MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[_Anonymous_]

Actually the ACM is in-agreement with your viewpoint. We don't have enough offensive firepower against PLAAF, so our strategy is defensive in nature. Just hold PLAAF from doing too much damage having a nice synergy between our Advance IADS and fighter jets and let IA do its job.

As strange it may sound, but IA has lot more offensive firepower against PLA than IAF has against PLAAF.

You must be joking. Have you seen the procurement policies & the ORBAT of the IA ? It's in tatters. If you think the IAF is in a bad shape let me assure you the IA's in a worse shape.

Our only strategy will eventually coalesce around human waves without actually sending human waves across. In short a hugely destructive war of attrition where old farts get to offer medals & commiserations on the corpses of young ones & nothing else.

To make matters worse it's the Agniveers who'd be holding the positions there not veterans like we have today.

All our plight is because we didn't procure 120 Rafales back in 2012 and dropped out of FGFA. Two of the biggest blunders in our mil-aviation history, IMO.

The Rafales yes. The PAKFA itself hasn't fructified as on date ,what to speak of the FGFA ? Latest reports indicate that the Item 30 TF is facing some issues which led the RuAF to suspend further deliveries of the PAKFA . They've received all of 2 nos this year after a gap of nearly 1.5 years with the AL-41 TF.

Regarding MKI upgrade, well the plan is to upgrade the fleet in tranches, with each subsequent upgrade being much potent than the previous one. MKI UPG. is going to be a drastically different aircraft than the current one and all the new stuff need to be validated/flight tested before hitting full rate upgrade cycle. Hence the 7 year timeline.

What's the point of a silver bullet after the war & what's the point of medicine after the patient has passed away is what I'm trying to point out here !

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Here it is

Rafales WITHOUT GAN AESA will be Outdated

 

[randomradio]

Okay, after the half-arsed ricidulous expose in post 5184, we get news that the ACM did talk quite a bit about MRFA.

IAF Capable to Take On Any Adversary: Air Chief AP Singh

Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Amar Preet Singh on Friday (October 4) said that China is rapidly building

raksha-anirveda.com

He emphasised the need to learn from past delays and push forward with plans like the Medium Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) programme. “We have made our requirements very clear and we are waiting for responses. Importantly, these aircraft must be made in India,” he said.

On the future of a multi-role fighter aircraft (MRFA) JV programme that would manufacture 114 jets with a foreign partner in India, the IAF Chief said, “We needed the MRFA as of yesterday.”

“If the Tejas Mark 2 gets into production, as planned, by 2028, and MRFA is signed, we are not too badly off. If these timelines are getting pushed, we have to look at alternatives,” he said.

 

[randomradio]

We abandoned GaN for the F4 in favour of a multi-channel digital receiver, which is necessary for the RBE2 XG anyway and which gives a better range (even better than GaN) in heavily jammed environments. Basically, you're choosing between better range when it's easy and better range when it's hard, and we've opted for the latter, knowing that later we'll have both.

Delaying GaN for the radar is fine, but it's necessary for SPECTRA.

Only the Israeli towed decoy could act as a stopgap for a while on the Indian version.

This is one area where the threat environment outpaces the financial abilities of the French. The SH has already been flying with a GaN EW suite as of 2016. France is lucky Russia has fallen behind by a few years compared to the Chinese.

 

[randomradio]

There's one thing I haven't said here because I know it won't please you, but in the end it doesn't matter. The hard thing to do is not to reproduce a high-tech device, but to reproduce the factory that made it possible to build this device efficiently, i.e. at a competitive cost. This is the difference between craftsmanship and industry. Prototypes are craft, and production aircraft are industry. And you've done industry with the Jaguar and the SU-30 MKI for example, but the factory was supplied to you by foreigners. And for the LCA programme, it's up to you to design the factory, and to say the least, it's been laborious.

So you can't easily produce the planned quantities of ACLs. We're patient, we know that one day you'll ask us for more Rafales.

MRFA is necessary, as per ACM, but our LCA production is pretty decent. As per HAL, the LCA is being made with the same tolerances as Rafale and Typhoon. Only the basic design is a generation older than the other two, we will catch up with TEDBF and AMCA. In any case, we are not in a race with Europe until the 2040s.

I think in just a few years we (IAF, not us lot here) will be able to compare IUSAV with whatever France and UK have cooked up via MRFA.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Delaying GaN for the radar is fine, but it's necessary for SPECTRA.

