MMRCA News and Discussions - Part II

[Quickgun Murugan]

VLADIMIR sir , no i certainly don't want that and thats why i dont expect US to sell JSF to us but as far as SH ToT is concerned its almost done just wait for a few months for a formal disclosure.

Just out of curiosity, is this just for gut feeling or you have contacts with proper defence sources?

 

[p2prada]

Brazillian MMRCA is worth just 4 bln. Indian MMRCA crosses 10 bln. I am sure, if US can agree to transfer technology for Brazil, India can definitely convince US lobby to transfer F-18 technology to India. It only makes business sense for US to agree to these terms as, technology transfer is a prime clause in MMRCA RFI's. US is offering no alien technology to India in MMRCA that will force india to overlook other fighters which are already ready for ToT and meet IAF's requirements.

Brazil has never asked ToT in the first place. It's just that the contenders are wooing the ministry with ToT. The ToT given to Brazil will be lesser than what we will get from the US. The ToT on the radar is less than 60%.

Boeing is desperate to clock sales as their fighters are nearing obsolescence after the F-22 and F-35. They are working on the F-15Silent Eagle and it will be their last fighter plane this decade and the next. A UCAV is being prepared to be ready only after 2030. The F-22 cancellation has led to further problems in their quest for building a good fighter business. That's the reason they are hawking the SH desperately in all countries.

 

[Vladimir79]

Brazillian MMRCA is worth just 4 bln. Indian MMRCA crosses 10 bln. I am sure, if US can agree to transfer technology for Brazil, India can definitely convince US lobby to transfer F-18 technology to India. It only makes business sense for US to agree to these terms as, technology transfer is a prime clause in MMRCA RFI's. US is offering no alien technology to India in MMRCA that will force india to overlook other fighters which are already ready for ToT and meet IAF's requirements.

Do you really know what Boeing offered Brazil? It seems "50%" of production is the going number according to the Saab officials. Considering Russia gave China 70% of production for Su-27SK which didn't include the engines or avionics, it looks like a far worse deal than that one. Is India getting Super Hornet withou AESA radar or engine production technology of any real value for Indian defence complex? Russia has already agreed for Zhuk AESA to be produced in India as well the engines which are only one step away from the current series 3 deal. Boeing can't even hope to compete with our ToT offer due to Congressional restrictions... nothing they say means anything without Congressional approval.

 

[blade]

Indian SH ToT will involve the following 1. Design & material science required for the air frame 2. Complete avionic suit except the standered US jammer( This jammer will be sold to india but with 0% tech transfer ) 3. A considerably high level of engine tech 3. some percentage of AESA tech. 4. A complete map for future upgradation. 5. Option will remain open for further ToT that involves future techs to be incorporated in SH in order to upgrade it.

 

[ppgj]

Indian SH ToT will involve the following 1. Design & material science required for the air frame 2. Complete avionic suit except the standered US jammer( This jammer will be sold to india but with 0% tech transfer ) 3. A considerably high level of engine tech 3. some percentage of AESA tech. 4. A complete map for future upgradation. 5. Option will remain open for further ToT that involves future techs to be incorporated in SH in order to upgrade it.

since you are not giving any links or sources for your claim that it is f-18e/f,
let me summarise what i feel.
i may be wrong but i will wait for the judgement day.

1. f-18e/f is more a heavy class fighter.
india already has su-30mki which is not only a air dominace fighter but can be effective in ground attack too.

2. f-18e/f comes with added weight penalty(being a carrier based). though it may be satisfying the RFP requirement
but loses out on maneurability because of the same reason.

3. costwise there is no comparison between su-30mki and f-18e/f. why would IAF waste money on
a similar class and less maneurable fighter.

4.india has already ordered more mki's which means it is looking for medium class fighter which is what MMRCA
stands for.

5. avionics may be better on f-18 but it far outweighs the cost. besides india does not have threats which can
challenge even our mki's. rememeber our mki's will have less RCS and better radar when HAL starts producing
indigenised version from 2010 making them even more lethal.

6. plus f-18 comes with the threat of sanctions and weak on TOT(unless you prove me wrong with your prediction).

let me add finally,
IAF, it seems, is looking for 3 types aircraft in its inventory.

HEAVY- su-30mki
MEDIUM- migs/mirages/jaguar and MRCA.
LIGHT- mig-21(to be phased out) and LCA.

if, by any chance an american fighter wins MRCA i think it would be the super viper which i consider the DARK HORSE.

