MMRCA Misgivings Unfounded (a must read)

[Sam.]

ISRAEL & IN FOCUS: AESA radar emerges from US export shadow - 1/20/2014 - Flight Global
Advanced Systems Improve Tejas’ Fighting Skills | Defense Update:
here is for all the Negative People

ignore him as he doesn't care about fact but he has tendency to flame anything which is desi .

 

[C130]

Rafale is so sexy. It is one of my favorite if not favorite jet fighter right now, and I'm big admirer of the SU-30MKI....to think India will have both in large quantities makes me jealous.

need to get the deal done boys

 

[Abingdonboy]

and what about timing even if we go for rafale today we will get first squad not less earli than mid 2018 or maybe 2019

and if we need it today there is no way HAL can be trusted to start full production for rafale for at least 4 years if not 5 or maybe more

onli way rafale deal can work for us if india decides to buy at least 2 french build squads (that to on fast time frame basis) but that will onli occur if french reduce the price tag consideraballi and as for so called TOT i guess it will be not more than "screw driver job"

as fro french AESA radar & spectra i guess we can use israeli radar or if things go smoothlli maybe even a japnese one .. who knowsand by that time i guess the new flanker engines will be ready so i think flanker is a good deal

IAF should go for
3 squads 18 X 4 = 72 french built rafales
3 squads 18 X 4 = 72 super flankers with new engine and AESA (russian or israeli )
3 squads 18 X 4 = 72 LCA

You are doing EXACTLY what this retired AVM has called out Mr Khand on- an armchair expert dictating the force structure of the IAF.

The IAF is made of experts- trust they know what they are doing.

Pakfa can be a reality for india in 2017-18 only if we agree to it with older engines..........

Why should the IAF compromise on their requirements and get the inferior PAK-FA?

3 squads 18 X 4 = 72 super flankers with new engine and AESA (russian or israeli )

The IAF has enough MKIs on order that will be upgraded to the Super standard. Ordering more is not wise. MKIs are abhorrently expensive to fly and maintain, the IAF needs a work horse that it can dedicate to strike missions and such whilst the MKIs do their job as the top-end "Air dominance" fighters in the IAF's inventory. As has often been the case with the Russians- they make well spec'd products but they are a nightmare to operate- the RMAF barely uses their MKMs but the IAF has every MKI pilot do at least 180-200+ flight hours on the bird each year.

 

[sancho]

ISRAEL & IN FOCUS: AESA radar emerges from US export shadow - 1/20/2014 - Flight Global
Advanced Systems Improve Tejas’ Fighting Skills | Defense Update:
here is for all the Negative People

The article doesn't talk about export to India, or more importantly the joint development of our AESA:

Either the USA has loosened its policy, or Israel has found applications for AESA radar that do not threaten the strategic or industrial interests of its military benefactor...

...Licht described the export versions of the EL/M-2052 now in production as having two different sizes. One is equipped with “something like 512” T/R modules. The other export customer has “a little more than 300” T/R modules, as the antenna “was adapted to the nose of the fighter”.

So Israel might have added the radar to trainer or older gen fighters for exports, which would explain the small T/R module number, since that hints on a very small nose diameter. Most modern gen fighters however have 800 to 1000+ T/R modules, so the US might agree on export of very small 2052 AESAs, that don't pose a big threat nor include any ToT, while the export for LCA as well as the joint development of our AESA, based on ToT of the 2052 won't!

 

[$even]

You are doing EXACTLY what this retired AVM has called out Mr Khand on- an armchair expert dictating the force structure of the IAF.

The IAF is made of experts- trust they know what they are doing.


Why should the IAF compromise on their requirements and get the inferior PAK-FA?


The IAF has enough MKIs on order that will be upgraded to the Super standard. Ordering more is not wise. MKIs are abhorrently expensive to fly and maintain, the IAF needs a work horse that it can dedicate to strike missions and such whilst the MKIs do their job as the top-end "Air dominance" fighters in the IAF's inventory. As has often been the case with the Russians- they make well spec'd products but they are a nightmare to operate- the RMAF barely uses their MKMs but the IAF has every MKI pilot do at least 180-200+ flight hours on the bird each year.

In my opinion, Air Vice Marshal Manmohan Bahadur didn't get off to a good start by questioning the credentials of Bharat Karnad. As far as I'm concerned every Indian deserves to be heard on the subject of national security and that includes AVM Bahadur a former Cheetah pilot. Arguably not the last word on the acquisition of modern fast jets.

