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

[Kane0610]

IAF kicks off contest to make single-engine fighters in India Published
Ajai Shukla | Business-standard

A global contest has restarted for supplying India a medium, multi-role fighter, with the Indian Air Force (IAF) inviting top international fighter jet manufacturers to set up a production facility in India. Business Standard has learned that Indian embassies in Washington, Moscow and Stockholm wrote on Friday tofighter jet manufacturers in these countries to confirm whether they would partner an Indian company in building a medium, single-engine fighter, with significant transfer of technology to the Indian entity. The confidential document sent by the embassies is not technically a “Request for Information” (RFI), which is a precursor to a “Request for Proposals” (also known as a tender). However, it serves the same purpose, which is to determine which vendors are interested and what they are willing to offer.

By specifying that the IAF requires a single-engine fighter, the latest letter differs from an earlier tender, issued in 2007, for 126 medium, multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA). The MMRCA tender, which had no such stipulation, saw six vendors fielding four twin-engine and two single-engine fighters. The twin-engine offerings included Dassault’s Rafale, Eurofighter GmbH’s Typhoon, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and RAC MiG’s MiG-35. The single-engine fighters offered were Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN Super Viper and Saab’s Gripen D. The much-hyped MMRCA tender eventually collapsed, with the IAF last month buying a token 36 Rafale fighters.

Now, the IAF has kicked off a more focused contest that will feature only single-engine fighters. Numerous airpower experts have pointed out that the IAF needs single-engine fighters to replace the single-engine MiG-21 and MiG-27 fighters that must be retired in the near future. The Rafale, a medium-heavy, twin-engine fighter, is too expensive for operational tasks that asingle-engine fighter can easily manage. While Boeing, Eurofighter, RAC MiG, Sukhoi and Dassault would technically be able to respond to the latest RFI, none of them can offer a state-of-the-art, medium, single-engine fighter. Therefore, it seems likely that New Delhi would have to choose between Saab’s Gripen E, and Lockheed Martin’s latest F-16 Block 70. As Business Standard reported earlier, both Saab and Lockheed Martin have kicked off high-stakes, high-voltage campaigns to meet the IAF’s needs. Both have already submitted what theIAF chief described on Thursday as “unsolicited bids” for building their fighters in India.

Saab has linked its offer with assistance to the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) development programme, which is being spearheaded by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), a unit of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). Saab has offered to help ADA in quickly developing the Tejas Mark IA, which the IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, said required four improvements — a better combat radar, more lethal weapons, dedicated electronic warfare capability and better maintainability. He said the upgraded Tejas should fly within three-four years. Saab has also offered to help ADA develop the planned next-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA). Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin is pushing an offer, made through the Indo-US Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), to shift its F-16 production line from Fort Worth, Texas to India. A new, more advanced version of the F-16, designated the Block 70, has been offered to entice India. Air Headquarters insiders say there is little chance of India buying the F-16, a significantly advanced version of the Block 50/52 that the Pakistan Air Force operates. Since Washington is aware of this important bias, it remains to be seen whether the US seizes this opportunity to offer India the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a state-of-the-art fifth-generation fighter. The IAF is keeping an open mind. On Thursday, Raha stated: “I’m sure whoever gives the best deal [will win]. All the aircraft are very capable, so it will depend upon who provides the best transfer of technology; and, of course, the price tag. It’s on the table; nothing is decided as yet.”

**********************************************************************************************************************

Although this has been going on for quite some time now. But the latest news (if true) is a bit surprising. Few questions that I have are:

• The article says, we require single engines aircraft to replace Mig-21 and mig-27. Now considering the fact that LCA is intended to replace Mig-21, that leaves us with only mig-27. However, is it a wise decision to have another type of aircraft in our inventory, when we already would have around 6 types in next 4 years (MKI, M2K, Rafale, Mig 29, LCA, Jaguar)?
  
• Why go to Moscow for single engine aircraft? UAC currently has no single engine aircraft.
  
• It seems that it is almost sure that more Rafales would be bought. While they might be bought as replacement for Jaguars and Mig-29s. I feel that given the multi-role capabilities of moder aircrafts such as the Sukhois, Rafales, (to a certain extent even the LCAs), in future do we really have to find a replacement specifically for Mig 27, considering that Mig 27 are used as ground attack aircrafts? Moreover, from 2030 or 2035 by the time jaguars and Mig 29s retire, we would also see AMCAs getting inducted.

