Over Rs 834 crore spent on Sukhoi maintenance

[Etilla]

No its just 1.5 hours, IAF also have mid-air engine changing facility
Stop claiming garbage figures if you have no knowledge about the subject.

Su-30MKI uses Saturn AL-31FP (ultimate service life of 2000 hrs). Its an improvement over AL-31F (ultimate life of 1500 hrs), AL-117S is further improved version of AL-31FP whose ultimate life is 4000 hrs.

NPO "SATURN" > 117S

mid-air engine change?

Take out engine and put a new one while plane is in flight?

Are you sure about that?

 

[The Great One]

Let's understand the basics first, for normal flight hour also known as CPFH these are the various parameters which you need to consider:
– Aviation Fuel
– Consumable Supplies
– Operation and Maintenance
– Unit Level Manpower
– System Improvements
– Capital Charges
– Depreciation
– Amortisation
Have you included all of the above parameters?
The figure quoted in Lok Sabha is just for maintenance only.

MOTHER OF GOD
I was mistaken. Argument withdrawn. Go RAFALE

 

[Etilla]

I'm sure the price hike is mostly due to depreciation in rupee.

The one post that makes the most sense on thread so far.

 

[MehrotraPrince]

yeah great diff between 1500 and 2000 genius.
Both al-31f and fp are shit engines.Period.

yeah for you 500 hrs in engine life means nothing and they need lesson form intelligent people like you as far as engine quality is considered, You are nothing more than troll.

 

[Hareeshu IA MBT]

Only thing I don't like with Russian weapon systems are their maintenance cost . We also have problem with ski engines in dusty environment. In which western engines are more reliable till date. This was conveyed during Air combat exercise in US . But we don't have any replacement .

And by the way what about our Kaveri today read about some honest points put forward by kaveri team .

 

[he-man]

yeah for you 500 hrs in engine life means nothing and they need lesson form intelligent people like you as far as engine quality is considered, You are nothing more than troll.

U are a new jingoistic member it seems or a drdo/hal troll out to defend them.Enough of u already here.
Any engine under 2000 hours is shit,,hell even rd-33mk of mig-29 k has 4000 hours life,,,m-88 or other western products may well be>6000 hours.

Go to rd site and check rd-33mk life.

 

[The Great One]

Rafale bests mki in eveything except range.Thats why.

Nope. We are going for it because the IAF had a requirement for a non-russian MRCA in the early 2000's after the Kargil excursion. Delays-Obsoletion-Re-tendering-New Suppliers-New jets-Technical evals-Delays-Falling sqaudrons due to more delays (in MMRCA and LCA) and voila, Rafale is selected and is now a neccesity regardless of its capability with respect to MKI.

 

[he-man]

Nope. We are going for it because the IAF had a requirement for a non-russian MRCA in the early 2000's after the Kargil excursion. Delays-Obsoletion-Re-tendering-New Suppliers-New jets-Technical evals-Delays-Falling sqaudrons due to more delays (in MMRCA and LCA) and voila, Rafale is selected and is now a neccesity regardless of its capability with respect to MKI.

Thats one aspect.
The fact remains its much much advanced than mki in ew systems,,,not even a debate.

If only squadrons strength was a problem we would have got more mki's or su-35's which were cheaper.
The medium in mmrca was just to deny russians an opportunity to sell flankers.

 

[Su-11]

Hmmm... 835 crores for 200 jets equals less than 4.2 crores. Repair and maintenance would mean repairing/replacing damaged parts as well, which includes replacing engines whose service life is over. Assuming a jet flew 350 hours a year(a 2 pilot rotation...but ideally its more like 2.2 to 2.5 which means even more hours in the air) that's 1,20,000Rs or 2000 Dollars of repair/damage every hour. Not bad at all!! So much for Russian jets maintenance is costly.

 

[sancho]

Correct me if I yam wrong >
834 crore equals some $135 millions.
135 millions over an estimated fleet of 200 jets equals some $700,000 per jet
Assuming 150 hrs per jet, we get less than $5000 per flight hour ~ less than Gripen NG let alone Rafale.

As MehrotraPrince said, maintenance costs and operational costs are different things, heavy class western fighters are estimated between $25.000 and 30.000 dollar per hour operational costs and the MKI surely won't be a cost-effective fighter to operate. So that's exactly where the medium class fighters offer the best mix of capability and costs.

 

[The Great One]

Let's understand the basics first, for normal flight hour also known as CPFH these are the various parameters which you need to consider:
– Aviation Fuel
– Consumable Supplies
– Operation and Maintenance
– Unit Level Manpower
– System Improvements
– Capital Charges
– Depreciation
– Amortisation
Have you included all of the above parameters?
The figure quoted in Lok Sabha is just for maintenance only.

As MehrotraPrince said, maintenance costs and operational costs are different things, heavy class western fighters are estimated between $25.000 and 30.000 dollar per hour operational costs and the MKI surely won't be a cost-effective fighter to operate. So that's exactly where the medium class fighters offer the best mix of capability and costs.

On the basis of a 2005 US Air Force study of its F-16 fleet, IHS Jane’s thinks the CPFH is composed of approximately:

– 10-15% Consumable Supplies (small parts, wiring, basic electrical components)
– 20-25% Sortie Aviation Fuel
– 60-70% Depot Level Repair and Systems Maintenance

Gripen operational cost lowest of all western fighters: Jane’s | StratPost
So, I believe Parrikar's statement covers points 1 & 3 ~ 70 to 85% of the overall costs. If you have superior sources do bring them up.

