Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I believe the 126 number is fixed while the $10B isn't.
(according to Wikipedia)Order value
The Order is for 126 aircraft with the option to buy another 64 - 74 more. While there were reports of the direct order being increased to 200, or split between two vendors, Former Chief of Air Staff of the IAF, Air Marshal S.P. Tyagi stated during Aero India 2007 that the number would remain the same, and would be sourced from a single vendor. The first squadron would be directly supplied by the vendor, while the rest would be manufactured under license in India by HAL. He stated however, that as the bidding progressed, this could change.
The Government of India has sanctioned approximately US$10 billion (Rs. 42,000 crore), with reports that another US$2 billion might be added to this. This is indicative of the high importance of the order to the respective vendors.
papaji you must be great at shorthand typing.
The Indian Express, 2 April 2005
Do F-16s have an edge over French Mirages? (SHIV AROOR)
NEW DELHI, APRIL 1: Does the American F-16 fighter have a better safety track record than the French Mirage-2000? The Indian Air Force certainly doesn't think so. In a presentation on military flight safety this morning, a senior IAF officer displayed data which indicated that the Mirage-2000H fighters operated by the IAF were the least prone to crashes by human error compared to Mirage-2000s in other countries and US Air Force F-16 jets. The Mirage-2000 and F-16 are among four fighters that will bid for a 126 aircraft tender later this year. A lower frequency of crashes due to human error would broadly, though not always, indicate a fighter that is simpler to operate in the air.
According to information made available by the IAFs Director General (Inspection & Flight Safety) Air Marshal Padamjit Ahluwalia, 52 per cent of all USAF F-16 crashes were caused by human error, while the worldwide percentage for Mirage-2000s crashes is 59 per cent and a substantially lower 43 per cent for crashes of Mirage-2000H fighters operated by the IAF out of Gwalior
USA will never provide complete technology transfer or source codes for their aircrafts. And India already know that.
Already explained in preivous post; plz help urself. In short, Almost LCA........Now plz don't say that Gripen is Superior than LCA; I know it is. But only due to its Avionics and Components. Not due to frae, size, or any other physical measures. And these superior things can be added into the plane of same size, i.e., LCA, in future. Like they are added in Gripen many years later; today's Gripen is not what it was when it developed. It got many new and better things; and that can happen to LCA too.
Gripen is very potent plane; no doubt, for smaller countries. But for the role, which MMRCA has to play, it is not suitable, inferior than other contenders.
No; I have no Idea, I gotta Vodafone.
OMG..........Thats news for me. BUT plz tell me one thing, ARE Indian MoD and IAF are MAD. Why they sent RFI for Rafale and even Eurofighter Typhoon in this case. I believe this is also news for them. I think THEY HAVE NO IDEA TOO; they got BSNL.
Budget and Life Cycle Costs........hummm, good point. I don't know much (as you already pointed out), but let me try...
In the defence industry, cost includes:
Per Unit Cost and Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost. The thumb rule is that the Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost is usually between 3.5 to 4 time of the cost of each unit.
Jokes apart, do you really think that Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost can be managed in 10+2 Billion............if so, for which fighter?
what happens if India is hit economically.......................I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT can you tell me plz...."what happen if the earth stop spinning?"
Holy lord , where is the 100 Billion dollars , i am falling short!!..................MY HOLY LORD; with $100 Billion u are still short!!! Plz rest assured, more money will be available, if there is a need.
Sorry for delay Buddy, was out of town.
But I m not superman..........i m SupermanKaPapa.
Sure brother...............here it is.
More detailed..........
It is a case of Uncle Sam's reliability too............u are in Ask anyone here about Sam's reliability. Ever heard about "Army, Allah and America?"
Sam is not a reliable partner........yes it is for European Countries; but they are Grandpas and Great-Grandpas of uncle Sam; same family. But not for Asian or African countries. For them, uncle Sam's moto is: Use and Throw. Few examples are: Pakistan, Iran, Saddam Hussein, etc.
USA will never provide complete technology transfer or source codes for their aircrafts. And India already know that.
I strongly believe all the interest India had shown through the RFI for F-16s was nothing but to trick and mislead in order to stop the sale of these aircrafts to Pakistan.
