IAF Chronicles - A side view of whats going on behind the closed doors in New Delhi

[randomradio]

BTW @randomradio, there was never any SE Tender, ever.

GoI had sent EoI to LM and SAAB and asked them what they would be offering IF GoI decides to consider acquiring them to arrest the falling sqn strength. Looks like HAL has managed to convince GoI that Mk-1A and Mk-2 will be enough (IAF concurs) for India's light fighter category instead of wasting money on another SE jet.

The introduction of a new MMRCA competition could be GoI's plan to force US/LM to officially offer the F-35A against France's Rafale. It'd be interesting to see if this is indeed the case.

How about hearing it from the person who authored the RFP himself?

With respect to the MMRCA, the RFI was signed and sent out in November 2004 under my signature… The fact or the point that you’re raising that the air force didn’t have a contention or consideration about cost factors – that two entrants were late entrants – is not entirely correct. It was a very well thought out process. Why because the first four that were involved and in consideration – except for the Gripen – the others were forty-year-old technologies. And you’re going to be inducting an aircraft which was going to come in late – the first decade of the 2000s originally – and you’d be using it for the next forty years. And it was not – we raised the question that is it was worth looking at three of the contenders – F-16, Mirage 2000 and the MiG-29 – they’re forty-year-old technologies. And that was the reason which was also accepted by MoD. And they raised the same question. That’s how the 20-ton limitation was removed. So the light-weight, medium and heavy aircraft consideration again needs to be looked at in the context – they are irrelevant today. And that’s the argument I put on the file and that was accepted at that point of time. You cannot categorize aircraft anymore as light – categorization can only be differentiated in terms of cost considerations and in terms of usage and quick rotation capabilities.”

 

[Aashish]

Only one survived . Rafale.. and with Safran kaveri engine deal in India , the floating story by LM finally fell apart..

Get ready to soon now new stories.. F35, Mig35, PAKFA, F-18, Gripen etc etc..

Finally one plane will come.. Rafale

 

[Aashish]

Govt scraps single-engine fighters plan, asks IAF to go for wider competition - Times of India - Govt scraps single-engine fighters plan, asks IAF to go for wider competition - Times of India
Govt scraps single-engine fighters plan, asks IAF to go for wider competition - Times of India


Govt scraps single-engine fighters plan, asks IAF to go for wider competition - Times of India

 

[zinswinsin]

There's no way no how the Rafale beats the F-35 in a fair competition. Rafale has been ducking such a competition with the F-35 ever since the program reoriented in 2010.

Rafale withdrew from bidding on the Danish and Belgium bid.

However, I doubt Lockheed is allowed to send the F-35.

probably F-16V sadly.

 

[_Anonymous_]

There's no way no how the Rafale beats the F-35 in a fair competition. Rafale has been ducking such a competition with the F-35 ever since the program reoriented in 2010.

Rafale withdrew from bidding on the Danish and Belgium bid.

However, I doubt Lockheed is allowed to send the F-35.

probably F-16V sadly.

Are you suggesting the Rafale is inferior to the F-35 ??? Sacrilege !!!Mon dieu !! You better edit your content else the French contingent here will fall on you like a ton of bricks . Make that 10 tons.

Sacre Bleu ! Your only hope here would be @BMD , which to be frank , as many veterans here will attest, is like being thrown both ends of the rope while you're drowning .

And there's @randomradio who'd merrily change sides before you blinked your eyelids , coming up with the kind of spin which would make veteran spinners like Ashwin and politicians like Sharad Pawar blush or turn crimson with a mix of envy and anger .Arguably he's one reason why Sancho hasn't turned up here , frustrated by his flip flops and slippery reasoning and in turn frustrating the rest of us on Older Forum by his obduracy and doggedness . It was a vicious circle which had everyone except randomradio tear out their hair .

 

[Nick]

The SE requirement was separate from LCA

2001-2004. M-2000, Mig-29 and F-16. It was a tender to purchase an aircraft that had an MTOW below 20T.

Please, show me a tender document/RFI wherein the govt asks OEMs of only M-2000, Mig-29 and F-16 to submit bids.
There never was any. So your point is moot.

Also if it was an SE requirement, why MiG-29? Again contradiction.

It didn't 'evolve' per se. It was an additional requirement.

MMRCA was about number of engines.

If it was about the number of engines, why Gripen and F-16? Again contradiction, where you yourself said above that the MMRCA had additional requirements over that of M-2000 class.

There is nothing contradictory in what I said. Air to air is merely one parameter.

Gripen can potentially beat the Rafale in MMRCA 2.0. But that doesn't take away Rafale's other advantages with respect to range and payload.

Why is air-to-air advantage relevant here? MMRCA is based on overall performance. Why bring it up?
Also where did IAF source officially or unofficially state Gripen had an A-A advantage?

