Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Indian Air Force Thread 21

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    I am not sure which costs would be lower if we see at most 2 squadrons of any major type are stationed at an airbase. And these keep rotating between different airbases? We will never base 6 squadrons at only 2 airbases.

    It is equally applicable to the weapons package. It might be lower the quantity by 30% but cost wise it will translate to a small percentage. Now add the inflation etc, at the end, it might turn out to be more expensive than another way so that's why +-15%.

    Comment


      +-15 = give or take 15% of total budget

      Comment


        all supporting infrastructure, in country investment (India wants to produce in country, which has to be paid for and the facilities have to be built, production chain put into place and so on), it comes at a price.. once the infrastructure is in place, the factory starts producing, they can sell the airframes at a price closer to their real price+-15%? maybe.. time will tell

        Comment


          Goi had options - rafale, eurofighter or none.

          Out of these rafale was L1, now we ordered 36 with zero tot and it still costs 9 billion.

          Now imagine, very highlevel cost calculation ... keeping end target in mind

          final costs = 9 billion x4 + Tot & ip costs + setting up tooling + professional training +- 15% (error)
          If GOI knew that Rafale was expensive buy they could have opted for a fighter which was affordable and state of art and could be lic buit in India in Number be that may be Grippen of F-16IN.

          MOD is under no obligation to buy only Rafale even if it would have been a preffered choice for IAF but can come to its own conclusion on what is the best option for the country to choose a fighter that is affordable and can be built in numbers.

          In the end they are doing exactly the same thing buying 36 Rafale and opening a competition for 100 plus SE fighter.
          "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

          Comment


            the major problem India faces with fighters having US content is the ToT, especially in India.

            One can quote Hillary Clinton when she visited Brasil for their competition and where the full ToT was required, she said that the "US will provide appropriate ToT"... "appropriate" would, obviously be only what the Congress would consider acceptable for the moment, and subject to change.

            During MMRCA, the Gripen and F-16 were part of the competition, and were eliminated even before the price became an element of selection. At one moment, price isn't everything, they have also to take into consideration the requirements they want to see fulfilled

            Comment


              India should learn from Egypt. who orderd MIG-35 after ordering Rafale. They already have F-16/M2K. they know the operational cost and that include ammunition.
              MIG35 is now more refined for high tempo.
              http://aviationweek.com/dubai-air-sh...egrated-mig-35
              Syrian Experience Integrated Into MiG-35
              It was India that ordered TVC equipped Flankers when no one was using it.
              Last edited by JSR; 19th November 2017, 21:31.

              Comment


                the major problem India faces with fighters having US content is the ToT, especially in India.

                One can quote Hillary Clinton when she visited Brasil for their competition and where the full ToT was required, she said that the "US will provide appropriate ToT"... "appropriate" would, obviously be only what the Congress would consider acceptable for the moment, and subject to change.

                During MMRCA, the Gripen and F-16 were part of the competition, and were eliminated even before the price became an element of selection. At one moment, price isn't everything, they have also to take into consideration the requirements they want to see fulfilled
                Design wise F-16 is older design and with little scope of any big procurement by new customer except perhaps India , They can provide the best TOT for F-16 compared to any types , The best is what the Congress would allow.
                "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

                Comment


                  design yes, but India wants a fighter of today, not the 1980's model... the F-16 sold today is a completely different beast compared to what it was over 30 years ago.. not sure the Congress agrees to transfer most recent technologies inside it. We'll see how it turns out some day.. maybe

                  Comment


                    LM will be doing final assembly but all other components coming from vast network so possibility of TOT is very low.
                    I am sure this LCA project is influenced form reading 1980s aviation week when it was full of F-20 TigerShark, Gripen, M2K, and Japanese F-2 competition.

                    Comment


                      The F16 is from 1980 because the US industry is a (big) step forward in term of design. There are a very few things that a F16/F18 can't do regarding the 4++ (read Swiss report). The years spent to catch the US technology does not constitute per essence any advance (sometime a fruit comes out of the tree but...).

                      Now, tell me, is the F22 outdated? Should we all run toward Su30MKI and Rafale for air dominance, airframe that have similar entry-dates?
                      Last edited by TomcatViP; 20th November 2017, 19:34.

                      Comment


                        IAF C-130J Hercules sets new record for longest flight duration

                        NEW DELHI: The Indian Air Force's C-130 Super Hercules plane has set a new record for longest non-stop flight, the IAF said.

                        The Hercules carried out a grueling 13-hour-31-minute non-stop flight, setting not only an IAF record but also globally, it said in a tweet.

                        “The team got airborne at first light on Nov 18 and landed only at 6:31 pm. This required great courage, skill and strength on part of the team,” it added.
                        ..

                        Comment


                          The F16 is from 1980 because the US industry is a (big) step forward in term of design. There are a very few things that a F16/F18 can't do regarding the 4++ (read Swiss report). The years spent to catch the US technology does not constitute per essence any advance (sometime a fruit comes out of the tree but...).

                          Now, tell me, is the F22 outdated? Should we all run toward Su30MKI and Rafale for air dominance, airframe that have similar entry-dates?
                          ok, now that you've done your flag waving stuff, go ahead and explain to India that they should buy the F-16A Block 10 or 15.... they'll gonna love it

                          Comment


                            You're ridiculous. This is the present state of aerospace, not any flag waving stuff. Take your neck out of your shoulders and look up a bit.
                            A block 15 F16 has very little to do with a Block 70 or the next incoming upgrade. Just like a Rafale M1 and its IR missile only have with the present flying configuration. Let's not play that game down below and instead have a rational conversation if we may. Thank you.
                            Last edited by TomcatViP; 21st November 2017, 14:18.

