Make In India - Fighter Jet musings - News, Developments, Updates - F16,F18, Gripen, Any other

[X_Killer]

From @BON PLAN posting today since You fail to read and/or comprehend.

"The improvement scheduled for the Gripen MS21 bring the capability close to the
Swiss expected capabilities"

It is ranked similar as Eurofighter for Strike Missions.
It says nothing about its capabilities for A2A.

MS21 is first introduced in Gripen E. Gripen C is at MS20.

View attachment 417764

The link to F-16 vendors shows company name and what they produce.
It is quite easy to check which companies in the vendor list are non-US,
and then list what parts of the F-16 they produce.
You are either too lazy or incompetent to extract the information,
But source has been provided.

You have also a link showing production of Gripen E has started, with planned
delivery in 2019 to Brazil and Sweden.

Based on that, and the cost of Rafale, it lost...
As I said, not enough bang for the bucks.

SAAB learns from the Air Forces operating their fighters.
Learning from Dassault, would probably make CPFH go up.

Dude, you have no sense about the Production schemes.
If I believe by your fact , India is also producing LCA from 2000 but it's not actually correct.

Those three Airframes for which you are talking about to be delivered soon, are the test Aircrafts which are not meant as war Fighters.
After that it go through LSP when it got IOC, than after when they have FOC , GRIPEN cleared for serial production. hope you will be able to find something related to IOC & FOC timeline.
http://indiandefencenews.in/gripen-e-beyond-hype-reality-is-much-stormier-much-murkier-much-scarier/
https://www.copybook.com/news/gripen-e-multirole-fighter-debuts

Also you created too much rant for the cost of GRIPEN E, the below link will be able to clear you facts. But didn't have RAFALE F3R's flyaway cost, it is 95 million USD.
https://defenseissues.net/2013/10/05/modern-aircraft-flyaway-costs/

Basically, Sweden selected GRIPEN over RAFALE because its is Sweden's own fighter.

For F-16 vender Companies, you should know that almost all Companies have their headquarters in US like P&W whereas it also has subsidiaries in other countries like Canada.
Here too , you failed to share anything which can back your statement.


Don't show your laziness in providing the backing stuff.

Good luck for your next attempt.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Dude, you have no sense about the Production schemes.
If I believe by your fact , India is also producing LCA from 2000 but it's not actually correct.

Those three Airframes for which you are talking about to be delivered soon, are the test Aircrafts which are not meant as war Fighters.
After that it go through LSP when it got IOC, than after when they have FOC , GRIPEN cleared for serial production. hope you will be able to find something related to IOC & FOC timeline.
http://indiandefencenews.in/gripen-e-beyond-hype-reality-is-much-stormier-much-murkier-much-scarier/
https://www.copybook.com/news/gripen-e-multirole-fighter-debuts

Also you created too much rant for the cost of GRIPEN E, the below link will be able to clear you facts. But didn't have RAFALE F3R's flyaway cost, it is 95 million USD.
https://defenseissues.net/2013/10/05/modern-aircraft-flyaway-costs/

Basically, Sweden selected GRIPEN over RAFALE because its is Sweden's own fighter.

For F-16 vender Companies, you should know that almost all Companies have their headquarters in US like P&W whereas it also has subsidiaries in other countries like Canada.
Here too , you failed to share anything which can back your statement.


Don't show your laziness in providing the backing stuff.

Good luck for your next attempt.

Nope, the test aircrafts are separate from this.
Aircraft will be delivered in 2019 to MS20+ standard.
Are You not worried that your two links on IOC/FOC show widely differing dates?

Using an unsourced forum entry for price is not a source.
A news article needs to refer to an actual contract to be useable as a source.
It also needs to be able to separate the aircraft from other parts of the contract.
Often, you cannot get the absolute price, but You can see the offer for the full deal,
and judge this against other offers.

India is getting IOC/FOC information as well as price, and if it does not fit, that is it.

Try finding the US headquarters for British Aerospace (BAE).
P&W is a US company, with a Canadian subsidiary.
Did I list fighter engines?
If You prefer to stick your head in the ground, and indulge in fantasies, it is your problem.
Fact is that you have to deal with companies from 10-20 different countries
if You want to produce F-16.

In the agreement between the US and NATO countries buying F-16,
it says that they have the right to part ot the production in third party countries,
which includes India.

Why would the European Countries demand such a clause, if production ends up with US companies in the US?

http://www.gao.gov/assets/120/119675.pdf

 

[X_Killer]

Nope, the test aircrafts are separate from this.
Aircraft will be delivered in 2019 to MS20+ standard.
Are You not worried that your two links on IOC/FOC show widely differing dates?

