What's new

Defence ministry ignores Russia’s requests to discuss FGFA fighter project

migflug

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
4
Country
India
Location
India
Defence ministry ignores Russia’s requests to discuss FGFA fighter project
SOURCE : Ajai Shukla / Business-standard.com

43038529654b4d571aeb1f.jpg




The programme for India and Russia to jointly develop a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), long touted as the flagship of a time-tested defence relationship, has run into a stone wall.

Documents available with Business Standard indicate India’sdefence ministry is cold-shouldering Russian requests to continue the negotiations on a “R&D Draft Contract”, which will govern the partnership to develop a futuristic, fifth-generation fighter.

A letter from Russia’s powerful export agency, Roso-boronexport, points India’s defence ministry has not responded to Russian requests dated February 9 and March 3, which “suggested holding of the negotiations in February and March of 2015.”

“(W)e have not received any data regarding readiness of the Indian side for the negotiations,” the letter says. It goes on to request holding the next round of negotiations between April 6 and 9.

The letter refers to Project 79L, the code name for the FGFA project.

This is a precipitous fall from grace for a co-development project considered so strategic that an Inter Governmental Agreement (IGA) that New Delhi and Moscow signed in October 2007 exempts it from normal procurement rules. Indian defence planners have long held that co-developing the FGFA would help India build its own fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Following the IGA came a General Contract in December 2008, which stipulated details like work share and cost, and the conditions under which the FGFA could be sold to other countries. Under a Preliminary Design Contract (PDC) in December 2010, New Delhi and Moscow contributed $295 million each to finalise the fighter’s basic configuration, systems and equipment.

With that completed in June 2013, the R&D Contract is now being negotiated. This would govern the actual design and development of the FGFA, and is estimated to cost $3-4 billion each. Meanwhile, the Indian Air Force (IAF) has turned cold to the FGFA proposal. Sources tell Business Standard this is because air marshals fear the FGFA undermines the rationale for buying the Rafale fighter from France, a $18-20 billion contract that is sputtering through so-far unsuccessful negotiations.

The first sign of the air force’s eventual volte-face on the FGFA came in October 2012, when then IAFboss, Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne, announced the IAF would buy only 144 FGFAs instead of the 214 that were originally planned.

In December 24, 2013, top IAF officials alleged the FGFA would not meet Indian expectations. Business Standard reported that air marshals at a high-level defence ministry meeting (January 21, 2014, “Russia can’t deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF”) claimed the FGFA has “shortfalls… in terms of performance and other technical features.”

The IAF claimed the FGFA’s current AL-41F1 engines were underpowered; the Russians were reluctant to share critical design information; and the fighter would eventually cost too much.

On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF’s top procurement official, said the FGFA’s engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India’s work share too low, and the fighter’s price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service.

Meanwhile, Sukhoi is flying and testing their version of the FGFA, which is termed the T-50, or the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or “Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation”). Moscow has declared it would enter Russian Air Force service by 2017-18.

However, rumblings within the Russian defence industry suggest that all might not be well with the PAK-FA. On January 17, the influential Mikhail Pogosyan was relieved as United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) – an umbrella body that oversees Russia’s aerospace establishment, including giants like Sukhoi, Irkut, RSC MIG, Ilyushin, Sokol Plant, Tupolev, UAC-Transport Aircraft, Aviastar-JV and VASO.

The Russian media has linked his departure with problems in developing the Sukhoi-35, a programme that is reportedly being scaled back. However, there is no word on cutting back the PAK-FA, a project personally backed by Putin.
 
.
"The IAF claimed the FGFA’s current AL-41F1 engines were underpowered; the Russians were reluctant to share critical design information; and the fighter would eventually cost too much.

On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF’s top procurement official, said the FGFA’s engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India’s work share too low, and the fighter’s price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service.

Meanwhile, Sukhoi is flying and testing their version of the FGFA, which is termed the T-50, or the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or “Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation”). Moscow has declared it would enter Russian Air Force service by 2017-18.

However, rumblings within the Russian defence industry suggest that all might not be well with the PAK-FA. On January 17, the influential Mikhail Pogosyan was relieved as United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) – an umbrella body that oversees Russia’s aerospace establishment, including giants like Sukhoi, Irkut, RSC MIG, Ilyushin, Sokol Plant, Tupolev, UAC-Transport Aircraft, Aviastar-JV and VASO.


Why India was so excited about PAK-FA secret project few years ago? After Rafale deal was disappointed and now this PAK-FA in another bad news. This speaks alot about India's poor management, cost problems and probably foolish.

:disagree:
 
. . .
"The IAF claimed the FGFA’s current AL-41F1 engines were underpowered; the Russians were reluctant to share critical design information; and the fighter would eventually cost too much.

On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF’s top procurement official, said the FGFA’s engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India’s work share too low, and the fighter’s price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service.

Meanwhile, Sukhoi is flying and testing their version of the FGFA, which is termed the T-50, or the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or “Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation”). Moscow has declared it would enter Russian Air Force service by 2017-18.

However, rumblings within the Russian defence industry suggest that all might not be well with the PAK-FA. On January 17, the influential Mikhail Pogosyan was relieved as United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) – an umbrella body that oversees Russia’s aerospace establishment, including giants like Sukhoi, Irkut, RSC MIG, Ilyushin, Sokol Plant, Tupolev, UAC-Transport Aircraft, Aviastar-JV and VASO.


Why India was so excited about PAK-FA secret project few years ago? After Rafale deal was disappointed and now this PAK-FA in another bad news. This speaks alot about India's poor management, cost problems and probably foolish.