                            Comment


                              Ok, let's put it together:

                              Austin said:

                              Design wise F-16 is older design and with little scope of any big procurement by new customer except perhaps India , They can provide the best TOT for F-16 compared to any types , The best is what the Congress would allow.

                              I answered:

                              design yes, but India wants a fighter of today, not the 1980's model... the F-16 sold today is a completely different beast compared to what it was over 30 years ago.. not sure the Congress agrees to transfer most recent technologies inside it. We'll see how it turns out some day.. maybe

                              To put it clear, IF India wants to buy the F-16, they want the latest model of it, not the first versions, and congress won't allow latest improvemlents of the F-16 to be transferred to them which means that it is quite uncertain that India may be going any further that way

                              And then, you came into the discussion you came back with your

                              The F16 is from 1980 because the US industry is a (big) step forward in term of design. There are a very few things that a F16/F18 can't do regarding the 4++ (read Swiss report). The years spent to catch the US technology does not constitute per essence any advance (sometime a fruit comes out of the tree but...).
                              Completely off topic, basically. It is about transfer of technology of today, regardless of when an airframe was initially built or where it came from

                              Comment


                                Looks like Dassault isn't the only one who doesn't want to partner with HAL...


                                https://www.thequint.com/news/india/...uality-control

                                Comment


                                  design yes, but India wants a fighter of today, not the 1980's model... the F-16 sold today is a completely different beast compared
                                  If you start adding those 3 little dots in the middle of your sentences, how do you want me to catch such subtleties when I read too fast!
                                  My bad, I was wrong (to contradict you as we were on the same line).
                                  Last edited by TomcatViP; 21st November 2017, 15:05.

                                  Comment


                                    never mind, I thought it was clear, probably typing too fast as well

                                    Comment


                                      I think that it was already posted here about the US industry's reservations with actual ToT for the Single Engine Fighter program. That is what has really put off the GoI and MoD and has raised some serious questions as to what the purpose of the SEF program will be. if at the end of it, the private sector cannot take up a very serious design, development and manufacturing role in the next fighter program for India, the AMCA, then what is the point of this program at all? One of the primary reasons for the SEF program was to have a private sector player as a Strategic Partner for fighter programs for the GoI, in addition to the Public sector's HAL.

                                      The big question mark on ToT has raised question marks on the need for a foreign SEF. the NSA Ajit Doval raised this question- what does the SEF do that the Tejas cannot and this threat to the possible import is what has led to a slew of articles targeting the Tejas. the US industry will not allow this opportunity for one last major export of the F-16 to go by without planting stories in the media that target its likeliest rival for those 118+ orders.

                                      Comment


                                        What is the definition of ToT?

                                        One American company cannot give away the rights to another company's intellectual property. About 60% of the value of an F-16 or F/A-18 are components purchased from other companies. Those suppliers own the IP of their products, not Lockheed Martin or Boeing.

                                        Valves, pumps, relays, radios, GPS, HUD, brakes, flight control actuators, fire control computer, accumulators, tires, jet fuel starter, battery, hydraulic start motor, radar, altimeter, cockpit displays, switches, ejection seat, air data transducers, aerial refueling receptacle, flex hoses, check valves, and hundreds of other parts are the IP of the companies who designed, built and sold them so BA or LM could build jets.

                                        An American company such as Boeing or Lockheed Martin would define ToT as setting up a production line and training a workforce to assemble jets. But India would have to purchase components from the supplier base in the same manner as Boeing or Lockheed Martin.

                                        If India defines ToT as "Give us every blueprint for every component, all the tooling to build every component and training so we can build a 100% Indian-sourced jet", then there is no way any American company can deliver, because the supplier base owns a huge percentage of the IP.

                                        Comment


                                          An American company such as Boeing or Lockheed Martin would define ToT as setting up a production line and training a workforce to assemble jets. But India would have to purchase components from the supplier base in the same manner as Boeing or Lockheed Martin.
                                          That would be Lic Production by Indian Definition


                                          If India defines ToT as "Give us every blueprint for every component, all the tooling to build every component and training so we can build a 100% Indian-sourced jet", then there is no way any American company can deliver, because the supplier base owns a huge percentage of the IP.
                                          TOT would broadly mean India would have access to design and document and eventually material composition that makes up the component something at the later stage they can make in India with Indian sourced material.

                                          It will not mean every component but mostly certainly a large percentage of it which is economically feasible to be made in india still many will be purchased from OEM as setting up manuf for small base will not be feasible.

                                          TOT is to make sure IAF is not dependent on OEM for spares components etc and Maintenance/Upgrade of aircraft can be done in India long term to reduce cost of these component.

                                          There are other aspect of TOT like transfer of Source Code to integrate indian weapons or even 3rd party ones like IAF uses Israel weapons , IIRC Transfer of Source Code from US companies was a sticking point in last MMRCA competition as they were fine sharing binary to interface other weapons but not the source itself.

                                          MOD will have no choice but to accept what they offer in eventual phase if US or Sweden refuse to transfer TOT for things MOD has specified.
                                          "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

                                          Comment


                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X