MMRCA news and discussions.

[nitesh]

Armed forces need modernisation: Antony

 

[nitesh]

- India's 10 latest defence procurement programmes-ET Slide Shows-Features-The Economic Times

The Ministry of Defence is reportedly planning to double its arms procurement and spend over $20 billion (over Rs 120,000 crore), more than twice the amount spent in the past 10 years on an annual basis. On the table are major naval acquisition programmes, including buying six submarines for abut $2.3 billion and $3 billion worth modernizations of India’s artillery corps.

Companies are, therefore, eyeing huge opportunities in the defence sector, also on the back of the India-US nuclear deal. For instance, US aerospace major Boeing alone sees a $20-billion opportunity in India’s defence sector over the next decade. It is bidding for defence orders worth $15-$20 billion for F/A-18 Super Hornet combat jets, P8I maritime surveillance aircraft and Apache combat helicopters.

According to sources, India has an ageing fighter fleet, mostly a combination of Jaguars, Russian-made MiGs and French Mirage aircraft, and some are up for replacement. India had also ordered new MKI fighters from Russia. A DefenseNews report suggests that India will increase the number of Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) it plans to buy to 200, opening the door for more than one supplier.

{This is amusing does this means F 18 has already "won" the contract}

1) F/A-18 Super Hornet combat jets
The Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is a supersonic carrier-capable fighter/attack aircraft. The Super Hornet, which is a larger and more advanced variant of the F/A-18C/D Hornet, was first ordered by the US Navy in 1992.

It entered service with the US Navy in 1999. An early version was marketed by McDonnell Douglas as Hornet 2000 in the 1980s.

The Super Hornet is about 20 per cent larger, 7000 lb (3000 kg) heavier empty, and 15,000 lb (6800 kg) heavier at maximum weight than the original Hornet.

It carries 33 per cent more internal fuel, increasing mission range by 41 per cent and endurance by 50 per cent over the ‘Legacy’ Hornet.

2) P8I maritime surveillance aircraft

The Boeing P8I maritime patrol aircraft, which the Indian Navy is on the verge of acquiring will give it a marked edge in the Indian Ocean region and one that is comparable to its US counterpart.

The P8I, a customized version for the Indian Navy, is based on the hugely successful Boeing-737 commercial airliner.

The Navy had in November 2006 expressed an interest in the aircraft as a replacement for its existing fleet of Il-38 aircraft that are nearing the end of their service life.

{Has this also "won the contract"}
3) Apache combat helicopters

The AH-64D Apache helicopter is an advanced, versatile, survivable, deployable and maintainable multi-role combat helicopter.

The new Apache helicopter integrates digital avionics and weapons, and the powerful T700-GE-701C engine. The AH-64D Apache helicopter's predecessor is the battle-proven AH-64A Apache helicopter.

However, the new Apache helicopter is built for the digital battlefield of the future.

4) Mig-29K (Fulcrum-D) fighters

The government is also likely to buy 30 more carrier borne Mig-29K (Fulcrum-D) fighters for the Indian Navy, according to news reports.

Russians have demanded a price escalation of $2 billion, almost double the original contract cost of $2.5 billion for refurbishing the 45,000-tonne carrier, including carrying out its elaborate sea trials in Russian waters, prior to its delivery by 2012.

Under the 2004 contract for the acquisition of Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier, India is to receive 12 single-seater MiG-29K and four two-seater MiG-29KUB by next year, with an option of ordering additional 30 fighters by 2015.

5) Ka-31 helicopters, Il-38D aircraft

Besides Mig-29K fighters, Indian Navy is also procuring other advanced aircraft to support fleet operations.

These include Ka-31 airborne early warning helicopters for the carriers, and land-based Il-38D maritime patrol aircraft.

6) Spyder missile

India has recently signed an agreement with Israel to acquire 18 Spyder surface to air missiles to protect high-value assets of the Indian Air Force.

The plans to acquire the Spyder had been announced in 2006 but were on hold due to allegations of corruption over the Israeli Barak missiles deal for the Indian Navy signed four years ago.

But as neither the IAF nor the Navy and Army have adequate missile defence protection, the government has been under pressure to do the needful for several years.

Spyder is a static low level, quick reaction missile (LLQRM) to neutralize hostile targets up to 15 km away, and at heights between 20 to 9000 meters.

7) Akash surface to air missile

The Indian Air Force is also in the process of acquiring the indigenous Akash surface to air missile which has a little longer effective range of 25 km as part of a layered approach to defend its assets.

Both the Spyder and Akash are all weather missiles, 24 x 7 and 360 degrees with autonomous management and advanced Electronic Counter Counter Measures (ECCM) capability.

It can be launched within five seconds, and once the commander has pressed the button, the process to seek and engage an aggressive aircraft or missile is automatic.

8) Hawk Mk-132 advanced jet trainer

In a step with major implications for pilot training, the Indian Air Force recently got its first indigenously built Hawk Mk-132 advanced jet trainer (AJT), manufactured at the state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL).

Powered by a single Rolls-Royce Adour Mk 871 turbofan engine, the aircraft is the first of 42 Hawk aircraft being built under licence by HAL in India, and is the 15th Hawk AJT handed over to the IAF.

The engine is a newer version of the Adour Mk 811 that HAL already builds for the IAF Jaguar strike aircraft. HAL is building 49 of these engines, but later, the same engine will also be fitted on the six Hercules C 130Js that IAF is acquiring from the US arms major, Lockheed Martin.

Each of these special role aircraft will be fitted with four engines, so the IAF requirement could be around 30 additional engines for them including spares.

{Now what exactly is this}

9) Multi Role Combat Aircraft

IAF is also likely to start getting delivery of its 126 Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MRCAs) from 2012 onwards.

According to reports, six contenders were due to submit their response to the Request for Proposal (RfPs) or tenders by March and ministry of defence sources had indicated that it should not take them more than a year-and-a-half to examine and clear the IAF recommendations in making the choice and placing the order.

Indications are that eventually, with indigenous production, the number of MRCAs could go up to 200 or more.

10) Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft

The Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) for the Indian Air Force is likely to be inducted in 2016.

India and Russia had agreed to co-develop the FGFA and an agreement was signed in this regard some time back when defence minister A K Antony had visited Moscow in October last year.

 

[nitesh]

Boeing Says Congress Re-Election May Boost India Defense Market

“India is doing a major recapitalization of a lot of defense equipment,” Albaugh said. “We’re talking about attack helicopters, heavy helicopters, ocean surveillance and attack airplanes. Eventually they are going have some interest in airborne early warning and control.”

 

[nitesh]

Indian arms spree on the fast track

 

[nitesh]

Russia yields after Antony burst

 

[nitesh]

ARMS TRADE - Defense contractors see open door in India

 

[Antimony]

I had a long talk with a Ex-US Naval Serviceman who has been on posts as high as an administrator of Destroyers and ASW ships. He has also been a part of the E-3 and E-2 programs and also been on various inspections with regards to the EUM monitoring team.

He has this to say:



I put him through a lot of questions. He answered well enough for me to understand that the EUM is simply a diplomatic nuisance put forward to satisfy the critics in the US. That's all. Ultimately all these inspections are simply formalities where the inspectors would just eat and drink with the hosts, look at some planes and leave.

The media has been misrepresenting the facts way too much. So, many countries buy US equipment without so much as a word. It was the anti-US LEFT in India which has been pressuring the UPA not to sign. Once the LEFT left, UPA is signing the agreement. Simple as that.

P2P,

As usual, good job in getting the professional perspective. Always help.

This lines up with my observations about legal documentation and their use in preactice. Any time you need to go back and study the fine print is when your relationship is in trouble.

That said, I am still cagey about how this will be worded, as I don't want some mole of a frtiendly neighbouring country gettings their hands on such stuff

Russia yields after Antony burst

Wow, we frightened overlord Putin?:boast:

 

[Arjak]

Same here pintuda,i am particularly allergic to the yankees......furthur america has still not confirmed full tot,and this deal may well be sanction prone......on that note the mig35 and the rafale are great......personally i'd opt for the rafale.......and also the mig35mki wd be a good option

 

[pppppppp]

Jamming lets you hide your position effectively. What you are talking about is Passive stealth. Stealth brought about by deflection or absorbtion of radar waves is passive.

As far as I understand Jamming is used for Electronic countermeasures to evade the missiles and stop signals to the missile's guidance systems. The mechanism of jamming just scrambles with the signals and disables communication mechanisms. I don't understand how it lets hide the position. If some jamming is present, how does the radar signals effect? Moreover if the radar signals are significantly disturbed in a particular region, the whole idea of stealth is lost. As far as I understand active stealth is currently achieved only with plasma. Let me know if I am missing some thing here.

 

[pppppppp]

I would suggest we would discuss technology in a different thread, so that new ideas can also be posted. It would be very good starting point I feel. Moderators, please suggest!

 

[John]

well the RCS of Rafale, EF, SH and Super viper are under 1m2, the lowest forward rcs is a close call between the Rafale and SH, Rafale is said to have rcs of 0.1m2 and SH is roughly the same. coupled with their radars and Aim-120D, the SH and Super viper are still deadlier than the others, not to mention they readily fire a lot more weapons and do not require too much tweaking to make them deadly. in terms of air superiority though the Rafale and EF are much better aerodynamic performers, they still fall behind the SH in sheer fire ability, the SH can carry upto 12 A2A missiles in a single mission with upto 10 bvr missiles and 2 WVR missiles. this is more than the EF or Rafale can carry and hence the SH has more of a chance. moreover the SH is also less physically and technically demanding to fly. SH is also a much deadlier ground and maritime strike air craft deploying long range an cost effective weapons and many of them can hit moving targets out to very long ranges. in all 3 roles SH remains un-matched, furthermore it is also the mother of all multiroles playing both nearly full-scale awacs and tanker roles.

 

[p2prada]

As far as I understand Jamming is used for Electronic countermeasures to evade the missiles and stop signals to the missile's guidance systems. The mechanism of jamming just scrambles with the signals and disables communication mechanisms. I don't understand how it lets hide the position. If some jamming is present, how does the radar signals effect? Moreover if the radar signals are significantly disturbed in a particular region, the whole idea of stealth is lost. As far as I understand active stealth is currently achieved only with plasma. Let me know if I am missing some thing here.

Radars emit signals too. Simple example. Lets say you are shouting at somebody. The other person can hear you. Now lets say the other person starts shouting at you with the same intensity as you are. So, in this case, will you be able to understand the other and vice versa?

This pdf will help. Cheers.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2003test/wang.pdf

Go down to page 16. The diagrams are simple to understand.

 

[luckyy]

You guys give Rafale too much credit. I want to caution you against going on looks alone. I have serious doubts about Rafale's combat radius without droptanks. You wanna know why? Because I almost never see Rafale without the droptanks. Its not normal for a 4th gen plane to haul so many tanks on virtually every mission.

Look for yourself. Google "Rafale", click on "images" and count how many photos you'll see of Rafale in the air and w/o droptanks.

i think most of these pictures are taken in afganistan where rafale has to take long hours Reconnaissance missions...