I do not wish to get into the numbers game. As I strongly feel that the golden figure of 42 squadrons is something which is not compatible to today's scenario, for the following reasons:

• Modern fighters with multirole capabilities, air-to-air refueling, smart maintenance procedures etc. are much capable than the fighters we had in 1950s and 1960s. Which means, 1 modern fighter is equivalent to 2-3 generation 1-2 fighters
  
• With increasing sophistication, modern fighters are becoming much more expensive day by day. So it may not be economically feasible to have so many squadrons

 

[Gessler]

I do not wish to get into the numbers game. As I strongly feel that the golden figure of 42 squadrons is something which is not compatible to today's scenario, for the following reasons:

• Modern fighters with multirole capabilities, air-to-air refueling, smart maintenance procedures etc. are much capable than the fighters we had in 1950s and 1960s. Which means, 1 modern fighter is equivalent to 2-3 generation 1-2 fighters
  
• With increasing sophistication, modern fighters are becoming much more expensive day by day. So it may not be economically feasible to have so many squadrons

Replacing older fighters with modern ones is not the only job IAF has to do.

They have to build a fleet that is capable AND large enough to tackle our presently perceived adversaries. That is where the squadron-strength requirement comes from.

The force-structure in other countries (mainly Europe) is built on completely different operational requirements. After the collapse of USSR, a lot of European (and even US, in some branches) decided that they can make do with a much smaller fleet of qualitatively superior aircraft. They were structured with maintaining high readiness for limited expeditionary campaigns against ill-equipped Middle-Eastern militaries, not for a pitched battle (where you will be losing aircraft all the time) against a peer opponent.

A defensive war against a massive Soviet assault was a forgotten concept.

Our requirements are totally different. We are contemplating a possible military confrontation with what is soon to be the world's largest economy. And an Islamist loose-cannon nation running around with nukes.

A force-structure where 1 modern aircraft is replacing 2-3 older aircraft will leave us with a fleet so small that a coordinated tactical ballistic/cruise missile attack will wipe out the majority of our air fleet in the opening stages of a war itself. This type of structure is not for us.

We need quality AND quantity....and that's what we're working to get.

 

[Agent_47]

Do we really need a new imported light fighter ?

Lets start by listing what we know confirmed about future force structure, Let us look things at squadron level.

• 14 sq MKI
• 3 sq Mig 29 + 3 sq M2000 + 3 sq jag D 3 (AMCA will replace these)
• 3 sq jag D1 (will be replaced by FGFA from 2027 )
• 6 sq LCA
• 2 sq Rafale

Total - 34 sq

Possible confirmed/accepted additions :

• 4-5 sq Rafale

Total - 38 sq

Number of sq to reach sanctioned strength of 42 is 3-4 sq.

What is the need for new LWF here ? Doubling the production of LCA mk1A from 2021-22 can easily fulfill the requirement.

UPA 2 has repeatedly stated requirement of 300+ LCAs for IAF. But after this DM took charge things suddenly changed and he started making statements about importing new light weight fighter. If LCA mk1A will be ready by 2021 and it fulfills every requirement IAF then What is the need for importing ? What changed?

Following statements are taken in to account by current and previous IAF chiefs.

1. "We are looking forward to building up our combat fleet to 42 squadrons by the end of the 14 th plan, by 2027.
2. Each IAF combat squadron has 21 fighter aircraft; 14 squadrons add to 294 Tejas fighters. The 21 comprise 16 frontline, single-seat fighters, two twin-seat trainers and three reserve aircraft to make up losses in a war.
3. "AMCA, the advanced medium combat aircraft - we still have over 15 years to work on it before the MiG-29 upgraded aircraft retire, before the Mirage 2000 upgraded ones retire, as well as Jaguar upgraded ones retire in another 15 years"
4. "I cannot give you numbers, but definitely we would like to have the MMRCA type of aircraft, at least six squadrons to my mind"
5. “We hope to form 14 squadrons of Su-30MKI fighters by 2018. By this time we will have 272 such planes in service”
6. "One more squadron will be based in Punjab and one will be in Southern Command in Thanjavur. Therefore, we will have 13-14 total squadrons of Sukhoi to add to our strength."

@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec @Koovie @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito @SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer@Tshering22@Dandpatta @danger007@Didact @Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222 @Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular @Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki @CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug@Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx-@Perpendicular @proud_indian @Mustang06 @Param@Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs] @Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss @jbgt90@Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp@Crixus @AugenBlick @Star Wars @GuardianRED @arp2041 @Aero @The Eagle @PaklovesTurkiye @PARIKRAMA

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

Do we really need a new imported light fighter ?

Lets start by listing what we know confirmed about future force structure, Let us look things at squadron level.

• 14 sq MKI
• 3 sq Mig 29 + 3 sq M2000 + 3 sq jag D 3 (AMCA will replace these)
• 3 sq jag D1 (will be replaced by FGFA from 2027 )
• 6 sq LCA
• 2 sq Rafale

Total - 34 sq

Possible confirmed/accepted additions :

• 4-5 sq Rafale

Total - 38 sq

Number of sq to reach sanctioned strength of 42 is 3-4 sq.