That is why I shared the date with least difference. But still you are unable share anything about it

Using an unsourced forum entry for price is not a source.
A news article needs to refer to an actual contract to be useable as a source.
It also needs to be able to separate the aircraft from other parts of the contract.
Often, you cannot get the absolute price, but You can see the offer for the full deal,
and judge this against other offers.

India is getting IOC/FOC information as well as price, and if it does not fit, that is it.

No credible information.
You are enjoying and sharing your fancy tales.

Try finding the US headquarters for British Aerospace (BAE).
P&W is a US company, with a Canadian subsidiary.
Did I list fighter engines?
If You prefer to stick your head in the ground, and indulge in fantasies, it is your problem.

You didn't listed anything except fantasies.
You have nothing to defend yourself.

Fact is that you have to deal with companies from 10-20 different countries
if You want to produce F-16.

I don't like F-16 for IAF But for you kind information , the process will be very similar to RAFALE deal because it is a combination of several french companies like Dassault, Thales, Safran etc but we don't need to sign individual contracts.
Similar will go for f-16 , if selected. But it's not same in GRIPEN case.

In the agreement between the US and NATO countries buying F-16,
it says that they have the right to part ot the production in third party countries,
which includes India.

Why would the European Countries demand such a clause, if production ends up with US companies in the US?

http://www.gao.gov/assets/120/119675.pdf

View attachment 417810

As you are quoting, EU countries for f-16, I want to tell you that there is a specific Production clause i.e. LICENCE PRODUCTION.
like India is license producing several projects including Su-30MKI, Hawk , do-228 etc. In license Production , the producing country can replace parts with the permission from OEM.

Right now Turkey and Japan is license producing F-35s too but with very minor modifications.

POST SOME SENSIBLE FACTS.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

That is why I shared the date with least difference. But still you are unable share anything about it


No credible information.
You are enjoying and sharing your fancy tales.

You didn't listed anything except fantasies.
You have nothing to defend yourself.

I don't like F-16 for IAF But for you kind information , the process will be very similar to RAFALE deal because it is a combination of several french companies like Dassault, Thales, Safran etc but we don't need to sign individual contracts.
Similar will go for f-16 , if selected. But it's not same in GRIPEN case.


As you are quoting, EU countries for f-16, I want to tell you that there is a specific Production clause i.e. LICENCE PRODUCTION.
like India is license producing several projects including Su-30MKI, Hawk , do-228 etc. In license Production , the producing country can replace parts with the permission from OEM.

Right now Turkey and Japan is license producing F-35s too but with very minor modifications.

POST SOME SENSIBLE FACTS.

I do not need to share data on IOC and FOC since I do not disagree
with the fact that they will occur later.
I agree with IOC = 2021 and FOC = 2023.
The argument is first production delivery in 2019, for which I have provided a source.

You claim that a number of EUROPEAN companies are American.
I gave you the example BAE, which undeniable is European, and undeniable is delivering
F-16 parts. Your reply is that this is fantasy.
For Your information, Safran is another one. You just called Safran a French company.
Are You going to change Your mind now, when they turn out to be a supplier of F-16 parts.
Where is the US headquarters of the Safran company, with a French subsidiary?

It is easy for everyone to find out the origins from the list of companies.
Apparently You fail to do this.

You appear to believe that LM can license production to India, regardless of
their contracts with other countries.
Wrong, They have signed away some of their rights, as shown previously.
There are a number of countries which has legal rights to production of parts
for a possible F-16 MII project.
The Su-30MKI, Hawk etc. that you mention does not have such legal commitments.

 

[X_Killer]

I do not need to share data on IOC and FOC since I do not disagree
with the fact that they will occur later.
I agree with IOC = 2021 and FOC = 2023.
The argument is first production delivery in 2019, for which I have provided a source.]

There will be no LSP before IOC and no SP before FOC.

You claim that a number of EUROPEAN companies are American.
I gave you the example BAE, which undeniable is European, and undeniable is delivering
F-16 parts. Your reply is that this is fantasy.
For Your information, Safran is another one. You just called Safran a French company.
Are You going to change Your mind now, when they turn out to be a supplier of F-16 parts.
Where is the US headquarters of the Safran company, with a French subsidiary?]

Unable to get your point. And I never said that SAFRAN is a F-16 vendor. You must Read my previous post to get the actual reference. I was talking about RAFALE when I mentioned Safran and Thales there.

