MRCA News & Dicussions (IV)

[StealthSniper]

 

[indian274]

so now it has been confirmed that .......from US, France or Sweden

 

[thakur_ritesh]

IAF to acquire 126 multi-fighter aircraft soon - India - DNA


Indian Air Force today said it will acquire 126 latest multi-fighter aircrafts within a year.

"We are in the final stages of placing orders to acquire 126 multi-fighter aircrafts from US, France or Sweden within a year," Air Marshal Anil Chopra told reporters during his visit to the Sainik School here.

Light Combat Aircrafts (LCA) would also be added to the air force soon, he said.

Chopra, who belongs to Kapurthala and a pass out from the Sainik School, later interacted with the students.

oh please, it is not the IAF's brief to spell out who all are in and who all are out, at no point in time IAF is supposed to be doing that, that is the job of the MoD and there is no way the IAF will by pass the MoD at anytime. i hope everyone understands it simple and straight. PTI either misquoted to create some pointless sensation or the AM missed out on mentioning the other two, so leave at that.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I though IAF was not counting on single engine fighter..
If so than F-16I is strong & Gripen still have a good chance..

Maximum take-off weight 20,900 kg

Max takeoff weight: 24,500 kg

Max takeoff weight: 14,000 kg

Max takeoff weight: (23,500 kg)

 

[keshtopatel]

Kunal Biswas;182533]I though IAF was not counting on single engine fighter..
If so than F-16I is strong & Gripen still have a good chance..

Why would USA jeopardise its chances by giving NOC/waiver to Saab which has American engine and also in the fray? Gripen´s gain is US loss.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

I though IAF was not counting on single engine fighter..
If so than F-16I is strong & Gripen still have a good chance..

The specs for Gripen and LCA are very similar.

General characteristics
Gripen LCA
Crew: 1 (2 for JAS 39B/D) 1
Length: 14.1 m (46 ft 3 in) 13,2
Wingspan: 8.4 m (27 ft 7 in) 8,4
Height: 4.5 m (14 ft 9 in) 4,4
Wing area: 30.0 m² (323 ft²) 38.4
Empty weight: 5,700 kg (14,600 lb) 5500
Loaded weight: 8,500 kg (18,700 lb) 8500
Max takeoff weight: 14,000 kg (31,000 lb) 14500
Powerplant: 1× Volvo Aero RM12 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 54 kN (12,100 lbf) 54,9
Thrust with afterburner: 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) 85
Wheel track: 2.4 m (7 ft 10 in)
Length (two-seater): 14.8 m (48 ft 5 in)
Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 2 (2,130 km/h, 1,320 mph) 2,08
Combat radius: 800 km (500 mi, 432 nmi)
Ferry range: 3,200 km (2,000 mi) with drop tanks 3000
Service ceiling: 15,240 m (50,000 ft) 54000ft
Wing loading: 336 kg/m² (68.8 lb/ft²) 221,4
Thrust/weight: 0.97 01.02
Armament


1 × 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon 120 rounds GSH with 220 rounds
6 × Rb.74 (AIM-9) or Rb 98 (IRIS-T)
6 × Rb.99 (AIM-120) or MICA
4 x Rb.71 (Skyflash) or Meteor
4 x Rb.75
2 x KEPD.350
4 x GBU-12 Paveway II laser-guided bomb
4 x rocket pods 13.5 cm rockets

 

[F-14]

i place my beats on the super bug

Resons

1) political punch
2) tactical boost

 

[LETHALFORCE]

i place my beats on the super bug

Resons

1) political punch
2) tactical boost

Superbug is a good plane the only problem with it other than the political issues is cracking is a major issue. Many hornets are not lasting more than 15 years and our MRCA choice is suppose to last 30 years.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

Superbug is a good plane the only problem with it other than the political issues is cracking is a major issue. Many hornets are not lasting more than 15 years and our MRCA choice is suppose to last 30 years.

Yes it is a valid concern and true for all high performance war planes especially CATOBAR carrier based ones.

104 Hornets grounded after cracks discovered - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

104 Hornets grounded after cracks discovered
By Philip Ewing - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Mar 15, 2010 21:24:14 EDT

Naval Air Systems Command grounded 104 Navy and Marine F/A-18 Hornet fighter jets Friday after inspectors discovered the airframes were developing cracks much earlier than engineers had thought.

The grounding order affects the first four varieties of Hornet — models A through D — and does not apply to aircraft now flying combat missions over Iraq or Afghanistan. The number of Hornets affected makes up 16 percent of the Navy-Marine A through D fleet.

There have been no crashes or other mishaps related to the problem, said Navy spokesman Lt. Nate Christensen. The crash Wednesday of a Marine F/A-18D Hornet from Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 224 off South Carolina — in which both the pilot and weapons officer were rescued — was not related to this problem, he said.

Of the 104 grounded jets, 77 are in flight status. Of those, 23 are in Navy and Marine Corps fleet squadrons; five are forward-deployed at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan; five belong to the Blue Angels flight demonstration team; and 44 are in fleet replacement squadrons. The other 27 Hornets are in a maintenance status.

The grounding notice from NavAir covered a "high stress focus area" that engineers already knew about as part of the Hornets' service-life assessment program, Christensen said, so NavAir issued a set of instructions for affected aircraft.

Squadrons have been ordered to perform a magnetic field inspection on jets included in the grounding. If they don't find cracks, their Hornets go back to unrestricted flight status, although crews are required to visually inspect the wings after every 100 hours of flight.

If a squadron can't do the magnetic inspection on a jet included in the grounding, its crews have been ordered to inspect its wings visually. Even if they find no cracks, the Hornet pilots will not be allowed to pull more than four Gs during flight.

Christensen said most of the problems had been reported on C and D model Hornets across the Navy and Marine Corps, although there was a potential for cracks on all versions of the jet. He said cracking was taking place at the "aft wing shear attach fitting" — approximately the seam where part of a Hornet's wing joins to the fuselage.

There are a total of 635 A- through D-model jets in the Navy and Marine Corps fleet.

 

[Crusader53]

Yes it is a valid concern and true for all high performance war planes especially CATOBAR carrier based ones.

104 Hornets grounded after cracks discovered - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

104 Hornets grounded after cracks discovered
By Philip Ewing - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Mar 15, 2010 21:24:14 EDT

Naval Air Systems Command grounded 104 Navy and Marine F/A-18 Hornet fighter jets Friday after inspectors discovered the airframes were developing cracks much earlier than engineers had thought.

The grounding order affects the first four varieties of Hornet — models A through D — and does not apply to aircraft now flying combat missions over Iraq or Afghanistan. The number of Hornets affected makes up 16 percent of the Navy-Marine A through D fleet.

There have been no crashes or other mishaps related to the problem, said Navy spokesman Lt. Nate Christensen. The crash Wednesday of a Marine F/A-18D Hornet from Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 224 off South Carolina — in which both the pilot and weapons officer were rescued — was not related to this problem, he said.

Of the 104 grounded jets, 77 are in flight status. Of those, 23 are in Navy and Marine Corps fleet squadrons; five are forward-deployed at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan; five belong to the Blue Angels flight demonstration team; and 44 are in fleet replacement squadrons. The other 27 Hornets are in a maintenance status.

The grounding notice from NavAir covered a "high stress focus area" that engineers already knew about as part of the Hornets' service-life assessment program, Christensen said, so NavAir issued a set of instructions for affected aircraft.

Squadrons have been ordered to perform a magnetic field inspection on jets included in the grounding. If they don't find cracks, their Hornets go back to unrestricted flight status, although crews are required to visually inspect the wings after every 100 hours of flight.

If a squadron can't do the magnetic inspection on a jet included in the grounding, its crews have been ordered to inspect its wings visually. Even if they find no cracks, the Hornet pilots will not be allowed to pull more than four Gs during flight.

Christensen said most of the problems had been reported on C and D model Hornets across the Navy and Marine Corps, although there was a potential for cracks on all versions of the jet. He said cracking was taking place at the "aft wing shear attach fitting" — approximately the seam where part of a Hornet's wing joins to the fuselage.

There are a total of 635 A- through D-model jets in the Navy and Marine Corps fleet.

The Stress from Carrier Operations is far more. Than Land Based Types Endure during Landing's and Taking Off's from your Typical Runway. Plus, the Report is in regards to much older F/A-18 A-D's Hornets and not the far newer Super Hornet.