What is the need for new LWF here ? Doubling the production of LCA mk1A from 2021-22 can easily fulfill the requirement.

UPA 2 has repeatedly stated requirement of 300+ LCAs for IAF. But after this DM took charge things suddenly changed and he started making statements about importing new light weight fighter. If LCA mk1A will be ready by 2021 and it fulfills every requirement IAF then What is the need for importing ? What changed?

Following statements are taken in to account by current and previous IAF chiefs.

1. "We are looking forward to building up our combat fleet to 42 squadrons by the end of the 14 th plan, by 2027.
2. Each IAF combat squadron has 21 fighter aircraft; 14 squadrons add to 294 Tejas fighters. The 21 comprise 16 frontline, single-seat fighters, two twin-seat trainers and three reserve aircraft to make up losses in a war.
3. "AMCA, the advanced medium combat aircraft - we still have over 15 years to work on it before the MiG-29 upgraded aircraft retire, before the Mirage 2000 upgraded ones retire, as well as Jaguar upgraded ones retire in another 15 years"
4. "I cannot give you numbers, but definitely we would like to have the MMRCA type of aircraft, at least six squadrons to my mind"
5. “We hope to form 14 squadrons of Su-30MKI fighters by 2018. By this time we will have 272 such planes in service”
6. "One more squadron will be based in Punjab and one will be in Southern Command in Thanjavur. Therefore, we will have 13-14 total squadrons of Sukhoi to add to our strength."

@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec @Koovie @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito @SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer@Tshering22@Dandpatta @danger007@Didact @Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222 @Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular @Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki @CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug@Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx-@Perpendicular @proud_indian @Mustang06 @Param@Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs] @Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss @jbgt90@Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp@Crixus @AugenBlick @Star Wars @GuardianRED @arp2041 @Aero @The Eagle @PaklovesTurkiye @PARIKRAMA

Good luck in advancing your air force...Respect from Pakistan

 

[Aero]

IAF kicks off contest to make single-engine fighters

A global contest has restarted for supplying India a medium, multi-role fighter, with the Indian Air Force (IAF) inviting top international fighter jet manufacturers to set up a production facility in India.

Business Standard has learned that Indian embassies in Washington, Moscow and Stockholm wrote on Friday to fighter jet manufacturers in these countries to confirm whether they would partner an Indian company in building a medium, single-engine fighter, with significant transfer of technology to the Indian entity.




The confidential document sent by the embassies is not technically a “Request for Information” (RFI), which is a precursor to a “Request for Proposals” (also known as a tender). However, it serves the same purpose, which is to determine which vendors are interested and what they are willing to offer.

By specifying that the IAF requires a single-engine fighter, the latest letter differs from an earlier tender, issued in 2007, for 126 medium, multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA). The MMRCA tender, which had no such stipulation, saw six vendors fielding four twin-engine and two single-engine fighters. The twin-engine offerings included Dassault’s Rafale, Eurofighter GmbH’s Typhoon, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and RAC MiG’s MiG-35. The single-engine fighters offered were Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN Super Viper and Saab’s Gripen D.

The much-hyped MMRCA tender eventually collapsed, with the IAF last month buying a token 36Rafale fighters. Now, the IAF has kicked off a more focused contest that will feature only single-engine fighters.

Numerous airpower experts have pointed out that the IAF needs single-engine fighters to replace the single-engine MiG-21 and MiG-27 fighters that must be retired in the near future. The Rafale, a medium-heavy, twin-engine fighter, is too expensive for operational tasks that a single-engine fighter can easily manage.

While Boeing, Eurofighter, RAC MiG, Sukhoi and Dassault would technically be able to respond to the latest RFI, none of them can offer a state-of-the-art, medium, single-engine fighter. Therefore, it seems likely that New Delhi would have to choose between Saab’s Gripen E and Lockheed Martin’s latest F-16 Block 70.

As Business Standard reported earlier, both Saab and Lockheed Martin have kicked off high-stakes, high-voltage campaigns to meet the IAF’s needs. Both have already submitted what theIAF chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha described on Thursday as “unsolicited bids” for building their fighters in India.

Saab has linked its offer with assistance to the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) development programme, which is being spearheaded by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), a unit of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

Saab has offered to help ADA in quickly developing the Tejas Mark IA, which the IAF chief said required four improvements — a better combat radar, more lethal weapons, dedicated electronic warfare capability and better maintainability. He said the upgraded Tejas should fly within three-four years.

Saab has also offered to help ADA develop the planned next-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin is pushing an offer, made through the Indo-US Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), to shift its F-16 production line from Fort Worth, Texas to India.

A new, more advanced version of the F-16, designated the Block 70, has been offered to entice India.

Air Headquarters insiders say there is little chance of India buying the F-16, a significantly advanced version of the Block 50/52 that the Pakistan Air Force operates. Since Washington is aware of this important bias, it remains to be seen whether the US seizes this opportunity to offer India the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a state-of-the-art fifth-generation fighter.

