Single Engine Gripen NG may win MMRCA

[sancho]

If IAF awards this mmrca to F18SH/RAFAEL OR TYPHOON IAF will be too top heavey with twin engines fighters by 2020 ie 80% of a 640 fleet will be 2 engines and far too expensive to operate maintain etc.

Hi Storm Force, the problem here is that this is your conclusion, but take a closer look at the decisions IAF/MoD made and you will see that they see it different.
The initial MRCA competition had focused on light weight single engine fighters mainly and by all what we know, the Mirage 2000 and Gripen C/Ds had the best chances. However, this is MMRCA and if IAF/MoD didn't wanted more twin engine fighters, they wouldn't had let the Rafale, EF and F18SH joined the competition. Also look at the later decisions too! More Su 30 MKIs although we know they are expensive to maintain and most of the new order will only arrive besides MMRCAs. That means if there were any problem with funding the twin engine fighters, IAF/MoD could have gone for more MMRCAs, which could be single engine fighters, or at least more cost-effective twin engine fighters.
But that's still not all, the recent reports about 250-300 heavy class Pak Fa / FGFA and also the medium class twin engine AMCA that could possibly come clearly says, that there is no problem in funding twin engine fighters, or a special focus on single engine fighters.

Gripen NG is a good fighter, but without any orders yet, no political, or industrial advantages for India and by beeing close in capability to LCA, it doesn't even offer our forces clear advantages.

 

[sancho]

Is this only me that still wants to see Eurofighter in IAF color?

It has nothing to do with India, or us don't want to see EF in Indian colors, but with what the EF can offer India!
Just as XiNiX pointed out, it offers too many critical disadvantages and in this stage of its development would clearly be the wrong choice for our forces.

 

[SQ8]

Hi Storm Force, the problem here is that this is your conclusion, but take a closer look at the decisions IAF/MoD made and you will see that they see it different.
The initial MRCA competition had focused on light weight single engine fighters mainly and by all what we know, the Mirage 2000 and Gripen C/Ds had the best chances. However, this is MMRCA and if IAF/MoD didn't wanted more twin engine fighters, they wouldn't had let the Rafale, EF and F18SH joined the competition. Also look at the later decisions too! More Su 30 MKIs although we know they are expensive to maintain and most of the new order will only arrive besides MMRCAs. That means if there were any problem with funding the twin engine fighters, IAF/MoD could have gone for more MMRCAs, which could be single engine fighters, or at least more cost-effective twin engine fighters.
But that's still not all, the recent reports about 250-300 heavy class Pak Fa / FGFA and also the medium class twin engine AMCA that could possibly come clearly says, that there is no problem in funding twin engine fighters, or a special focus on single engine fighters.

Gripen NG is a good fighter, but without any orders yet, no political, or industrial advantages for India and by beeing close in capability to LCA, it doesn't even offer our forces clear advantages.

But its baseline brother has had orders.. multiple ones. So in retrospect had the F-18SH not received any orders would you consider it a good choice? The same could also be said of the Su-30.. If I am not mistaken India was one of the first customers for this aircraft.. considering the Russians order was negligible.. why did India go for it.
All of the above depends on the IAF's ASR.. and how closely and how economically a jet meets it. Therefore to give a good speculation for the MRCA.. Its best a good debate on the IAF's probable ASR is done as well.

 

[sancho]

But its baseline brother has had orders.. multiple ones. So in retrospect had the F-18SH not received any orders would you consider it a good choice? The same could also be said of the Su-30.. If I am not mistaken India was one of the first customers for this aircraft.. considering the Russians order was negligible.. why did India go for it.
All of the above depends on the IAF's ASR.. and how closely and how economically a jet meets it. Therefore to give a good speculation for the MRCA.. Its best a good debate on the IAF's probable ASR is done as well.

Yes, but the NG is a new developed fighter and even Sweden will only buy a few of them, if an export customer orders it too, otherwise they will just develop an upgrade pack for the older versions, based on the NG (radar, avionics mainly) . We have the same problem with the Mig 35s, where no orders has been placed, not even from Russia too.
You can't compare it with Su 30s, because the advantages they offered were clearly higher and besides that China bought Su 30s at that time too and Russia ordered Flankers with similar techs, although not the same versions.

 

[SQ8]

Yes, but the NG is a new developed fighter and even Sweden will only buy a few of them, if an export customer orders it too, otherwise they will just develop an upgrade pack for the older versions, based on the NG (radar, avionics mainly) . We have the same problem with the Mig 35s, where no orders has been placed, not even from Russia too.
You can't compare it with Su 30s, because the advantages they offered were clearly higher and besides that China bought Su 30s at that time too and Russia ordered Flankers with similar techs, although not the same versions.

Agreed.. which is why I insist on having a speculative idea of IAF's ASR.. the Su-30's bought advantages to the IAF.. so might the Gripen.

 

[sancho]

Agreed.. which is why I insist on having a speculative idea of IAF's ASR.. the Su-30's bought advantages to the IAF.. so might the Gripen.

