MRCA News & Dicussions (IV)

[StealthSniper]

Well, then purchase the Super Hornet for both the IAF and Indian Navy. Combined with the fact that the LCA-MK2 will be equipped with the same GE F414. Its just more icing on the cake.....

I got 3 points for you why American jets will not be good for the Airforce and Navy. First point is that I am sure India will not sign the CISMOA because I know they won't allow American technicians to come on their airbases to check the American military equipment, it just won't happen (And they haven't signed it for C-130 anyway). Second, since we are not signing the CISMOA we are getting downgraded aircraft (which is inevitable) and that makes the F-18, F-16 inferior to other competitor products and maybe even to our own Sukhoi's and LCA's. Third is that when Eurofighter is giving blueprints and Rafale is giving software source codes, what really is the reason for getting American jets ? Sure their is the political aspect, but they are already selling arms to our main enemy so what can they really offer us except downgraded, expensive, and restricted use fighter aircraft.


One other thing is that it would be stupid to have the Super Hornet in the Navy when India is trying to cut down the number of different types of fighters in it's inventory. I will say it again, the Mig-29K and N-LCA is the BEST answer for India and we are comfortable with these aircraft and they come with no strings attached.

 

[Parthy]

Indian MMRCA contract by March 2011: IAF Chief

The Indian contract to buy 126 MMRCA fighter aircraft is expected to be signed by March 2011, the Indian Air Force Chief of Staff, P.V. Naik has been quoted as saying.


In an interview to Vayu Aerospace, a media partner of defenseworld.net, the air force chief said that the likely timeframe for completing various activities before the contract is signed is about 6-8 months, "So, we expect the contract to be signed by March 2011. From thereon, the induction should begin by mid 2014 onwards".

The RFP for the M-MRCA was issued in August 2007 to six global vendors. These vendors responded with their proposals and the TEC was completed in June 2009. By this time, the IAF was already ready to undertake Field Evaluations and these were conducted from July 2009 to May 2010, the Air Chief said.

Thereafter the IAF has completed the analysis of results and compiled an exhaustive report well in time. The Staff Evaluation report was submitted on 30 July 2010.

"In my opinion, considering the number of vendors involved and the complex nature of evaluations, there has not been any inordinate delay. We have been able to achieve our objectives well within the stipulated time frame", he added.

http://www.defenseworld.net/go/defensenews.jsp?id=5285

 

[Crusader53]

I got 3 points for you why American jets will not be good for the Airforce and Navy. First point is that I am sure India will not sign the CISMOA because I know they won't allow American technicians to come on their airbases to check the American military equipment, it just won't happen (And they haven't signed it for C-130 anyway). Second, since we are not signing the CISMOA we are getting downgraded aircraft (which is inevitable) and that makes the F-18, F-16 inferior to other competitor products and maybe even to our own Sukhoi's and LCA's. Third is that when Eurofighter is giving blueprints and Rafale is giving software source codes, what really is the reason for getting American jets ? Sure their is the political aspect, but they are already selling arms to our main enemy so what can they really offer us except downgraded, expensive, and restricted use fighter aircraft.


One other thing is that it would be stupid to have the Super Hornet in the Navy when India is trying to cut down the number of different types of fighters in it's inventory. I will say it again, the Mig-29K and N-LCA is the BEST answer for India and we are comfortable with these aircraft and they come with no strings attached.

The Europeans are offering no more access to there Technology than the Americans. Plus, the Super Hornet and Viper are not less capable than there European Rivals. As a matter of fact in the attended role of Multi-Role (Strike Fighter) both are more capable and more mature designs.


As for the Mig-29K and N-LCA. The Indian Navy had little choice. As they have been forced to take both. The Mig-29K in order to get the Ex-Gorshkov and the N-LCA by pressure from the Indian Government. (i.e. IAF)

 

[StealthSniper]

The Europeans are offering no more access to there Technology than the Americans. Plus, the Super Hornet and Viper are not less capable than there European Rivals. As a matter of fact in the attended role of Multi-Role (Strike Fighter) both are more capable and more mature designs.


As for the Mig-29K and N-LCA. The Indian Navy had little choice. As they have been forced to take both. The Mig-29K in order to get the Ex-Gorshkov and the N-LCA by pressure from the Indian Government. (i.e. IAF)

Maybe you should read a little more about how we are not getting full TOT for the AESA radar for the Super Hornet and we are NOT getting source codes for the F-16 and F-18 WHICH IS A NATIONAL SECURITY PROBLEM. That means that if we want to program mission parameters into our new Super Hornets and F-16 we need to get them programmed by the manufacturer which means we are potentially compromising our mission before it even started. Also we need to consult America about every little thing we do to their aircraft so India can forget about making a MKI version of the American fighters jets if they win. Their is no real advantage for India to operate American jets in it's inventory, unless they want to be watched like an eagle and not be able to do ANYTHING to the aircraft that they have bought. So that makes them useless.

 

[SHASH2K2]

The Europeans are offering no more access to there Technology than the Americans. Plus, the Super Hornet and Viper are not less capable than there European Rivals. As a matter of fact in the attended role of Multi-Role (Strike Fighter) both are more capable and more mature designs.


As for the Mig-29K and N-LCA. The Indian Navy had little choice. As they have been forced to take both. The Mig-29K in order to get the Ex-Gorshkov and the N-LCA by pressure from the Indian Government. (i.e. IAF)

Crusader will USA allow us to integrate Made in India or Russian weapons in those planes? Answer is not because it needs access to source codes and USA will never ever do so. while others are ready to cooperate in that filed as well. In RADAR they will give limited TOT so that mission programming can be done by us but we need more TOT than that .

 

[Crusader53]

Maybe you should read a little more about how we are not getting full TOT for the AESA radar for the Super Hornet and we are NOT getting source codes for the F-16 and F-18 WHICH IS A NATIONAL SECURITY PROBLEM. That means that if we want to program mission parameters into our new Super Hornets and F-16 we need to get them programmed by the manufacturer which means we are potentially compromising our mission before it even started. Also we need to consult America about every little thing we do to their aircraft so India can forget about making a MKI version of the American fighters jets if they win. Their is no real advantage for India to operate American jets in it's inventory, unless they want to be watched like an eagle and not be able to do ANYTHING to the aircraft that they have bought. So that makes them useless.

Sorry, you will read no official Indian Goverment sources supporting such claims. Plus, its funny that India has had no issue with other American Equipment including the Highly Advance P-8I.

 

[Rahul Singh]

As for the Mig-29K and N-LCA. The Indian Navy had little choice. As they have been forced to take both. The Mig-29K in order to get the Ex-Gorshkov and the N-LCA by pressure from the Indian Government. (i.e. IAF)

How idiotic is this? Do you even know that it was Navy which first contacted ADA for feasibility study to see if LCA can operate from IAC? Back then, ADA in spite of being happy and encouraged, answered it like "It is too much asking from a little bird". But, nevertheless with Navy's positiveness and active technical help, the ADA started the study. And when ADA discovered that LCA can operate, then it was the Navy which approached government for sanctioning a parallel LCA project for the Navy for equipping IAC (which in absence of N-LCA can very well be equipped with MIG-29Ks, in that case it would have lead to next to nill complications). Unfortunately when initial funds where getting delayed(may be here it was pressure from IAF in order to stop ADA from distributing its manpower and keep them focused on IAF LCA), it was the Navy which had released her own money to get work started. Something like funding by force/user in defence R&D was never seen in India before and in fact it took every one by pleasant surprise...................

N-LCA project offers multiple advantage to Navy some of them are like small size leading to more numbers on small IACs, indigenous hence less complicated to operate and upgrade, significantly small RCS and quick turn around time makes it dead suitable for air-to air interception(this is something NAVY dead requires) etc.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

I have been looking for pictures of the F/A-18 E/F carrying asymmetric loads for sometime. I finally found some very good pictures, the F/A-18 E/F can fly,fight and return to the carrier carrying asymmetric loads of up to 35,000 lbs.

 

[Rahul Singh]

I have been looking for pictures of the F/A-18 E/F carrying asymmetric loads for sometime. I finally found some very good pictures, the F/A-18 E/F can fly,fight and return to the carrier carrying asymmetric loads of up to 35,000 lbs.

In the time of digital fly-by-wire controls, flying with asymmetrical load is just as easy as eating Dairy Milk chocolate bar. Landing on the aircraft-carrier with that load looks good on paper but interesting thing is to see how much fatigue it cause to airframe with that 4G recovery every time?

 

[death.by.chocolate]

In the time of digital fly-by-wire controls, flying with asymmetrical load is just as easy as eating Dairy Milk chocolate bar.

Can you elaborate? In most cases, pilots are severely limited under asymmetrical load conditions. These limitations are described in detail in the pilots flight manual and include AoA,speed,roll limits. These limits are not imposed on the F/A-18 E/F and it retains full pitch authority, remains AoA unrestricted even under full or asymmetric loads conditions.The F/A-18 E/F has more control surfaces both by surface area and by count than most forth generation fighters, it spent 14,000 hours in a NASA wind tunnel before OPEVAL. The result of this extensive work is a fully integrated FCS, while you opine 'digital fly-by-wire' makes the aircraft easy to fly this is only partially true, it is the FCS (flight control system) that deflects control surfaces in response to pilot input that makes the aircraft easy to fly, fly-by-wire facilitates the deflections commanded by the FCS. FCS cannot create control power that does not exist, once a control surface is fully deflected it has reached its limit. The F/A-18 E/F has a unique 'DepRes' system that continuously works under any load conditions to prevent inadvertent departures.
FCS in conjunction with auto-release of heavy bombs allows the F/A-18 E/F to counter lateral weight asymmetries giving it the ability to accurately engage two
or more closely separated ground targets in a single pass with multiple release of individual LGB or iron bombs. In common air-to-air scenarios the F/A-18 E/F pilots can engage air targets without the need to jettison expensive ordnance. The amount of ordnance the F/A-18 E/F has brought back to the carrier has probably already paid back the USN half the Super Hornet program development cost.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Can you elaborate?.........
hile you opine 'digital fly-by-wire' makes the aircraft easy to fly this is only partially true

