MMRCA News and Discussions - Part II

[AJSINGH]

^^^that is what is said by boeing but the issue of TOT is decided by USA goverment not the company ,plus when he said " Indian pilots today are very skilled at flying Russian and French aircraft. There's no reason to believe, given the training Boeing will offer, that they will have any difficulty adapting to the user-friendly technology of the Super Hornet." he did not provide any technical infomration

 

[p2prada]

The article was quoted to highlight the schedule process only. I was'nt boasting any authenticity of the source at all. Take it or leave it.FYI the author Vijainder K Thakur is ex-IAF pilot.

I assume I am entitled to draw to my conclusions from the quoted part. You don't buy it, fine by me.

The point in the article quoted by Vladmir is not accurate. I guess that's what is being pointed out. Nowhere in the article does it say the IAF is not looking for air combat alone.

From the article:

Trial Emphasis Going by recent statements of IAF officers linked to the evaluation trial, the emphasis in the MMRCA selection process appears to be on attack potential and low cost of ownership, not air combat capability.

The above hyperlink does not give the required information as concluded by Vijainderji. Meaning he is assuming IAF requirements for the MRCA.

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

^^^that is what is said by boeing but the issue of TOT is decided by USA goverment not the company ,plus when he said " Indian pilots today are very skilled at flying Russian and French aircraft. There's no reason to believe, given the training Boeing will offer, that they will have any difficulty adapting to the user-friendly technology of the Super Hornet." he did not provide any technical infomration

He does not have to give any technical information. It is a well known fact that boeing's trainers and simulators are one of the most advanced state of art technologies.

The issue of ToT was always there and that is a severe drawback. However, your other concerns were addressed in the interview. Like.

The Super Hornet will remain a highly capable and combat relevant asset in the USN force structure for decades to come and is projected to be in service with the USN beyond 2035, thereby ensuring the IAF availability of spares and repairables for long-term support.

All of this, coupled with the demonstrated reliability and ease of maintenance of the Super Hornet's avionics and airframe systems, adds up to lower life cycle costs over the aircraft's life span, and makes the Super Hornet a more dependable and affordable combat fighter than its competitors.

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

The P-8 was chosen because they have no competition. The Phalcon was chosen because there was no equivalent available. Phalcon was without ToT too.

The point is not that. In case of a US sanctions, all these costly machines will be vulnerable too. If IN is optimistic that, P-8I will not be subjected to sanctions, why should IAF be apprehensive about the same F-18 SH?

Then the argument will go, it is 126+ aircraft's, so it is too risky to take that chance. But then, if US really wants to sanction India, they can hurt us more bad economically than militarily.

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

The point in the article quoted by Vladmir is not accurate. I guess that's what is being pointed out. Nowhere in the article does it say the IAF is not looking for air combat alone.

The only conclusion I drew was, F-16 and JAS gripen well and truly have a chance as Mig's are traditionally costly to maintain.

From the article:

The above hyperlink does not give the required information as concluded by Vijainderji. Meaning he is assuming IAF requirements for the MRCA.

ex-IAF pilot's assumption would be a lot better than our assumption.

 

[p2prada]

The point is not that. In case of a US sanctions, all these costly machines will be vulnerable too. If IN is optimistic that, P-8I will not be subjected to sanctions, why should IAF be apprehensive about the same F-18 SH?

Then the argument will go, it is 126+ aircraft's, so it is too risky to take that chance. But then, if US really wants to sanction India, they can hurt us more bad economically than militarily.

If the US does sanction India, then it will hurt them too. Even after Pokhran I the civilian tech sanctions were not very strict. Only really high tech stuff, mainly dual use technology, was sanctioned. After the bonhomie between India and US, any sanctions will mainly focus on restricting our military and not our civilian industry and businesses. US has way too much stake in India too.

If sanctions are placed, then expect our military to be the hardest hit. And all of the US military equipment will bear the brunt of it. If some of our recce planes are out of commission, then no problems, we can secretly source parts and spares from our airline industry for the P-8s. But, if 5 to 10 squadrons of fighters are out of commission, then we will face big problems.

 

[p2prada]

ex-IAF pilot's assumption would be a lot better than our assumption.

You are grabbing at straws here. The Pilot will indeed have more experience. But, that in no way implies he is right. It is well known that the main IAF requirement is a jet capable of strike. I was pointing out that he gave a wrong source for his conclusion. As Vlad pointed out the only thing we can conclude from the Ex-pilots hyperlink is that IAF will go for the cheapest fighter. His source does not point out to his conclusion that IAF is only looking at strike capability and cost.

 

[AJSINGH]

He does not have to give any technical information. It is a well known fact that boeing's trainers and simulators are one of the most advanced state of art technologies.

The issue of ToT was always there and that is a severe drawback. However, your other concerns were addressed in the interview. Like.

can you provide that boeings trainers are the most advance and the russian systems are not ?

