MMRCA news and discussions.

[RPK]

F-18s, F-16s racing to reach Bangalore for trials - Bangalore - City - NEWS - The Times of India


BANGALORE: F-18s and F-16s. The US fighter aircraft are in a neck and neck race to reach Bangalore for commencement of test trials by the IAF. The
trials, to begin in the next three weeks, are a matter of pride for Bangalore as it is one among three locations selected, the other two being Leh and Jaisalmer. IAF will purchase 126 new fighter aircraft.

Both aircraft had come in as recently as October 2008 for Aero India and were slugging it out even then for public attention. Stationed side by side, the aircraft competed in the sorties they flew and in the access they lent to the public, aerospace experts and media.

As things stand, Boeing's F-18 will fly into Bangalore ahead of the F-16IN for the trials. The F-18 will be the super hornet version, favourite of the US Navy. The F/A-18E is a one-seater, while the F/A-18F is a two-seater. In the US, the super hornet production is expected to continue through 2015.Manufactured by Boeing IDS, the super hornets are aircraft designed with just a flip of the switch to fly both air-to-air missions (fighter) and air-to-ground missions (attack).

While the display of its frontline fighter is itself a statement about changing Indo-US relations, Boeing is upbeat about long-term R&D collaboration and technology transfer projects, unthinkable even a year ago. "We do have long-term plans. We are looking at research in breakthrough technology with the premier scientific institution in the country, the IISc. We will also look at defence R&D," Chris Chadwick, vice-president, Global Strike Systems, Boeing IDS, told TOI.

The F-16s from Lockheed Martin will be the IN version said to be the latest in the F-16 stables. Lockheed is flying in a specialized pilot and flight engineer for demos. "A cockpit simulator is being brought for familiarization with electronics and overall atmosphere of the F-16 cockpit," Lockheed representatives told TOI.

The latest version of the F-16 incorporates the advanced avionics, stealth and other critical systems of our F-22 and the F-35 jets, the only two fifth generation fighters currently flying. Lockheed believes F-16 is the fastest path for the IAF to the fifth-generation fighter. India and Russia are currently engaged in joint design of a fifth generation fighter but its production is at least a decade away.

The IAF needs new jets to replace its fast-depleting fleet of Soviet-era MiG-series jets.

 

[proud_indian]

I wouldn't say Tejas is on paper. Gripen doesn't possess a AESA yet. Don't know much about EW Suite of Gripen but Mayavi would be used by IsAF on there F-35 so by 2012-14 it could be operation. We are ready for new engine evaluation for Tejas.
US already started arm-twisting against gripen. It uses a lot of us technologies. It is technologically outclassed by every other fighter may be except Mig-35.

dark
i am here talking about mk2 it's just a paper plane yet.

On AESA i think gripen will be the first plane to have aesa amongst non-american mmrca contenders and tejas also dosen't posses aesa.
Is LRDE working on any AESA or we will get ELTA AESA?

On mayawi i did not know it was developed by israeli's. I thought it's a drdo product.
i and do not think US let others to customize their avionics

all and all i can say in present condition tejas mk2 is nothing more than a paper plane

 

[nitesh]

dark
i am here talking about mk2 it's just a paper plane yet.

On AESA i think gripen will be the first plane to have aesa amongst non-american mmrca contenders and tejas also dosen't posses aesa.
Is LRDE working on any AESA or we will get ELTA AESA?

On mayawi i did not know it was developed by israeli's. I thought it's a drdo product.
i and do not think US let others to customize their avionics

all and all i can say in present condition tejas mk2 is nothing more than a paper plane

Well AESA is for future. Mayawi is a DRDO project Israel joined in 2006 there after no detail report about the status of project. MK2 is under progress and will come in due time (say 2015) by that time if we choose Gripen we will have two planes in similar category. that's what DS is saying

 

[John]

Don't look today feature look for the future. US never give full TOT and imposable to give a best AC of that kind and as will as they are untrusted partner. and F/A-18 SH have a Air Frame problem Reported by RAAF. and accepted by us also. Price is not compared while before new learning technology and security, then we are partner we have full TOT for AESA later. then get experience from manufacturing of EXPORT QUALITY FIGHTER PARTS AND ASSEMBLY.