Already explained in preivous post; plz help urself. In short, Almost LCA........Now plz don't say that Gripen is Superior than LCA; I know it is. But only due to its Avionics and Components. Not due to frae, size, or any other physical measures. And these superior things can be added into the plane of same size, i.e., LCA, in future. Like they are added in Gripen many years later; today's Gripen is not what it was when it developed. It got many new and better things; and that can happen to LCA too.
Gripen is very potent plane; no doubt, for smaller countries. But for the role, which MMRCA has to play, it is not suitable, inferior than other contenders.
No; I have no Idea, I gotta Vodafone.
SOME = 10+2 BILLION............. You must be a very rich man; but for me, this amount is not SOME.
Budget and Life Cycle Costs........hummm, good point. I don't know much (as you already pointed out), but let me try...
In the defence industry, cost includes:
Per Unit Cost and Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost. The thumb rule is that the Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost is usually between 3.5 to 4 time of the cost of each unit.
Now plz tell me with the Per Unit Cost given below; which Fighter fits in this criteria.
Aircraft: Per Unit Cost
Rafale: ~US$67.2 million or 48 million
Eurofighter Typhoon: ~US$91.2 million or 63 million
F-16IN Fighting Falcon: US$50 million
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: US$58 million
JAS 39 NG: US$48 million
MiG-35 Fulcrum-F: US$38.5 million
If India decides to buy and induct the cheapest one out of these, i.e. MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, the total cost will be:
126 units X $38.5 Million = $4.851 Billion
Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost at 3 1/2 times = $16.9785 Billion
Total costs for MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, i.e., Per Piece cost plus Life Cycle Cost, is approximately $21.8295 Billion. (Please excuse and notify me if thr is any miscalculation.)
That means INDIA can't AFFORD even 126 Mig-35. And if India want to induct Mig-35, then they need to cut the number to half (63). And lesser in case any other fighter is chosen.
I believe the "Budget and Life Cycle Costs" points are not calculated by Indian MoD, FM, and IAF correctly.
Jokes apart, do you really think that Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost can be managed in 10+2 Billion............if so, for which fighter?
OMG..........Thats news for me. BUT plz tell me one thing, ARE Indian MoD and IAF are MAD. Why they sent RFI for Rafale and even Eurofighter Typhoon in this case. I believe this is also news for them. I think THEY HAVE NO IDEA TOO; they got BSNL.
what happens if India is hit economically.......................I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT can you tell me plz...."what happen if the earth stop spinning?"
Holy lord , where is the 100 Billion dollars , i am falling short!!..................MY HOLY LORD; with $100 Billion u are still short!!! Plz rest assured, more money will be available, if there is a need.
again SOME...........U gotta very-very big scale.
you still doubt about the budget and Money associated............what to say now; I quit.
Cheers!!!
My Wish (still):
1. Rafale
2. Eurofighter Typhoon.
3. F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
The above was cherry picked by SupermanKaPapa to support his theory that F-16 pilots are more prone to human error. He left out a critical piece from the same report which states that worldwide the Mirage suffers from a higher accident rate due to pilot error 59% compared to the F-16's 52%.
Do F-16s have an edge over French Mirages?
In a presentation on military flight safety this morning, a senior IAF officer displayed data which indicated that the Mirage-2000H fighters operated by the IAF were the least prone to crashes by human error compared to Mirage-2000s in other countries and US Air Force F-16 jets.
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1996 Aug;67(8):777-83.
F-16 Class A mishaps in the U.S. Air Force, 1975-93.
Knapp CJ, Johnson R.
USAF School of Aerospace Medicine, Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5123, USA.
Abstract
All USAF F-16 fighter Class A (major) aircraft mishaps from 1975-93 were analyzed, using records from the U.S. Air Force Safety Agency (AFSA). There were 190 Class A mishaps involving 204 F-16's and 217 aircrew during this 19-yr period. The overall Class A rate was 5.09 per 100,000 flight hours, more than double the overall USAF rate. The mishaps are categorized by year, month, time of day and model of aircraft in relation to mishap causes as determined and reported by AFSA. Formation position, phase of flight and primary cause of the mishap indicate that maneuvering, cruise and low-level phases account for the majority of the mishaps (71%), with air-to-air engagements associated with a higher proportion of pilot error (71%) than was air-to-ground (49%). Engine failure was the number one cause of mishaps (35%), and collision with the ground the next most frequent (24%). Pilot error was determined as causative in 55% of all the mishaps. Pilot error was often associated with other non-pilot related causes. Channelized attention, loss of situational awareness, and spatial disorientation accounted for approximately 30% of the total pilot error causes found. Pilot demographics, flight hour/sortie profiles, and aircrew injuries are also listed. Fatalities occurred in 27% of the mishaps, with 97% of those involving pilot errors.
