Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[TPFscopes]

India to announce road map for single-engine fighter program


By: Vivek Raghuvanshi   16 hours ago

India's Ministry of Defence will float a request for information to Lockheed Martin for its F-16 Block 70 and Saab for its Gripen E (above) next month.






NEW DELHI — To accelerate the Make in India initiative under the strategic partnership model, the ruling National Democratic Alliance will formally issue a request for information next month to Lockheed Martin of the U.S. and Saab of Sweden to manufacture single-engine fighters in collaboration with a private company in the India.



The Ministry of Defence will float a request for information, or RFI, to Lockheed Martin for its F-16 Block 70 and Saab for its Gripen E next month, a senior MoD official said.



Under the new strategic partnership, or SP, model the two companies will be asked to submit offers of the single-engine fighters’ air power capabilities, the offer for India-specific technology transfer, indigenous solutions for the program and the offer for building an ecosystem for the program in the country, said a senior Indian Air force official.





“We have chosen both F-16 Block 70 and Gripen E because both single-engine fighters are fully upgraded, fully tested and are in full use,” the IAF official added.



Both Lockheed Martin and Saab will be given three months to respond to the RFI, which will then be evaluated by an IAF expert committee and the final selection will be made early next year, the IAF official added.



Likewise, an expression of interest, or EOI, will be issued to domestic companies in the next three to four months, who will, in turn, tie-up with overseas original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, to build around 120 single engine fighters, initially costing around $18 billion under the strategic partnership model, an MoD official noted.



India’s ruling NDA government unveiled the SP policy in May, which allows major private defense companies to be nominated as entities to manufacture major defense platforms in partnership with OEMs.



Under this policy, nominated private entities will build submarines, helicopters, single-engine fighters and armored vehicles and battle tanks in India in the next 20 years.




An MoD official explained, “This is a very important and complex program, and the government, therefore, will have to prepare a full proof policy so that it moves forward without any glitches and cost overruns, keeping in mind that the Indian Air Force gets the latest single-engine fighters for the next 30 to 35 years.”



We aim to ink the contract in the next three to four years and will ensure that India-specific single-engine fighter will start to be produced in the country by a private company in the next eight years, he added.



After evaluation of the EOI offer from private companies, the MoD will select two or three private players to build single-engine fighters in India.



A request of proposal or tender will be issued in the next 16 months to the selected private player who will, in turn, will tie-up with selected foreign OEMs to manufacture this fighter in India.



Both Indian players and foreign OEMs will be free to forge either a joint venture or equity partnership to execute this program in India.



A CEO of a private defense company who requested not to be named said: “This is indeed a very encouraging move by the government, because both private players and foreign OEMs were apprehensive about this program as no time frame was spelled out by the MoD.”


http://www.defensenews.com/air/2017...e-road-map-for-single-engine-fighter-program/

 

[square]

https://www.defensenews.com/air/201...e-road-map-for-single-engine-fighter-program/



NEW DELHI — To accelerate the Make in India initiative under the strategic partnership model, the ruling National Democratic Alliance will formally issue a request for information next month to Lockheed Martin of the U.S. and Saab of Sweden to manufacture single-engine fighters in collaboration with a private company in the India.

The Ministry of Defence will float a request for information, or RFI, to Lockheed Martin for its F-16 Block 70 and Saab for its Gripen E next month, a senior MoD official said.

Under the new strategic partnership, or SP, model the two companies will be asked to submit offers of the single-engine fighters’ air power capabilities, the offer for India-specific technology transfer, indigenous solutions for the program and the offer for building an ecosystem for the program in the country, said a senior Indian Air force official.



“We have chosen both F-16 Block 70 and Gripen E because both single-engine fighters are fully upgraded, fully tested and are in full use,” the IAF official added.

Both Lockheed Martin and Saab will be given three months to respond to the RFI, which will then be evaluated by an IAF expert committee and the final selection will be made early next year, the IAF official added.

Likewise, an expression of interest, or EOI, will be issued to domestic companies in the next three to four months, who will, in turn, tie-up with overseas original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, to build around 120 single engine fighters, initially costing around $18 billion under the strategic partnership model, an MoD official noted.

India’s ruling NDA government unveiled the SP policy in May, which allows major private defense companies to be nominated as entities to manufacture major defense platforms in partnership with OEMs.

Under this policy, nominated private entities will build submarines, helicopters, single-engine fighters and armored vehicles and battle tanks in India in the next 20 years...


An MoD official explained, “This is a very important and complex program, and the government, therefore, will have to prepare a full proof policy so that it moves forward without any glitches and cost overruns, keeping in mind that the Indian Air Force gets the latest single-engine fighters for the next 30 to 35 years.”

We aim to ink the contract in the next three to four years and will ensure that India-specific single-engine fighter will start to be produced in the country by a private company in the next eight years, he added.

After evaluation of the EOI offer from private companies, the MoD will select two or three private players to build single-engine fighters in India.

A request of proposal or tender will be issued in the next 16 months to the selected private player who will, in turn, will tie-up with selected foreign OEMs to manufacture this fighter in India.

