Boeing’s Make in India F-18 offer comes with a rider but it’s still a better offer claims Source

[A.P. Richelieu]

That's why there are Rafales, MKIs, 29 UPGs, Mirage UPGs, what have you. There's one manufacturing plant up for LCA right now, and another in the works. Doesnt matter what you think, it's a platform that's going to be produced and worked/improved on with further blocks. And MK1A is a fine low tier, multi role fighter. Gripen has no chance, and it's completely irrelevant now. Frankly, it was dead/irrelevant from the beginning.

If it was acceptable, more countries would consider it, don't You think??

 

[Water Car Engineer]

If it was acceptable, more countries would consider it, don't You think??

Doesnt matter what other countries would accept. It's something India is accepting as it's low tier AC. And it's India's responsibility to improve on the platform. LCA is happening irrespective of the winner. If you want to compare Gripen with something, compare it with it's competitors - Rafale, F18, etc. You get why it was irrelevant from the beginning if you do.

It's lobby does a good job of making it more relevant than it actually is in this context. They're putting in their moneys worth in that regard.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Rome wasn't built in a day.


Well that's why the MKIs and Rafales are being bought (in addtion to the upgrading of the Mirage 2000s and MiG-29s). The LCA will hold its own against any enemy in the region fighting on its turf just how it is designed to fight- it is not going to be going on long range strike missions in enemy airspace, it was never meant to do so. The LCA is a point defence aircraft that is being designed to conduct rear-guard operations and CAS whils the "heavies" take the fight to the enemy.




The LCA has only just been marketed to the international market, it will take a long time for it to get any such attention- how long did it take for SAAB to get orders for the NG?

First order was was several years before the delivery.

Doesnt matter what other countries would accept. It's something India is accepting as it's low tier AC. And it's India's responsibility to improve on the platform. LCA is happening irrespective of the winner. If you want to compare Gripen with something, compare it with it's competitors - Rafale, F18, etc. You get why it was irrelevant from the beginning if you do.

It's lobby does a good job of making it more relevant than it actually is in this context. They're putting in their moneys worth in that regard.

Rafale and F-18 has lost several procurements vs Gripen, so it seems to fit some countries needs for sure.
In India, delivery in 2018 was the key showstopper.
As for chances, there is no need to convince 1.3B Indians, just a few significant decision makers.

 

[Abingdonboy]

In India, delivery in 2018 was the key showstopper.

There were more technical defencies than that that led to the Gripen not being "downselected".

As for chances, there is no need to convince 1.3B Indians, just a few significant decision makers.

And you failed to prove that getting the Gripen was worth selling out the LCA project.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Rafale and F-18 has lost several procurements vs Gripen, so it seems to fit some countries needs for sure.
In India, delivery in 2018 was the key showstopper.
As for chances, there is no need to convince 1.3B Indians, just a few significant decision makers.

The key showstopper was the trials each birds went through, which the Gripen failed. Then was the industrial benefits that comes with it. Other Europeans and the US companies were more alluring in that factor as well.

You cant pass these companies, nor can you take LCA place as it's already happening. Gripen is done, been done for a long time.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

There were more technical defencies than that that led to the Gripen not being "downselected".


And you failed to prove that getting the Gripen was worth selling out the LCA project.

Has anyone "proved" that not abandoning the LCA , will strengthen the IAF.

The key showstopper was the trials each birds went through, which the Gripen failed. Then was the industrial benefits that comes with it. Other Europeans and the US companies were more alluring in that factor as well.

You cant pass these companies, nor can you take LCA place as it's already happening. Gripen is done, been done for a long time.

Gripen C failed the tests, not Gripen E.
That is why IAF pilots will come to Sweden to test the Gripen E later this Year.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...e-saabs-gripen-ng-fighter-jet-india/80566588/

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Gripen C failed the tests, not Gripen E.
That is why IAF pilots will come to Sweden to test the Gripen E later this Year.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...e-saabs-gripen-ng-fighter-jet-india/80566588/

Lol, test it in LEH, S. India, Rajasthan. Do that whole years long trialing process again. No one cares about what some pilots fly in Sweden for a couple of minutes. Face facts, it's done.

 

[Perpendicular]

Has anyone "proved" that not abandoning the LCA , will strengthen the IAF.

Its not just about strengthening IAF but to strengthen an eco system to meet our future needs through in-house. Gripen is a capable aircraft no doubt but there is more to LCA program as a whole rather looking at it as just a platform.

 

[Masterhunter]

And You are not concerned that buying LCA instead of Gripen might harm Indian Pilots
and the results achieved by IAF in a conflict.

Bit sir... Till now LCA never had a single crash in its trial..and gripen had quite a few ..
And... Can u plz give in writing with 100% guarantee that buying gripen will not harm Indian pilots...
Yea but sure it will harm Indian aerospace industry.
Sometimes, u support your own industry u may need to buy slightly inferior product (which you may be thinking that LCA is inferior to gripen, but most of the posters including me are of different opinion. LCAmk1a is as good as gripen C/D, may be a notch better, and LCA mk 2 will be better than Gripen NG)
But we won't be able to make mk2 if we BUY gripen NG.....so sorry sir, we don't want gripen...you can set up your shop elsewhere...

@Abingdonboy @PARIKRAMA @Ankit Kumar

 

[airmarshal]

Its a very good offer. But India has a baniya problem. They think they are not buying a fighter jet but a Maruti.

 

[Immortan.Joe]

.

But would that come with full ToT? Highly doubtful and thus of limited utility really.

I too am against second line, but let's say that GE is ready to transfer whole assembly line of 414 Engines or superalloy knowhow but condition for that is that we buy at least 100 F-18s, I would say a second MMRCA would make a perfect sense. In this case, even if there is zero ToT for rest of F-18,it would be a better deal as we anyway already have ToT for non critical aspects of Aircraft manufacturing.

Another dimension that posters are ignoring is that Boeing is one of the two big Aircraft manufacturer and could have promised to bring its civilian jet factories to India (rather than China), if it could get enough business from India.

It may be ideal to fill whole Mid-Tier requirement by one plane only (Rafael) , but there may be other factors that may lead to division of MMRCA pool.

As someone has counted in Rafael sticky, we need around 350-400 Aircrafts in next 10 years, which after deducting number of LCA that could be humanely inducted, we still need around 200-250 aircrafts. They could either be filled by 250 Rafaels, or 90+36+18= 144 Rafaels and 100 F-18s


The truth about MMRCA is that no one knows anything about it as government has not been very forthcoming with information. All articles appearing in media are paid NEWS. There is a good chance that original deal for 36 aircrafts is finalized and ongoing negotiations are for follow on MII part as cost of those 36 and rest follow on's would depend on size of order.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Even though Gripen is a good jet for a single engine category, we will be biased towards the LCA product more.. The reason being Gripen itself has evolved from its variant based development program.

For example the A variant entered service in 1996, and the E variant or NG single seater will enter service perhaps in 2020 after test flights .. So the progress of 2 decades of flying experience cannot be brought right away to Tejas LCA.

Secondly, the Tejas to us has demonstrated few important milestone for us like a capability to build our own indigenous fighters to a good safety record to lower cost benefits etc etc..

Even though Gripen E may have an advantage of almost 5-6 years of first flight over Tejas MK2, we will still prefer our home grown MK2 primarily bcz of 3 reasons

1. Cost of MK2 at max would be $32-$40 Mn
2. Progressive evolution of our local MIC to move from MK1 to MK2 to finally main 5th gen objective AMCA
3. indigenous needs of minimum 15-20 light category squadrons for our IAF fleet

If this is not enough, the naval variant is our test bed for maturing technologies needed for AMCA program too.

In fact my own views after discussing with few people seems to point that IAF and IN both consider Rafale as the FINAL acquisition in 4.5th Generation Birds in our fleet. Post this, they are looking at 5th Gen jets. Thus it does not make any sense to look at another contemporary 4.5th Gen Gripen E.