@GURU DUTT the Rafale is in a different league when it comes to low level penetration, SEAD and reconnaissance to list a few roles in which the Su-30 is a non starter. But I agree completely with @Bang Galore the Rafale is beyond our reach its time to move on.

 

[sancho]

Legitimate questions are, well...legitimate questions. Cost and affordability is definitely a valid point. It is true that other countries have found the Rafale too expensive & made other choices. The dismissing of those choices by simple talking about nuclear armed adversaries is hardly logical. The rafale is not about to be primarily used to lobby nukes. There is much muck flying around, I'm sure it flies both ways. Just as there are those who are using the cost & other reasons to derail this deal, others are lobbying equally for the deal to be simply accepted, no questions asked. It cannot be anyone's argument that there never should be any questions asked. Playing the devil's advocate is a very important part of reaching any decisions on large deals like this. Trying to browbeat any opposition by questioning motives is the oldest trick in the book. The GoI is not about to be pushed around by newspaper columns or the opinion of "experts". If Bharat Karnad or anyone else has any known pecuniary advantage in derailing this deal, let that be a direct allegation along made public. If not provable. let us just treat it as an alternative opinion whether it merits consideration or not.

But that's the point, are the questions legitimate? It's silly to say other countries have said Rafale is too expensive and selected other once, by ignoring the simple facts that

A) each country have different requirements
B) from the 2 fighters that fitted our requirements, Rafale is the most cost-effective one

Also, you also have to see the reasons why other countries selected different fighters and not Rafale, Singapore or S.Korea for example favoured US political advantages, Switzerland and Brazil simply couldn't afford it anymore, the Netherlands prefered to team up for the F35. But one point is common in all these countries, even if the technical / operational requirements were different, Rafale always came out as the best or one of the best after the evaluations.

For India political benefits were not an issue, selecting a cost-effective fighter neither. We wanted technical capability and industrial benefits and the Rafale as well as the EF offer both, that's why they were shortlisted and others not.

So asking questions by looking at other countries with different requirements or policies and creating relation to the MMRCA is not legitimate! Only Brazil and Switzerland took fighters, that according to their own evaluation did not met the requirements, but were the only option they could afford, doesn't mean we must do the same, right?

 

[he-man]

ISRAEL & IN FOCUS: AESA radar emerges from US export shadow - 1/20/2014 - Flight Global
Advanced Systems Improve Tejas’ Fighting Skills | Defense Update:
here is for all the Negative People

Well u can try to be positive about Hal/Drdo,,,ur wish but at the end of the day 2052 is an israeli radar just like 2032 developed years ago so whats the scope of Hal/drdo doing a jv on an already developed product??

Especially when we cannot even manufacture high quality mmic's ourselves for x band as of yet

But that's the point, are the questions legitimate? It's silly to say other countries have said Rafale is too expensive and selected other once, by ignoring the simple facts that

A) each country have different requirements
B) from the 2 fighters that fitted our requirements, Rafale is the most cost-effective one

Also, you also have to see the reasons why other countries selected different fighters and not Rafale, Singapore or S.Korea for example favoured US political advantages, Switzerland and Brazil simply couldn't afford it anymore, the Netherlands prefered to team up for the F35. But one point is common in all these countries, even if the technical / operational requirements were different, Rafale always came out as the best or one of the best after the evaluations.

For India political benefits were not an issue, selecting a cost-effective fighter neither. We wanted technical capability and industrial benefits and the Rafale as well as the EF offer both, that's why they were shortlisted and others not.

So asking questions by looking at other countries with different requirements or policies and creating relation to the MMRCA is not legitimate! Only Brazil and Switzerland took fighters, that according to their own evaluation did not met the requirements, but were the only option they could afford, doesn't mean we must do the same, right?

Till we were growing at 9 % cost was not an issue.................it is one now.
Not that i am suggesting that we don't get rafale,quite the contrary as we need something asap now...................but its way more costly for a country whose economy is in dumps right now and will stay so for a couple of years

 

[Bang Galore]

But that's the point, are the questions legitimate? It's silly to say other countries have said Rafale is too expensive and selected other once, by ignoring the simple facts that

Cost is as legitimate a question as it comes. We do not live in a vacuum. Questions are legitimate when directed around this point. Also legitimate if people want to question it on technical parameters using cost as basis. People pushing for the Rafale deal act as if any questioning is not legitimate. There can be genuine differences on many matters without ulterior motivation. The attempt to dismiss all opposition should itself be seen as suspicious.(I'm sure that had Brazil picked the Rafale, the supporters would have alluded to the fact in their case) When the cost is at the level it is, everything should be open to question. Many people including a large chunk in the IAF thought the M2k modernisation deal was a bad one ( I agree with that view) at the cost but it went ahead anyways. These questions will always remain valid and should be treated on merits. You can make any argument buttressing the case for Rafale's purchase but to insist that there be no opposition would be just silly.

In my opinion, Air Vice Marshal Manmohan Bahadur didn't get off to a good start by questioning the credentials of Bharat Karnad. As far as I'm concerned every Indian deserves to be heard on the subject of national security and that includes AVM Bahadur a former Cheetah pilot. Arguably not the last word on the acquisition of modern fast jets.

Well put.

 

[he-man]

Cost is as legitimate a question as it comes. We do not live in a vacuum. Questions are legitimate when directed around this point. Also legitimate if people want to question it on technical parameters using cost as basis. People pushing for the Rafale deal act as if any questioning is not legitimate. There can be genuine differences on many matters without ulterior motivation. The attempt to dismiss all opposition should itself be seen as suspicious.(I'm sure that had Brazil picked the Rafale, the supporters would have alluded to the fact in their case) When the cost is at the level it is, everything should be open to question. Many people including a large chunk in the IAF thought the M2k modernisation deal was a bad one ( I agree with that view) at the cost but it went ahead anyways. These questions will always remain valid and should be treated on merits. You can make any argument buttressing the case for Rafale's purchase but to insist that there be no opposition would be just silly.



Well put.

i agree with u here,,,i don't understand why people still insists cost is not a concern for us??
Brazil is actually richer than us and they have way less population too.

The best would have been SU-35S deal 2 years back with an aesa instead of irbis-e pesa.
Now su-35s cannot match rafale in all the roles for sure but we don't need a world beater here.........

But then these comparisons are pointless unless we know the price of a modern su-35s with aesa,,,,if the price is almost same as rafale then i guess rafale is the better bet

 

[Bang Galore]

i agree with u here,,,i don't understand why people still insists cost is not a concern for us??
Brazil is actually richer than us and they have way less population too.

The best would have been SU-35S deal 2 years back with an aesa instead of irbis-e pesa.
Now su-35s cannot match rafale in all the roles for sure but we don't need a world beater here.........

But then these comparisons are pointless unless we know the price of a modern su-35s with aesa,,,,if the price is almost same as rafale then i guess rafale is the better bet

I don't think any Russian platform would have been under consideration (IAF wanted diversification) but I would have liked to know the respective costs of acquiring 126 aircrafts of the Rafale. Typhoon, Super hornet & the Gripen. We could then have looked at the additional features that Rafale has versus the cost we would be paying for that. That would have made sense. Not just shortlisting the Rafale on technical grounds & then being faced with whatever bill the manufacturers want.

 

[he-man]

I don't think any Russian platform would have been under consideration (IAF wanted diversification) but I would have liked to know the respective costs of acquiring 126 aircrafts of the Rafale. Typhoon, Super hornet & the Gripen. We could then have looked at the additional features that Rafale has versus the cost we would be paying for that. That would have made sense. Not just shortlisting the Rafale on technical grounds & then being faced with whatever bill the manufacturers want.

The problem is we are growing at just 4.5 % now..............it will take another 5 years at least to start 7-7.5% growth again so this deal is automatically under strain,all this negotiations is bullshit,the deal is stuck on price alone.

But as i said in mid 2014 we have no option now,we have to go with rafale now.

Also looking at the speed of lca mk1,i am not too hopeful of seeing a mk2 before 2025,if u are well hats off to u.So we need rafale asap.
As for pakfa we made a blunder of not selecting the 1 st phase with older engines as we were under impression that we will continue to grow at 9% and will have rafale by 2018 or so(all of them).
Guess it did not turn out that way and we are left with funding

lca mk1
lca mk2
rafale
pakfa
amca(possibly)

all at the same time which is really a laughable situation

 

[Bang Galore]

The problem is we are growing at just 4.5 % now..............it will take another 5 years at least to start 7-7.5% growth again so this deal is automatically under strain,all this negotiations is bullshit,the deal is stuck on price alone.

But as i said in mid 2014 we have no option now,we have to go with rafale now.

Also looking at the speed of lca mk1,i am not too hopeful of seeing a mk2 before 2025,if u are well hats off to u.So we need rafale asap.
As for pakfa we made a blunder of not selecting the 1 st phase with older engines as we were under impression that we will continue to grow at 9% and will have rafale by 2018 or so(all of them).
Guess it did not turn out that way and we are left with funding

lca mk1
lca mk2
rafale
pakfa
amca(possibly)

all at the same time which is really a laughable situation

That's the problem. We back ourselves into a corner & then say we have no choice but to do this or that. That way questions of cost etc... get sidelined. That may very well be "our way" but we should always be accepting of questions. That is the only thing that forces circumspection in the authorities concerned.

