Make In India - Fighter Jet musings - News, Developments, Updates - F16,F18, Gripen, Any other

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Not sure about the Su-35 for the navy. They opted for mig-29 rather then the su-33Shoreiki.

Now we don't need su-35 mki against the j-31 for point defense. Rafales and the super sukhoi will be more then enough.

Su-35 for the A&N islands is an interesting idea but don't you think some good SAM cover and an squadron of LCA navy and rafales/migs stationed there will be a more viable option??

SAMs, good. But if a dedicated fighter squadron is to be placed , it should be high end air superiority one. Tejas can't do that.shore based Rafales would also work...

But I would personally prefer a specialist. Anti Shipping missions is not a concern , air superiority is.

S400 and MRSAM would be placed in more important areas first. A&N by next fiscal end should get a BrahMos Regiment.

 

[Indiran Chandiran]

For me the matter is wide.
The issues are

1) Replacement of equipments which are past their expiry dates.
2) Bringing up the numbers .

The first one , is more important as a man in uniform losing life due to faulty equipment is the greatest shame for any nation.

And coming on numbers , we atleast need

A.) 1.25:1 Ratio in our favor in the western sector , and atleast 1/3rd of PLAAF in the north and east. Means about 450-500.

This means if I take 21 aircrafts to be a squadron , we need atleast 52 squadrons.

Now comes the two questions
1.) Money
2.) Options

Coming to first even if we are looking to spend 20-30 billion USD(not defence budget ,but budget for capital purchase) each year , for next 15 years , it is quite possible and money won't be a problem.

Now coming to options.

1.) Su30MKI
As of today we would be having ~232 of them. And the present order of 272 will be competed by 2019. Now here is what is disappointing. We have one working option here , and clowns at HAL have been "Successful in bringing down the production rate" from 15 in 2014-15 to 12 in 2015-16 , so as to extend the production .

What we need is to drill some arses, and get the production upto atleast 18 aircrafts a year.

And the Su30MKI line is the most probably one which will be transformed by 2024 to build FGFA.

So it gives us a window to utilise this option more.Order atleast 4-5 more squadrons , 2 for Strategic needs , and two more to get 2 Mig 21 squadron replaced. ( Which by the 18/Year rate from mid 2018, to 2024 is possible ) [Here I am taking that 18/year from next year we will compete the present orders earlier. ]

This is possible, economically good idea too.

If we actually utilise this option we would be able to operate 18 Full Strength Su30MKI squadrons .

The Spare Parts Manufacturing in India and Super Sukhoi upgrade is also important.

2.) Rafale

36+18 from France should be aimed by 2022.
And meanwhile a MII deal , to ensure that we have a manufacturing unit by 2020 in India ready to roll out Rafale by 2021.

We should not wait to negotiate the MII deal , rather compete it by 2017-18 start constructing the manufacturing unit , capable of at least 1 aircraft every two weeks , meaning atleast 24 a year. 33 A year would be still better.

And order 198 more , so as to have 12 compete squadrons.


Now when we opt for the above two we already have 30 squadrons by 2030. (Assuming Super Sukhoi upgrade adds a minimum of 15 years to the very first Su30MKI ).

EVEN IF WE OPT THE TWO , problem remains with the quick replacement of over 150 Mig21s.

Here I would choose the cheaper option which is not even being thought about.

They are

3.) More Mig29SMT

Yes , order 2 full squadrons straight and add them all before 2021, which is all possible.

Its 1.) Cheap 2.) Damm Effective , and given the low numbers and direct G2G deal it will be easier to sign ( as there will be little pressure from other big companies here ) , and will also ensure Russia is in our side for at least 5 more years.

These along with present UPG will mean 5 modern 4+ gen multirole aircrafts , capable of taking on any aircraft which our enemy posses as of today.

4.) Second one is 2nd Hand Mirages .

Yes , you read it right.
We have an infrastructure in place ,capability to MLU too , and the experience too. And it will surely be cheaper .

Now you would think , where do we get the 2nd hand airframes from , answer is Egypt, Qatar and UAE. You will ask why would they sell us ?

Now let me take them one by one , Qatar as known is getting Rafales , to replace its seldom used fleet of 12 Mirage 2000, which it wants to get rid off. Second is Egypt , which too is getting Rafales , but you would say , how can I say that they want to get rid of their too ? Because UAE in 2014-15 offered Egypt 24 UAE airframes to strengthen their Mirage Fleet of 1 squadron , but they didn't , this also shows that how they are looking to replace the small fleet.

