[QUOTE=BlackArcher;2328141]Just posting the English translation of the Kommersant article that FBW posted. Targeted serviceability rate – 80%, Overall serviceability ~ 42% , serviceability of MiG-29 fleet ~ 20-25%.

Really illuminating.[/QUOT]
25% very good for fighters built in Soviet times in 1980s. Look at how small F-16 fleets are now for F-16As compared to what was inducted in US and EU.

India’s fault? Or India’s fault that they operate types that they don’t produce or have an indigenous spares program for? You’ve stated that the Mig-29 had no issues in VVS service. That is incorrect, and well documented (look at previous page). The Mirage-2000 have received excellent reviews for availability in IAF service. 65% serviceability/availability would be considered acceptable by most air forces standards. The Migs have never reached that number in the IAF, nor in recent VVS/VKS service.

USAF does operate aircraft as least as old as most Mig’s. I’ve posted the availability of all F-15/16 in USAF service in the “not f-35” thread. The Sukhoi’s get a pass, they are improving with better after sale service and parts, the Mig’s…not so much.

You have data of F-16/F-15 built from 1983-1985 readiness. India MIG-29UPG is upgraded to multirole. It is like putting CFT and strike capability to 1983 F-15C. Where is your data of IAF M2K readiness rate. upto 10 of them crashed.
Perhaps India putting more money into Su-30MKI readiness as they use them at most exercises and longer range. It does not tell anything how much budget and competent manpower they allocating to MIG.

Apaches & Mi-28 design has its own merit , specially if you are fighting a jihadi in Iraq or in Syria , A pilot would be more comfortable to sit inside these two chopper knowing well they might at worst face a 23 mm Ack Ack or Stinger/Igla and in most cases an AK.

But if you add a half decent modern organic air defence cover there would be little benefit in pursuing such a heavy chopper design with limitation in manouverability or hot high operation role , A design like Europen Tiger , Indian LCH or Russian Ka-52 would be a better trade off with emphasis on Manouverability and decent protection levels with hot/high operation possible , survivability would be better in presense of enemy organic AD system and its protection level would be equally good when fighting Jihadi types of targets.

Even the cancelled Comanche program relied on manouveribility & stealth and some of the future attack chopper program from Russian UAV has taken Ka-52 like approach

There is no place for lighter helicopter just like there is no place for light fighter. Bigger helicopters with stronger engines fly fast loaded with more flexibility of diverse weopons at greater ranges to saturate battlefield . bigger power supply to bigger radar for multi target engagement. even bigger cockpit with more LCD displays help in situational awareness in netcentric warfare.

IL-476 is designed for range. 52 tons to 5000km with current engines. That is very competitive with C17 70 tons to 4200km. IL-476 is universal platform for airefuller and AWACS (that AWACS will be multifunctional against air, surface and subsurface )and with new PD-14 engines will enhance its range by 20%. IL-476 active production line bring down the cost.

$70k sortie per hour with such low payload.

^^^ Mig-29 RD-33 series 3 engine has been in use on Indian Mig-29 for quite some time , HAL makes or atleaset assembles those engines here , Series 3 are also part of 29UPG upgrade program.

Tradationally a lot of Mig-29A series ( not the 29SMT or 35/29K ) was built with low structural and engine life IIRC like 2000 hrs where they are suppose to get replaced , not to mention the engines were very smoky , Even then engines has issues and were not able to live up to those hours.

I thought RD-33 series 3 is part of MIG-29UPG so they are just getting upgraded. India need to model its airforce along the Middleastern airforces where OEM control the maintainance and support and those OEM subcontract to locals depend on competency.

if there is problem with engine/fbw than availablility will be zero percent. you cant rely on Indian government reports.

Last (and only) turn down was in 2012 IIRC. Radically different scenario today in 2016 with the F-35 on the cusp of operationalization, the Rafale proven to be a pricey ordeal and the FGFA induction at least 10 years away.

its radicaly worse. none of your scenarios that were based on wishfull thinking in past has come to fruitation regarding IAF procurement. Rafale is not any more pricey than F-16E/F-18E when your insisting 30 to 50% offsets.

Additional Su-30s and stepped up Tejas production is sensible. But they still need a (more capable) western aircraft to complement that. With the SH & F-16 orders dwindling away and consequently losing economies of scale, the (ramping up) F-35 program offers the best value for money, although the capital costs associated with a local FACO line will be substantially higher for the (decommissioned) SH/Viper.

India is not some industrial power that it can automatically match Turkey/Italy/Japan. these countries have history of making complex things directly or indirectly working in Germany.