MRCA news and discussion /feb-june 2009

[VayuSena1]

not really sir, i think that the choice will be made depending on the needs and specifications of the indian air force,its of little significance what the other countries are doing.this has being stated by the air chief himself in aero india 09 when asked about the induction of f-16 in IAF as PAF also posses them.

thnx

I quite agree with you, Mr. Invincible. Despite media getting a lot of spicy topics and stories of all kinds on various "source-quoted" information that even the men in uniform are unaware of, I must say that MiG-35 has a solid chance of being inducted in the air force though partially.

My guess here might seem impractical owing to the nature of this deal and its expectations by our senior commanders and government, I expect that this contract would be split between MiG-35 and Dassault Rafale. In my opinion, it s due to following reasons:

1) Splitting the contract would mean the co-winner has to work equally hard to secure any potential future market and would hence lead to a healthy competition

2) Would reduce the risk of worrisome delays of one manufacturer making the entire 126+74 aircraft, and therefore deny that company/country immense power to bully India.

3) Would enable us keep a couple of our regular suppliers 'in the bag'. (I shall elaborate this in a separate post).

I am however confident in my opinion, that MiG-35 has a strong chance of winning.

 

[VayuSena1]

I feel that there would (and should) be two winners of this competition, France's Rafale and Russia's MiG. I have my following reasons to say thus:

1) Our engineers have experience operating the older cousins of these aircraft and therefore would be easier and quicker to deploy these obtaining all technical know-how in shortest possible time unlike gaining knowledge about and operating Typhoons, Gripens or American jets.

2) A combination of RAC-Dassault aircraft has proven to be an excellent and lethal package in the past (Kargil conflict where Mirages were used with MiG-29s as fighter escorts).

3) Russia and France both have supplied India with reliable weapons in times of her need and therefore this would further boost ties with both countries in the sphere of foreign relations.

4) Costs are dramatically reduced due to lesser learning time and training of pilots as compared to other 4 contenders, them being totally alien to our engineers.

5) Both Russia and France are independent of US or any other foreign policies and do not question how we use our weapons in times of war, unlike USA's case where the user of her weapons is subjected to an annual weapons inspection by specialists of either Boeing or Lockheed Martin. Hence our independent stand will not be compromised.

6) MiG and Dassault have a long history of stay in Indian defence markets and therefore know exactly what Indian military requirements are. Therefore, from a supplier's perspective, this creates lesser complications for them to supply us what we need.

 

[A.V.]

sir will the annual inspection clause still hold true even for the mrca deal is there no way of negotiating it?
also the other planes or equipments the IAF is getting from the US is it also subject to this inspection for eg:-the CI30 or the P8i for the navy.

 

[jackprince]

sir will the annual inspection clause still hold true even for the mrca deal is there no way of negotiating it?
also the other planes or equipments the IAF is getting from the US is it also subject to this inspection for eg:-the CI30 or the P8i for the navy.

I don't see why US wont insist on 'Golden Sentry' for MMRCA. After all they did so for our version of Airforce One, which only have some defensive measures built in. CAG did quite a tongue-lashing to the MoD guys for that reason, but to no avail.

 

[jackprince]

If the contract is split between Rafale and Mig, it would be good as the production would be faster and the required squadrons can be met faster. Also if one of the supplier goes rogue on the deal, we can scrap the whole deal with them and go for the other one for the remaining numbers (at least can threaten them to!). This way India could keep a leash on Mig (if Mig is chosen and as Mig is most likely to get greedy).

But there could be a problem in India itself, as 85% of production is to be done by HAL, they would need to open two different facilities for production. The human resources would also have to be split.

Anyways, if it is split what are the two a/c in your opinion should get the contracts. IMO, 70% Rafale and 30% F/A-18E/F. Rafale because all the points I've already stated. And F/A-18E/F Super Hornet because it's good plane and even if it comes with a luggage, it has good tech. and it'll open up another avenue for future. Also, with smaller no. of a/c US won't have that much leverage. and also I like it!

