India selects EF, Rafale for MMRCA shortlist

[dbc]

Unfortunately, it seems that no exception (or not enough of one) was made in this case. Alarm bells should have been ringing when the F-18 fared poorly (reportedly) in the high altitude trials. The trump card for the U.S. was the AESA radar. Unfortunately it seems that were not willing (again reportedly) to share technology completely on that. Once AESA was discounted. the odds were tilted heavily against them. The U.S. barked up the wrong tree with all the stress on a strategic relationship. While most people in India want a close relationship with the U.S. (some members on this forum excepted), no one was just willing to prioritise that over better performing aircrafts. As one former Ambassador to the U.S. put it - " Nobody wants to lose a war to win a strategic ally". Even if that was hyperbole, the U.S. needed to do more than what it did to overcome Indian fears. I had pointed out earlier that I thought it was the U.S.'s contract to lose; unfortunately they did nothing to avert that outcome.

(The recent scams & the rap on the knuckles that the government has been getting from its auditors (CAG) made it almost impossible for the government to overrule IAF's technical evaluation. What was needed was a game changing offer by the Americans to convince the IAF but unfortunately that wasn't forthcoming. Hence the result.)

You aren't going to convince me or anyone in the US administration the Super Hornet or Desert Falcon 'under performed'. Fine, the IAF don't see themselves operating aircrafts constrained by CISMOA /ITAR and what not. Boeing and LM should not have been invited to participate,unceremoniously booted and told their products are inferior. I'd end this farce by selecting the Rafale, it needs a better engine and some tender loving care but overall better value than the other finalist which proved..er..inadequate in Libya from all accounts.

Now that India has sounded Washington it is not interested in 'strategic partnership' expect 'change'.

 

[Ghostwhowalks]

You aren't going to convince me or anyone in the US administration the Super Hornet or Desert Falcon 'under performed'. Fine, the IAF don't see themselves operating aircrafts constrained by CISMOA /ITAR and what not. Boeing and LM should not have been invited to participate,unceremoniously booted and told their products are inferior. I'd end this farce by selecting the Rafale, it needs a better engine and some tender loving care but overall better value than the other finalist which proved..er..inadequate in Libya from all accounts.

Now that India has sounded Washington it is not interested in 'strategic partnership' expect 'change'.

sore loser, are we?

 

[Bhairava]

You aren't going to convince me or anyone in the US administration the Super Hornet or Desert Falcon 'under performed'. Fine, the IAF don't see themselves operating aircrafts constrained by CISMOA /ITAR and what not. Boeing and LM should not have been invited to participate,unceremoniously booted and told their products are inferior. I'd end this farce by selecting the Rafale, it needs a better engine and some tender loving care but overall better value than the other finalist which proved..er..inadequate in Libya from all accounts.

2) Now that India has sounded Washington it is not interested in 'strategic partnership' expect 'change'.

Frankly no one wants to. They were given a fair chance, their performance duly noted and after not making the down-select the respective corporations have been given the technical appraisal which they are free to dispute.

As for the second point - this is precisely the mentality among the doyens of Capitol Hill of you are either with us or against us that makes India cautious of dealing with them. We are not some pushover country, i would not like to name it, for making these kind of statements and getting the required co-op.

As long as the C-17 orders, C-130 orders, P-8I orders were all coming it was good, but one deal did not come and then threats of change. Good those are not what you call "strategic partnerships" but "one-night stands".

 

[Tin Man]

The rafaele is a very competent aircraft. It is reliable and proven. India will gain a formidable weapon should they choose to induct the rafaele.

 

[Break the Silence]

Well, if somebody wants a strategic relationship with India.. then no need to cry over rejection of their bids(coz its totally a businessand buyer has every right of evaluation.. what is good and what is bad).
Now if some body just starts crying over failure of their bids, then its simply an indication, that the seller country is just interested in revival of their economy not in developing strategic relationships.