Now coming to UAE , the case is well known , and the new closeness too. 36 of their 67 are almost only a decade old.Also they are not going to sell all before any new deal signed , its better to negotiate and get the half.

Adding 12(Qatar) + 16( Egypt) + 36( UAE), to our 50, we will have 5 Squadrons.
And please , no , buying second hand if it serves our purpose is not shameful . Don't bring that type of crap to me.


And you can see , together the 3 and 4 , we are going to add 5 squadrons very early , replacing almost 5 Mig21 squadrons. They are cheaper options as of today .

5.) Su35 MKI

Now you would think why I am bringing this ? The answer is J31, 3 Squadrons of improved Su35 MKI , ( Which has been discussed with our top brass quite a few times by Russians) is the solution of the gap which may happen if PAF manages to get J31 before we get FGFA.

6.) LCA MK1A.

HAL at present is severely screwing this for its benefits , which is criminal.

Two lines , one Private and one HAL , with orders of 5 squadrons each.

These will replace the remaining gap.



And these 6 options , do solve our problem.

Untill we want to pay more , with more delays and more lives lost , I don't feel necessity of any 2nd foreign fighter jet.

@PARIKRAMA @anant_s @Abingdonboy
I don't feel we should shell out another 20 billions for an aircraft whoes importance is only for next 5-7 years for replacing Mig21s , when we have very cheaper and very quick options.

Except for point no 5 , all the other points make eminent sense.Particularly given the urgency of the situation post 2019 & the economics involved in procuring a brand new aircraft

The LCA MK.2 isn't simply a MK.1A with the indigenous UTAAM AESA radar fitted in place of the EL/M-2052. The MK.2 is a substantial redesign of the the LCA MK.1 with increased wingspan, internal fuel capacity, uprated engine, improved EW systems and avionics.

Now with the tech coming from the Rafale deal and with French help the MK.2 can be further optimised as a significant step up on the MK.1 and can truly eclipse the Gripen E as far as India's needs are concerned.


With SAAB having very little in the way of IPRs on critical tech (propulsion and sensors) on the Gripen I am waiting for a coherent argument as to why it is in the slightest bit attractive to India when the LCA MK.2 will be on par with it in most areas and will naturally be a greater boost to India's industrial development.

So the F-18 the IAF might be somewhat interested in (ASH) is not cleared for export to India and the F-16 offers next to no real industrial or strategic gains for India.

Once again one comes back to the natural (and cleanest) force structure:

LCA/LCA MK.2
Rafale
MKI
FGFA

----

AMCA (somewhere down the line)

A SIGNIFICANT streamlining of the IAF and a multiplying of capabilities that really would be radical.


As @GuardianRED rightly says, keep it simple.



By the way guys. Let us not lose sight of what the LWF is meant to be to the IAF, it is not meant to be an uber fighter meant to excel in every domain as the country's premier fighter. This is how the Gripen is marketed to smaller airforces but where the IAF is concerned their LWF is a rear guard point defence fighter that would protect Indian airspace/gains to release the "heavies" (MKI, FGFA, Rafale, AMCA) to prosecute targets deep(er) in enemy territory and take the fight to them. On a day to day basis the LWF will be utilised primarily in air policing roles negating the need for the far more expensive to fly twin engined fighters leaving them in their hangers/training for combat.

The IAF DOESN'T NEED anything other than what the Mk.2 will offer; increased on station time, improved sensors for A2A combat and improved availability/maintain ability. It fits perfectly with their needs. Let us not be duped here, the LWF is the very lowest rung of the IAF's firepower index and it needs to be as simple and easy to keep flying as possible. The MMRCA and LFW are VERY different requirements, some simply conflate the two and assume the LWF needs to be the very best in it's class also...NO.

@Nilgiri @PARIKRAMA @anant_s


Sorry bro I have to disagree with respect to your Mig-21 replacement options (although fully fully agree on the MKI production uptake and Rafale MII orders).

I understand what you are suggesting and understand the logic behind it but really this is short termism. Sure the 150 MiG-21s need replacing ASAP but does that mean you screw the IAF for the next 30-40 years with rash decisions that they will have to pay for (literally)?