You appear to believe that LM can license production to India, regardless of
their contracts with other countries.
Wrong, They have signed away some of their rights, as shown previously.
There are a number of countries which has legal rights to production of parts
for a possible F-16 MII project.
The Su-30MKI, Hawk etc. that you mention does not have such legal commitments.

You don't have any understandings about the same

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

There will be no LSP before IOC and no SP before FOC.

Unable to get your point. And I never said that SAFRAN is a F-16 vendor. You must Read my previous post to get the actual reference. I was talking about RAFALE when I mentioned Safran and Thales there.


You don't have any understandings about the same

You said that Safran is a French Vendor.
The F-16 Vendor list contains Safran...
From that, one can deduce that Your statement that the F-16 can be 100% supplied
by US vendors is wrong.

I understand fully that India will have to buy products from all vendors
that have a contractual share of all F-16 production,
and India will never be allowed full rights to produce F-16.
LM cannot sell what they do not own.

 

[X_Killer]

You said that Safran is a French Vendor.
The F-16 Vendor list contains Safran...

I said Safran is a French vendor for RAFALE , not F-16.

I understand fully that India will have to buy products from all vendors
that have a contractual share of all F-16 production,
and India will never be allowed full rights to produce F-16.
LM cannot sell what they do not own.

Why don't you wait and watch...

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I said Safran is a French vendor for RAFALE , not F-16.

Why don't you wait and watch...

Let me repeat myself:

• You said Safran is French.
• The F-16 Vendor list contains Safran.

What is the logical conclusion of that?

• The Vendor List contains a French company.

That makes the statement:

• All parts of the F-16 are produced by US vendors

FALSE!

 

[X_Killer]

Let me repeat myself:

• You said Safran is French.
• The F-16 Vendor list contains Safran.

What is the logical conclusion of that?

• The Vendor List contains a French company.

That makes the statement:

• All parts of the F-16 are produced by US vendors

FALSE!

You need to learn some English because I'm unable to learn Swedish.

I'm quoting my statement for your convenience. now, You must translate my statement in that language which is convenient for you.

for you kind information , the process will be very similar to RAFALE deal because it is a combination of several french companies like Dassault, Thales, Safran etc but we don't need to sign individual contracts.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

You need to learn some English because I'm unable to learn Swedish.

I'm quoting my statement for your convenience. now, You must translate my statement in that language which is convenient for you.

The Rafale MMRCA deal is no more.
The actual Rafale deal is a purchase from Dassault of completed items.
Of course, You do not need to negotiate with the suppliers of Dassault.

For an MII deal, you can negotiate a contract for X airplanes,
but you cannot negotiate a contract with infinite duration for an unknown number of aircraft.
You can ask LM to act like a distributor for all F-16 parts and negotiate a price with them,
but that means they will charge for the pleasure.
You can make the same deal with SAAB in that case.

 

[X_Killer]

The Rafale MMRCA deal is no more.
The actual Rafale deal is a purchase from Dassault of completed items.
Of course, You do not need to negotiate with the suppliers of Dassault.

For an MII deal, you can negotiate a contract for X airplanes,
but you cannot negotiate a contract with infinite duration for an unknown number of aircraft.
You can ask LM to act like a distributor for all F-16 parts and negotiate a price with them,
but that means they will charge for the pleasure.
You can make the same deal with SAAB in that case.

I shared many facts from the actual ground from MoD.

None of the both f-16 and GRIPEN will going to induct in IAF , once if the ongoing test will get success.

More RAFALEs will be there for sure.

You must have to wait and watch....


____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

Rafale Pilot using the Fighter Sphere tablet.

Sphere is an integrated Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) from Dassault Aviaition. EFBs are electronic information management devices that helps flight crews perform flight management tasks more easily and efficiently with less paper. It is a general purpose computing platform intended to reduce, or replace, paper-based reference material often found in the pilot's carry-on flight bag, including the aircraft operating manual, flight-crew operating manual, and navigational charts (including moving map for air and ground operations).

In addition, the EFB can host purpose-built software applications to automate other functions normally conducted by hand, such as performance take-off calculations.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I shared many facts from the actual ground from MoD.

None of the both f-16 and GRIPEN will going to induct in IAF , once if the ongoing test will get success.

More RAFALEs will be there for sure.

You must have to wait and watch....


____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

Rafale Pilot using the Fighter Sphere tablet.

