uss novice2) is shared by other companies, & none of the radars you name are fighter radars. 3) & 4) can change overnight, so current status is not a reason to make decisions in the future. Decisions should be made dependent on the circumstances at the time.
1) is a good reason, but not enough on its own.
To say “buy Israeli” on the basis you’ve laid out is very short-sighted. If the Israelis think they have you in their pocket, you won’t get the best service from them. They need competition to keep them up to scratch (same for any supplier). That means you make your procurement decisions case by case, with a real chance every time that if someone else comes up with a better deal you’ll take it. That isn’t incompatible with cultivating a long-term relationsip, just means that you don’t let long-term suppliers own you.
Another good reason might very well be “commonality” in parts with other IAF a/c which use the EL 2032 such as the Jags, LCAs and perhaps even the M2ks apart from the IN’s Shars. JMT
Personally, I’d like to see some MKI with the IRBIS – that beast has some range. The MKI is a brute and so let it be. Use the 2052s on the MiG 35s or Shornets (MRCA) and perhaps even a lighter version on the LCA.
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceCan anyone say what the schedule is for withdrawal of different types from service? i.e. MiG-21, MiG-27, Jaguar (complicated by new build, I know), MiG-29 (excluding the MiG-29K), Mirage 2000?
Based on open source reports and a poor memory:
MiG 21 Bison = 2015 (naturally all other versions will be retired long before)
MiG 29 Baaz = 2030+ (25 years after upgrade ought to do it)
Mirage 2000 = 2035+
MiG 27 = 2025
Jaguar = 2030+
Regards,
USS..
uss noviceThis acc. to Rakall & Harry.
120 km range against a small sized fighter target (design aim)
10 Target TWS, 2 target attack with ARH missiles
Currently to be fitted to LSP-3
Look down/ Look up TWS- A2A modes tested and verified
Currently testing STT
To be followed by DSTT (two target STT)
Hardware is fully ready.
A2G modes s/w being tested and need to be ported onto MMR- Eltas help will be taken for this
Quick question:
Does a DSTT allow for engaging 2 targets with SARH missiles? if so, how many can the MKI engage with the r27/Bars?
Thanks much
USS.
uss noviceMig is celebrating so much difference than previous version of the Mig-29 that you don’t have any choice of years of test …. if it’s true of course.
There has been a lot of testing done on the aircraft as a whole, what do you think they’ve been doing on the MiG 29k ever since the IN decided upon it? Again, the K is the base for both the ‘M’ and the 35 and the K is about to be delivered to the IN. Like I said, apart from the AESA, everything seems pretty well OK. But then thats no different from either the rafale or the typhoon neither of which have AESAs operational today.
But there isn’t any questions.
The RAfale/Typhoon/EF-18/F-16 are operationnal now, the Mig-35 isn’t.
naturally, no AF has ordered it so far, so how can it be operational. Is the m2k-5 MKI operational today?
DAssault CEO spoke about the possibility of incresating the rate of the RAfale production line for free to a certain degree and a real increase after some investment. About the Typhoon, in case of, they can ask 4 production lines.
I hope you are right, what would increased lines mean to production costs?
I don’t know what EADS/Bae has decided about the Typhoon but I can assure you that you couldn’t be more wrong about the Rafale, The Mirage 2000 MKI that we jsut talk about is only another proof of that.
Again, I hope you are right, the m2k is a bird thats at the end of its tether, all production lines have been closed so its no big deal to allow for deep TOT. Rafale OTOH is another story being the french pride n joy.
1) I have a hard time to imagine an american F-16 or F-18 without important american system even if it’s still possible.
2) such modifications means years of test and a smaller serie than the “vanilla” concept, so, expensive.
no doubt, but thats no different from the Mirage 2000 MKI is it? And israeli inputs have drastically reduced the price from an earlier estimation of ~ USD 2billion to just 800 million as of today. .
By reading Indian forums, it itsn’t that simple.
Naturally it is hotly debated. But anybody knows how this current GOI is warming up to the U.S. And so long as it is in power, an American MRCA is a very distinct possibility. You can see this from how the russians are responding (even they are not sure of their monopoly any more).
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceOf all the aircraft in the MRCA, it’s the only one which isn’t ready, so I doubt that.
apart from the zhuk ae, which is flying as of now (and supposedly has excellent SAR), the 35 is as ready as it gets. Its hardly different from the K which the IN gets later this year. IF they need longer time to sort out the AE, they can perhaps fit the earlier deliveries with the Zhuk M which has heavy commonality with the AE. Remember all the rest esp. the U.S. birds will have to undergo significant modifications before they are up to IAF configs. That will take time. Moreover, while the Rafale, Typhoon and Hornet lines are busy with existing orders from the Adla/Saudi/USN etc, Mig lines are empty.
Inductionwise too the MiG 35 are likely to be the quickest since already a lot of the existing infrastructure in India will support it (such as the line for the RD 33.3 engines) and IAF’s previous experience with the bird will certainly come into play here. These are certain advantages that stand in favor of the MiG 35 along with its commonality with the existing MiG 29 fleet and the IN ‘K’ fleet.
Having said this, it seems as though the fulcrum is probly the last choice in this context simply because the IAF prefers a degree of diversity in its inventory. this inherent proclivity along with the French/Euro reluctance to allow customization on the exhorbitantly priced rafale/typhoon, there seems to be a perfect opportunity for the Americans to cash in. Obviously it works in their favor that they are willing to tinker with their a/c with heavy israeli inputs. That way they don’t have to convince congress for TOT on critical items, nor do the Indians have to fear sanctions and the cost of the birds comes down to very reasonable levels. Moreover, the current GOI is very “tight” with the GWB administration. There seems to be very good chance that if the MRCA deal is finalized during the term of the current GOI, you will see a Superhornet or F16 in IAF colors. Wouldn’t be such a bad idea really if all critical parts are israeli (radar, EW suite, etc) thereby making the bird quite sanction proof.
So Ray, no need to feel 🙁 we may quite likely see a Super Hornet/Soufa with EL 2052 with Amraam C5/Derby/Python etc as the IAF MRCA. Scooter, you may as well bring out the champaigne. 😀 JMT.
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceOh well, pricey chaps. 😀
😀 😀 😀 thnks for the laffs!
USS.
uss noviceSay welcome to Mig-35 as the MRCA..:( *
R77 only 50 kms against fighters..if there had been a version with a IR seeker then still would have been a bit better..
*above emoticon doesnt apply to uss:)
Heh heh that was funny 😀 . But this is not right, whats so sad about a Mig 35? If not anything I bet they can deliver them faster than any other birds. If that doesn’t help you feel better, then think about the alternative – Teens in IAF colors 😮
BTW, I’ve seen R77 engagement ranges for 5sqm targets @ 70km.
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceI’d seriously liked to have seen the R77 on the M2ks (as was rumored). Whether Israeli Derbys or French Micas; against Amraam equipped PAF f16 blk52 its too darned close although the Teen (Apg 68) suffers from a marginally lower detection range.
But still, IMHO this is a very comparable upgrade to the Mirage 2000-5/9 other than the Scalp. At probly half the cost.
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceWideband receivers, not wide bank..
Usual Indian mix and match, LOL :rolleyes: 😀
On a related note- new avionics from Israel…logistics commonality?
French MFDs, Head down display
Su967 HUD from Elbit
RLG INS from SAGEM
70nm for a fighter sized target = RDY Mk2
Could very well be the EL 2032 as well. Point being the difficulties in slaving Israeli munitions to french radar without any mention of the Mica. Also, whats the point in having a French radar if all the bloody weapons are going to be Israeli? Furthermore, EL 2032 would have commonality with initial batch of LCA and IN upgraded Shars.
Mission computers- Indian I guess
Weaponry- Israeli- Derby, Python V and Popeye (I bet!!)
4 Derbys + 2 Python + Bombs/missiles = Mirage 2000 V style 9 pylons.
No MICA although Derby is very similar in range though does not have an IR version.
EW fit– grey area– Israeli or French?
What is the latest French fit on the Mirage 2000 and how good is it?
Israeli+Indian would be my guess. Makes no sense to have an exotic (french) mixture with little commonality with other birds in the fleet. Also, India (IAF and IN) has lots of experience with Israeli EW.
Whatever happened to the 1.5bln Euro figure that was quoted earlier? My guess is that either : 1)Israeli inputs will be additional to the $ 800 million going to Dassault. So $ 800 mil to France + additional $ 600 million to Israel including weapons. OR 2) the entire upgrade cost = $ 800 million (including Israel’s share). The latter would make more sense in that it reduces an upgrade package price to reasonable levels and explains the heavy israeli input. Would also explain why no french weapons have been mentioned. Seems like the Qatari deal may also get the shaft.
Not too shabby a deal. Saves money and gives the M2kmki plenty of teeth. Very comparable to overpriced M2k-5.