I'm against Mig because IMO our existing 2 squadrons of Mig-29 could be upgraded. Also, IAF faced a lot of tech trouble with Mig-29s. Mig-35 wasn't even accepted by Russians. Whereas all other a/cs have already been operational in at least one air force.

 

[VayuSena1]

If the contract is split between Rafale and Mig, it would be good as the production would be faster and the required squadrons can be met faster. Also if one of the supplier goes rogue on the deal, we can scrap the whole deal with them and go for the other one for the remaining numbers (at least can threaten them to!). This way India could keep a leash on Mig (if Mig is chosen and as Mig is most likely to get greedy).

But there could be a problem in India itself, as 85% of production is to be done by HAL, they would need to open two different facilities for production. The human resources would also have to be split.

Anyways, if it is split what are the two a/c in your opinion should get the contracts. IMO, 70% Rafale and 30% F/A-18E/F. Rafale because all the points I've already stated. And F/A-18E/F Super Hornet because it's good plane and even if it comes with a luggage, it has good tech. and it'll open up another avenue for future. Also, with smaller no. of a/c US won't have that much leverage. and also I like it!

I'm against Mig because IMO our existing 2 squadrons of Mig-29 could be upgraded. Also, IAF faced a lot of tech trouble with Mig-29s. Mig-35 wasn't even accepted by Russians. Whereas all other a/cs have already been operational in at least one air force.

What use do you think is of aircrafts that come with more strings attached than a pinnocchio puppet such as F-18 Superhornet? When we do not have the freedom to use it the way we deem it fit for our defence needs despite us paying a colossal amount to the US, I think we don't need such a "superb and high tech" aircraft and the US can just keep it to themselves.

The 30% should be reserved for MiG-35 because MiG-29 would be seeing combat service exit anytime soon and a possibility of a mere upgrade should not make us do the same mistake we did with MiG-21s. Our MiG-29s have a very good record unlike MiG-21s because their lifespan hasn't reached to the breaking point yet. However, it can be anytime in the near future and we must keep this in mind. As such we have so many issues in the air force to deal with; What all would you want to deal at a time when you suddenly need newer aircraft? A country that throws in a hundred tantrums and warnings to just operate their aircrafts, as well alongside the frustration of keeping the force numbers alive? I don't think F/A-18 is such a worthy aircraft for all the trouble it can cause. If it is being so desperately sought, I feel that the government should stretch the budget and get Typhoons for the remaining 30% because if at all the government can expand the budget for 30% aircraft while not wanting a MiG, Typhoon packs the punch here. Despite its sky-brushing price tag, it has something to boast about along with freedom to use whenever desired.

I would still consider giving MiG the 30% portion since they are already in trouble and giving them a smaller bailout would also turn the things in our favor.

 

[Soham]

I feel that there would (and should) be two winners of this competition, France's Rafale and Russia's MiG. I have my following reasons to say thus:

1) Our engineers have experience operating the older cousins of these aircraft and therefore would be easier and quicker to deploy these obtaining all technical know-how in shortest possible time unlike gaining knowledge about and operating Typhoons, Gripens or American jets.

2) A combination of RAC-Dassault aircraft has proven to be an excellent and lethal package in the past (Kargil conflict where Mirages were used with MiG-29s as fighter escorts).

3) Russia and France both have supplied India with reliable weapons in times of her need and therefore this would further boost ties with both countries in the sphere of foreign relations.

4) Costs are dramatically reduced due to lesser learning time and training of pilots as compared to other 4 contenders, them being totally alien to our engineers.

5) Both Russia and France are independent of US or any other foreign policies and do not question how we use our weapons in times of war, unlike USA's case where the user of her weapons is subjected to an annual weapons inspection by specialists of either Boeing or Lockheed Martin. Hence our independent stand will not be compromised.

