AbhimanyuHere I am not saying that the Tejas is not going to be a good plane, may be it will be as good as some of the MRCA contenders for some missions.
I disagree with the above. As repeatedly discussed earlier, Tejas Mk.2 will have all specs of MRCA and will be able to handle all the missions meant for MRCAs.
The problem is that Tejas is not ready yet and we cannot afford to wait.
See, as per Mr. Fali Major’s own estimates (given in the same interview), Tejas Mk.2 is expected in the same year as the MRCA winner. So, what problem does IAF have in choosing the Tejas Mk.2 as MRCA instead ?
I agree with Dr. Natarajan’s statement that, and I quote, ” the services prefer Parisan perfumes to our desi Hamaam”, end quote.
The ToT from the MRCA will help the LCA and the MCA. 🙂
Please note that for Tejas separate ToT is already sought like Kaveri-Snecma core, EADs consultancy etc.
AbhimanyuIts by time you come to terms with the reality that the MRCA and LCA are two different programs and will have their own place in the IAF inventory. The Tejas is not in the running for the MRCA so any talk in this regard is just fantasy talk 😉
ante_climax, I agree Tejas is “not in the running” for MRCA, but that is exactly my view, that it MUST be in the running.
As an example, some illiberal people say people say “backward” class people in India and “upper” class people have their own place. But many others rightly want all people to have same opportunities.
Hence, we must “oppose” the IAF’s myopic viewpoint that Tejas is merely a “light MiG-21 replacement”. The Tejas Mk.2 has all the capabilities to be the MRCA contender. The IAF must accept Tejas as the MRCA, because it is indigenous.
AbhimanyuIts by time you come to terms with the reality that the MRCA and LCA are two different programs and will have their own place in the IAF inventory. The Tejas is not in the running for the MRCA so any talk in this regard is just fantasy talk 😉
ante_climax, I agree Tejas is “not in the running” for MRCA, but that is exactly my view, that it MUST be in the running.
As an example, some illiberal people say people say “backward” class people in India and “upper” class people have their own place. But many others rightly want all people to have same opportunities.
Hence, we must “oppose” the IAF’s myopic viewpoint that Tejas is merely a “light MiG-21 replacement”. The Tejas Mk.2 has all the capabilities to be the MRCA contender. The IAF must accept Tejas as the MRCA, because it is indigenous.
AbhimanyuIt will be ready by the time the first MRCA rolls out. While the pre production array will be used for the trials etc. Will the EF have the the CAESAR for MRCA weapons test and demos ?? :rolleyes:
Optimism shown above for a radar’s “just in time” release, may also be shown by the IAF for the Tejas Mk.2 which will also be ready by the time the MRCA is expected to roll out.
If IAF can be “lenient” to allow a foreign fighter compete without an AESA radar, it should be lenient to allow an indigenous fighter’s Mk.1 version to compete for the MRCA also.
AbhimanyuIt will be ready by the time the first MRCA rolls out. While the pre production array will be used for the trials etc. Will the EF have the the CAESAR for MRCA weapons test and demos ?? :rolleyes:
Optimism shown above for a radar’s “just in time” release, may also be shown by the IAF for the Tejas Mk.2 which will also be ready by the time the MRCA is expected to roll out.
If IAF can be “lenient” to allow a foreign fighter compete without an AESA radar, it should be lenient to allow an indigenous fighter’s Mk.1 version to compete for the MRCA also.
AbhimanyuIf I may allow myself some humour, then Eurofighter and MiG-35 not contending for the MRCA tender may be EXCELLENT :
Excellent ! In the typical style of Mr. Burns.
Now only 4 more fighters are left to be further disqualified.
AbhimanyuA system being present in two platforms, doesn’t mean it’s the same and that no technology can be obtained.
In my view, it is not necessary to purchase entire aircraft with the aforementioned systems pre-installed in them. Mere purchase of the systems would suffice.
As per a recent news report, EADs had offered an AESA radar and a customized TVC engine for the Tejas.
AbhimanyuNot exactly, the F-15E weighs around 17000 tons empty and 36450 ton Mtow. The MKI weighs about 18400 empty and 39000 mtow. Btw, internal fuel carriage is a massive advantage in that it frees all the hardpoints, not to mention reduces drag.
The above is inaccurate. As per Air-Force.mil (website of USAF), the F-15 Strike Eagle itself weighs 14,000 kgs only. This weight is close to the estimated empty weight of the MiG-35 at 12,500 to 13,000 kgs.
I know what you mean and sort of agree. Increasingly it seems as though the MRCA is just to get some politico/babus coffers filled.
The above is true. The Tejas complements the Su-30 MKI very well — the Tejas Mk.2 even more so, as it comes very close to F-16’s specifications.
Hence, the MRCA deal is totally unnecessary.
AbhimanyuHighly advanced EWS, dual-band IIR systems, DVI, advanced HMDS, superior FCS technology, advanced composite materials, engine technologies and controls, sensor fusion, RCS reduction measures etc. Certainly nothing to learn from…;)
MM11, the above are present in Tejas and Su-30 MKI also, which albeit slightly dated, will not give them an assailable disadvantage.
Please note that Tejas’ composite layout software is used by “best in the business” i.e. A380 of Airbus. It has an advanced HMDS co-developed with Israel. Although it’s FCS is not based on multiple programming languages and multiple h/w (though I am unaware of advantages, if any), as per IAF test pilots, it is “a joy to fly” and handles very well.
Sensor fusion shall be present from Mk.2 version onwards. As far as engine is concerned, it is unrelated to the MRCA tender, as a separate tender will be passed for Mk.2 engine and another one for the co-operation on Kaveri engine.
As far as EWS is concerned, Su-30 MKI will be equipped with SIVA EW pod. It is likely that Tejas will also be equipped with it as well, along with Litening target pod that is already present. I am unaware what DVI stands for.
References :-
Posts from Bharat Rakshak forum, by rakall.
AbhimanyuI have done waay too much research on this and believe me your sources are ridiculously generic or old to have anything worthwhile. Fas.org! for heavens sake man. That section of the site has not been updated for eons. Just remember this (as per the ACM Krishnaswami the MKI flew with loads of up to 39000kg!) Empty weight ~ 18400 (including TVC). Now do the math. Also engines are not what is available on open source, phil camp/simon watson’s latest book on the MKI is a good read to pick up on this.
uss novice, your figures coincide with the ones I gave earlier.
See, what use is a Rafale that can carry 5 tons of weapons and 8 tons of fuel ? The Su-30 MKI too typically carries 5 tons of weapons and 8 tons fuel.
The only difference is that Rafale distributes it’s fuel into internal and external tanks, whereas Su-30 MKI carries only internal fuel, that’s it.
The same is extended to Typhoon and F-18 also (MiG-35 may get an “honourable mention”).
Boss, wrong again! And wikipedia! The 17ton figure is empty equipped (i.e. is with fuel). PUrely empty the mig-29A weighed at 10.9 tons with mtow of 18tons. The latest version is 30% heavier mtow. Again, do the math. MTOW of 35 comes to 23500-24000kg. Now deduct the 50% additional fuel (5500kg), now deduct the payload (6500kg). These were the same figures given for the MiG-29M (on which the 35 is based) during the austrian competition, remember that one anybody?
See, MiG-35 weighs approximately 12 tons empty, which is equal to F-15. But as it carries weight less than single-engine F-16, so we may not go further into it’s cost-effectiveness and per hour cost of operation.
It may also be mentioned that there are no technologies in Eurofighter, Rafale etc. that Tejas or Su-30 MKI don’t have. With the exception of the “ubiquitious” AESA radar, there is NO other technology that is not present in Su-30 MKI and Tejas together (including Mk.2). Tejas and Su-30 MKI shall have all the latest technologies and weapons.
Hence, MRCA is needless as far as ToT is concerned also.
AbhimanyuI’m afraid I’m not following your reasoning here, Abhimanyu. First you say that you can eliminate the Typhoon, Rafale and Super Hornet because they never carry max payloads and as such are useless when you have MKIs that already can, then you say that the MiG-35 isn’t viable because it can’t carry a payload greater to the normal ones you outlined.
CommanderJB, I used the argument of the MiG-35 being the “worst” of all the 6 contenders in order to eliminate it outright.
Then, I reasoned that the “better” contenders (viz. Rafale, Typhoon and F-18 SH) too would be totally redundant additions in the IAF.
AbhimanyuHow many are equiped with the latest AESA radar. The answer is very few. The export versions are not equipped with them like the F15 K. It has its benefits like you said higher range and payload. I think the latest European fighters atleast equal it. If the Americans were so comfortable with it then they had no need to go for the Raptor and JSF.
I’m sorry to introduce F-15 again in the topic, because I need to mention that I do not espouse it’s inclusion in the IAF at all.
Regarding “Euro-birds”, each one of them falls short of F-15 Strike Eagle’s payload by 5 tons atleast (please refer widely available internet sources). Even if wrongly assuming that they did, you may be weakening your own case because there is place for only 1 “beast” in IAF, which Su-30 MKI already is.