THINK TWICE BEFORE WE DO..

GREAT OPPORTUNITY WITH WESTERN TECHNOLOGY AND BECOME PARTNER OF FOUR NATION IN MANUFACTURING.

well first thing what makes you think EF will come with full-tot, matter of fact the EF has many US made parts that is a good 40% of aircraft's critical parts will need tot clearance from the US. Secondly the RFP doesn't require full-tot and its quite obvious that full-tot in not as important to the Govt. as it is to us. RFP mentions at least 60% tot, source codes are useless because just to understand the flow of the code of such advanced aircraft will take us at least 4 to 5 years and lots of money to improve it or customize.

TOT is over-rated. SH has no remaining 'bugs' in it, all of its problems related to fatigue have been fixed long time ago, these supposed problems were just rumors spread by the Marine Core which wants to avoid buying the SH. NAVAIR, USN and RAAF are completely happy with the SH. The SH had these problems like wing drop in 97 when it was being tested heavily and many problems were uncovered and fixed many of them a long time ago.

NAVAIR which tests every platform for the Navy has many a time cleared it up that SH is by far the most operationally excellent aircraft in their inventory. Besides the US radars have the largest library of threats including all Chinese, paki threats, yes i doubt the US will give full-tot but is it really that important?? and what makes you think US wont give full-tot, the competition hasn't even started yet, do u think the US will throw its ace early in the game?? They know how to do business, they will leave the offering till later, because as of now we have only set basic requirements. After trials we'll know exactly what we want and in what configuration only then will US see what to give. Well even the Rafale's Spectra EW suite come from Thales North America, EW suite made by US employees in a US subsidiary of a French company, this automatically requires US govt. clearance for tot.

Going for EU aircraft is expensive, secondly much more complex, the EF is a logistical nightmare, suppliers spread all across the world, besides all these aircraft also need US weapons which means more negotiations with many more companies, payments in many currencies etc. All headaches re-lated to a multilvendor / multinational sourcing. Keeping timing in mind, SH is the only aircraft that will reach India in time.

US will drop full-tot as a last minute bombshell and take this deal because, wait till price negotiations and depending who is in the final list of contenders, they will adjust their offering. US performs best in very competitive deals. With a TOT agreement in place, the manufacturer will share with you just enough information to allow sourcing non critical components from the domestic market, or certain acceptable foreign markets. full-tot gives you charts, how to build each part and assemble the aircraft, it wont teach you how to design an aircraft, how to build a engine from scratch.

Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?

Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?
Posted by vkthakur on 14 July 2009 (EST)
Transfer of technology has been a buzz phrase in India for defense acquisitions since decades. So far India has little to show for all the technology transfers and license production that have taken place.

July 14, 2009, (Sawf News) - Transfer of technology has been a buzz phrase in India for defense acquisitions since decades. So far India has little to show for all the technology transfers and license production that have taken place.

I have heard the phrase being bandied by politicians, bureaucrats and technocrats, since my school days, nearly 40 years ago.

India has been manufacturing MiG-21 variants since the 70s. Let alone developing a new aircraft based on the MiG-21, HAL was never able to even improve the aircraft in any way - Adding a dorsal fuel tank, for example, as in the MiG-21 Bis.

India designed and developed the Marut HF-24 in the late 1960's with assistance from German designer Dr. Kurt Tank and a lot of British help. HAL could never come up with a follow up.

We license produced the Jaguar? What good did that do? Where did the technology that was transferred go?

Whether transfer of technology works or not is linked to the technology base that a country has developed.

Talk to any DRDO official and they tell you the Russian never transfer technology.

At Aero India 2009 the DRDO chief publically termed Russian TOT as a farce.

