This is a discussion on New Indian Air Force Fighter competition within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; This one good advantage of EF and Rafale. They are available much faster.
Both the UK with the EF und ...
This one good advantage of EF and Rafale. They are available much faster.
Both the UK with the EF und France with the Rafale would have no problems to exchange some of their early slots with later slots which would normally go to the buyer.
The UK to stretch their order in the future (The number they bought is just too high but now they have to live with it) and France to finally get their first export order.
This would result in a very fast delivery.
Something I am not sure of the US or Russia can do the same way.
Origin:
I think that the origin of the new fighter, let's say weapon system, isn't going to play that big role anyway.
Remember, the Indians are already operating russian, french (Mirage 2000) and british (Harrier, anglo-french Jaguar) designs side by side, so they are open minded I think. Shouldn't be too much of a problem for the European contenders. Could be a bit of a problem for our American friends though.
Another point is that the Indians might want to diversify their suppliers a bit more which would make a point against russian planes.
General Layout/ Performance:
The IAF has lost hundreds of fighters during the last decades and might prefer a twin engine layout for safety reasons (Same thing with the German Luftwaffe which after that awful lot of starfighter accidents decided to never buy a single engined fighter again).
India is a huge country and it seeks to improve control over surrounding "blue waters", therefore any true MRCA needs to be a capable interceptor/ air superiority fighter with good range and speed. Given that all contenders do have a decent sensor suit and BVR capabilities and weapons, this too would make one of the twin engine solutions probable at least.
As far as "true MRCA" is concerned: Could be a problem for the Typhoon as there still is some development work to be done. But this point also requires a big weapon load, which some have, some haven't. IMO a true MRCA has to carry anti radiation missiles, bombs and air to air missiles at a time to switch roles during the mission.
Another thing is that I think the IAF definitely wants to have an edge over the PAF on a face-to-face basis which would rule out the F-16.
Politics:
As this competition is about 126 potentially expensive fighters and there are rumours around (see DID's coverage today) that it could extend to around 180 fighters, each of the contenders will pretty much do everything to win and as all of the involved potential bidders (USA, France, UK, Russia) are very experienced with sweetening defence contracts, that's gonna be an interesting competition! I think we too will see some interesting technology transfer and economical incentives here...
Last point: New and warming relationships are a good thing, but keeping old ones hot is just as good...
Which brings me to the conclusion: F-16:
+ multi-role
+ warming indo-us relations
- range
- single engine
- PAF flies it
- old design, growth potential doubtful
F-18:
+ multi-role
+ twin engine
+ warming indo-us relations
+ potential powerful carrier plane for the indian carrier plans
- speed
- very ugly (complete waste of metal and electronics)
Rafale:
+ multi-role
+ very good performer
+ already strong defence ties (mirage 2000)
+ twin engine
+ potential powerful carrier plane for the indian carrier plans
+ availability
+ modern design
- further development in doubt as there are few users (France and India) and low numbers so far
Typhoon:
+ great performer
+ best dogfighter
+ already strong defence ties with the British
+ twin engine
+ modern design
+ enormous growth potential with lots of developments already on the way
+ sexy
+ availability
- multi-role not yet proven
- expensive
Gripen:
+ multi-role
+ new but proven design
+ offered by the British (see above)
+ low purchasing and operating cost
+ easy to maintain
- range and speed
- weapon load
- in some respects competitor to the Tejas
Flanker:
+ multi-role
+ twin engine
+ best range
+ very good performer
+ Flanker already in service
+ low price tag
+ very strong defence ties with russia
- old design
- diversification issues
- probably inferior to western contenders in terms of avionics (sensor fusion, situational awareness, etc.) and reportedly in ergonomics
Fulcrum:
+ multi-role
+ twin engine
+ good performer
+ low price tag
+ very strong defence ties with russia
- old design
- diversification issues
- probably inferior to western contenders in terms of avionics (sensor fusion, situational awareness, etc.) and reportedly in ergonomics
im not sure that the iaf have a big problem with costs.they want the best aircraft that they can possibly get and if there isnt a massive variance in prices between the top,most closely matched aircraft then it wont be the price that decides it.
what they are looking for,i think,is the best package that can be continually developed to provide dominance over the pakistan and chinese airforces for the next 10/20 yrs.the best contenders in that respect remain the typhoon,rafale and possibly gripen.the f35 is a non starter i believe.the iafs preference is obviously for an air superiority aircraft primarily with good air to ground capabilities also...not thre other way around.as far as i am aware the f35 is optimised in the air to ground role and doesnt offer the same air to air capabilities as the typhoon.(ill be interested to see how the typhoon fares against the f35 when the royal navy get to exercise against them in the future).
in any case the wait for the f35 would be far too long as per waylanders comments.
It says that the F-35 is disputed by some defence officials because it lacks range and speed, it's stealth characteristics will be negated by new radar developments and because it was primarily designed for air to ground roles. Same range and speed issues for the gripen.
