Actually the French rather than us Indians should be pissed off with what he said.

Navy to network-target test Derby AAM from upgraded Sea Harrier

As part of the Limited Upgrade Sea Harrier (LUSH), the Indian Navy will shortly conduct its second live firing test of the Israeli Derby beyond visual range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM), a weapon system that has been integrated to the last of the Navy’s Sea Harriers as part of the upgrade programme. While the first live firing of the Derby active-radar seeker missile was conducted using the aircraft’s primary sensor, the next test will be from one of the Navy’s upgraded Sea Harriers with its radar switched off. Guidance will be provided from another platform, either on the ground or in the air.

According to Navy sources, the LUSH programme has made the Sea Harriers fully new aircraft. The heart of the upgrade is of course the replacement of the venerable old Ferranti Blue Fox monopulse airborne intercept radar with the time-tested EL/M-2032 multimode advanced pulse doppler radar. The new radar, in the words of one of the pilots, has put the aircraft in “a different league”. While sea clutter proved to be the bane of look-down missions with the Blue Fox radar (the sweep would be swamped), the Elta sensor has none of those issues.

Of the eight Sea Harriers involved in the LUSH programme, six have been upgraded and delivered back to the Navy, while two are currently being upgraded by HAL. The INS Viraat, currently undergoing a mini-refit in Kochi, will be back in service by September-October, and will have the LUSH Harriers on board.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/exclusive-navy-to-network-target-test.html

I think its a bunch of BS to be fair. SAAB already has shown its radar which is not any IAI derivative.

It is supplying EW equipment for Sukhois anyway so I don’t think any of this will cause delays.

If Americans want to pull the plug on the Gripen they can do so by denying rhe engine.

Part V – Super Hornet

Overview

The F/A-18E/F/IN Super Hornet is a little gem of an aircraft, except it’s hardly little. It’s 30% heavier than the legacy Hornet, and its designation was only kept the same to ease the pushing through of the idea to US Congress. In a sense, the Hornet is better known than the F-16 during the Cold War era. It was aircraft carriers stacked to the hilt with Hornets that prowled international waters for decades (and continue to do so with both Hornet and Super Hornets). Many say the Super Hornet is a completely new aircraft, which should have been given a new designation number and a new name, considering just what a different aircraft it is. But the IAF recognises that, not least because Boeing’s Super Hornet has also been among the most visible aircraft in the sweepstakes:

STRENGTHS

It was Boeing, remember, that changed the entire complexion of the MMRCA, by “elbowing” (a phrase used by the IAF, but not with acrimony) itself into what was to be a competition for a medium-weight, medium-range fighterplane. It was also Boeing which virtually pulled the rug from under the other contenders by being the first to express its intention to supply an active electronically-scalled array (AESA) radar with its contender — the highly respected Raytheon APG-79 radar. It was only after the IAF began doggedly pursuing information on the Raytheon radar and export licensing information that the other five contenders jumped onto the bandwagon and began either offering AESA radars, or publicising them in a more emphatic manner. The IAF recognises that unwaveringly, but still gives Boeing credit for changing the game. Among the six competing radars, the IAF has also been most exposed to the capabilities of the APG-79 that comes with the Super Hornet, in simulators and live flights. One IAF pilot who took the front seat in a Super Hornet at Aero India 2007 said he found the airplane’s digital flight control system (FCS) to be possibly the most mature and intelligent in the world on a fourth generation aircraft. Many in the IAF are of the opinion that alleviation of pilot workload is something that has been achieved in a dramatic way in the Super Hornet — its cockpit, one pilot says, is the very definition of convenience, automation and ergonomics. The AN/ASQ-228 advanced targeting forward looking infrared (ATFLIR) targeting pod is considered on par, if not better, than Lockheed-Martin’s equivalent on the F-16IN. A lot of folks thought the fact that the Super Hornet is a naval fighter would be a downer, but no — it has actually translated into its acceptance as a far more rugged, quick reaction fighter, which the Super Hornet undoubtedly is. In demonstration flight debriefs, the IAF has been careful to note that the airplane’s short take-off capability with near full combat load is undeniable, as are its handling characteristics at low altitude with the same load. The Super Hornet comes backed by a firm that the government of India has a lot of experience dealing with. The fact that ahead of the F-35C, the US Navy’s air arm is being standardised across roles on the Super Hornet platform is a source of great reassurance, for its reputation as the Navy’s next “swiss-army knife”. Being fairly battle proven despite its freshness off the block is a good thing too.

WEAKNESSES

The Super Hornet is in approximately the same weight class as the Su-30, and is, in every way, a heavy hitter, with all the attendant cross-section and logistics issues. The IAF has expressed apprehensions about the Super Hornet’s logistics footprint (and its overall impact on ownership costs), though these have been discussed only internally — they will be taken up during the foreign leg of the field evaluation tests (FETs). The Super Hornet is a rugged, beast of an airplane no doubt, but there remains a substantial quarter in the IAF which is still hung on the apprehension that it is, ultimately, a maritime strike fighter. “Let’s face it. The development of the Super Hornet was with the US Navy in mind. The exports to other country’s air forces are simply bonuses. It is a maritime strike fighter, with a maritime role development history behind it. Fielding it as an air force jet is borne from commercial considerations. Both Boeing and Lockheed are trying to maximise profits from the F-18/F-16 production lines before they have to shut shop for the F-35,” says one senior IAF pilot, who does not fly anymore. The Indian government has opened its Boeing IDS account with the P-8I Poseidon deal — the government may be wary of laying it on too thick with one vendor.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/mmrca-part-5-american-turbo-bug.html

The IAF is one of the few air forces that is likely to face a robust A-A threat – F-16s to the West, ‘Flankers’ to the East and North.