Only the Israeli towed decoy could act as a stopgap for a while on the Indian version.

This is one area where the threat environment outpaces the financial abilities of the French. The SH has already been flying with a GaN EW suite as of 2016. France is lucky Russia has fallen behind by a few years compared to the Chinese.

If you have seen Ananth Krishnan's interview with Dr JADHAV , Chief of ADA , he said that MK 1A has GAN AESA DRFM JAMMER

Also another video by Alpha Defence talks of Growler like EW Variant for SU 30 Which will carry Both GAN AESA And Heavy Jammers for Replacing SAP 14 and SAP 518

 

[randomradio]

While the ACMs statements were aimed at the powers that be, his comment about a 'defensive' posture vs the PLA sends all the wrong signals imo at a time when we're locked in a face-off with them.

This could impact ongoing negotiations over patrolling rights along the border. Now India is no Philippines but such comments should never have been made in public, imo.

Whatever happened to adopting Chanakya niti in response to China's Sun Tzu?

Our posture vis-a-vis PLAAF was always defensive. They have always had 3000-4000 jets compared to the IAF's 900+.

Only very, very recently have they taken a lead, and for the very first time a chunk of their air force is finally employable against India to a high capacity.

So this is already well-known.

 

[Rajput Lion]

You must be joking. Have you seen the procurement policies & the ORBAT of the IA ? It's in tatters. If you think the IAF is in a bad shape let me assure you the IA's in a worse shape.

Unlike IAF, which can't match PLAAF in numbers, IA can match PLA in proper mirror deployment. "Quantity has a quality of its own", remember. In fact, this swift mirror deployment by IA against PLA post Galwan is what proved to be a huge deterrent. Chinese are very wary of fighting IA over the mountains.

Our only strategy will eventually coalesce around human waves without actually sending human waves across. In short a hugely destructive war of attrition where old farts get to offer medals & commiserations on the corpses of young ones & nothing else.

To make matters worse it's the Agniveers who'd be holding the positions there not veterans like we have today.

Let's see how this Agniveer/Agnipath scheme goes.

The Rafales yes. The PAKFA itself hasn't fructified as on date ,what to speak of the FGFA ? Latest reports indicate that the Item 30 TF is facing some issues which led the RuAF to suspend further deliveries of the PAKFA . They've received all of 2 nos this year after a gap of nearly 1.5 years with the AL-41 TF.

Actually it's delayed because they're integrating Raptor like flat nozzles. Al-51F is ready now.

What's the point of a silver bullet after the war & what's the point of medicine after the patient has passed away is what I'm trying to point out here !

I too hope that we've MKI UPG. ready before the next Indo-China war.

Here it is

Rafales WITHOUT GAN AESA will be Outdated

Bullshit!

If you have seen Ananth Krishnan's interview with Dr JADHAV , Chief of ADA , he said that MK 1A has GAN AESA DRFM JAMMER

Yes, ASPJ pod with GaN. MK1A also has SPECTRA like wideband digital-RWR(1-40GHz).

Also another video by Alpha Defence talks of Growler like EW Variant for SU 30 Which will carry Both GAN AESA And Heavy Jammers for Replacing SAP 14 and SAP 518

Both GaN HBJ pods are ready as SAP 518 replacement. But they will only become operational in the MLU as it's designed to work with a wideband digital RWR(1-40GHz) that is far more advance than current Dhruti DR118(1-18GHz). So far haven't heard anything about SAP 14 replacement. But I hope that we do make our own low-band GaN jamming pod. E/A-18G also now has GaN based NGJ fully operational.

 

[Speedster1]

Our posture vis-a-vis PLAAF was always defensive. They have always had 3000-4000 jets compared to the IAF's 900+.

Only very, very recently have they taken a lead, and for the very first time a chunk of their air force is finally employable against India to a high capacity.

So this is already well-known.

I guess we should all be grateful he didn't call the Tejas a 'three legged cheetah' like one former officer. While squadron numbers are falling off a cliff, the IAF is still demanding software mods, canopy reprofiling and other tweaks, holding up Tejas induction.

Problem is they are still thinking and acting like an uppity customer - as if this were not their baby. We only have to look at the Pakistanis to see how an AF should champion local products. They inducted the JF-17 by the dozens, with critical flaws like wing cracks, radar gliitches and what not.