6) MiG and Dassault have a long history of stay in Indian defence markets and therefore know exactly what Indian military requirements are. Therefore, from a supplier's perspective, this creates lesser complications for them to supply us what we need.

I agree that our engineers have experience about the French and Russian fighters, but is that leverage satisfactory enough to reject the others ?

While I can't deny the fact that the Mirage and the Migs were very effective in Kargil, are you sure they are better than the competition ?
As the Pakistani F-16s did not possess BVR capability back then, it was a suicide for them to try their luck against the Migs. So they didn't.

So there's no way of knowing who's most effective.

Completely agree with your third point, and therein lies my support for the two planes...

Point 4... yes. The costs might increase, but its not like we are going bankrupt. If its for a better aircraft, training and infrastructure costs might turn out to be worth the spending.

Agree with your last two points. But as mentioned before, they are not reasons enough to discard the others.

 

[Yusuf]

MRCA has to be seen from the strategic angle.
We have a great new relation with US, Good old one with Europe, Old but shaky relations with Russia.

MiG 35 ruled out for me because it is Russian. With all the problems we are facing in procuring stuff from them, who knows that after quoting $8 Billion for 126 pcs, they might ask for 4 more midway after India has already paid $5billion as advance. Just like the Gorshkov deal. So this is the time to teach the Russians a good lesson.

Europe (UK and France) are our old and trusted partners. But their products are more expensive.

Gets us to the US. New bonhomie. Right time to develop a better strategic relations with them. The process is already underway with the acquisition of the Jalashwa and contracts for Hercules, and Poseidon.
SH which i personally prefer costs about $55million to the the Europeans upto $100million. Only the MiG 35 will be cheaper provided the Russians stick to their offer.
The SH is combat proven.

 

[Yusuf]

MRCA has to be seen from the strategic angle.
We have a great new relation with US, Good old one with Europe, Old but shaky relations with Russia.

MiG 35 ruled out for me because it is Russian. With all the problems we are facing in procuring stuff from them, who knows that after quoting $8 Billion for 126 pcs, they might ask for 4 more midway after India has already paid $5billion as advance. Just like the Gorshkov deal. So this is the time to teach the Russians a good lesson.

Europe (UK and France) are our old and trusted partners. But their products are more expensive.

Gets us to the US. New bonhomie. Right time to develop a better strategic relations with them. The process is already underway with the acquisition of the Jalashwa and contracts for Hercules, and Poseidon.
SH which i personally prefer costs about $55million to the the Europeans upto $100million. Only the MiG 35 will be cheaper provided the Russians stick to their offer.
The SH is combat proven.

 

[Soham]

Gets us to the US. New bonhomie. Right time to develop a better strategic relations with them. The process is already underway with the acquisition of the Jalashwa and contracts for Hercules, and Poseidon.
SH which i personally prefer costs about $55million to the the Europeans upto $100million. Only the MiG 35 will be cheaper provided the Russians stick to their offer.
The SH is combat proven.

Just as you think that there is a probability of Russian spoilsport...
Equally great are the chances of an arms-embargo...

So... stick with European, and we'll be safe.
I'm sure we have enough money to afford the Rafale, or even better, the EF.

 

[Yusuf]

Arms embargo is a thing of the past. There is this nuke deal which has the US and other companies licking their lips. There is a lot of money at stake. The US needs India for geo-political reasons, its huge arms market and also economic reasons.

 

[jackprince]

Arms embargo is a thing of the past. There is this nuke deal which has the US and other companies licking their lips. There is a lot of money at stake. The US needs India for geo-political reasons, its huge arms market and also economic reasons.

Nuke deal was made with Bush admin. and they were happy. But the Obama admin. doesn't seem to be inclining toward India instead trying to 'better' relationship with China. There GE fiasco was a hint what problems might arise. P-8I, Hercules deals were big deals, but not that crucial for Indian defense as MMRCA. Putting 10+ squadrons of our fighter a/c in American whim and legal issues will not be wise IMO. Safest and economical bet is Rafale.