The IAF is keeping an open mind. On Thursday, Raha stated: “I’m sure whoever gives the best deal [will win]. All the aircraft are very capable, so it will depend upon who provides the best transfer of technology; and, of course, the price tag. It’s on the table; nothing is decided as yet.”

• Indian Air Force (IAF) invites international players to make medium, multi-role, single-engine fighter jets in India
  
• IAF also wants significant transfer of technology to the Indian entity
  
• India needs single-engine fighters to replace the single-engine MiG-21 and MiG-27
  
• Boeing, Eurofighter, RAC MiG, Sukhoi and Dassault may respond but none of them can offer a state-of-the-art, medium, single-engine fighter
  
• Contest likely between Saab’s Gripen E and Lockheed Martin’s latest F-16 Block 70
• Last month, IAF bought 36 medium-heavy, twin-engine Rafale fighters

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...ke-single-engine-fighters-116100800638_1.html

### Side Note ###
Boeing, Mig ,Sukhoi, Dassault can respond to tender but none of them have any single engine Fighter Jet to sell so comes down to Gripen & F-16
The contest will involve Gripen - E & F-16 In Block 70+ Aircraft but latter might be choice of Aircraft of IAF due to our requirement of Medium category fighter (MMRCA/Rafale was intended for).
US may be unwilling to provide us full Tot even for this aged platform.
If for Make in India we actually do take this fighter & fill up IAF inventory (Why?) as other countries are moving away from this platform.
i don't think logic of more Rafales will come true (as we all were saying in Rafale thread). If these Rafales go to SFC then F-16 for sure is coming to IAF in large numbers .

@Abingdonboy @PARIKRAMA @Nilgiri What's your thought?

 

[Taygibay]

What is the need for new LWF here ? Doubling the production of LCA mk1A from 2021-22 can easily fulfill the requirement.

Couldn't agree more!

Great day to you, mate, Tay.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Do we really need a new imported light fighter ?

Lets start by listing what we know confirmed about future force structure, Let us look things at squadron level.

• 14 sq MKI
• 3 sq Mig 29 + 3 sq M2000 + 3 sq jag D 3 (AMCA will replace these)
• 3 sq jag D1 (will be replaced by FGFA from 2027 )
• 6 sq LCA
• 2 sq Rafale

Total - 34 sq

Possible confirmed/accepted additions :

• 4-5 sq Rafale

Total - 38 sq

Number of sq to reach sanctioned strength of 42 is 3-4 sq.

What is the need for new LWF here ? Doubling the production of LCA mk1A from 2021-22 can easily fulfill the requirement.

UPA 2 has repeatedly stated requirement of 300+ LCAs for IAF. But after this DM took charge things suddenly changed and he started making statements about importing new light weight fighter. If LCA mk1A will be ready by 2021 and it fulfills every requirement IAF then What is the need for importing ? What changed?

Following statements are taken in to account by current and previous IAF chiefs.

1. "We are looking forward to building up our combat fleet to 42 squadrons by the end of the 14 th plan, by 2027.
2. Each IAF combat squadron has 21 fighter aircraft; 14 squadrons add to 294 Tejas fighters. The 21 comprise 16 frontline, single-seat fighters, two twin-seat trainers and three reserve aircraft to make up losses in a war.
3. "AMCA, the advanced medium combat aircraft - we still have over 15 years to work on it before the MiG-29 upgraded aircraft retire, before the Mirage 2000 upgraded ones retire, as well as Jaguar upgraded ones retire in another 15 years"
4. "I cannot give you numbers, but definitely we would like to have the MMRCA type of aircraft, at least six squadrons to my mind"
5. “We hope to form 14 squadrons of Su-30MKI fighters by 2018. By this time we will have 272 such planes in service”
6. "One more squadron will be based in Punjab and one will be in Southern Command in Thanjavur. Therefore, we will have 13-14 total squadrons of Sukhoi to add to our strength."

@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec @Koovie @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito @SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer@Tshering22@Dandpatta @danger007@Didact @Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222 @Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular @Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki @CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug@Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx-@Perpendicular @proud_indian @Mustang06 @Param@Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs] @Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss @jbgt90@Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp@Crixus @AugenBlick @Star Wars @GuardianRED @arp2041 @Aero @The Eagle @PaklovesTurkiye @PARIKRAMA

This is why: it is a brilliant lab prototype, but can't be produced.


Tejas- joke or hope?

Joke. Thirty years of development to produce an aircraft with short range, poor payload, and severe quality control issues throughout the manufacturing process leading to badly fitting structural components, slow delivery rates and high costs due to remanufacturing and alterations requirements. India would have done much better to have just bought a licence to manufacture Gripen C/D.