Two of your fixes are heavy twin engined Russian fighters, as India knows from it own experience this is not a good combination. The whole point of the LWF/MiG-21 replacement is to be a point defence fighter with quick reaction times and high availability, neither the MiG-29 nor Su-35 offers a solution here. Get ready for a lifetime of pain in this scenario. There is a reason Russian equipment is being rejected in many areas by the Indian military these days.

On the second hand Mirages I think the boat has long since sailed. It's a short term fix that would lead to long term pain. I'm assuming in your plan these second hand M2ks would not be upgraded to the IAF's -5 Mk.2 standard meaning there were commonality issues with the rest of the IAF's M2k fleet and also these birds would be rather dated in terms of on board systems. Furthermore by the time the IAF had signed the deal, inducted and operationalised these birds they would be close to needing to be retired. There is a reason the Indian military rarely goes for second hand options. It is penny wise but pound foolish.


The solution lays in fixing the production issues of the LCA (whether HAL likes it or not give L&T a production line of their own)

I think ordering the used M2K & upgrading them to what the IAF is doing to our M2K , provided the procurement is executed by 2018 & the upgradation takes 2-3 years , seems both a sensible & cost effective option.

It also runs in line with the philosophy( something which you endorse too) of not having an inventory of too many diverse aircrafts .Add to that the fact that these AC will not see active duty beyond 2030-35 timelines. The same would hold true for the upgraded MIG 29 & Jaguars.You could add the MIG 29 SBT to the mix in case the GoI opts to go in for them .

Of course , all these would birth a new set of problems around 2030-40 timelines , when all these AC are mothballed & the Mk1a is due for an MLU , given that there is little one can upgrade in a Mk1a .Hopefully , the Mk2 will remedy that & will be convertible to 5th gen during its MLU , with further scope for Mk 3 too after we're done with developing Mk 2. I hope Km not sounding too optimistic given the uninspiring past record of the ADA - HAL - DRDO triumvirate..

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Between 2018 and 2024, Sweden plans to replace 100 Gripen C/D with 60-70 Gripen E.
The plan is to cannibalize some of the Gripen C, but if a deal is made with India,
I guess the 100 Gripen C could be sold to India instead, with new Gripen E manufactured
under the MII program.
The last delivery of Gripen C, was 2015, so some are quite new.
While Gripen E will be significantly better, this would make up numbers quite fast.

The Gripen C has been qualified for Meteor, and has a nice radar upgrade,
so it is not to be sniffed at.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Between 2018 and 2024, Sweden plans to replace 100 Gripen C/D with 60-70 Gripen E.
The plan is to cannibalize some of the Gripen C, but if a deal is made with India,
I guess the 100 Gripen C could be sold to India instead, with new Gripen E manufactured
under the MII program.
The last delivery of Gripen C, was 2015, so some are quite new.
While Gripen E will be significantly better, this would make up numbers quite fast.

The Gripen C has been qualified for Meteor, and has a nice radar upgrade,
so it is not to be sniffed at.

No new builds, but is 100 airframes, fully refurbished , atleast as capable as Mirage 2000, with total deal under 6-8 billion USD.That would be nice....

But in the MMRCA result Gripen failed in front of the IAF test team, so G2G deal as of now is next to impossible . Same goes for F16 , F18 etc.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

No new builds, but is 100 airframes, fully refurbished , atleast as capable as Mirage 2000, with total deal under 6-8 billion USD.That would be nice....

But in the MMRCA result Gripen failed in front of the IAF test team, so G2G deal as of now is next to impossible . Same goes for F16 , F18 etc.

I am not sure that all demands for the MMRCA process needs to be fulfilled.
Does Tejas meet all requirements? If so, why induct Rafale.
India would get a large fleet of BVR capable fighters.

 

[Agent_47]

I am not sure that all demands for the MMRCA process needs to be fulfilled.
Does Tejas meet all requirements? If so, why induct Rafale.
India would get a large fleet of BVR capable fighters.

2,000 + posts and thats all you learned?

LCA -> Light, point defence,interception
MMRCA -> Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft.

Yes, LCA has passed all requirements and it is capable of firing BVR.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

First one needs to understand what planners want really -

Do they want a bird which primarily replaces Mig 21 and does secondary work of say Mig 27 types.. a 75%:25% kind of a division..

The replacement bird is LCA Tejas MK1A.

Now supposing the btter iteration is LCA MkXX. The LWF fighter so selected should be having incremental in terms of capabilities on the domestic platform.

For that both F16 and Gripen is a overkill.. Especially Gripen E.. But if its thought from teh perspective of the future its Gripen E which is a much better platform than F16 and i have no iota of doubt about it.

