MMRCA 2.0: News & Discussions

[Samsung J7]

Have you even read any of the post Libyan campaign briefs that came out in 2012-13 that dissected the tactics and platforms used? Do you even have access to those articles.. I wouldn't know.

Most of the briefs I read were back at the INA, so, no, I can't provide any links: did find one though:
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR600/RR676/RAND_RR676.pdf.

Do give it a thorough read : and note that of the Rafales deployed throughout the campaign, and in Afghanistan, wartime combat availability has never dipped below 80%. The French Air Force's tabled report that you provide a link to also includes mothballed squadrons!

And yeah, your language shows your outlook.

Now you r claiming war time availability with normal availability rate

 

[Sancho]

Yes more Rafales is what is ridiculous. What is sensible is getting F16 or Gripen.

That's exactly what a former Air Chief says:

BTW wasn't I proved right (& you wrong) when SEF was cancelled?

Right on what exactly?

 

[Sancho]

Anyone got an accurate picture for the price of the

F-18 ASH
F-16 IN Block 70/72
MiG-35 MKI
Eurofigter T3
Gripen E

The costs I have found for Eurofighter and F-16 seem insanely high and for F-18 ASH seem unrealsitically low.

@Sancho

The only accurate figure to compare is the flyaway cost, or costs from a tender where the fighters were proposed in the same conditions.

F18 B3 costs are known:
https://defenceforumindia.com/forum...hornet-cheaper-option-for-india.76249/page-48

 

[Sancho]

I am confused, a post above the blame was on GoI now Dassault.

Different issues => different blame!

Dassault for single handedly killing MMRCA, by not complying to the RFP and therfore hurting IAFs modernisation and the critical improvement of the Indian aviation industry.
The government and especially the PM, for making insanely bad deals and being completely clueless about how to support IAF.

May 2014 till April 8th 2015 - MMRCA 1.0

April 9th till September 2016 - 36 Rafale deal

October 2016 till April 2017 - SE MMRCA

April 2017 till most likely 2019 after the elections - MMRCA 2.0

How can you not blame the government for these flip flops and U turns in just 4 years?

And how can you not blame the PM for awarding Dassault with a 9 billion USD deal, without meeting any core goals of the MMRCA?

When our Air Force was making frenetic SOS calls for depleting numbers as Migs were killing our Pilots and Pakistan and China were coming out more stronger and together the pressures was always on us.

And the IAF is still making SOS calls, because 36 fighters won't protect India from China, let alone a 2 front war.

http://indianexpress.com/article/in...rength-says-iaf-chief-bs-dhanoa-4876669/lite/

That's why they put priority on getting the RFI for SE MMRCAs and wanted additional Rafales only later

 

[Sancho]

I agree but could you expand on this point using technical information so I can include this in my article bro?

You are not honestly going to take that nonsense in a public article do you? :biggrin2:

Su 57 vs Rafale is a laughable comparison.

 

[Samsung J7]

The two front bs peddled by Indian army and airforce needs to stop. These guys r never going to attack china or Pakistan. Pakistan and China is also not going to attack India. Only thing Pakis going to do(already doing) is proxy war using terrorists. And they wil do this for eternity.Even thousands of rafale not going to stop Pakistan from sending terrorists. Why waste money? Learn from China they never run behind these international arms mafia.

 

[Sancho]

Dumb analysis that entirely ignores the ISEs.

First educate yourself what Indian specific enhancements are, before you make inaccurate claims and make up cost advantages!

Mirage 2000 Upgraded to FOC: Yet Another HAL Project Takes-off on Schedule

...The FOC configuration covers the integration of Indian specific weapons, sensors and EW system. This FOC upgrade on Mirage 2000 gives additional capability of air to ground weapon, training, helmet mounted display etc...

http://www.hal-india.com/Mirage 2000 Upgraded to FOC Yet Another HAL Project Takes-off on Schedule/ND__172

Indian specific enhancements, are capability corrections or upgrades, to make a fighter suitable to IAFs operational requirements. They are applied to all fighter procurements or also upgrades as you can see with the commonality of the Mirage 2000 upgrade and Rafale enhancements, but also to MKI or Mig, Jaguar upgrades.
They are also requested by IAF and not negotiated by a specific party, therefore is not something special to the Rafale deal.

Rafale did not had HMS, nor a capable targeting pod, that's why 2 of the enhancements / capability corrections, were the integration of Israeli systems to counter these shortfalls.
The EF had HMS and the Litenting pod integrated, so would not have needed these corrections and therefore no need of these additional costs. The rumored thrust enhancement for M88 engines is another capability correction, that comes at extra cost, which again would not be needed for the EF, with the highest TWR of all MMRCAs.

Even if you compare it to Gripen E, the Rafale is in disadvantage, since it not only gets 2 different HMS options, but also Litenting LDP and via Brazil even Spice integrated. So all these costs can be avoided, while they were necessary for Rafale!

Not only the flyaway unit cost is likely to be lower, but also the cost for Indian specific enhancements, while the operational costs advantage of an SE can't be matched by Rafale at all.

Your notion that Rafale wouldn't need infrastructure costs is also illogical, because we only paid for 2 bases. The new MMRCA tender however is for new bases in different areas of the country, so even if we order more Rafales, we also have to pay for new infrastructure.


Rafale is and advanced fighter, with a lot of good capabilities, but they come at a high cost. IAF is clear that they want to make up numbers and that's not possible with a costly Rafale and the low defence budgets. That's why they wanted the SE MMRCA route and sInce the SE contenders are also still in the tender, will have the cost advantage.

 

[Sancho]

Maybe their experience with nEURON is something we will be provided with.

View attachment 24218

Not that Dassault could not do it, but...

Saab Delivers Neuron Fuselage

Saab Aerospace handed over the fuselage section of the pan-European Neuron unmanned combat air vehicle technology demonstrator during a ceremony at its Linköping site in Sweden on 25 January. The structure will be shipped by road to the Istres air base in the south of France, where Dassault, the aircraft’s lead integrator, will attach the wings and prepare it for ground and flight tests to start early next year...

• Saab: Fuselage
• Cassidian, Spain: wings, ground control station and data-link integration
• Dassault: wing leading and trailing edges and flight-control system
• Hellenic Aerospace Industry: rear fuselage and tail pipe
• Alenia Aeronautica: electrical system and weapons bay
• Ruag: pantograph to lower ordnance from weapons bay...

https://www.uasvision.com/2011/01/31/saab-delivers-neuron-fuselage/

Alenia Aeronautica Delivers nEUROn Smart Integrated Weapon Bay Hardware to Dassault Aviation

Alenia Aeronautica, a Finmeccanica company, announces today that it has recently delivered the Weapon Bay Doors & Mechanism for nEUROn (the new-generation technology demonstrator for a European Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle - UCAV) to Dassault Aviation. This complex system was designed, built and integrated entirely by Alenia Aeronautica to include the weapon housing doors and the respective activation and control system...

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/ar...delivers-neuron-ucav-weapon-bay-hardware.html

 

[Immanuel]

It's silly we should be discussing TOT for weapons bay tech, folks it's not that hard really. I can understand TOT need for GAN sensors, core engine tech etc but for weapons bays really? Let's not be assholes and let's work on this tech ourselves. WTF

 

[Immanuel]

Now you r claiming war time availability with normal availability rate

People seem to confuse peace time availability to war time or even intense excercise availability. Heck even Mig-21 Bisons in our inventory have over 90% availability during excercises since the logistical and maintenance requirements are well prepared for and put in place leading upto the excercise self.

For the Gagan Shakti excerise, the prep work for maintenance, logistics, spares etc. would have started in last the quarter of 2017. It usually takes between 4-6 months to build up enough spares to support such an event specially one where virtually the entitre fighter arm is being rigirously tested.

Gagan Shakti is also the first time virtually the entire fleet is activated for intense excercises, this to me suggests, that the MKI is finally at a peace time avalability of 70%. This excercise will now test the next part i.e the ability to maintain 90%+ availability for 3 weeks fleet wide.

I also believe there are several critical benchmarking excercizes happening. We'll finally know at the current stage what is the real life availability we can attain during intense first 3 weeks of a two front war.

 

[Rahul Singh]

How could IAF+MOD have selected either of F-16 and Gripen E when Trump was unwilling to have F-16s manufactured in India (in order to protect more jobs for American promise) let alone meeting 100% ToT requirement and Gripen E had not even made first flight until June 2017 let alone any certification?