While the IAF is happy to make concessions for foreign manufacturers like Dassault (inducted M2000 with an older engine initially) but will insist on full-spec for local products.

On the Rafale induction, the less said the better. Still looks like "they don't have a Plan B", like a former ACM (Raha?) said back in 2015- nearly 10 years later. And while they pine like a jilted lover for the S-400, they continue to twiddle thumbs on systems like Akash-NG which has been ready for a while now.

We're never going to match China's manufacturing scale and that is not the plan. The least you'd expect is a ACM who doesn't think himself the underdog.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Delaying GaN for the radar is fine, but it's necessary for SPECTRA.

Only the Israeli towed decoy could act as a stopgap for a while on the Indian version.

This is one area where the threat environment outpaces the financial abilities of the French. The SH has already been flying with a GaN EW suite as of 2016. France is lucky Russia has fallen behind by a few years compared to the Chinese.

Whether or not GaN is needed for SPECTRA, I'll leave to the specialists at Thales, but if GaN is needed for SPECTRA, it will be there: there are no technical difficulties in introducing GaN for either Radar or SPECTRA, and what's more, for SPECTRA the antennas are small, so the cost is reasonable.

 

[randomradio]

As strange it may sound, but IA has lot more offensive firepower against PLA than IAF has against PLAAF.

By design. The IA is more threatening than IAF to the Chinese due to the potential for loss of land.

All our plight is because we didn't procure 120 Rafales back in 2012 and dropped out of FGFA. Two of the biggest blunders in our mil-aviation history, IMO.

Given what we know today, I don't think those Rafales would have helped a lot. We would have been in a better position, but we needed far more advanced capabilities than that.

FGFA wasn't realistic 'cause the Russians weren't playing ball, but I won't be surprised if we get to know MMRCA was closed due to creeping obsolescence rather than financial issues, although that would have played a part. For example, we were negotiating for F3+, and it could not be upgraded to F5 or F6, and has its own separate MLU process which would have made it less capable in the future.

IAF officers have been known to complain about how we start a tender and then induct old stuff 'cause the tender would take a decade to deliver.

For example, the RBE2 AESA was already older than the American APG-83 SABR and APG-84 RACR by the time MMRCA was complete, and now the APG-79(V)4 GaN radar. This was also the reason given for focusing on indigenization, which resulted in Uttam Mk2 coming up to Western standards around the same time as they did.

As for what Ignorants is ranting about, he's made two mistakes. First, he thinks a funny video by Andrew Tate deserves the same seriousness as a doctoral thesis that's regularly cited. I don't have to explain why, but that limits his own intellect.

Second is he thinks quite a bit of the equation between India and China has changed since before, but it's not so. Our posture against China was always defensive, both air force and army. The IAF merely had a technological edge, but it's the Chinese that have held an offensive posture against India for decades, both in the air and on the ground, primarily on the ground. They have had a 3 million-man strong army for decades alongside 4000 fighters. They planned on using 25-30 divisions against India back then. And we maintained a defensive posture with a few mountain divisions and a few hundred fighter jets, mostly Mig-21s.

Since 1995, they phased out over 3000 fighter jets out of 4000+, and reorganized their ground forces to less than a million men and still maintain an offensive posture against India. Btw, those are 4000 "fighters," not counting another 1000+ fighter-bombers and multirole aircraft like the J-10 and J-11. Their bomber fleet back then was 400+ too.

After 2020, the IA has rapidly switched to an offensive-defense posture with their 2 new MSCs, new border infrastructure and talk of setting up the IRF, whereas IAF has only carried that out their plans on paper. That's why I think when the Chinese started their reorganization under Xi Jinping, the Modi govt killed MMRCA and FGFA in exchange for a new strategy, which evolved into today's MRFA and AMCA.

Had we stayed the course with MMRCA, we would have ended up with a lot of outdated jets by 2025-30, a repeat of MKI. MMRCA was designed to maintain a defensive posture against the Chinese, and the FGFA was an MKI replacement program. Once MKI's lifespan was enhanced to 40-50 years instead of 25-30, and ADA/HAL fixed issues with LCA, new options showed up, so the MoD began plans for Project Ghatak and AMCA, with MRFA enabling the two programs in the form of a technology partner.

