Honeywell tenders for Jaguar engine upgrade

[Abingdonboy]

Does IAF getting some Old jaguars as spares...??

Much if the Jag fleet will be retired in the coming few years- only a few will be upgraded to this DARIN III standard. Wrt spares- most if the IAF's Jags were made by HAL under licence so spares are not really an issue.

 

[sasi]

Does IAF getting some Old jaguars as spares...??

No since it is license produced in Hal. Hal jagur production is closed only in 2008 only. As for as i know there is no problem for spare parts,since it is locally available.

 

[dbc]

Because the French LGB was a 2000lb bomb, procured for high value targets and not small hideouts that can be attacked by 500 or 1000lb LGBs. The more cost-effective US LGBs in 1000lb were procured, but couldn't be used at the begining and no other guided weaponary was available then.
So cost was not the issue, but the lack of suitable GUIDED bombs!

You are contradicting yourself when you say the "more cost-effective" weapon was preferred and then claim cost is not an issue.

Which nobody risks anymore, especially not in Indias case! Why would you risk a fighter (worth several millions) being hit by air defences, when you can use LGBs or PGMs today from safer distance? We have 2013 now and not the 80s or 90s anymore, the advantage of these guided kits is not only the precision, but also that the weapon itself takes over the attack run and the fighter pilot don't have to do steep dives.

True, and again no one is disputing that but a LGB kit costs about 20,000 $ while something like the Sagem AASM costs 351,158€ according to CPRA. The AASM has the benefit of standoff delivery the LGB still requires the pilot to get to within 8NM of the target well within range of anti-air assets protecting the target. Besides a steep dive actually helps the attacking fighter, by trading altitude for speed the pilot has a lot more energy to egress quickly. Dumb bombs can also be delivered in straight and level flight including a high speed run over the target using snake eye retarded delivery system.

That's what I said as well, but modern multi role fighters don't even have this limitation, they can be used in any strike missions even if not even partial supermacy is achived and that will be the case in any Indian conflict.

This is where you are dead wrong, there are always limitations. Some limitations are environment, like dust storms, smog, fog or low cloud cover to name a few. Troops in contact cannot wait for the weather to clear to get air support. Some limitations are self imposed in the form of rules of engagement and some limitations are technical such as fuel fraction or drag. The A-10 Warthog for instance have a longer play time and can loiter over the target for much longer than fast jets. Other limitations are imposed upon the attacker by the defender. GPS Jammer, or IR decoys and countermeasures against laser designators have been available since the '70's. Countermeasures against laser designators range from cheap and effective methods such as smoke grenades or sophisticated methods such as deceptive jamming or dazzling the laser receiver on the missile or bomb.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

i have always thought Jag was an oddball acquisition for IAF. Although IAF has squeezed every drop of life from it's paltforms, Jags might see an early departure....

Does the Honeywell contract point towards that?

 

[sancho]

You are contradicting yourself when you say the "more cost-effective" weapon was preferred and then claim cost is not an issue.

Not really, I just pointed out that they already had decided for a more suitable LGB for CAS, that also was cheaper than the French LGB in a similar weight class, but it was the lack of that weapon in the initial stages, that made all the strikes with dumb bombs necessary, not because it was an approach to safe costs.

The AASM has the benefit of standoff delivery the LGB still requires the pilot to get to within 8NM of the target well within range of anti-air assets protecting the target.

Depends on the defence system don't you think? That's still out of the range of air defence guns, manpads, or SR SAMs and when you look at the trend with AASM 125/250 (55 to 100Km), SDB (up tp 100Km), JDAM-ER (up to 80Km), SPICE 250/1000 (60 to 100Km), it's clear that the use of these weapons from even greater ranges to protect the fighters is the way to go in modern warfare. While fighters in steep dives with dumb bombs would be vulnerable even by manpads.

This is where you are dead wrong, there are always limitations...

But not that require partial supremacy over the area to use the fighter, which is the case for the Jaguar and that was the point!
It's just logical that weather limitations will hit a Rafale as much as a Jaguar, but using the Rafale in an area with active air defences and enemy fighters is far more likely, than using a Jaguar, since the risk of losing the later is far higher. Not to mention that you would require far more fighters to cover the Jag and that as said will be a crucial factor for India when you want to defend to borderlines!

 

[GURU DUTT]

i think this jaguar ugrade think is just a screen for corrupt netas and babus to make a quikk buck the same way they did with M2k upgrds

whats the use of going for the expensive upgrds when niether it will increase the load carrying capacity , hard points of the jag the old engines are doing fine ya nothing wrong in going for a avionks and radar ugrd but this ..i guess we better retire them than spending so much on them

 

[Abingdonboy]

i think this jaguar ugrade think is just a screen for corrupt netas and babus to make a quikk buck the same way they did with M2k upgrds

whats the use of going for the expensive upgrds when niether it will increase the load carrying capacity , hard points of the jag the old engines are doing fine ya nothing wrong in going for a avionks and radar ugrd but this ..i guess we better retire them than spending so much on them

What nonsensical drivel sir- where's the evidence??

 

[sancho]

whats the use of going for the expensive upgrds when niether it will increase the load carrying capacity , hard points of the jag the old engines are doing fine ya nothing wrong in going for a avionks and radar ugrd but this ..i guess we better retire them than spending so much on them

The use is limited, the problem however is that we have produced the fighter way too long, just because we could and not because the fighter will remain an asset for the future. That however will forces us to keep upgrading it for decades, just to keep them a life, although the operational benefits are not existent soon. Most of the Jags will be phased out from 2025 onwards, but the latested batches actually could serve till 2038 or longer, which obviously is ridiculous. That's why these should be sold to other countries (Afghanistan for example) as soon as possible, to safe the money and not keep paying for a type of fighter that has no meaning.

In general, upgrading them with avionics for night flying capabilities, the replacement of LDPs and older bombs or missiles makes sense. But the upgrade should be limited to cost-effective alternatives, according to it's potential! The engine upgrade that RR offered for example should have been more cost-effective and easier than the replacement and licence production of a new engine. HMS and an advanced SR missile are not needed either, if most of IAF's and IN's fighters remain with R73. Even the addition of radar for the whole fleet is questionable, since most of them have neither A2A nor A2G weapons that would be guided by radar. If it would be at least the indigenous MMR, it might be justifiable, but since that is not available, but not really like this.