 

[Sridhar]

F 18

* Empty weight: 30,600 lb (13,900 kg)
* Loaded weight: 47,000 lb (21,320 kg) (in fighter configuration)
* Max takeoff weight: 66,000 lb (29,900 kg)
* Powerplant: 2× General Electric F414-GE-400 turbofans
o Dry thrust: 14,000 lbf (62.3 kN) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) each
* Internal fuel capacity: F/A-18E: 14,400 lb (6,530 kg), F/A-18F: 13,550 lb (6,145 kg)
* External fuel capacity: 5 × 480 gal tanks, totaling 16,380 lb (7,430 kg)

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 1.8+[11] (1,190 mph, 1,900 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m)
* Range: 1,275 nmi (2,346 km) clean plus two AIM-9s[11]
* Combat radius: 390 nmi (449 mi, 722 km) for interdiction mission[72]
* Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,070 mi, 3,330 km)
* Service ceiling: 50,000+ ft (15,000+ m)
* Wing loading: 92.8 lb/ft² (453 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight: 0.93

Rafale

* Empty weight: 9,500 kg (C), 9,770 kg (B),[44] 10,196 kg (M) ()
* Max takeoff weight: 24,500 kg (C/D), 22,200 kg (M)[45] (54,000 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Snecma M88-2 turbofans
o Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN with M88-Eco >90 kN after 2010 (17,000 lbf) each

Performance

* Maximum speed:
o High altitude: Mach 2 (1,290 knots)[46]
o Low altitude: 1,390 km/h, 750 knots
* Combat radius: 1,852+ km (1,000+ nmi) on penetration mission
* Service ceiling: 16,800 m (55,000 ft)
* Rate of climb: 304.8+ m/s (1,000+ ft/s)
* Wing loading: 326 kg/m² (83 1/3 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.13


The bug weighs extra 4 tons , for a mere 1 ton increase in payload.

check also the thrust to weight ratio , 1.13 vs .93 , now decide which one will be fuel efficient and have long legs.

 

[Sridhar]

USN Turns On The F-18
June 19, 2009: The U.S. Navy is trying to reduce F-18E purchases, by nine aircraft (leaving 22), for next year in favor of F 35.

After next year, 58 F-18Es are still scheduled for delivery before production halts in four years. The admirals believe that the F-35 is more vital to any future combat operations than the current F-18E

Another unexpected expense is maintaining existing F-18s. The U.S. Navy has found that both their older F-18C Hornet fighters, and their newer F-18E "Super Hornet" are wearing out faster than expected.

The F-18E entered service about a decade ago, and was supposed to last 6,000 flight hours. But the portion of the wing that supports the pylons holding stuff (bombs, missiles, equipment pods or extra fuel tanks) is now expected to be good for no more than 3,000 flight hours. The metal, in effect, is weakening faster than expected. Such "metal fatigue", which ultimately results in the metal breaking

The navy is modifying existing F-18Es to fix the problem, which is a normal response to such situations. Sometimes these fixes cost millions of dollars per aircraft, but this particular fatigue problem is costing more to fix than expected. Many aircraft appear beyond repair, and will have to be retired after 8,000 hours in the air.

Murphy's Law: USN Turns On The F-18

 

[p2prada]

well the RCS of Rafale, EF, SH and Super viper are under 1m2,

Source, especially for SH and Viper.

the lowest forward rcs is a close call between the Rafale and SH,

No they are not. The SH has a big RCS, even from the front. What Boeing claims is a reduced RCS. Its like a Chinese claim. SH is not stealthy.

Rafale is said to have rcs of 0.1m2 and SH is roughly the same.

Rafale RCS has not been revealed. SH is significantly higher. The Rafale and EF-2000 are way out of league of the SH in RCS reduction.

coupled with their radars and Aim-120D, the SH and Super viper are still deadlier than the others, not to mention they readily fire a lot more weapons and do not require too much tweaking to make them deadly.

Theoretically and Statistically, Yes. But, Not proven.

in terms of air superiority though the Rafale and EF are much better aerodynamic performers, they still fall behind the SH in sheer fire ability, the SH can carry upto 12 A2A missiles in a single mission with upto 10 bvr missiles and 2 WVR missiles.

The EF-2000 carries a payload of 6.5tons. Low.
SH carries a payload of 8tons.
Rafale carries a payload of 9.5 tons.

