Sukhoi Su-30MKI

[randomradio]

Keep in mind that the longer an aircraft is kept flying, the more expensive its maintenance becomes as parts become rarer and rarer. I doubt India will find it cost-efficient to keep Mirage 2000 in operation past 2040.

Yeah, I think the cut off date is 2042 for the last squadrons of both Jaguar and M-2000.

 

[Milspec]

In terms of capability, the Rafales are a massive step up compared to the MKI. We need the Super MKI to keep up, and are expensive. And the Rafales are proven too.

In terms of service life, the Rafales are already at 7000-8000 hours and can be doubled again. MKI's at 6000 hours and you can expect another 2000 hours after service life extension. So I would recommending calculating the LCC based on a per hour flight basis.

The maintenance requirements for MKI are ridiculous. Apart from the extensive downtime due to regular maintenance, the MKI requires 3 expensive overhauls which costs $10-15M each time and takes many months. And that's without counting the 30 hours it stays on the ground for every hour of flight. The Rafale doesn't need overhaul and stays on the ground only for 9 hours for every hour of flight.

There are also a whole host of other advantages like quicker turnaround and greater sorties/day. In the same conditions, the Rafale will fly more than the MKI can. And in case something goes wrong with either aircraft, I can put the Rafale back in the air much faster than the MKI. For example, Rafale's engine can be replaced in 30 minutes, it takes 8 hours to do the same on the MKI.

The MKI is not cheaper than Rafale. The CPFH of the MKI is $12000 according to HAL. Rafale's CPFH is much lower at $10000 when being sourced from France, it will become much lesser once DRAL starts supplies from Indian factories.

You can't compare Russian upgrades with French. We paid almost $1B for the Mig-29s and that's only for 10 years of extra flying time, 1000 hours extra. We paid extra for the engines in a separate contract. We paid $2.5B for the M-2000s and are getting 5500 hours of extra flight time, so we can fly it for another 30-40 years. Mig-29s will have to be retired by 2030, we can use M-2000s until 2050-60 at least if necessary. So they are not the same.

I am a big fan of rafale, I would be more than happy if IAF was to get 126 Rafales heck even 200, but i have my doubts that IAF can afford to procure them. It could barely get 36.
I highly doubt that MoD has the kahones to spend large upfront acquisition cost, while it is still deciding and it dilly daly's for a decade, IAF is already grounded most of Mig27M, most of existing FL will be decommisioned by next year, and then Bisons will go earlier than its expected retirement.
In the interim, I don't see anything other than MKI's or Upgraded Mig29M, with a doable price tag that can replenish the fleet. Most of makeshift options have been already exhausted, these are the only ones that remain - IF SQDN STRENGTH IS A REAL CONCERN. If not we can wait till 2024 to get the first LW-MRCA or add on to MMRCA.

And if it does want to play the waiting game, by the time first additional aircrafts whether LWF or MMRCA hits the fleet, there is a good possibility that PAKFA could be a reality.

 

[randomradio]

I am a big fan of rafale, I would be more than happy if IAF was to get 126 Rafales heck even 200, but i have my doubts that IAF can afford to procure them. It could barely get 36.
I highly doubt that MoD has the kahones to spend large upfront acquisition cost, while it is still deciding and it dilly daly's for a decade, IAF is already grounded most of Mig27M, most of existing FL will be decommisioned by next year, and then Bisons will go earlier than its expected retirement.
In the interim, I don't see anything other than MKI's or Upgraded Mig29M, with a doable price tag that can replenish the fleet. Most of makeshift options have been already exhausted, these are the only ones that remain - IF SQDN STRENGTH IS A REAL CONCERN. If not we can wait till 2024 to get the first LW-MRCA or add on to MMRCA.

And if it does want to play the waiting game, by the time first additional aircrafts whether LWF or MMRCA hits the fleet, there is a good possibility that PAKFA could be a reality.

