Lockheed Eyes Tata to Help Land Next Big India Warplane Deal

WolfPack86

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
8,862
Likes
12,837
Country flag
Lockheed Martin Corp. is leaning toward the Tata Group as a potential partner to build its flagship F-16 as India looks to modernize an aging fleet of fighter jets.

“Naturally we would gravitate to Tata," George Standridge, Lockheed Martin’s vice president for Aeronautics Strategy and Business Development, said in an interview in New Delhi on Wednesday when asked about production of F-16s. “We know them well and we have worked with them well."

Lockheed Martin, Boeing Co. and Saab AB are all maneuvering for the next big fighter jet contract in India, which may be announced sometime in the next year. India still needs hundreds of warplanes after Prime Minister Narendra Modi scaled back an order for Rafale jets due to disagreements over price.

About a third of India’s 650 fighter jets are more than 40 years old, putting the nation’s defenses at risk as neighboring China bolsters its military capabilities. Replacing them with planes made locally would improve security and help achieve Modi’s goal of transforming India from the world’s biggest weapons importer into a global hub for defense manufacturing.

Lockheed and Tata Advanced Systems Ltd. have had a joint venture since 2012 to build tail sections and center wing-box components for the C-130 cargo plane’s global supply chain. Tata Advanced Systems had no comment on a possible tie-up with Lockheed Martin to build F-16s, according to a spokesperson.


Rafale Deal ::

Since January, Indian government officials have listened to pitches from foreign manufacturers to build combat planes in India. No announcement has been made on either the timeframe or the quantity under consideration.

Any agreement is likely to be between governments, however, after a tender process for 126 warplanes that began in 2007 -- the world’s biggest fighter jet deal at the time -- has yet to be concluded.

India picked Paris-based Dassault Aviation SA in 2012 to build the planes at an estimated cost of about $11 billion. Yet talks stalled over price and quality guarantees, and Modi decided last year to instead buy only 36 of the fighter jets directly from the French government. The deal is still being finalized.

For an analysis of why Modi scaled down the Rafale deal, click here.

Lockheed Martin has been in talks with the U.S. government over producing in India for more than a year, Standridge said.
‘Ready to Go’

"We are ready to go with the Indian government when it is ready to go," he said. “We are engaging with the Indian government on a recurring basis to ensure we are responsive."

The U.S. and India have strengthened defense ties since Modi came to power. Last month U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter reiterated plans to help India develop jet-engine technology.

It would be feasible for Lockheed Martin to set up an F-16 assembly line if about 100 jets are to be produced for the Indian Air Force and for possible exports, Abhay Paranjape, a director for business development of the company, said in March.

Saab has proposed setting up a production facility in India for its Gripen aircraft as well as a development center for the plane, Ulf Nilsson, the company’s Head of Aeronautics, said in a March interview.

Boeing has also offered to manufacture its F/A-18 fighter jets -- the mainstay of the U.S. navy -- in India.
http://www.defencenews.in/article/Lockheed-Eyes-Tata-to-Help-Land-Next-Big-India-Warplane-Deal-5421
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
7,696
Likes
14,573
Country flag
Bloody everybody has lined up to produce their aircraft in india. I want this sector specific highly aggressive policy in the sector. I want them to join hands with Mahindra, TATA and possibly L & T and reliance. I want sukhois to produce passenger jets in partnership with TATA. Soon we are going to have a huge talent pool in this area also and that will be a game changer.
 

Zebra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
6,060
Likes
2,295
The answer lies with F 18 for the twin engine role, and rope in LM to work with HAL/ADA for the LCA Mk 2 and flowing from that the AMCA.
Between f18 and f16 I think India will be better off going with the f18.
OR
:smash: As a second thought.........
India go for F/A-18 and F-16V both. :scared1:
But then two different engines for both of them. :facepalm:

To counter it, cancel the Jaguar engine project and forget about Gripen.
 

sob

Mod
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
6,425
Likes
3,802
Country flag
Due to the engine being common for Super Hornet and the LCA Mk2 , the F 414, it makes sense to go with this combo. The same engine would also feature for the illusive AMCA.

It gives us bigger leverage with GE, with the volumes involved and also eases the supply chain for the engines.
 

sasum

Atheist but not Communists.
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,435
Likes
757
F-18 is owned by Boeing. That can be considered as separatly. As for F-16, if LM agrees to buy back entire production, there is no harm. Our ancillary industries will benefit from infusion of tech. + employment will be generated. Our Govt will earn revenue from Excise Duty and Corporate Tax.
 

smestarz

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
1,929
Likes
1,048
Country flag
Right now LM cannot produce anything in India, F-16, is a big NO, except we build and sell spares, F-35, no
But yes, if they team with TATA, they could work together on possibly their take on AMCA, this is still an open option. Surely LM would be interested. And as for present requirement, Best to go for Su-30 MKI or Su-35 or MiG-35 (in case IAF is eager for MEDIUM) else the other make in india option is F/A-18 ASH, it may not be an excellent dog fighter, but why to get into a knife fight if you have a machine gun? Like someone said, if you get into a dog fight, then you did something wrong, if you develop these as tactics, F/A-18 ASH can certainly be an excellent asset for both IAF and IN also, But lets see what advantages it brings and the cost.
 

Zebra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
6,060
Likes
2,295
Right now LM cannot produce anything in India, F-16, is a big NO, except we build and sell spares, F-35, no
But yes, if they team with TATA, they could work together on possibly their take on AMCA, this is still an open option. Surely LM would be interested. And as for present requirement, Best to go for Su-30 MKI or Su-35 or MiG-35 (in case IAF is eager for MEDIUM) else the other make in india option is F/A-18 ASH, it may not be an excellent dog fighter, but why to get into a knife fight if you have a machine gun? Like someone said, if you get into a dog fight, then you did something wrong, if you develop these as tactics, F/A-18 ASH can certainly be an excellent asset for both IAF and IN also, But lets see what advantages it brings and the cost.
I don't think so.

And SH has Helmet-mounted display.

If we talk about airframe / flyaway cost, ASH is cheaper.

Just half the price of Rafale and Typhoon.

Plus state of the art after sale service.

On top of it, add make in India and strategic benefits for being with US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sob

sob

Mod
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
6,425
Likes
3,802
Country flag
We have to look at it from various angles,

1. Strategic advantage
2. Cost
3. Speed at which the project can start
4. Make in India
5. TOT under offer.

Looking at all above I feel FA 18 suits us the most. We already have plenty of programmes with the Russians and we need to spread our risks around. With the production line being shifted to India and US Navy/air Force will be flying this craft for at least 20 more years there will be upgrades and also orders for the Indian unit.

And the LCA will fill in the gap for the Single engine fighter.
 

sasum

Atheist but not Communists.
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,435
Likes
757
Right now LM cannot produce anything in India, F-16, is a big NO, except we build and sell spares, F-35, no
But yes, if they team with TATA, they could work together on possibly their take on AMCA, this is still an open option. Surely LM would be interested. And as for present requirement, Best to go for Su-30 MKI or Su-35 or MiG-35 (in case IAF is eager for MEDIUM) else the other make in india option is F/A-18 ASH, it may not be an excellent dog fighter, but why to get into a knife fight if you have a machine gun? Like someone said, if you get into a dog fight, then you did something wrong, if you develop these as tactics, F/A-18 ASH can certainly be an excellent asset for both IAF and IN also, But lets see what advantages it brings and the cost.
If Tatas make F-16 in India, it need not be for IAF. They can dump it anywhere including Pakistan.Indian Pvt Sector aviation industry has to gain a foothold. While making F-16 from scratch, Tatas and other small & medium industries will benefit from designing and moulding both hydrolic-pneumatic mechanical components as well as electronic. Besides they will get insights into aerodynamic structure of modern fighter jets. After all F-16 sold over 4300 units around the world, can still give many modern aircrafts the shiver and is the most celebrated fighter jet in the history of aviation industry..a legend in itself. It is necessary to build up an aeronautics industrial eco-system. What better can be a stepping stone than a proven, rugged, time-tested, contemporary aircraft than F-16? F-18 ASH or others can be bought for IAF. These aircrafts even if made locally, will be assembled from semi-knocked-down imported kits. Like SU-30 MK I. Indian industry will not absorb any technology in terms of engine, avionics, radar, sensor etc.
The other benefits of employment generation, revenue earnings are extra.
 

Akask kumar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
588
Likes
669
out of these three craft..
f-16
f-18 SH
Gripen.
we should go for F-18 SH.
reasons..
F-16 - pak already have it, its single engine,though it battle tested but in few decade it will be grand old tech.will fail to serve for longterm..

Gripen- its single engine and after looking at the spec i felt that Tejas MK2 will be almost equal or better than this craft.so waste of money..

F-18- double engine and its engine will also be used in Tejas MK2.. so maintainace should not be the problem.long range,long combat radius,can carry more and heavier weapons,multi-role fighter.ONLY PROBLEM ITS 1.8 MACH..while f-16,gripen are faster..
 

smestarz

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
1,929
Likes
1,048
Country flag
I don't think so.

And SH has Helmet-mounted display.

If we talk about airframe / flyaway cost, ASH is cheaper.

Just half the price of Rafale and Typhoon.

Plus state of the art after sale service.

On top of it, add make in India and strategic benefits for being with US.
Just having HMDS to fire AIM-9X would not deem it as an excellent dog fighter, Dog fighter will need the plane to be very maneuverable and have excellent AoA . F/A-18 is good plane, clean and very capable, but one thing that is is not is a dog fighter. BTW why not go for F-15 SE, those planes are as capable as Su-30 MKI and having those hunting along with Su-30 MKI should deter any country from doing any mischief with India.
If have to vote between F-15 and F/A-18, maybe I would go with F-15..
 

SajeevJino

Long walk
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
5,888
Likes
3,188
Country flag
Actually the dumb Defense minister giving multiple ideas in the context

What he says LCA and another single engine fighter to replace MiG 21

Also

India will buy Rafale and build another twin engine fighter in India

He never mentions the PAK FA anywhere
 

raja696

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
1,020
Likes
1,466

Hope we never do mistakes like what Canadians did for few tech from yanks , that killed cf 105 Avro arrow in those days. I simply feel the cunningness of yanks convincing friendly country to kill its own baby (LCA,Kaveri ). So that they would never surpass yanks in indigenisation of technology.