Both Indian players and foreign OEMs will be free to forge either a joint venture or equity partnership to execute this program in India.

A CEO of a private defense company who requested not to be named said: “This is indeed a very encouraging move by the government, because both private players and foreign OEMs were apprehensive about this program as no time frame was spelled out by the MoD.”

 

[Vinod DX9]

LM never fails to woo,but fails to convince

 

[mahesh]

Jaguar aircraft which flew with AESA Radar at HAL Airport, Bengaluru today

It looks like jaguar have some huge landing gears...

 

[Vijyes]

LM never fails to woo,but fails to convince View attachment 19548

How much global orders do F16 have at all for India to profit? Let's take an example:

the global orders are for a total of 3 billion USD and Indian production is 1 billion USD and IAF gives additional 3 billion of which 1 billion is made in India, then the total dollar spent by India will be 3 billion and total dollars circulated will be 2 billion and hence India will still lose out 1 billion dollars

If there is ToT or enough foreign orders to ensure that Indian forex doesn't go waste, it is worthwhile. Otherwise, it is a waste.

 

[TPFscopes]

It looks like jaguar have some huge landing gears...

Big landing gears to provide margin to center line attached ammunition or drop tank

 

[Vijyes]

Big landing gears to provide margin to center line attached ammunition or drop tank

Isn't the BAE HAL Hawk a better plane than Jaguar? With HTFE, a 25-30kN dry thrust engine, the same as in jaguar, the Hawk can be a much cheaper option too. The only drawback is the maximum speed

 

[TPFscopes]

It looks like jaguar have some huge landing gears...

Big landing gears to provide margin to center line attached ammunition or drop tank

Isn't the BAE HAL Hawk a better plane than Jaguar? With HTFE, a 25-30kN dry thrust engine, the same as in jaguar, the Hawk can be a much cheaper option too. The only drawback is the maximum speed

1st. HTFE-25 is not ready for integration but when ready it will be integrated on Hawks and Sitara and there will be HTFE-40 for Jaguar.
2nd. Hawks can perform only CAS role in low threat environments only.
3rd. Hawks can't perform deep strike missions.
4th. Hawks are not qualified to carry nuclear weapon.

 

[Vinod DX9]

Four new C-130 Super Hercules reaches Arjan Singh Airbase, Panagarh. Possibly two more at the end of the month will jointhem. They will make 2nd C-130J squadron in the country.

 

[Vijyes]

Big landing gears to provide margin to center line attached ammunition or drop tank

1st. HTFE-25 is not ready for integration but when ready it will be integrated on Hawks and Sitara and there will be HTFE-40 for Jaguar.
2nd. Hawks can perform only CAS role in low threat environments only.
3rd. Hawks can't perform deep strike missions.
4th. Hawks are not qualified to carry nuclear weapon.

Why aren't Hawks qualified for nuclear strikes? Deep strikes in what sense? Can't it strike 400km deep at least?

 

[TPFscopes]

Why aren't Hawks qualified for nuclear strikes? Deep strikes in what sense? Can't it strike 400km deep at least?

they need is a pylon with wiring that's certificated to nuclear standards, and in UK service that means permanently fitted. Ever wonder why you never saw some SHARs without inboard pylons, or why some Jags always had a centreline pylon? To maintain the integrity of the wiring and release systems. You also need a secure release lock system on the weapon and in the cockpit (and in the case of two seat aircraft, separate elements of the release circuit in both cockpits, so that both crewmembers had to consent in order to release. In the case of the V bombers, two crew members still had to agree, with one of the Navs and the pilot having separate arming/release controls. That was why the single-seat Jag caused such waves as a strike aircraft, since the two-man principal was effectively over once the gates to the runway were opened).
Other thing, it would EMP shielding for all of the electronics on board, otherwise after the explosion they would all get fried by the EM pulse a nuclear weapon creates.

compare the specifications of both aircraft for deep strike role.
speed: Mach 0.84 for Hawk but Mach 1.65 for jaguar
Range: 2500km ferry (no afterburner) but 950km in lo-lo-lo combat profile & 3500km ferry range
weapon load: jaguar have weapon load of 4500kg where as 680kgs

main thing is that jaguar can perform terrain hugging flight more easily than any other jet in IAF inventory which helps it a lot.

 

[Vijyes]

they need is a pylon with wiring that's certificated to nuclear standards, and in UK service that means permanently fitted. Ever wonder why you never saw some SHARs without inboard pylons, or why some Jags always had a centreline pylon? To maintain the integrity of the wiring and release systems. You also need a secure release lock system on the weapon and in the cockpit (and in the case of two seat aircraft, separate elements of the release circuit in both cockpits, so that both crewmembers had to consent in order to release. In the case of the V bombers, two crew members still had to agree, with one of the Navs and the pilot having separate arming/release controls. That was why the single-seat Jag caused such waves as a strike aircraft, since the two-man principal was effectively over once the gates to the runway were opened).
Other thing, it would EMP shielding for all of the electronics on board, otherwise after the explosion they would all get fried by the EM pulse a nuclear weapon creates.

compare the specifications of both aircraft for deep strike role.
speed: Mach 0.84 for Hawk but Mach 1.65 for jaguar
Range: 2500km ferry (no afterburner) but 950km in lo-lo-lo combat profile & 3500km ferry range
weapon load: jaguar have weapon load of 4500kg where as 680kgs

main thing is that jaguar can perform terrain hugging flight more easily than any other jet in IAF inventory which helps it a lot.

Thanks for the excellent information. Since you appear to have considerable knowledge, I want to ask one more question.

Why does Tejas need 60/90kN engines to perform averagely (some people even demand 65/100kN) while Jaguar needs just 27/40kN engines for its role? Jaguar has supersonic speeds too just like Tejas. Why then is the engine requirement so greatly different, by about 2.5 times?

 

[TPFscopes]

Why does Tejas need 60/90kN engines to perform averagely (some people even demand 65/100kN) while Jaguar needs just 27/40kN engines for its role? Jaguar has supersonic speeds too just like Tejas. Why then is the engine requirement so greatly different, by about 2.5 times?

Nice question, I'll write a detailed post on it later,

The thurst requirement is purely hidden in the design of the aircraft.
Jaguar has twin engine which generates a net thurst output of about 78Kn (17500 lbf). For the Jaguars it needed a high bypass capable of high thrust for take off, supersonic flight and low level "dashes".
Jaguar has a small, low aspect ratio wing with a high speed aerofoil and small engines which, especially in dry power, develop relatively low thrust. This leads to an optimum sustained turn speed of around 0.85 to 0.9M and a high corner speed.
that is why Jaguar obviously is not an agile low speed combat machine! Nor does it have a high dry power maximum speed, rapid reheated acceleration from low speeds, a high dry power ceiling nor good take-off performance (especially at high OAT).

Now, Come to LCA, it is quite fine with the 52Kn dry thurst with the present configuration. But when we expect a lot from a small and highly agile aircraft than we have an option to enlarge it (for more surface area) to carry more load than we need more thurst too to push it.

 

[mahesh]

they need is a pylon with wiring that's certificated to nuclear standards, and in UK service that means permanently fitted. Ever wonder why you never saw some SHARs without inboard pylons, or why some Jags always had a centreline pylon? To maintain the integrity of the wiring and release systems. You also need a secure release lock system on the weapon and in the cockpit (and in the case of two seat aircraft, separate elements of the release circuit in both cockpits, so that both crewmembers had to consent in order to release. In the case of the V bombers, two crew members still had to agree, with one of the Navs and the pilot having separate arming/release controls. That was why the single-seat Jag caused such waves as a strike aircraft, since the two-man principal was effectively over once the gates to the runway were opened).
Other thing, it would EMP shielding for all of the electronics on board, otherwise after the explosion they would all get fried by the EM pulse a nuclear weapon creates.

compare the specifications of both aircraft for deep strike role.
speed: Mach 0.84 for Hawk but Mach 1.65 for jaguar
Range: 2500km ferry (no afterburner) but 950km in lo-lo-lo combat profile & 3500km ferry range
weapon load: jaguar have weapon load of 4500kg where as 680kgs

main thing is that jaguar can perform terrain hugging flight more easily than any other jet in IAF inventory which helps it a lot.

Given the wide delta wing I guess tejas also can perform terrain hugging flights more easily

Sent from my irisX8 using Tapatalk

 

[Vinod DX9]

SAAB to tie up with Adani group to manufacture Gripens in India

 

[square]

SAAB to tie up with Adani group to manufacture Gripens in IndiaView attachment 19585

LM with TATA....
SAAB with Adani...

game ON....

advantage saab...???

 

[TPFscopes]

SAAB to tie up with Adani group to manufacture Gripens in IndiaView attachment 19585

LM with TATA....
SAAB with Adani...

game ON....

advantage saab...???

I don't like this match.
ADANI group has almost zero experience in aviation industry. Saab should tie-up with mahindra aerospace instead.
By choosing ADANI, saab degrades its possibility of selection which was already lower.

 

[IndianHawk]

I don't like this match.
ADANI group has almost zero experience in aviation industry. Saab should tie-up with mahindra aerospace instead.
By choosing ADANI, saab degrades its possibility of selection which was already lower.

Adani is closer to modi . That is perhaps why Saab chose adani.

Mahindra might not be interested in the fighter aircrafts for now it's too much capital .

 

[Vijyes]

SAAB to tie up with Adani group to manufacture Gripens in IndiaView attachment 19585

Why will India take in Gripen when India has Tejas? Doesn't this appear as fake news? Gripen has very little Swedish parts. Its is like an assembly plane. Gripen hasn't even received FOC, doesn't have AESA radar (it was OFFERING India joint development of AESA radar!). What doea it have at all to be even considered?

What advantages does India have by having Gripen over Tejas? It appears like a fake news. Just because same thing is said again and again, it won't become true or correct

 

[ezsasa]

I don't like this match.
ADANI group has almost zero experience in aviation industry. Saab should tie-up with mahindra aerospace instead.
By choosing ADANI, saab degrades its possibility of selection which was already lower.

Mahindra is a very conservative group, they don't take risks.

Adani on the other hand are huge risk takers.

I have seen both from the inside.