When it comes to Rafale's affordability, they should be smart about it. Dassault says they can initiate MII if just 36 more are ordered. Buying in tranches of 36 each every few years is so much easier than paying 15% upfront for 126.

In fact, just doing it once is fine. By the time the first 72 are delivered, we would be in 2026, our economy would have doubled, our defence imports would have reduced considerably due to import substitution and the IAF would be able to buy 100+ straight away.

In the interim, at the very best, we can buy 2 more squadrons of MKI.

PAK FA will be a reality for India. When it comes to MMRCA, we have 6 options for India alone. But when it comes to the heavy air superiority class, the whole world has only two right now, that's PAK FA and J-20. So it's not a choice. We need PAK FA regardless of what aircraft we choose for MMRCA.

 

[smestarz]

.... and we would be ones being with 4th Gen planes in surplus when even Pakistan would possibily be having 5th gen plane as its mainstay
Dassault can weave a lot of BS just to get orders, its too desperate for orders now after all the tech on Rafale is almost outdated and its the same reason why the Americans are trying to push for F-16 block 70 and Swedes for their Gripen NG..

When it comes to Rafale's affordability, they should be smart about it. Dassault says they can initiate MII if just 36 more are ordered. Buying in tranches of 36 each every few years is so much easier than paying 15% upfront for 126.

In fact, just doing it once is fine. By the time the first 72 are delivered, we would be in 2026, our economy would have doubled, our defence imports would have reduced considerably due to import substitution and the IAF would be able to buy 100+ straight away.

In the interim, at the very best, we can buy 2 more squadrons of MKI.

PAK FA will be a reality for India. When it comes to MMRCA, we have 6 options for India alone. But when it comes to the heavy air superiority class, the whole world has only two right now, that's PAK FA and J-20. So it's not a choice. We need PAK FA regardless of what aircraft we choose for MMRCA.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

So there will be a 30% difference in weight between Rafale and Gripen if specs are reached.

But they will not reach the specs. To reach the specs they need to get the level of skill of Dassault, and my estimate is that they have only the level of skill of Eurofighter. It's like Vstol: the magnificent performance of his LSA or his MSA is due in large part to the very low mass of his aircrafts. But to achieve this you must be better than Dassault in the Airframe design, which is not credible for someone who is alone and has no experience in the construction of aircraft.

 

[vstol Jockey]

But they will not reach the specs. To reach the specs they need to get the level of skill of Dassault, and my estimate is that they have only the level of skill of Eurofighter. It's like Vstol: the magnificent performance of his LSA or his MSA is due in large part to the very low mass of his aircrafts. But to achieve this you must be better than Dassault in the Airframe design, which is not credible for someone who is alone and has no experience in the construction of aircraft.

You are correct. However my design calculations have been done using the best mathematical models used all over the world and these calculations are for a metal structure. MSA fuselage length is just 13.75m partly dues to a smaller 3.5m length engine. The aircraft empty weight is 6.9 tons which is higher than Gripen C/D empty weight of 6.7 tons which had a fuselage length of 14.2m.
Also compare the empty weight of my design with LCA which at present is 6.5 tons with a 13.2m fuselage. MK1A will surely be about 5750kgs. So my design is still over one ton heavier compared to LCA MK1A.

Finally the reason for excellent performance for my design is not low weight but I have applied the lessons learnt from Mirage F1 aircraft to my design. My design will probably be the only aircraft which will use BLC even during combat. The very strong STOL ability of my design gives it such a performance.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

You are correct. However my design calculations have been done using the best mathematical models used all over the world and these calculations are for a metal structure. MSA fuselage length is just 13.75m partly dues to a smaller 3.5m length engine. The aircraft empty weight is 6.9 tons which is higher than Gripen C/D empty weight of 6.7 tons which had a fuselage length of 14.2m.
Also compare the empty weight of my design with LCA which at present is 6.5 tons with a 13.2m fuselage. MK1A will surely be about 5750kgs. So my design is still over one ton heavier compared to LCA MK1A.