Really, are we surprised that a heavily used and old naval aircraft my suffer fatigue problems.........:emot100:

 

[luckyy]

Advantage Eurofighter

Eurofighter is highly agile , but the best part of it is the Service ceiling which is 65000ft , almost 8000ft better then any other compiteter in mmrca...

flying at such a hight , it can panetrate realy deep inside enemy territory , ..

it will be difficult for the enemy fighters to counter a aircratf which is flying almost 8000ft above their head..

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

if congress chooses f16 or f18 then it will be a greater tragedy than even bhopal .we will be shooting our global ambition in the foot.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

The Stress from Carrier Operations is far more. Than Land Based Types Endure during Landing's and Taking Off's from your Typical Runway. Plus, the Report is in regards to much older F/A-18 A-D's Hornets and not the far newer Super Hornet.

Really, are we surprised that a heavily used and old naval aircraft my suffer fatigue problems.........:emot100:

All air frames experience structural fatigue including commercial air planes, the Hornet was designed to withstand the rigors of carrier based operations.So the fact that a few air frames have visible cracks at the wing root either means that these air frames exceeded manufacture limits during operations OR a design flaw is causing premature cracking. The later is easily addressed by a design review that is incorporated into new planes or MLU'd into existing air frames the former 'end user' abuse is harder to resolve. The manufacturer is typically required by contract to address shortened life span due to air frame worthiness issues caused by design flaws.

I haven't researched this but I suspect land based Hornets like the ones operated by Canada, Switzerland, Australia and Kuwait have no known structural integrity issues. Finally, I doubt there is enough catapult launches or arrest recovery data from a handful of carrier based Rafale's for a valid comparison.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

What is this seriously? :angry_1::angry_10:

Why PINK!..

 

[neo29]

Apart from US the only other country that is planning to operate sh-18 is Australia. That too only for bombing and reconnaissance only. Even during its operational history never heard of sh-18 assigned as a interceptor, just as a bomb truck. It really is not wise to go for it. Most ponder about EF's A2G capabilities but forget that sh-18 has mostly been used for only A2G and reconnaissance. That leaves doubt of its interceptor and dog fight efficiency.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

Apart from US the only other country that is planning to operate sh-18 is Australia. That too only for bombing and reconnaissance only. Even during its operational history never heard of sh-18 assigned as a interceptor, just as a bomb truck. It really is not wise to go for it. Most ponder about EF's A2G capabilities but forget that sh-18 has mostly been used for only A2G and reconnaissance. That leaves doubt of its interceptor and dog fight efficiency.

That's incorrect, the primary role of the Marine Corps' VMFA F/A-18 squadrons based in Miramar, Beaufort and Fort Worth is to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft. I guess you also missed the news last month of two CF-18's intercept of Russian bombers over Canadian airspace.

Canadian fighter jets have scrambled to repel Russian bombers that intruded into Canadian airspace.The Russian Tupolev-95 is a long-range bomber capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
Canadian defence minister Peter MacKay says CF-18s were sent to intercept two of the bombers that made several attempts to enter Canadian airspace.Military officials say there was no advance warning and Mr MacKay says all such incursions will be met with a swift response.Intelligence analysts say the frequency of these attempts has been increasing, especially as Canada and Russia are in a race to lay claim to huge sections of the Arctic seabed believed to hold vast reserves of oil and gas.

 

[neo29]

An Extract from idrw magazine Sep Issue

The MMRCA Game by Pratik Sawerdekar

The word MMRCA is again making lots of noise in defense circles as the Flight evaluation
test report by the Indian Air Force has been submitted to the Ministry of Defense.
The report consists of some 643 test points which were determined by the IAF have been
submitted to the Ministry for approval. Old news apart, the biggest debate going around
and quite for a while now is who will win the competition and gloat around at air shows
and exhibitions. All the experts have made very good commentary on this debate; every
debate made by them has some really good points and some really serious criticism.
All the six contenders need this contract as it will determine their future. The F-16
wants to squeeze everything out of it and prove that it is still one of the best platform, the
F/A-18SH needs a big contract from outside USA to ensure its future and that of Boeing,
Rafael needs to open its export account, Typhoon needs the deal to offset its downsizing
by sponsor nations and the entire future of MiG-35 and JAS-39 Gripen depends on winning
the contract. MMRCA deal is not only worth a lot in terms of money but also the
competitor's future prospects and how the world sees it post-MMRCA depends on it.
Now we know that the suppliers will do everything to win but who will India choose is
a different game all together. IAF needs a fighter which will act as stop gap measure and
prevent further force depletion. But the game is just a bit more complicated than that with
players like Transfer of technology, life cycle cost, weaponry, politics, etc. playing hard.
Now India won't get everything it wants because it's not possible to hit a 6 on every ball
and dismiss the entire opposition in 10 balls. Like any other captain India needs to choose
the right players and right combination to win the game in the best possible manner without
creating any controversy.
I have divided the winning formula into three game plans all of them should ensure
victory at certain expense.