Moscow is trying not to dramatize the situation saying that it was India's exclusive right to choose the aircraft supplier it needs. Russia's Defense Ministry earlier said that it was planning to purchase 26 deck-based MiG-29 and not less than 72 MiG-35. The contracts have not been signed yet. The price of those fighter jets may turn out to be too high for the home market now, after the loss in the Indian tender. If Delhi had purchased the Russian jets, the largest contract would give an opportunity to set the home price for the jet a lot lower.
It now seems unnecessary to develop the production of MiG-35 jets for a relatively small order from the defense ministry. Most likely, Russia will have to shelve those plans. The loss also questions the promotion of the aircraft on other markets - in Latin America and in the Middle East.
MiG, a part of the United Aircraft Corporation, is the oldest designer and manufacturer of combat planes in Russia. The central product of the company is the MiG-29 fighter jet. There have been over 1,600 of them built since 1982.
According to the most recent financial report of the company over 2009, MiG received the profit of 24.8 billion rubles and suffered net losses of 7.9 billion. The debt of the company makes up 44 billion rubles. It is worthy of note that in 2009, Algeria refused from purchasing MiG-29 - the jets were eventually bought by the Russian Air Force.
The United States, another participant of the Indian tender, has lost too. India declined Boeing and Lockheed Martin. Originally, the American manufacturers were not considered as favorites, but they took the loss very painfully. US Ambassador to India Timothy Roemer stated that the USA was deeply disappointed with the preliminary results of the tender. Mr. Roemer unexpectedly stepped down on Thursday citing "personal, professional and family considerations." The participants of the tender were fighting for their victory selflessly. Presidents of Russia and France, Sarkozy and Medvedev, British Prime Minister David Cameron and US President Barack Obama supported their manufacturers during the final stage of the tender. However, India made the choice which it considered right for itself - in favor of Europe.
Experts believe that India's choice for European aircraft makers is based on the intention to obtain the technologies required for the realization of its own TEJAS light fighter jet program. The Russian technologies, which India could obtain with MiG-35 jets, do not fit the program. The key advantage of the Russian offer was the price. The MiG-35 is the cheapest of all other planes. The most expensive one is Rafale - $79.5 million, whereas the price of MiG is a little more than $40 million.
The contract stipulates the delivery of 126 multi-purpose fighter jets. The winner will have to supply 18 planes. The remaining 108 will have to be assembled in India. The fighter jets will be in service for over 40 years. The supplier will have to guarantee the technical servicing of the jets during that time period.
The list of participants included Russia's MiG with MiG-35, Europe's Eurofighter with EF-2000 Typhoon, USA's Boeing with F/A-18 Super Hornet and Lockheed Martin с F-16 Fighting Falcon, Sweden's SAAB with JAS-39 Gripen and France's Dassault Aviation with Rafale.
The cost of the contract is $10.5 billion. The price does not include the possible purchase of 64 more jets and the technical servicing.


Russia loses deal of the century to Europe - English pravda.ru

P.s. Learn from Russian admministration.

 

[Markus]

You aren't going to convince me or anyone in the US administration the Super Hornet or Desert Falcon 'under performed'. Fine, the IAF don't see themselves operating aircrafts constrained by CISMOA /ITAR and what not. Boeing and LM should not have been invited to participate,unceremoniously booted and told their products are inferior. I'd end this farce by selecting the Rafale, it needs a better engine and some tender loving care but overall better value than the other finalist which proved..er..inadequate in Libya from all accounts.

Now that India has sounded Washington it is not interested in 'strategic partnership' expect 'change'.

The initial RFI from India had gone to LM only, Boeing jumped in with the US govt help (read pressure)

 

[PRACTICAL PATRIOT]

TIME FOR AMERICANS TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHOLE WORLD IS NOT THEIR PLAYGROUND. ATLEAST INDIA IS NOT A PUPPET.

 

[drunken-monke]

I'm totally aware that any US export hardware are water down. But India should now get the water down of the water down versions for the same prices as any export products. I think India prefer to be treated like how Russia is screwing them over and over again. So if america treat India like how India is treated by how Russia sell weapons to India, India would be grateful. As for satisfying requirements, any previous generation US weapons are much more advance than the cutting age stuff from Europe. The Europeans are only good at make very good stuff with yesterday's technology. As for the T-50, India have to pay 10 times the current cost to get the water down technology from Russia.

Dear Mr. Faithfulguy,

Following is a breif coparision of Rafale, EFT, F16-IN, F/A-18IN
Rafale Specs

Wingspan-10.8 m
Wing area: 45.7 m²
Empty weight- 9,500 kg (C), 9,770 kg (B), 10,196 kg (M)
Loaded weight: 14,016 kg (30,900 lb)
Max. Take off weight- 24,500 kg (C/D), 22,200 kg (M) (54,000 lb),
Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN (17,000 lbf) each
Maximum speed
· High altitude: Mach 1.8+ (1900 km/h, 1026 knots)
· Low altitude: 1,390 km/h, 750 knots
Range- 3,700+ km (2,000+ nmi)
Combat Radius- 1,852+ km (1,000+ nmi) on penetration mission
Service ceiling-16,800 m (55,000 ft)
Rate of Climb-304.8+ m/s (60,000+ ft/min)
Wing Loading-306 kg/m² (62.8 lb/ft²)
Thrust/Weight-1.10 (100% fuel, 2 EM A2A missile, 2 IR A2A missile)
Armament
· Guns: 1× 30 mm (1.18 in) GIAT 30/719B cannon with 125 rounds
· Hardpoints: 14 For Armée de l'Air version (Rafale B,C), 13 for Aéronavale version (Rafale M) with a capacity of 9,500 kg (21,000 lb) external fuel and ordnance
· Missiles:
o Air-to-air:
§ MICA IR/EM or
§ Magic II and in the future
§ MBDA Meteor
o Air-to-ground:
§ MBDA Apache or
§ SCALP EG or
§ AASM or
§ GBU-12 Paveway II or
§ AM 39 Exocet or
§ ASMP-A nuclear missile
· Others:
o Thales Damocles targeting pod
o RECO NG reconnaissance pod
o up to 5 drop tanks
o The Rafale can also carry a buddy-buddy refuelling pod
Avionics
· Thales RBE2 radar
· Thales SPECTRA electronic warfare system.
· Thales/SAGEM OSF (Optronique Secteur Frontal) infrared search and track system
Radar Cross Section- 2m2

EFT specs
· Wingspan: 10.95 m (35.9 ft)
· Height: 5.28 m (17.3 ft)
· Wing area: 51.2 m2 (551 sq ft)
· Empty weight: 11,150 kg (24,600 lb)
· Loaded weight: 16,000 kg (35,000 lb)
· Max takeoff weight: 23,500 kg (52,000 lb)
· Powerplant: 2 × Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
o Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,000 lbf) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 89 kN (20,000 lbf) each
· Fuel capacity: 4,500 kg (9,900 lb) internal
Performance
· Maximum speed:
o At altitude: Mach 2 (2,495 km/h/1,550 mph)
o At sea level: Mach 1.2 (1,470 km/h/910 mph)
o Supercruise: Mach 1.1–1.5
· Range: 2,900 km (1,800 mi)
· Combat radius:
o Ground attack, lo-lo-lo: 601 km (325 nmi)
o Ground attack, hi-lo-hi: 1,389 km (750 nmi)
o Air defence with 3-hr combat air patrol: 185 km (100 nmi)
o Air defence with 10-min. loiter: 1,389 km (750 nmi)
· Ferry range: 3,790 km (2,350 mi)
· Service ceiling: 19,810 m (64,990 ft)
· Rate of climb: >315 m/s (62,000 ft/min)
· Wing loading: 312 kg/m2 (64.0 lb/ft2)
· Thrust/weight: 1.15
· g-limits: +9/−3 g


German ground crew mount an IRIS-T to a Eurofighter
Armament
· Guns: 1 × 27 mm Mauser BK-27 Revolver cannon with 150 rounds
· Hardpoints: Total of 13: 8 × under-wing; and 5 × under-fuselage pylon stations; holding up to 7,500 kg (16,500 lb) of payload.
· Missiles:
o Air-to-air missiles:
§ AIM-9 Sidewinder
§ AIM-132 ASRAAM
§ AIM-120 AMRAAM
§ IRIS-T
§ MBDA Meteor, in the future
o Air-to-surface missiles:
§ AGM-65 Maverick
§ AGM-88 HARM
§ Storm Shadow (AKA Scalp EG)
§ Brimstone
§ Taurus KEPD 350
§ Penguin
§ AGM Armiger, in the future
· Bombs:
o Paveway II/III/Enhanced Paveway series of laser-guided bombs (LGBs)
o Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)
o HOPE/HOSBO
· Others:
o Flares/infrared decoys dispenser pod
o chaff pods
o Electronic countermeasures (ECM) pods
o LITENING III laser targeting pod
o Up to 3 drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time.
Avionics
· Euroradar CAPTOR Radar
· Passive Infra-Red Airborne Tracking Equipment (PIRATE)
Radar Cross section- 1m2


F16 IN specs
General characteristics
· Wingspan: 32 ft 8 in (9.96 m)
· Wing area: 300 ft² (27.87 m²)
· Airfoil: NACA 64A204 root and tip
· Empty weight: 22,000 lb (9,980 kg)
· Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)
· Max takeoff weight: 46,000 lb (20,900 kg)
· Powerplant: 1 × GE F110-GE-132 afterburning turbofan
o Thrust with afterburner: 32,500 lbf (145 kN)
Performance
· Maximum speed:
o At sea level: Mach 1.2 (915 mph, 1,470 km/h)
o At altitude: Mach 2+ (1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h clean configuration)
· Combat radius: 340 mi (295 nm, 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with six 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
· Ferry range: 2,280 NM (2,620 mi, 4,220 km) with drop tanks
· Service ceiling: 60,000+ ft (18,000+ m)
· Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
· Wing loading: 88.3 lb/ft² (431 kg/m²)
· Thrust/weight: 1.095

F-16C/D block 60 with conformal fuel tanks.


M61A1 on display.
Armament
· Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan 6-barreled gatling cannon, 511 rounds
· Hardpoints: 2× wing-tip Air-to-air missile launch rails, 6× under-wing & 3× under-fuselage pylon stations holding up to 17,000 lb (7,700 kg) of payload
· Rockets:
o 4× LAU-61/LAU-68 rocket pods (each with 19× /7× Hydra 70 mm rockets, respectively) or
o 4× LAU-5003 rocket pods (each with 19× CRV7 70 mm rockets) or
o 4× LAU-10 rocket pods (each with 4× Zuni 127 mm rockets)
· Missiles:
o Air-to-air missiles:
§ 2× AIM-7 Sparrow or
§ 6× AIM-9 Sidewinder or
§ 6× IRIS-T or
§ 6× AIM-120 AMRAAM or
§ 6× Python-4
o Air-to-ground missiles:
§ 6× AGM-45 Shrike or
§ 6× AGM-65 Maverick or
§ 4× AGM-88 HARM
o Anti-ship missiles:
§ 2× AGM-84 Harpoon or
§ 4× AGM-119 Penguin
· Bombs:
o 8× CBU-87 Combined Effects Munition
o 8× CBU-89 Gator mine
o 8× CBU-97 Sensor Fuzed Weapon
o Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser capable
o 4× GBU-10 Paveway II
o 6× GBU-12 Paveway II
o 4× JDAM
o 4× Mark 84 general-purpose bombs
o 8× Mark 83 GP bombs
o 12× Mark 82 GP bombs
o 8× Small Diameter Bomb
o 3× B61 nuclear bomb
· Others:
o SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys dispenser pod and chaff pod or
o AN/ALQ-131 & AN/ALQ-184 ECM pods or
o LANTIRN, Lockheed Martin Sniper XR & LITENING targeting pods or
o up to 3× 300/330/370 US gallon Sargent Fletcher drop tanks for ferry flight/extended range/loitering time.
Avionics
· AN/APG-80 AESA

F/A-18IN
General characteristics
· Wingspan: 44 ft 8½ in (13.62 m)
· Height: 16 ft (4.88 m)
· Wing area: 500 ft² (46.5 m²)
· Empty weight: 32,081 lb (14,552 kg)
· Loaded weight: 47,000 lb (21,320 kg) (in fighter configuration)
· Max takeoff weight: 66,000 lb (29,937 kg)
· Powerplant: 2 × General Electric F414-GE-400 turbofans
o Dry thrust: 14,000 lbf (62.3 kN) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) each
· Internal fuel capacity: F/A-18E: 14,400 lb (6,780 kg), F/A-18F: 13,550 lb (6,354 kg)
· External fuel capacity: 5 × 480 gal tanks, totaling 16,380 lb (7,381 kg)
Performance
· Maximum speed: Mach 1.8+ (1,190 mph, 1,900 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m)
· Range: 1,275 nmi (2,346 km) clean plus two AIM-9s
· Combat radius: 390 nmi (449 mi, 722 km) for interdiction mission
· Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,070 mi, 3,330 km)
· Service ceiling: 50,000+ ft (15,000+ m)
· Wing loading: 94.0 lb/ft² (459 kg/m²)
· Thrust/weight: 0.93
· Design load factor: 7.6 g
Armament
· Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan nose mounted gatling gun, 578 rounds
· Hardpoints: 11 total: 2× wingtips, 6× under-wing, and 3× under-fuselage with a capacity of 17,750 lb (8,050 kg) external fuel and ordnance
· Rockets:
· Missiles:
o Air-to-air missiles:
§ 4× AIM-9 Sidewinder or 4× AIM-120 AMRAAM, and
§ 2× AIM-7 Sparrow or additional 2× AIM-120 AMRAAM
o Air-to-surface missiles:
§ AGM-65 Maverick
§ Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM-ER)
§ AGM-88 HARM Anti-radiation missile
§ AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
o Anti-ship missile:
§ AGM-84 Harpoon
· Bombs:
o JDAM Precision-guided munition (PGMs)
o Paveway series of Laser guided bombs
o Mk 80 series of unguided iron bombs
o CBU-87 cluster
o CBU-78 Gator
o CBU-97
o Mk 20 Rockeye II
· Others:
o SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys dispenser pod and chaff pod or
o Electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod or
o AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR Targeting pods or
o up to 3× 330 US gallon (1,200 L) Sargent Fletcher drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time or
o 1× 330 US gal (1,200 L) tank and 4× 480 US gal (1,800 L) tanks for aerial refueling system (ARS).
Avionics
· Raytheon APG-79 Radar
· Northrop Grumman/ITT AN/ALE-165 self-protection jammer pod or BAE Systems AN/ALE-214 integrated defensive electronic countermeasures system
· Raytheon AN/ALE-50 or BAE Systems AN/ALE-55 towed decoy
· Northrop Grumman AN/ALR-67(V)3 radar warning receiver
· MIDS LVT or MIDS JTRS datalink transceiver

Will you please enlighten me how the Eurocanards are inferier to American warplanes. Yes you will say better radar (AESA), weapons, engine capability of F16-IN. But in many aspects the european jets have been superior than the americans toys. Also F16 reached its last stages of improvement, where further one would be impossible. F18 good one but has lower T/W ratio and you neve know the US policy towards your war strategy. never to forget the string attached like End User Monitering agreement.

Please correct me if am wrong on justifying the rejection of US toys

regards

 

[drunken-monke]

You aren't going to convince me or anyone in the US administration the Super Hornet or Desert Falcon 'under performed'. Fine, the IAF don't see themselves operating aircrafts constrained by CISMOA /ITAR and what not. Boeing and LM should not have been invited to participate,unceremoniously booted and told their products are inferior. I'd end this farce by selecting the Rafale, it needs a better engine and some tender loving care but overall better value than the other finalist which proved..er..inadequate in Libya from all accounts.

Now that India has sounded Washington it is not interested in 'strategic partnership' expect 'change'.

sour grapes

 

[PRACTICAL PATRIOT]

yeah we are really expecting change. something like real better deal next time WITHOUT STRINGS ATTACHED.
when we pay for something we want to use those things at out own wish. If you cant handle it then keep your things to yourself. i hope messege is clear this time.

 

[Tin Man]

At the americans- business is business oui? C`est la vie

 

[luckyyy]

is this shortlist final...?

i mean what will be the situation if both shortlisted didn't fall within the allocated budget/fund for MMRCA in cost bidding..

does the next fighter inline on technical evaluation report will be called...

 

[bhagat]

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/dogfight.pdf

 

[Dash]

You aren't going to convince me or anyone in the US administration the Super Hornet or Desert Falcon 'under performed'. Fine, the IAF don't see themselves operating aircrafts constrained by CISMOA /ITAR and what not. Boeing and LM should not have been invited to participate,unceremoniously booted and told their products are inferior. I'd end this farce by selecting the Rafale, it needs a better engine and some tender loving care but overall better value than the other finalist which proved..er..inadequate in Libya from all accounts.

Now that India has sounded Washington it is not interested in 'strategic partnership' expect 'change'.

When will you come out of the mentality that the world spins around you guys ..huh..anyway, Looks like you forgot the real meaning/difference strategic partners and strategic allies....your strategic ally was Pakistan. Thank God we are disinterested in both!

 

[sancho]

It's actually understandable that many americans feels hurt now, especially because both fighters were kicked and this is the first time that something like this happend. Normally they can deal with the weaker performance, or offers with political power, but this time it seems that wasn't enough (which even surprised me).
However, from Indias point if view it is perfectly understandable and that is important, but some people always looked at the things only from the US side.