Finally the reason for excellent performance for my design is not low weight but I have applied the lessons learnt from Mirage F1 aircraft to my design. My design will probably be the only aircraft which will use BLC even during combat. The very strong STOL ability of my design gives it such a performance.

Yes but you use very high power engine for the mass of your plane, normally you have to reinforce the structure to do that.

 

[lcafanboy]

They want to save fuel. That's why SE MMRCA came into being.

So it all comes down to, "KITNA DETA HAI".......

 

[vstol Jockey]

Yes but you use very high power engine for the mass of your plane, normally you have to reinforce the structure to do that.

yes and that is the reason that it is heavier than its contemporaries. I have not used an overpowered engine but a correctly powered engine for INDIAN conditions.
MSA is a French design as it uses lessons learnt from DA. I am a great admirer of French technology including their wine and women. LOL.

 

[randomradio]

But they will not reach the specs. To reach the specs they need to get the level of skill of Dassault, and my estimate is that they have only the level of skill of Eurofighter. It's like Vstol: the magnificent performance of his LSA or his MSA is due in large part to the very low mass of his aircrafts. But to achieve this you must be better than Dassault in the Airframe design, which is not credible for someone who is alone and has no experience in the construction of aircraft.

7T is not unrealistic. Especially if we are aiming to get to 5.8T on a 13.2m airframe. If we add 2 more meters for Gripen E, we will be adding 1T more, so 6.8T.

 

[vstol Jockey]

7T is not unrealistic. Especially if we are aiming to get to 5.8T on a 13.2m airframe. If we add 2 more meters for Gripen E, we will be adding 1T more, so 6.8T.

I am willing to share the formulas which I have used and also all metal design fighters from history to prove my point. I have even shared it with Cmde Mao and he has found them to be on the higher side but correct for prototype stage. Though I do have serious differences with him regarding RSS design vs low positive stability design of MSA.
I am going ahead with my design and will even join hands with Leonardo systems as co-development partner using Eurofighter tech and avionics package.

 

[vstol Jockey]

@Picdelamirand-oil, somehow it appears to me that DA or the French govt is following what I have been posting here or on the previous forum. Their decision to support Kaveri and go for higher thrust version of it besides supporting LCA MK1A design is one such example. French are playing their card extremely well as they have killed SE tender which is now completely LCA game. This will ensure that Rafale gets more orders and no other design is able to cut down Rafale orders.
MSA is more like IJF-Indian Joint Fighter in SE category. It comes with folding wings design also and from design stage itself it has been designed as a Naval fighter. The more I speak to people who are called the certified and unquestionable experts about my design, more I get convinced that I am on correct path. I am putting my own money in it and I am convinced that I will succeed. The failure means that I will be rendered a bankrupt man.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

@Picdelamirand-oil, somehow it appears to me that DA or the French govt is following what I have been posting here or on the previous forum. Their decision to support Kaveri and go for higher thrust version of it besides supporting LCA MK1A design is one such example. French are playing their card extremely well as they have killed SE tender which is now completely LCA game. This will ensure that Rafale gets more orders and no other design is able to cut down Rafale orders.
MSA is more like IJF-Indian Joint Fighter in SE category. It comes with folding wings design also and from design stage itself it has been designed as a Naval fighter. The more I speak to people who are called the certified and unquestionable experts about my design, more I get convinced that I am on correct path. I am putting my own money in it and I am convinced that I will succeed. The failure means that I will be rendered a bankrupt man.

