What's new

EADS Eurofighter in the MRCA competition Thread

Originally Posted by SupermanKaPapa
India and France have recently agreed to "go beyond a buyer-seller relationship.

But the French haven't specified what sort of a relationship they mean, did they?

You mentioned only French.........why?

Anyway; this relation can be anything..........but physical;)

Please note that India will not be an equal member of the consortum.

Hummmm..............What do you think about EuroFighter's future, if it failed in MMRCA??? I can't see any other color than black. And the countries involved in developing EF Typhoon should also know this.


Originally Posted by SupermanKaPapa
Already explained in preivous post; plz help urself. In short, Almost LCA........Now plz don't say that Gripen is Superior than LCA; I know it is. But only due to its Avionics and Components. Not due to frae, size, or any other physical measures. And these superior things can be added into the plane of same size, i.e., LCA, in future. Like they are added in Gripen many years later; today's Gripen is not what it was when it developed. It got many new and better things; and that can happen to LCA too.

Are you suggesting that if two aircraft are of the same size, their capabilities will be or can be made the same regardless of how they may differ in their basic airframes?

When did I claim that? My point was that they got many things common in their characteristics and performance (NOT CHALLENGING Gripen's superiority by any means, mind you), and it will not be a wise decision to induct two different plateforms with so many similarities. Choose one of them; whether it be LCA or Gripen, but not both. And being cheaper (in price), LCA is better option. It will make a good Hi-Medium-Lo combination with SU30MKI-MMRCA-Tejas. Therefore, India should not buy Gripen or F-16 for MMRCA.:cheers:
 
Last edited:
You mentioned only French.........why?

Anyway; this relation can be anything..........but physical;)

Hummmm..............What do you think about EuroFighter's future, if it failed in MMRCA??? I can't see any other color than black. And the countries involved in developing EF Typhoon should also know this.

Here's something sancho posted in another thread...

The Eurofighter is not offered with an equal partnership as a fifth consortium member! That is a mistake that many people thinks, but in reality they offered only a partnership to produce avionics for the EF. That means all they do is outsourcing a part of the production to reduce costs, but it doesn't mean India will get any say for future developments of the EF.

Rafale did not openly specify what it means when they say, "beyond a buyer seller relationship". If we took the chance to be the first customer of the Rafale, with an order between 126 and 200, we surely would be an equal partner, not sure what they will, or can offer now when they already theam up with UAE and Brazil.
 
I had no clue that you had replied -- sorry very poor in tracking threads.

Gr8, we got many things common:tup:


ooopss sorry -- in betn that was real funny ! :D

Thx.


As death by choc pointed out -- Cherry picking here are we ? The fighter aircraft whose service length is unmatchable and whose combat history is lengedary is being questioned on its maintenance?

Pakistan has been operating F16's fore more than 2 decades -- what is the crash rate in Pakistani air force ? Last i heard it was 4-5 crashes in its two decades of service length. Last crash happened in 2009 and before that i think in 1995, a gap of 15 years !! F16 maintenance , service length , multirole ability is as good as it gets which other aircrafts (in MRCA) can only dream of achiveing.


Are you sufferring from the same disease which Amir Khan had..........Short Term Memory Loss??? Let me take you in flashback.

Originally Posted by anathema (07-10-2010, 01:48 AM)
Care to explain the bold part? (which was:"The F-16 is also more prone to pilot errors than the Mirage 2000H")/COLOR]

The fact that PAF has this plane is the only thing that is going against them otherwise there is no other better option in terms of maintenance, service length , potency and Life cycle costs (read affordability)


Also that was the view of Indian Air Force, not mine. I am great admirer of The Viper. This is wallpaper on my system:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Crash.arp.600pix.jpg

But the fact that matters most is what IAF, not you or me, thinks.


Sorry -- If uncle sam is not reliable then India wouldnt be buying the equipment that it has planned to buy. The Globemaster deal is worth more than 5 Billion dollars - and we are trying to figure out whether Uncle sam is reliable or not. For all that matters - GoI has thought about it and decided that Uncle Sam is reliable enough to buy cutting edge defence equipment.

Malik, we can't ignore a big gun like US. We need to give him a big share too. After all, it is a matter of our new friendship with USA. But still; we can't trust them so much to put all eggs in one basket. Even in our past, we suffered becasue of lack of US support in crisis, like 1965. I know things are not the same; but you know --- Doodh Ka Jala Chaach Ko Bhi Phook-Phook Kar Peeta Hai!!!


