MTA Program by UAC/HAL

Gessler

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
2,296
Likes
11,129
Country flag
Well, I guess this opens up some further opportunities for Lockheed in India. Licensed production of C-130J-30 by Tata subsidiary companies seems a distinct possibility. If not jointly invest in development of a specialized version like C-130XJ concept.



@abingdonboy What do you say mate?
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,391
Country flag
get over the mindset that what ever india does is crap......now to this topic.....why invest in15-20 tonnes payload with older engine n flight controls . when we can buy superior c130 with carrying capacity of 22 tonnes. earlier we were barred from US arms thats why we were intrested in this project but now things are changed. and dont think Russian as very responsible sellers, they had allways sold us old craps.
People like you are responsible for buying useless Hercules planes that actually crash.
 

salute

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
2,174
Likes
1,094
Well, I guess this opens up some further opportunities for Lockheed in India. Licensed production of C-130J-30 by Tata subsidiary companies seems a distinct possibility. If not jointly invest in development of a specialized version like C-130XJ concept.



@abingdonboy What do you say mate?
thats crazy you want india to escape from russian grip and right to the american hold.
 

Certified Gipsy

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
93
Likes
116
IAF is deliberately trying to play its tricks of changing the specifications in the last minute, so that Russia can make the first call to cancel the partnership.Seems like IAF wants to give more business to the Tata's joint venture with Lockheed in buying the C 130J Super Hercules transport aircraft. But what needs to be noted if whether Lockheed would make the whole aircraft in India if such a deal happens or just use the aerostructures produced by the Tata advanced systems and call it made in India. If it is the latter, then the Russian deal is much more advantageous, as the partnerships with Russian is far more reliable, project from the scratch make us true partners in design and development and hence our people could gain indepth experience that would be very helpful incase we decide to design and produce such an aircraft on our own in the future.
 
Last edited:

Gessler

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
2,296
Likes
11,129
Country flag
thats crazy you want india to escape from russian grip and right to the american hold.
I want India to have a good medium-lift transport aircraft. The old Antonov An-32B planes need a replacement in the next decade.
 

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,574
Country flag
Well, I guess this opens up some further opportunities for Lockheed in India. Licensed production of C-130J-30 by Tata subsidiary companies seems a distinct possibility. If not jointly invest in development of a specialized version like C-130XJ concept.



@abingdonboy What do you say mate?
Seems like the most logical alternative (IMHO) and this could potentially be more benfefical to Indian industry if it goes to TATA- imagine TATA churning out C-295s and C-130XJs whilst Reliance are producing Rafales in India. This can be the making of India's future aviation giants.

Addtionally this deal would be benefical from a MRO point of view for the existing 12 C-130J-30 fleet of the IAF who right now will have to go to either the US or some third nation for their MRO services.
 

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,574
Country flag
IAF is deliberately trying to play its tricks of changing the specifications in the last minute, so that Russia can make the first call to cancel the partnership.Seems like IAF wants to give more business to the Tata's joint venture with Lockheed in buying the C 130J Super Hercules transport aircraft. But what needs to be noted if whether Lockheed would make the whole aircraft in India if such a deal happens or just use the aerostructures produced by the Tata advanced systems and call it made in India. If it is the latter, then the Russian deal is much more advantageous, as the partnerships with Russian is far more reliable, project from the scratch make us true partners in design and development and hence our people could gain indepth experience that would be very helpful incase we decide to design and produce such an aircraft on our own in the future.
This line of reasoning makes no sense, one minuet the IAF is being accused of changing requirements to suit their "import agenda" but now they are being accused of doing so to support an Indian private entity who has minimal ties to the IAF as it stands?

Instead of demonising the IAF look at the facts.

HAL/IAF have remained consistent in their demands for a engine will FADAC for the MRTA from day ONE- the Russian side has refused to conede on this demand and still expects Indian taxpayers to foot 50% of the devlopment costs? Tell me what other nation/organisation would put up with this $hit?

I say good, if the Russians have really shown their true colours once again and steam rolled over India's concerns- maybe it will wake up those in the MoD/GoI that Russia doesn't see India as anything but a cash cow.
 