 

[Vladimir79]

Indian SH ToT will involve the following 1. Design & material science required for the air frame 2. Complete avionic suit except the standered US jammer( This jammer will be sold to india but with 0% tech transfer ) 3. A considerably high level of engine tech 3. some percentage of AESA tech. 4. A complete map for future upgradation. 5. Option will remain open for further ToT that involves future techs to be incorporated in SH in order to upgrade it.

Where do you get such non-sense?

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

Boeing is desperate to clock sales as their fighters are nearing obsolescence after the F-22 and F-35. They are working on the F-15Silent Eagle and it will be their last fighter plane this decade and the next. A UCAV is being prepared to be ready only after 2030. The F-22 cancellation has led to further problems in their quest for building a good fighter business. That's the reason they are hawking the SH desperately in all countries.

That is my point. if boeing is really desperate to sell its fighter, then it is pretty obvious that they have to cut some slack to the Indians. Indians really do not have to lobby around the Americans for ToT as they already have other options. It is Americans who need to have better business sense.

IAF would defintely opt for a fighter which has ToT restrictions.

Do you really know what Boeing offered Brazil? It seems "50%" of production is the going number according to the Saab officials. Considering Russia gave China 70% of production for Su-27SK which didn't include the engines or avionics, it looks like a far worse deal than that one. Is India getting Super Hornet withou AESA radar or engine production technology of any real value for Indian defence complex? Russia has already agreed for Zhuk AESA to be produced in India as well the engines which are only one step away from the current series 3 deal. Boeing can't even hope to compete with our ToT offer due to Congressional restrictions... nothing they say means anything without Congressional approval.

There again, that is exactly what I am trying to say. Americans know that India has other options in case they do not agree for ToT. Why will IAF jump into this quagmire if they know they have an alternate route to take. To be in competition, either US have to agree to IAF's requirements or be out of the race.Simple.

 

[GRIM SS]

The best way to order MRCA is: Do some nuclear test and find how many remains in the race with whatever claims they have made while offering there planes. I bet it will be Rafale and MiG 35 (This will be for sure)

I agree with what you said:twizt:

 

[Vladimir79]

There again, that is exactly what I am trying to say. Americans know that India has other options in case they do not agree for ToT. Why will IAF jump into this quagmire if they know they have an alternate route to take. To be in competition, either US have to agree to IAF's requirements or be out of the race.Simple.

Who is saying India has jumped into anything? They set out the RFP and the bidders have to meet it. Indian RFP is only slightly more than the usual licensed production agreements which still require "lifetime support." US will withold radar fabrication technologies as well as engines. The Congress will not allow their ToT export and it is not an RFP requirement if they are requiring "lifetime support."

 

[p2prada]

then it is pretty obvious that they have to cut some slack to the Indians.

It's not in their hands. It depends on the US Congress.

IAF would defintely opt for a fighter which has ToT restrictions.

Maybe , maybe not.

There again, that is exactly what I am trying to say. Americans know that India has other options in case they do not agree for ToT. Why will IAF jump into this quagmire if they know they have an alternate route to take. To be in competition, either US have to agree to IAF's requirements or be out of the race.Simple.

Congress will not allow transfer of critical technology to India as of now. This includes engine and radar.

 

[Daredevil]

If IAF plays fair game in the selection of MMRCA based on its RFP, Gripen will be the most likely winner. But then geopolitics and previous experience of IAF will play a major role in the selection of the fighter.

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

It's not in their hands. It depends on the US Congress.



Maybe , maybe not.



Congress will not allow transfer of critical technology to India as of now. This includes engine and radar.

Are you some kind of a policy maker for US congress that you are so confident about this? There is nothing special with F-18 SH or F-16 IN offers which can convince India to go for it without ToT.

If US congress does'nt agree, then its their $10+billion loss. It is too early in the MMRCA decision race for US to give perks to India. Once a deadline is set for the winner to be announced, all the perks would follow.

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

If IAF plays fair game in the selection of MMRCA based on its RFP, Gripen will be the most likely winner. But then geopolitics and previous experience of IAF will play a major role in the selection of the fighter.

Gripen is way too dependent on other countries for it be even deemed a contender. If by chance Gripen wins, US will lay all end user sanctions on it.

 

[p2prada]

Are you some kind of a policy maker for US congress that you are so confident about this? There is nothing special with F-18 SH or F-16 IN offers which can convince India to go for it without ToT.

If US congress does'nt agree, then its their $10+billion loss. It is too early in the MMRCA decision race for US to give perks to India. Once a deadline is set for the winner to be announced, all the perks would follow.

ToT for airframe and other accessories will be provided except for engine and certain avionics like radar. I don't need to be a policy maker to know it. There will be little or no transfer of source codes for the radar.