The question that finally comes down is
3. Ease of Maintenance and Serviceability - Gripen E will turn out better owing to much modern plane and a new design to incorporate such feedbacks and ease of maintenance

2. Armaments - From Meteors/Mica combo to possibly getting Derby/Derby ER/Python combo also - The reason being Saab had held many discussions with Rafael Industries Israel in the past as well for such integrations.. GBU LGB, Scalp etc

1. Engines - Instead of GE414 if a possible situation arises and we can get it re engined with kaveri new engine completed with Safran help.. then its a big plus..

Why i said engine is bcz as long as its Ge 414 or any GE derived engine or a US engine, USA will prefer pushing their own LWF over any other..


Thus we need to see the package and fitment to understand where such a LWF bird will lead us too.. We might end up with just Mk1A only and not buy any F16/Gripen scenario as well..

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

2,000 + posts and thats all you learned?

LCA -> Light, point defence,interception
MMRCA -> Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft.

Yes, LCA has passed all requirements and it is capable of firing BVR.

The question was if LCA meets all the requirements for MMRCA...
Just because India considered Gripen C not good enough for MMRCA,
does not mean that it cannot find a place in IAF, if the alternative is waiting 5-10 years more.

 

[Agent_47]

The question was if LCA meets all the requirements for MMRCA...
Just because India considered Gripen C not good enough for MMRCA,
does not mean that it cannot find a place in IAF, if the alternative is waiting 5-10 years more.

LCA does not want qualify in MMRCA because it was build as light/interception role which Gripen is not.
It does not have a place in IAF as MMRCA may be in LWF category which DM is talking about.
MMRCA requiremnet well be filled with second batch order of 72-90 rafales.

 

[Ali Zadi]

I dont exactly picture Tejas as an interceptor based squarely on the speed. Almost all of the interceptors I know of have high speed as an asset yet even with the 1.8Mach "FOC" its slower than say a typical interceptor.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

LCA does not want qualify in MMRCA because it was build as light/interception role which Gripen is not.
It does not have a place in IAF as MMRCA may be in LWF category which DM is talking about.
MMRCA requiremnet well be filled with second batch order of 72-90 rafales.

Gripen was a built as a multi-role plane.
In Sweden it is called JAS-39 Gripen.
JAS = Jakt/Attack/Spaning or Fighter/Attack/Reconnaissance

That means that it can be used as a Light/Interceptor role.
While India/HAL is talking about increasing production of LCA, the production rate
is still limited to much less than what is needed.

Even if a second batch of Rafale is ordered, and that is not clear, IAF are still short of squadrons,
and Gripen C is inifinitely better than any plane that has been scrapped due to old age.

 

[Agent_47]

Gripen was a built as a multi-role plane.
In Sweden it is called JAS-39 Gripen.
JAS = Jakt/Attack/Spaning or Fighter/Attack/Reconnaissance

That means that it can be used as a Light/Interceptor role.
While India/HAL is talking about increasing production of LCA, the production rate
is still limited to much less than what is needed.

Even if a second batch of Rafale is ordered, and that is not clear, IAF are still short of squadrons,
and Gripen C is inifinitely better than any plane that has been scrapped due to old age.

Why do IAF buy a costly European assembled plane for a regular role which can be done by our LCA ?
Your concerns duly noted, if we can build a fourth gen plane from scratch I'm sure we can increase production rate with respect to our needs.

 

[Allen Iverson]

Gripen was a built as a multi-role plane.
In Sweden it is called JAS-39 Gripen.
JAS = Jakt/Attack/Spaning or Fighter/Attack/Reconnaissance

That means that it can be used as a Light/Interceptor role.
While India/HAL is talking about increasing production of LCA, the production rate
is still limited to much less than what is needed.

Even if a second batch of Rafale is ordered, and that is not clear, IAF are still short of squadrons,
and Gripen C is inifinitely better than any plane that has been scrapped due to old age.

Many of you guys are just looking at variables such as stealth charecteristics of the Aircraft, Armaments, cruise speed, AESA etc, but the far more important aspects are Logistics, Maintenance friendly, ease of Handling, Lesser operating cost etc..
I happened to participate in one of the SAAB sponsored programmes and happened to learn more about Gripen..The core ideas on which the Gripen NG was built would blow the minds of any fighter pilot because, Gripen is the only fighter which was built to be truly multirole in the whole world.. I mean truly multirole..
1. It can Take off in a 30 feet strip
2. It can take off and land in Highways and even a hot refuelling can be done in a highway..Trust me guys the Hot refuelling aspect is truly great in terms of war..
3. It is the only fighter that takes less than one hour before it gets compltetely refuelled and armed for a second sortie.. Wooww, that is amazing, compared to what we have operated so far..
4. The time taken for a complete engine change is 2 hours.. I mean this is truly a multi role fighter..
5. These are the sort of planes india need to go about in future..

All emotions aside, I personally Loved Gripen and the way SAAB approached India with such openness in terms of TOT..
Gripen is my favourite not to fill the gaps of existing squadrons, but as a partner in AMCA.. Why shouldn't we have a 5th Gen fighter with all the Goodies Gripen can offer and the Experience HAL had over Building Tejas.. It will become a potent combo.. Just my two cents..

 

[Allen Iverson]

Why do IAF buy a costly European assembled plane for a regular role which can be done by our LCA ?
Your concerns duly noted, if we can build a fourth gen plane from scratch I'm sure we can increase production rate with respect to our needs.

Let us be honest and Practical boss.. did we just build a plane from scratch..? We had our shortfalls and gaps which were filled in time by GE ,ELTA & RAFAEL.. But we did get extremely valuable and costly knowledge of How to build a fighter from scratch, which no one in this world will offer.. And regarding the cost of manufacturing, unless the LCA production line is privatised, it will continue to remain a costly business.. Costlier than Gripen NG.. (I'm comparing just Airframes not weapons).. but the day when atleast 80 % of the parts manufactured by HAL are privatised, than we can see a real good toy in hand..

 

[R!CK]

Many of you guys are just looking at variables such as stealth charecteristics of the Aircraft, Armaments, cruise speed, AESA etc, but the far more important aspects are Logistics, Maintenance friendly, ease of Handling, Lesser operating cost etc..
I happened to participate in one of the SAAB sponsored programmes and happened to learn more about Gripen..The core ideas on which the Gripen NG was built would blow the minds of any fighter pilot because, Gripen is the only fighter which was built to be truly multirole in the whole world.. I mean truly multirole..
1. It can Take off in a 30 feet strip
2. It can take off and land in Highways and even a hot refuelling can be done in a highway..Trust me guys the Hot refuelling aspect is truly great in terms of war..
3. It is the only fighter that takes less than one hour before it gets compltetely refuelled and armed for a second sortie.. Wooww, that is amazing, compared to what we have operated so far..
4. The time taken for a complete engine change is 2 hours.. I mean this is truly a multi role fighter..
5. These are the sort of planes india need to go about in future..

All emotions aside, I personally Loved Gripen and the way SAAB approached India with such openness in terms of TOT..
Gripen is my favourite not to fill the gaps of existing squadrons, but as a partner in AMCA.. Why shouldn't we have a 5th Gen fighter with all the Goodies Gripen can offer and the Experience HAL had over Building Tejas.. It will become a potent combo.. Just my two cents..

Grippen is definitely a great aircraft.No doubts about it. It is definitely more capable than Tejas and has better upgrade potential than F-16.

But do we really need a super duper plane as point defense? Maybe not. We just need a cheap replacement for Mig21. An AESA radar, multi-role and BVR capability, air-refuelling and decent range is all we need to replace Migs and there is no cheaper alternate than Tejas for it.

As for TOT, truth is SAAB is just an integrator for many sub systems in the aircraft. This means that control over several sub systems are with several manufacturers across the world. SAAB can never assure TOT of components they don't make themselves. Similar to how tejas has several sub systems from foreign vendors who are still reluctant to transfer technology to HAL. We can't speak for the future, regardless. With regards to GAN AESA, SAAB couldnt miniaturise it to fit into a fighter aircraft yet, which is why Grippen E flies with a Selex AESA? People from military production and research domain can endorse how tricky the term 'miniaturise' is.

But if I were to speak for a country that needs a cost effective alternative as their Back bone then there is no other aircraft that fits in perfectly than the Grippen. Unfortunately or fortunately, for a country operating Su30 and Rafale, there is no desperation for Grippen to take up 3rd layer of Defence.

Personally, if GOI pulls a miracle and fix production output, we don't need any other single engine aircraft for the next decade apart from MK1-A. That makes the most sense both financially, operationally and sometimes even politically.

Good Day!