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/fighter-...mines-the-current-state.441070/#ixzz4MWQuSCS7

 

[Echo_419]

This is why: it is a brilliant lab prototype, but can't be produced.


Tejas- joke or hope?

Joke. Thirty years of development to produce an aircraft with short range, poor payload, and severe quality control issues throughout the manufacturing process leading to badly fitting structural components, slow delivery rates and high costs due to remanufacturing and alterations requirements. India would have done much better to have just bought a licence to manufacture Gripen C/D.


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/fighter-news-round-up-royal-united-services-institute’s-justin-bronk-examines-the-current-state.441070/#ixzz4MWQuSCS7

Hand over the entire project to private sector

 

[Aero]

Do we really need a new imported light fighter ?

Lets start by listing what we know confirmed about future force structure, Let us look things at squadron level.

• 14 sq MKI
• 3 sq Mig 29 + 3 sq M2000 + 3 sq jag D 3 (AMCA will replace these)
• 3 sq jag D1 (will be replaced by FGFA from 2027 )
• 6 sq LCA
• 2 sq Rafale

Total - 34 sq

Possible confirmed/accepted additions :

• 4-5 sq Rafale

Total - 38 sq

Number of sq to reach sanctioned strength of 42 is 3-4 sq.

What is the need for new LWF here ? Doubling the production of LCA mk1A from 2021-22 can easily fulfill the requirement.

UPA 2 has repeatedly stated requirement of 300+ LCAs for IAF. But after this DM took charge things suddenly changed and he started making statements about importing new light weight fighter. If LCA mk1A will be ready by 2021 and it fulfills every requirement IAF then What is the need for importing ? What changed?

Following statements are taken in to account by current and previous IAF chiefs.

1. "We are looking forward to building up our combat fleet to 42 squadrons by the end of the 14 th plan, by 2027.
2. Each IAF combat squadron has 21 fighter aircraft; 14 squadrons add to 294 Tejas fighters. The 21 comprise 16 frontline, single-seat fighters, two twin-seat trainers and three reserve aircraft to make up losses in a war.
3. "AMCA, the advanced medium combat aircraft - we still have over 15 years to work on it before the MiG-29 upgraded aircraft retire, before the Mirage 2000 upgraded ones retire, as well as Jaguar upgraded ones retire in another 15 years"
4. "I cannot give you numbers, but definitely we would like to have the MMRCA type of aircraft, at least six squadrons to my mind"
5. “We hope to form 14 squadrons of Su-30MKI fighters by 2018. By this time we will have 272 such planes in service”
6. "One more squadron will be based in Punjab and one will be in Southern Command in Thanjavur. Therefore, we will have 13-14 total squadrons of Sukhoi to add to our strength."

@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec @Koovie @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito @SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer@Tshering22@Dandpatta @danger007@Didact @Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222 @Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular @Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki @CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug@Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx-@Perpendicular @proud_indian @Mustang06 @Param@Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs] @Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss @jbgt90@Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp@Crixus @AugenBlick @Star Wars @GuardianRED @arp2041 @Aero @The Eagle @PaklovesTurkiye @PARIKRAMA

Actually In-house development is lagging behind our requirements , Bad cooperation between IAF and Local Defence industry is to blame (beside usual suspects) but then again Import is also not a solution to our problem.

This is why: it is a brilliant lab prototype, but can't be produced.


Tejas- joke or hope?

Joke. Thirty years of development to produce an aircraft with short range, poor payload, and severe quality control issues throughout the manufacturing process leading to badly fitting structural components, slow delivery rates and high costs due to remanufacturing and alterations requirements. India would have done much better to have just bought a licence to manufacture Gripen C/D.


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/fighter-news-round-up-royal-united-services-institute’s-justin-bronk-examines-the-current-state.441070/#ixzz4MWQuSCS7

Import can't be a substitute for indigenous fighter, if we bought gripen licence then what again we have to start developing a fighter of ours sometimes (we can't always keep importing) & next gen fighters will be more difficult than these fourth gen.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hand over the entire project to private sector

If there is a slim hope of making this plane in quantities, one needs to ask an uninterested entity - not SAAB, not Boeing, perhaps Dassault, not McDonnell Douglas (the day is not far off when we need to chuck out the failed MiG 29 and get something more carrier-friendly, and that leaves only the Super Bug and the naval Rafale).

My choice would be BAE Systems; scope of work and steps - productionise the plane, standardise the composite sections and make them easy to produce in bulk, act as supervisors of integrators, appoint at least two integrators in India, strictly keep out HAL, produce 24 to 36 a year. Or just use the know-how for making the next plane, and buy Gripen in numbers.

There are losses and gains on either decision.

Actually In-house development is lagging behind our requirements , Bad cooperation between IAF and Local Defence industry is to blame but then again Import is also not a solution to our problem.


