MMRCA may be scrapped by year end

[RazorMC]

it might be new to you,but we are working of FGFA,which will be far more steathier than Rafale,just saying..not to mention our own AMCA.and if India wanted that,they could easily go for Typhoon(which is more stealthier than Rafale) or god forbids,F-35..
...
an aircraft doesn't crash for assembly line fault,but for shoddy parts..and Hal assembled various fighter jets for decades and produced own.so,i think they know how to perform assembling a jet.

How many FGFAs have been inducted so far ?? And can India already include those stealth-related features in it's own aircraft any time soon?
And since when is Typhoon stealthier than Rafale?

 

[Nishan_101]

So it means that more Mirage-2000 even from taiwan and France... Along with EF-2000s and Jas-39 Grippen is on the way....

 

[GR!FF!N]

Why are you still struggling to complete LCA then , why import the engine when you had the technology already ? You had stealth technology and AESA radar one , cmon !

China is still struggling with their engines and importing russian engines..come on..we joined FGFA project like,5-6 years ago.Pak-fa is flying over 3 years now..so,what does it meant??do we have the tech or not??

and DRDO is selecting AESA for Tejas..google it and you'll know..

 

[Secur]

Russians did give it to the Indians though. The Su 30MKI engine is now completely manufactured in India.

Are you seriously asking this question? Then you have no clue how International business works. If tomorrow Indian govt wants to buy some turbines from GE and GE gets the fabrication work done by its subcontractor in India, who do you think will own the responsibility of the delivery.. The subcontractor or GE ??
The same applies here. HAL is going to be a subcontractor for Dassault in this case.. Hence from the customer (GOI) perspective, the complete responsibility has to stay with Dassault.

I hate to break it to you but the core technology is never transferred, it hasn't been for much bigger deals.

I have a quite firm idea of how things work, the subcontractor you talk of whom the company procures various parts from, are held liable for delays or errors, not the company. Here you are trying to do the opposite.

 

[foxbat]

I hate to break it to you but the core technology is never transferred, it hasn't been for much bigger deals.

R&D may not be but all necessary technology to fabricate the engine is. Read up on the 100% made from scratch Indian Su30 MKI.

I have a quite firm idea of how things work, the subcontractor you talk of whom the company procures various parts from, are held liable for delays or errors, not the company. Here you are trying to do the opposite.

Sorry.. Looks like you dont have that idea about how these things work.. The accountability for the customer is always with the primary supplier. The primary supplier may hold the subcontractor liable thru a back to back contract, but the customer would never directly deal with the subcontractor, irrespective of the nationality of any of the 3 parties in question..

 

[Secur]

China is still struggling with their engines and importing russian engines..come on..we joined FGFA project like,5-6 years ago.Pak-fa is flying over 3 years now..so,what does it meant??do we have the tech or not??

and DRDO is selecting AESA for Tejas..google it and you'll know..

They have come a long way, there's really no comparison. You have been trying to develop LCA for 3 decades, isn't it? Now you claim that Russia has transferred every technology without any link or source, so why is it still taking so long?

There are plans to develop or procure AESA, nothing concrete.

 

[Secur]

R&D may not be but all necessary technology to fabricate the engine is. Read up on the 100% made from scratch Indian Su30 MKI.

Sorry.. Looks like you dont have that idea about how these things work.. The accountability for the customer is always with the primary supplier. The primary supplier may hold the subcontractor liable thru a back to back contract, but the customer would never directly deal with the subcontractor, irrespective of the nationality of any of the 3 parties in question..

Still the core comes from Russia, ask any senior member. It isn't a thing to be transferred to anyone, just too sensitive and precious.

True, but with a single problem.

The HAL is operated by the Indian Govt itself (the customer), the subcontractor is the Govt company, there lies the problem. Normally the customer has no concerns with the subcontractor, I know but what to do when the customer wants to do it himself and still held the seller responsible?

 

[Awesome]

PAF says: pfft

 

[foxbat]

Still the core comes from Russia, ask any senior member. It isn't a thing to be transferred to anyone, just too sensitive and precious.

Can you point me to a link that clarifies that.

True, but with a single problem.

The HAL is operated by the Indian Govt itself (the customer), the subcontractor is the Govt company, there lies the problem. Normally the customer has no concerns with the subcontractor, I know but what to do when the customer wants to do it himself and still held the seller responsible?

And therein lies the concept of Legal entity. MoD/Air force is a different legal entity from HAL and hence the above logic does not apply.

 

[Secur]

Can you point me to a link that clarifies that.

And therein lies the concept of Legal entity. MoD/Air force is a different legal entity from HAL and hence the above logic does not apply.

At the moment, no... I am on mobile. But think if you had the engine technology, why would you need GE to supply engines?

Well the Indian Govt doesn't seem to think so hence the problem, otherwise if HAL could be held responsible, what problems can Dassault have?

 

[invincible]

Full ToT and complete license production, including the engines. This was clear from the very beginning. I dont know what kind of illiterate journo wrote this BS.

The problem is that Dassault has problems with HAL and not with ToT.

Wow !!! Engines ToT would be great

What is their prob after agreed upon ToT from very beginning ? Can u explain me the main cause??

 

[foxbat]

At the moment, no... I am on mobile. But think if you had the engine technology, why would you need GE to supply engines?

Because using the technology received for licensed production in a separate project would be illegal. Intellectual Property 101...

Well the Indian Govt doesn't seem to think so hence the problem, otherwise if HAL could be held responsible, what problems can Dassault have?

HAL can surely be held responsible, but only by the primary supplier, which is Dassault in this case. Why would a customer (MoD) bother with the relationship between the main supplier (Dassault) and a subcontractor (HAL).

 

[Matrixx]

100% TOT or else go home ....who is next ..

 

[RazorMC]

Because using the technology received for licensed production in a separate project would be illegal. Intellectual Property 101...
...

Depends on what kind of contract India can pull. Just license production or full Tech transfer. LP would prevent HAL from manufacturing those engines for other projects, but a full transfer is almost similiar to buying the rights to the tech itself.

Licensed productions are also time bound, which means HAL can later utilize what it "learnt" from that design after the period is over.

 

[illusion8]

Don't jump the gun yet people, negotiations are going on and it will be ratified in a few months time.