Army Chief warns against govt-to-govt deals with US

[AJSINGH]

The original RFP was cancelled because the airbus quote was too high, lol. Unless Airbus makes a competitive bid this time around, which I doubt, boeing will win the contract.

Il-76 will be even lower

 

[AkhandBharat]

Il-76 will be even lower

IL-78 doesn't fit the requirements of IAF

 

[AJSINGH]

IL-78 doesn't fit the requirements of IAF

that i know and so does IAF , but will finance ministry fund more expensive aircraft , thats a big question

 

[Armand2REP]

The original RFP was cancelled because the airbus quote was too high, lol. Unless Airbus makes a competitive bid this time around, which I doubt, boeing will win the contract.

Boeing can't even compete in their own country, their execs are discussing not even bidding on the largest tanker contract on Earth. The Indian RFP was re-floated to make Airbus lower the price. It didn't have to when competing against ancient Russian aircraft. Boeing hasn't even submitted a bid to India, if they won't do so in the US, they certainly won't do it in India.

 

[AkhandBharat]

Boeing can't even compete in their own country, their execs are discussing not even bidding on the largest tanker contract on Earth. The Indian RFP was re-floated to make Airbus lower the price. It didn't have to when competing against ancient Russian aircraft. Boeing hasn't even submitted a bid to India, if they won't do so in the US, they certainly won't do it in India.

If Airbus lowers the price, even better. The MoF audited the deal and found it to be overpriced. It might not be overpriced now that Euro is almost equivalent to a dollar, so who knows. Besides, I seriously doubt boeing will lose out on the US tanker contract solely because of aggressive bidding by Airbus. US bureaucrats will not want to dole it out to Airbus, simply because they can get 40,000 jobs out of this contract and if it goes to Europe, there will be a lot of rage in US.

If Boeing wins the US contract, they will aggressively bid in the Indian RFP as well.

 

[AkhandBharat]

that i know and so does IAF , but will finance ministry fund more expensive aircraft , thats a big question

ofcourse it will. It just has to be competitive and closer to reality.

 

[san]

look Il-76 is old , but Il-476 is new , with better engines and glass cockpit , plus look at what price we are getting 10 C-17 , in the same price we can get at least 20 Il-476 . The Il-476 is a significantly modernized version of Russia's Il-76 Candid transport plane, featuring a fully-digital flight control system, new avionics and PS-90A-76 engines with improved fuel efficiency systems. About your
" old design" theory , F-16 is such an old aircraft ,introduced in early 1980s but USAF is still using it , so how does it matter that it is old design ,as long as the aircraft is upgraded ,it good to fly .

Of course inducting Mig would be cheaper , but unfortunately new and improved Migs were not available, and if you see till MMRCA deal is sealed , we have till now inducted even in 1990s Russian aircraft .

Is there any IL-476 is flying? Is it their paper project waiting for money from outside?

 

[nrj]

go back in thread and look what people have posted , the base price would no way lower than 2.2 billion

Doesn't make sense to replace C17 with other aircraft. You are comparing Oranges with Apples. Both aircrafts are totally different. You have idea of how much advanced electronics crammed on C17? Does Russians have proven DIRCM on IL-76? IL-76 with its all variants are old airframe work. C-17 is the highest produced aircraft in its category & has proven role over the years. Wait till the role of these airlifting planes is disclosed then it'll be fair to compare C17 with others like An-124, IL-76.

 

[AJSINGH]

Doesn't make sense to replace C17 with other aircraft. You are comparing Oranges with Apples. Both aircrafts are totally different. You have idea of how much advanced electronics crammed on C17? Does Russians have proven DIRCM on IL-76? IL-76 with its all variants are old airframe work. C-17 is the highest produced aircraft in its category & has proven role over the years. Wait till the role of these airlifting planes is disclosed then it'll be fair to compare C17 with others like An-124, IL-76.

if you must know there are more Il-76 in the world flying than there are all the C-17 put together , airframe is not old otherwise russians would have upgraded it , also the new Il-476 will feature full glass cockpit and way more efficient engine

 

[nrj]

if you must know there are more Il-76 in the world flying than there are all the C-17 put together , airframe is not old otherwise russians would have upgraded it , also the new Il-476 will feature full glass cockpit and way more efficient engine

My young friend, IL76 is 45 tons category while C17 is 70-80 tons category aircraft. How can you possibly replace the requirement of 70-80tons category with two IL-76?

There is some strategic requirement so the 70-80tons C17 is being considered. IL76s are right now the best in 45tons family & we might even order new if the requirement in 45tons arise. For 45tons transport, we are relied on IL76 & will continue to operate them for considerable time.

If C17 is found out to be not suitable for our requirements then it has to be another aircraft in 70-80tons category only. This heavy category can't be replaced by couple of IL76s or 4 MTAs.

 

[AJSINGH]

My young friend, IL76 is 45 tons category while C17 is 70-80 tons category aircraft. How can you possibly replace the requirement of 70-80tons category with two IL-76?

There is some strategic requirement so the 70-80tons C17 is being considered. IL76s are right now the best in 45tons family & we might even order new if the requirement in 45tons arise. For 45tons transport, we are relied on IL76 & will continue to operate them for considerable time.