If you ask my personal opinion then yes i would prefer europeans to uncle sam but thats not what GoI thinks and in the end thats what matters !

As I wrote above............."Gr8, we got many things common:tup:"


With regards to ToT -- sorry if we dont get the right ToT then its not Uncle SAM's fault, ITS OUR FAULT. We should make sure that we will not be doing any such deals where we are handicapped -- why blame the manufacture , a customer should always do research before investing.

Can you tell me the way, how to make sure and force US to give us right ToT????


You know you remind me of some Pakistani posters -- JF 17 will be equal to Su 30 MKI by 2015 -- as if Su 30 MKI will be just waiting for JF 17 to come on level playing ground.
That simply is not going to happen!

:hitwall: This comment doesn't do justice with your image, which is very bright for me.

JF17 and Su30 MKI are from different category. One from Lightweight (low end) and another from Yokozuna class (high end). This is not the case with Gripen and LCA. You can compare JF17 with Gripen, F16, LCA, or Mirage 2000; but not with Su30 MKI or F-15.


Gripen NG is superior to LCA in every aspect ! Be it avionics , engine , payload , endurance , radar , etc...

As I repeated many times................I have no doubt in Gripen's Superiority over LCA at present. But I think you have some doubts!!!

But again you won't buy Coke and Pepsi together..........right? So my point is............whether it be LCA or Gripen, only one should be there; not both. For example, which will be a better combination?

Hyundai Santro - Volkswagen Polo - Suzuki Grand Vitara
HAL LCA Tejas - SAAB Gripen NG - Sukhoi Su-30 MKI

OR

Hyundai Santro - Toyota Corolla - Suzuki Grand Vitara
HAL LCA Tejas - Rafale/F18 SH/EF - Sukhoi Su-30 MKI

Now plz don't say that this is not like this or that!!!...........This is just an example to simplify what is my view.

As far as superiority in above mentioned Specifications (avionics, engine, payload, endurance, radar), here is the conclusion:

Avionics:

Gripen: The Gripen cockpit is dominated by three large, full color, Multi-Function Displays (MFDs) and a wide angle diffractive optics Head-Up Display (HUD) with a holographic combiner. A highly efficient human-machine interface has been integrated into the Gripen to substantially ease pilot workload, particularly in combat situations. This provides a Gripen pilot with outstanding situation awareness, ensuring unrivalled operational effectiveness. It also increases the time available for tactical decision-making allowing the pilot to use the aircraft and weapons system to maximum effect.

The main functions of each display are as follows:
  • Head-Up Display (HUD) - providing FLIR imagery and weapon aiming information superimposed on the outside world at all altitudes.
  • Flight Data Display (FDD) - provides flight data and system status information about the engine, fuel and external stores.
  • Horizontal Situation Display (HSD) - provides navigational and tactical mission data superimposed on an electronic map of selectable scale.
  • Multi-Sensor Display (MSD) - presents information from the radar, FLIR imagery and other sensors. Flight and fire control data are also superimposed.

Tejas: The Tejas has a night vision goggles (NVG)-compatible "glass cockpit" that is dominated by an indigenous head-up display (HUD), three 5 in x 5 in multi-function displays, two Smart Standby Display Units (SSDU), and a "get-you-home" panel (providing the pilot with essential flight information in case of an emergency[57]). The CSIO-developed HUD, Elbit-furnished DASH helmet-mounted display and sight (HMDS), and hands-on-throttle-and-stick (HOTAS) controls reduce pilot workload and increase situation awareness by allowing the pilot to access navigation and weapon-aiming information with minimal need to spend time "head down" in the cockpit.

The MFDs provide information on the engine, hydraulics, electrical, flight control, and environmental control systems on a need-to-know basis, along with basic flight and tactical information. Dual redundant display processors produce computer-generated imagery on these displays. The pilot interacts with the complex avionics systems through a simple multifunction keyboard and function and sensor selection panels.

Target acquisition is accomplished through a state-of-the-art radar — potentially supplemented by a laser designator pod, forward-looking infra-red (FLIR) or other opto-electronic sensors — to provide accurate target information to enhance kill probabilities. A ring laser gyro (RLG)-based inertial navigation system (INS) provides accurate navigation guidance to the pilot. The LCA also has secure and jam-resistant communication systems such as the IFF transponder/interrogator, VHF/UHF radios, and air-to-air/air-to-ground datalinks. The ADA Systems Directorate's Integrated Digital Avionics Suite (IDAS) integrates the flight controls, environmental controls, aircraft utilities systems management, stores management system (SMS), etc. on three 1553B buses by a centralised 32-bit, high-throughput mission computer.