 

[VayuSena1]

Exactly my feeling about the Super Hornet. Especially with the administration try to scuttle defence deals with even friendly nations now. For example, the notice to GE to not produce engines for the Shivalik Frigate... hehehehe....

I think this will put a big dent on the prospects of the Super Hornet. And, I'm quite sure they'd have problems giving ToT for their AESA radars even though, arguably, the French would have no such problem offering AESA to us...

Anyways, what about the Eurofighter? I know its not value for money, but if I give 122 million dollars a piece, it should be one hell of a piece of equipment, right?

And, if we buy Eurofighter, we're not only denying it to Pakistan, but also getting the whole of Europe on our side... What say???

Considering the geo-political aspects of the deal, I think that it would be better to remember that of the "entire" Europe on our side, only the UK is a permanent member in the UNSC, while others are more or less not so effective. UK has a rather shady history of bowing down to US pressure on almost anything (remember the Pokhran sanctions?).

During the Pokhran II, we must remember that apart from Russia and Israel, France was the only country that refused to condemn Indian nuclear tests and did not impose embargo upon us; only 3 countries. What I want to make a point here is that if we have to consider roping in a reliable and free-willed globally powerful and influential nation, we must consider the France as a stronger contender as compared to Britain and the remaining consortium of which Germany is the only other nation that has excellent track record with India. Spain and Italy are more or less not so involved and I believe that their not bein permanent members makes them a dead weight in any future international decision made.

Regarding Pakistan getting access to the Typhoon, it is a very far cry looking at the price tag at which the aircraft comes and also the economic condition Pakistan is currently in. However, if considering allies, I must say that Pakistan might get access to the Typhoon's know-how via Saudi Arabia, with which it is an extremely close partner on various issues. Not that it would give them any additional strategic capability against Indian air force in any future conflict, but knowledge can anytime and anyhow come in handy, especially having the knowledge of the enemy's aircraft in a war. This problem is further eliminated with the selecting of Rafale as France is the ONLY country that currently operates the fighter.

A $12 billion deal with the promise of obtaining mission codes means that India virtually buys off the entire line of production..as I said virtually. This would mean that India can retain the crucials of Rafale with us, the French being the only other country aware of them. When I talk about this, I am specifically referring to the Indian-Sub-continent region and not the entire world. This however is my opinion and I would welcome arguments both for and against this.

 

[Singh]

^^ GE fiasco was resolved. Rafale is expensive. yes, Ohbummer (Obama)'s India policy is all messed up and I agree with the part no to American jets for MMRCA.

 

[EnlightenedMonk]

Considering the geo-political aspects of the deal, I think that it would be better to remember that of the "entire" Europe on our side, only the UK is a permanent member in the UNSC, while others are more or less not so effective. UK has a rather shady history of bowing down to US pressure on almost anything (remember the Pokhran sanctions?).

During the Pokhran II, we must remember that apart from Russia and Israel, France was the only country that refused to condemn Indian nuclear tests and did not impose embargo upon us; only 3 countries. What I want to make a point here is that if we have to consider roping in a reliable and free-willed globally powerful and influential nation, we must consider the France as a stronger contender as compared to Britain and the remaining consortium of which Germany is the only other nation that has excellent track record with India. Spain and Italy are more or less not so involved and I believe that their not bein permanent members makes them a dead weight in any future international decision made.

Thanks... but, what are your views on the technical aspects of the Eurofighter ??? Is it really worth the 122 million that they're asking for???

Personally, I think if they are asking for 122 million, there ought to be a couple of "killer" features that none of the other jets have...

