What's new

Compounded Irrationalities Due To Systematic Stupidity

Abingdonboy

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
29,597
Reaction score
46
Country
India
Location
United Kingdom

As the saying goes, “Those who know much, talk little”. But its meaning seems to have been lost on India’s new Raksha Mantri (Defence Minister) Manohar Parrikar, if we are to believe what he was reported to have said at an on-the-record press conference on December 30, 2014 regarding the procurement of 189 Rafale medium multi-role combat aircraft (M-MRCA). Most of the ‘desi’ newspapers attributed two statements to Parrikar: (1) additional licence-built Su-30MKIs are adequate for the IAF in case it is decided not to procure the Rafale; and (2) The Su-30MKI is an adequate aircraft for meeting the air force’s needs. Now, while it is understandable for a select group of ‘desi’ journalists to deliberately twist-and-turn the Raksha Mantri’s statements/observations (since for the past 18 months they have either been promoting, for their own vested financial interests, the procurement of either the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or the Eurofighter EF-2000), in case these ‘desi’ journalists for once did get it right and correctly quoted the Raksha Mantri, then India is indeed in some serious trouble.

Let me explain how and why. Neither the Su-30MKI nor the MiG-29UPG/MiG-29K were ever designed as multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA). Their design and performance parameters were instead optimised for air dominance/air superiority, with standoff all-weather precision strike undertaken from medium altitudes being a secondary capability. It is for this reason that the erstwhile USSR had developed the Su-24 and Su-27IB/Su-34 as all-weather, terrain-hugging deep penetration strike aircraft (DPSA), and the Su-25 as a dedicated tactical strike/close air support aircraft. Consequently, neither the Su-30MKI’s nor the MiG-29UPG’s/MiG-29K’s airframes have the stress tolerances that are required for flying terrain-hugging flight profiles. Their existing X-band multi-mode radars or MMR (RLSU-30MK NO-11M ‘Bars’ and the Zhuk-M2E) therefore don’t come with low-altitude terrain avoidance mode or automatic terrain-following capability or weather-mapping mode, and neither are they equipped with low-altitude navigation pods.


Simply put, therefore, the IAF is in dire need of procuring an M-MRCA fleet with automatic terrain-following capability—which the Rafale is optimised for. Presently, the IAF operates 3 MiG-29B-12 squadrons (now being upgraded to MiG-29UPG standard), 9 MiG-21 Bison squadrons, 4 Jaguar IS squadrons, 1 Jaguar IM squadron, 10 Su-30MKI squadrons, 3 Mirage 2000H/TH squadrons (being upgraded to Mirage 2000UPG standard), 3 MiG-27UPG squadrons, and 2 MiG-27M squadrons, making a total of 35 squadrons. Although the sanctioned strength of the IAF is 42 combat aircraft squadrons (which is due for increase to 50 squadrons by 2024, at least on paper), of these, those equipped with MiG-21 Bisons, MiG-27UPGs and MiG-27Ms will have to be decommissioned by 2017 at the latest.

Presently, the IAF is gearing up to form the first ‘Tejas’ Mk1 squadron—No45 ‘Flying Daggers’ Sqn—which will initially be first raised in Bengaluru before relocating to Sulur in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, this March. Present plans call for the first four IOC-standard) Tejas Mk1 MRCAs built by the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to be delivered by March 31, 2015, another six by March 31, 2016, and another eight by March 31, 2017. This squadron will, however, be declared fully operational only in 2022, once its 18 Tejas Mk1s are upgraded to FOC standard. The second Tejas Mk1-equipped squadron, comprising 20 FOC-standard MRCAs, will be formed up in 2017 and will become fully operational by March 31, 2020. All Tejas Mkls will be equipped with Israel Aerospace Industries/ELTA Systems-supplied EL/M-2032 MMRs, which will possess both automatic terrain-followingand weather mapping modes of operation.

Going by calculations based on universal norms, I have estimated the flyaway unit cost of procuring 40 Tejas Mk1s as being US$52 million. To this must be added the cost of air base customisation and procurement of weapons packages, all of which works to out about US$72 million per aircraft.

Meanwhile, to replace the MiG-27UPGs and MiG-27Ms, 68 Jaguar IS aircraft are presently being upgraded to DARIN 3-standard so that they can undertake all-weather tactical strike/close air support operations. This Rs.31.3 billion (US$0.57 billion) contract was awarded to HAL in March 2008 and is due for completion by December 2017. The upgraded Jaguar IS too will have on board the EL/M-2032 MMRs possessing both automatic terrain-following and weather mapping modes of operation.