Game Plan 1: The best beast wins!
The first game plane is relatively simple; India should choose the best platform available
to them. In this competition the Dassault Rafael and the Eurofighter Typhoon are
probably the best beasts. Both the platforms are quite new and come with the latest in avionics,
self-defense systems and weaponry. Both the fighters have very good kinematic
performance and are stated to receive new AESA radars. Rafael has its SPECTRA electronic
survival system and Typhoon has its advance avionics and flight control system
which are said to be best in the business. The only downside to these aircrafts is that they
are very expensive to buy.

Game Plan 2: The Political Power play
Politics is the real game changer here. More than often experts, politicians, officials
and air force personnel's have touted this to the star player in game. Looking at the current
trend the Americans look the strongest in this area and will probably emerge victorious
with their F/A-18SH if the final decision is a political one. Now, the Super Hornet is a
very good fighter with deadly capabilities and the best Radar in the competition. It would
also mean that India would receive great deal of support in various fields like nuclear science,
Research and development, Military cooperation, UNSC permanent seat, etc. from
USA. The downside to this is that anything Americans sell comes with several strings attached
which the Indian media has put light on several times.

Game Plan 3: The L1 Policy
The third and the final game plan is L1, the lowest bidder wins. IAF wants these fighters
as a stop gap measure and they will be demoted to level 2 fighters once 5th generation
fighters start entering service which is by 2025. That means the gains of this game will
last only a decade hence it makes since to buy a reasonable capable fighters at low cost. In
this scenario the MiG-35, Gripen and the F-16IN have a good chance. All three have some
very good qualities and they are jack of rest. The MiG-35 will need less of everything as
it an upgraded version of MiG-29 with which IAF has absolutely no problem. Gripen is a
new platform like Rafael and Typhoon but is cheap, F-16 will allow IAF to understand the
threats it faces with PAF (F-16Blk-50 and JF-17) and PLAAF (J-10) having fighters with
similar or less capabilities. The downside to this will be that IAF won't be getting anything
worth for long term future and need not necessarily be the sharpest knife.

Conclusion:
India has to choose the fighter keeping in mind its long term and short term objectives. If
she wants to buy the best than Rafael and Typhoon are the one to look at, if she wants to
achieve its political goals than Super Hornet is probably the best buy and if she wants to
just spend less and get the job done than MiG-35, JAS-39 Gripen and F-16 are the aircraft
which come cheap.

 

[ace009]

As I discussed in another forum before, The three most important features for MMRCA should be -
1. Operability in Indian conditions
2. Capability including dual role as a fighter and a ground attack aircraft
3. Service record and future lifetime

In addition, thre are other strategic considerations like "not putting all eggs in one basket" (going against the Mig35 and being weary of US export powerplay - going against the f-16 and f/a 18 (f/a by the way means fighter / attack).

With these in mind the best bet are the EF2000 and the Rafale. However, looking at the Rafale export record (zero customers in 23 years) and the much better technology available for the . EF2000, we should definitely go for the EF2000. Why do all these talks of carrier based aircraft come it is difficult to get. IN has 1 carrier - for which we are getting the Mig29K to replace the harriers. Then as IN will have more carriers, the Tejas N will come in. The MRCA is for IAF - not the IN. The configurations will be different, the pilot trainings too, not to mention the services. So, Rafale being a carrier-based plane provides no advantage. India should make a decision in the next 2-3 months and choose the MRCA - best bet, the EF2000. Enough time has passed since 2001 - national defence is at stake here.

 

[luckyy]

An Extract from idrw magazine Sep Issue

The MMRCA Game by Pratik Sawerdekar

Game Plan 1: The best beast wins!

Game Plan 3: The L1 Policy
.

Game Plan 1: The best beast wins!

USD70ml

Game Plan 3: The L1 Policy


that's the difference between the two planes.

 

[StealthSniper]

Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet mission animation