But that's a littlebit off topic now, I don't thik it's a contender here...
I do not agree on the lack of range for the F-35, after all the UK, Australia italy are using it too replace its range is much larger strike warplanes like the Tornado and F-111. Moreover, F-35 has better rang than a lot of IAF's combat planes at present like floggers, eariler fulcrums and jags. I argue for the Mig-35 now, for the MRCA requirment, then, in 8 yrs for so, go for the F-35 to replace other warplanes after the US/India replacement has matured. Of course, the IAF buying something bigger, more capable like Rafale would be something many of us would like too see.
Is the MKI is not MRCA enough ? , isn't it more suitable to increase the amount of MKI rather than operate new kinds of aircraft + you had licensed production :p
Both the UK with the EF und France with the Rafale would have no problems to exchange some of their early slots with later slots which would normally go to the buyer.
The UK to stretch their order in the future (The number they bought is just too high but now they have to live with it) and France to finally get their first export order.
This would result in a very fast delivery.
I cannot let you get away with the “just too high” comment.
If the UK goes ahead with the current plans to purchase Trauche 3 aircraft they will have enough aircraft to equip 7 operational squadrons of 16 aircraft. Remember that the Typhoon is not just replacing the Tornado F2, but the Jaguar and taking on some of the tasks currently under taken by the Harrier and Tornado GR4 aircraft (not to mention the Canberra that when out of service last year).
The UK has already given up two Tranche 1 slots to support the Austrian order and will give up 24 Tranche 2 slots out of the 36 slots available over the next two years, to support the Saudi deal.
Under these arrangements the UK is committed to purchase the full number of aircraft ordered and as you have said will acquire replacement in latter slots.
However the UK is beginning to run out of options. The last Jaguars were scheduled to be withdrawn from service latter this year and to reform with the aircraft that will now be allocated to the RSAAF. The obvious option to delay the retirement of the Jaguar may not be practical, because most of these aircraft are reaching the end of their life, an extension of a few months might just be possible, but not beyond the middle of next year.
Although it has not been officially announced it is common knowledge that the Tornado F2 will remain in service about two years longer than originally planned. Note that these aircraft have not received the same structural modifications as the Tornado GR4 aircraft, so that the remaining few aircraft (the rest have already been retired) will all be out of hours by the beginning of 2010.
So I do not think that there is any further room for the UK to give up production slots for a possible Indian order.
However, EADS will lead the EF team for this prospect and I think they maybe Germany will be able to do a deal on trading slots. Most of their Typhoon aircraft are going to be used to replace Tornado IDS aircraft, so they would prefer to get latter block aircraft. At present the German Air Force is operating about 170 Tornado IDS & ECR aircraft and in the future this will be reduced to 80 aircraft that are undergoing a MLU. The reminder will be retired. Slightly delaying this process could give Germany the chance to offer production slots for 20 – 30 aircraft.
One advantage for both the UK & Germany air forces is that the more deals that are done of this nature the better the chances are of Trauche 3 going ahead.
Apart form the obvious advantages to India in getting aircraft early, the Trauche 2 aircraft will be capable of being updated to the full Trauche 3 standard.
With regards to offsets some manufacturing could be carried out in India, but also could include free of charge (FOC) support for the developing Indian defence industry.
My feeling is that India will not go for Russian aircraft as it does not want to put all its eggs in one basket.
India has and does operate French and British aircraft and indeed some Indian aircraft based on designs from these countries. Although the Rafale is more nature than the Typhoon I think that the Typhoon in the longer term will both be more potent and more development potential.
A key feature of this requirement is time. The old Mig-21 series aircraft have to be replaced quickly before they all drop out of the sky, apart from the tragic loss of pilots; it does no good to the moral of the air force and damages the credibility of the air force and of India.
Yeah, replacing some early EF slots with later ones would also take some pressure of our budget.
But the EF is not mainly a replacement for the Luftwaffe Tornados but for the F-4F PhantomIIs and MiG-29s. All of them get retired (Or have been already) and it is this A2A capability for which we need a replacement fast.
Many Tornados are phased out and some squadrons willbe replaced with EFs but in the end it is not the main replacement.
And more customers for the EF and so a more possible Tranche 3 is always favorable and the EF nations should do nearly everything reasonable to make this happen.
You dont need a crystal ball to see that India/Yank relations are going to strengthen more and more in the coming decades. Its real hard to envision India doing something that could force sanctions. Other then their nuclear program, and that hurdle has been crossed, what have they done in their history that would have done so?....
The 1971 India-Pakistan war - the USA sent a carrier battle group to the Bay of Bengal, encouraged Pakistan to try to hold on in East Pakistan (which led to a perception in both India & Pakistan that what was meant was "hold on until we can come to your aid - e.g. with that CBG") & (officially due to a bureaucratic error, but try to persuade Indians of that) delivered weapons to Pakistan after a US-backed arms embargo on both countries had come into force.