From the above, it becomes clear that the IAF is now in desperate need of M-MRCAs with credible deep penetration strike capabilities and capable of flying terrain-hugging profiles. It is also well-known that the IAF wants to arrest the steady decline of its frontline combat aircraft inventory ASAP. The only available options—all non-negotiable—are as follows:

1) Ink the procurement contract for 189 Rafales latest by June 2015.

2) Increase the size of the Su-30MKI fleet to no less than 350 by procuring the first 50 Super Su-30MKIs in semi-knocked-down condition from Russia’s IRKUT Corp, starting 2017, while concurrently commencing the upgrading of in-service Su-30MKIs in successive tranches to Super Sukhoi-standard.

3) Increase the quantum of Jaguar IS being upgraded to DARIN 3-stadard from 68 to 125 and re-engine the entire fleet with Honeywell-supplied F-125 turbofans.


Now a brief explanation on why the Rafale M-MRCA procurement’s contract signature has been subjected to delays. Firstly, there was the financial crunch over the past two years. Secondly, the Union Ministry for Home Affairs had in 2012 issued mandatory industrial security-related regulations that called for comprehensive vetting (a most time-consuming process) of all technical and managerial personnel of those India-based Tier-1, Tier-2 and Tier-3 companies that were selected for the licence-manufacturing/licenced-assembly components of the Rafale M-MRCA. Thirdly, since French aerospace OEMs have always made use of France-origin precision machining, riveting and welding equipment and related test-benches, this time too they insisted that HAL and its sub-contractors procure all such hardware exclusively from French OEMs, instead of issuing global tenders for such industrial hardware procurements. Had HAL not agreed to comply with this key issue, all the involved French OEMs would have been unable to issue certificates of airworthiness for all those Rafales licence-built by HAL. It is this issue that has been most time-consuming and in the end, HAL had no other choice but to give-in.


TRISHUL: Compounded Irrationalities Due To Systematic Stupidity

PSG's blog has to be taken with a bucket of salt usually but this is perhaps the most credible and factual article I have read on the MMRCA deal in a long, LONG, time. I'm willing to give the new DM the benefit of the doubt on this issue, hopefully he was just playing mind games with Dassualt because PSG is right, as I have said numerous times, simply ordering more MKIs (and or supplementing this with more LCAs) is just not viable nor is it an effective substitute to the Rafale in any way shape or form.


@sancho @sandy_3126 @acetophenol
 
.
We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ..We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not....We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not

that is the kind of flip flop we are hearing past ...do not know ...how many years .

this kind of flip flop is going to dent India's credibility seriously .

and it is also going to dent IAF's capability seriously too..

I mean how many years it is going to take to complete the negotiations ....???
 
.

As the saying goes, “Those who know much, talk little”. But its meaning seems to have been lost on India’s new Raksha Mantri (Defence Minister) Manohar Parrikar, if we are to believe what he was reported to have said at an on-the-record press conference on December 30, 2014 regarding the procurement of 189 Rafale medium multi-role combat aircraft (M-MRCA). Most of the ‘desi’ newspapers attributed two statements to Parrikar: (1) additional licence-built Su-30MKIs are adequate for the IAF in case it is decided not to procure the Rafale; and (2) The Su-30MKI is an adequate aircraft for meeting the air force’s needs. Now, while it is understandable for a select group of ‘desi’ journalists to deliberately twist-and-turn the Raksha Mantri’s statements/observations (since for the past 18 months they have either been promoting, for their own vested financial interests, the procurement of either the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or the Eurofighter EF-2000), in case these ‘desi’ journalists for once did get it right and correctly quoted the Raksha Mantri, then India is indeed in some serious trouble.

Let me explain how and why. Neither the Su-30MKI nor the MiG-29UPG/MiG-29K were ever designed as multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA). Their design and performance parameters were instead optimised for air dominance/air superiority, with standoff all-weather precision strike undertaken from medium altitudes being a secondary capability. It is for this reason that the erstwhile USSR had developed the Su-24 and Su-27IB/Su-34 as all-weather, terrain-hugging deep penetration strike aircraft (DPSA), and the Su-25 as a dedicated tactical strike/close air support aircraft. Consequently, neither the Su-30MKI’s nor the MiG-29UPG’s/MiG-29K’s airframes have the stress tolerances that are required for flying terrain-hugging flight profiles. Their existing X-band multi-mode radars or MMR (RLSU-30MK NO-11M ‘Bars’ and the Zhuk-M2E) therefore don’t come with low-altitude terrain avoidance mode or automatic terrain-following capability or weather-mapping mode, and neither are they equipped with low-altitude navigation pods.


Simply put, therefore, the IAF is in dire need of procuring an M-MRCA fleet with automatic terrain-following capability—which the Rafale is optimised for. Presently, the IAF operates 3 MiG-29B-12 squadrons (now being upgraded to MiG-29UPG standard), 9 MiG-21 Bison squadrons, 4 Jaguar IS squadrons, 1 Jaguar IM squadron, 10 Su-30MKI squadrons, 3 Mirage 2000H/TH squadrons (being upgraded to Mirage 2000UPG standard), 3 MiG-27UPG squadrons, and 2 MiG-27M squadrons, making a total of 35 squadrons. Although the sanctioned strength of the IAF is 42 combat aircraft squadrons (which is due for increase to 50 squadrons by 2024, at least on paper), of these, those equipped with MiG-21 Bisons, MiG-27UPGs and MiG-27Ms will have to be decommissioned by 2017 at the latest.

Presently, the IAF is gearing up to form the first ‘Tejas’ Mk1 squadron—No45 ‘Flying Daggers’ Sqn—which will initially be first raised in Bengaluru before relocating to Sulur in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, this March. Present plans call for the first four IOC-standard) Tejas Mk1 MRCAs built by the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to be delivered by March 31, 2015, another six by March 31, 2016, and another eight by March 31, 2017. This squadron will, however, be declared fully operational only in 2022, once its 18 Tejas Mk1s are upgraded to FOC standard. The second Tejas Mk1-equipped squadron, comprising 20 FOC-standard MRCAs, will be formed up in 2017 and will become fully operational by March 31, 2020. All Tejas Mkls will be equipped with Israel Aerospace Industries/ELTA Systems-supplied EL/M-2032 MMRs, which will possess both automatic terrain-followingand weather mapping modes of operation.

Going by calculations based on universal norms, I have estimated the flyaway unit cost of procuring 40 Tejas Mk1s as being US$52 million. To this must be added the cost of air base customisation and procurement of weapons packages, all of which works to out about US$72 million per aircraft.

Meanwhile, to replace the MiG-27UPGs and MiG-27Ms, 68 Jaguar IS aircraft are presently being upgraded to DARIN 3-standard so that they can undertake all-weather tactical strike/close air support operations. This Rs.31.3 billion (US$0.57 billion) contract was awarded to HAL in March 2008 and is due for completion by December 2017. The upgraded Jaguar IS too will have on board the EL/M-2032 MMRs possessing both automatic terrain-following and weather mapping modes of operation.

From the above, it becomes clear that the IAF is now in desperate need of M-MRCAs with credible deep penetration strike capabilities and capable of flying terrain-hugging profiles. It is also well-known that the IAF wants to arrest the steady decline of its frontline combat aircraft inventory ASAP. The only available options—all non-negotiable—are as follows:

1) Ink the procurement contract for 189 Rafales latest by June 2015.

2) Increase the size of the Su-30MKI fleet to no less than 350 by procuring the first 50 Super Su-30MKIs in semi-knocked-down condition from Russia’s IRKUT Corp, starting 2017, while concurrently commencing the upgrading of in-service Su-30MKIs in successive tranches to Super Sukhoi-standard.

3) Increase the quantum of Jaguar IS being upgraded to DARIN 3-stadard from 68 to 125 and re-engine the entire fleet with Honeywell-supplied F-125 turbofans.


Now a brief explanation on why the Rafale M-MRCA procurement’s contract signature has been subjected to delays. Firstly, there was the financial crunch over the past two years. Secondly, the Union Ministry for Home Affairs had in 2012 issued mandatory industrial security-related regulations that called for comprehensive vetting (a most time-consuming process) of all technical and managerial personnel of those India-based Tier-1, Tier-2 and Tier-3 companies that were selected for the licence-manufacturing/licenced-assembly components of the Rafale M-MRCA. Thirdly, since French aerospace OEMs have always made use of France-origin precision machining, riveting and welding equipment and related test-benches, this time too they insisted that HAL and its sub-contractors procure all such hardware exclusively from French OEMs, instead of issuing global tenders for such industrial hardware procurements. Had HAL not agreed to comply with this key issue, all the involved French OEMs would have been unable to issue certificates of airworthiness for all those Rafales licence-built by HAL. It is this issue that has been most time-consuming and in the end, HAL had no other choice but to give-in.


TRISHUL: Compounded Irrationalities Due To Systematic Stupidity

PSG's blog has to be taken with a bucket of salt usually but this is perhaps the most credible and factual article I have read on the MMRCA deal in a long, LONG, time. I'm willing to give the new DM the benefit of the doubt on this issue, hopefully he was just playing mind games with Dassualt because PSG is right, as I have said numerous times, simply ordering more MKIs (and or supplementing this with more LCAs) is just not viable nor is it an effective substitute to the Rafale in any way shape or form.


@sancho @sandy_3126 @acetophenol


Brilliant article
 
.
We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ..We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not....We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Loves Rafale ...We loves Rafale not ...We Love Rafale ...We loves Rafale not

that is the kind of flip flop we are hearing past ...do not know ...how many years .

this kind of flip flop is going to dent India's credibility seriously .

and it is also going to dent IAF's capability seriously too..

I mean how many years it is going to take to complete the negotiations ....???
I wouldn't call anything that has happened flip flops mate. I think PSG clearly explains the issues that have delayed the signing of this deal to date. The fact the Indian media have entirely failed to articulate such points and instead gone around chasing nonsensical ideas is another matter. The GoI. IAF and MoD have all held a consistent line on this deal.
 
.
The question is what should India do if France does not accept our
legitimate demands

Writing an article is easy

Tomorrow if the whole deal gets messed up due to haste or short sightedness
it will become a big scam and will blow up in the face of the Govt and the BJP

And suppose after five years there is another govt and they
start prosecuting the bureaucrats for a bad deal ; THEN WHAT
 
.
The question is what should India do if France does not accept our
legitimate demands

Writing an article is easy

Tomorrow if the whole deal gets messed up due to haste or short sightedness
it will become a big scam and will blow up in the face of the Govt and the BJP

And suppose after five years there is another govt and they
start prosecuting the bureaucrats for a bad deal ; THEN WHAT
Where does haste or short sightedness come into the picture? No one has levied this charge at the GoI (current or former) as this deal is pretty much out of their hands and being handled by the dedicated CNC. Everything mentioned in the article is valid and far more credible than any of the BS the Indian media have been peddling on this deal for God knows how many years.
 
.
I wouldn't call anything that has happened flip flops mate. I think PSG clearly explains the issues that have delayed the signing of this deal to date. The fact the Indian media have entirely failed to articulate such points and instead gone around chasing nonsensical ideas is another matter. The GoI. IAF and MoD have all held a consistent line on this deal.

I do not think ..if PSG knows really why the deal is delayed . He is just throwing stones in the dark ...like everybody else .

he says that firstly the deal was delayed because of financial crunch ...

does that mean that we deliberately delayed negotiations because of financial crunch ?

I do not think so ...the very fact that negotiations have been so protracted ...I believe finances or no finances the deal could not have been finalized 2 years back ...so this very premise of financial crunch being the first important cause for delay in signing of Rafale deal is vacuous one .

I agree with you that GOI, MoD, IAF have done no flip flop ..at least not officially ...

but rest all - including ourselves have done that ...One look at the threads in past 4 years will confirm that .
 
Last edited:
.
@Abingdonboy

This is what PSG has written

Thirdly, since French aerospace OEMs have always made use of France-origin precision machining, riveting and welding equipment and related test-benches, this time too they insisted that HAL and its sub-contractors procure all such hardware exclusively from French OEMs, instead of issuing global tenders for such industrial hardware procurements. Had HAL not agreed to comply with this key issue, all the involved French OEMs would have been unable to issue certificates of airworthiness for all those Rafales licence-built by HAL. It is this issue that has been most time-consuming and in the end, HAL had no other choice but to give-in.