These two programs, and MRFA, now provide the IAF the capabilities necessary to switch to an offensive posture. This is the reason why MRFA is necessary and will happen. And the latest comments from the ACM confirm that.

In the meantime, the IAF will continue to maintain a defensive posture against China with its new IADS and introduction of new weapons, which was always part of the plan beforehand.

 

[randomradio]

I guess we should all be grateful he didn't call the Tejas a 'three legged cheetah' like one former officer. While squadron numbers are falling off a cliff, the IAF is still demanding software mods, canopy reprofiling and other tweaks, holding up Tejas induction.

There was truth in what was said back then. ADA tried pushing an unfinished product onto the IAF prematurely.

Problem is they are still thinking and acting like an uppity customer - as if this were not their baby. We only have to look at the Pakistanis to see how an AF should champion local products. They inducted the JF-17 by the dozens, with critical flaws like wing cracks, radar gliitches and what not.

All they have done is sign their death warrants. The PAF made a mistake, and they will pay for it quite brutally.

While the IAF is happy to make concessions for foreign manufacturers like Dassault (inducted M2000 with an older engine initially) but will insist on full-spec for local products.

Not true. DRDO changed LCA specs. The IAF wanted M2000 specs from the 80s on LCA, for introduction in the mid-90s, but DRDO changed it to M2000 specs from the late 90s for introduction in the mid-2000s, but took until the mid-2010s to deliver.

When the IAF first wanted LCA, it was a simple aircraft with hydraulics, with an old analog radar capable of targeting one with the old R-60 WVR missile. DRDO introduced all new stuff without involving the IAF, made it heavy and useless.

On the Rafale induction, the less said the better. Still looks like "they don't have a Plan B", like a former ACM (Raha?) said back in 2015- nearly 10 years later. And while they pine like a jilted lover for the S-400, they continue to twiddle thumbs on systems like Akash-NG which has been ready for a while now.

We're never going to match China's manufacturing scale and that is not the plan. The least you'd expect is a ACM who doesn't think himself the underdog.

My previous post should have answered some of this. I'll add another post a bit later explaining why we are in this situation.

 

[randomradio]

If you have seen Ananth Krishnan's interview with Dr JADHAV , Chief of ADA , he said that MK 1A has GAN AESA DRFM JAMMER

Also another video by Alpha Defence talks of Growler like EW Variant for SU 30 Which will carry Both GAN AESA And Heavy Jammers for Replacing SAP 14 and SAP 518

We are introducing GaN on fighters faster than Europe.

 

[randomradio]

Whether or not GaN is needed for SPECTRA, I'll leave to the specialists at Thales, but if GaN is needed for SPECTRA, it will be there: there are no technical difficulties in introducing GaN for either Radar or SPECTRA, and what's more, for SPECTRA the antennas are small, so the cost is reasonable.

We have to wait and see if IN chooses GaN for SPECTRA then.

 

[Ginvincible]

While the ACMs statements were aimed at the powers that be, his comment about a 'defensive' posture vs the PLA sends all the wrong signals imo at a time when we're locked in a face-off with them.

This could impact ongoing negotiations over patrolling rights along the border. Now India is no Philippines but such comments should never have been made in public, imo.

Whatever happened to adopting Chanakya niti in response to China's Sun Tzu?

We're never going to match China's manufacturing scale and that is not the plan. The least you'd expect is a ACM who doesn't think himself the underdog.

It's not a secret tho? Forget actual defence planners, even enthusiasts can see the difference clear as day. The PLAAF thoroughly outclasses the IAF and the IA will have to pay for it in blood. I see these comments as a plea for help. To prevent many needless deaths in an upcoming conflict by finally prioritizing modernization. India is a democracy, if the uninformed masses can be shown the state of the forces, and rallied, they can demand change at the polls.

Given what we know today, I don't think those Rafales would have helped a lot. We would have been in a better position, but we needed far more advanced capabilities than that.

India would be sitting much prettier today with 120 rafales. MMRCA1 wasn't just the fighters, but also a lot of backend infrastructure to support them, quickly induct more, the experience gained, etc. It's all in the past now, I just hope the various procurement bureaus have learned from their past failures.

