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

[randomradio]

What is even more interesting is that when real negotiation ensued, the price for the Rafale deal went up from $10B to $26B.

There was no $10B. It was just an estimate the govt made before the tender was released.

https://www.news18.com/news/politic...fale-jets-says-its-good-for-india-981723.html
Parrikar said that Rafale is a costly fighter plane and for 126 planes the total deal will be of Rs 90,000 crore.

Based on today's exchange rate, it's $12.8B. Or 714Cr/$101M per jet.

The price of Rafale is more like $130M per aircraft.

The govt says something else.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...670-cr-govt/story-KiI85qHBzxlm4N59rBWQMP.html
Each basic version of the Rafale jet would cost Rs 670 crore, the government informed the Rajya Sabha on Monday

Based on today's exchange rate, it's $95M. So the GTG was actually cheaper than MMRCA.

With a price of $85,5 the 36 aircrafts purchased by India would cost ~3B.
Not three times as much.

We paid 3.42B euros for the 36 jets.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/rafale-fighter-jets-deal-cleared-modi-france-342442-2016-09-21
Sources said the "vanila price" (just the 36 aircraft) is about 3.42 billion Euros. The armaments cost about 710 million Euros while Indian specific changes, including integration of Israeli helmet mounted displays, will cost 1700 million Euros.

The Rafale is simply 50% more expensive to buy and quite a lot more expensive to run.

In France, the cost of operating the M-2000 per hour is 8000 euros and Rafale is 10,000 euros. So it's not any more expensive. In India, the M-2000 costs $4000 per hour. The difference is quite negligible compared to the capability upgrade.

Someone has to prove that one Rafale, which almost always requires french weapons,

The Indian Rafales are being equipped with Israeli and Indian weapons also.

is better than two or more Gripen E.

Nobody cares about such things. If the engine fails, the Rafale can still fly on another engine while the Gripen will crash, which is particularly important for us over the Himalayas and Tibet where surviving pilots can die in just a few hours. So there are more important factors at play here.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

There was no $10B. It was just an estimate the govt made before the tender was released.

https://www.news18.com/news/politic...fale-jets-says-its-good-for-india-981723.html
Parrikar said that Rafale is a costly fighter plane and for 126 planes the total deal will be of Rs 90,000 crore.

Based on today's exchange rate, it's $12.8B. Or 714Cr/$101M per jet.



The govt says something else.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...670-cr-govt/story-KiI85qHBzxlm4N59rBWQMP.html
Each basic version of the Rafale jet would cost Rs 670 crore, the government informed the Rajya Sabha on Monday

Based on today's exchange rate, it's $95M. So the GTG was actually cheaper than MMRCA.



We paid 3.42B euros for the 36 jets.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/rafale-fighter-jets-deal-cleared-modi-france-342442-2016-09-21
Sources said the "vanila price" (just the 36 aircraft) is about 3.42 billion Euros. The armaments cost about 710 million Euros while Indian specific changes, including integration of Israeli helmet mounted displays, will cost 1700 million Euros.



In France, the cost of operating the M-2000 per hour is 8000 euros and Rafale is 10,000 euros. So it's not any more expensive. In India, the M-2000 costs $4000 per hour. The difference is quite negligible compared to the capability upgrade.



The Indian Rafales are being equipped with Israeli and Indian weapons also.



Nobody cares about such things. If the engine fails, the Rafale can still fly on another engine while the Gripen will crash, which is particularly important for us over the Himalayas and Tibet where surviving pilots can die in just a few hours. So there are more important factors at play here.

So far, in more than 20 years, not a single Gripen of the 250 or so delivered has crashed with engine failure...

 

[polanski]

Don’t sell the skin before You shoot the bear...
The Phillippine government has commented and said that Gripen is in a good position, but that is all.
Bulgaria was offered used F-16s from Portugal, Tranche 1 Eurofighters from Italy and Gripen C/D
from Sweden. Initially Bulgaria announced Gripen, but backtracked.
Now they are asking for new aircrafts from all three.
Portugal certainly cannot sell new F-16s so it will be new Tranche 3 Eurofighters vs new Gripen C/Ds.


F-16 Block 70 and SH are a little more expensive than the Gripen E.
All three are 30-40% cheaper than Rafale.
Eurofighter beeing the most expensive.

Philippines concludes fighter studies, points to possible Gripen acquisition
Jon Grevatt, Bangkok - Jane's Defence Weekly
17 October 2018
The Philippine Department of National Defense (DND) has concluded a study in support of its programme to procure a new fighter jet and confirmed that Saab’s Gripen aircraft is in pole position to win the contract.

Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said in comments published by the Philippine News Agency (PNA) on 15 October that the DND “is most likely to buy” the Gripen following a “thorough study and research” to support the Philippine Air Force’s (PAF’s) Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) project.

Lorenzana said the Gripen was the least expensive platform to procure and maintain. He reportedly added that the DND had been offered Lockheed Martin F-16 fighter aircraft from the US government but that the proposal was “too expensive”.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Philippines concludes fighter studies, points to possible Gripen acquisition
Jon Grevatt, Bangkok - Jane's Defence Weekly
17 October 2018
The Philippine Department of National Defense (DND) has concluded a study in support of its programme to procure a new fighter jet and confirmed that Saab’s Gripen aircraft is in pole position to win the contract.

Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said in comments published by the Philippine News Agency (PNA) on 15 October that the DND “is most likely to buy” the Gripen following a “thorough study and research” to support the Philippine Air Force’s (PAF’s) Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) project.

Lorenzana said the Gripen was the least expensive platform to procure and maintain. He reportedly added that the DND had been offered Lockheed Martin F-16 fighter aircraft from the US government but that the proposal was “too expensive”.

Before a contract is signed, nothing is for certain in fighter sales business.

 

[randomradio]

So far, in more than 20 years, not a single Gripen of the 250 or so delivered has crashed with engine failure...

That depends on how much you fly, how you fly, where you fly etc.

 

[BON PLAN]

Taiwan plans on retiring their Mirage 2000 fleet and intends to sell them off.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/taiwan-gives-f-35-turns-f-16v-option-37332

10 years that story is on the air....

What is even more interesting is that when real negotiation ensued, the price for the Rafale deal went up from $10B to $26B.

The price of Rafale is more like $130M per aircraft.
With a price of $85,5 the 36 aircrafts purchased by India would cost ~3B.
Not three times as much.

The Rafale is simply 50% more expensive to buy and quite a lot more expensive to run.
Someone has to prove that one Rafale, which almost always requires french weapons,
is better than two or more Gripen E.

You're wrong.

The Rafale "dry" was selled to India +/- 95 millions each. It's official.

The 10$ Billions was an estimate by the Indian governement !
The 26$ Billions was the HAL bill, including 2.6 more man hour for each bird.
Reality is between the 2 figures.

That depends on how much you fly, how you fly, where you fly etc.

Indeed.
Gripen C is more a point defense fighter than anything else. It's easier in this case to avoid a crackdown.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

That depends on how much you fly, how you fly, where you fly etc.

Gripen has flown in Arctic Climate, over the deserts of Northern Africa, also over Southern Africa.
and the Humid South East Asia. It can fly everywhere.
The engines have chewed birds multiple times without crashes.

In May 2011 it had completed 160,000 flight hours without any crash due to engines
In January 2017, it had completed 250,000 flight hours.
It should by now have flown about 275,000 flight hours without an engine related accident.

 

[BON PLAN]

Gripen has flown in Arctic Climate, over the deserts of Northern Africa, also over Southern Africa.
and the Humid South East Asia. It can fly everywhere.
The engines have chewed birds multiple times without crashes.

In May 2011 it had completed 160,000 flight hours without any crash due to engines
In January 2017, it had completed 250,000 flight hours.
It should by now have flown about 275,000 flight hours without an engine related accident.

hep hep hep... This august, a swedish Gripen crashed after a bird strike (engine stopped)

And there was some other crash :
1993 : a serial plane lost for FBW failure.
1999 : during a dog fight, a plane lost for a FBW "disorientation" (same than the one occured to a Rafale : anemometric probes totally mad by the blast of another engine plane)
2005 : A plane lost because unable to leave a stall situation (FBW)
2015 : 2 lost, without clear explanation (at my level).
2017 : one lost during an aero show (pilot disorientation? FBW Pb? other?)
August 2018 : see below.

And if I remember well 2 others, but it was clearly pilot errors.
And a FBW failure on a prototyp.

Engine seem reliable. FBW.... not so.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

hep hep hep... This august, a swedish Gripen crashed after a bird strike (engine stopped)

And there was some other crash :
1993 : a serial plane lost for FBW failure.
1999 : during a dog fight, a plane lost for a FBW "disorientation" (same than the one occured to a Rafale : anemometric probes totally mad by the blast of another engine plane)
2005 : A plane lost because unable to leave a stall situation (FBW)
2015 : 2 lost, without clear explanation (at my level).
2017 : one lost during an aero show (pilot disorientation? FBW Pb? other?)
August 2018 : see below.

And if I remember well 2 others, but it was clearly pilot errors.
And a FBW failure on a prototyp.