 

[he-man]

That's the problem. We back ourselves into a corner & then say we have no choice but to do this or that. That way questions of cost etc... get sidelined. That may very well be "our way" but we should always be accepting of questions. That is the only thing that forces circumspection in the authorities concerned.

Sadly people commenting here either don't have knowledge about our current state of affairs or are nri's brushing off the reality of the economy.

Have u seen the videos of mmrca discussions??Its pretty obvious in those that a lot of guys,majority feel that HAL/drdo is not upto the job and u will still find these guys defending them as if they know better than the top brass.

Talking about this one.It makes it pretty obvious that people are split especially after the figure of 44% availability rate of rafale,so to lable all those who have reservations about the deal as anti national or paid agents is as stupid as it can get

The fact is a lot of those top people are worried that HAL will not be able to use the tot properly like it has always been the case

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Legitimate questions are, well...legitimate questions. Cost and affordability is definitely a valid point. It is true that other countries have found the Rafale too expensive & made other choices. The dismissing of those choices by simple talking about nuclear armed adversaries is hardly logical. The rafale is not about to be primarily used to lobby nukes. There is much muck flying around, I'm sure it flies both ways. Just as there are those who are using the cost & other reasons to derail this deal, others are lobbying equally for the deal to be simply accepted, no questions asked. It cannot be anyone's argument that there never should be any questions asked. Playing the devil's advocate is a very important part of reaching any decisions on large deals like this. Trying to browbeat any opposition by questioning motives is the oldest trick in the book. The GoI is not about to be pushed around by newspaper columns or the opinion of "experts". If Bharat Karnad or anyone else has any known pecuniary advantage in derailing this deal, let that be a direct allegation along made public. If not provable. let us just treat it as an alternative opinion whether it merits consideration or not.

I do not think that anybody can make a case that Bharat Karnad has any pecuniary advantage in torpedoing this deal; but it can be reasonably said that he is making arguments that are not based on any worth-while technical knowledge of aviation nor on any considered evaluation of the process that led to the selection of a MMRCA. If he wrote that piece only to peddle his 'credentials' as some sort of an analyst; then he even did a great disservice to that "cause"!

Questions are acceptable; but questions then must be clearly articulated and the logic behind them clearly demonstrated.
So then what are the questions that Bharat Karnad and other 'nay-sayers' throwing up now. Let me toss in a few to get the ball rolling:
1. Is the program for the MMRCA inherently unjustified?
2. Was the brief given to the IAF to "down-select" a MMRCA incorrect?
3. Was the process undertaken by the IAF as part of its technical evaluation incorrect?
3. Was the choice of the final MMRCA choice of aircraft wrong on the basis of any techical parameters?
4. A very basic question: was there even any alternative to looking for an aircraft in the MMRCA category?

The only questions that seem to stand "on any leg" are those that ask about costs. But even those questions need to be asked clearly and coherently; not that they impinge upon technical suitability in any worth-while manner.
The most absurd argument that Bharat Karnad makes against the selection is that other countries have not selected the same aircraft. There cannot be any "follow the leader practices" in making such important choices and it cannot make for any convincing argument.

Just as one poster here says something to the effect that AVM Manmohan Bahadur's credentials are questionable because he may have been a Helo-Pilot !!!!! That is JUST STUPID to the core.
Was ACM Fali H.Major unqualified to be CAS of the IAF because he was also a Helo-Pilot? Unbounded ignorance was displayed by that poster. Probably he cannot even fathom that AMs (and other Officers) of the Aviation Engineering Branch of the IAF had to contribute to drawing up the Technical Parameters just as they had to be part of the Technical Evaluations.

 

[$even]

Just as one poster here says something to the effect that AVM Manmohan Bahadur's credentials are questionable because he may have been a Helo-Pilot !!!!! That is JUST STUPID to the core.
Was ACM Fali H.Major unqualified to be CAS of the IAF because he was also a Helo-Pilot? Unbounded ignorance was displayed by that poster. Probably he cannot even fathom that AMs (and other Officers) of the Aviation Engineering Branch of the IAF had to contribute to drawing up the Technical Parameters just as they had to be part of the Technical Evaluations.

Relax Captain, there is no reason to resort to name calling. All I said was that AVM Bahadur isn't the last word on acquisition of fast jets. His combat experience ferrying supplies to Saichen does not make him an expert on air combat regardless of the amount of burnt jet fuel he claims to have sniffed on the flight line.