What DRDO officials mean is that the Russians don't tell us how to build their products from scratch. The question is not only - Should they be telling you how to do so? - but also - Can they effectively tell how to do - considering that we do not have a technological base matching theirs?

A large amount of metal alloys and composites goes into an aircraft. The alloys used differ from each aircraft component. The strength of the metal varies with the manufacturing process used to produce it. When transferring technology should the manufacturer tell from where to source the metal or how to manufacture it? If your country hasn't mastered the manufacturing processes what good would that do?

Recently someone referred to the possible French and Swedish readiness to part with source code for their AESA radars. (I am not aware this is true.)

While getting the source code along with the radar helps, it cannot be construed as transfer of technology.

Anyone who has worked with software knows the complexities of imbibing code.

Any code is based on thousands and thousands of lines of library code. Is the library source also being offered? Even if it is being, you will need to spend months, possibly years, to understand its flow and logic.

How generic is the code? How much generic can it be? Hardware specific code tends to be less generic to facilitate faster development and processing. Reuse of code is also limited by continuous improvements in hardware and software.

Code that took 100 person years to develop cannot be mastered within one or two months, even if you deploy 2,000 people for hacking it, assuming the cost of deploying 2,000 top notch software professionals on the project makes economic sense.

The example, is applicable to most electronic components fitted on a fighter aircraft, each of which uses software.

No transfer of technology allows you to copy manufacture. You can only license produce the quantity negotiated. So the vendors hold back a lot of data, like wind tunnel and flight testing data that would make it easy to modify the aircraft.

Broadly speaking, with a TOT agreement in place, the manufacturer will share with you just enough information to allow sourcing non critical components from the domestic market, or certain acceptable foreign markets.

If we buy the Rafale, the French are not going to teach us how to build a fifth generation version of the Rafale.

Talking about French friendliness, here is a detail that I have mentioned elsewhere on this site. When they supplied us the Durandal runway denial bombs for use on the Jaguars, they missed out on a small detail that prevented the Jaguar from dropping it.

The IAF discovered the flaw years after acquiring the bombs, when Jaguars attempted to test fire them on a target runway in Pokharan for the first time.

Pre acquisition trials were conducted in France and since the bomb was so expensive IAF waited for the life of the first lot of bombs to nearly expire before testing them. Three Jaguars unsuccessfully attempted to release the bombs in front of the Defense minister, COAS and other top officials.

There were a lot of red faces that day, not just in the squadron tasked with the trials but right up the chain of command.

The software patch, when it arrived from France, took minutes.

Oh! Did I mention the squadron tasked was flying HAL manufactured Jaguars.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

The entire ToT issue is just a hype. HAL is not capaible to build even a single plane on its own not even Tejas. To the max what HAL can do is assemble a plane using its components by looking at the circuit diagram.
Several small but critical components like Very Lagre Scale Integrated Curcuit need to be imported as it is not feisable to manufacture it locally.
An air-force guy also stated once that HAL can only build planes for which blue prints are aviable, the can't develop something by themself.

 

[natarajan]

why you are bashing HAL

 

[SATISH]

The entire ToT issue is just a hype. HAL is not capaible to build even a single plane on its own not even Tejas. To the max what HAL can do is assemble a plane using its components by looking at the circuit diagram.
Several small but critical components like Very Lagre Scale Integrated Curcuit need to be imported as it is not feisable to manufacture it locally.
An air-force guy also stated once that HAL can only build planes for which blue prints are aviable, the can't develop something by themself.

Yes you are right and wrong....Yes the HAL can only build planes by looking at the blye-print. The development and design is done by ADA. No, The HAL has it's own chip manufacturing plant and it outsources the manufacture to BEL.