If MRCA 2 is anything then it is a rectification of SEF and a bargaining tool for both MoD and MEA.

 

[Pandeyji]

That's exactly what a former Air Chief says:

With all due respect to the Air Chief this is a completely stupid statement. The Air Chief starts with enumerating all the different platforms IAF is using & then suggests that it should add a new one in the form of either F16 or Gripen. Anyone who had studied Operation Research for even 10 minutes would laugh at the statement.

Right on what exactly?

This is what I was right about

Bhai @Sancho know one thing. This SEF wouldn't be here in this janam. No matter how many attempts LM & Saab make.

This is what you were wrong about

Lol, where you offline last year to not get any news?

In May 2017 the part time DM Arun Jaitley approved the strategic partnership model, as part of NDAs DPP 2016, which includes an own section for the SE tender!
Air Chief Dhanoa held a press conference and publicly stated that for IAF, the SE tender has priority, to make up the numbers in the medium class requirement.
All that is left to start the tender, is final go ahead in Form of the RFI and only the government is stalling that.

Hilarious level of denial :biggrin2:

 

[Armand2REP]

How could IAF+MOD have selected either of F-16 and Gripen E when Trump was unwilling to have F-16s manufactured in India (in order to protect more jobs for American promise) let alone meeting 100% ToT requirement and Gripen E had not even made first flight until June 2017 let alone any certification?

If MRCA 2 is anything then it is a rectification of SEF and a bargaining tool for both MoD and MEA.

According to the RFI 25% of them must be twin seaters, Gripen E doesn't have a two seater so that is out. That was the only one I was ever worried about undercutting the price of Rafale. Eurofighter has only become more expensive in comparison.

 

[Rahul Singh]

According to the RFI 25% of them must be twin seaters, Gripen E doesn't have a two seater so that is out. That was the only one I was ever worried about undercutting the price of Rafale. Eurofighter has only become more expensive in comparison.

Gripen E is not going to get certified anytime before 2024. So it is disqualified on one more ground. In fact, it does not have any chance at all since Tejas MK-2 has been given go-ahead already.

US fighters. If US gives something which NSA+PMO dearly wants then there is the slightest hope of any purchases. Merely on technical parameters, those two fighters have no chance.

SU-30MKI along with Mig-29K is probably our last Russian fighters. We are not sticking our head again in that mud-hole.

EF-2000 can make it on two grounds combined. If it turns out L1 and offers better ToT especially on the engine. Without both combined. It has no chance. GoI won't buy it to create a logistical nightmare if it does not get anything special.

Rafale. The only thing it needs to do now is to help us develop two different engine; one in 100-105 Kn category(for Tejas MK-2) and other in 110-130 Kn category(for AMCA). If Safran could do it. GoI might happily spend $30 billion. However, i believe they will ultimately put a mixed order of EM, DH and M models not exceeding 115 in total.

 

[F-14B]

looking at anil 's tweet why do I get the feeling that the government may want to partially replace the Jag at least the ones up to Drain I and II std and Mig -29 fleet and also completely replace the MiG-27 Floggers as well

 

[Sancho]

With all due respect to the Air Chief this is a completely stupid statement. The Air Chief starts with enumerating all the different platforms IAF is using & then suggests that it should add a new one in the form of either F16 or Gripen. Anyone who had studied Operation Research for even 10 minutes would laugh at the statement.

Wrong, because the overall cost reduction of a larger fleet of SE fighters, counters the twin logistics. Not to mention that IAF was forced to split the MMRCA requirement, so that's on the PM not on IAF.
The Air Chief is absolutely right, that purely based on costs, IAF has a too large fleet of twin engine fighters fore sure and with the large amount of MKIs alone, is too top heavy. So if there is an SE that can fulfil the requirements, it's more economical to choose it, especially with the increasing costs of FGFA and or AMCA in mind, which both will add considerable operational costs in the long term. And the way this government is cutting defence spending, a cost-effective choice is more likely than a high capability one. However, cost-effective does not necessarily mean an SE have to win, the F18 is now a prime competitor and there were hints about it for quite some time.

This is what I was right about

This is what you were wrong about

Not really. You claimed the SE tender would not be real, which as explained doesn't made any sense, since the government and the IAF confirmed it. And even now nothing has changed for the SE contenders, other than the addition of more competition. They are still in the tender, the tender is still under the same SPM rules and they already have their industrial partners selected.