Sphere is an integrated Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) from Dassault Aviaition. EFBs are electronic information management devices that helps flight crews perform flight management tasks more easily and efficiently with less paper. It is a general purpose computing platform intended to reduce, or replace, paper-based reference material often found in the pilot's carry-on flight bag, including the aircraft operating manual, flight-crew operating manual, and navigational charts (including moving map for air and ground operations).

In addition, the EFB can host purpose-built software applications to automate other functions normally conducted by hand, such as performance take-off calculations.

So You said, and you have nothing from the Indian Government to back You up.

Showing a tablet does not make the Rafale S/W architecture App based.

Can You write a program on the tablet that allows the Rafale to fire an AMRAAM
without changing the Rafale Firmware?

 

[X_Killer]

So You said, and you have nothing from the Indian Government to back You up.

I didn't find any of the strict stuff with credible backing from your side.
It's like discussing a topic with a statue or a unrelevant UI.
You need to share something to back your words first.
I already shared each and everything but as you are behaving like dumbhead than its not my headache..

Showing a tablet does not make the Rafale S/W architecture App based.

Can You write a program on the tablet that allows the Rafale to fire an AMRAAM
without changing the Rafale Firmware?

That post wasn't joined with the reply.
It's an individual post but due to this freaking forum it gets attached with that. And other one is you who didn't find the dash breaking line.

You will find the basic functions of that sphere tablet , in that post.

Good luck

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I didn't find any of the strict stuff with credible backing from your side.
It's like discussing a topic with a statue or a unrelevant UI.
You need to share something to back your words first.
I already shared each and everything but as you are behaving like dumbhead than its not my headache..

That post wasn't joined with the reply.
It's an individual post but due to this freaking forum it gets attached with that. And other one is you who didn't find the dash breaking line.

You will find the basic functions of that sphere tablet , in that post.

Good luck

The US has not said NO to MII F-16 nor ToT of F-16 parts.
Not saying yes, does not mean saying no.
You have not been able to show any India Government source claiming this.

You have not been able to show any source indicating India
is planning to buy more Rafale for the Indian Air Force.

There will be a tender for IN, where they rejected Tejas as underpowered
and they seem to favour dual engine solutions.

I have seen quotes here on PDF, that India intends to look for
dual engine fighters after the single engine tender is completed.
That was a comment from an official, and there has been no official request.
I have certainly not bothered to look through PDF for that.

You claim that the Single Engine project is a fake.
You claim that this will never result in a purchase.
We agree that no RFI has been sent out, but India has asked a number
of countries for information, and this is equivalent to an RFI.
You have shown no source, indicating that India has planned to kill the tender.
You have given a number of arguments why neither the F-16 nor Gripen E
will be acceptable to India. That is not the same thing as giving source.
You might be right, You also might be wrong.
There are others here that has stated that India will buy F-16 with
the same enthusiasm you show, when You say that the SE is dead.

You are totally clueless regarding Gripen E radars.
The Swedish and Brazil Gripen E are planned to use GaAs based Raven.
You claim that this is using GaN. No Source.

I have shown source of SAABs GaN based radar, which has been offered to India
as part of a ToT package, if India chooses Gripen E.
It is not 100% ready for production, but at an advanced stage
and can be made ready in the timeframe needed for Indias production.
SAAB has flying AESA technology since 30 years in EriEye.
SAAB has GaN AESA in production for Giraffe since 2014 and EriEye ER
with same will soon be delivered to UAE.
Competition will only have flying GaN AESA radars in 3-4 years.

You have claimed that Gripen is incompatible with Indias weapons.
I have argued that it is much easier to integrate weapons with Gripen E
due to its S/W architecture where a weapon can be added through an App.
This is a much more efficient way of dealing with the problem
than the old fashioned way of making source codes available.
You have replied with an irrelevant photo of a tablet.



While the USA has not said no to ToT for F-16:
LM can only negotiate ToT for what they own. That is self-evident.
There are no incentive for GE, P&W, Grumman to provide ToT on their products.
Conclusion: It is unlikely that Engine/Radar/EW will be part of an F-16 ToT package.

F-16 contains parts from a dozen countries.
Source has been given by providing a list of vendors.
Anyone can check where those companies are located.
You have chosen to ignore facts, and claim that all companies are US based
which means that you claim Safran and BAE are US companies.
You have contradicted yourself by claiming Safran is a French company.

India has the choice.
1. Negotiate with vendors from a dozen countries
2. Make a distribution deal with someone (LM) which will negotiate with
all vendors for a price adder (25%?)