As such A-A capability is vital, and ensuring the highest possible exchange rate is equally important. Super Hornet won’t provide that, and nor will F-16IN.

Typhoon and Rafale may be expensive, but dead aircrew (or losing the war) can cost far more!

Thats what the FGFA is for.

PART IV – Rafale

Overview

The Rafale is an intriguing aircraft. Everyone remembers the dramatic way in which Dassault announced in 2006 that it was withdrawing the Mirage-2000-V from the MMRCA competition and instead fielding the the Rafale. It was a surprise move, considering the fact that the IAF had initially simply wanted to buy a whole lot more Mirages as its MMRCA, and was deeply convinced about the capabilities of the Dash-5. Fate (and Dassault) had other plans, it seemed. And with the government, in its wisdom, ordering the IAF to “open up” its qualitative requirements to engender a real competition, Boeing leapt into the fray with the Super Hornet. Almost on cue, the Mirage was withdrawn and the Rafale pitched. There are those who believe this was a seriously bad move, though Dassault unofficially sent across the message that there was no way in hell that it was going to keep its production line warm for the notorious time it was going to take for the Indian government to make its mind up, and also that there was no assurance that the Mirage would be selected finally. And therefore, the Rafale.

STRENGHTS

The Rafale smacks of the intangible “newness” of being a truly contemporary airplane built for today’s missions. Conversely, it suffers none of the reputational hazards of being an old souped up platform with tinkering under the bonnet. Pitched as an “omnirole” fighter, the IAF has incrementally been convinced of what this term really means. Pitched as a logical next-step to the Mirage — which the IAF loves with a passion — the people at Dassault have managed to pitch well the idea that operating the Rafale will be a progression of the same ownership/operation experience. The pitch that IAF pilots will take to the Rafale more easily than any of the other fighters is something that has managed to be persuasive to an extent. While the Thales RBE2 AESA radar is still its final developmental phase, the IAF has been provided with regular and detailed updates on the radar’s capabilities and performance parameters, and one officer, who has been part of the teams that receive these updates on a regular basis, says the IAF had no reason to doubt the laid down capabilities, and was in fact deeply impressed with what the French had managed to achieve in what is a science simply dominated by two American firms. Not just that, Dassault says the Rafale is the only aircraft in its class to be equipped with active arrays for both its radar and electronic warfare suite (EWS). IAF officers have in fact regularly been invited to witness RBE2 prototypes being tested on the Hack — a Mirage-2000 test bed for the radar since 2003. In April 2008, the Rafale opened its operational account by being deployed to Afghanistan and being flown on 220 active combat missions, involving 730 flight hours. This may be peanuts compared to the operational logs of the Rafale’s competition in the MMRCA, but the IAF recognises that this is a new aircraft in a transitory phase of tranche-level modernisation. At Red Flag 2008, IAF pilots got up close with the Rafale. A report on the Rafale was in fact informally submitted to Vayu Bhawan by the team when it returned. TheIAF has been given detailed presentations on the Rafale’s multi-sensor data fusion system — the RBE2 radar, Link 16 data bus, Front Sector Optronic (FSO) and SPECTRA self-defense suite and has been impressed by the ensemble. The Rafale is also considered by the IAF to be possibly the only plane in the sweepstakes with a focused use of composites for stealth and reduced RCS. The Rafale will also come with new, high-capability variants of MBDA missiles that the IAF has operated for decades, and places a lot of value on. Former Navy chief Admiral Arun Prakash, as FOC-in-C Western Naval Command, flew the Rafale during an official visit to Paris. A few other senior officers of the IAF have also had a chance to spin up in the otherwise reclusive Rafale. The sense that Dassault isn’t displaying its wares like the other five contenders are, is something that has somehow been looked at as “proper” by some in the Defence Ministry. This is, after all, a serious defence procurement, some say — “there’s no need for so much song and dance at Aero India every year”. The Rafale is the only aircraft in the sweepstakes that comes with an explicitly stated nuclear delivery capability. None of the others mentioned it. And the reason I mention this is that some very senior officers in the air force, are wondering why. Finally, defence deals with France have always been expensive, but always been excellent professional and operational experiences for the Indian forces. From the Mirages to Alouettes to the Mysteres. No spares problems. No nonsense. The French could also leverage significant political power to push India as the prestigious launch customer of the Rafale, though not quite like the Jaguar’s initial years were. A maximum 11 Gs in critical manoeuvers doesn’t hurt either.

WEAKNESSES

The albatross around the Rafale remains its relatively unproven stature, and of course, the fact that it hasn’t ever been exported. As one of the most expensive (flyaway cost) aircraft in the sweepstakes, it also comes with possibly the largest price-tag in terms of total contract cost, though Dassault has made strenuous efforts to convey to the IAF that its use of Dassault aircraft over time, particularly the Mirage, will significantly erode the total commitment necessary in terms of new infrastructure. Obviously, the IAF isn’t buying this — they’re treating the Rafale as any new aircraft type. There are almost no articulated weaknesses in specifications, though the IAF is anxious about an aircraft that has been fielded for a lot of competitions unsuccessfully. Finally, the government has recently awarded France with the huge Scorpene deal. Awarding the MMRCA to France would be politically too much for too little. The leadership of Nicolas Sarkozy doesn’t half do what Jacques Chirac’s did in its time.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/mmrca-part-4-french-squall.html

What Shiv offers is inside view on the MoDs and IAF’s view of thinking. I think most of the forumers know the obvious strengths and weaknesses of each platform.