The Super Hornet will remain a highly capable and combat relevant asset in the USN force structure for decades to come and is projected to be in service with the USN beyond 2035, thereby ensuring the IAF availability of spares and repairables for long-term support. i would like to stress upon the word " projected " that situation is not in the hands of the company , USAF may or may not operate these aircraft once F-35 is in active service

All of this, coupled with the demonstrated reliability and ease of maintenance of the Super Hornet's avionics and airframe systems, adds up to lower life cycle costs over the aircraft's life span, and makes the Super Hornet a more dependable and affordable combat fighter than its competitors. affordable than its competitors ,that is too general statement , he did not give the technical life of airfrmae ,avionics etc

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

can you provide that boeings trainers are the most advance and the russian systems are not ?

No, I will not because I never said Russian trainers are not advanced. When you find Boeing commercial flight simulators to be so user friendly, I would not be wrong to perceive the same about a military technology.

i would like to stress upon the word " projected " that situation is not in the hands of the company , USAF may or may not operate these aircraft once F-35 is in active service

USAF has raptors. Yet, it operates F-16's and F-15's. Arrival of F-35 does'nt mean they will dump SH on the whole. Only the older F-18's which are not SH yet operational will be phased out. F-35 is not so cheap to buy and maintain. USN will prefer maintaining SH to F-35 any day.

affordable than its competitors ,that is too general statement , he did not give the technical life of airfrmae ,avionics etc

He said, the fighter won't see a scheduled visit to a maintenance depot until it has clocked a minimum of 6,000 hours of flying time.

This interview was an email conversation by Ramananda Sengupta. Why will he be technical, wherein the only people he has to convince is the IAF and GOI and not the people of India.

You are so obsessed with Mig 35 that you don't fighters a fighting chance. You just want to create hypothetical scenarios to downplay US. We have had our share of bitterness frm Russians too.

 

[AJSINGH]

^^^ F-22 raptor is very expensive ,that is why they are buying only 187 aircraft however F-35 is very affordable ( hence it will be called the aircraft of the century ) F-35 was built to replace SH in navy .like i said ,even Migs have improved inservice life ,for example ,Mig 29K will see only 1 overhaul in 10 years ,technical life of Mig 35 engine is superb and so is the airframe life ( if you want exact numbers,i shall do that too )

i also like rafale ,but no yankee fighters

 

[AJSINGH]

i have seen SH simulator in aero india 2007 ( infact i was sitting in WSO seat and Ratan Tata was in the pilot seat ) and i have also seen Mig 35 simulator ,you cant really make out which simulator is different because bulit for different aircraft to simulate different flight conditions

 

[tarunraju]

True, F-35 indeed is cheaper. It was even formally offered to India. The only catch there was that India would have had to sweeten the deal with handing MMRCA over to crappy F-16s.

 

[Vladimir79]

True, F-35 indeed is cheaper. It was even formally offered to India. The only catch there was that India would have had to sweeten the deal with handing MMRCA over to crappy F-16s.

Well, they just upped the F-35 cost estimates by an additional $15 billion and a two year delay. At $315 billion for a planned 2,443 run, they will cost $128.9 million per unit including the development costs. There are several nations who are downgrading the number of frames they wish to purchase. If this trend continues, F-35 could go the way of F-22.

 

[Sridhar]

Thursday, October 29, 2009

[Vishnu Som] Update On Boeing Super Hornet Pitch

Boeing and its F/A-18 industry partners Raytheon, GE and Northrop-Grumman held a press conference in Delhi on Wednesday. Friend and NDTV associate editor VISHNU SOM was there and has been kind enough to send LiveFist this update on what happened:

As far as the transfer of source codes for AESA is concerned, Boeing is still at the "can't discuss in an open forum, lets see how this plays out" mode. At the same time, the fact that India has agreed to the US end user agreement during Hillary Clinton's visit here means that the full-up Super Hornet IN, inclusive of the upgraded GE F414 engine, the APG-79 AESA and other key systems are cleared for transfer. So it's quite possible that the version of the AESA offered will be full-spec. In fact, I am sure, India would not accept anything less than that.

Secondly, February 2010 is the big date for the IAF and the next phase of the Hornet There will be an evaluation of the following: 1. Mission systems flight evaluation 2. AESA 3. FLIR 4. EW 5. Weapon delivery 6. Maintenance evaluation 7. Technical evaluation.

All this will be done at the Naval Air Station Lemoore in California, the same base from where I flew the second of my Super Hornet sorties. Boeing reps repeatedly state that the AESA will be evaluated in conjunction with other systems, ie, the data link, FLIR etc to showcase the full package.

As far as AESA is concerned, the Boeing-Raytheon team seemed to take on their European rivals who are still developing/integrating their product. They explained how it took eight years for the APG-79 to move from low rate initial production to first operational deployment. The dates are as follows: June 2003 Low rate initial production / December 2006 Operational evaluation completed / December 2007 Initial Operational clearance & Full scale production approval and May 2008 First operational deployment.