The option to produce all parts in India does not exist.
LM has signed contracts with a number of countries giving them
rights to supply parts to all future F-16 production (including MII F-16)
Source for this has been given.

Note: I may have attributed comments from other Indians to You.
Arguments still stand.

 

[X_Killer]

The US has not said NO to MII F-16 nor ToT of F-16 parts.
Not saying yes, does not mean saying no.
You have not been able to show any India Government source claiming this.

I said , SE TENDER will be cancelled once if LCA TEJAS ABLE TO INTEGRATED THE MORE Indigenousation in respect of critical components like RADAR, EW SUITE ETC . 2018 END IS THE DEADLINE FOR IT.
You can understand that there are many things which can't be share on Government domain.

You have not been able to show any source indicating India
is planning to buy more Rafale for the Indian Air Force.

IAF
Presently deal has an option of 18 jets, hope you know about that.
It'll be cleared at the time when delivery of first batch started.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-01-12/more-rafales-india-still-likely?amp

There will be a tender for IN, where they rejected Tejas as underpowered
and they seem to favour dual engine solutions.

We're discussing about IAF not IN.
you're are trying to derail the topic.
Tender already floated and 5 contenders Responded along with Saab with its paper-plane Sea GRIPEN

I have seen quotes here on PDF, that India intends to look for
dual engine fighters after the single engine tender is completed.
That was a comment from an official, and there has been no official request.
I have certainly not bothered to look through PDF for that.

The delay in decision about SE tender is actually due to the new integration of AESA , EW etc on TEJAS. Everything is not shared in public media.
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2017/07/india-wont-ink-single-engine-fighter.html?m=1

moreover, PDF is not the actual stage to have such informations. You may sign-up IDF for more credible information.

You claim that the Single Engine project is a fake.

Where I claimed that?

You claim that this will never result in a purchase.
We agree that no RFI has been sent out, but India has asked a number
of countries for information, and this is equivalent to an RFI.
You have shown no source, indicating that India has planned to kill the tender.

First India has no official RFI and nothing is equivalent to it in formal.
And regarding the cancellation, it has a condition.

You have given a number of arguments why neither the F-16 nor Gripen E
will be acceptable to India. That is not the same thing as giving source.
You might be right, You also might be wrong.
There are others here that has stated that India will buy F-16 with
the same enthusiasm you show, when You say that the SE is dead.

If Indian DPSU failed to fulfill the condition regarding LCA than you will see a formal RFI under MII.
We have requirement for point Defense jet or Interceptor, not a deep Strike fighter. And LCA fits in that scenario very much.
F-16 has only one majors reason for rant is that it is used by our Enemy forces.
Everybody is free to share his/her views about anything in India (not on PDF) and they are share their views about f-16 or GRIPEN. And than you have to decide , on which info you need to believe.

I have shown source of SAABs GaN based radar, which has been offered to India
as part of a ToT package, if India chooses Gripen E.
It is not 100% ready for production, but at an advanced stage

I also shared a source which states that Saab has requested India to co-develop GaN AESA . It makes some sense.

You have claimed that Gripen is incompatible with Indias weapons.
I have argued that it is much easier to integrate weapons with Gripen E
due to its S/W architecture where a weapon can be added through an App.

I never said that GRIPEN is incompatible with Indian missiles and bombs. Whereas I said IAF don't have any Saab manufactured MISSILE or bomb.

This is a much more efficient way of dealing with the problem
than the old fashioned way of making source codes available.
You have replied with an irrelevant photo of a tablet.

But here you failed to back your claim by an credible source.

which means that you claim Safran
You have contradicted yourself by claiming Safran is a French company.

Are you stupid or mentally dumb.
You are unable to understand English sentences than its not my problem.

India has the choice.
1. Negotiate with vendors from a dozen countries
2. Make a distribution deal with someone (LM) which will negotiate with
all vendors for a price adder (25%?)

Let India to decide about its requirements.
India has its own Indigenous option . $31 million never be equal to $85 million.

The option to produce all parts in India does not exist.
LM has signed contracts with a number of countries giving them
rights to supply parts to all future F-16 production (including MII F-16)
Source for this has been given.

Your previous posts (which also don't have any credible source ) can't be considered as a source.


NOTE: Don't try put your words in my mouth.
You are trying to make many false claims on my behalf. If you have anything which I said ever than please quote that post despite of creating rant over it, raised due to your loose hands on language understanding.

You'll get better understanding about these facts on Indian Defense forums whereas you're trying to find them of this biased Pakistani Defense forum, where anyone can be banned anytime.