MTA Program by UAC/HAL

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
1)The Russians aren't easy going on IPR violations. They refused to sell China the MiG-29K because of the J-11 and J-15 and have been conducting back-door talks on this matter for a while and it is specculated China has agreed to not export any Russian origin design (J-11/15) to a third party.

2) India respects IPR and that's why it has got where it has, violating them now would not be benefical.

3) What part of the MTA that India will get ToT on is critical tech that India doesn't have now?
Mig 29K sale was vetoed by India as India being the primary operator can stop the sale of Mig 29 K2 to any country.
 

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,573
Country flag
Mig 29K sale was vetoed by India as India being the primary operator can stop the sale of Mig 29 K2 to any country.
The Russians also said no on the basis of J-15 IPR infringments (Su-33). This was before they "buried the hatchet" though and came to the present agreement that allowed for the sale of Su-35 to them.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
1)The Russians aren't easy going on IPR violations. They refused to sell China the MiG-29K because of the J-11 and J-15 and have been conducting back-door talks on this matter for a while and it is specculated China has agreed to not export any Russian origin design (J-11/15) to a third party.

2) India respects IPR and that's why it has got where it has, violating them now would not be benefical.

3) What part of the MTA that India will get ToT on is critical tech that India doesn't have now?
For stater turbofan engine technology ,non satellite high precision navigation ,some for elector optics sensor and off course some other primary system like high precision motor and other.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
The Russians also said no on the basis of J-15 IPR infringments (Su-33). This was before they "buried the hatchet" though and came to the present agreement that allowed for the sale of Su-35 to them.
J 15 was copied thanked to Ukraine ,as for Su 35 deal ,they are getting a version without new engine ,sensor and avionics plus Russian are working on a new upgrade on Su 35 .
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
For stater turbofan engine technology ,non satellite high precision navigation ,some for elector optics sensor and off course some other primary system like high precision motor and other.
Joint development means joint IPR. Issue is not TOT. TOT is wrong word.

Joint IPR means India can produce as many copies as it wants, and can export as well.
 

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,573
Country flag
For stater turbofan engine technology ,non satellite high precision navigation ,some for elector optics sensor and off course some other primary system like high precision motor and other.
Of these, the turbofan engine tech is all that really appeals to India and are the Russians going to be so ready to transfer such know how to India? I wouldn't think so. And let's not forget, that FADEC would be absent on these engines so they are already rather outdated.
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
@abingdonboy
The cost of Mi 28N is 15 million and cost of AH 64D is 65 million.Let take the cost of maintenance of 20 years as 3 times for AH 64 D and 10 times for Mi 28N.The final cost of Mi 28N (15 +150) is 165 million and for AH 64 Dit is (65 +195) 260 million .By your logic Mi 28 N should have won as it has the lowest bet.The cost of Mil Mi 26 T2 is 18 million and for CH 47 F is 38.5 million.Let take the same maintenance figure Mi 26 (18 +180) 198 and CH 47 (38.5 + 115) 154 so Chinook is OK for that logic .Il 78 unit cost is 116 ,A 330 is 231 million so with same figure Il 78 is 1.276 billion while A 330 MRT 976 million so ok for A 330 MRT .The reason I gave you were the official reason give to Russian embassy for thier lost in contract.
The number you are quoting are weird.
Where these numbers are coming from. India was running a full Soviet inventory. How much was India spending on maintenance. I want real numbers not assumptions.

Can somebody show me real numbers. Numbers can be obtained from any long term operator for most aircraft.
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
Of these, the turbofan engine tech is all that really appeals to India and are the Russians going to be so ready to transfer such know how to India? I wouldn't think so. And let's not forget, that FADEC would be absent on these engines so they are already rather outdated.
Russians may not give turbofan tech to India. I don't think that is covered in MTA. So this discussion is meaningless.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
The number you are quoting are weird.
Where these numbers are coming from. India was running a full Soviet inventory. How much was India spending on maintenance. I want real numbers not assumptions.