I had used Fly by Wire as a vague substitute for DFC, my bad here.

DFC is a combination of DFCC and its software. Just like any other software the DFCC software can be updated and modified by feeding latest scenario and solution to it discovered by users or research team. In case of new jets designer writes solution to requirement, test pilots test it and after modification and validated a reliable solution to the scenario is feed into software. And from that time onwards DFCC knows how to fly jet in control manner during that particular condition, here in case of uneven weight distribution. In nut shell any jet with SMS(store management system) integrated with DFCC can fly with asymmetrical load, considering its DFCC's software has solution for that particular case.

As you can see in this video LCA is carrying only one R-73 missile on port wing while starboard wing has only pylons. Now again, if an uncertified jet with DFCC loaded with proper software (in short equipped with FCS) can fly with asymmetrical load then what is special in fully certified combat ready F/A-18E/F flying in one such configuration?

 

[death.by.chocolate]

....................................

 

[Rahul Singh]

You are right here but my point was that with FCS and preloaded solutions now a days any fighter with expected asymmetrical load can fly, manoeuver and even land. However i do acknowledge that F/A-18E/F/G do have distinct feature which enables recovery on carriers with relatively higher loads. But it is a trade off and comes at a cost.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

I had used Fly by Wire as a vague substitute for DFC, my bad here.

DFC is a combination of DFCC and its software. Just like any other software the DFCC software can be updated and modified by feeding latest scenario and solution to it discovered by users or research team. In case of new jets designer writes solution to requirement, test pilots test it and after modification and validated a reliable solution to the scenario is feed into software. And from that time onwards DFCC knows how to fly jet in control manner during that particular condition, here in case of uneven weight distribution. In nut shell any jet with SMS(store management system) integrated with DFCC can fly with asymmetrical load, considering its DFCC's software has solution for that particular case.

As you can see in this video LCA is carrying only one R-73 missile on port wing while starboard wing has only pylons. Now again, if an uncertified jet with DFCC loaded with proper software (in short equipped with FCS) can fly with asymmetrical load then what is special in fully certified combat ready F/A-18E/F flying in one such configuration?

Flight isn't a problem under asymmetric load conditions, typically the pilot is able to trim the aircraft to correct the asymmetry.
Like I said before the aircraft FCS (Flight control system) on aircrafts many forth generation aircraft impose heavy restrictions on the pilot under asymmetric load conditions so while the aircraft is able to fly its performance envelope is severely limited. If you want to verify this try and get a hold of a pilots flight manual.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

You are right here but my point was that with FCS and preloaded solutions now a days any fighter with expected asymmetrical load can fly, manoeuver and even land. However i do acknowledge that F/A-18E/F/G do have distinct feature which enables recovery on carriers with relatively higher loads. But it is a trade off and comes at a cost.

BAE SYSTEMS announced that aircraft DA2 had successfully completed a series of high-risk, asymmetric carefree handling flight trials designed to evaluate the Flight Control System (FCS) on the aircraft. "Carefree" means that the pilot can perform whatever action he wants with the stick, pedals and throttle and the aircraft's flight control system will protect the pilot and the aircraft by limiting parameters such as angle of attack, g-force and roll-rate, to a safe level.

To test the FCS to the full, the aircraft was fitted with the most demanding weapon configuration. For these trials, which are to clear the Eurofighter Typhoon for Initial Operational Clearance, this consisted of two AIM-120 AMRAAMs on the right-hand under fuselage stations and a AIM-9 Sidewinder on the right-hand wing tip. Other configurations will be tested in the future as the aircraft proceeds through to full operational clearance.

http://www.targetlock.org.uk/typhoon/development.html

Under asymmetric loads the Typhoon's FCS limits "angle of attack,g-force and roll-rate to a safe level". I've seen a fully loaded Typhoon in level flight release a 2000lb Paveway II from a hardpoint under its fuselage close to its longitudinal axis, I was amazed to see the amount of lateral stick input required for the pilot to level the aircraft post release. Now imagine the imbalance the release of a heavy ordnance closer to the wing tip will cause.