If we had the money, both programs would have been parallel acquisitions. But we can only go for one at a time.

Costs are controlled by the vendors, not the govt.

Whatever the price the vendor quotes, without GoI approving the funds, the acquisition will not take place. Hence GoI has the final say.

How about hearing it from the person who authored the RFP himself?

Where does he say that a separate SE tender was released before MMRCA? He was saying that that at first only F-16, Gripen, Mig-29/35 and Mirage-2000 were considered but later changed since most of them were 40-year-old technology. When Rafale, Typhoon and F/A-18 entered, the whole MMRCA requirements were changed as they offered better capabilities compared to three of the first four. But it was too late to remove them from the competition and were allowed to stay.

Your quote doesn't answer any of the questions I raised.

 

[Nick]

This claim is contrary to facts. The IAF has already ordered 123 LCA

After having already ordered the LCA, the IAF was trying to pursue the Gripen also.

When the LCA missed the timelines, the whole dynamics of the acquisition shifted. It was no more about final number/economics but about induction rate. LCA will never meet IAF's deadline of 42 sqn before 2035 with just 2 assembly lines. Feelers sent to pvt industries to start a third line failed spectacularly due to their apprehensions with HAL. IAF suggested additional Rafale orders asap, GoI fumbled due to monetary constraints as the 2016-17 capital budget for IAF was already exceeded. GoI suggested another SE to IAF to fill the gaps and IAF reluctantly agreed.

The govt simply developed cold feet at the prospect of a single vendor situation and asked the IAF to combine their SE and TE requirements into one single requirement (a much better idea), which means even the final numbers purchased will be very large. The govt fears that the IAF will tailor make the RFP in favour of the Gripen and we will end up with a scam on our hands.

Wait, you said IAF was always interested in SE jets other than LCA. So how does joining SE and TE tenders solve that problem? Only one fighter wins the competition, either a SE jet or a TE jet. If Rafale again wins the MMRCA 2.0, then how will IAF fill the SE requirement? Another SE tender?
If Gripen wins, how will IAF fill TE requirements?

See the problem with your argument?

Sources have told ThePrint that the defence ministry is not yet convinced with the air force argument for breaking up its requirements into two parts – a new single engine jet line and a different double engine jet programme.

Contrary to popular belief, the govt has nothing to do with the IAF bifurcating their requirement into SE and TE.

Says an anonymous source, You believe it over Air Chief's own words??

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

There's no way no how the Rafale beats the F-35 in a fair competition. Rafale has been ducking such a competition with the F-35 ever since the program reoriented in 2010.

Rafale withdrew from bidding on the Danish and Belgium bid.

However, I doubt Lockheed is allowed to send the F-35.

probably F-16V sadly.

The Rafale will beat the F-35 in the Belgian competition. Only Rafale allow a true integrated sensor fusion. F-35 one doesn't work.

 

[randomradio]

Are you suggesting the Rafale is inferior to the F-35 ??? Sacrilege !!!Mon dieu !! You better edit your content else the French contingent here will fall on you like a ton of bricks . Make that 10 tons.

Sacre Bleu ! Your only hope here would be @BMD , which to be frank , as many veterans here will attest, is like being thrown both ends of the rope while you're drowning .

And there's @randomradio who'd merrily change sides before you blinked your eyelids , coming up with the kind of spin which would make veteran spinners like Ashwin and politicians like Sharad Pawar blush or turn crimson with a mix of envy and anger .Arguably he's one reason why Sancho hasn't turned up here , frustrated by his flip flops and slippery reasoning and in turn frustrating the rest of us on Older Forum by his obduracy and doggedness . It was a vicious circle which had everyone except randomradio tear out their hair .

Weird. Not even one of my opinion has changed to date.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Weird. Not even one of my opinion has changed to date.

Was just kidding . chill !!

 

[Nick]

The Rafale will beat the F-35 in the Belgian competition. Only Rafale allow a true integrated sensor fusion. F-35 one doesn't work.

In all fairness, the Belgian requirements need to be looked at carefully before saying Rafales will win hands down.

The French offer for an industrial partnership to the Belgians, might at first glance look like a better proposition, but offers little advantage to a country like Belguim especially for an order of that size. The investment is directly proportional to the number of fighters they buy and in their case is too low other than to create a few hundred more jobs in their country.

The Belgian AF will not be undertaking any lone missions and will always be under the aegis of NATO. With the F-35 which offers better data fusion and networking with other F-35s in the NATO fleet would be better in terms of interoperability. Also, the support system will be less expensive and much more integrated due to the scope of F-35 program.