this thread like others is very informative and ext gud to read ....
earlier i enjoyed PDF...now i am addicted to it !!!
wooow this is some reply dude ya its been long since i read a reply like this i bet u had a good week off or ur boss might have pissed u off any ways it was fun reading it
I agree with you that the US don't like to transfer technology, and the best example in recent years will the the US denying several key techs to U.K. regarding the F-35 despite the fact that the U.K. is one of it's oldest allies and is a partner of the JSF "joint venture". But then no country will be willing to provide 100% ToT, especially on key technologies. The Russians and the Europeans can surely offer us much more than the Americans, but complete ToT is unlikely.
But do you think that today's Tejas can out-match and out-perform today's Gripen? Even if we put the same systems on the Gripen and the LCA, can you prove that the LCA is better than the Gripen or vice-versa? The basic airframe of the aircraft also plays a major role (and I admit I don't know which has a better airframe). Are you suggesting that if two aircraft are of the same size, their capabilities will be or can be made the same?
Originally Posted by SupermanKaPapa
Already explained in preivous post; plz help urself. In short, Almost LCA........Now plz don't say that Gripen is Superior than LCA; I know it is. But only due to its Avionics and Components. Not due to frae, size, or any other physical measures. And these superior things can be added into the plane of same size, i.e., LCA, in future. Like they are added in Gripen many years later; today's Gripen is not what it was when it developed. It got many new and better things; and that can happen to LCA too.
Gripen is very potent plane; no doubt, for smaller countries. But for the role, which MMRCA has to play, it is not suitable, inferior than other contenders.
Oh please, can you be atleast a bit serious???
Please care to elaborate how the life-cycle cost is related to the unit cost by the simple relation:
Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost=Unit Cost x 3.5 or 4
The 10/12 billion budget is not to include life-cycle costs as far as I know. It only includes the cost of the 126 fighters, spares and for ToT.
Originally Posted by anathema
.......you think just because India is planning to spend some dollars it will be able to afford and absorb any fighter aircraft ? You dont have any idea what a budget means right ? You do know what life cycle costs mean right !!
100 billion over one decade -- one year = 10 Billion dollars. You know what is the cost of Rafale in the ongoing Brazil competition -- Its almost 8-10 Billion dollars for 36 aircrafts -- You know how much it will cost for 120 planes ? ...You know much life cycle costs does Rafale have? Further if Rafale has to undergo any future upgrades you know how much it will cost considering that Frenchies are notoriously pricy!!
Anathema has a valid point. Do you think it is wise to spend every single penny we have? Instead of wasting time, why not try to answer his questions??
Without the software source codes, the IAF would have to specify mission parameters to foreign manufacturers to enable configuration of their radar, seriously compromising security in the process.
Sorry for delay Buddy, was out of town.
But I m not superman..........i m SupermanKaPapa.
Sure brother...............here it is.
More detailed..........
It is a case of Uncle Sam's reliability too............u are in Ask anyone here about Sam's reliability. Ever heard about "Army, Allah and America?"
Sam is not a reliable partner........yes it is for European Countries; but they are Grandpas and Great-Grandpas of uncle Sam; same family. But not for Asian or African countries. For them, uncle Sam's moto is: Use and Throw. Few examples are: Pakistan, Iran, Saddam Hussein, etc.
USA will never provide complete technology transfer or source codes for their aircrafts. And India already know that.
I strongly believe all the interest India had shown through the RFI for F-16s was nothing but to trick and mislead in order to stop the sale of these aircrafts to Pakistan.
Already explained in preivous post; plz help urself. In short, Almost LCA........Now plz don't say that Gripen is Superior than LCA; I know it is. But only due to its Avionics and Components. Not due to frae, size, or any other physical measures. And these superior things can be added into the plane of same size, i.e., LCA, in future. Like they are added in Gripen many years later; today's Gripen is not what it was when it developed. It got many new and better things; and that can happen to LCA too.
Gripen is very potent plane; no doubt, for smaller countries. But for the role, which MMRCA has to play, it is not suitable, inferior than other contenders.
..good one.No; I have no Idea, I gotta Vodafone.