Can somebody show me real numbers. Numbers can be obtained from any long term operator for most aircraft.
It is wild assumption a real one is 3 time for NATO equipment and 4-5 for Russian equipment but real one are classified ,this was to disprove the point that Life cycle cost of Russian equipment is less.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
Of these, the turbofan engine tech is all that really appeals to India and are the Russians going to be so ready to transfer such know how to India? I wouldn't think so. And let's not forget, that FADEC would be absent on these engines so they are already rather outdated.
FADEC was planned in joint upgrade plus the requirement of the jet did not require FADEC ,it was midway that it was demanded by IAF and no prospect of increase in money for jet , making a new engine is impossible.A new engine means 5-10$ billion plus 5 years of waiting ,was IAF ready to give this much money.A engine is more complicated then the plane .As for turbofan engine ,we have full ToT, similar to BhraMos .
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
It is wild assumption a real one is 3 time for NATO equipment and 4-5 for Russian equipment but real one are classified ,this was to disprove the point that Life cycle cost of Russian equipment is less.
I know. IAF did LCC only between Eurofighter and Rafale. I can challenge any person on this. IAF never included all fighters as it already rejected the remaining four on technical grounds.

I can guarantee that Russian transports have lower LCC. Let anybody disprove with numbers.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
Of these, the turbofan engine tech is all that really appeals to India and are the Russians going to be so ready to transfer such know how to India? I wouldn't think so. And let's not forget, that FADEC would be absent on these engines so they are already rather outdated.
FADEC is way of controlling the engine in which the power of engine and fuel injection is decided by digital network,The actual engine component like the material making the blades of compressor ,blade geometry ,injection system , no of stages ,heat and each stage is what is the core of engine and decide it outdated or or not.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
1)The Russians aren't easy going on IPR violations. They refused to sell China the MiG-29K because of the J-11 and J-15
They haven't refused to sell Mig-29K to China because Chinese never asked for it. They get only one aircraft carrier which can only accommodate one type of fighter. Since they already spent a fortune on their own Su-33, they can't afford another fighter on board.
 

tharun

Patriot
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
2,149
Likes
1,377
Country flag
I don't know people talking about....TOT's let me tell u some thing
We need a cargo plane with 18-20 ton capacity....there are planes like an-197,kc-390, thing is we need it's aircraft body..there are many jet engines with in class of 30000-32000 lbf thrust.
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
I don't know people talking about....TOT's let me tell u some thing
We need a cargo plane with 18-20 ton capacity....there are planes like an-197,kc-390, thing is we need it's aircraft body..there are many jet engines with in class of 30000-32000 lbf thrust.
IAF want a total new redesign engine,nothing in the market suit their need so a new engine with FADEC control has to be made.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
It takes a lot of effort to build a clean sheet brand new engine. Russia already has the fully matured Soloviёv PS-90, that is also used in the Ilyushin-76. FADEC might be a good-to-have feature, but a clean sheet engine, as demanded by IAF, might be too optimistic and also financially untenable.

It is rather rich of IAF to have such high standards. It can toss around such demands to HAL and DRDO, as we have seen with the LCA project, and criticize them when they fail, but looks like Ilyushin Bureau will not put up with it, and have responded with a polite "take it or leave it" rebuttal.

Hopefully, IAF will be less unkind to domestically made products. The T-90 loving IA should also take note.
PS90 is reliable engine, IAF’s FADEC requirement came midway for MTA Project: UAC President

Breaking his silence on stalled Indo-Russian Medium Transport Aircraft (MTA) project due to issues related to choice of engine envisaged to power the aircraft, UAC Chief Yuri Slyusar confirmed that Full authority digital engine (or electronics) control (FADEC) system is not available on Aviadvigatel PS-90 turbofan engine as asked by Indian Air force and also informed that IAF’s requirement for FADEC was added midway and was never part of initial requirements .