Rafales are much better at operating alone under extreme Anti-Access/Area Denial scenarios and doesn't require external support. But being part of a NATO fleet, there will always be dedicated EW support aircraft thereby negating that advantage for Rafale in the case for Belgium.

 

[randomradio]

Please, show me a tender document/RFI wherein the govt asks OEMs of only M-2000, Mig-29 and F-16 to submit bids.
There never was any. So your point is moot.

Also if it was an SE requirement, why MiG-29? Again contradiction.

Again, it not a contradiction. The first RFI was sent out to Dassault, LM, Saab and Mig. Had this program gone into the RFP stage, the Russians wouldn't have actually participated. Dassault later withdrew their aircraft because its production was coming to an end.

Google "2001 MRCA RFI".

The first program was called MRCA, and then they removed the 20T restriction and changed the name to MMRCA.

If it was about the number of engines, why Gripen and F-16? Again contradiction, where you yourself said above that the MMRCA had additional requirements over that of M-2000 class.

AM Matheswaran already cleared it. Just look at my previous post to A Person. The F-16 and Gripen stayed because the IAF couldn't ask them to leave.

The F-16 and Gripen had no chance in the MMRCA simply because of one engine.

Why is air-to-air advantage relevant here? MMRCA is based on overall performance. Why bring it up?

Everything is relevant. Air to air has the highest grade out of all parameters.

Also where did IAF source officially or unofficially state Gripen had an A-A advantage?

For that, you need to enlarge your friend's group.

Whatever the price the vendor quotes, without GoI approving the funds, the acquisition will not take place. Hence GoI has the final say.

GoI having the final say is irrelevant. They can only accept or reject. Everything else is up to the IAF and the vendors.

Where does he say that a separate SE tender was released before MMRCA? He was saying that that at first only F-16, Gripen, Mig-29/35 and Mirage-2000 were considered but later changed since most of them were 40-year-old technology. When Rafale, Typhoon and F/A-18 entered, the whole MMRCA requirements were changed as they offered better capabilities compared to three of the first four. But it was too late to remove them from the competition and were allowed to stay.

Your quote doesn't answer any of the questions I raised.

2001 MRCA.

..:: India Strategic ::. IAF: Building IAF's fighter force

 

[randomradio]

When the LCA missed the timelines, the whole dynamics of the acquisition shifted. It was no more about final number/economics but about induction rate. LCA will never meet IAF's deadline of 42 sqn before 2035 with just 2 assembly lines. Feelers sent to pvt industries to start a third line failed spectacularly due to their apprehensions with HAL. IAF suggested additional Rafale orders asap, GoI fumbled due to monetary constraints as the 2016-17 capital budget for IAF was already exceeded. GoI suggested another SE to IAF to fill the gaps and IAF reluctantly agreed.

The first plan was to induct 6 LCA and 6 M-2000 squads in parallel. 2001 RFI for M-2000.

The second plan was to induct 6 LCA, 6 Rafale and 6 Gripen squads in parallel. 2004 RFI was for twin engine aircraft. M-2000 was out of contention.

The third plan is the latest plan: 6 LCA and 6 Rafale. Obviously, Rafale numbers will now cross 15 squads.

Wait, you said IAF was always interested in SE jets other than LCA. So how does joining SE and TE tenders solve that problem? Only one fighter wins the competition, either a SE jet or a TE jet. If Rafale again wins the MMRCA 2.0, then how will IAF fill the SE requirement? Another SE tender?
If Gripen wins, how will IAF fill TE requirements?

If you are talking about before yesterday, then IAF would have held two MMRCA programs. One will have Gripen and F-16 competing, the other will have Rafale and other TEF competing. So two aircraft will be chosen and we will have two MMRCA production lines for 120-200 aircraft each.

See the problem with your argument?

I don't see any problem. There were three independent programs. SE, TE and LCA.

GoI wants to combine SE and TE into one program while IAF wants two separate programs.

Says an anonymous source, You believe it over Air Chief's own words??

Lol. Those are the Air Chief's words.

 

[randomradio]

https://www.livefistdefence.com/201...ngine-jet-bid-after-strat-partner-policy.html
Apart from the single-engine fighter contest, Livefist can confirm that both Boeing and Dassault have been formally informed that the requirement for a twin-engine Make in India fighter will be floated once the Indian MoD finalises and announces its strategic partnership policy (Minister Parrikar yesterday suggested there was only ‘5% work left’). Both companies also concur that the deal will be to supple well over 150 jets to the Indian Air Force (and, potentially, the Indian Navy), and a focus to export to the global market.

 

[randomradio]

Strategic Partnership model to be finalised by Jan end, search on for another single engine fighter line: Manohar Parrikar
Parrikar confirms India requires another single engine fighter line that will be done under the SP model.

Parrikar makes it clear that a competition for twin engine made in India fighters will also be considered, but not this year.