 

[VayuSena1]

Nuke deal was made with Bush admin. and they were happy. But the Obama admin. doesn't seem to be inclining toward India instead trying to 'better' relationship with China. There GE fiasco was a hint what problems might arise. P-8I, Hercules deals were big deals, but not that crucial for Indian defense as MMRCA. Putting 10+ squadrons of our fighter a/c in American whim and legal issues will not be wise IMO. Safest and economical bet is Rafale.

I agree with you 100%. I was more confident of the burgeoning ties between us and the Americans when Mr. George. W. Bush was in the White House. However with the dawn of Obama and his rather restrictive and pro-Chinese view towards the Indian sub-continent, I am not very confident about future good arms relations with the United States. As you said, the GE jolt was a very good warning about what the path ahead of us is all about when engaging with USA. For now, I feel that India should keep USA at one arm's distance with limiting weapons deals to P-8Is and C-130 Super Hercules.

A thing that has happened in the past does not necessarily mean that it will not happen in the future. A country that has a track record of restricting crucial material to the closest of its allies is not something we must invest too much upon. I am not being Anti-American but the way they treat their allies is something that bothers me very much. France on the other hand though business-minded, knows how to consider their regular suppliers and close allies with respect and not just smack them with jolts every single second.

 

[Singh]

Considering the geo-political aspects of the deal, I think that it would be better to remember that of the "entire" Europe on our side, only the UK is a permanent member in the UNSC, while others are more or less not so effective. UK has a rather shady history of bowing down to US pressure on almost anything (remember the Pokhran sanctions?).

Sir in addition, UK also refused to upgrade our Sea Harriers and India is facing also sorts of issues with Hawk.

During the Pokhran II, we must remember that apart from Russia and Israel, France was the only country that refused to condemn Indian nuclear tests and did not impose embargo upon us; only 3 countries. What I want to make a point here is that if we have to consider roping in a reliable and free-willed globally powerful and influential nation, we must consider the France as a stronger contender as compared to Britain and the remaining consortium of which Germany is the only other nation that has excellent track record with India. Spain and Italy are more or less not so involved and I believe that their not bein permanent members makes them a dead weight in any future international decision made.

Sir but France, Germany and Italy all deal with Pakistan too. At this point in time our relationship with France is akin to buyer-seller one, we must try to bring them in our camp and make sure that France doesn't supply anything to our enemies etc.

Regarding Pakistan getting access to the Typhoon, it is a very far cry looking at the price tag at which the aircraft comes and also the economic condition Pakistan is currently in. However, if considering allies, I must say that Pakistan might get access to the Typhoon's know-how via Saudi Arabia, with which it is an extremely close partner on various issues. Not that it would give them any additional strategic capability against Indian air force in any future conflict, but knowledge can anytime and anyhow come in handy, especially having the knowledge of the enemy's aircraft in a war. This problem is further eliminated with the selecting of Rafale as France is the ONLY country that currently operates the fighter.

Sir Emiratis strictly use only Emirati Arabs to pilot their top end planes like F16 block60s and Mirage 2000-9. It is the Dubai emirate with older planes who use Pakistanis. I believe similar would be the case with Saudis post Typhoon acquisition.
Though I agree Pakistanis with their close relationships with UAE, KSA and Turkey can gauge the capabilities of F16s, F-35s, Typhoons, M2Ks which may help them.

A $12 billion deal with the promise of obtaining mission codes means that India virtually buys off the entire line of production..as I said virtually. This would mean that India can retain the crucials of Rafale with us, the French being the only other country aware of them. When I talk about this, I am specifically referring to the Indian-Sub-continent region and not the entire world. This however is my opinion and I would welcome arguments both for and against this.

Sir, ToT would not be all encompassing and it will take us significant amount of time to understand about Rafale. The learning curve is quite steep and since we are developing Pak-Fa with Russia, in which our participation would be minimal at this point to me it appears we are investing in expensive lessons and knowledge which we will not possibly use in the future.