The US Congress will not worry about the $10Billion loss. They sell much more to their Arab and East Asian allies.

 

[AJSINGH]

You are forgetting that even Brazil has close ties with Russia. Brazil was offered partnership with PAK-FA project even before Russia offered it to India.
Hilary Clinton's visit to broaden strategic and defence ties was aimed at this only.

US knows that all other fighter planes in MRCA have agreed for ToT. If it is genuinely interested in winning the deal, it will obviously have to cut some slack.

i hope this give you answer why we should not go for SH
The Super Hornet is in approximately the same weight class as the Su-30, and is, in every way, a heavy hitter, with all the attendant cross-section and logistics issues. The IAF has expressed apprehensions about the Super Hornet's logistics footprint (and its overall impact on ownership costs), though these have been discussed only internally -- they will be taken up during the foreign leg of the field evaluation tests (FETs). The Super Hornet is a rugged, beast of an airplane no doubt, but there remains a substantial quarter in the IAF which is still hung on the apprehension that it is, ultimately, a maritime strike fighter. "Let's face it. The development of the Super Hornet was with the US Navy in mind. The exports to other country's air forces are simply bonuses. It is a maritime strike fighter, with a maritime role development history behind it. Fielding it as an air force jet is borne from commercial considerations. Both Boeing and Lockheed are trying to maximise profits from the F-18/F-16 production lines before they have to shut shop for the F-35," says one senior IAF pilot, who does not fly anymore. The Indian government has opened its Boeing IDS account with the P-8I Poseidon deal -- the government may be wary of laying it on too thick with one vendor.

LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: MMRCA Part 5 - The American Turbo Bug

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

i hope this give you answer why we should not go for SH
The Super Hornet is in approximately the same weight class as the Su-30, and is, in every way, a heavy hitter, with all the attendant cross-section and logistics issues.

Let me give you some facts here.
Empty weight: F-18 Sh = 13,864 kg, Mig 35= 15,000 kg
Maximum Payload: F-18 SH = 8,050 kg, Mig 35=6,000 kg
Max takeoff weight : F-18 SH: 29,900 kg, Mig 35=29,000 kg

Mig-35 is heavier than F-18 as a matter of fact

The IAF has expressed apprehensions about the Super Hornet's logistics footprint (and its overall impact on ownership costs), though these have been discussed only internally -- they will be taken up during the foreign leg of the field evaluation tests (FETs). The Super Hornet is a rugged, beast of an airplane no doubt, but there remains a substantial quarter in the IAF which is still hung on the apprehension that it is, ultimately, a maritime strike fighter. "Let's face it. The development of the Super Hornet was with the US Navy in mind. The exports to other country's air forces are simply bonuses. It is a maritime strike fighter, with a maritime role development history behind it. Fielding it as an air force jet is borne from commercial considerations. Both Boeing and Lockheed are trying to maximise profits from the F-18/F-16 production lines before they have to shut shop for the F-35," says one senior IAF pilot, who does not fly anymore.

Every fighter plane is designed according to their own country's requirement. F-18 is a maritime strike fighter means it is no good for Indian requirements? How does anyone come to that conclusion.

The Indian government has opened its Boeing IDS account with the P-8I Poseidon deal -- the government may be wary of laying it on too thick with one vendor.

LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: MMRCA Part 5 - The American Turbo Bug

By this logic if govt. is wary of laying it too thick with one vendor, then Mig-35 would also be out of the race.


You have been unfair in just quoting the con-side of F-18 SH. Whereas the same article has quoted the excellent capabilities F-18 brings along with it.

 

[Vladimir79]

Let me give you some facts here.
Empty weight: F-18 Sh = 13,864 kg, Mig 35= 15,000 kg
Maximum Payload: F-18 SH = 8,050 kg, Mig 35=6,000 kg
Max takeoff weight : F-18 SH: 29,900 kg, Mig 35=29,000 kg

Mig-35 is heavier than F-18 as a matter of fact

MiG-35 empty weight is 11,000kg, not 15. Sorry, but you fail.

 

[IBRIS]

Danish gov : No Gripen

Danish government as well as the oposition says Denmark will not chose the SAAB Gripen as their new fighter. The choice will be between Lockheed Martin and Boeing

No one even talks about the Swedish alternative sources say"

Taper også i Danmark - - Verden - Aftenposten.no

SAAB is caught in a vicious circle. The company is already under a lot of pressure, and if India, Brazil and Switzerland also turns them down their days as a fighterplane manufacturer is numbered.

 

[IBRIS]

^^^^^
Sweden loses yet another fighter plane contract worth tens of billions of kroner. Also Denmark says no to-owned SAAB JAS 39 Gripen, according to key sources.

All indications are that the already highly compressed Swedish aircraft manufacturer already has crash-landed in the fight against two U.S. competitors to create new fighters for the Danish Air Force. Very central sources in both the government parties and the opposition says to Aftenposten that it's definitely not the JAS 39 Gripen. The decision is scheduled to be around New Year. Thus remains the favorite JSF from Lockheed Martin, who beat the Swedes in Norway for almost a year ago, and another flygigant in the United States: Boeing.

Including Norway.
It is important for the Danes that Norway last year chose JSF and had a negative assessment of the JAS 39 Gripen. The Swedes were not only outraged that Norway chose the other finalists. Industry Giant Saab and Swedish government was - and is - as stated above argument against the JAS Gripen. According to Stoltenberg government satisfied not Swedes requirements for new aircraft. Moreover, says the Norwegians that the Gripen is more expensive than the JSF. The math for how much, respectively, the Swedish and American aircraft would cost in the end, is very controversial. At the central government in the Danish decision-making process is still on the Norwegian price analysis:

"It is clear that the economic situation we are in, the price is a very important argument," said a very convenient source with regard to Norway's assessment and relate it to why the Danes turned thumbs down on the JAS Gripen.

-No talking about the Swedish option, "said the second well-placed political sources.

Vicious circle
. It could have been a breakthrough for the Swedes, have become a vicious circle. If NATO veteran Norway had chosen Jas Gripen, it would have been a reference value at least one fighter in gold for non-NATO country Sweden. It would also become an additional public relations effort to beat a strong competitor from the largest NATO country.

Instead of a domino effect which could have given a giant deal with such Danes, gave last year's Norwegian rejection rather than a loser stamp as well. This makes matters worse for the yellow and blue. If there's a miracle in the Danish final sprint, the Swedes are not only missing out on tens of billion again. All of the further development of the Swedish Air Force met with concern and questions. The pressure is enormous. Nerves affected the whole of the Swedish town of Linköping, where aircraft manufacturers are located, even before Norway was to decide last year.

But when they finally know from the Danes, there is reason to believe that the Swedish reaction is reinforced resignation rather than a repetition of the shock when the Norwegian judges voted the JAS 39 Gripen. The same can happen in The Netherlands. Ryker also have the Swedes really only three fingers back to bite nails with: India, Brazil and Switzerland are countries that can save Sweden's future fighter aircraft manufacturer.

More expensive alone.
The Swedes planned to develop its final version, together with such Norway and Denmark. "If Norway chooses Gripen, Sweden will accelerate further development so that the Swedish Air Force have a number of aircraft already before Norway get their deliveries," said SAAB vice president with responsibility for flyvirksomheten, Lennart Sindahl Aftenposten last November.

He admitted that it would be "clearly cheaper" if more countries sharing the costs of further development. That Denmark also turns his back to the JAS Gripen can make it difficult for the Swedes to be cutie brother in the Nordic defense cooperation, as in other areas have become closer in recent years.

 

[AJSINGH]

Let me give you some facts here.
Empty weight: F-18 Sh = 13,864 kg, Mig 35= 15,000 kg
Maximum Payload: F-18 SH = 8,050 kg, Mig 35=6,000 kg
Max takeoff weight : F-18 SH: 29,900 kg, Mig 35=29,000 kg

Mig-35 is heavier than F-18 as a matter of fact



Every fighter plane is designed according to their own country's requirement. F-18 is a maritime strike fighter means it is no good for Indian requirements? How does anyone come to that conclusion.





By this logic if govt. is wary of laying it too thick with one vendor, then Mig-35 would also be out of the race.


You have been unfair in just quoting the con-side of F-18 SH. Whereas the same article has quoted the excellent capabilities F-18 brings along with it.

look SH is primarlly a maritime strike fighter with maritime strike qualities that is why no air force operates SH . IN already has Mig 29 k so they dont need the help of IAF anymore . plus USA will be phasing these aircraft out in near future so the last thing they want is to sell more of there aircraft ( to squeeze out little more profit before the production lines shut down ) and this MMRCA competition is too tempting for them to ignore .
take this hypothetical example
if we choose SH ,and 5 years from now we want to do more neuclear test ,guess who will stop the spares and support of the aircraft , it will be USA
whereas we are pretty sure that russia wont do it
also our relationship with russia is at very different level ,they will give us whatevr we need in terms of TOT
besides SH looses out to Mig 35 interms of performence however SH has better radar and avionics ,but Mig 35 feature OLS which is better than the one on SH