The inability of yanks to apologise to Japan over use of nuclear weapons but visiting the site in solidarity is immense hypocracy on part of USA.

Manohar parikar decision not to buy f16 for IAF is best decision, but we could produce them for other countries , unless USA offers ground changing technology to India.
 

smestarz

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
1,929
Likes
1,048
Country flag

Hope we never do mistakes like what Canadians did for few tech from yanks , that killed cf 105 Avro arrow in those days. I simply feel the cunningness of yanks convincing friendly country to kill its own baby (LCA,Kaveri ). So that they would never surpass yanks in indigenisation of technology.

The inability of yanks to apologise to Japan over use of nuclear weapons but visiting the site in solidarity is immense hypocracy on part of USA.

Manohar parikar decision not to buy f16 for IAF is best decision, but we could produce them for other countries , unless USA offers ground changing technology to India.
We were developing our own plane after the success of HF-24 Marut, but the Russians offered us MiG-21 with ground attack capability, and we got swayed by it and we lost our aerospace industry to that seduction.
So what Canada experienced, we got through the same also
 

smestarz

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
1,929
Likes
1,048
Country flag
Try not to call a guy who did well in IIT "dumb" if you are Indian you surely know how "easy" it is to get into IIT.
He is not a double speaking politician, he is learning to be one. He cannot really hide all the things so easily.
Media, usually the paid media are asking him about development in Rafale order, so all he can say is that it is being negotiated. How would it sound if he said "We have sent them home, told them to come after we clear AW scam first " ?

As I understand the French are not willing to give bank guarantees nor sovereign guarantees but can give Guarantee of thei present president (thats very similar to how PM Neville came back with signed agreement with hitler, and we know how it worked out) Thus on that basis for each aircraft deal Bank guarantees are must, Comfort letter is of no use. If thats the case, why not give the French comfort letter from Modi that money will be paid after they deliver planes. Can they accept it? It will be comofort letter both ways that make each other comfortable. This is not how defence deals are done, The French are just trying to waste time nothing else.

PAKFA has reached status quo, Russia is building the unit that will the basis of FGFA and that will then be presented to IAF pilots for their testing, and then there would be progress on that front.

Presently Tejas is the project that is priority and that is already in progress . Rafale discussion, already explained, they are also discussing with various other companies for "Make in India" remember make in India does not necessary mean that IAF would buy, BUT IDEALLY, IAF would be buying this plane that would leave the options to Twin engine planes and Rafale is not among them as of now (stuck due to 36 planes discussions)
One way that can be done if the deal is done or cancelled, I mean when the deal is being discussed for 36 planes, Dassault cannot just team with Reliance and offer to make in india at higher price, why would GoI buy a plane more expensive than what it is getting at? If they offer it cheaper, then there is no need to discuss these 36 either.

Here is some feedback for the wise people here.

Actually the dumb Defense minister giving multiple ideas in the context

What he says LCA and another single engine fighter to replace MiG 21

Also

India will buy Rafale and build another twin engine fighter in India

He never mentions the PAK FA anywhere
 

Mikesingh

Professional
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
6,988
Likes
26,986
Country flag
Between f18 and f16 I think India will be better off going with the f18.
Yep! The advanced Super Hornet would be a good deal as it is a newer platform than the 40 year old F-16.

But it's intriguing why Russia is silent and not aggressively going in for producing the state of the art 4++ gen SU-35 in India with Indian private collaboration like Boeing and SAAB.
 

Mikesingh

Professional
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
6,988
Likes
26,986
Country flag
out of these three craft..
f-16
f-18 SH
Gripen.
we should go for F-18 SH.
reasons..
F-16 - pak already have it, its single engine,though it battle tested but in few decade it will be grand old tech.will fail to serve for longterm..

Gripen- its single engine and after looking at the spec i felt that Tejas MK2 will be almost equal or better than this craft.so waste of money..

F-18- double engine and its engine will also be used in Tejas MK2.. so maintainace should not be the problem.long range,long combat radius,can carry more and heavier weapons,multi-role fighter.ONLY PROBLEM ITS 1.8 MACH..while f-16,gripen are faster..
The most important aspect is that the Advanced Super Hornet is ideal for the new aircraft carrier under construction, the INS Vikrant.

The Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet has been upgraded with conformal fuel tanks and an external weapons pod, a configuration Boeing calls the "Advanced Super Hornet."

So we can kill two birds with one stone - a common platform for the IAF as well as the IN.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
26,473
Likes
29,785
Country flag
Yep! The advanced Super Hornet would be a good deal as it is a newer platform than the 40 year old F-16.

But it's intriguing why Russia is silent and not aggressively going in for producing the state of the art 4++ gen SU-35 in India with Indian private collaboration like Boeing and SAAB.
I think Chinese maybe blocking su35 sale to India . Chinese have a lot more pull with Russians in defense then India acknowledges


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top