The history of the USA, India & Pakistan is such that many Indians don't trust the USA not to embargo them & support Pakistan (e.g. by supplying secret details of US weapons operated by India) if there's ever another conflict between India & Pakistan, even if started by Pakistan. And in the circumstances, even if you disagree with them, it's easy to understand why they think that way.
The 1971 India-Pakistan war - the USA sent a carrier battle group to the Bay of Bengal, encouraged Pakistan to try to hold on in East Pakistan (which led to a perception in both India & Pakistan that what was meant was "hold on until we can come to your aid - e.g. with that CBG") & (officially due to a bureaucratic error, but try to persuade Indians of that) delivered weapons to Pakistan after a US-backed arms embargo on both countries had come into force.
Who would have thought in 1971 that one day we would be supplying advanced fighters to eastern bloc nations? And that they would also be a part of NATO?
The 1971 Indo-Pak war did not happen in a vacuum. The Soviet Union backed their guy and we backed ours, and this was a reality in almost every conflict during the Cold War period.
Who would have thought in 1971 that one day we would be supplying advanced fighters to eastern bloc nations? And that they would also be a part of NATO?
The 1971 Indo-Pak war did not happen in a vacuum. The Soviet Union backed their guy and we backed ours, and this was a reality in almost every conflict during the Cold War period.
The world has moved on.
What you say is very true Rich but I also agree with the points made by swerve. The world has moved on but mutual trust can take many decades to establish.
A smallish Su-30 deal so close to the big 120-plane deal. Looks to me like a consolation to the Russian, meaning the 120 deal will most likely go to F-18.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Source: http://www.*************.com/reports/2871
Air Force to Acquire 40 Russian-build Su 30 MKI Fighter Jets
Dated 9/2/2007
India will purchase 40 Russian-made Sukhoi-30 fighter jets, an air force spokesman said Thursday. "The government has cleared the proposal to buy the Sukhoi planes and we'll be getting them shortly," Wing Commander Mahesh Upasani said.
He had no details about the cost of the planes or an exact date for their arrival.
India had previously said it was shopping for 126 fighter jets for its air force, but Upasani said the Sukhoi-30 purchase wasn't part of that.
On Wednesday, Defense Minister A.K. Anthony said the country would soon invite bids from combat aircraft makers for the 126 jets. That deal is estimated to be worth between US$6.5 billion and US$10 billion (euro5.4 billion and euro8.3 billion). Anthony's comments were made at the opening of an air show in the southern technology hub of Bangalore.
India also is considering buying nearly 200 army reconnaissance and observation helicopters, Anthony said.
Aviation companies from around the world have flocked to the air show, hoping for a piece of the billions of dollars in defense contracts the South Asian country plans to spend in modernizing its military.
The five-day event at the Yelahanka air base has drawn 500 companies, including 275 foreign companies, more than ever before, Defense Production Secretary K.P. Singh told reporters.
Who would have thought in 1971 that one day we would be supplying advanced fighters to eastern bloc nations? And that they would also be a part of NATO?
The 1971 Indo-Pak war did not happen in a vacuum. The Soviet Union backed their guy and we backed ours, and this was a reality in almost every conflict during the Cold War period.
The world has moved on.
Try to see it from an Indian perspective.
Indians have never seen India-Pakistan issues as having anything to do with the Cold War, or themselves as ever having been part of the Soviet bloc. They find references to India as "the Soviet Unions guy" insulting: they consider themselves to have always been their own guys, & are either baffled or infuriated by US backing for Pakistan against them. They see it as pro-dictatorship, pro-Islamic extremist, anti-freedom, anti-democracy. Sometimes they see it as imperialist, intended to make India subservient.
The USA gives military aid to Pakistan, right now. When Pakistan launched a cross-border attack in 1999, US diplomacy was quite effective in keeping the war limited - but from an Indian point of view, the USA leant towards Pakistan, which was clearly in the wrong (it did attack . . . ), & put pressure on India to prevent the Pakistani army from being punished as it should have been.
As far as I can see, Indians in general are pretty pro-American - but they don't trust US governments, or understand why the USA backs (& that's how they see it) the backward, terrorist-supporting Pakistani dictatorship. As long as the USA appears to Indians to favour Pakistan over India (& I don't see any prospect of that changing in the near future), India will view US governments with deep suspicion.
shumi,as stated earlier in this thread,india is looking for a latest generation air superiority/interdiction aircraft and whilst the super hornet is vast improvement it is still,fundementally, an upgraded last generation aircraft thats reaching the end of its ability to upgrade a great deal further...unlike the rafale and typhoon which are at the beginning of their development.also and as per the above,the iaf are unlikely to go with a us option.its just too insecure an order to contemplate.
further...unlike the rafale and typhoon which are at the beginning of their development.also and as per the above,the iaf are unlikely to go with a us option.its just too insecure an order to contemplate.