On top, MOD jargon usage is commonality of a spare and service chain for ease of operations,maintenance and availability. This is further taken forward with liberal tacit understanding that weapon pool also has to be mostly common and the OEM has to be in India serving both IAF and IN needs. This pet theme is very very significant. As of now among all the names that has been thrown in the ring the choices were limited to

1. Rafale and Rafale M
2. F18 ASH and F18 Land Variant

Gripen naval variant is in planning stage and Mig35 is same planning stage for its variant. So Gripen and Mig does nt fit into the MOD theme. On top even 18s being not selected by IAF or any inclination showed for 18s land version makes it unsuitable as per the MOD vision.

That is why IAF pilots will come to Sweden to test the Gripen E later this Year.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...e-saabs-gripen-ng-fighter-jet-india/80566588/

I said similar things

https://defence.pk/threads/dassault...ussions-thread-2.351407/page-161#post-8173308

From the article of defense news
" As part of the government-to-government negotiations process, IAF pilots are set to test fly the Gripen-NG in Sweden later this year."

This is where there is a mistake, IAF wont like to test a version which is not fully cleared unless IAF is investing in the program to ascertain its capabilities. Unless its just a flight to gauge very basic things but not a full fledged technical evaluations. Bcz evaluations will need a more detailed environment.

In fact, if I am from Saab i wont allow this test flight. Knowing IAF they will come home and tell Tejas folks they want this, this and this as seen in Gripen NG in Tejas program.. and the result will move the Tejas with user feedback to a much better product

@Abingdonboy

 

[randomradio]

From the article of defense news
" As part of the government-to-government negotiations process, IAF pilots are set to test fly the Gripen-NG in Sweden later this year."

This is where there is a mistake, IAF wont like to test a version which is not fully cleared unless IAF is investing in the program to ascertain its capabilities. Unless its just a flight to gauge very basic things but not a full fledged technical evaluations. Bcz evaluations will need a more detailed environment.

In fact, if I am from Saab i wont allow this test flight. Knowing IAF they will come home and tell Tejas folks they want this, this and this as seen in Gripen NG in Tejas program.. and the result will move the Tejas with user feedback to a much better product

@Abingdonboy

It is in fact of great benefit to Saab, if they package Gripen with the LCA program. They don't mind what IAF buys as long as they also buy 100-200 Gripens. If the LCA improves, even there they will make money, it's one of their objectives.

If you are thinking of a direct threat to LCA, it is the Americans and the Russians, not the Swedes. The other two countries want to undermine the LCA. The Russians will do it involuntarily because their jet is so cheap.

If you completely ignore all politics, then Gripen has the highest chance of winning this deal, followed by the Mig-35.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

It is in fact of great benefit to Saab, if they package Gripen with the LCA program. They don't mind what IAF buys as long as they also buy 100-200 Gripens. If the LCA improves, even there they will make money, it's one of their objectives.

If you are thinking of a direct threat to LCA, it is the Americans and the Russians, not the Swedes. The other two countries want to undermine the LCA. The Russians will do it involuntarily because their jet is so cheap.

If you completely ignore all politics, then Gripen has the highest chance of winning this deal, followed by the Mig-35.

That sums it up nicely.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

It is in fact of great benefit to Saab, if they package Gripen with the LCA program. They don't mind what IAF buys as long as they also buy 100-200 Gripens. If the LCA improves, even there they will make money, it's one of their objectives.

If you are thinking of a direct threat to LCA, it is the Americans and the Russians, not the Swedes. The other two countries want to undermine the LCA. The Russians will do it involuntarily because their jet is so cheap.

If you completely ignore all politics, then Gripen has the highest chance of winning this deal, followed by the Mig-35.

How can you not consider Swedes Gripen as a direct threat to LCA? They're of the same category. It's a direct cut into LCA's share of the cut. And I doubt IAF even wants dual production of two different "LCAs" anyway.

I doubt Gripen, or the MIG 35 will get anything. They were deemed the bottom tier by the IAF in trials, that'll continue to play a role in the outcome. And in terms of industrial benefits, both the other Europeans and the US companies offer more.