Engine seem reliable. FBW.... not so.

The plane that crashed 2018 did so because hit hit a flock of cormorants, and the control surfaces stopped working. It was not engine related according the limited reports available.

The 2017 crash was caused by spatial disorientation, nothing wrong with the aircraft.
The 2005 crash was caused by an inexperienced pilot which did not know how to exit an inverted superstall.
The 1993 crash was the first production aircraft, and it had a known problem with the software for flight control, but it would only occur if the pilot made a lot of stick movement. They had not told the pilot. The pilot made a U-turn during an air exhibition and flew back into his own turbulence, and he was ”whipping cream” with the stick, which resulted in the low level control loop not getting enough CPU cycles to maintain stable flight. They modified the priorities in the operating system, and that problem has not occured since then.
I actually watched that plane go down in person. It crashed just a fe hundred meters from my appartment in central Stockholm.

Noone claimed that the Gripen has not crashed, just that there is no engine related crash.

 

[BON PLAN]

The plane that crashed 2018 did so because hit hit a flock of cormorants, and the control surfaces stopped working. It was not engine related according the limited reports available.

The 2017 crash was caused by spatial disorientation, nothing wrong with the aircraft.
The 2005 crash was caused by an inexperienced pilot which did not know how to exit an inverted superstall.
The 1993 crash was the first production aircraft, and it had a known problem with the software for flight control, but it would only occur if the pilot made a lot of stick movement. They had not told the pilot. The pilot made a U-turn during an air exhibition and flew back into his own turbulence, and he was ”whipping cream” with the stick, which resulted in the low level control loop not getting enough CPU cycles to maintain stable flight. They modified the priorities in the operating system, and that problem has not occured since then.
I actually watched that plane go down in person. It crashed just a fe hundred meters from my appartment in central Stockholm.

Noone claimed that the Gripen has not crashed, just that there is no engine related crash.

1993 : it was the second production aircraft.
2005 : Isn't the FBW job not to enter in a uncontrolled maneuver? inexperenced pilot? a lieutnant colonel.... ?
2018 : I find no source about a breakdown of control surface. The more probable reason is bird ingestion (and what a big bird).

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

1993 : it was the second production aircraft.
2005 : Isn't the FBW job not to enter in a uncontrolled maneuver? inexperenced pilot? a lieutnant colonel.... ?
2018 : I find no source about a breakdown of control surface. The more probable reason is bird ingestion (and what a big bird).

1993: It was the first in the Swedish Air Force.
2005: The problem is that the sensors get the wrong input in this situation, so the FBW is helpless.
2018: The plane hit a bunch of cormorants. The Swedish newspapers including some with technical focus, as well as TV news mentioned that the aircraft did not respond to the stick.
The final report is not released.
The engines are tested shooting frozen chickens into the front, and they will still survive.

 

[BON PLAN]

1993: It was the first in the Swedish Air Force.
2005: The problem is that the sensors get the wrong input in this situation, so the FBW is helpless.
2018: The plane hit a bunch of cormorants. The Swedish newspapers including some with technical focus, as well as TV news mentioned that the aircraft did not respond to the stick.
The final report is not released.
The engines are tested shooting frozen chickens into the front, and they will still survive.

1993 : 2nd plane delivered... (serial number 39-102).

At the end I agree : Engine seem reliable. The Gripen FBW less.

 

[randomradio]

View attachment 524497
1993 : 2nd plane delivered... (serial number 39-102).

At the end I agree : Engine seem reliable. The Gripen FBW less.

Bird strikes are a problem in tropical regions like India, where we actually have birds, not the Arctic Circle where the Gripen lives.

 

[BON PLAN]

Bird strikes are a problem in tropical regions like India, where we actually have birds, not the Arctic Circle where the Gripen lives.

The cormorants on the Gripen flight was not invented.
And Cormorant is a big bird.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

View attachment 524497
1993 : 2nd plane delivered... (serial number 39-102).

At the end I agree : Engine seem reliable. The Gripen FBW less.

The FBW problem was fixed after the second accident. It has not been a problem since then.
The most interesting crash was when a pilot made a tight turn right before landing.
The 3G suit inflated, and combination of this and the unusually muscular thighs of the pilot
triggered the ejection seat.

View attachment 524497
1993 : 2nd plane delivered... (serial number 39-102).

At the end I agree : Engine seem reliable. The Gripen FBW less.

The prototypes are called 39-1 .. 39-9.
39-9 is the second Gripen E.
Production aircrafts are called 39-XXX. X = {0..9}
I do not know if there was a 39-101.