Import can't be a substitute for indigenous fighter, if we bought gripen licence then what again we have to start developing a fighter of ours sometimes (we can't always keep importing) & next gen fighters will be more difficult than these fourth gen.

So what do you propose - we gather around the Tejas periodically and mourn the fact that it can't be made? Do you understand that not just for speedy production, but for maintenance as well, standardisation is a must? Do you realise the staggering impact of dealing with a 100+ fighter fleet where each aircraft might be idiosyncratically individual?

We should be doing what the Pakistanis did successfully - make a Model T in bulk. That's all they needed; that's all that we need, below the penumbra of the heavy fighters.

 

[Aero]

@Joe Shearer

So what do you propose - we gather around the Tejas periodically and mourn the fact that it can't be made?

Not exactly, but like during Rafale deal we had a good chance.
I think for once we should let a foreign company like Dassault/Saab to let develop fighter for ,we pay & get to keep all technical data, & then make in large numbers at our local production facilities.
All know how obtained must be delivered to all local whether public/private companies who can help in next aircraft.
In this we we can satisfy immediate requirement as well as have a good lead time to develop next gen fighter jet.

Do you understand that not just for speedy production, but for maintenance as well, standardisation is a must?

Yes, i do agree. Standardisation will also help in lowering production costs & as well as maintenance costs.

Do you realise the staggering impact of dealing with a 100+ fighter fleet where each aircraft might be idiosyncratically individual?

How can you say that? (Elaborate a bit please)

We should be doing what the Pakistanis did successfully - make a Model T in bulk. That's all they needed; that's all that we need, below the penumbra of the heavy fighters.

Tejas was supposed to be our Model T but i think we need a new one.
Even i don't understand why can't we have a fighter designed for us abroad so we can manufacture at home in all sufficient quantity needed.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

IAF kicks off contest to make single-engine fighters in India Published
Ajai Shukla | Business-standard

A global contest has restarted for supplying India a medium, multi-role fighter, with the Indian Air Force (IAF) inviting top international fighter jet manufacturers to set up a production facility in India. Business Standard has learned that Indian embassies in Washington, Moscow and Stockholm wrote on Friday tofighter jet manufacturers in these countries to confirm whether they would partner an Indian company in building a medium, single-engine fighter, with significant transfer of technology to the Indian entity. The confidential document sent by the embassies is not technically a “Request for Information” (RFI), which is a precursor to a “Request for Proposals” (also known as a tender). However, it serves the same purpose, which is to determine which vendors are interested and what they are willing to offer.

By specifying that the IAF requires a single-engine fighter, the latest letter differs from an earlier tender, issued in 2007, for 126 medium, multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA). The MMRCA tender, which had no such stipulation, saw six vendors fielding four twin-engine and two single-engine fighters. The twin-engine offerings included Dassault’s Rafale, Eurofighter GmbH’s Typhoon, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and RAC MiG’s MiG-35. The single-engine fighters offered were Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN Super Viper and Saab’s Gripen D. The much-hyped MMRCA tender eventually collapsed, with the IAF last month buying a token 36 Rafale fighters.

Now, the IAF has kicked off a more focused contest that will feature only single-engine fighters. Numerous airpower experts have pointed out that the IAF needs single-engine fighters to replace the single-engine MiG-21 and MiG-27 fighters that must be retired in the near future. The Rafale, a medium-heavy, twin-engine fighter, is too expensive for operational tasks that asingle-engine fighter can easily manage. While Boeing, Eurofighter, RAC MiG, Sukhoi and Dassault would technically be able to respond to the latest RFI, none of them can offer a state-of-the-art, medium, single-engine fighter. Therefore, it seems likely that New Delhi would have to choose between Saab’s Gripen E, and Lockheed Martin’s latest F-16 Block 70. As Business Standard reported earlier, both Saab and Lockheed Martin have kicked off high-stakes, high-voltage campaigns to meet the IAF’s needs. Both have already submitted what theIAF chief described on Thursday as “unsolicited bids” for building their fighters in India.

Saab has linked its offer with assistance to the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) development programme, which is being spearheaded by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), a unit of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). Saab has offered to help ADA in quickly developing the Tejas Mark IA, which the IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, said required four improvements — a better combat radar, more lethal weapons, dedicated electronic warfare capability and better maintainability. He said the upgraded Tejas should fly within three-four years. Saab has also offered to help ADA develop the planned next-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA). Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin is pushing an offer, made through the Indo-US Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), to shift its F-16 production line from Fort Worth, Texas to India. A new, more advanced version of the F-16, designated the Block 70, has been offered to entice India. Air Headquarters insiders say there is little chance of India buying the F-16, a significantly advanced version of the Block 50/52 that the Pakistan Air Force operates. Since Washington is aware of this important bias, it remains to be seen whether the US seizes this opportunity to offer India the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a state-of-the-art fifth-generation fighter. The IAF is keeping an open mind. On Thursday, Raha stated: “I’m sure whoever gives the best deal [will win]. All the aircraft are very capable, so it will depend upon who provides the best transfer of technology; and, of course, the price tag. It’s on the table; nothing is decided as yet.”

**********************************************************************************************************************

Although this has been going on for quite some time now. But the latest news (if true) is a bit surprising. Few questions that I have are:

• The article says, we require single engines aircraft to replace Mig-21 and mig-27. Now considering the fact that LCA is intended to replace Mig-21, that leaves us with only mig-27. However, is it a wise decision to have another type of aircraft in our inventory, when we already would have around 6 types in next 4 years (MKI, M2K, Rafale, Mig 29, LCA, Jaguar)?
  
• Why go to Moscow for single engine aircraft? UAC currently has no single engine aircraft.
  
• It seems that it is almost sure that more Rafales would be bought. While they might be bought as replacement for Jaguars and Mig-29s. I feel that given the multi-role capabilities of moder aircrafts such as the Sukhois, Rafales, (to a certain extent even the LCAs), in future do we really have to find a replacement specifically for Mig 27, considering that Mig 27 are used as ground attack aircrafts? Moreover, from 2030 or 2035 by the time jaguars and Mig 29s retire, we would also see AMCAs getting inducted.

I do not wish to get into the numbers game. As I strongly feel that the golden figure of 42 squadrons is something which is not compatible to today's scenario, for the following reasons:

• Modern fighters with multirole capabilities, air-to-air refueling, smart maintenance procedures etc. are much capable than the fighters we had in 1950s and 1960s. Which means, 1 modern fighter is equivalent to 2-3 generation 1-2 fighters
  
• With increasing sophistication, modern fighters are becoming much more expensive day by day. So it may not be economically feasible to have so many squadrons

This is partially an incorrect news now being spun in a big way as part of the marketing campaign.. Recall post Fadnavis visit to Sweden and then a Maharashtra Event in Feb2016. It was covered in PDF by me as well.. Here were the details

Posted in Feb 21, 2016

https://defence.pk/threads/dassault-...ussions-thread-2.230070/page-161#post-8173308

I can assure you shukla is going bonkers with its utter useless and crap shit point of journalism. The LWF fighter choice is now plain as morning daylight sun under clear skies. LCA MK1A itself is now a delayed project which i had said before in the other forum. SO clearly a LWF need comes out. The choices are

1. LSA
2. Gripen E/F not Gripen D
3. F16 Block 70/72 which may be in fact replaced by a new bid of Block 80+ with newer onboard computers or later offered as MLU
4. LCA Mk2 inhouse

The bid which will win will be the one which either gives us engine tech as part of the package or uses the Safran Kaveri Engine in the fleet with recertification.
The winning LWF also needs to use the weapon systems available from teh common pool and Make In India Weapon Manufacturings from the likes of Rafael and later MBDA. Again the package of Derby, DerbyER, Python 5, Brimstone, Meteor, Spice and other such combinations gives the more comfort zone to Gripen E over F16. But dark horse is the LSA. I can say IAF is not against this idea but their are people against LSA internally in other departments. @vstol jockey knows them and he already identified the major roadblocks who either wants their palms greased and some who genuinely are skeptical due to plan being on paper and nothing in prototype stage to show what LSA is all about.

So basically if you see its a 7 months old news rehashed now..

@Stephen Cohen
The jags whole fleet cant be re engined.. You will finally get some 60-65 Jags only under darin III. OSme of the planes are way too old for replacements as well.. The Mig27s cant be replaced by LWF as well. So the need of Rafale increases much more from such replacement POV as well..

For Mig21 replacement is LCA and its variants. Now since numbers are an issue from HAL productivity part and secondly the inability to deliver the goods inspite of supporting ecosystem being in position to support means there is a natural need being created by HAL itself.

Pls read here what Prasun K Sengupta said

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AVI D: What was issued on October 8, 2016 was a RESTRICTED RFI for a single-engined light MRCA. That same RFI was also issued to ADA & ADA will offer the Tejas Mk.2. If a foreign design is selected, that will be the end of the Tejas MRCA's R & D programme. The Tejas Mk.1A or whatever else be its designation, as long as it makes use of the existing Tejas Mk.1 airframe design, it will be a sub-optimal integrated weapons platform no matter how beautifully it flies & enthrals all the fanboys. That the 'techies' at ADA have completely failed to design a functional & effective weapons platform is no longer in doubt & if a 4.5-generation can't amanate from ADA, then what's the guarantee that a 5th-generation AMCA will be a complete success? No wonder no R & D funding has been released so far for the AMCA. So now, in order to cover-up the DRDO's mother-of-all national embarrassment, i.e. the Tejas LCA R & D project, all kinds of idiotic & therefore indefensible excuses are being offered, such as Saab helping ADA with the Tejas Mk.2 & AMCA, when it is evident that the shareholders of Saab will never agree to any proposal for creating any competitor (like the Tejas Mk.2) to the Gripen NG. And why should a light MRCA like Tejas Mk.1 be made to drop 1,000lb bombs (if Cmde Balagi's anmswers to Kindergarten-level questions posed by Shekhar Gupta are to be believed)?



I am not endorsing his opinion in any manner but read the points. Its clear as day light the AMCA again will get delayed as i have said earlier due to eco system being not matured enough. So this also leads to Rafale MII number needs further.

Saab is actively talking with Adani and also trying hard to rope Mahindra (who are already doing work for Gripen E project) as i have said earlier. Its way too early for them to be writing all this sponsored articles.


++

PS: Pls do ask Saab trip to Shukla and Aroor.. and many others,, then ask is this yellow journalism or a reality.. if not just read this line
Business Standard has learned that Indian embassies in Washington, Moscow and Stockholm
and pray do enlighten me which jet from Russia fits the LWF Single engine? How much ever Shukla and likes try for Gripen or F16, it wont cut ice till strategic partner for each is revealed.. Or they give a deal at par or better than the likes of Dassault.. So sit back and enjoy.. This drama will continue much longer..

 

[Aero]

So you implying more Rafales can come ? (I read some news that No more Rafales DM said)

Gripen E will be viable if we can squeeze all Tot of design.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer


Not exactly, but like during Rafale deal we had a good chance.
I think for once we should let a foreign company like Dassault/Saab to let develop fighter for ,we pay & get to keep all technical data, & then make in large numbers at our local production facilities.
All know how obtained must be delivered to all local whether public/private companies who can help in next aircraft.
In this we we can satisfy immediate requirement as well as have a good lead time to develop next gen fighter jet.

Did you know that because we were a one-stop shop for the IAF, I had the dubious pleasure of translating all - ALL - their aircraft manuals into SGML? That included the MiG 21.

Now - are you ready for this?

The Russians didn't give the IAF any English versions of the critical manuals. They had to be translated from the Russian, validated by test pilots familiar with the plane, and only THEN translated.

Imagine a TOT scenario (the obvious real life examples can't be cited, so this one above was just a sampler); how do you know what you have been given until you start production? And what do you do if it turns out that you can't do the full production job, because of some seemingly minor factor? By withholding money until the first successful run?

You've just seen what happened with the Rafale, and the deals earlier were all deals where the western powers were backing the Pakistanis to the hilt - the Sabre, the Starfighter, for starters - and were starving us of even the basic technology? Do you know that according to the Dept. of Commerce restrictions, we couldn't even import a Mac server without a special clearance? When we were struggling with one (or was it two) specialist design and drawing machines, the Singaporean equivalent had wall-to-wall O2s?

You think they'll really level with us? The amount of technology involved is vast. Unless the vendor wants to, there is no way that the purchaser can be sure that he has got everything he paid for.

Get real, mister.

Yes, i do agree. Standardisation will also help in lowering production costs & as well as maintenance costs.

It's worse than that. There are some parts and composite panels on the existing pre-production models where the dimensions differ from one model to the next; there are, in short, unique dimensions for each existing aircraft.

How can you say that? (Elaborate a bit please)

Right.

You are running the support team for a squadron of 18 aircraft in a remote location. Which dimensions of parts will you use, considering that there might be one set of dimensions for each aircraft produced? Which 18 will you ask for, to keep in stock? I'm sorry, but clearly I am not getting through.

Tejas was supposed to be our Model T but i think we need a new one.
Even i don't understand why can't we have a fighter designed for us abroad so we can manufacture at home in all sufficient quantity needed.

First, you are right, we need a Model T. It was the MiG 21, and we need replacements. So now we've agreed on everything that we can agree on.

Second, after McDonnell Douglas threw out our people from their design centres, without their own notes, which were withheld, the entire flight control system was re-developed. It is one of the finest going today; a particular general-officer level person thought, after flying the Tejas, that the FCS might even have improved the functioning of his own favourite aircraft, the F 16. You can't do that with a design generated abroad. You can't do any foreign republication of the things that the LCA project generated.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

And according to me , if by 2022 we have a Rafale line , and Tejas coming as atleast 1.5 Squadrons a year , we won't need a third fighter which will not come before 2025-26.

And in present situation , untill we are granted a full ToT on GE414, I don't see any reason why our meager resources will be pointed towards an unnecessary investment.

The concept of pushing only Rafale and Tejas was what we all had in mind.It makes perfect sense and was rather concrete, until this government and the present MoD himself started to make noise. This is why I said not to just brush this aside, doesnt matter what you or I think, fact is their contemplating something else.