Preliminary design for the MTA was completed nearly 3 years ago but has been stuck due to difference emerging on the choice of engine to power the aircraft. Slyusar confirmed that UAC was asked by Indian Air force to search for an alternative engine but they were unable to find one which meets four major criteria in engine performance asked by IAF.

idrw.org in the past had reported that Russian and HAL team have met to find solutions to the deadlock but IAF is holding its ground and is adamant that engines for MTA transporter should have FADEC system requirements but Slyusar has questioned IAF’s demand and pointed out the engine in question has extensively used across civilian and military platforms across Russia and argued that no one should question performance or reliability of the engine since even Russian Presidental aircraft is powered by same engines .

Slyusar also added that if the engine issued is sorted soon and matter resolved with IAF/HAL, work on the first Prototype can be done rapidly. Defence Analyst Ranesh Rajan close to idrw.org feels that IAF might be actually interested in integration on FADEC system equipped engines from Western OEM which Russians are not agreeing to do leading to the whole project going in the backburner lately.

FADEC system in engine basically means that an ECU (Engine Control Unit – digital computer) controls all aspects of the engine performance and decides on the amount of fuel it injects into the inlet ports as well as the exact timing of the spark advance. FADEC has no form of manual override available, placing full authority over the operating parameters of the engine in the hands of the computer.

Not only FADEC system provides optimum engine efficiency for a given flight condition and helps users receive engine health and maintenance reports leading to the better serviceability of the aircraft. But the failure of FADEC means certain engine failure and recent crash of Airbus A-400M was attributed to complex engine software which crashed on that ill flight leading to engine failure killing its 4 crew.


http://idrw.org/ps90-is-reliable-en...way-for-mta-project-uac-president/#more-89884
Looking at the specifications of MTA project 20000kg payload same as Airbus a400m..but a400 has four engines but MTA has only two
The MTA/Ilyushin-214 has or will have 2 x Soloviёv PS-14/PD-14 engines with no FADEC. This translates into 2 x 153 kN = 306 kN.

The Sukhoi Superjet 100 has 2 x PowerJet SaM146 engines with FADEC. This translates into 2 x 80 kN = 160 kN.

If the MTA/Ilyushin-214 can be modified to have four engines like the Ilyushin-76, then we will have 4 x PowerJet SaM146 engines with FADEC. This will translate into 4 x 80 kN = 320 kN, more than what is available with the current MTA/Ilyushin-214. The extra power might be useful if the fuselage or the wings need to be extended for extra fuel capacity and equipment.

@gadeshi, your views on this?

@Gessler, @garg_bharat, @Bahamut, et al., please chip in.
 
Last edited:

Zebra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
6,060
Likes
2,303
Country flag
If I am not wrong the " MTA Program by UAC/HAL " has been cancelled already by GoI.

As the Russians offered already developed project in the name of joint development.

It is already ready, there are nothing new to develop in it.

They just need funds for further events, like production.

Correct me. Please.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
@Zebra,

If IAF is serious about MTA, it will revive the project. India is not in a position of strength. Russia can build airplanes without India. India cannot build airplanes without Russia. If India can, then it should go ahead, just like Russia has gone ahead, with or without India.

Since IAF was insistent on FADEC, I only offered a solution to resolve the impasse.
 

charlie

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
1,150
Likes
1,245
Country flag
The MTA/Ilyushin-214 has or will have 2 x Soloviёv PS-14/PD-14 engines with no FADEC. This translates into 2 x 153 kN = 306 kN.

The Sukhoi Superjet 100 has 2 x PowerJet SaM146 engines with FADEC. This translates into 2 x 80 kN = 160 kN.

If the MTA/Ilyushin-214 can be modified to have four engines like the Ilyushin-76, then we will have 4 x PowerJet SaM146 engines with FADEC. This will translate into 4 x 80 kN = 320 kN, more than what is available with the current MTA/Ilyushin-214. The extra power might be useful if the fuselage or the wings need to be extended for extra fuel capacity and equipment.

@gadeshi, your views on this?

@Gessler, @garg_bharat, @Bahamut, et al., please chip in.
4 engines will increase down time of the aircraft, cost of spares and maintenance will increase and that will make the project unfeasible for the aircraft size of IL214.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top