uss noviceThe first option sounds a little like they’ve accepted defeat, Ray. Its like they’re looking for a contract with much much lower value when the MRCA is still ongoing and might indicate that they know that they stand little chance in winning the MRCA.
The second is more of a smart option- they can show to the IAF and MoD that they are looking to make the Tejas Mk2 and the MRCA as interoperable as possible and utilise their experience and technologies on the Gripen NG on the Tejas Mk2 as well, to give the IAF a possible very large reduction in total Life Cycle Costs due to shared systems and their spares. That when combined with the existing lowest LCC for the Gripen NG will translate to huge savings overall. For instance, if the Tejas Mk2 is to use similar avionics and architecture as the Gripen NG (if chosen as MRCA) it will lead to lowered maintenance costs on them both together and there could be shared upgrade developments for both, once again leading to savings in cost.
ADA will be interested most in how the Gripen NG’s MTOW, fuel and weapons payload were increased without a significant increase in empty weight. They could also look to involve SAAB in weight reduction and in aerodynamic studies for the Tejas Mk2. Fact is that there is a lot to gain from SAAB and their likely involvement in the AMCA is also something I hope fructifies eventually. If they are involved from the study stage rather than after the design is frozen (sometime this year as per Dr Subramanyam of ADA), it will likely result in more benefits as their ideas and experience can also be takein into account.
Good analysis, I think Saab’s presence at AI 11 could be an indicator of what option they have chosen. If they come in with a lot of hype, option 2 is on the cards. If they keep a low profile, option 1 is likely.
The thought of a cheap M2k-5ish bird with massive commonality with the Tejas in the form of avionics, weapons, and engines – would be rather tempting to the parties involved.
USS.
uss noviceGood to know this view getting some kind of acceptence.
I also like the 126 business nice and even but I think it would be slightly different.
200 MKI some older ones being retired…
120+ FGFA in production…….
150+ Tejas – I think with SAAB help the MK2 will be very good that like Akash the IAF will endorse it.
180-200 Gripen IN
100+ AMCA in production…
Well, I endorse this view not in light of what Aroor has to say re. the LCA – his leaning towards the Saab chaps has been rather obvious. I feel that the coming of the J20 might have some repercussions. Namely, the IAF might think investment in large amounts of 5 gen birds is a better idea than having uber MRCA non-lo birds that cost a packet. A push for 50 odd Pakfas direct from Russia on an express schedule may very well be on the cards if the J20 starts to mature quickly.
As far as your guesstimates above – who knows? The line right now is that the IAF sees a need for 250 FGFA. Orders worth 140 odd Tejas (40 Mk1 + 100 Mk2) seem definite (unless the IAF pulls the rug on the Mk2 and uses the extra 414s ordered for Gripen MRCAs :eek:). 270 MKI around 2030 is v. likely since the oldest (circa 2001) will be upgraded around 2014 and will at least get another 15 years there after. The AMCA numbers are up in the air at this moment.
USS.
uss noviceFockewulf has this right I think. The article above talks of 42 being purchased from HAL. IOWs, their production starts when the original 140 are completed ~ 2014. In total HAL will produce about 182 MKIs. The rest: 50 original order (including the swap for 18) and 40 additional (ordered in 2007) will come from Irkut.
Total – 182 (HAL) + 90 (Irkut) = 272.
Sanjay, if they are still negotiating another deal worth 42 a/c direct from Irkut, I’d love to hear of it – but can you find a source?
USS
uss noviceWhoa! Looks like my comment re. similarity between the MiG 1.4 design and the J20 sure stirred up a can o worms!
Chillpill fellas – the comment was not meant as a put down by any means. I do feel though that the two birds have a similar design. The J20 is certainly more refined but the planform is similar, rather longish fuselage, and similar nozzle/boom placement. To my eyes anyways.
As I have already noted, the bird is quite an original piece of work. By the way, the question remains – is it better to have/not have canards for a lo design? This bird sure has big ones, canards i mean.
USS.
uss noviceWhere is DJCross’s analysis on this bird? I remember he had made a good assessment regarding the Pakfa, would like to hear his take on this one too. And what cave has that Otaku gone to? Seems like them FSB guys got him at last. He was right on one thing – the influence of the MiG 1.4 is very evident on the J20.
USS.
uss noviceThere might just be some merit to the thought that India may double up on the Gripen NG as a support (hedge) to the Tejas, especially if only a limited production order is planned (100-150) for the latter. The engine commonality will definitely be a factor here. And the cost savings compared to the twin engined contenders will weigh in as well. Not to mention the possibility of cooperation with SAAB for the AMCA.
That way the IAF can concentrate on using funds for the Pakfa/FGFA and the AMCA.
So circa 2030, we may see:
270 MKI
126 GripenIN
126 Tejas
126 Pakfa
126 AMCA
800 odd fighters ~ 39 sqds
USS.
uss noviceFor goodness’ sake, they did not go through all this trouble – creating a brand new (and for once original) stealth fighter only to leave out a weapons carriage capability.
If it is not on the prototype, it’ll get there later. And it might very well be on this bird as well – it is a “concealed” weapons bay on a stealth platform afterall:diablo:!
