Hot Dog Indian AF News and Discussion Part 17

[Teer]

Ajay Shukla suggesting that MRCA tender will be scrapped. Ramblings ?

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2011/...g-through.html

Very unlikely, his own views are towards cancelling the MMRCA for JSF. Thats not going to happen.

[quadbike]

Shuklas New Article

Hefty Rs 42,000 crore bill for combat aircraft may rise

For years, India’s proposed purchase of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) --- the world’s largest overseas fighter buy for which the Typhoon, built by Eurofighter GmbH; and the Rafale, developed by French vendor Dassault, remain in contention --- has been valued at Rs 42,000 crore, almost US $10 billion. Now that valuation is set to rise dramatically as the Ministry of Defence carries out a process called benchmarking.

Benchmarking is the crucial process of estimating the fair price for any purchase, and is completed before the MoD opens the price bids for any tender. This is done by an MoD committee which scrutinises similar tenders worldwide, especially recent sales, to arrive at a comparable --- or as the name suggests, a benchmark --- price. If all the vendors’ bids emerge significantly higher than the benchmark, the tender is cancelled and the process begun afresh.

For example, if the MoD committee that is currently benchmarking the MMRCA concludes that Rs 42,000 crore is a decade-old estimation that should be increased due to inflation by 50%, the benchmark for that contract will be pegged at Rs 63,000 crore. When the Eurofighter’s and Dassault’s bids are opened, if both turn out to be notably higher, the MoD will scrap the MMRCA tender. On the other hand, if the lower bid is less than or approximates the benchmark, that bid will be accepted.

A keen watcher of these developments is Lockheed Martin, whose F-16IN Super Viper was rejected by the IAF. A visiting Lockheed Martin executive told Business Standard that the fifth-generation F-35 Lightening II would become a real option for India if the MMRCA procurement was scrapped.

“We did not offer the F-35 for the MMRCA contract because it exceeded the Indian specifications; the fighter was not yet ready for the kind of flight testing specified in the tender; and because the US government had not yet approved it for release to India to include transfer of technology as specified in the RfP,” said Orville Prins, Lockheed Martin’s Vice President for Business Development.

Six years down the line, these conditions have changed. Prins now points out that, with Lockheed Martin set to build 20 fighters per month, i.e. 240 per year, “we could be in a position to supply India with its first F-35s by 2016, contingent upon many additional factors including US governmental approval that would affect this timing.”

Asked for the cost of the F-35, Lockheed Martin estimates it “in the mid-60s”, i.e. somewhere between $60-70 million for the conventional version of the fighter. This would be the cost of a full-up, operational configuration with all the high-tech sensors that are integrated internally in a 5th generation, stealthy aircraft. Added to this cost would be the added expenses of training, technology transfer (ToT), manufacturing infrastructure, etc, which would significantly raise the overall cost of buying 126 F-35s.

[Fedaykin]

Haven't we already covered that this guy has a bit of a F35 bias.

If Indian MOD actually did that the European nations still competing would go ballistic. Anyway EADS and Dassault must know that the Indian MOD would do this and ensure their bids were within the safety zone.

[BlackArcher]

X-32 looked classy from the top.

To be honest before AMCA design was made public i half expected AMCA to be a delta shape like X-32 (atleast from the top) with twin engines and conventional twin intakes (to minimize work by retaining delta wing fbw of Tejas)

Not to mention the massive wastage of bandwidth for the last 10 years, when IAF decided that it needed some planes.

you do know that this was only the design of the X-32 A/B for the first 2 prototypes right? They dumped the delta wing and the later design went to a more conventional wing with 4 poster tail instead of the delta wing.

The reason was that the USN changed its requirements and required more maneuverability. The delta wing design was found to be heavier for those requirements and the design was changed, but it was too late for the prototypes whose wings had already been fabricated.

[BlackArcher]

I actually liked the X-32 it was something that looked different. The X 35 looked too conventional.

Looking at how the F 35 getting criticised for being 'fat' it would have been so interesting had the X-32 won the JSF, Raptor & Euro fanatics would have had more ammunition.

It was the world's most ugly ever fighter..Boeing's design was so fugly that many commentators raised that old saying "if it looks good it'll likely fly good" to question the whole design..they said it had looks that only its mother could love..

the X-32 flew ok, but was undoubtedly the ugliest. Seeing the Nova program on the X-32 vs X-35 competition and seeing it fly confirmed that for me. There isn't any angle from which it looks good.

The X-35 was more conventional but that meant it was more maneuverable and since its huge engine fan was not exposed up front itself, X-35 was a stealthier design as well. Boeing knew full well that the perception was that the X-32 wasn't as stealthy as the X-35 and Lockheed Martin's previous work on stealth designs had been useful for it whereas for Boeing/MDD, there wasn't much stealth design experience.

[quadbike]

X 32 would have probably included an inlet blocker in the final configuration. And the redisgned wing X 32 which never flew was supposed to be more manevarable. Accoridng to the PBS program link posted here, the navy changed their plans mid way through and demanded a more maneuvrable figher, and Lockheed was kept in the competiton where it could have been ejected.

[TR1]

They both met the RCS requirements. Let's not get into visual perception again people.

[MadRat]

I imagine one could shrink the design and settle around the F100 to entice F-16 users into a Boeing JSF-lite if one was desperate for sales.

[quadbike]

Another MiG 21 crashes killing the pilot. MIG 21 MType 96.

RIP

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2011/08...ian+Defence%29

[quadbike]

Ok this is crazy Hillary or just DDM

Hillary Clinton’s Hits And Misses In India – Analysis

Clinton is understood to have made a strong pitch for more US military sales to India, especially in the wake of American companies recently losing out in the race for a $ 10.4 billion order by the Indian Air Force for 126 fighter aircraft. She expressed her country’s willingness to sell state-of-the-art F 35 warplanes to India at “unbelievable” prices. The Americans are understood to have asked the Indian government to open its purse strings for the Lockheed built fifth generation super stealth F-35 Lightning the basic model of which is being made available to India for $ 65 million apiece. The Indian defence establishment would naturally find the offer too good to be true as much inferior fourth generation French Rafale is priced at $ 85 million and Eurofighter Typhoon (also a fourth generation aircraft) at $ 125 million apiece. The American offer signals American desperation for capturing a big pie of the highly lucrative Indian defence market, especially after two top American fighter aircraft manufacturers – Lockheed (F-16) and Boeing (F-18) – got eliminated in the recent Indian MMRCA deal worth $ 10.4 billion. More clarity would have to emerge on the proposed F 35 Lightning sales to India.

[rayrubik]

Another MiG 21 crashes killing the pilot. MIG 21 MType 96.

RIP

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2011/08...ian+Defence%29

All Mig 21s need to be phased out including the bisons.

[quadbike]

The Mirages are not going to get an Engine upgrade and are going to be in service till 2030 atleast, wlll it be the Mig 21 off the future for IAF ? I meant accident rates.

[BlackArcher]

The Mirages are not going to get an Engine upgrade and are going to be in service till 2030 atleast, wlll it be the Mig 21 off the future for IAF ? I meant accident rates.

engine upgrades are likely to be a part of the total work package (as per Flight Global)

link to FlightGlobal article

[uss novice]

Ok this is crazy Hillary or just DDM

Hillary Clinton’s Hits And Misses In India – Analysis

Might not be such a bad idea imho, and Shukla despite his penchant for the JSF, might be on to something. There is very little chance that the Rafale/EF will fit in the stated budget - $ 10.2 billion for 126 units sounds really low. IIRC, the RSA Tiffy deal was for about the same price but got only 70 a/c. And then the current race requires much more sophisticated entries - AESA and what not. Plus cost for tech transfer. And add to that weapons etc.

Unless they use the excessively expensive M2k upg deal to subsidize Rafale costs I don't know how the Ecanards are going to fit the said budget.

Dunno much about the JSF program, but I wouldn't be surprised if the JSF came in at a lower tag considering that in terms of volume produced, the JSF will be produced in much greater quantities than the Ecanards and economies of scale should favor the american fighter.

It should the IAF far more capability than the ecanards imho, and IF they can deliver around 2016-17, there is hardly any delay involved.

In any case, as I have said before, the MRCA is hardly going to make much difference to the falling numbers as per the given timeline. If they want to arrest this fall in the short term, a relatively modest investment in an extra sqd of Tejas, MKI, Qatari/UAE/HAF M2ks, or HuAF MiG-29s might be worth considering.