 

[Tamil]

well first thing what makes you think EF will come with full-tot, matter of fact the EF has many US made parts that is a good 40% of aircraft's critical parts will need tot clearance from the US. Secondly the RFP doesn't require full-tot and its quite obvious that full-tot in not as important to the Govt. as it is to us. RFP mentions at least 60% tot, source codes are useless because just to understand the flow of the code of such advanced aircraft will take us at least 4 to 5 years and lots of money to improve it or customize.

TOT is over-rated. SH has no remaining 'bugs' in it, all of its problems related to fatigue have been fixed long time ago, these supposed problems were just rumors spread by the Marine Core which wants to avoid buying the SH. NAVAIR, USN and RAAF are completely happy with the SH. The SH had these problems like wing drop in 97 when it was being tested heavily and many problems were uncovered and fixed many of them a long time ago.

NAVAIR which tests every platform for the Navy has many a time cleared it up that SH is by far the most operationally excellent aircraft in their inventory. Besides the US radars have the largest library of threats including all Chinese, paki threats, yes i doubt the US will give full-tot but is it really that important?? and what makes you think US wont give full-tot, the competition hasn't even started yet, do u think the US will throw its ace early in the game?? They know how to do business, they will leave the offering till later, because as of now we have only set basic requirements. After trials we'll know exactly what we want and in what configuration only then will US see what to give. Well even the Rafale's Spectra EW suite come from Thales North America, EW suite made by US employees in a US subsidiary of a French company, this automatically requires US govt. clearance for tot.

Going for EU aircraft is expensive, secondly much more complex, the EF is a logistical nightmare, suppliers spread all across the world, besides all these aircraft also need US weapons which means more negotiations with many more companies, payments in many currencies etc. All headaches re-lated to a multilvendor / multinational sourcing. Keeping timing in mind, SH is the only aircraft that will reach India in time.

US will drop full-tot as a last minute bombshell and take this deal because, wait till price negotiations and depending who is in the final list of contenders, they will adjust their offering. US performs best in very competitive deals. With a TOT agreement in place, the manufacturer will share with you just enough information to allow sourcing non critical components from the domestic market, or certain acceptable foreign markets. full-tot gives you charts, how to build each part and assemble the aircraft, it wont teach you how to design an aircraft, how to build a engine from scratch.

Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?

Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?
Posted by vkthakur on 14 July 2009 (EST)
Transfer of technology has been a buzz phrase in India for defense acquisitions since decades. So far India has little to show for all the technology transfers and license production that have taken place.

July 14, 2009, (Sawf News) - Transfer of technology has been a buzz phrase in India for defense acquisitions since decades. So far India has little to show for all the technology transfers and license production that have taken place.

I have heard the phrase being bandied by politicians, bureaucrats and technocrats, since my school days, nearly 40 years ago.

India has been manufacturing MiG-21 variants since the 70s. Let alone developing a new aircraft based on the MiG-21, HAL was never able to even improve the aircraft in any way - Adding a dorsal fuel tank, for example, as in the MiG-21 Bis.

India designed and developed the Marut HF-24 in the late 1960's with assistance from German designer Dr. Kurt Tank and a lot of British help. HAL could never come up with a follow up.

We license produced the Jaguar? What good did that do? Where did the technology that was transferred go?

Whether transfer of technology works or not is linked to the technology base that a country has developed.

Talk to any DRDO official and they tell you the Russian never transfer technology.

At Aero India 2009 the DRDO chief publically termed Russian TOT as a farce.

What DRDO officials mean is that the Russians don't tell us how to build their products from scratch. The question is not only - Should they be telling you how to do so? - but also - Can they effectively tell how to do - considering that we do not have a technological base matching theirs?

A large amount of metal alloys and composites goes into an aircraft. The alloys used differ from each aircraft component. The strength of the metal varies with the manufacturing process used to produce it. When transferring technology should the manufacturer tell from where to source the metal or how to manufacture it? If your country hasn't mastered the manufacturing processes what good would that do?

Recently someone referred to the possible French and Swedish readiness to part with source code for their AESA radars. (I am not aware this is true.)

While getting the source code along with the radar helps, it cannot be construed as transfer of technology.

Anyone who has worked with software knows the complexities of imbibing code.

Any code is based on thousands and thousands of lines of library code. Is the library source also being offered? Even if it is being, you will need to spend months, possibly years, to understand its flow and logic.

How generic is the code? How much generic can it be? Hardware specific code tends to be less generic to facilitate faster development and processing. Reuse of code is also limited by continuous improvements in hardware and software.

Code that took 100 person years to develop cannot be mastered within one or two months, even if you deploy 2,000 people for hacking it, assuming the cost of deploying 2,000 top notch software professionals on the project makes economic sense.

The example, is applicable to most electronic components fitted on a fighter aircraft, each of which uses software.

No transfer of technology allows you to copy manufacture. You can only license produce the quantity negotiated. So the vendors hold back a lot of data, like wind tunnel and flight testing data that would make it easy to modify the aircraft.

Broadly speaking, with a TOT agreement in place, the manufacturer will share with you just enough information to allow sourcing non critical components from the domestic market, or certain acceptable foreign markets.

If we buy the Rafale, the French are not going to teach us how to build a fifth generation version of the Rafale.

Talking about French friendliness, here is a detail that I have mentioned elsewhere on this site. When they supplied us the Durandal runway denial bombs for use on the Jaguars, they missed out on a small detail that prevented the Jaguar from dropping it.

The IAF discovered the flaw years after acquiring the bombs, when Jaguars attempted to test fire them on a target runway in Pokharan for the first time.

Pre acquisition trials were conducted in France and since the bomb was so expensive IAF waited for the life of the first lot of bombs to nearly expire before testing them. Three Jaguars unsuccessfully attempted to release the bombs in front of the Defense minister, COAS and other top officials.

There were a lot of red faces that day, not just in the squadron tasked with the trials but right up the chain of command.

The software patch, when it arrived from France, took minutes.

Oh! Did I mention the squadron tasked was flying HAL manufactured Jaguars.

You worried about 40% US parts,
THINK if we select 100% US parts what will cause???

We already have such problem in 98/99' by grounded our fighting machines on ground.

IM telling if we select EFT, it is a Product of UK, GERMANY, ITALY, SPAIN and INDIA. if they refuse to give the parts they are against other four nations also, think the other point.

 

[Soham]

IM telling if we select EFT, it is a Product of UK, GERMANY, ITALY, SPAIN and INDIA. if they refuse to give the parts they are against other four nations also, think the other point.

Don't be dragged into the hype created by EF.
We AREN'T becoming a part of the consortium. We'll just be involved in the tech. of the future EF tranche.
Secondly, the decisions about the EF business are taken by the consortium as a whole. None of the member nations stand against each other. If we are denied parts, we'll be denied parts on behalf of the whole consortium.

 

[John]

well EFT is nightmare with parts coming from all over the world and this will complicate ad delay the local manufacturing part. Besides EFT is even more expensive than the SH. EFT and Rafale depend on US weapons to be any effective and the latest PGMs and weapons are deployed on the SH and the Viper, buying EFT will also need us to do more weapons integration, get a good AESA lots of trouble. needless to remind you we'll have lower number of aircraft than PAk by the time the first mrca has to land. EFT wont come to India before 2014, neither will the Rafale, SH will be ready by mid-2013 once the order is placed. Timing, weapons, integration, avionics and new engine taken into account the SH is the ideal option and what makes you think US will suspend support to us in the event of a war?? EUVA dictates that we can use our platforms against whoever poses a threat. Its madness for them to loose this entry point into Indian business, do u really think they will let go of the chance to make billions with us by alienating us during a war?? madness.

 

[John]

Bangalore sky to host biggest airfight

Bangalore: The grand finale in the fight to win the largest-ever single order placed by the Indian Air force (IAF) for 126 medium-weight multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) will begin in Bangalore on Friday, when a team of Boeing officials will land in the city to finalise the details of the test trials.
The test trials, to be conducted by the IAF's Aircraft Systems and Training Establishment (ASTE), on six contenders eyeing the Rs42,000 crore deal, will run for over a year, beginning mid-August with Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

Sources, privy to the year-long test trials to be held one after the other on all six contenders, told DNA that a DC-10 aircraft is scheduled to land in city on August 12 at the HAL airport carrying the maintenance and spares equipment for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The test trials on F/A-18E/F Super Hornet would begin about August15-17.

"Once the equipment is set up, the all-clear would be given for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter to fly in for the test trials," said the source.

The test trial schedules are being worked out by a joint working group comprising officials of the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), ASTE, and the competing companies.

Besides Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the other five contenders are Dassault's Rafale, Eurofighter's Typhoon, Lockheed Martin's F-16, Russian Aircraft Corporation's (RAC) MiG-35 and Swedish Saab Gripen's JAS-39.

The flight trials in Bangalore would take off from the city's HAL airport where military test flights are being conducted, including that of India's light combat aircraft (LCA), Tejas.

Sources said, the F/A-18E/F, after taking off from the HAL airport, would head 50 nautical miles south-east of Bangalore where flight trials would be conducted.

After the Bangalore trials, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet would head to Jaisalmer in Rajasthan for desert trials, and then to a location in Ladakh for high altitude tests. "The idea is to check the fighter aircraft in all weather patterns," explained the source.

Bangalore sky to host biggest airfight

 

[Tamil]

in future 126 MMRCA is one of the biggest scam case in india.

Note: Its Purly my personal thought, not to hurt or make chaos to others. I say It may happen or else not.

 

[natarajan]

no plan can be done without bribery so if we wont get anything without this scam(netas should be feeded so that armed forces will get something)

 

[youngindian]

Race Begins Next Week for $12B India Warjet Deal

7 Aug 2009

NEW DELHI - India will start fighter jet trials next week as the world's six top aerospace giants vie for a $12 billion military contract, an official said Aug. 7.

The trials for what will be the world's most lucrative fighter contract in more than a decade will begin in Bangalore, India's space research and aeronautical industry hub.The assessment is due to continue for almost a year before New Delhi makes its choice from the six companies, the official said.

Boeing will be the first to take part when it displays its F/A-18 "Superhornet," the official said, adding that a team of U.S.-based aviation experts would be present in the southern city for the trials.

Lockheed Martin of the U.S. and Europe's EADS will be among the other five firms descending on Bangalore.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the precise date for the start of trials will depend on weather conditions.

India is on a spending spree to update its largely Soviet-era weapons system and is looking at buying 126 fighter jets.

After Boeing, Lockheed Martin is next in line to showcase its F-16 to the technology-hungry Indian Air Force, the official said.

The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) will offer its Typhoon Eurofighter, while Russia is seeking to sell the MiG-35 and MiG-29.

French Dassault, which constructs the Mirage, has put forward its Rafale aircraft as a contender.

In April, India said it would not buy the Rafale because it was too expensive. But within weeks, New Delhi said, without elaborating, the French firm had re-joined the race.

The line-up is completed by Gripen, part of Sweden's Saab.

Industry sources have said Lockheed Martin and Boeing have emerged as front-runners.

Race Begins Next Week for $12B India Warjet Deal - Defense News

 

[Sabir]

The MMRCA procedure is taking so much time, sometimes I feel everything is an eyewash.....IAF already selected a fighter and order has been given to the vendor. After evaluating every contenders it will select the one already started manufacturing. This way IAF will obtain the aircraft earlier than anyone can anticipate.May be Rafale is the winner as IAF was fond of Mirage2000.....
Hey ! Dont ask for link....I said I feel....

 

[natarajan]

may be f18,mig35 can win

 

[Daredevil]

The MMRCA procedure is taking so much time, sometimes I feel everything is an eyewash.....IAF already selected a fighter and order has been given to the vendor. After evaluating every contenders it will select the one already started manufacturing. This way IAF will obtain the aircraft earlier than anyone can anticipate.May be Rafale is the winner as IAF was fond of Mirage2000.....
Hey ! Dont ask for link....I said I feel....

I think that assumption is wrong. The purpose of MMRCA competition is to pitch the A/C companies against one another resulting in offering of more goodies or discounts to IAF and as you can see, it is already happening. Every A/C company is falling one over the other to induce IAF into buying their A/Cs.

 

[p2prada]

OK Boys. This is fresh from a source of mine.

The final prices for the Brazilian tender and his comment.

The F-X2 finalists submitted their "Best and Final Offers" last week.

Dassault Rafale - Euro 50M
Boeing F/A-18E - USD 55M
Saab Gripen NG - USD 50M

Here's the buzz. . . . . The Gripen NG is seen as a prototype project with avionics yet to be sorted out. This is attractive for the FAB to develop new systems, however the top brass are not keen to acquire a system that is not yet fully operational. The F-18 and Rafale are technically tied ahead of the Gripen NG, the Rafale with an edge in technology, and the F-18 ahead in logistics support, especially availability and least cost in parts support. The F-18 also has an edge in weapons availability and price. France and the USA have pledged ToT, offsets, and partnering with Brazilian firms for in-country manufacture.

The FAB will submit their final recommendation to the Minister of Defense and President next week with the F-X2 winner to be announced on 7 September.

 

[natarajan]

We will shift workload from Germany to India in the area of avionics

One of the largest defence purchases in recent times, the 126 aircraft purchase order from the Indian Air Force, is reaching the final stages of the a long drawn out tender process, with flight trials of the five aircraft set to start this month. Mint’s Anil Padmanabhan and Rahul Chandran spoke to Bernhard Gerwert, chief executive officer of military air systems, EADS Defence and Security, the largest stock holder in the Eurofighter Typhoon, one of the five aircrafts going to flight trials this year, when he was in New Delhi. Edited Excerpts:

I saw some reports saying that the Eurofighter is willing to sweeten the deal in the Indian context, and offer a manufacturing facility. True?

Fighter instinct: Gerwert says he is gaining confidence in his firm’s bid for Indian Air Force’s jet orders as he is getting a lot of questions. Ramesh Pathania / Mint
The reason of my visit here is a little bit broader than just to make a statement regarding what we are doing here. The main reason why I am here in the last few days is to get a feeling for where we are in the campaign and that is why I spent three days here. On the one side of course, to have the discussion with my own people, directly placed here in Delhi and Bangalore, but as well to have a lot of discussions with the customer, feeling where we are in this campaign because you have to take into account the next phase: We have to go into flight trials. And to go for flight trials is a very expensive journey. Coming to India with two, three fighters, doing the flight trials in Europe and before doing so, I’d like to get a little grip on where we are. And I have to say, I have a good feeling.
And what made you get a good feeling? Is it something you offered?

I could not offer something now in addition to what we already offered. We submitted our bid in April last year. And the first target was to be invited for the flight trials and now we are invited.

You can see that as a huge success but all the other competitors have been successful as well. So it is by far not enough. But we talked a lot about what is the next phase. What is the outcome of the flight trials. How the flight trials would be evaluated and so on.

I strongly believe, due to the discussions I had the last two days, that the customer and the decisive people are fully aware that the evaluation of such a mission, is a huge challenge. Because they have to take into account very different dimensions, not only performance of an aircraft but the performance of our bid and that is a challenge of course. They have to judge the performance of the aircraft, they have to evaluate the mission capabilities of the aircraft, they have to take into account the technology of such an aircraft and not forget they must be very cautious about what the customer really needs and what the customer wants.
source

 

[duhastmish]

if brasil goes for - f/a 18 sh , i think that will put - super hornet on back seat for our mmrca, or so it should.
because that means we will get more delayed delivery of our fighters. if we are ready to be so late why not go for - f-35 ????.