SH carries 12 A2A at the sacrifice of range and performance. A single mission with this payload will not last long without the use of external fuel tanks. Both Rafale and SH carry 6 AAMs with 3 fuel tanks.

moreover the SH is also less physically and technically demanding to fly.

You just made this stuff up.

SH is also a much deadlier ground and maritime strike air craft deploying long range an cost effective weapons

I wont argue about cost of European weapons. Except for the fact that we have been buying a lot of European weapons since the early 80s.

But, the Rafale can carry more anyways. Add IFR and it will be no problems.
The Rafale range limitations compared to SH is insignificant compared to how other contenders fare against the SH.

and many of them can hit moving targets out to very long ranges.

This is not something special meant for the SH alone. Only LGBs can hit slow moving targets effectively. Many countries develop such weapons. We even used some in 1999.

in all 3 roles SH remains un-matched, furthermore it is also the mother of all multiroles playing both nearly full-scale awacs and tanker roles.

No its not. Its best in strike roles because of the AESA.

The AESA does not provide a major significant plus point in BVR, except for a longer detection and tracking range. In the end it will be the AMRAAM which will hit the enemy and not the AESA.

WVR: SH is the worst in WVR.

It cant handle full scale AWACS role. The "bechara" navigator will die of stress. It only provides targeting coordinates to other aircraft. This depends on the Datalink. By 2012 all aircraft in the IAF will be capable of achieving this.

It has a big range, so it will no doubt handle tanker roles. But, not a significant plus point compared to other abilities provided by other aircraft. Range and AESA are the only plus points.

SH will be one of our worst buys. I would prefer the Viper compared to the SH if we go for American.

If we only go for weapons, then Raytheon is willing to provide AMRAAMS and the Aim-9X for our jags, so I bet they will sell weapons to us even if we choose non-American aircraft. They are already selling the CBU-105.

 

[p2prada]

Super Hornet:
Service ceiling: 50,000+ ft (15,000+ m)
Wing loading: 92.8 lb/ft² (453 kg/m²)

Rafale
Service ceiling: 16,800 m (55,000 ft)
Wing loading: 326 kg/m² (83 1/3 lb/ft²)

Very important specifications if you consider they are to be used against an advanced enemy over the Himalayas.

You cant evade Short range and Medium SAMS with such crappy figures for the SH. SH is good over the sea and plains. At the same time the Vipers wing loading of 200kg/m2 and a service ceiling of 18km is incredibly useful.

 

[p2prada]

Double post

 

[Sridhar]

Estimating the Real Cost of Modern Fighter Aircraft

check this little old report by defense-aerospace.com

Aircraft Type Unit Procurement Costs Program Unit Costs Comments
Rafale C (EUR 51.8) $ 62.1 (EUR 113.2) $ 135.8 Air force single-seat (inc VAT)
Rafale M (EUR 56.6) $ 67.9 (EUR 121.4) $ 145.7 Naval version (inc VAT)
JAS-39C Gripen (Poland bid) $ 68.9 (SEK 552.9) $ 76.07 Swedish version (inc VAT)
F-18E Super Hornet $ 78.4 $ 95.3 MYP II contract
Eurofighter (Germany) (EUR 85.7) $ 102.8 (EUR 118.3) $ 141.9 Tranche 2, Dec. 2003 prices
F-15E Strike Eagle $ 108.2 Not significant FY06 order
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter $ 115.0 $ 112.5 LRIP aircraft (estimates)
Eurofighter Typhoon (UK) (GBP 64.8) $ 118.6 (GBP 78.6) $ 143.8 Tranche 2, July 2004 prices
Eurofighter (Spain) Not available (EUR 105.6) $ 126.7 Tranche 2, mid 2005 prices
F-22A Raptor $ 177.6 $ 338.8 FY06 contract

(Sources: GAO, CBO, NAO, DoD, UK MoD, French Parliament for data; defense-aerospace.com for analysis.
Figures are latest available)


as per it Rafale costs less than Gripen and F 18.

 

[Daredevil]

Rafale at Paris Airshow