Anyway, @sancho I called you out because I have seen your arguments about medium class jet having lower maintenance costs and thus the need for acquiring a completely new platform (Rafale) instead of more MKI's. Firstly I would certainly like to see a link/source from where you peeps got the $25000 - $30000 figure. Second of all, that is absolutely not why we are buying Rafale. As I said before

Nope. We are going for it because the IAF had a requirement for a non-russian MRCA in the early 2000's after the Kargil excursion. Delays-Obsoletion-Re-tendering-New Suppliers-New jets-Technical evals-Delays-Falling sqaudrons due to more delays (in MMRCA and LCA) and voila, Rafale is selected and is now a neccesity regardless of its capability with respect to MKI.

 

[sancho]

I called you out because I have seen your arguments about medium class jet having lower maintenance costs and thus the need for acquiring a completely new platform (Rafale) instead of more MKI's. Firstly I would certainly like to see a link/source from where you peeps got the $25000 - $30000 figure. Second of all, that is absolutely not why we are buying Rafale. As I said before

There are budget reports of US forces that shows the operational cost figures of their fighters, helicopters or other aircrafts. And your point about IAF requirement is flawed, once by the fact that a Russian medium class fighter was present and allowed in the MRCA as well as M-MRCA, secondly because IAF kept increasing orders of MKI over the last decade, while insisting on more medium class fighters (preferably more M2Ks). So it never was about not buying more MKIs, but about having an alternative to it, with different techs, capabilities and as well costs. The fact that the tender got bigger has nothing to do with IAF, but with politics that saw more potential for the industry, so the selection of an M-MRCA again has nothing to do with not buying more MKIs, which also is proven by the additional order of MKIs at the same time as we induct M-MRCAs.

 

[The Great One]

There are budget reports of US forces that shows the operational cost figures of their fighters, helicopters or other aircrafts.

I know what it is, and as I said, if you have superior sources, put them out instead of ceaseless guessing and speculation. Jane's is only using the report as a base and not directly extrapolating F-16 figures on every jet.

And your point about IAF requirement is flawed, once by the fact that a Russian medium class fighter was present and allowed in the MRCA as well as M-MRCA

Not wrong on any count

• IAF wanted to simply buy the Mirage 2000 after its performance in Kargil.
• GOI decided to create a multi-party tender by making MRCA and issuing RFI's to everyone (4)
• Mikoyan was also issued RFI's purely for political posturing as Russia was our major defense supplier and willfully excluding them would look....................................
• Rest is history

The rest of your post about MKI and stuff went over my head. I don't know how it pertains to my earlier posts

Thats one aspect.
The fact remains its much much advanced than mki in ew systems,,,not even a debate.

If only squadrons strength was a problem we would have got more mki's or su-35's which were cheaper.
The medium in mmrca was just to deny russians an opportunity to sell flankers.

Squadron strength became a problem much after the requirement was first disclosed. Delays in LCA was the reason along with delay in MMRCA itself.
And no LOL, MMRCA wasn't designed to exclude flankers. Why the hell would Sukhoi enter MMRCA when we already bought their jet. If IAF wanted more flankers or if it wanted Super-Flankers it would have dealt directly with Sukhoi.

 

[he-man]

Squadron strength became a problem much after the requirement was first disclosed. Delays in LCA was the reason along with delay in MMRCA itself.
And no LOL, MMRCA wasn't designed to exclude flankers. Why the hell would Sukhoi enter MMRCA when we already bought their jet. If IAF wanted more flankers or if it wanted Super-Flankers it would have dealt directly with Sukhoi.

1)Su-35 is not upgraded su-30mki,,,don't make that mistake.
Its much more capable

2)Mig-35 with zhuk ae similarly is way better than mig-29k.

Point is flankers are simply nowhere in front of rafale in EW and even weapon package.

 

[sancho]

I know what it is, and as I said, if you have superior sources

That's why I mentioned the budget reports, I have seen those figures in them, but would have to search for them again. And the costs are estimates anyway, since every force include different figures into the calculations, which is why competitive evaluations often get the most reliable figures. Neither India nor Brazil for example got to the $3500 Saab advertised at the begining for Gripen NG and even the $4700 that Jane's quoted seems to be too low, as recent reports from Brazilian officals puts the cost above $5000 and it might be even higher when the final prototype can be evaluated. So all you can do, is to get to such official figures, either from the governments or from competition evaluations.

• Mikoyan was also issued RFI's purely for political posturing as Russia was our major defense supplier and willfully excluding them would look.

That's only your opionion and doesn't even support your point on the MKI, but more importantly, when the MRCA tender was issued, the Mig 29 had the same chance of winning as the M2K, since that tender was about a fast induction of fighters and not aimed on the industrial advantages as M-MRCA. Not to mention that the Mig 29 did a good job in Kargil too, but since it was limited to A2A it couldn't do much more, the Mig 29SMT on the otherside, was multi role capable and simular to the UPGs that we now induct. So neither was the tender against MKIs nor was there any political limitations to the Mig back then.
And excluding the Mig without offending the Russians was even very easy if IAF had insisted on single engine fighters only (M2K, Gripen and F16), that would had ruled out the Russians for technical reasons, but that wasn't the case.

Delays in LCA was the reason along with delay in MMRCA itself.

No, it was the reason for MRCA, which is why a fighter alternative was searched that was fast to induct, M-MRCA moved away from that requirement.

If IAF wanted more flankers or if it wanted Super-Flankers it would have dealt directly with Sukhoi.

Exactly, just as they did in several follow orders, that's why MKI has no relation to the MRCA / M-MRCA tenders.