 

[Sancho]

Defexpo 2018 news and pics regarding MMRCA 2.0

 

[Sancho]

More reports on the Boeing, Mahindra, HAL partnership:

 

[Pandeyji]

Wrong, because the overall cost reduction of a larger fleet of SE fighters, counters the twin logistics. Not to mention that IAF was forced to split the MMRCA requirement, so that's on the PM not on IAF.

Rubbish

Not really. You claimed the SE tender would not be real, which as explained doesn't made any sense, since the government and the IAF confirmed it. And even now nothing has changed for the SE contenders, other than the addition of more competition. They are still in the tender, the tender is still under the same SPM rules and they already have their industrial partners selected.

More Rubbish

The Air Chief is absolutely right, that purely based on costs, IAF has a too large fleet of twin engine fighters fore sure and with the large amount of MKIs alone, is too top heavy. So if there is an SE that can fulfil the requirements, it's more economical to choose it, especially with the increasing costs of FGFA and or AMCA in mind, which both will add considerable operational costs in the long term. And the way this government is cutting defence spending, a cost-effective choice is more likely than a high capability one. However, cost-effective does not necessarily mean an SE have to win, the F18 is now a prime competitor and there were hints about it for quite some time.

Still more Rubbish.


Be sure to cry when the final result is more Rafales either 36 or 72. After that it is Indian all the way

 

[Rahul Singh]

The only way India can ever fight and win from China is by building a military which can fight both capability based war and an attrition-based war put together.

Building a capability-based military may sound easier as capability can be bought from outside. However, in realistic terms, higher the capability(technology) the greater is the cost of acquisition consequently heavier the strain on the economy. So if India decides to build capability by sourcing from outside then it will have to buy a minimum number of high tech weapons. But as the things stand even the cost of minimum numbers are skyrocketing. Case in point is Rafale deal. If India chooses to buy 115 Rafales more then it will have to spend ~30 billion USD in total which will be 50% of the yearly Defence Budget. Spread over at least 10 years it will be ~3 billion USD which will be 20% of the total money spared for Capital Equipment purchase for all three services. Appaling as it sounds, it is the reality.

Furthermore, building a military for Attrition based war requires a long gestation period with increasing flow of funds for R & D as well an infrastructure development. The paradox is, for a country like India which spends much of its budget on purchases from outside leaves very little for investment in R&D. Which in turn makes India heavily dependent on technologies from outside. So even if India erects infrastructure for manufacturing its ability to mass produce any hardware remains dependent on support from outside. This, in turn, negates any advancement made in production. Case in point is this MRCA which is supposed to come with 100% ToT. It is historically proven that there is no such thing as 100% ToT out in the real world. So even if an MRCA is selected and starts getting produced in India our ability to unilaterally produce it will remain an unrealised dream. And out gain may still remain at the same place where we are with SU-30MKI.

Now come to China. China today has a military which is not only capable of fighting a capability-based war but also an attrition bases war. The reasons out in open for everybody to see. Today it not only has a rich R&D capability infused with increased funding but also a manufacturing complex which is large and efficient. And all thanks goes to its long-term vision, planning and execution. Here if I don't mention sacrifices then it won't complete the picture.......... And yes stealing and copying may be ethical but it still helps China where it hurts India most.

So if we truly want to fight and defeat China when the time comes. Then we will have to stop looking for shortcuts(e.g MRCA and all) and we will have to copy Chinese model with full implementation. Which is of maximum indigenisation even at the cost of quality during the early phase aided by sufficient injection of funding in R&D and infrastructure.

For that become possible services will have to start sourcing from within even at the cost of quality initially. Apart from this GOI in coordination with military and industry will have to formulate a long-term vision which should be protected by a constitutional act in order to keep it immune from the policies of governments changing every 5 years.

Summary of all I have written is, we are witnessing the emergence of another Germany of WW2 on our borders
and least we should do is to not become another France. We need aggressive proactive policies with full implementations aided and protected with sweet and blood. Time for reactionary behaviour is long gone.

Bottom line is, if India is not getting multiple help for the timely development of AMCA. Then throw this MRCA into a dustbin. And start investing that money into R&D and infrastructure. In the meantime build required numbers with extra SU-30MKI and versions of Tejas.