:disagree:



That is a lot of BS is such short space, Sukhoi is not "flying and testing their version of the FGFA". They have a new static tester dubbed the T-50-7 and the T-50-6-2 airframe which is based off of modifications from the T-50-7 has probably not flown yet although it should shortly. Neither aircraft is the FGFA, and yes the 117 engines have had some problems but those are not permanent engines, and all prototype aircraft have issues even if they are not reported in the press. A pak-fa equipped with izdeliye 30 engines has not even flown let alone the FGFA.
 
Last edited:
. .
That is a lot of BS is such short space, Sukhoi is not "flying and testing their version of the FGFA". They have a new static tester dubbed the T-50-7 and the T-50-6-2 airframe which is based off of modifications from the T-50-7 has probably not flown yet although it should shortly. Neither aircraft is the FGFA, and yes the 117 engines have had some problems but those are not permanent engines the and all prototype aircraft have issues even if they are not reported in the press. A pak-fa equipped with izdeliye 30 has not even flown let alone the FGFA.
Its Ajai Shukla :3 What else to expect from him
 
. . .
Meanwhile, the Indian Air Force (IAF) has turned cold to the FGFA proposal.
top IAF officials alleged the FGFA would not meet Indian expectations.
On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF’s top procurement official, said the FGFA’s engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India’s work share too low, and the fighter’s price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service.
The IAF claimed the FGFA’s current AL-41F1 engines were underpowered; the Russians were reluctant to share critical design information; and the fighter would eventually cost too much.

Some serious allegations, makes you believe nothing is going well with the project.
But is there are a hidden agenda in the report? :pleasantry:
 
.
Defence ministry ignores Russia's requests to discuss fighter project

The programme for India and Russia to jointly develop a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), long touted as the flagship of a time-tested defence relationship, has run into a stone wall.

Documents available with Business Standard indicate India's defence ministry is cold-shouldering Russian requests to continue the negotiations on a "R&D Draft Contract", which will govern the partnership to develop a futuristic, fifth-generation fighter.

A letter from Russia's powerful export agency, Roso-boronexport, points India's defence ministry has not responded to Russian requests dated February 9 and March 3, which "suggested holding of the negotiations in February and March of 2015."

"(W)e have not received any data regarding readiness of the Indian side for the negotiations," the letter says. It goes on to request holding the next round of negotiations between April 6 and 9.

The letter refers to Project 79L, the code name for the FGFA project.

This is a precipitous fall from grace for a co-development project considered so strategic that an Inter Governmental Agreement (IGA) that New Delhi and Moscow signed in October 2007 exempts it from normal procurement rules. Indian defence planners have long held that co-developing the FGFA would help India build its own fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Following the IGA came a General Contract in December 2008, which stipulated details like work share and cost, and the conditions under which the FGFA could be sold to other countries. Under a Preliminary Design Contract (PDC) in December 2010, New Delhi and Moscow contributed $295 million each to finalise the fighter's basic configuration, systems and equipment.

With that completed in June 2013, the R&D Contract is now being negotiated. This would govern the actual design and development of the FGFA, and is estimated to cost $3-4 billion each. Meanwhile, the Indian Air Force (IAF) has turned cold to the FGFA proposal. Sources tell Business Standard this is because air marshals fear the FGFA undermines the rationale for buying the Rafale fighter from France, a $18-20 billion contract that is sputtering through so-far unsuccessful negotiations.

The first sign of the air force's eventual volte-face on the FGFA came in October 2012, when then IAF boss, Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne, announced the IAF would buy only 144 FGFAs instead of the 214 that were originally planned.

In December 24, 2013, top IAF officials alleged the FGFA would not meet Indian expectations. Business Standard reported that air marshals at a high-level defence ministry meeting (January 21, 2014, "Russia can't deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF") claimed the FGFA has "shortfalls… in terms of performance and other technical features."

The IAF claimed the FGFA's current AL-41F1 engines were underpowered; the Russians were reluctant to share critical design information; and the fighter would eventually cost too much.

On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF's top procurement official, said the FGFA's engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India's work share too low, and the fighter's price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service.

Meanwhile, Sukhoi is flying and testing their version of the FGFA, which is termed the T-50, or the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or "Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation"). Moscow has declared it would enter Russian Air Force service by 2017-18.

However, rumblings within the Russian defence industry suggest that all might not be well with the PAK-FA. On January 17, the influential Mikhail Pogosyan was relieved as United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) - an umbrella body that oversees Russia's aerospace establishment, including giants like Sukhoi, Irkut, RSC MIG, Ilyushin, Sokol Plant, Tupolev, UAC-Transport Aircraft, Aviastar-JV and VASO.

The Russian media has linked his departure with problems in developing the Sukhoi-35, a programme that is reportedly being scaled back. However, there is no word on cutting back the PAK-FA, a project personally backed by Putin.

Defence ministry ignores Russia's requests to discuss fighter project | Business Standard News
 
.
India should forget about FGFA and spend money developing its own engineer to build its own AMCA.
 
.
I think FGFA joint development has been shelved due to Russia's insistence on Indian paying half the money for around 15% of the work-share and reluctance to provide sensitive information to India.
Russia made the same promise of joint export with Brahmos but constantly undermines Brahmos export by offering Yakhont in a separate package to the interested country.
Same thing would have happened with FGFA joint export.


IMO India will most likely MKI-ize PAKFA to suit its needs rather than develop a different version of it.
 
. . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom