AbhimanyuU.S. fighter bids for India hit tech-transfer snag
“We hope the U.S. government will get its act together,” Somers said by telephone. “Time is of the essence if we hope to compete with foreign companies for this hugely important deal.”
Lockheed Martin and Boeing declined to comment on the U.S. government’s delay in approving their India packages, as did the Indian embassy in Washington.
Bob Gower, vice president of Boeing’s F/A-18 program, said Boeing was confident the U.S. government ultimately will clear release of the APG-79 radar.
“The F/A-18 has an advantage in that we are the only airplane in the competition with a fielded production AESA radar,” Gower said in a written response last month to questions from Reuters. “I like our competitive position on the AESA radar.”
AESA presents many military advantages, boosting pilots awareness of any threats, according to William Ostrove, a radar market analyst at Forecast International, an aerospace consultancy in Newton, Connecticut.
“The United States has the most advanced AESA technology in the world,” he said. “No other country currently has an AESA radar in production.”
The United States already has sent AESA technology to Singapore and the United Arab Emirates, but they did not demand as much access to the underlying know-how as India has done, Ostrove said.
Washington might resolve its AESA-related dilemma by clearing a “dumbed down” version, he said. Substituting a less powerful processor, for instance, would make it less capable than one now flown by U.S. Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet pilots.
“This would allow the Indians to build the radar themselves while preventing the most advanced American technology from leaving the country,” Ostrove said.
As part of a strategic initiative designed to cement new security ties, President Bush in March 2005 gave Boeing and Lockheed the nod to sell advanced fighters to India.
——
In my view, the above may be extremely good news. The IAF must now realize that technology as it understands, is not a commodity that can be traded for cash. The differentiator between the most powerful nations and weaker ones is technology, and a nation that has spent billions of dollars over many decades, will definitely not “squander” it away to a cheap manufacturer like India.
This must “jolt” the IAF into reality, and “pave the way” for firmer commitments, backing, overseeing and funding of indigenous weapons hardware.
Not only AESA, many other technologies related to sensor fusion, data-linking, etc. can be withheld to India. The Tejas Mk.2 will definitely benefit from this. The only factor is that IAF must “shed it’s blinkers” and see how the Tejas is no longer an “LCA” of the 1980s, but a 21st century 4++ gen. fighter as capable as Gripen-NG and F-16.
Reference :-
AbhimanyuI think you still misunderstand it! The JV will not be at Pak Fa cause Russia had developed most of it before we joint, but at FGFA!
Yes I meant that only (FGFA). I have variously referred to it as Indian version of PAK-FA or customized PAK-FA. This version will be designed by Sukhoi, and HAL will merely licence produce it in India.
But besides that we can integrate and customize FGFA as we want and did at Su 30 Mki.
Actually your links says that too:As Pogosyan said, the Indian requirements can be taken into account later, while HAL’s 50% share in the development of the IAF modification can be realized in the more distant future
See, FGFA will be designed by Russia as mentioned by Mr. Pogosyan above. Since the so-termed “50% share” is separately mentioned than design, it probably means share in local manufacture of components and parts only.
Thus, even if some technologies will be incorporated later into the Indian PAK-FA, the so-termed 50% joint development will only mean HAL’s local manufacture of the components and parts and NOT actual R&D towards their development.
I doubt that it will be really 50% at the end, cause we will take many parts from them of course, but there will be Indian and I bet western stuff too.
So once again, the Pak Fa will be all Russian, the FGFA will be a JV with India!
In my view, if India is paying 50% of the development costs, but if its not involved in the design from the start, and reportedly unsure about exactly how much technology transfer it will get even in the finished product, then it is tantamount to mere licence production only. HAL and the MoD are thus misleading the taxpayers by claiming that it is a JV.
Note that India won’t add the two-seat, but Russia will. Likewise, any other customization per the IAF’s needs will be developed by Russia and 50% of the parts / components will be manufactured by HAL.
Of course it will be a multi role combat aircraft and cost-effective, but will it be as capable as all the MMRCA contenders?
See, the above is an “excuse” to defer Tejas’ induction. If IAF has doubts, then it has to make it capable and see to it that it becomes capable.
Floating a “glamorous” international tender for 126 jets is very effortless (even that took so many years). But getting down to the workshop with ADA to make Tejas Mk.2 equivalent to Gripen – NG requires hard work. Unfortunately, the IAF is reluctant to do this; it doesn’t even have a history of doing this. Like a patron at a restaurant, it simply gives a list of requirements and waits. Unlike the Pentagon or the PLAAF, it just doesn’t have a track record of working in tandem with the defence research establishment.
AbhimanyuPlease note that as per the statement of Sukhoi head, Mr. Mikhail Pogosyan, Sukhoi will design and develop the customized Indian version (with twin-seats et al). He said right now he does not have “time” to develop the Indian version, as Sukhoi has to concentrate on the Russian version first.
Thus, it is not a JV at all, as Mr. Pogosyan has “let slip” that it is Russia that will design the PAK-FA. Also, it can easily be observed that NOWHERE Mr. Baweja (ex-HAL) or Mr. Fakruddin (marketing head, HAL) have ever said that India will design the IAF’s version. They merely list it’s features, like twin-seat.
Also, Sukhoi has reportedly not agreed to provide any technology transfer to India for the PAK-FA. (This further cements the fact that India is merely purchasing the PAK-FA and NOT involved in JV or any similar activity).Thus, India does not gain anything by licence producing the PAK-FA.
As regards the Tejas Mk.2, as repeatedly mentioned earlier, because it’s introduction date is estimated to be the same as the estimated date of the MRCA, the Tejas Mk.2 would be best suited to be the MRCA.
References :-
AbhimanyuIn my view, it is extremely unfortunate that despite everything being developed indigenously, the IAF is searching private foreign companies for major weapons hardware.
For MRCA, instead of taking Tejas Mk.2 to it’s conclusion, foreign tenders are being invited. For 5th gen. fighter, instead of only MCA, a Russian experimental prototype is being purchased (in which there is nil Indian input till date, unlike MCA which will be IAF’s “baby” from start).
AbhimanyuYes absolutely, I mean incorporating a second seat (a first for a 5G), and redesigning the structure/aerodynamics/wings/control surfaces etc. to maintain LO & flight performance/range- is no big deal.
The above is inaccurate. As discussed earlier in another thread, Russia — and not India — will be designing the customized PAK-FA for India (with two-seat, etc.). India will only licence produce the same.
But as far as I understand it, FGFA will be fighter BASED on Pak Fa, with changes to our needs and customizations like we did with the Su 30.
The difference between the Su-30 and PAK-FA will be that all the customizations and designing in the PAK-FA will be done by Sukhoi (based on IAF’s “wish-list” like a two-seat). HAL will purchase the licence manufacturing rights for that design, however “disguised” as a “Joint Development”.
I agree with you that we have to make more weapons and systems on our own to be not dependent on others, but we can’t do it from one day to another!
See, we’ve already made Tejas which is a 4++ gen. fighter jet in our very first attempt. All previous attempts were only licence productions like German designed HF-24, British Ajeet (gnat), MiG-21 assembly, Jaguar assembly, etc.
Thus, the logical next step is 5 gen., which we have already undertaken with MCA.
MRCA is only needed because LCA is delayed (and mainly because we were not able to build indigenous radar and engine!) and like the severall crashes in the last few weeks and months proves, our fleet is way too old and had to be replaced and modernised fast. So we can’t wait any longer till LCA/LCA mk2 is ready and especially proven, same should be the case for MMRCA contenders like Mig 35 and Gripen NG which still are only under development. We Can’t efford any further delays and should speed up this deal or we will lose more jets and pilots!
Don_Jupp, as per the interview of the IAF chief, the introduction of Tejas Mk.2 as well as MRCA is in 2013-14. So, the IAF may as well induct Tejas Mk.2 because it would be indigenous as well as superbly cost-effective, as compared to ANY foreign MRCA.
AbhimanyuOtaku, please note that India is purchasing the PAK-FA from Russia, and not “co-developing” it (the “co-development” propaganda is in name only). US has also offered JSF to India, albeit without licence production rights, unlike PAK-fA.
Abhimanyuante_climax, adding to your point it is also well known that PAF pilots did evaluate Su-30s in Russia in the 1990s. However, the sale did not go through for unknown reasons (not that Russia was unwilling). Anyway, Pakistan already has had numerous hardware of Russian origin via China, like J-7 (MiG-21), and Bakhtar Shikan ATGM (Chinese copy of a Russian system).
Again, instead of current RD-93 engines, Russia can also sell TVC RD-33 engines to Pakistan for it’s JF-17 fighters.
Similarly, Sweden is also triggering an arms race by selling AWACs to Pakistan, and offering Gripen to India. US and France have also made numerous offers to Pakistan like submarines, fighter jets, missiles, SAMs, etc.
The only beneficiary in selling arms to two competitors is the arms merchant only. This is even more worsened if we start “compensatory” purchases like, “Don’t sell to Pakistan. In return we’ll buy all that you’ve got.”
Hence, the only way for India to “get off” this ever steepening treadmill is to stop being like a Banana Republic, and start inducting indigenous hardware. Like Tejas Mk.2. Like MCA. Like AAD as MRSAM. Like Arjun as the MBT. Like 10 Akash squads. Instead, we have MRCA. PAK-FA. T-90. “Paper tiger” Barak NG and what not.
AbhimanyuI agree with Misraji, in that India must NEVER indulge in compensating a defence supplier for loss of a contract (for whatever reason).
2 years ago, there was a suggestion that India must purchase significant Russian hardware to prevent them from making sales to Pakistan. It was also suggested that India must join the PAK-FA program wholeheartedly to prevent China from joining it.
Firstly, Russian arms sales to Pakistan have been on since 1993, with the delivery of helicopters, GPS jammers, and upto now with RD-93 engines for their JF-17 fleet. Russia will also be supplying the Al-31 engines to Pakistan’s upcoming J-10 purchase. Secondly, China had rejected the PAK-FA many years ago for their indigenous J-XX.
Thus, merely to counter this India must NOT purchase compensatory arms from Russia. This is an “arm-twisting” tactic from Russia and this “bluff” must be called, by completely freezing all purchases from Russia. Whether it later on sells arms to Pakistan or not, should be of NO concern to India, as we should be on the path to self-modernization and indigenization.
AbhimanyuIf an American jet is selected which version of the AMRAAM will be cleared for India the C5. C7, D ?
See, the above is NOT a matter of concern or care.
The reason for the above is that ultimately India is “shelling out” the billions of dollars for these “toys” — exactly like a Banana Republic. What difference does it make, of what make it is ?
See, there was a natural argument in the days preceding the nuclear test that, “Oh, Pakistan has bought it’s ballistic missiles from China & North Korea. But ours are indigenous.” It gave us a better sense of security, although logically it was argued that what difference does it make to India, if Pak’s missiles are N. Korean or Chinese ?
Similarly, it doesn’t make ANY difference regardless of what fighter toy IAF chooses out of the six. They all have more or less the same “gizmos” like AESA radar, sensor fusion, etc. In the International community, we would still remain the Banana Republic (like Qatar, which bought Typhoons or UAE, which bought F-16s). However, if the Tejas Mk.2 is chosen as the MRCA, everyone in the international community — especially SAAB — will discuss at length about Tejas Mk.2 and the IAF.
AbhimanyuIOC (Initital Operational Certificate) :-
Accorded by : Manufacturer
When : After it has passed all tests successfully.
What Happens : 1 squadron of the fighter is inducted in the Air Force.
FOC (Final Operational Certificate) :-
Accorded by : Air Force
When : After 1 squadron has spent it’s first 2 years in service.
What Happens : The fighter is deemed fully combat worthy without any remaining kinks or issues to be resolved. Further squadrons are ordered.
Tejas will receive it’s IoC next year, after which 1 squadron will be inducted in the IAF. Thereafter, the IAF will fly it for 2 years in routine sorties, mock war games etc. By 2013 it will be accorded the FoC by IAF and a year later, the Mk.2 will start entering service.
A previous news report claiming that Tejas will get FOC in 2010 is inaccurate. It will get it’s IOC next year.
AbhimanyuJF-17. Well, it was China (a nation with plenty of experience in fighter R&D…CAC were already working on a more advanced J-10) who did most of the work. Pakistanis were there becasue they had invested the money, and primarily to learn the whole process (from the start to end), i.e. to start their own fighter aviation industry.
In Tejas also, most of it’s avionics are flying on Su-30 MKI and Jaguars. The Su-30 MKI is regarded as a 4.5 generation aircraft because of it’s avioncs (the Su-27 has been extant since the 1970s and never considered 4.5 G).
As for Tejas, well if you think the current version can be classified as 4.5G, you are by all means entitled to your opinion. As for the 5th G, we are yet to see if it actually enters service in 2017/18.
See, Tejas has an unusually high percentage of composites, a very high wing body blending, and a pioneering tailfin, which is a monolithic honeycomb piece. It’s a compounded, cranked and cropped delta, which is an improvement over the simple right-angle deltas of Mirage-2000.
Thus, structurally Tejas improves over a typical, all-metal 4th gen fighter like Mirage-2000.
Now, it has repeatedly been discussed that Su-30 MKI carries avionics meant for Tejas. Examples are a highly integrated core avionics computer, radar processors, and Litening target pod (present in F-16 Sufa of Israeli Air Foce). It also has an HMDS (not reportedly on Su-30 MKI) and a new integrated sensor suite being developed from Line Replacable Units. Besides, a former Vice-Admiral and a Scientific Advisor to Indian govt. have publicly stated that Tejas is firmly in the 4++ category.
It is unconfirmed whether Tejas will also feature the Su-30 MKI’s SIVA sensor pod, which has been test-flown on Su-30. It already has jammers and RWR from Su-30 MKI.
Hence, that the Tejas is 4.5 G, is not my “opinion”. If you may ignore all this at your own convenience, it is your own prerogative only.
AbhimanyuThe following is another post from another forum :-
The JPEG pic I have of the Tejas specs have this
Weights :
Take Off Clean – 9500 kg
Empty – 6500 kg
External Store > 4000 kg
So the internal fuel alone is around close to 3 tons (I would put it at approx 2850 kg) and the MTOW at around 13.5 tons .
So with a typical store 2 heat seeking missiles, 2 external tanks , LDP and 2 2000lb bombs, we will have around 4300 kgs of fuel out of the MTWO of 13.5 tons, a fuel fraction of around 31 to 33% (depending on exact numbers). With the IN 20, that will give it really really long legs. I think it will be very competitive wrt Gripen NG as far as range goes in Mk1 version.
Yeah, with the newer more powerful engine, the MTOW will increase and the payloads will go up as well. The MkII I think will be very competitive to the Gripen NG, especially if they can do what the swedes did by moving the undercarriage from the fuselage to the wing mounted blisters , giving more internal fuel.
I agree with the above. As already commented by Capt. Maulankar in this article, the Tejas has, and I quote, “demonstrated enviably long legs for an aircraft so small”, end quote.
The Tejas Mk.1 already has close to 3 tons of internal fuel, which is close to Gripen C/D. As repeatedly discussed earlier, Tejas Mk.2 will have a newer lighter undercarriage (EADs consultancy), which is likely to increase it’s internal fuel weight more : just like Gripen – NG vis-a-vis Gripen C/D, after a new undercarriage. This may also provide it with more weapon stations also.
Work on Tejas Mk.2 has already been expedited, with EADs being chosen as consultants and tender process for a more powerful engine commencing in August this year. If work on it begins by next year, then by 2014 it should be introduced in the IAF. However, ongoing work on Naval Tejas and Trainer Tejas may then have to be slowed down.
AbhimanyuWhen Gripen entered operational service in late 90s, it was at least equivalent to Mirage 2000, and yet it would take SAAB another 15-20 years before Gripen NG would enter operational service (around 2014 or so).
Early F-16s were also equivalent to Mirage 2000 and in spite of various improvements it would take around 15-20 years before F-16 Block 60 would enter operational service.
Now if first Tejas enters squadron service in 2010, and squadron entry of MMRCA is slated for 2015, what makes Tejas so different from the above two examples? Considering the state of Indian aviation industry vis-a-vis Swedish or US, i.e. not as advanced, what makes you even think that an upgraded Tejas (equivalent to the above two so that at least could take part in this competition) will be ready by 2015?
See, from the above analogy Pakistan too did not have to start from making F-86s or F-7s. In it’s debut, it can now directly manufacture JF-17, which is the most advanced fighter jet currently in PAF — even more advanced than the 20 year old F-16s in it’s fleet, which lack basic BVR.
Similarly, Tejas too has transformed from being merely MiG-21 capable, to a modern 4.5 G fighter. India has also embarked upon a plan to make an indigenous 5th G fighter already at par with F-22, despite having far less experience than America in this field.
Abhimanyu5 Tejas jets in formation flight before Aero-India 2009, Bangalore
Pakistan’s JF-17 before an air-show :-
Both these are 4th and 4.5 Generation fighters from India and Pakistan-China respectively. I’ve posted this because till now we’ve only concentrated on western and Russian fighters, but none from Asia
AbhimanyuTwo Aircraft are discounted by most here. The F 16 IN and the Gripen. I think both of these represent IAF’s original requirements for a single engined fighter (Mirage 2000).
ante_climax, from the above Tejas Mk.2 is most suited to be the MRCA because as per Vice-Admiral Raman Puri (retd) and Mr. Parthasarthy (ex-Scientific advisor to GoI), the Tejas is already capable to Mirage-2000, and even exceeds it in some features.
The Gripen on the other hand has an advantage because it do not represent a major power (like Aspis and I before him pointed out) Sweden perhaps needs the order more than the other participants and we can expect a good deal from them. And from what I have read about the NG it will not be inferior to any other MRCA competitor in a great deal with its innovative radar and added range/payload.
It may sincerely be hoped that the Gripen – NG “wins” the final round of the selection process. Then, DRDO as well as popular public opinion can pressurize an “adamant” IAF to accept the Tejas Mk.2 instead, for by then it would have been developed as much as Gripen – NG. It has happened in the past as in case of Bofors howitzers and light utility choppers.
This is the only way to force the IAF to accept Tejas Mk.2, given that it will obviously miss the August deadline of user-trials.
Sign In
