Indian Aircraft Crash Notification

A contract that should have been signed at the end of 2019 got delayed by a year because HAL got a bit too greedy. It's also likely they increased the prices so the govt calls for negotiations and this way HAL buys more time for the development of Mk1A.

So yeah, with 2 jets to be delivered by March 2024, and the remaining every year after that at a minimum of 16/year, we are going to see a delivery cycle of 6 years. Basically, the year we will decommission the last Mig-21, we will commission the first full Mk1A squadron. So we will have to manage our western border with only about 50-60 jets, not a good position to be in. It will take at least 2 more years for us to be in a comfortable position.

I hope the Kiran hangar is properly leveraged to reduce the delivery time.
What we need to understand is that with the Mig21 going out we have 2 problems, which need 2 solutions.

They are first, the fall in numbers and secondly their capabilities. Ideally Mk1/Mk1A should have filled for both. But as you yourself said, let's leave what has already happened. We are looking to replace the Mig21 capabilities between 2024 to 2028. That's solving the capability , but the number problem still persists. Additional Rafale and that second hand Mig21 squadron if signed could have filled in the numbers. But then again everything depends on CAPEX. I do not have any possible solution for that as of now.
 
What we need to understand is that with the Mig21 going out we have 2 problems, which need 2 solutions.

They are first, the fall in numbers and secondly their capabilities. Ideally Mk1/Mk1A should have filled for both. But as you yourself said, let's leave what has already happened. We are looking to replace the Mig21 capabilities between 2024 to 2028. That's solving the capability , but the number problem still persists. Additional Rafale and that second hand Mig21 squadron if signed could have filled in the numbers. But then again everything depends on CAPEX. I do not have any possible solution for that as of now.

We have recently purchased 21 MiG 29s

Why cannot we increase this order to 50 planes

LCA will be further delayed

Secondly the IAF has been claiming that its accident rates per 10 ,000 hours is very low

So with this mentality , they will never replace the MIG 21
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker
We have recently purchased 21 MiG 29s
We have as of today not signed any contract either for 21 Mig29 or 12 Su30MKI.
Why cannot we increase this order to 50 planes
Mig29 is supposed to be a stop gap. We will need them to replace starting 2035. Doesn't make sense to invest a lot. Better to utilise remaining funding for force multipliers.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Sathya
What we need to understand is that with the Mig21 going out we have 2 problems, which need 2 solutions.

They are first, the fall in numbers and secondly their capabilities. Ideally Mk1/Mk1A should have filled for both. But as you yourself said, let's leave what has already happened. We are looking to replace the Mig21 capabilities between 2024 to 2028. That's solving the capability , but the number problem still persists. Additional Rafale and that second hand Mig21 squadron if signed could have filled in the numbers. But then again everything depends on CAPEX. I do not have any possible solution for that as of now.

Since a few years, I've been saying that we need a minimum of 350 jets signed by the end of the decade to arrest the fall in squadron numbers. Beyond this decade, the sheer size of our economy will take care of the rest.

So, with 83 LCAs, 36 Rafales, 21 Mig-29s and 12 MKIs, we are already at 152 new jets this decade. Follow those up with 118 LCA Mk2 and 114 MRFA, we get 384 jets. Add 40 AMCA Mk1, we get 424 jets. So we are already well set, as long as MRFA takes off. Even without MRFA, it's still a decent 310 jets which are practically assured.

Capex is a major issue only for the next few years, because we are buying so many things at once right now. A huge amount of money has gone into building new command and control facilities as well, including for BMD. Beyond 2027, pretty much all IAF projects are only on paper. None of that money has even been allocated yet. Even with a very modest average of $10B a year as capex between 2027 and 2037, up from $6B today, we get $100B. 114 Rafale will not cost any more than $20B in procurement costs. 118 LCA Mk2 will likely cost less than $12B. It's only 30% of a modest capex budget. There's enough money to double orders for both and still have 40% of the capex money left over for the decade. I don't see capex becoming a problem after 2027 when it comes to arresting squadron drawdown. Time will become more important by then.
 
Since a few years, I've been saying that we need a minimum of 350 jets signed by the end of the decade to arrest the fall in squadron numbers. Beyond this decade, the sheer size of our economy will take care of the rest.