I think he is oversimplifying a complex deal

There is no mention of the latest dispute which has held up the progress
of the negotiations ie Dassault unwilling to take responsibility

The Indian media is not concocting any story
they get their feed from officials

Even the Defence Minister has admitted to problems in the deal

Lastly HAL has not started manufacturing planes yesterday
THAT they do not understand the importance of OEM supplied hardware
and its implications on the overall QC / QA


PSG ; his stories are legion
 
.
Well in last one month or so, the only official statements coming from Indian side are that DM Parriker wants Dassault to stick to RFP conditions and not take India for a ride. Thats sensible considering the value (both monetary and strategic) associated with this deal. Don't understand why the writer is painting DM in bad colors. GoI is taking a sensible cautious approach and while it may take some time, ultimately Dassault will abide by the original RFP both in letter and spirit.
 
.
prasun gupta claims in his article


this part is wrong or really confusing

how can LCA mark1 1st squadron beomes fully operationally capable by 2022 meanwhile LCa mark1 2nd squadron get FOC by 2020 how is that possible .

CHEERS
From how I understand it the first LCA squadron (20 birds) aren't being produced to full FOC standard but IOC-2 standard. As such, technically speaking, the first LCA SQD the No. 45 ‘Flying Daggers’ won't be declared FOC compliment until their birds (first batch of LCAs) are brought up to this standard during their overhaul in the years 2022. This is an issue that ONLY pertains to the first LCA SQD and won't be an issue for any of the others.
 
.
prasun gupta claims in his article


this part is wrong or really confusing

how can LCA mark1 1st squadron beomes fully operationally capable by 2022 meanwhile LCa mark1 2nd squadron get FOC by 2020 how is that possible .

CHEERS

as per PSG the first Tejas Mk1 squadron will be formed with Tejas aircrafts in IOC standard .. they will be upgraded later to FOC standard ..while 2'nd squadron of Tejas Mk1 will be formed with Tejas aircrafts that are already FOC standard to begin with...
 
. .
  • Very good article... for long so many stories are being written about MMRCA that it now causes most of the folks to have headache the moment you mention "MMRCA".
  • It would be nice if PSG could give a bit insight about lifecycle cost part too.. That way a large section of folks which are misguided by statements of the deal being very expensive can understand whats the reality...
  • Interestingly, if the terrain hugging capacity is not there at present with the MKIs and neither forseen with Zhuk AESA, I wonder what could probably FGFA have in it?
  • If PSG is correct forecasting MKI at 350 birds and guessing FGFA 127 birds then around 500 birds without low-altitude terrain avoidance mode or automatic terrain-following capability or weather-mapping mode, and low-altitude navigation pods, then ops limitation will be with IAF. Then the question comes in my mind how a costly FGFA fulfills our requirement when we say its 5G and stealthy yet its usage will be again air superiority only and in no manner can be customised to possibly A2G.
  • Moreover, this clearly indicates how Rafale is so much vital to IAF for its omnirole potential. May be IAF plans Rafale's utilization more so as Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft (DPSA) which gives swing fleet capacity which is missing atm in case of a war breakout (including 2 front) or surgical strikes or low intensity conflicts.
 
Last edited:
.
If PSG is correct forecasting MKI at 350 birds and guessing FGFA 127 birds then around 500 birds

IAF is going to get at least 214 FGFAs bro.

Interestingly, if the terrain hugging capacity is not there at present with the MKIs and neither forseen with Zhuk AESA, I wonder what could probably FGFA have in it?
Like PSG points out, the entire design ethos of the MKI, MiG-29 and now FGFA are designed for air-superiority (IAF refers to it as air "dominance) roles.
 
.
but this is perhaps the most credible and factual article I have read on the MMRCA deal in a long, LONG, time.

:woot: Please tell me you are messing around! A decade of evaluations, trials and news reports and now he comes up with the glorious idea that MMRCA somehow has anything to do with terrain-following that??? You got to be kidding me, he also states that the MKI is not designed for multi role, which is silly but it gets even better when he then says that the Su 34 is. What nonsense is that? Both are varients of the same platform with high commonality and the MKI has even the same low speed maneuverability advantage as the Su 34 because of the canard design, the difference comes mainly due to different set of avionics that gears the Su 34 to terrain-following profiles, but what stops us to implement them to MKI? Nothing! F15 air superiority design, with the Strike Eagle multi role varient more geared to ground attack. Mirage 2000 also with different varients specific for ground attack, heck even Mig 23 and 27 showed that you can use the same design for different roles, by tweaking it's systems mainly. Modern multi role fighters like the MKI or MMRCAs however don't limit themselfs to a single role anymore, but can have both A2A and A2G capabilities.

Usually he at least puts some interesting pics or specboards in his reports, but this time even that was not really something new.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom