Imported Single Engine Fighter Jet Contest

nongaddarliberal

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
4,080
Likes
23,180
Country flag
That's an opinion, not a fact and as said, IN showed specific interest and was turned down.
That was a different time. Italy and Canada had not significantly reduced their orders then, and Lockheed Martin was still in the middle of lobbying to get the politicians bound to it. And Indo US relations have only been improving. LM needs to make up for lost orders, and America wants India to enter into it's camp, for which access to F 35 is a minimum. Americans are already saying that almost all their technology is available to India if we want. Link: https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.th...White-House-official/article14403073.ece/amp/

That's a clear sign from them that f 35 is on the table. But I don't think we should waste our money on that plane.
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
New Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
That was a different time. Italy and Canada had not significantly reduced their orders then, and Lockheed Martin was still in the middle of lobbying to get the politicians bound to it. And Indo US relations have only been improving. LM needs to make up for lost orders, and America wants India to enter into it's camp, for which access to F 35 is a minimum. Americans are already saying that almost all their technology is available to India if we want. Link: https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.th...White-House-official/article14403073.ece/amp/

That's a clear sign from them that f 35 is on the table. But I don't think we should waste our money on that plane.
The idea of arms import is to scuttle Indian defence by draining all the budget, forex and weakening Indian economy. Only technology must be imported either as ToT or reverse engineering
 

Immanuel

New Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
3,605
Likes
7,574
Country flag
A company can give presentations, but the export approval comes from the US government and as said, throughout the MMRCA and now in the SE MMRCA, the official statement is, F16 now => F35 later.
IN even sent an RFI to LM, without getting a reply. So even if India would be interested now, it's not on offer from the US.
F-35 can't be acquired in the traditional sense. As said, it's a single pilot aircraft, no twin seat version avaialble, therefore our pilots would have to have full knowledge of the aircraft and would have to qualify to fly it before any trials can occur and moreso without a guarantee of purchase. This is a big block for both India and LM and US since they won't allow anyone who isn't going to buy it to fly it. F-35 can be acquired much like the FGFA with Govt. partnership which would require India to order 5-10 aircraft for wide ranging set of trials with a gurantee to purchase atleast a couple of squadrons. Indian specific IOC and FOC requirments would need to be laid out and the intial set of aircraft would help fine tune those IOC and FOC needs while production ramps up for additional orders. India is always welcome to join the F-35 partnership as was approached a long time ago but at that point we had set our eyes on FGFA. Not sure how the FGFA will go forward.

In the traditional sense F-35 can win competitions without actually undergoing competitive trials like it did so far in some countries based purely on sim flights, detailed classified breifings etc. I doubt IN or IAF are keen on an aircraft they can't fly in trials themselves.
 

Immanuel

New Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
3,605
Likes
7,574
Country flag
LM and US Govt. will openly provide the F-35 if we follow a similar approach as acquiring the FGFA i.e. a Govt to Govt. deal with a clear comitment to actually buy it. Now whether we should go down this road is another conversation. There are quite a few benefits for having the F-35, IAF can operate it, IN can operate it, it is quite versatile and comes packed with good technology. I see a clearer path for the F-35 for FOC, future upgrades etc. than I see for PAKFA/FGFA. The F-35 is better funded, has plenty of professional AFs buying it, tactics will evolve to be cut throat, has wide ranging positive implications for the local industry.

I think buying the F-35 for IAF the 'imported SEF (if this competiton continues to exist in the future)' 100 aircraft, IN's 57 (an eventual mix of 30 F-35C for IAC-2 delivered when that carrier is ready and 20 F-35B that can be used temporarily on the IAC-1/Vikky till the 4 San antonio Class LPDs become available while 7 are kept is reserve) is still a better deal than buying any of the 4.5 gen aircraft apart from offcourse the Tejas MK-1A and Mk-2.
 

Sancho

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,034
F-35 can't be acquired in the traditional sense.
Of course it can be, as tenders all around the world shows, but first you need government approval for the sale. Middle eastern countries as well as India doesn't have it so far.

F-35 can be acquired much like the FGFA with Govt.
Not even close!!! Even if we would et US approval for the sale, we wouldn'tget it even in a licence production deal similar to MKI/MMRCA/SE MMRCA. The FGFA is a partnership for the joint development of an own varient, that's a level of freedom that only Russia and Israel offer us so far.
Only an off the shelf order in flyaway condition would be possible without any ToT, or industrial advantages, that's why the US is offering us only their teen series.

You also missed the point of this tender, which is to get a more cost-effective alternative to 126 Rafales, that can be procured and deployed in numbers.
F35 is the opposite! It's costlier to procure so far, which is why most countries go for lower numbers than initially planned or required and as a stealth fighter, it's also far costlier to operate.
So even if you keep the non availability, the lack of licence production and ToT as side, it wouldn't even meet IAFs basic requirements for this tender. So F35s would only play a role if we cancel FGFA, which would be nothing short but a disaster for the national security.
 

Kay

New Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
1,029
Likes
1,354
Country flag
The whole reason why we have to import stuff is, that we can't develop similar things on our own so far.
- US engines, because of Kaveri failure
- Israeli radar modes and possibly foreign AESA, because of the issues and delays in our radar programms
- British nose and refuelling probe, because our materials were not suitable
=> foreign medium class fighters, because we can't develop similar as well.

So of course it would be the best, if we could invest the money into our own industry and get the results we want, but that's simply not realistic as the LCA programm showed.
We still need to bridge the gap and learn, with the aim on replacing foreign parts over time and doing more things alone in future.
We are considering a Swedish plane that has US engine. It seems that is fine. But for an Indian plane to have an US engine is not ok. This is hypocritical and stupid and outright malicious.

We can develop our stuff quite well, but seems it seems our products are victims of arbitrary standards of evaluation, even when they are available.
 

Sancho

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,034
We are considering a Swedish plane that has US engine. It seems that is fine. But for an Indian plane to have an US engine is not ok. This is hypocritical and stupid and outright malicious.
Where did I said the US engine in LCA is a problem? The point was, that we need it because our own developments are not up to the mark.
And the high standards excuse is a common statement to distract from the failure itself, because we Indians prefer to blame each other, than to tackle the problem, which is the lack of knowledge, experience and disastrous project management in our industry. But as long there is no accountability in our PSUs and as long as they fight each other, instead of working together, we won't get anywhere and we will remain to be dependent on imports.
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
New Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
Where did I said the US engine in LCA is a problem? The point was, that we need it because our own developments are not up to the mark.
And the high standards excuse is a common statement to distract from the failure itself, because we Indians prefer to blame each other, than to tackle the problem, which is the lack of knowledge, experience and disastrous project management in our industry. But as long there is no accountability in our PSUs and as long as they fight each other, instead of working together, we won't get anywhere and we will remain to be dependent on imports.
Lack of fund is not lack of knowledge, experience or management. If it is needed to break heads and loot bodies to get funds, then that should be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kay

Sancho

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,034
Saab's Gripen M has been rejected by IN without even considering it seriously !!

https://www.livefistdefence.com/201...s-india-opens-talks-with-boeing-dassault.html
Did that surprise you? You can't consider something, that is not available anytime soon. That's why IN rejected the NLCA MK2 and went on importing 57 foreign fighters in the first place. So shortlisting only F18 and Rafale was the logical choice, while for IAF there is no shortlisting necessary at the moment, because there are only 2 medium class single engine options.
 

tejas warrior

New Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Messages
1,268
Likes
3,723
Country flag
Did that surprise you? You can't consider something, that is not available anytime soon. That's why IN rejected the NLCA MK2 and went on importing 57 foreign fighters in the first place. So shortlisting only F18 and Rafale was the logical choice, while for IAF there is no shortlisting necessary at the moment, because there are only 2 medium class single engine options.

Ohh man, you are still hopeful of Gripen in IAF :bounce::bounce::bounce:
 

Kay

New Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
1,029
Likes
1,354
Country flag
First IAF wanted a light fighter having qualities similar to Mirage 2000. When Mirage 2000 was not available, they wanted a medium multi-role fighter like Rafale because HAL is already producing a "heavy" Su-MKI. Now when Rafale is too costly materially and politically and Tejas is available, they want a "medium single engine fighter".
If we manage to make a Tejas MK2 medium single engine fighter and AMCA, they will ask for a single engine stealth fighter (read F-35).
I think the defense ministry needs to give the IAF bosses one tight slap and stop this travesty once and for all.
 

Sancho

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,034
Ohh man, you are still hopeful of Gripen in IAF :bounce::bounce::bounce:
Of course, anybody that is interested in the defence of the country, should want the best possible equipment for our force. And it should be clear that a bad F16 won't be able to protect the country.
 

Sancho

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,034
First IAF wanted a light fighter having qualities similar to Mirage 2000.
You are contradicting yourself, neiter is the Mirage 2000 a light class fighter, nor did IAF ever requested foreign light class fighters. The limitation of the MRCA tender was a MTOW of 20t, while the limitation in the MMRCA was 30t. So if they now cap the same tender to single engine participants only, it still is about medium class fighters!
So IAF is not changing anything to keep LCA out, since the aim was always on fighters above the light class.

Light => Mig 21 / Tejas
Medium => Mirage 2000 / Mig 29 / SE MMRCAs and Rafale
 

Immanuel

New Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
3,605
Likes
7,574
Country flag
Of course it can be, as tenders all around the world shows, but first you need government approval for the sale. Middle eastern countries as well as India doesn't have it so far.



Not even close!!! Even if we would et US approval for the sale, we wouldn'tget it even in a licence production deal similar to MKI/MMRCA/SE MMRCA. The FGFA is a partnership for the joint development of an own varient, that's a level of freedom that only Russia and Israel offer us so far.
Only an off the shelf order in flyaway condition would be possible without any ToT, or industrial advantages, that's why the US is offering us only their teen series.

You also missed the point of this tender, which is to get a more cost-effective alternative to 126 Rafales, that can be procured and deployed in numbers.
F35 is the opposite! It's costlier to procure so far, which is why most countries go for lower numbers than initially planned or required and as a stealth fighter, it's also far costlier to operate.
So even if you keep the non availability, the lack of licence production and ToT as side, it wouldn't even meet IAFs basic requirements for this tender. So F35s would only play a role if we cancel FGFA, which would be nothing short but a disaster for the national security.
Well, I can understand the reasoning below when IAF and IN were initially appraoched by LM, it was 5-7 years ago, when F-35 was faced with lengthy delays and the issues list was big. As for affordability the F-35 shouldn't be an issue since it will more or less be priced competitively to other 4.5 gen aircraft,& if we are looking to equip the IN/IAF and the order numbers are well over a 100. I say if orders are placed for deliveries commencing 2023-24, the flyaway cost should be in the range of 100-120 million. Looking at deal values for Soko, they were offered 60 F-35 for 10.8 Billion including service costs, soft dev./integration etc. They eventually bought 40 for just under $7 billion which puts the total cost at $175 million per. This whole idea that it would be more expensive when part of it could be assembled in India under medium TOT conditions is naive. Many of the F-35 buyers have local assembly, to think in this day and age, local assembly with decent TOT is not available to India is silly, especially when IN & IAF orders combined would easily make us the second largest operator of the F-35 after the US. Also if we want a level of freedom, we could simply ask for a modifed Israeli version anyways.

Sure, buying the F-35 won't be a joint devlopment case much like FGFA deal which currently is walking a fine line since my understaing is that for PAKFA we ask for full-tot while the Russians aren't keen on this. Also Indian version of the aircraft would need 43 improvments over the base PAKFA, when are we to get these fighters? Timelines aren't clear at all. 127 fighters are expected to cost $25 billion which would put it in the same price range as the F-35. Now I do understand that full-tot is nice to have but experience suggests such implementations are full of inefficiencies when working with Russians, every such deal including MKI, T-90 has such problems. If the deal continues to be delayed, stalled, then not sure if it will go through.

An F-35 purchase for India benefits only if acquired for IN and IAF, i.e 5 sqds (90-100 F-35A) for next gen SEF and 57-60 for IN(Combo of 30 F-35 C and 27-30 F-35B). 30 F-35C can go for the IAC-2 while 27-30 F-35B play a role a dual role based on land while working from INS Vikky and IAC-1 as well as from the future 4 LPDs (if San Anotnio Class LPD is acquired). Such aipower is always useful especially for Marine Infantry Ops. LPD deploying the F-35 would effectively turm them into mini carriers with formidable force projection as and when needed. F--35 brings commonality, industrial benefits, flexibility in Ops; especially for the Navy. It also brings an overall good mix of technology, capability and fire power.
 

Sancho

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,034
When did Mirage 2000 become medium? What is its payload?
Since it's MTOW puts it their, which is the criteria to distinguish fighters or helicopters in weight classes.

As for affordability the F-35 shouldn't be an issue since it will more or less be priced competitively to other 4.5 gen aircraft,
That's the aim for the procurement cost in some years, the operational cost per hour however is far higher, since it's difficult to maintain a stealth fighter.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallm...-u-s-militarys-fighter-fleet-infographic/amp/

As you can see, the F35A is 20.000 Dollar costlier per hour than an F16C. Add that for the high flying hours IAF has and to the requirement of 114 fighters and you have a significant cost difference. Not to mention that even Rafale would be cheaper and therfore more affordable.


This whole idea that it would be more expensive when part of it could be assembled in India under medium TOT conditions is naive. Many of the F-35 buyers have local assembly, to think in this day and age, local assembly with decent TOT is not available to India is silly, especially when IN & IAF orders combined would easily make us the second largest operator of the F-35 after the US.
Please man, we are fighting with them for proper ToT for basic stuff like Javelin ATGMs, the M777 howitzer or decades old F16s and you think we would get it for their highest tech weapon system? Also only partner nations of the F35 programme itself, or close partners get parts of assemblies and India is none of those.

So as said before, neither is it available to India, nor does it fit to the cost and industrial requirements of the MMRCA / SE MMRCA tenders.
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
New Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
Since it's MTOW puts it their, which is the criteria to distinguish fighters or helicopters in weight classes.
Its payload is 6ton. Also, it is suspicious as to how its MToW is 17 ton while F404 powered tejas has 13.5 ton. 10% increase in thrust 9M2k = 95kN and F404 = 86kN)should have given MToW of 15 ton only. So, the MToW may be 15ton and payload 4ton in reality.
This is a light fighter by payload
 

Articles

Top