?) for the IAF to consider it now. The closest we are likely to see to a bomber in IAF service is the Su-34.

I appreciate your wonderful, understated, sarcasm (Perhaps the person giving the statement, Chief of Air Staff of the Indian Air Force, does not know what he is talking about) but, it’s clear to anyone with reasonable interpretation skills that the Air Chief is being tactful in the above interview.

The reason he is being tactful is because the IAF was chary that the losing vendors would do everything to scuttle the competition, put political pressure and what not. So the IAF kept things on an even keel and answered all such questions with a smile and continued.

Everyone knows by now that the IAF evaluation was thorough and looked at various criteria, and the EF & Rafale were the ones that met the maximum criteria as set by the IAF.

What the CAS rtd is saying is that does not necessarily mean the other aircraft were bad, its just that they were not good enough for the IAF’s set of criteria. The IAF wanted balance across the criteria, not just that weapons and sensors be good, or that paper claims be made about cost effectiveness etc.

Unless of course you wanted him to come out and say openly that the Gripen really sucked, hard and in x specific areas. Whereupon you would have been outraged, and there would have been anguished replies in turn saying how unfair the process was etc etc. Netherlands, anyone?

The IAF evaluated the aircraft across six hundred plus odd criteria, encompassing aerodynamic performance, mission systems, weapons etc and the Gripen did not make the call. Nor did three other aircraft.

Its not surprising either, given the Gripen came last amongst the three in the Swiss evaluation as well versus the EF and Rafale.

All things looked at, the Gripen was not suitable for India.

It may be good enough for countries with more limited mandates, but for India, which may face a two front war scenario, every little bit counts, and frankly, India needs the edge that the Rafale or the EF may bring to the fight.

Besides which, with the Tejas, we don’t need something like the Gripen from the industrial perspective anyhow. And then there is strategy & offsets, I’d wager EADS & the Dassault consortia will offer better defence related offsets as well.

Now, the PR team is still hoping India is stupid enough to cancel the tender or come running back in their arms, but I wouldn’t bet on that happening. The MOF (Ministry of Finance) has been part and parcel of the process from day one.

All said and done, your post comes across as an exercise in misplaced snark. If you really want to learn more about the MMRCA process, then read here:

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/military-&-aerospace/MMRCA-and-the-Indian-Air-Force.html

The Gripen and the other’s did not make that cut, pure and simple. Their teams have received briefings as to why, and the Americans for one, have moved on.

They have been busy winning mega deals for airlifters, and now helicopters. The F-35 was hinted at, the GOI said, thanks but no thanks, the MMRCA is continuing.

If Saab wants to do business with India, its best served in not trying to keep hoping for a slice of the MMRCA pie but focus on realistic projects like the MRMR for the Navy (Medium Range Maritime Recc) and others.

A year ago I’d confided my fear of the MMRCA tender being cancelled due to one allegation or another and IIRC you stated that you sincerely hoped that’s what would happen so that the IAF would induct more Tejas instead. I’m glad you’ve accepted otherwise.:D

True; however it’s not surprising that journalists and others don’t care about those little details.

Anyway would the European engine manufacturers be willing to share that technology? Would Eurojet be obliged to do so if India becomes a full Eurofighter partner?

I recall they were willing to do so if India chose the EJ200 to power the Tejas Mk.2 and became a partner in the Eurojet programme. Which we didn’t.

I’m sure they’ll make accommodations for a full Eurofighter partner. This technology isn’t as tightly controlled as people make it out to be; Russia was willing to transfer SC blade tech with the Su-30 licenced production deal but the Indian side chose to eschew it(supposedly due to cost reasons).

I think none of the submarines you mentioned was designed with VLS in mind. Even if they did, the almost cricular hulled S-80, Merlin are going to fully degrade their hydrodynamic profile with huge humps. Type 214 will probably look like being pregnant with bulges on its side (more so visible on the top).

Amur-1650 will probably be the only diesel-electric subs that will be able to integrate the VLS for Yakhont/Brahmos without much degradation to their hull. Kilos will not even need to have any hump (or maybe even negligible hump than Amur) considering they are pretty big at over 9m in Hull diameter.

I doubt VLS alone would sway the Indian Navy, and I doubt it’d be such a problem when DCN has promised the ability to integrate the BrahMos with Scorpene(presuably using larger-diameter torpedo tubes) and the Germans themselves have previously offered VLS in a proposed Type 214 follow-on.

http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/68059

Note that the Ladas in service/under construction for the Russian Navy don’t have VLS either; it’s just a proposed modification for the Indian export version.

The Indian Navy will acquire 12 more P-8I.

Navy to Induct 24 P-8I Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft

Whoa! That said they’d need at least 16 to replace the Bears given the reduced range.

What about the medium-range MPA tender, then? Will that role also be taken by the P-8?

http://olarhat.livejournal.com/170965.html

A very light Ukranian modernization of one of their Mi-24s.

Any details? The Ukrexport(can’t spell it right) site advertises the ability to overhaul and upgrade practically every Soviet-lineage aircraft in service today, but I’m highly sceptical of what they can achieve with their more narrow military-industrial complex.

I’m guessing that Mi-24 upgrade simply involved a new IRST?

I don’t doubt that such a plane and facility exist, but that pic seems an obvious CGI/Photoshop job to me.

A longish interview with Sergei Safronov CEO “Sevmash” and the Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering Design Bureau “Rubin” Andrew Djachkov.

http://ria.ru/interview/20111202/503747393.html

Thanks. Interesting that they still intend to offer the Amur class for India’s submarine tender. I suppose in lieu of the failed Liana and Litiy systems they’ll try to sway the Indian Navy with their fuel cell-based AIP system. Being able to produce hydrogen from methanol would soothe the IN’s concern about hydrogen storage.

But something tells me this will go the way of the MMRCA again. The other prospective contenders(S80, Marlin and Type 214) are likely to have comparable(and already productionised) AIP systems plus superior sensors.