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.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,391
Country flag
Something is definitely wrong with the Indian Air Force. They are going about scuttling every deal with the Russians. There must be some big Yankee saboteur inside IAF. This person should be found out and put down like a dog, no matter his rank or seniority.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,391
Country flag
Well, I guess this opens up some further opportunities for Lockheed in India. Licensed production of C-130J-30 by Tata subsidiary companies seems a distinct possibility. If not jointly invest in development of a specialized version like C-130XJ concept.



@abingdonboy What do you say mate?
Why are you so fixated on C130? Play CoD too much eh?
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
@spikey360, nothing wrong with C-130 to be fair.

When it comes to join development, is IAF getting a better deal with any alternative to the Ilyushin-214? Is there any other option available to IAF whereby it will get a clean sheet engine with FADEC?

I am trying to see whether we are placing our demands with alternatives available, or just blowing hot air.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,391
Country flag
@pmaitra Nothing wrong with C130 per se. It is a very capable platform, I am sure. However, what is the point in antagonizing Russia by first starting a joint project and then stopping it?

It is certainly not a business like behaviour. It is neither a friendly behaviour. Then what is it, if not antagonising.
Going to a fish market, buying a fish and then complaining it does not have four eyes and accusing the seller of fraud is certainly not a sane behaviour.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
@spikey360, I think with the Indo-Russian join ventures being mainly Russian as far as technical contribution goes, I doubt how much India can have a say. India wants to get a bigger share and greater say, and this is perhaps motivated by the will to learn more, but Russia wouldn't want to create a competitor. This, I think, indicates that India is seen as capable of defence production.

IAF was indeed insane when they chose the CH-47 over the Mil-26T2 as a heavy lifter (as a heavy lifter, repeated for emphasis). The former can never be a substitute for the latter. That deal looked like politically motivated. Now, we have only one operational, with about 100 hours left.
 

Gessler

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
2,296
Likes
11,129
Country flag
Why are you so fixated on C130? Play CoD too much eh?
Two simple reasons :

1) We already operate them. IAF has accumulated ample experience with the type, and has already developed several spares-supply lines & maintenance procedures tailored for the SuperHerc. Additional planes of the type will take less time to be assimilated into the fleet.

2) Our companies already are part of the SuperHerc international supply chain. Companies like Tata Advanced Systems Ltd. (TASL) manufactures critical components like central wing boxes and tail section (fin & stabilizers included) for C-130, C-130J and C-130J-30 versions. They are fully capable of churning out fully assembled SuperHercs out of their Hyderabad facility if license is secured and the facility is suitably expanded. Plus as @abingdonboy pointed out - we can turn India into the regional MRO center for all Herc/SuperHerc models operated in the South/East Asia/Middle East neighbourhood.

Btw, I do play CoD much.
 
Last edited:

Gessler

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
2,296
Likes
11,129
Country flag
@pmaitra Nothing wrong with C130 per se. It is a very capable platform, I am sure. However, what is the point in antagonizing Russia by first starting a joint project and then stopping it?

It is certainly not a business like behaviour. It is neither a friendly behaviour. Then what is it, if not antagonising.
Going to a fish market, buying a fish and then complaining it does not have four eyes and accusing the seller of fraud is certainly not a sane behaviour.
Nothing all that strange - we started a project, one of the partners dropped out for whatever reason. This happens all the time. Considered multi-nation armored vehicle projects for example, like the Boxer APC that was originally meant to be British-German collaborative effort, Brits got out. Or the Leopard MBT, thought to be a joint Franco-German effort, French got out.

It does not have to mean that business has gone to the dogs...just that the project at hand does not or cannot offer the exact capabilities that one of the partner countries desires of it. No need for us to sit around and accept that we don't want - especially when there are great alternatives available!

This is quite unlike the FGFA project where if we reject it, we have no other alternative out there for a 5th generation air-superiority/multi-role plane.
 
Last edited:

Neelkanth

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
105
Likes
118
Nothing all that strange - we started a project, one of the partners dropped out for whatever reason. This happens all the time. Considered multi-nation armored vehicle projects for example, like the Boxer APC that was originally meant to be British-German collaborative effort, Brits got out. Or the Leopard MBT, thought to be a joint Franco-German effort, French got out.