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceThinking back, I came up with this. Might not be a 100% accurate view, but I’m sure someone will correct any errors I may have made.
ADS started out too long ago for Rafale to be in the running, & was originally intended to be a smaller ship: a Harrier-carrier. The combination of delays & growth in size could have made Rafale a contender, but a CATOBAR carrier bought from France would have needed US-made catapults. France has never bothered to design its own catapults, because for a couple of carriers (& they’ve never had more than two), it’s cheaper & easier to buy American.
When the Gorshkov deal was being negotiated, & ADS started to look as if it might actually be built soon, the USA had just embargoed India over nuclear matters. A French carrier with US-made catapults wasn’t feasible at that time. By the time it was, commitments had already been made.
IIRC, the Rafale was checked out by the IN (and perhaps the Chief himself) for the Gorshkov, it was supposed to be the preferred a/c of the navy; however, the Russians tied up the “free” Gorky deal to an assortment of MiG 29Ks and India had no choice but to go with the fulcrum. So it wound up pumping in $$$ for the further development of the initial MiG 29k models as a result of which MiG is now able to showcase a very new version of the 29k, the MiG 29M and 35 as well, the latter two being based heavily on the K, which was developed by MiG via huge inputs from the IN.
Still, the 29k is a pretty sharp bird and i’m sure will only get better.
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceThe netting door is copied from the Su-27 FOD doors. The early Migs used solid doors and overwing louvers. The Mig-29M adopted the Su-27s netted door to stop Foreign Object ingestion during takeoff and landing as it reduced complexity an wasted space with comparable reduction in thrust to the overwing louvers. As far as I know it has nothing to do with stealth and only operates when the undercarriage is lowered and there is pressure on the front wheel (ie to stop material sprayed up by the front wheel from entering the engines).
Thanks garry, thats helpful.
regards,
USS.
uss noviceIMHO, the MiG 35 (as shown in bangalore) is both the landbased version of the 29k and also is the next evolution of the K. It is surely based on the K – same airframe (slightly greater wing area), same engines, similar IRST. It is also an evolution above the K because it has a greater payload (1000 kgs), range, similar but more comprehensive IRST suite, TVC, AESA radar. All in all it looks like a beast for the price.
One question, a detailed pic of the 35 from Aeroindia 07 showed its intakes to contain a sort of netting in front of the compressor blades (i’ll try to dig it up if i can). Is this mainly for preventing bird hits or does it also help in diffusing radar waves and thereby help in RCS reduction? The b2 is supposed to have its windows meshed to prevent radiation from getting out.
Regards,
uss
uss noviceNow try to extend the main landing gear… 😉
Right then, so much for that idea. 😮 POint still remains though…where the hell are they going to get the 2 additional pylons from? Maybe find space on the extremeties of the wings past the last r73 but short of the wingtip sensors? The defenitive MiG 35 will be an interesting bird for sure. Very impressive so far. Pibu, thanks for answering those questions. This bird is HOT, and fits beautifully in the medium category. Would provide an inexpensive solution to the IAF fleet nicely complementing the heavy SU 30MKi and smaller Tejas. JMT
Regards,
USS.
uss noviceOK here is my terrible rendering of the point I was trying to make:
Feels pretty cool to host an image, its only my second time yet. 🙂
Regards,
USS>
uss noviceAbout the 10 underwing pylons:
My guess based on the pics posted by Bichito (beautiful btw), they’d squeeze in an additional pylon able to hold an R77 between the first pylon and the intake area, there seems to be enough room there esp. if the wing is broadened further (as in the case of the ‘K’ version) lending it additional strength in that particular region.
Here is the MiG 35 pic (courtesy Bichito) that clearly shows room for an additional pylon in that area
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4581/mig35w3ld1.jpg
also, notice how narrow this wing (as it currently stands is) compared to the MiG 29kub:
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/8829/migkubw1tf6.jpg
By using the K’s broader wing (as pointed out by Pibu), perhaps structural strength near the wing joint (between engine intakes and first pylon) could be increased thereby allowing for an extra pylon.
apart from that I doubt there is room elsewhere what with all that optic/flir/laser gimmickry.
By the way, does anybody know – what is the sensor under the portside engine intake? The one on the other side i’m guessing is the OLS K. Also, how do they plan to carry the ELT 568 SPJ which they are developing with italy? External or internal? If it can be internal, that would be totally awesome – would leave 10 hardpoints solely for weapons considering that the OLS UEM/K does the job of a FLIR+targeting pod.
Does anyone have answers to these questions?
Thanks and REgards,
USS.
Sign In
