Yeah a good deal. This might be for IAC and Vikram. What we need with K is just a good AESA other than Zhuk-ME. :rolleyes:

No need to for roll eyes on the ME. It is an excellent set and the IN seems very satisfied with the radar and the a/c in general, they would’nt buy more otherwise. THe specs on the ME are v.v.good – as good as the Zhuk A in some ways, and probly better on FOVs. Should be more than enough to counter the Apg 68V9 on PAF 16s. But yes, later upgrades will probly see AESAs

USS.

Just to confirm what I was suggesting earlier – there goes the price on the fulcrum:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/India-to-buy-more-MiG-29Ks/articleshow/5084749.cms

Defence ministry sources said the fresh order for 29 more MiG-29Ks from Russia for around Rs 5,380 crore (around $1.12 billion) will “soon” be sent to the Cabinet Committee of Security for the final approval.

I think Manu Pubby was off when he considered the orginal K’s @ 1.5 billion and the new 30 @ below $ 2 billion. The original Ks (16 pieces) were around 750 mil.

So ~ 30 MiG-29Ks @ $ 1.1 billion 😮 Less than $ 40 million a pop, not bad at all. What happens when 126 birds are to be bought? The other MRCA candidates are going to have a hard time beating russian fighter prices.

1 X F-18E/F or TIffy or Rafale easily = 2 X MiG 35! :dev2:

USS.

I think you are a bit wrong here. The IAF having a fleet full of Russian fighters and going for more Su 30s and FGFA in the future, will be keen to diversify.

Yes, the IAF doctrine does call for diversification (sounds more and more like EoE) but the ultimate call is GOI’s and MOD. The current GOI by ensuring that all defence purchases have to go through multiple vendors in a sense has jeopardized the IAF doctrine above. How?

In a multiple vendor situation like the MRCA race, often the best bang for the buck is sought. In fact fair price is the basis of competitoin. The russkis are experts at this, the other birds may have a marginal edge here and there, but the russians will under cut them severely, they almost always do. Perhaps the Gripen can challenge this. If they land up offering 180-200 MiG-35s for the allocated budget of $ 10+ billion, the GOI is going to find it extremely difficult to justify another a/c.

In the past, the GOI kept IAF diversification needs in mind and sometimes simply went in for single vendor purchases, whether for political considerations or for strategic needs I dunno but Jags, Mirages etc were bought. Now it cannot do so – thanks to its own policy. MMS the economist and free market specialist has ensured this. Further, the Congress party is paranoid about defence scandals so I doubt it can pull the wool that easily.

The only way I can see this going to some country other than Russia is if the IAF eval somehow totally disses the fulcrum and then the GOI offers russia some major sweetners elsewhere. Perhaps the IAF harping about “cost of lifetime ownership” is an indication of an attempt to way lay the russkis.

Hmmm…..so IAF wants 50 more Su-30MKIs and IN wants 29 more MiG-29Ks…this is starting to look like the consolation prize for the MMRCA.

Perhaps – but not necessarily.

The minimum level of ToT is all that counts and everyone has complied with it.

This actually works in mig’s favor since, if brownie points are not given for extra goodies, the 35 will probly come with the lowest tag.

Mig-35 growth path is certainly not superior to any of the MRCA contenders. There is actually a block III upgrade plan for the F/A 18 E/F and in LMs Viper site you can see a page for the future options in the Falcon.

The U.S. lost a golden opportunity in this race imho by not offering the IAF exclusive a/c free of possible sanctions. An F-18C with 414s, RCS mgmt, TVC would’ve made it an excellent “medium” fit, perhaps even a small wing redesign. Option 2 was the best viper ever made – the F-16 XL. They had plenty of time to offer exclusive production/export rights for such a/c.
Even if the U.S. did not want to part with Apg 77 type tech, it could’ve chosen Israel as its partner and gone the EL 2052 way. But alas, we see a fat viper and a super fat hornet being offered!

The Rafale and EF being the mainstays of European fleets will be upgraded as well.

Rodina upgrades have the usual price advantage over european efforts.

The MIG-35 sadly do not have any export customers and even the Russians are not to bothered. Even if they buy a handful of these birds they will not be first priority for future upgrades, meaning that the IAF will probably have to pay out of its own pocket for upgrading these birds at a future date

Hardly a problem – this lack of export order issue is overstated imho. The MKI had not a single export prospect when the IAF bought it. It provides a solid, reliable model the IAF-UAC can again follow. As far as upgrading goes, there are umpteen options, all of them probly cheaper than western counterparts.