No, because they lack at very important points as ToT, political and industrial advantages. MKI gave us ToT and licence production of all critical parts, the NG instead is dependent on other countries and need clearance first. However, would be a good addition in terms of air defense though (super manouverable, SC, low RCS, METEOR), but lacks in other fields again.
Imo the race is between Rafale and F18SH!

 

[razgriz19]

Gripen was also finalized by PAF but later dropped in favor of JFT.

not sure about "favor of jft" but it had american components and we were under US sanctioned at the time....

 

[Ras]

The Gripen NG in my view fits the bill for the MRCA almost like a glove.
The impression among a few here that it overlaps the LCA is absurd as well.
The only problem is the unproven A2G capabilities which can be taken care of in a few months. It is by far the better choice.

It would if the LCA was not present..now it makes no sense. The Gripen can never be true multi role just like the F-16. I do not even know why they are in the competition to begin with.

 

[INDIAN007]

I think we shud go with TYPHOON

 

[rsingh]

Things that go against Gripen NG
No denying to the fact gripen impressed Indian pilot and is cheap and cost less to operate and can fire westeren weapons.
1. IAF was not impressed by AESA radar of Gripen.
2. Gripen would kill LCA and this has happened with IAF before , Marut I suppose.
3. MMRCA jets are for mostly countering the Chinese and we need the best given the current scenario, moreover any Chinese aggression would mean two front war.
4. Excellent Political gains and moreover we can press the Americans for F35, since according IAF chief stealth fighter would not be here before 2017. If we Give Unkil Sam over 16-17 $ billion (including spares and all) then we deserve F35 if there is delay in Russian stealth program.

 

[gubbi]

Imo the race is between Rafale and F18SH!

I have had the privilege of seeing both th F-16 (both a single aircraft demo as well as the USAF Thunderbirds) and the F-18SH (single aircraft demo) just yesterday at an airshow. The sheer power and grace of the F-18SH is enough to impress anyone - did a loop pulling 11Gs! You have to see it to believe it.
Anyhow, the F-18SH is a totally new aircraft - though belonging to the F-18 family but a new aircraft inside out nonetheless.

IMHO, India should go for the F-18SH. I dont know how many of you guys have seen other aircraft in action, but having witnessed both the F-16 and F-18SH in action, I have no doubt that the superbug is the awesomest aircraft amongst all the contenders!!

ps: to touch that aircraft is almost a magical feeling!! I was too busy gwaking and oogling at the aircraft to bother taking decent pictures!

 

[gubbi]

3. MMRCA jets are for mostly countering the Chinese and we need the best given the current scenario, moreover any Chinese aggression would mean two front war.

IIRC, MMRCA is to replace the aging MiG-27s and Jaguars. Those particular aircraft are deep strike aircraft. SO basically IAF is looking for advanced bombing trucks, if they can attack and protect themselves in an airfight then much better.

The only aircraft which can wholly satisfy these needs are the F-18SH and Rafale - both very new platforms and with proven A-to-G abilities, not to mention fulfilling other requirements in the tender. Typhoon and Mig-35 are basically air-superiority fighters with some A-to-G capabilities. Dunno about the Gripen.

IMHO, it should be the superbug. None like it, unless anyone here has seen both the Rafale and F-18SH in action and thinks better of the Rafale.

ps: the catchword about the MMRCA is operational needs of the IAF.

 

[prototype]

F/A-18's combat radius is less when compared to EFT,also it cannot super cruise like EFT and have a low service ceiling compared to EFT,also EFT have a much smaller RCS also,what other advantages super hornet hold other than AESA and A2G role

 

[gubbi]

F/A-18's combat radius is less when compared to EFT,also it cannot super cruise like EFT and have a low service ceiling compared to EFT,also EFT have a much smaller RCS also,what other advantages super hornet hold other than AESA and A2G role

Let me emphasize the intended role of the MMRCA aircraft. Deep Strike aircraft!

These aircraft are meant to carry huge amounts of munitions for a strike. They will be flying in a strike group along with air-superiority fighters and other supporting aircraft.

Why would you need supercruise abilities if you want the aircraft to carry large qty of ammunition?
Why would you need a large combat radius if you just want the aircraft to bomb and run?
Why do you need a very high service ceiling when strike aircraft usually fly low? The trials at Leh are enough that the aircraft can takeoff and land at high altitudes.
With F-18SH's multirole capabilities, it can very well take care of itself after a bombing run and lend a helping hand to the air-superiority fighters if needed.

AESA and advanced unmatched A-to-G capabilities, the primary requirements of IAF! Why would you want anything else?

 

[softtec]

Gripen was also finalized by PAF but later dropped in favor of JFT.

Its wrong. PAF was involved with china for jft-17 long back than they tested Gripen. Ist Gripen was almost three times costlier to JFT and according to ur PAF head, Gripen was so advance comparing JFT that Pakistan industry couldn't absorb its complex TOT.