Way to go China! This was an eyeopener, no mistake. I love the surprises they produce – first with the J10 (no one sees it, and all of a sudden the net is flooded with evidence for not one or two, but regiments of the bird!). I wonder if one last surprise is still in store for spotters. Give ’em a few months, and we might see a regiment or two or three.
USS.
uss noviceMig-29K vs Naval LCA
Crew: 1 / 1
Length: 17.3 m / 13.20 m
Wingspan: 11.99 m / 8.20 m
Height: 4.40 m / 4.40 m
Wing area: 43 m² / 38.4 m²
Usefull load: 5,500 kg / 4000 kg
Loaded weight: 18,550 kg / 9,500 kg
Max takeoff weight: 24,500 kg / 13,500 kg
Powerplant: 2× 88.3 kN / 1x 85 kN
Wing loading: 442 kg/m² / 221.4 kg/m²
Thrust/weight: 0.97 / 0.91
Range: 3,000 km / 3000 km
I think that the latest Ks can manage a payload of 6500kg. They should be able to take off with a rather decent amount, iirc, this was an issue more for the original Su-33 than the naval fulcrum.
The Tejas could provide top cover for a strike mission with the fulcrums lugging the munitions.
USS.
uss noviceThat the report makes an error is rather obvious, I believe even the MiG-21 can manage more than a 45 minute flight with a combat radius of around 400km!
The Tejas should do much better, and iirc it is said to top the M2k on internal fuel. Even at is currently stands, it should manage an external payload of 3000kg, add to this 2500kg internal fuel + 6500kg empty + 500 kg pylons/fluid/pilot = 12500kg MTOW.
Radius with 4 BVR AAMs + 2 WVR AAMs + 1X2000litr centerline tank (2400kg) should be in excess of 1000km imho. More than enough for decent A2A duties or support for a CBG.
USS.
uss noviceIMHO, the MKI that we see today is not exactly what it will be a couple of years down the road! There is already a massive amount sanctioned for an upgrade, I’d wager that it’ll be equal or greater than the Su-35 in some aspects.
Although I doubt A2A, kinematics will be one of these improved areas. There is no talk of engine upgrades for the MKI – and I don’t think there will be one until the Pakfa engines get confirmed. The IAF/HAL already has a lot of infrastructure built for the AL-31FP, and there seems little merit in going for something interim like the 117 thats on the 35. I see an engine change happening only when a similar investment is on the cards – aka Pakfa.
In the meanwhile the debate whether the MKI has 12.5 or 13.3 ton AL-31s continues. :diablo: While public sources mainly suggest 12.5 tons; there is some rather intriguing evidence to the contrary. However, increase in composite usage and perhaps weight reduction might be on the cards. There is nothing re. the radar either – Bars II (supposedly twice the performance of Bars I) or an AESA perhaps. Either way, it sounds good. Top it off with a rather powerful internal suite and range of new weapons, and you have a damn good fighter in your hands within a 5 year period!
This ain’t your daddy’s MKI for sure. Question is what would make it an ideal partner? The Rafale or Typhoon? The MKI is bombtruck enough to take on both and the Shornet as well, but pure high speed aero performancewise it is probly less than the Tiffy. However, the rafale offers some rather exotic options a2a – what will be the deciding factor I wonder?
USS.
uss novice1 billion for 12 Mirage-2000-5s? And people were complaining about a $2.1 billion deal for 51 Mirage-2000 upgrades.
The MoD offered $350 million or so for them and was rejected. the Qataris wanted $600 million or so for these 12 and that itself was considered too high and the negotiations failed.
These also come with a stock of weapons, and people were saying that it is the weapons that make the cost so high! Anyways, the idea is to inject some numbers into the IAF in a hurry. They were saying that sqd. strength is seriously low as of now.
The $ 375 mill price offered was low, probably even offensive – the Qataris paid a fortune for them, and the a/c have much of their life left!
USS.
uss noviceStop this nonsense, Rafale have american parts.
Many things does not need repairs and replacement, even in its lifetime.
But there is a possibility, as for Gripen and Eurofighter, that US can interfere at will. Thats life, live with it. But its even worse with f-16 and f-18 😉
Point is does Rafale have “sanctionable” US parts or parts that will handicap the a/c when sanctioned, IOWs, parts that have no possible substitutes.
USS.
uss noviceI would like to see the IAF pick up a few extra airframes during this time though – what happened to those Qatari M2k-5s, still languishing in their hangars? Shelling out even a $ 1 bill tag for these 12 birds might not be a bad idea.
USS.
uss noviceRe. the US components in French planes argument – quick question, which might give us a good idea as to what this can actually mean to operating AFs –
How many US components did they have in the Mirage 2000 (esp. as compared to the Rafale)? Did this have any adverse consequences on operating AFs because of US sanctions?
AFAIK, the IAF was mighty happy with M2k uptimes during Kargil, which was during US sanctions regime. Or does the M2k simply not have any US parts at all?
USS.
uss novice^^ Hmm, perhaps it’ll make Dassault more “pliable” in India? Its a much bigger cake anyways.
USS>
Sign In