Budget and Life Cycle Costs........hummm, good point. I don't know much (as you already pointed out), but let me try...
In the defence industry, cost includes:
Per Unit Cost and Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost. The thumb rule is that the Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost is usually between 3.5 to 4 time of the cost of each unit.
Now plz tell me with the Per Unit Cost given below; which Fighter fits in this criteria.
Aircraft: Per Unit Cost
Rafale: ~US$67.2 million or €48 million
Eurofighter Typhoon: ~US$91.2 million or €63 million
F-16IN Fighting Falcon: US$50 million
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: US$58 million
JAS 39 NG: US$48 million
MiG-35 Fulcrum-F: US$38.5 million
If India decides to buy and induct the cheapest one out of these, i.e. MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, the total cost will be:
126 units X $38.5 Million = $4.851 Billion
Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost at 3 1/2 times = $16.9785 Billion
Total costs for MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, i.e., Per Piece cost plus Life Cycle Cost, is approximately $21.8295 Billion. (Please excuse and notify me if thr is any miscalculation.)
That means INDIA can't AFFORD even 126 Mig-35. And if India want to induct Mig-35, then they need to cut the number to half (63). And lesser in case any other fighter is chosen.
I believe the "Budget and Life Cycle Costs" points are not calculated by Indian MoD, FM, and IAF correctly.
Jokes apart, do you really think that Life-Cycle Operating and Support Cost can be managed in 10+2 Billion............if so, for which fighter?
OMG..........Thats news for me. BUT plz tell me one thing, ARE Indian MoD and IAF are MAD. Why they sent RFI for Rafale and even Eurofighter Typhoon in this case. I believe this is also news for them. I think THEY HAVE NO IDEA TOO; they got BSNL.
what happens if India is hit economically.......................I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT can you tell me plz...."what happen if the earth stop spinning?"
Holy lord , where is the 100 Billion dollars , i am falling short!!..................MY HOLY LORD; with $100 Billion u are still short!!! Plz rest assured, more money will be available, if there is a need.
you still doubt about the budget and Money associated............what to say now; I quit.
[/QUOTE]Cheers!!!
My Wish (still):
1. Rafale
2. Eurofighter Typhoon.
3. F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
- The French government has cleared full technology transfer of the Rafale to India, including that of the RBE2-AA Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar (which will be integrated with the Rafale by 2010) and the transfer of software source codes, which will allow Indian scientists to re-programme a radar or any sensitive equipment if need be. Without the software source codes, the IAF would have to specify mission parameters to foreign manufacturers to enable configuration of their radar, seriously compromising security in the process.
[*]Dassault has also offered to fit the Kaveri engine into the Rafale, which, if chosen, would greatly improve commonality with the Tejas aircraft that will enter service into the IAF by 2010. Concerns have been raised about cost issues as well as potential sales to Pakistan, which has also expressed interest in the Rafale. However, no such jets have been sold to Pakistan, and India and France have recently agreed to "go beyond a buyer-seller relationship."
[*]EADS has invited India to become a partner of the Eurofighter Typhoon programme if the Typhoon wins the contract, and will be given technological and development participation in future tranches of the Typhoon. Bernhard Gerwert, CEO of EADS Defense Department, elaborated that if India becomes the fifth partner of the Eurofighter programme, it will be able to manufacture assemblies for new Eurofighters.
[*]Russia's willingness to give full ToT for Mikoyan MiG-35.
[*]In January 2009 SAAB International, proposed to India the transfer of technology if Gripen win the MRCA and make India 'an independent manufacturer' of its own fighter jets. SAAB favored 'extensive transfer of technology' well in excess of 60 % more than requirement of RFI to boost India's indigenous capabilities in fighter jets.
India and France have recently agreed to "go beyond a buyer-seller relationship.
EADS has invited India to become a partner of the Eurofighter Typhoon programme if the Typhoon wins the contract, and will be given technological and development participation in future tranches of the Typhoon.
SupermanKaPapa said:Already explained in preivous post; plz help urself. In short, Almost LCA........Now plz don't say that Gripen is Superior than LCA; I know it is. But only due to its Avionics and Components. Not due to frae, size, or any other physical measures. And these superior things can be added into the plane of same size, i.e., LCA, in future. Like they are added in Gripen many years later; today's Gripen is not what it was when it developed. It got many new and better things; and that can happen to LCA too.