Engine:

Gripen - General Electric F-404-400 80 KN (18,000lb) thrust with afterburner

Tejas - General Electric F404-GE-IN20 turbofan 85 kN (19,100 lbf) thrust with afterburner.

Payload:
Gripen:
Empty weight: 5,700 kg (12,600 lb)
Loaded weight: 8,500 kg (18,700 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 14,000 kg (31,000 lb)


Tejas:
Empty weight: 5,680kg (12,522 lb)
Loaded weight: 9,500 kg (20,945 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (31,967 lb)


Endurance:
"NO IDEA" (again).


Radar:
Gripen: The primary sensor of the Gripen target acquisition/weapons aiming system is the long range Ericsson PS-05/A radar. The Gripen radar is a compact, long-range, high performance multi-mode pulse doppler radar with a modular architecture and high reliability, offering high resolution, excellent look-down performance and good Electronic Counter-Counter Measures (ECCM) capabilities. Using state-of-the-art technology, including fully programmable signal and data processors, the radar is able to handle all types of air defence, air-to-surface and reconnaissance missions with built in growth potential to meet future requirements.

Tejas: The coherent pulse-Doppler Multi-Mode Radar in development is designed to keep track of a maximum of 10 targets and allowing simultaneous multiple-target engagement. Jointly developed by the LRDE and HAL Hyderabad, the MMR is being designed to perform multi-target search, track-while-scan (TWS), and ground-mapping functions. It features look-up/look-down modes, low-/medium-/high-pulse repetition frequencies (PRF), platform motion compensation, Doppler beam-sharpening, moving target indication (MTI), Doppler filtering, constant false-alarm rate (CFAR) detection, range-Doppler ambiguity resolution, scan conversion, and online diagnostics to identify faulty processor modules. While originally planned to be fitted on production aircraft, delays in the development of MMR prompted the DRDO to co-operate with Israel Aerospace Industries to integrate a Hybrid version of the EL/M-2032 radar for use with Tejas. The EL/M-2032 radar used in LSP-3 has a detection and tracking range of up to 150 km in air-to-air mode, the air-to-ground mode generates high resolution radar imagery of locations at up to 150 km, and air-to-sea mode can detect and classify naval targets at ranges of up to 300 km.

CONCLUSION: Gripen is superior, BUT...............:smokin:


further Gripen allows us to do a MKI sort of platform where in we can integrate all the Israeli tech that we want in the plane.

Do you mean that we can't add Israeli (or other Western) tech in LCA??? Some are:
  1. Multi-function displays (MFDs) by Sextant (France) and Elbit (Israel)
  2. Helmet-mounted display and sight (HMDS) cueing system by Elbit (Israel)
  3. Laser pod supplied by Rafael (Israel).
  4. Hybrid version of the EL/M-2032 radar from Israel Aerospace Industries.
  5. Unspecified number of Electronic Warfare Suite from Israel's Elisra for the LCA prototypes.


There were structural modifications for Gripen NG -- re adjustment of landing gear for greater fuel storage , air intake adjustment for GE414 , etc ..and swedes accomplished all this in a very short time, so to say 'new components were added to old Gripen to make it New Gripen' is well totally incorrect!

If LCA had been what it was supposed to be then maybe it could have thought of going up against Gripen C/D -- but the way things are - LCA is far from achiving IOC , then comes FoC..then comes LCA MK2 ...and by this Gripen would have made its own advancement !!


As you mentioned yourself, these were modifications, not creating a new plane. You can do that once you have confidence in the plateform and the problems and ideas that came in front of you while using it over years.


As far as time is considered, if I am correct, the first Gripen first flew in December 1988 and achieved IOC in 1997 (in 9 years).

On the other hand, LCA Tejas' maiden flight was made by first technology demonstrator, TD-1, on 4 January 2001 and and is expected to achieve IOC in December 2010 (9 years). So, keeping the pace despite being an Indian Project!!!


..good one.

Thx.


First the cost of Rafale is very close to EF -- and not 68 million..i know many websites report it ...but the deals that french are trying to make with other countries doesnt reflect that.

not 68 million; may be true, but can't comment.


Indian Mod has made it very clear that Lifecycle costs will be considered for MRCA acquisition. That being said -- pure cost is not the driving factor -- in addition to cost it will also go by geopolitical benefits and ability of platform. If US offers UN security council seat - then this deal goes to F18SH , pretty much sure about that.

Agreed.

If US offers UN security council seat (permanent one), then F18SH will be a very good deal. As we all know the proven capabilities and history of F18; coupled with UN Permanent security council seat will be the next best thing happen to India. I am "Pretty much sure about that."

But by choosing Eurofighter, India can get Four mangoes with a single stone.......... UK, Italy, Spain and Germany. Uncle Sam can be made happy with other deals, like we are doing. But with these four European hotshots in favor of India, our case will be stronger.

According to eastimates India is planning to spean $100 Billion dollars over the coming decade -- If India a contender like EF or Rafale then pretty much the entire lifecycle costs would be more than 50 Billion dollars (based on your calculation)... What will India do for other services ? What will India do for Navy, Army , Intelligence , Coast Guard , para military , etc ? Further what if these fighters are to be upgraded what will be cost involved !!

So to answer your question - no life cycle costs will not be managed in 10-12 billion dollars. The 10-12 billion dollar amount was propped up a decade back in the Indian media -- In 2009 according to new directive frm MoD -- it was directed to IAF that Lifecycle costs be considered for the acquisition -- so no 10-12 doesnt include life cycle costs. But with platforms like EF or Rafale the costs are just exhorbitant.

Is that so? Can you imagine its Life Cycle Cost of SU30MKI???? Being a Russian fighter, I strongly believe it will be on the very high side. But that doesn't mean we should not procure them. Same is with the EF or Rafale. If they meet the requirements, they should be considered. But we can't buy anything which is not suitable to our objectives, just becasue it is less pricy to afford.

And everything should be upgraded when needed.

Money matters, but security and power matters much more.


No you are asking the question other way round ! Mod raised RFI to the companies -- MoD has to, since as per the Defence procurement bidding procedure , it needs to give everyone a chance. So MoD raised the RFI to the companies , and yet the companies choose to respond to RFI !! So its not MoD's responsibility , it was companies!

Further RFI never gives out dollar details -- RFI procedure contains a set of questions around the ability of the aircraft and the acircrft manufacture. If the Aircraft manufacture and airplane meeds the criteria then they are in !! There is no dollar amount associated with RFI , this happens in the later stages. You can also find these in recent procurements - where MoD raised RFI's for i believe LUH to eurocopter , sikorsky and Kamov...Initially Eurocopter responded favourably to RFI ...but later they send another letter saying that they are not able to meet the requirements and hence nullifying them from competition. The Rafael deal for making the armed forces net centric can also be used as an example.

But why to waste precious time, efforts, and money on testing those things which we simply can't afford. Test only those things which we can buy and then select the one which is best. Isn't that simple???


You might read the article 'Defence deals that bankrupted Greece'. It will give you a good idea of what i am talking about. There is no rhetoric, it was never meant to be. This shouldnt be a case of biting more than we can chew.

Why do you have so many doubts about our chewing capacity??? We are entering in our Demographic Window and it will last until middle of the present century. History shows that most nations made incredible progress in this period; whether it is Europe from 1950 to 2000 or China from 1990. So we have to make most of this time to make our nation Super. So better to increase our chewing power as much as we can...


Sure there is no question about that. But if that situation ever arises then it would tantamount to bad planning and fore sight. We can understand that happening with projects like Kaveri (where we had no experience) but when it comes to dealing with international firms with years of experience in aircraft manufacturing then there should be no scope for bad planning. We all know what happens when deals escalate -- for example Gorshkov - a blot in indo-russian history.


Most of the Asian Countries are suffering from this disease......very badly. You and me can't do much about this.


There is always a money and budget associated! To say that its not is mere fallacy !! India is neither China nor US with seemingly infinte wallet -- if that were the case there wouldnt have been a bidding process.

We don't need to be China or US...........But this is my strong believe that we can easily afford whatever is needed for security of our nation.

There should be a bidding process every time, so that we can get the maximum of what we are paying like the offers made in this MMRCA deal, but process should not be this lenghty.[/QUOTE]

My list

Rafale ( i cant see how it is practically possible)
Gripen
F18 SH

EF has still not proved its A2G capability -- And india's main focus is A2G capability.


Look.............we got 66% similarities........:cheers:

My Wish (once again):
1. Rafale
2. Eurofighter Typhoon.
3. F/A-18E/F Super Hornet


Oh yes, I believe if we go like this, both of us can make this threat the lengthiest.:devil:
 
Last edited:
Here's something sancho posted in another thread...

Originally Posted by sancho
The Eurofighter is not offered with an equal partnership as a fifth consortium member! That is a mistake that many people thinks, but in reality they offered only a partnership to produce avionics for the EF. That means all they do is outsourcing a part of the production to reduce costs, but it doesn't mean India will get any say for future developments of the EF.

Originally Posted by SupermanKaPapa
Hummmm..............What do you think about EuroFighter's future, if it failed in MMRCA??? I can't see any other color than black. And the countries involved in developing EF


Eurofighter sweetens its India offer

Ajai Shukla / New Delhi August 3, 2009, 1:06 IST


With the four-nation Eurofighter consortium facing the uncomfortable reality of dwindling orders at home, India’s tender for 126 medium fighters, worth some $11 billion, is now crucial. So, Eurofighter has reworked some of its most fundamental tenets and structures, to appear more appealing to India.

Next Friday, Eurofighter boss Bernhard Gerwert will fly into Delhi to offer a new sweetener to the ministry of defence: if India chooses the Eurofighter, it can become a full-fledged manufacturing partner, the first “outsider” to crack a tightly-interwoven four-country manufacturing chain.

The consortium that developed the Eurofighter — comprising the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain — had decided on a unique manufacturing structure. Each part of the Eurofighter is manufactured in a different country; e.g. the right wing is made in Spain, the left wing in Italy. After that, all four partners assemble their own aircraft, bringing the parts together from the plants where they are manufactured.

This EU-style compromise distributed manufacturing jobs (100,000 jobs in 400 companies) amongst the four partners, while creating a mutual dependency.

If India becomes the fifth Eurofighter partner, it will manufacture complete assemblies — say, as a random example, the front fuselage and tail fins — for every new Eurofighter across the world. That will include fighters for the air forces of the UK, Germany, Spain, Italy, Austria and Saudi Arabia. In addition, Switzerland, Japan, Romania, Greece and Turkey, which are currently evaluating the Eurofighter, could also be on that list.

Kicking off its India campaign in early 2008, Eurofighter had suggested that India could play a major role in the programme, even using the word, “partnership”. But that was never elaborated; only now will India unambiguously be offered a share of the manufacture. All four European partners have agreed to forgo a part of their work share to bring India in.

An order like India’s is badly needed. Earlier this year, a budget-strapped British Ministry of Defence (MoD) tried to pull out of buying its contracted share of 88 fighters from the latest batch (called Tranche 3). Eventually the UK honoured its commitments only because default would have cost London billions of Euros in penalties. The other Eurofighter partners are equally cash-strapped; all have jointly agreed to cut back on their orders for now.

In contrast to the gloom in Europe, the future in India looks rosy. EADS — Eurofighter’s major shareholder — has enjoyed notable success in penetrating the Indian market. Early this year, EADS signed a $20 million contract to help resolve persistent niggles in India’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme. US companies Boeing and Lockheed Martin were ruled out of that bid by Washington’s unwillingness to grant permissions (called Technical Assistance Agreements). EADS points to the LCA consultancy as a major victory that highlighted the comparative ease of doing high-tech business with Europe.

Buoyed by the LCA consultancy, EADS is now focusing on the $600 million tender — floated by the MoD on 17 July — for supplying 99 fighter engines for India’s single-engine LCA. Eurojet, an EADS subsidiary, has offered EJ200 engines, which power the twin-engine Eurofighter. The rival engine is the General Electric GE-414, which powers Eurofighter’s big rival, the twin-engine Boeing F/A-18. Getting the engine selected, both rivals believe, is a sure path towards getting the fighter selected as well.

Clarification
The article incorrectly terms Eurojet an EADS subsidiary. In fact, Eurojet is owned by a four-company consortium consisting of AVIO (Italy), ITP (Spain), MTU Aero Engines (Germany) and Rolls-Royce (UK).

When i commented about "EuroFighter's future," I mean the same, i.e., that an order like India is essential for EF's future. And this is the case with all six contenders, whether it be Gripen, Rafale, or Typhoon, or other three. All the countries participating in MMRCA know that it is a question of life or death for their plane. So they will do whatever they can to save the future of their plane.

And don't forget the Offset clause. In 2005, in response to allegations of corruption in defence procurements around the world, the Defence Ministry formulated the Defence Procurement Policy (DPP) 2005. According to the DPP, at least 30% of any order over Rs. 300 crores (~US$70 million) is to be sourced from Indian companies.

The economic offset for the MMRCA tender was increased to 50% under the DPP 2006. The bidders must confirm the offset details in a separate proposal, to be submitted by 9 June 2008.[63] This brings the value of offsets in the MMRCA deal to almost Rs. 25000 Crores (US$6 Bn).

So, this clause itself secure a big share of India in MMRCA project. Right?

Originally Posted by sanchoRafale did not openly specify what it means when they say, "beyond a buyer seller relationship". If we took the chance to be the first customer of the Rafale, with an order between 126 and 200, we surely would be an equal partner, not sure what they will, or can offer now when they already theam up with UAE and Brazil.

I wrote in my reply that "India and France have recently agreed to "go beyond a buyer-seller relationship." But you mentioned only French that "they haven't specified what sort of relationship they mean, did they?"

Originally Posted by SupermanKaPapa
You mentioned only French.........why?

I just asked why you only mentioned French and not India that they haven't specified the nature and extent of relationship. Obviously everything is not there for public. But some clues are here....

France and India deepen defence ties
France, India fire up military cooperation, nuclear energy ties
(AFP) – Jan 24, 2008

NEW DELHI (AFP) — India and France agreed Friday to push their military ties beyond arms sales, signing an accord on nuclear power cooperation as soon as New Delhi is allowed to enter the global atomic energy market.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said he had agreed with visiting French President Nicolas Sarkozy to go beyond a "buyer-seller relationship," in which France is merely positioned as one of several international arms suppliers.

French officials said the two sides signed the framework of a planned bilateral accord on nuclear power research and supply, a key area of French expertise and seen as crucial to India's effort to fuel an economy currently expanding at a rate of nine percent.

"We have agreed to go beyond a buyer-seller relationship. We will increasingly focus on joint research and development projects, transfer of technology and greater military exchanges," Singh told reporters.

"It is very important that India and France should cooperate, share information and intelligence gathering for defence of the values which are dear to both our countries," he said in a joint news conference.

Sarkozy jetted into New Delhi early Friday without girlfriend Carla Bruni, although an Indian foreign ministry source said the ex-supermodel and pop singer may still join him.

The French president will be the chief guest at India's 59th Republic Day celebrations on Saturday, after which he will make a private visit the Taj Mahal -- India's 17th century monument to love.

But in India on Friday, Sarkozy focused on business -- with France lobbying hard for deals in a country ranked the biggest weapons buyer among emerging nations and expected to spend an estimated 30 billion dollars on arms over the next five years.

French-Indian defence ties took a blow last month when New Delhi cancelled a Eurocopter bid for a 600-million-dollar (410-million-euro) helicopter contract due to alleged irregularities. The alleged payment of bribes in a submarine deal is also being probed.

France was the second largest arms supplier to India after Russia but has now been overtaken by Israel. The United States is also pushing for a place in the Indian market.

However, French officials said India -- traditionally non-aligned and keen to maintain a careful balance of arms suppliers -- had agreed to invite a French consortium to upgrade its fleet of Mirage fighters in a contract worth up to 1.5 billion euros that Israel had also been chasing.

Nuclear cooperation has been in the works for years, aimed at allowing France to supply equipment and fuel to India once it has cleared hurdles with the UN's nuclear watchdog.

A joint statement Friday said "this agreement will form the basis of wide-ranging bilateral cooperation from basic and applied research to full civil nuclear cooperation including reactors, fuel supply and management."

India is currently banned from buying fuel for atomic reactors and related equipment because of nuclear weapons tests in 1974 and 1988, but signed a deal with the United States in 2006 as a way of getting off the blacklist.

The American and French deals hinge on the outcome of negotiations between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and with the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, which controls the global nuclear trade.

"The needs of India in energy are huge... If we do not let India accede to civilian nuclear energy it will have to go to more polluting means," Sarkozy said, adding he expected to see an international consensus emerge within "weeks".

The French nuclear energy group Areva says India, currently the world's fourth biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, will need 25 to 30 nuclear reactors.