 

[Rahul Singh]

So here your are saying that these G limit, roll limit and AoA limit are not imposed on F/A-18 by its FCS when flying with asymmetrical load?

As written there Typhoon is still to get the Final Operational Clearance and hopefully by the time it acquires that FOC the FCS will have solution to level the aircraft automatically as Pilot 'pickle' for bomb release bringing jet into uneven weight configuration.

 

[Crusader53]

How idiotic is this? Do you even know that it was Navy which first contacted ADA for feasibility study to see if LCA can operate from IAC? Back then, ADA in spite of being happy and encouraged, answered it like "It is too much asking from a little bird". But, nevertheless with Navy's positiveness and active technical help, the ADA started the study. And when ADA discovered that LCA can operate, then it was the Navy which approached government for sanctioning a parallel LCA project for the Navy for equipping IAC (which in absence of N-LCA can very well be equipped with MIG-29Ks, in that case it would have lead to next to nill complications). Unfortunately when initial funds where getting delayed(may be here it was pressure from IAF in order to stop ADA from distributing its manpower and keep them focused on IAF LCA), it was the Navy which had released her own money to get work started. Something like funding by force/user in defence R&D was never seen in India before and in fact it took every one by pleasant surprise...................

N-LCA project offers multiple advantage to Navy some of them are like small size leading to more numbers on small IACs, indigenous hence less complicated to operate and upgrade, significantly small RCS and quick turn around time makes it dead suitable for air-to air interception(this is something NAVY dead requires) etc.

Sorry, its well known that the Indian Naval only received Mig-29K's because of the deal over the ex-Gorshkov. Which, is clearly supported by the recent RFI for a New Naval Fighter.

As for the N-LCA the Indian Navy hasn't been a big fan. Especially, because of its lenghty development and lack of Warload when Carrier Based. That said, I think it will make a great Advance Trainer.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Sorry, its well known that the Indian Naval only received Mig-29K's because of the deal over the ex-Gorshkov. Which, is clearly supported by the recent RFI for a New Naval Fighter.

It is very well that a Russian fighter with ex-Gorshkov was compulsion and SU-33K was the jet of choice initially but for technical reasons baseline Mig-29K was selected and was re-developed as per Naval ASR, and Navy's follow-on order for 29 jets gives firm base to assumption that Navy 'lovin it'! And sorry it is also very well known that among all those nations receiving RFI Russia is also one, no surprise if Russia puts forward Mig-29K CATOBAR and Navy selects.

As for the N-LCA the Indian Navy hasn't been a big fan. Especially, because of its lenghty development and lack of Warload when Carrier Based. That said, I think it will make a great Advance Trainer.

Usual rhetoric hopelessly thrown once again. As far i know as recent as one day ago Navy Chief said these lines. "Our indigenous naval fighter programme marked a significant milestone this year, with the first 'roll out' of the naval version of the LCA on 6th July at Bangalore. We expect the first flight to take place his month". Where you see criticism if not enthusiasm?

 

[Crusader53]

It is very well that a Russian fighter with ex-Gorshkov was compulsion and SU-33K was the jet of choice initially but for technical reasons baseline Mig-29K was selected and was re-developed as per Naval ASR, and Navy's follow-on order for 29 jets gives firm base to assumption that Navy 'lovin it'! And sorry it is also very well known that among all those nations receiving RFI Russia is also one, no surprise if Russia puts forward Mig-29K CATOBAR and Navy selects.

Usual rhetoric hopelessly thrown once again. As far i know as recent as one day ago Navy Chief said these lines. "Our indigenous naval fighter programme marked a significant milestone this year, with the first 'roll out' of the naval version of the LCA on 6th July at Bangalore. We expect the first flight to take place his month". Where you see criticism if not enthusiasm?

Sorry, the Indian Navy is very unlikely to purchase a Catapult Capable Mig-29K. As if it was interested in such a type. Why place a RFI on a New Naval Fighter. Hell the Indian Air Force doesn't even want the Mig-35 for the MMRCA. So, you thing the Indian Navy will take more Mig-29K's. Good luck with that one.


As for the N-LCA its hardly going to be a capable Naval Fighter. As its way to small and has a very limted Payload vs Range. Yet, as I have over and over. It will be very valuable to the Indian Navy. As an Advance Trainer. Which, it is ideally suited in my opinion.

 

[ashdoc]

i have read that the RBE-2 radar of the rafale has a detection range of only 100 km .

france has not bothered to have a long range for the rafale's radar because it has AWACS which will give it the position of the target by data-link .

but india can hardly afford to have an aircraft with such a low range of radar . even the pakisatani f-16 block 52s have a radar with range of 300 km .

how come the indians are even considering this aircraft if its radar's range is so low ??