 

[Pintu]

I agree with you Singhji, but still filling that there will be two competitors in the race, in the last leg they will be Rafale and Mig-35, INS Shivalik can cast some negative impact on selection of F-16 and F-18 and I also see Gripen NG losing out of the race. I may be wrong in my prediction, but it is an assumption.

 

[VayuSena1]

Sir in addition, UK also refused to upgrade our Sea Harriers and India is facing also sorts of issues with Hawk.



Sir but France, Germany and Italy all deal with Pakistan too. At this point in time our relationship with France is akin to buyer-seller one, we must try to bring them in our camp and make sure that France doesn't supply anything to our enemies etc.



Sir Emiratis strictly use only Emirati Arabs to pilot their top end planes like F16 block60s and Mirage 2000-9. It is the Dubai emirate with older planes who use Pakistanis. I believe similar would be the case with Saudis post Typhoon acquisition.
Though I agree Pakistanis with their close relationships with UAE, KSA and Turkey can gauge the capabilities of F16s, F-35s, Typhoons, M2Ks which may help them.



Sir, ToT would not be all encompassing and it will take us significant amount of time to understand about Rafale. The learning curve is quite steep and since we are developing Pak-Fa with Russia, in which our participation would be minimal at this point to me it appears we are investing in expensive lessons and knowledge which we will not possibly use in the future.

I am only making very broad assumptions in my comments and am being very very approximate to real life scenario. Yes, French do deal with our rivals, but if seen that way we have only 2 options left in front of us: either make one on our own in 5 years or stick to Russia. I am sure that $10-$12 billion (stretchable) deal in one go would enable us to apply considerable pressure on France and limit their arms dealings with Pakistan.

Besides, I do not think that Pakistan is even considering buying any of these fighters since they are too expensive for them at any stage of time. Currently, all the Pakistani military budget is focused on cooperation and acquisition of weapons and aircraft from China. JF-17, J-10 and K-8 karakourum being some of the finest examples. As such the production of JF-17 is being done on a credit basis that the Government of Pakistan is supposed to repay in about 6-7 years. Therefore, investing in Rafales might not be a possibility for them for quite sometime before which if we buy the French off, can change this further to our advantage. I am sure you understand that important factor. Rafale being a neutral choice and meeting almost all our specs is the safest bet and therefore France is the only other option we can keep alongside Russia and our own domestic production. With MCA and PAK FA being quite distant from their dates of induction, I must say that we must try to get the 200 total Rafales ( or MiG-35 mix if our government deems it feasable) as soon as possible bearing the tiranga fin flash.

I never said about UAE or any other Arab country but only Saudi Arabia with which Pakistan has very strong ties. Pakistani pilots are known to train Saudi pilots and this is not something impossible considering their closeness. Currently, Saudi is the only country that operates the Typhoons in the Middle East. While it is more of a show and not for combat reasons, we are not in that position since we have to operate the aircraft day and night on regular sorties to specialize in them in as fast as possible.

This is what is the current situation with our Sukhoi-30 MKI squadrons. Most of us are relatively younger-than-usual fighter pilots to be put on such advance fighter aircraft and due to this, there is less-to-medium level of expertise on the aircraft at current stage despite 100% of input to specialize from the pilots' side. This means that by the time all the Sukhois are inducted in the air force, we might be able to gain complete mastery on their usage and secrets.

We have to consider experience and learning curve here, especially with all the turbulence in our neighbourhood. We have operated the Mirages and therefore are well aware of Dassault's technology ; both pilots and engineers. Therefore, choosing this aircraft would take the minimum time needed to gain enough knowledge to project power on these fighters. MiG-35 is the other easiest option we have considering the cost-experience-learning curve trio.

 

[HellFiReD]

We have so many Mig 29s already, it just makes more sense if we get a platform they we are used to and already have a tech support setup.And the fair part is that we will be getting source code for AESA radar....if they ever make it.I don't
know how mig-35 compares with rafale in terms of BVR but given its cost,it's pretty much a good deal.