So, with 83 LCAs, 36 Rafales, 21 Mig-29s and 12 MKIs, we are already at 152 new jets this decade. Follow those up with 118 LCA Mk2 and 114 MRFA, we get 384 jets. Add 40 AMCA Mk1, we get 424 jets. So we are already well set, as long as MRFA takes off. Even without MRFA, it's still a decent 310 jets which are practically assured.

Capex is a major issue only for the next few years, because we are buying so many things at once right now. A huge amount of money has gone into building new command and control facilities as well, including for BMD. Beyond 2027, pretty much all IAF projects are only on paper. None of that money has even been allocated yet. Even with a very modest average of $10B a year as capex between 2027 and 2037, up from $6B today, we get $100B. 114 Rafale will not cost any more than $20B in procurement costs. 118 LCA Mk2 will likely cost less than $12B. It's only 30% of a modest capex budget. There's enough money to double orders for both and still have 40% of the capex money left over for the decade. I don't see capex becoming a problem after 2027 when it comes to arresting squadron drawdown. Time will become more important by then.
We are banking a lot. Almost everything on desi developments. Meanwhile the trainer of Tejas has yet not been certified. And that is to be Mk1 standards only. Not Mk1A. I really don't think we have the resources to complete multiple development projects simultaneously.

What we have poured into AMCA development till date, South Korea has been investing 5 times that amount every year for the past 10 years. I really don't have much confidence on ADA/HAL.

Therefore batch buys of Rafale, Made in Irkut Su30MKI (only non Russian equipment fitted in India) is the way forward. Atleast till we see Mk2 and AMCA test beds flying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra
We are banking a lot. Almost everything on desi developments. Meanwhile the trainer of Tejas has yet not been certified. And that is to be Mk1 standards only. Not Mk1A. I really don't think we have the resources to complete multiple development projects simultaneously.

You can't compare privately run programs with govt sanctioned ones. SPORT is just a HAL venture.

What we have poured into AMCA development till date, South Korea has been investing 5 times that amount every year for the past 10 years. I really don't have much confidence on ADA/HAL.

That's incorrect. South Korea depends on private industry, so all the funding is clearly earmarked and made public. Otoh, AMCA is a govt run program, so finances are spread out under different overheads. For example, the South Korean funding covers the cost of salaries, utilities etc of the manpower and infrastructure, along with the construction of new infrastructure, not just R&D costs. AMCA's funding is purely R&D costs, everything else is paid for elsewhere. For example, Project Orange isn't part of AMCA's funding, but has likely costs thousands of crores to build and run. The program has barely begun and I'm sure that we have spent a lot more than the Koreans have. And then the Koreans are in the engineering stage as well, by the time we get to it, we will also have spent a lot. Let's also not forget that Korea is a first world country with first world costs. You are basically comparing the PDC cost of AMCA with program cost of KF-21.

Also, there's nothing very special about S Korea's plane, it's pretty contemporary, an equal to the Typhoon or TEDBF. AMCA is a true next gen aircraft.

Therefore batch buys of Rafale, Made in Irkut Su30MKI (only non Russian equipment fitted in India) is the way forward. Atleast till we see Mk2 and AMCA test beds flying.

I end up repeating this quite often. Rafale is necessary even if Mk2 and AMCA succeed. Mk2 is not twin engine, nor does it have the same capabilities as Rafale. And AMCA is meant to become available in numbers only after 2040, we are still in 2021. Rafale is meant to be our lynchpin for the next 20-30 years, ie 2020 to 2050. AMCA's importance lies between 2040 and 2070. They are not even in the same generation. The only thing common amongst these three jets is the term "fighter jet". Just because they look the same, a cylinder and two triangles, doesn't mean they are the same.

If batch buys are the way forward, then the initial numbers should be big enough for MII, like a program for 108 jets in 2 batches of 54 each. Private industry doesn't work like govt sector, they need a proper legally binding number given to them early on. This will also make the program cheaper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: suryakiran
I think we must start talks with TAIWAN and GREECE for buying their Second hand Mirages in Future

Both the countries are engaged in tiff with turkey & China.. And dire need of fighters.
Even when retired, they likely to keep it as reserves.

If this is second upgrade d mirage accident, we also need to investigate and fix the cause of such.