 

[LX1111]

As strange it may sound, but IA has lot more offensive firepower against PLA than IAF has against PLAAF. All our plight is because we didn't procure 120 Rafales back in 2012 and dropped out of FGFA. Two of the biggest blunders in our mil-aviation history, IMO

It can only be said that it is a failure of India, after all, who would have thought today when the Su-30 was mass-produced? In other words, India does not have a rational plan at all, he buys things like a street vendor, he buys everything in sight and does not think about tomorrow.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

We have to wait and see if IN chooses GaN for SPECTRA then.

I think , what has happened is that IAF has matched SU 30 with Rafales and then decided how to go about Upgrading the SU 30


That is how the New Radars and Jammers have evolved and transpired

If SU 30s can match Rafale capability, then we are in a good position

 

[randomradio]

India would be sitting much prettier today with 120 rafales. MMRCA1 wasn't just the fighters, but also a lot of backend infrastructure to support them, quickly induct more, the experience gained, etc. It's all in the past now, I just hope the various procurement bureaus have learned from their past failures.

I think the choice was between getting the IA ready or throwing money at the Rafale when the Chinese were moving up the value chain phenomenally faster than anyone else. 36 Rafales gives us most of the stuff you said.

It appears that what prevented the IAF from advancing was the MKI. According to earlier plans, the first 84 MKIs were supposed to be sitting pretty with an AESA radar and an advanced BVR missile between 2015-20, maintaining parity with the PLAAF. But what followed was the IAF not anticipating India's economic failure and China's technological rise, which subsequently ruined all other plans.

What's interesting is that after the induction of M2000 and Mig-29, the IAF had only 2 good ideas since then, until 2022. One was the Bison upgrade and the other was procuring MKI. Pretty much all their other procurement plans for fighters were just really, really bad, be it replacing Jaguar's engines, delaying M2000's upgrade and ultimately their MRCA, MMRCA and FGFA circus which led to the premature investment into a large number of less capable LCA. Only the Mig-29 upgrade went normally, at least as far as the IAF's track record is concerned. It took them until 2022, quite comically, to finalize what they really wanted. LCA Mk2, MKI MLU, MRFA and AMCA were finalized then. Along with I'm assuming 50 large satellites out of a total requirement of 250 satellites by 2032.

So the finalized doctrine evovled in 2022.

https://indianairforce.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2MB.pdf

“Indian Air Force should become Aerospace Force and be readyto protect the country from ever evolving threats.”~Raksha Mantri’s Keynote Address, MoD PIB Delhi Release: 05 May 2022

Now they desire to become an "Air and Space Force" and rebrand themselves to the IASF. So now they have settled on LCA, MRFA, MKI and AMCA. But this required almost 20 years of trial and error and missed opportunities to get to.

So, yeah, let's hope this is the culmination of all that they have learned after over two decades of mistakes. We can't keep repeating this circus. Whatever they decided in 2022 is what's going to define our airpower for the next 30 years.

 

[randomradio]

It can only be said that it is a failure of India, after all, who would have thought today when the Su-30 was mass-produced? In other words, India does not have a rational plan at all, he buys things like a street vendor, he buys everything in sight and does not think about tomorrow.

The worst plans were made by the US. We can see that with both F-22 closure and the current progress of the F-35. The B-21 is their saving grace.

The second worst plan is China. You may think you have a good plan, but the only reason it appears so is because the Americans screwed up their own plans. Had the Americans not stopped at 187 F-22s and the F-35 was even a few years ahead, the PLAAF would have been entirely incapable of challenging the USAF. Even after screwing up, the USAF still maintains a significant advantage over the PLAAF.

As for India, the biggest problem was money. The IAF's plans were centered around 8-9% GDP growth. But after India's economy failed between 2011 and 2014, the main plan had to be rolled back. Yes, India is not the best planner in the world, but most of the problems are because our procurement budget is just $7 billion, even lesser in 2011. PLAAF's budget could easily be 10 times higher. USAF's is 20 times higher. The IAF now has a new plan, we should see the result in 10 more years.

Remember, everything India's achieved in the military and space fields to date is by spending a fraction of the amount US and China have. For example, India's total expenditure on space since the start of the space program is half that of NASA's yearly budget.

India makes mistakes, but we do not have the luxury to go shopping without care.

 

[randomradio]

I think , what has happened is that IAF has matched SU 30 with Rafales and then decided how to go about Upgrading the SU 30


That is how the New Radars and Jammers have evolved and transpired

If SU 30s can match Rafale capability, then we are in a good position

That would be desirable. The IAF's MKI upgrade plan has been going on since 2010.