USS.

[Boom]

USS, you are missing a very big part of the MRCA picture, tech transfer. that certainly won't be available for us.

[uss novice]

USS, you are missing a very big part of the MRCA picture, tech transfer. that certainly won't be available for us.

IMho, two points to consider:

I don't think the US position will be too contrary to tech transfer, not anymore. Yes, it will still be guarded but that is to be expected. So long as it does not impinge upon IAF operations, India will be OK. I think the US very well knows by now that they can't expect to have a typical boss-poodle type relationship with India, they also know what the MRCA RFI/P requires in this dept. and hence would not be altogether restrictive in sharing certain technology.

Second, some of these issues could be worked around by using 3rd party products - Israeli for example. So, while access to Apg 81 might not be available, perhaps full access to EL-2052 could be arranged.

USS.

[quadbike]

engine upgrades are likely to be a part of the total work package (as per Flight Global)

link to FlightGlobal article

If so that is excellent news ? But what engines ? May be Refurbished M53s? I am not sure the M-88 will fit or have enough thrust.

[quadbike]

IMho, two points to consider:

I don't think the US position will be too contrary to tech transfer, not anymore. Yes, it will still be guarded but that is to be expected. So long as it does not impinge upon IAF operations, India will be OK. I think the US very well knows by now that they can't expect to have a typical boss-poodle type relationship with India, they also know what the MRCA RFI/P requires in this dept. and hence would not be altogether restrictive in sharing certain technology.

Second, some of these issues could be worked around by using 3rd party products - Israeli for example. So, while access to Apg 81 might not be available, perhaps full access to EL-2052 could be arranged.

USS.

1. I like the F 35 but at this late stage it would make us look really bad IMO. But then again our strategic needs should take more presedence. The Europeans can be compensated in other ways, the submarine tender to Germany and some of those nice modular surface ships from the UK.

2. I don't think we will be getting any tech transfer with the F 35 other than basic stuff, we will be lucky to get some.

3. Americans are not even letting Israel modify the F 35 and put in their stuff I doubt they will allow EL-2052 on perspective Indian F-35s. And why would you want that anyway? one of F 35s key strengths is its integrated sensor suite.

[BlackArcher]

If so that is excellent news ? But what engines ? May be Refurbished M53s? I am not sure the M-88 will fit or have enough thrust.

they won't change the M53-P2. they'll overhaul it and possibly upgrade it based on recent work done on the M53

Snecma M53 brochure

Over the last few years, Snecma has introduced new technologies into the M53-P2 in order to reduce the number of engine removals and maintenance costs.

[swerve]

1. I like the F 35 but at this late stage it would make us look really bad IMO. But then again our strategic needs should take more presedence. The Europeans can be compensated in other ways, the submarine tender to Germany and some of those nice modular surface ships from the UK.

2. I don't think we will be getting any tech transfer with the F 35 other than basic stuff, we will be lucky to get some.

3. Americans are not even letting Israel modify the F 35 and put in their stuff I doubt they will allow EL-2052 on perspective Indian F-35s. And why would you want that anyway? one of F 35s key strengths is its integrated sensor suite.

1. "Compensated" - bazaari thinking - wrong. Buy what India needs, not what you think will appease other countries. Your second sentence is right: your strategic needs should come first.

2. Yep. You can't get full tech transfer on F-35 without the consent of partners, which include the UK & Italy, which are trying to sell you Eurofighter. You can't get local production (except assembly of imported components) without the consent of partners, who've invested money in order to get their own share of that production. And then you have to persuade the USA to give you its own secrets, which is no easy task.

F-35 is not structured for technology transfer to non-partner countries or licence production.

3. Absolutely right.

[quadbike]

I agree with everything else but the thing about license production ? Really.

What if Japan chooses F 35 clearly they will want licensed producton. I can think of so many countries who will only buy it with licensed production ? Do you think the Americans are not going to let it happen because of some silly agreements ?

If they can get approval from their congress/government I doubt they will care about junior partners. They could also do with some extra billions.

[swerve]

You're saying the USA will ignore legally-binding agreements with countries & companies which supply critical components for all F-35s, that they will openly break their own laws. Really?

I am making a distinction between licenced assembly and production. Final assembly & check can be done by a customer (indeed, Italy has a plan to do it, though I'm not sure if it'll come to fruition), but that consists only of fixing together imported components & assemblies. There's no ToT involved in that, except maybe some improved assembly & fixing methods.

Building sub-assemblies, or components, & incorporating any customer systems, are far more difficult. If parts made by partners are to be replaced by, e.g., Japanese parts, they'd have to be compensated, or they could sue in the US courts - where they'd win, & get compensation anyway. If partner technology is handed over by the USA without consent, same, but the compensation would be vastly greater. How'd you like essential parts from LM for Indian-made F-35s seized in transit under, say, an Italian or Turkish court order? Could happen, if the USA tried to ignore its obligations.

The only relatively easy way to incorporate non-partner components is to cut the US content, e.g. let a partner fit their own radar in place of the APG-81. But that's reckoned to be very tightly integrated, & the integration is exactly the sort of thing that the USA is unwilling to release even to the UK, which I must remind you is the only Tier 1 partner. Replacing it would therefore have extreme political difficulties, both external (with the UK, etc) & internally (the USA won't share it with its closest ally, the only country in the world with which it shares some secrets, but it'll sell it to, e.g., India). The same would apply to most of the US avionics. The stuff that could be handed over easily is much lower level than you can get from Dassault, BAe, EADS etc. as part of building Rafale or Typhoon.

The argument that the US will do it if the price is right is false. It refused to sell F-22 to Japan, for example. The 'if they get agreement' argument falls over here.

[quadbike]

You did not pay attention to my posts. What matters is the decision of the US government and the U.S Congress. So the point of F 22 is not really relevant.

As for Turkey or Italian court orders ? really do you think they have a chance ? The US pressure will be so much on them they won't even go to court.

Lets look at a non military thing to show you what I meant. India has been best buddies with Russia for ages but they could not help us get the NSG waiver. But once India got the 123 deal witht he U.S they pressured everyone else @ NSG and we got the waiver. So what matters is the decision of the US government and the US Congress the rest of the west just fall in line when there is serious pressure from Washington. Hard to swallow for proud Europeans but invariably the truth. Even Russia left India at the altar when it came to cryogenic engines because of U.S pressure. Just the way the uni polar world works.

[glitter]

There is very little chance that the Rafale/EF will fit in the stated budget - $ 10.2 billion for 126 units sounds really low.

I asked the question (a long time ago) about who could sell 126 planes + ToT + weapons + many other things for only 10 billions and nobody provided a real answer.

Unless they use the excessively expensive M2k upg deal to subsidize Rafale costs I don't know how the Ecanards are going to fit the said budget.

On french forums, that sound like something to be considered. Because at first glance, who would spend so much money on old mirage 2000 ?
Knowing that the upgrade is 2.5 billions for the planes themselves and another billion for infrastructure, you are right to assume that a Rafale would have a nice synergy there.

Dunno much about the JSF program, but I wouldn't be surprised if the JSF came in at a lower tag considering that in terms of volume produced, the JSF will be produced in much greater quantities than the Ecanards and economies of scale should favor the american fighter.

It should the IAF far more capability than the ecanards imho, and IF they can deliver around 2016-17, there is hardly any delay involved.

Here again, you're certainly right. We must never underestimated the political question.
But you should ask the good question. For India, does it make sense to be a JSF customer, knowing that there will be no ToT.
USA cannot consider India as the "usual customer" for the JSF.

[Sintra]

Might not be such a bad idea imho, and Shukla despite his penchant for the JSF, might be on to something. There is very little chance that the Rafale/EF will fit in the stated budget - $ 10.2 billion for 126 units sounds really low. IIRC, the RSA Tiffy deal was for about the same price but got only 70 a/c.
USS.

Check the numbers, the RSAF deal involved 72 Typhoons for 4,43 billion Pounds. On the other hand the Israeli JSF deal involves 19 fighters for 2,75 billion US$ being delivered in the same time frame that you have proposed.

[quadbike]

The report said hillary offered it at an affordable price. If they really want to (for nor eason) warm ties with India with cheap F 35s we should say yes >

[BlackArcher]

Check the numbers, the RSAF deal involved 72 Typhoons for 4,43 billion Pounds. On the other hand the Israeli JSF deal involves 19 fighters for 2,75 billion US$ being delivered in the same time frame that you have proposed.

this article claims that the deal was worth 8 billion pounds. and this article on FT claims that the deal was worth £4.43bn, part of a contract that defence sources said could exceed £20bn.

The announcement was made in a statement from the official Saudi Press Agency, which said the price of each aircraft – which works out at £61.5m ($122.5m, €88.4m) – was exactly the sum paid by the UK’s Royal Air Force for each Typhoon.

and another £5bn or so for weapons plus £10bn for support/maintenance. A very expensive deal without ToT and definitely way way over the $11 billion that is being quoted for the MRCA contract (for which weapons were to be bought separately as well).

I understand that the amount the Saudis paid for support and maintenance includes much more support than most other nations require, but just the fly-away cost per plane of €88.4m makes it a very expensive fighter.

Negotiations are continuing for the armaments systems to be carried by the aircraft, which could cost an estimated £5bn. A further contract – estimated by some sources at up to £10bn – for support and maintenance of the Typhoon envisages building a big defence infrastructure in the kingdom. That is expected to include the expansion of air bases and the eventual building of capacity that will allow aircraft components to be manufactured in Saudi Arabia.

Going by these prices, the Rafale will be comfortably L1.

[quadbike]

Its been a while since news on the LCA ? Is anything new going on ?

[Teer]

After the success of the Sudarshan LGB (and orders placed), more emphasis on PGMs

DRDO July 11 http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/nl/2011/nl_july.pdf

ARDE

Inauguration of PGM -Electronics
Centre and HILS-facility at ARDE
The Precision Guided Munition (PGM)-Electronics
Centre and HILS-Facility at Armament Research
and Development Establishment (ARDE), Pune,
was inaugurated on 06 June 2011 by Shri Anil M
Datar, OS and Director, ARDE, Pune. This Centre
has three parts, viz., control electronics, guided
sensors and hardware-in-the-loop simulation (HILS).
The facilities available at this Centre are inertial test
setup, precision acceleration test setup, three-axes
flight motor simulator, two-axes linear trial motion
simulator, GPS simulator, and electronic integration
facility for PGM. This Centre will be specialised in
electronics for PGMs.
Shri Anil M Datar, OS and Director, ARDE inaugurating the Facility.

Also, confirming the MPR (Medium Power Radar) is in an advanced stage of development.

LRDE, (DRDO radar lab)

Vice Admiral Satish Soni, AVSM, NM,
OSD to CNS, on 02 June 2011
Vice Adm Satish Soni evincing keen interest on MPR
proto array.

The PDF has a picture of the Radar backend, processing and RF hardware.

Also, DRDOs Aslesha 3D Low Level Lightweight radar has cleared trials for IAF. Apart from surveillance orders, will be interesting to see if a variant, mast mounted, is used for the SRSAM being developed with MBDA, same as ELTA 2160 is used for SpyDer

http://www.bel-india.com/index.aspx?q=&sectionid=441

[Teer]

Same file - note this is for 2010 achievements. We are already closing on 2011 end.

Good progress made on key systems on the avionics front.

Ring Laser Gyro (RLG)
based Inertial Navigation System was developed,
qualified, and tested. An Active Radar Seeker for
advanced missions was successfully developed. A
Fibre Optics Gyro was successfully developed and
tested onboard.

Currently IAF uses French RLG-INS and Astra seeker is Russian.

A novel method was developed and
flight-tested for an in-flight structural monitoring of the
manned as well as unmanned aircraft structures

HAL Edgewood also offers structural monitoring systems, plus there is a SAAB system on Su-30 MKI.

Besides,
over 100 test flights of a 3,000 gm Micro Aerial
Vehicle (MAV) designed and developed by DRDO
were carried out.

For IA and IAF Special Forces and regulars.

A laser seeker kit – ‘Sudarshan’, for
1,000 lb bombs was developed and initial demand for
significant number of seeker kits has been received
from the Services.

Sudarshan cleared for production. Till date IAF used French (BGL100), US (Paveway2) and Israeli (Griffin series) LGBs