Singh said the process would "take time" -- alluding to domestic pressure from the government's Communist allies who say such a pact with the IAEA, which would involve some international inspections, compromises India's strategic programme.

:cheers:
 
Last edited:
What is a re-programming of radar ? What do you mean by changing configuration of radar ?

If you are refering to Radar modes then it doesnt require any source code transfer. Source code transfer is not even required to specify mission parameters -- if it had been how would PAF be able to operate its F16 fighters ? How would nations operate their F35 fighters if they cant change mission parameters ? These are all configurable where in the country which has brought the equipment can change the mission parameters through parameterized inputs (falcon said this correctly). The latest generation fighters - can have their mission profile and parameters updated via data link .i.e no need for any manual intrevention-- goes to show how far techonology has progressed.

Now the question -- why do we need source codes ? Very simple -- so that we can integrate our own components , missiles , systems to the aircraft without depending on the manufacturer. This is where source code transfer is important. So in your example - If rafale had been selected then we would have to depend on France to integrate Astra on Rafale if there were no source codes available to us.
The second advantage is our scientists can understand how advanced nations have written , managed and incorporated their source codes.

However it is not as easy as it sounds -- Source codes are actually programming languages -- further most of the aircrafts have it in ADA language which is a serious headache (JF17 has it in C+) -- to decipher and understand it is a very lengthy process.

You are so generous..........just saved my efforts on reply. Thx:azn:

Also it shows your vast area of knowledge...............:tup:


All the above things that you have listed is great to read. However in our field -- whenever we resign from a postion then manager offers us better paypackage, better position , greater responsibilities --and everything.

We call it 'GAJJAR de RAHA HAIN' ....These are all marketing tactics. Further Kaveri is long way from complete -- what Rafale achive if it integrates Kaveri ? Whos going to design the airframe again ? Who will be charged for the re design ?

Russia and Swede (SAAB) are the only countries which can offer us some real ToT. Russia because well we deal with them, so we know what they can offer us and russians know that they cant bluff us by making these kinds of statements. SAAB because there is too much for them to loose -- this is a make or break deal for them -- If SAAB clinches this - the Gripen legacy will continue to live, if not then it would face its eventual demise -- just the Mcdouglas (maker of F18) faced its demise when it was not selected for the F35 program.

Yes..........All these can be marketing tactics, but what do you think - They can claim whatever they want to sell their product (Fighter Plane in this case) to us and then take a back step when the deal is final. We are not going to give them all the cash in advance.......right? It is not like buying a pair of jeans. We are talking about a deal worth more than $10 Bn. And if the seller fail to fulfil the commitments, you can well imagine what will be the future of their product.

If Dassault is offering to fit the "Kaveri" in Rafale, then this will be based on some ground. Somebody like Dassault can't commit anything silly at world level. However, I doubt this will happen.

For every plane taking part in Indian MMRCA bid, it is a question of life or death...............not only for Gripen, but for all of them. How many buyers they have for their respective Aircrafts..........For Rafale, For EF, for F-16, for Gripen, For Mig 35, or for F18 S/H???

EF............Other than four parent countries, sale options are very low.
Rafale.......If it fails, it has very dark future.
Gripen......Same as Rafale.
F-16.........Production will be closed.
Mig 35......0 till now.
F18 S/H....It will live longer than others.

So, whichever fighter will won the MMRCA, it will be more of INDIA's fighter than the country of its origin. In other words, we are buying almost whole program, not the fighter planes!!! This is the main reason for every one of them trying to make their picture more rosy than the others.

My Wish (once again):
1. Rafale
2. Eurofighter Typhoon.
3. F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
 
Last edited:
Eurofighter promo... :D



1258780.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No one? Of course you mean no one except the US. Dont you? I can bet you that US is ready to take on anyone. I'm not supporting US to be belligerant. When if it comes to capability, US have the capability. However, US seek friendship with India.:usflag:
My dear friend..u r answer is very ignorant...
do u think india cannot take on US...dude are u really very much clever than the defence anylist in India...?
do u know how much influence indians have in US..
In 2020,if india and US go for a war..then there will be a super loss for both US and india..The whole world will be nuclear waste land...
do u think india has only 60-90warheads and US 1000's of them..
forgot 1998 secret shakti test,no nation in this world could trace this until india disclosed it....
do u think India will be having only 70-100 nuclear warheads in 2020???
just be logical...
but dont worry...we both r democratic countries...
we will never go for war..instead we will destroy our enemy completely...
just think US-INDIA-Russia....there will be a revolution in this world in 2020...
just wait my friend...
 
Posted by faithfulguy
No one? Of course you mean no one except the US. Dont you? I can bet you that US is ready to take on anyone. I'm not supporting US to be belligerant. When if it comes to capability, US have the capability. However, US seek friendship with India.


You know damn well that we don't have any hostile intentions towards USA and rather are strategic partners today with certain common interests.
You could consider delivering veiled cautions to certain members who are day and night bombing US with words of destruction and what not by supporting Taliban on the U.S. Affairs section.

I think your efforts are misplaced as India is right now a strategic partner to your adopted country. :)
 
My dear friend..u r answer is very ignorant...
do u think india cannot take on US...dude are u really very much clever than the defence anylist in India...?
do u know how much influence indians have in US..
In 2020,if india and US go for a war..then there will be a super loss for both US and india..The whole world will be nuclear waste land...
do u think india has only 60-90warheads and US 1000's of them..
forgot 1998 secret shakti test,no nation in this world could trace this until india disclosed it....
do u think India will be having only 70-100 nuclear warheads in 2020???
just be logical...
but dont worry...we both r democratic countries...
we will never go for war..instead we will destroy our enemy completely...
just think US-INDIA-Russia....there will be a revolution in this world in 2020...
just wait my friend...
Stop commenting like a 2-year old. India has no need to take on US as we have enough troubles already. I don't think for at least the coming century, we'd be fighting any war on anything so there's no point of discussing such stupid points.
 
who r these guys dig up these old threads and starting flame war..... :(
 
My dear friend..u r answer is very ignorant...
do u think india cannot take on US...dude are u really very much clever than the defence anylist in India...?
do u know how much influence indians have in US..
In 2020,if india and US go for a war..then there will be a super loss for both US and india..The whole world will be nuclear waste land...
do u think india has only 60-90warheads and US 1000's of them..
forgot 1998 secret shakti test,no nation in this world could trace this until india disclosed it....
do u think India will be having only 70-100 nuclear warheads in 2020???
just be logical...
but dont worry...we both r democratic countries...
we will never go for war..instead we will destroy our enemy completely...
just think US-INDIA-Russia....there will be a revolution in this world in 2020...
just wait my friend...

may be u dont know faithfullyguy is arrogant but there is no need to put ur foot in ur mouth........... and reply like a kid dude grow up.... i know ur patriotic and all but hello here is the reality check india is no way comparable in military power with usa even in 2030...... unless u have harry potters magical power and lord voldemort on our side :coffee::coffee::coffee:
 
My dear friend..u r answer is very ignorant...
do u think india cannot take on US...dude are u really very much clever than the defence anylist in India...?
do u know how much influence indians have in US..
In 2020,if india and US go for a war..then there will be a super loss for both US and india..The whole world will be nuclear waste land...
do u think india has only 60-90warheads and US 1000's of them..
forgot 1998 secret shakti test,no nation in this world could trace this until india disclosed it....
do u think India will be having only 70-100 nuclear warheads in 2020???
just be logical...
but dont worry...we both r democratic countries...
we will never go for war..instead we will destroy our enemy completely...
just think US-INDIA-Russia....there will be a revolution in this world in 2020...
just wait my friend...

Jesus Christ. Someone is nuts.
 
My dear friend..u r answer is very ignorant...
do u think india cannot take on US...dude are u really very much clever than the defence anylist in India...?
do u know how much influence indians have in US..
In 2020,if india and US go for a war..then there will be a super loss for both US and india..The whole world will be nuclear waste land...
do u think india has only 60-90warheads and US 1000's of them..
forgot 1998 secret shakti test,no nation in this world could trace this until india disclosed it....
do u think India will be having only 70-100 nuclear warheads in 2020???
just be logical...
but dont worry...we both r democratic countries...
we will never go for war..instead we will destroy our enemy completely...
just think US-INDIA-Russia....there will be a revolution in this world in 2020...
just wait my friend...

US is not wack to invade India.
No India can't Nuke USA If they decide to nuke us we would lean on Russia for nuke protection from USA.
We would be military devastated but USA would loose a lot too in a conventional battle.
The potential for trouble for USA if they try and invade India is huge considering the size of the country and its population.
They would be economically shooting themselves in their head if they try and invade India.
 

Back
Top Bottom