However, this is not to say that Rafale and Typhoon are “worthy” contenders for MRCA. This is because no fighter jet — from Tejas to Rafale — carries more then 2.5 to 3 tons of total warload in ANY mission profile. Su-30 may carry 5 tons max. against it’s advertised limit of 8 tons. Same is the case of Typhoon, Rafale and F-18 also.
Su-30 carries 8 tons internal fuel and 5 tons weapons (it can’t carry fuel pods) for ANY mission profile. F-18 can easily match this by 5 tons of weapons + 1.5 tons of fuel pods + 6.5 tons of internal fuel. The Rafale too can easily match this by 5 tons weapons + 2 tons of fuel pods + 6 tons internal fuel. It will still have hardpoints to spare. Same is the case with Eurofighter Typhoon.
Hence, F-18, Rafale and Typhoon would be totally useless and redundant additions in the IAF, because their peak performance is already matched by Su-30 MKI’s practical performance, in a much lower cost-of-operation.
Could you please post some sources and comparisons between the two a/c?
They are as per comparisons from widely read internet sites like Army Technology, FAS.org, wikipedia, etc. You may run a comparison yourself.
You are wrong here the MiG-35 is certainly at least 2-3 tons lighter than the Shornet. ~ 11500kg, v. similar empty to the typhoon. its mtow is 23500kg, carries 6500kg payload and 5500kg fuel. Do the math.
The above is inaccurate. 11,500 kg is F-18’s empty weight. MiG-35’s “clean” weight i.e. with internal fuel is 17,700 kgs (per wikipedia). Thus, empty weight must be of the order of 12,500-13,000 kgs. This is the empty weight of F-15 Eagle.
Despite this, it carries only excess of 6 tons on just 9 hardpoints — only 1 more than Tejas. We may assume 6.5 tons, as CommanderJB suggested. Yet, this is only 0.5 tons more than the single-engined Gripen.
Thus, MiG-35 is likely to be an inefficient, costly, addition to the IAF, besides being totally needless.
Abhimanyuante_climax, though not to be discussed any further, the F-15 Strike Eagle (not ‘E’) carries the most weapons for the highest range amongst all fighters : Western or eastern, 4 G or 4++ G. It is also equipped with an AESA radar and all kinds of latest avionics that appear in the defence market from time to time.
AbhimanyuCommanderJB, actually given a Russian fighter and a US (or western) fighter of the same weight class, the Russian fighter usually has inferior specs.
As another example, the Su-30 MKI weighs a “good” 4 tons more than the F-15 Strike Eagle, when both are empty. It is also longer and taller than the latter. However, the F-15 SE carries 4 tons more external payload than the Su-30, though internal fuel is around 1.5 tons lesser. Still, the overall load carried is 2.5 tons more, despite being smaller and weighing nearly 4 tons lesser.
Also, the F-15 SE is known to perform full 9G maneouevers upon full load, just like the Su-30.
Were the Su-30 to try to achieve the specs of F-15 SE, it’s size would have to be “bloated” even further to the level of a mini-bomber.
The same is the case with the MiG-35 — it’s size and weight are massive, nearly that of F-15, but it really falls short of the ‘nimbler’ Rafales and Typhoons; these can carry upto 9.5 tons of external payload on 14 hardpoints each, compared to just 6 tons on 9 hardpoints on the MiG-35.
About range, we may assume it to be same as F-16, because even though it may carry more internal fuel, it would be used up soon due to it’s extremely high weight, which in turn is due to it’s F-15-ish size. Thus, MiG-35 by far, is the worst cost-effective contender for the MRCA.
Whatever be the case, in my view, the F-15 Strike Eagle is the world’s best fighter jet in the 4 and 4++ generations. It “beats” one & all. It also doesn’t have “fashionable” canards on it. They may seem to be a “Euro-fad” only.
References :-
AbhimanyuMiG-35 has the Zhuk-AE AESA, and as ante_climax has already confirmed this is part of the package being offered on the -29K’s its guaranteed to be on the -35s as well.
CommanderJB, I agree I was mistaken, as I don’t follow the MiG-35’s development.
Anyway, more grounds can be “conjured” to reject it :-
1) It has the size of an F-18, but it’s specs are inferior to the much smaller F-16 (it’s max. payload is quite lesser than an F-16’s, while range is same or lesser).
2) Of late, Russia has been a very unreliable supplier of weapons. It has breached contracts, hiked prices without intimation, denied transfer of technology, delayed various projects etc. Thus, it’s support of MiG-35 is also likely to be very “problematic” for India.
Hence, there are sufficient grounds to reject the MiG-35, even if it comes with an AESA radar pre-installed.
Sign In