The APG-79 has 1,000-hours mean time between failures (MTBF), more than 75,000 operational flight hours, it's been approved for sale to India and will be sustained in US service beyond 2035. The proposed GE F414 EPE (Enhanced Performance Engine) for India offers a 20 per cent increase in thrust and a 1 per cent reduction in fuel burn. The F414 is itself in the 22,000-lb thrust class, 170 lb/second airflow. Engine change is done in under 30 minutes, interchangeable left and right engine installation. No need for a functional check flight after engine change. No throttle restrictions while in operation (I have personally witnessed this, it's amazing -- you can pretty much do what you want with the throttle, slam it to burner and take it back as much as you want ... nothing happens).

Boeing says it WILL offer the Indian Air Force an out and out 9G fighter -- this has been a promise made by the Boeing team. I was led to believe this involves changes in the flight control system, though the airframe itself is OK for 9G.

The pitch -- this is a rugged, proven, operational platform, which is now available to India at a cost NOT too much over its single engine competitors in the MMRCA race. As far as their performance in the trials in Bangalore are concerned, they say that they are satisfied with what they were able to demonstrate to the Indian Air Force but reiterate that its the IAF which has to be satisfied. Thats it for the moment folks.


LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: [Vishnu Som] Update On Boeing Super Hornet Pitch

 

[Sridhar]

Cross posting

Boeing assurance on ToT for production of F-18IN in India

New Delhi: After successfully completing the second phase of trials for Indian Air Force's 126 medium range multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) tender , US firm Boeing Co said it was ready to transfer technology which would allow construction of its F/A-18IN Super Hornet fighter jets in India.
'We fully intend for Super Hornet to be built in India,' said Boeing Military Aircraft Integrated Defence Systems president Christopher M Chadwick here.
While the Indians generally maintain a free-flowing relationship with the Russians as far as transfer of technology is concerned, US firms are more tight-fisted and, given the lack of political goodwill amongst both nations, also more unreliable.
'We plan to build 18 aircraft in the US and from the 19th aircraft it will be built in India…. we will continue transfer of technology to India so that they not only assemble but make lots of part of the aircraft in India…. actually building the aircraft here,' Chadwick added.
Boeing and the Indians are aware that for transfer of American technology, prior approval of the US Congress required. It is fairly certain that award of the MMRCA contract to a US firm, either Boeing or Lockheed Martin, would eventually hinge around the level of technology transfers that the Americans are willing to allow with their aircraft.
Lockheed Martin, the world's biggest defence contractor, is in the running with the Block 60 version of the F-16, dubbed the F-16IN Super Viper. This is the most advanced version of the aircraft currently available and serves with the UAE air force.

domain-b.com : Boeing assurance on ToT for production of F-18IN in India

and

domain-b.com : Boeing signs offsets deal with Indian defence PSUs for P-8I contract

 

[AJSINGH]

about the post 156 , the boeing can say whatever they want about TOT,but it is with US govermnet to decide . how can boeing be so sure ?

 

[F-14]

Bharat Rakshak • View topic - MRCA News and Discussion

pls read the link that i have posted

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

about the post 156 , the boeing can say whatever they want about TOT,but it is with US govermnet to decide . how can boeing be so sure ?

Read this line

the fact that India has agreed to the US end user agreement during Hillary Clinton's visit here means that the full-up Super Hornet IN, inclusive of the upgraded GE F414 engine, the APG-79 AESA and other key systems are cleared for transfer. So it's quite possible that the version of the AESA offered will be full-spec. In fact, I am sure, India would not accept anything less than that.

:man_in_love:

But inspite of all this, if Mig-35 wins, it is pretty obvious that IAF thinks its best of best. IAF should start its elimination process by dumping Gripen first.

 

[venom]

The Fight is between F-18[depends on lever of tech transfer],Mig-35[Delivery period] & Typhoon[A2G Capability upgrade]........lets c wat is the result,what we say here wont affect the selection process of IAF & its knows what is best for its requirements.....we just go on discussing something based on stupid articles by some1 [Around 95%] & discussion on basis of genuine articles released by the firms is just somewhere around 5%. And i wont be surprised if grippen is declared as the winner because its the only fighter which suites the original RPF[A single engine medium multi role combat aircraft with flexibility of operations & lower life cycle cost] & i have no idea how much the RPF has been modified wue to participation of F-16In,F-18n & others.F-16 is out & i think the reasons have benn discussed here before.

 

[icecoolben]

Iaf would definitely be looking at a twin engined fighter for its medium category requirement as single engined light category is filled by tejas. The truth is selecting a large fighter would make our su-30 mki superfluous. If i had to decide i would scrap mmrca and go for fast tracking tejas.