It does not have to mean that business has gone to the dogs...just that the project at hand does not or cannot offer the exact capabilities that one of the partner countries desires of it. No need for us to sit around and accept that we don't want - especially when there are great alternatives available!

This is quite unlike the FGFA project where if we reject it, we have no other alternative out there for a 5th generation air-superiority/multi-role plane.
I wholly agree with you, few points I'd Like to add.

1) Russians have taken us for a ride quite a few times, and it has usually sold us Birds while they have phased out it at home. Examples. Mig 27 & Mig 23, Primary reason of them being Phased out is because of the lack of spares support from Russia, They got the point that it was no use in having multiple aircraft for the same role. Thankfully for Su-30 we are indigenizing spares which will yield results in 2-3 years, but spares kit supply shouldn't have affected us coz Ruskies are themselves using Su 30, even then we have low spare availability, and only 55% of birds are serviceable while official sanction is of 75%. Comparatively our Mirages (bought around the same time, of Mig 27 & 23) are comfortably well supplied with spares and most of em are functional.

2) FGFA will be dumped, mark this. T-50 is already a flying white elephant with even Russian Air Force to buy fewer PAK FA fighter aircrafts and the number from 52 has dropped to 12. initial order, the Engine or avionics aren't yet fully realized. Good luck with that. Russians were looking at us as cash cows we fund them but at the end they wont give us tech, or equal rights with IPRs (its far saner to use western Engines and Israeli avionics on that plat form, but if that happens the market for Russia will go Kaput) Dumb proposition to buy everything from Russia, and still pay for IPRs and Tech. Then again we were supposed to receive prototypes as a part of "Indian Round of testing", BTW that's was not the new offer but the old one read the deal that was signed. So, as of now IAF is unclear about its capabilities. So literally what kind of "Joint project" is this?.

3) About the MTA, we have an MoU for 8 years, while Embraer KC-390 is already off ground (3 proto types) which was first planned in 2006, Russia was just moving around with this, Even if we get MTA we have to use Russian Avionics and Engines and will not have total rights over half its IPRs even though if we paid and researched for it. so 8 years lost again. and we have what ? NADA !

Again we cannot use our own Avionics or Israelis or own Engine or Western Ones. This is Bull crap!! We pay for half the development cost and we don't have any rights, all levers will be in Moscow, this License production mania has to go.

We should Search for another Partner, my choices are :
a. Antonov An-178 (Ukrainians are good in business if we pay them they will give a good deal )
b. Embraer KC-390 (Should have gobe in Joint Development with Brazil, too late i guess ??)
c. Kawasaki XC-2 (we just signed a deal Def cooperation deal with Japanese)
d. C-130 J (can we put turbofans on that ?)
e. Antonov An-124 Ruslan Strategic heavyweight (perhaps a pipe dram but if the Ukrainians are willing to sell then why effing not ? (I know its mot MTA category)
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,370
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 less less unkind to domestically made products. The T-90 loving IA should also take note.
I mentioned it before and at that time I wasn't able to prove it, same is today that I can not prove or give any plausible reasons but it looks all fishy to me.

IAF some how has develop an Eco system of pre-procurement scamming both the nation and the vendor where they float tenders and some how make it difficult for participants and the government to conclude. This saves them blame of corruption when some thing actually is procured ???

Just a conspiracy theory ???

The question must be asked on this particular JV that what you were doing when it was contemplated; then to wait so long and come back with new requirements.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
I mentioned it before and at that time I wasn't able to prove it, same is today that I can not prove or give any plausible reasons but it looks all fishy to me.

IAF some how has develop an Eco system of pre-procurement scamming both the nation and the vendor where they float tenders and some how make it difficult for participants and the government to conclude. This saves them blame of corruption when some thing actually is procured ???

Just a conspiracy theory ???

The question must be asked on this particular JV that what you were doing when it was contemplated; then to wait so long and come back with new requirements.
No, not a conspiracy theory to me at least. We have a precedence where the IA came up with requirements that were unrealistic.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...uristic-vehicle-for-its-armoured-corps.68514/
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...in-conflict-with-drdo-project-parrikar.69201/
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top