 

[randomradio]

The Rafale will beat the F-35 in the Belgian competition. Only Rafale allow a true integrated sensor fusion. F-35 one doesn't work.

Unless the Common Defence plan takes off completely, it makes more sense for the smaller European countries to buy American jets and maintain their partnership.

 

[zinswinsin]

The Rafale will beat the F-35 in the Belgian competition. Only Rafale allow a true integrated sensor fusion. F-35 one doesn't work.

Yeah easy to say when you ignore the tender.

 

[randomradio]

@vstol Jockey

With the SE and TE MIIs clubbed together, I suppose your SE version of MSA will easily win a contract with the IAF.

 

[Nick]

Again, it not a contradiction. The first RFI was sent out to Dassault, LM, Saab and Mig.

The first program was called MRCA, and then they removed the 20T restriction and changed the name to MMRCA.

Don't try to squirm away when cornered.

I asked you for the proof of a SE tender before MRCA/MMRCA which is what you claimed, saying IAF had a need for another SE jet over and above the LCA.

AM Matheswaran already cleared it.

The F-16 and Gripen had no chance in the MMRCA simply because of one engine.

You're just going round and round in circles. if F-16 and Gripen didn't have a chance in the last MMRCA, what chance do they have now? Then how will IAFs SE requirement be met?

Stop making up things to suit your narrative.

Everything is relevant. Air to air has the highest grade out of all parameters.

So? How does that make Gripen the best MMRCA?

For that, you need to enlarge your friend's group.

Or you could just quote your source and make it easier for the both of us. Don't know why you're reluctant to back up your claims with hard facts and 'named' sources.

GoI having the final say is irrelevant. They can only accept or reject.

Doesn't the whole competition revolve around that final 'acceptance' from the govt? Then i don't know how you can say the govt's say is irrelevant.

2001 MRCA.

..:: India Strategic ::. IAF: Building IAF's fighter force

Instead of quoting whole articles, quote his actual words, where he says IAF sent RFI for SE jets before MRCA/MMRCA.

The first plan was to induct 6 LCA and 6 M-2000 squads in parallel. 2001 RFI for M-2000.

The second plan was to induct 6 LCA, 6 Rafale and 6 Gripen squads in parallel. 2004 RFI was for twin engine aircraft. M-2000 was out of contention.

The third plan is the latest plan: 6 LCA and 6 Rafale. Obviously, Rafale numbers will now cross 15 squads

Wow, you really are good at pulling numbers from out of that place where sunlight doesn't reach.

If you are talking about before yesterday, then IAF would have held two MMRCA programs. One will have Gripen and F-16 competing, the other will have Rafale and other TEF competing. So two aircraft will be chosen and we will have two MMRCA production lines for 120-200 aircraft each

Im talking about the combined SE+TE tender and you know it. Don't act all dumb.

I don't see any problem. There were three independent programs. SE, TE and LCA.

GoI wants to combine SE and TE into one program while IAF wants two separate programs.

Again, I'm asking you. Since the GoI has decided to combine both SE and TE requirements, how will IAF meet the other requirement as only one of them will be selected (either an SE or a TE)?

Lol. Those are the Air Chief's words.

Does the below look like it's from the ACM?

Sources have told ThePrint that the defence ministry is n

Quote his exact words please!

https://www.livefistdefence.com/201...ngine-jet-bid-after-strat-partner-policy.html
Apart from the single-engine fighter contest, Livefist can confirm that both Boeing and Dassault have been formally informed that the requirement for a twin-engine Make in India fighter will be floated once the Indian MoD finalises and announces its strategic partnership policy (Minister Parrikar yesterday suggested there was only ‘5% work left’). Both companies also concur that the deal will be to supple well over 150 jets to the Indian Air Force (and, potentially, the Indian Navy), and a focus to export to the global market.

Strategic Partnership model to be finalised by Jan end, search on for another single engine fighter line: Manohar Parrikar
Parrikar confirms India requires another single engine fighter line that will be done under the SP model.

Parrikar makes it clear that a competition for twin engine made in India fighters will also be considered, but not this year.

What are you trying to prove? That there was plans to induct both SE and TE jets under SP? I already agreed to that. But i'm asking you to prove your claim that SE requirements over and above LCA existed before MMRCA.
SP model came in 2016.

BTW, something that will bust your claims, found it randomly in today's ToI article.

It was the then defence minister Manohar Parrikar who had advised IAF to go in for the single-engine production line because he said the country could afford only 36 of the twin-engine Rafales for meeting its “critical operational necessity” immediately.

Govt scraps single-engine fighters plan, asks IAF to go for wider competition - Times of India

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Yeah easy to say when you ignore the tender.

Until now the Belgian were not able to eliminate the French proposal....