If C17 is found out to be not suitable for our requirements then it has to be another aircraft in 70-80tons category only. This heavy category can't be replaced by couple of IL76s or 4 MTAs.

once again the New IL 476 IS CAPABLE OF 60 TONS NOT 45 TONS

 

[ppgj]

once again the New IL 476 IS CAPABLE OF 60 TONS NOT 45 TONS

yes agree with that. but as of now there are doubts about its production status. infact many beleive only one - the prototype exists!! if you frequent other forums.

here -

http://ilyushin.org/eng/products/military/76mf.html

i do not dispute the fact that it is one hell of an aircraft. it has a good record wrt safety of operation and has served and will continue to serve with distinction in IAF.

however what people forget is post SU breakup the plants that manufacture IL 76's got split between Ukraine and Russia and it is no secret relations between them have been rosy ever since, what with US - fishing in dirty waters, though things are seemingly stabilizing, even if slowly it is still a long way. besides the plants themselves have to sort out their employee unrest and finances. this has also affected the spares for those who operate these aircrafts.

the situation at the Russian plant has also been in chaos.

However, the mass production of IL-76 family at TAPO in early 2000s fell into serious problems. This is mainly due to reductions in the factory: If at the end of the 1980's in the TAPO employed 50 thousand people, by 2005 it was less than 10 thousand This has affected the performance of a number of contracts. In particular, for a year and a half was delayed assembly of three Il-76MD-90 for the manufacture on the basis of their long-range radar detection aircraft A-50EI for India. Only in January 2008 (instead of summer 2006), the first of three cars went to Israel to install its Phalcon radar and onward transmission to the Indian Air Force. According to a September 2005 contract between Rosoboronexport and China's Defense Ministry, worth $1.5 billion, Russia was supposed to deliver 34 Il-76 Candid medium-range military transport aircraft and four Il-78 Midas aerial refueling tankers. Delivery was planned for 2008-2012. The first deliveries under the contract were due to begin in 2007, but in March 2006, Uzbekistan's Tashkent Chkalov Aircraft Association, the manufacturer of the aircraft, refused to sign a production contract with Rosoboronexport at the contract price. The Tashkent plant had no large orders in the late 1990's and was without significant subsidies, and thus was unable to fulfill an agreement. According to TAPO, the real cost of assembling 38 aircraft was more than $ 400 million more than the contract price agreed with Beijing. As a result, the agreement was delayed, and Beijing suspended negotiations on this and several other military contracts with Russia.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-76.htm

though the IL 76MF was tested in 1995, the picture is still unclear about the numbers produced due to the reasons quoted above.

another link -

There were reliability problems with the PS-90A engines at first, requiring them to be derated for a time, but the troubles were resolved. Although the VVS has evaluated and formally adopted the Il-76MF, the exact number of Il-76MFs built to this time is unclear. Jordan purchased two in 2005, making that country the first foreign user of the variant.

http://www.vectorsite.net/avil76.html

even Jordan receiving them seems doubtful since Jordan AF site does not show any IL 76's.

besides IL 76 MF is a stretched version. it may allow extra payload but the width restrictions remain the same. IOW it won't be able to carry a tank like Arjun or T-90. it is important for people to know how difficult it was for the IAF to transport T-72 in the past wrt IL 76. here is a gripping account of the same by the man who made it possible -

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1987IPKF/1033-Bewoor01.html

it may be (IMO) possible that C-17 requirement also factors in the tank transport to the forward bases in view of the "cold start" doctrine that the IA has adopted, which calls for rapid mobilizing of forces and equipment - a lesson, learnt from Op. Parakram, in which case C-17 becomes a natural choice particularly considering the fact that even AN 124's are still not in production.

it is eminently acceptable both IL 76 & AN 124 will be cheaper compared to C-17 but the fact they are not in production means any "evaluation" is moot. besides one has less cargo capability (IL 76) and the other more (AN 124). what is IAF requirement, no body knows, since it has not been spelt out.

besides i myself feel, this is, in a way - quid pro quo - wrt to nuke deal. the fact that never heard of deals are taking FMS route in so quick time with the US only adds fuel.

so all in all, if the IAF goes for it, they need to get them at an acceptable price and without too many strings.

i rest my case.

 

[nrj]

once again the New IL 476 IS CAPABLE OF 60 TONS NOT 45 TONS

IL476, its 60tons. I guess the requirement is up for 75+ tons so IL476 (unknown numbers, unknown status, unproved platform) is no match. Why are you so hasty? Let the things proceed & first hear IAF requirements, MOD statements so the comparison can be made.

 

[AJSINGH]

okay , but exsisting Il76 wont be retired as soon as we get C-17 ,also ppgp , i have already provided you with photo of Il-76 loading MBT in its belly

 

[ppgj]

okay , but exsisting Il76 wont be retired as soon as we get C-17 ,

agree. they have still lot of life. i would be happy if they can be upgraded with the new perma engines.

also ppgp , i have already provided you with photo of Il-76 loading MBT in its belly

i don't seem to have seen it. if you read the link i gave in my previous post, you would know that with great difficulty IAF could transport T-72 to jaffna and later to the ladakh sector. width restrictions does not allow T-90 or Arjun.