Bottomline is that pricewise, the non russki bidders are at a serious disadvantage.

USS.

JSOW-ER 300 NM range

Is it available for production yet? More importantly, is it available for the export customer. IIRC it has a range of 500 odd km, about 200km more than MTCR stipulations so exports might be a no-no. I think the RAAF got the JSOW – C recently. also, what sort of warhead does the beast carry?

USS.

From BR,

PHOTOS of IN pilots training in Russia on MiG 29 KUB:

http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt66/fulcrum29/Navy2.jpg
http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt66/fulcrum29/Navy1.jpg
http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt66/fulcrum29/Navy3.jpg
http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt66/fulcrum29/Navy4.jpg
http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt66/fulcrum29/Navy5.jpg

Super stuff – best looking fulcrums i ever saw.

USS.

Actually the MiGs are not given to India for peanuts anymore. The Navy got a good deal with its Mig 29 Ks but for additional MIG 29 Ks the Russians ahd a price like 60-65 Million dollars, now the MIG 35 with the AESA is probably going to cost more.

I would think the Gripen and F 16 In will be in the same price range of the MiG and the Super Hornet slightly higher. The Gripen more than makes up for it because if its lower life time costs.

You make me laugh talking about 2 Mig 35s for the cost of one Gripen NG :rolleyes:

Errr don’t bet on a high price for the MiG-35. Firstly the article was a one off piece by a notorious indian journo – V. Raghuvanshi, we simply have not heard more on the cost escalation of the MiG-29Ks. They’d find few takes for a MiG-35 if it costs just about as much as a Su-35. The GripenNG offered to Brazil, Norway and the Dutch I believe were all around $ 70 mil a piece with support and the like. It should be considerably less for 126 a/c one’d think. Then again, it was $ 46 million for 16 mig-29k in 2004, what could you expect for 126 birds @ 2010 prices? Good price competition between the gripen and the mig-35. Buyer’s market for sure.

Secondly, with indo-russki deals you never really know what is being paid for – another akula perhaps 😮 Much more that meets the eye in those deals (esp. mega ones).

USS.

Just checked India on Google Earth.
If India prepares for war against China, I’d advise a fighter with good performance at high altitudes. This is due the Himalayas and I’m certain that aerial combat over that mountain range would write a whole new book of warfare, since there is no terrain equivalent in the world.
So, what does India need for that?
A lot of AWACS and cheap ones, since those will go down, to cover possibly the largest cluster of radar blind spots in the world.
New Indian fighter should have the best possible climb, acceleration (speed) and high altitude performance. Those many radar blind spots, provide abundant amount of places suitable for aerial ambushes, so the fighter must be able to respond ASAP to last minute discovered, rapidly closing threat.

So, although some put F-18 in a favorite place, it’s pretty clear that Hornet (although excellent aircraft in other duties) is the least capable in that role.
Don’t know about version 35, but Mig-29 was always notoriously short legged, so it isn’t suitable either. Eurofighter, although the best performer, is too expensive for India and Rafale, most likely too.
So, that leaves F-16 and Gripen.
By some accounts Gripen (NG), beats F-16 in interceptor role and is, in my opinion best suited for India. High sortie rate, improvised airstrips and overall the cheapest fighter offered, Gripen is the best buy for India. And I’m sure Swedes would be more than happy to throw in a squadron or two of their S-100B Erieyes, on affordable price.

If India prepares for war against Pakistan, than better buy/produce a few thousands MBTs.

From what the IAF has been saying so far, the greatest need at high alt ops (such as from Leh) is POWER – plenty of it – to be able to take off with decent loads + fuel. I have a feeling the Gripen NG may run short on this – it has a pretty low TWR despite the engine upg. The twin engined rafale, ef-2k and the Mig 35 ought to do well.

BTw, the IAF currently stations its fulcrums up there and it is considered one of the best of the lot for A2A duties in the himalayas. The 35 is only more powerful, has far more range and payload so, it should work well i think.

USS.

I haven’t seen it confirmed anywhere and I took for granted that they’d show it. I even think I read some where that every contender had to demonstrate an aircraft of equal standard as the one being offered, i.e. fitted with an AESA radar. I’ll see if I can dig up that source.

I could be wrong, but this was confirmed when Gerhart was in New Delhi a month or so ago. The EF that flies for field evals in the MRCA race will carry the Captor M. Things could change of course. Any way, tiffy folks have always said it is equal to most AESAs out there.

USS.