The strategy is easy: it's to help IAF in the battle against MOD. To improve LCA allow IAF to avoid Gripen and F-16.
Saab and Lockheed are facing Indian time and during this time at Dassault we work. I have always said that when the first Rafales will be delivered to the IAF, they will no longer accept to import other planes.
I add the same for IN

 

[Ironhide]

@Picdelamirand-oil, somehow it appears to me that DA or the French govt is following what I have been posting here or on the previous forum. Their decision to support Kaveri and go for higher thrust version of it besides supporting LCA MK1A design is one such example. French are playing their card extremely well as they have killed SE tender which is now completely LCA game. This will ensure that Rafale gets more orders and no other design is able to cut down Rafale orders.
MSA is more like IJF-Indian Joint Fighter in SE category. It comes with folding wings design also and from design stage itself it has been designed as a Naval fighter. The more I speak to people who are called the certified and unquestionable experts about my design, more I get convinced that I am on correct path. I am putting my own money in it and I am convinced that I will succeed. The failure means that I will be rendered a bankrupt man.

Why not get some big Indian company as your partner? You will get economic, political and media advantage this way, no point facing bankruptcy in a sector where everything is either delayed or cancelled.

 

[Noodler]

The failure means that I will be rendered a bankrupt man.

Capt Amol got 35000 crores for his project (which is nothing more than a cessna 172), with the promise to create jobs. Why not just go to a state that wants economic development so that you get some initial thrust.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

That plane is a joke. SARAS is a far better one and has lesser cost. I simply don't see this as anything other than a stunt

Capt Amol got 35000 crores for his project (which is nothing more than a cessna 172), with the promise to create jobs. Why not just go to a state that wants economic development so that you get some initial thrust.

 

[vstol Jockey]

The strategy is easy: it's to help IAF in the battle against MOD. To improve LCA allow IAF to avoid Gripen and F-16.
Saab and Lockheed are facing Indian time and during this time at Dassault we work. I have always said that when the first Rafales will be delivered to the IAF, they will no longer accept to import other planes.
I add the same for IN

You started a poll about fighters for India. I voted for Rafale. It might surprise you but I have been consistent about my choice that Rafle is best for India. Even to the iN I had stated that combination of SE MSA and Rafale is what they need. 100% rafle fleet or 100% MSA fleet is not the best of the options.

 

[Noodler]

SARAS

Ur comparing apples and oranges. I wonder how much it would have cost to set up a Cessna beechcraft plant for a 60 year old design. The guy's plane must be a lemon but he's worked his a$$ to get to this stage. Let us give him a little credit.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

Ur comparing apples and oranges. I wonder how much it would have cost to set up a Cessna beechcraft plant for a 60 year old design. The guy's plane must be a lemon but he's worked his a$$ to get to this stage. Let us give him a little credit.

He did work hard but the 35000 crore is not worth the price when there is already a readymade aircraft which is fully flightworthy and is much cheaper. SARAS too less than $1 billion to be made developed and flight tested. This $5+ billion for making a new plane with no new addition is really laughable.

 

[Milspec]

All aircraft have their own part to play in such exercises. MKI and Mig-29 almost always handle fighter sweep and top cover. Jaguars and Mig-27s are always strike. Mig-21 always plays escort. M2K can switch between recce, strike and escort as and when necessary.

I call BS on this one. We have configured multiple exercises with 3 MKI carrying Strike element, 2 MKI as escorts and 4 M29's as High Alt Air Sup configs N number of times.
MKI's have been configured for strike as well as Air Sup configs multiple times when I was around.

But once you bring in Rafales, none of the above becomes necessary. The Rafales will take over fighter sweep, top cover, escort, recce and strike all at once. Even the strike equipped Rafales can join the fight after they have dropped their loads. AMCA is basically a more modern Rafale. So these are the two jets actually qualified to replace the Jaguar.

Funny thing is all you mention about Rafales above, MKI's have been doing for IAF for the past one and half decade.

Even the strike equipped Rafales can join the fight after they have dropped their loads

(Just FYI thats not how air combat works in this day and age)

The 20m2 RCS MKI is not fit for strike missions anymore. Compared to the latest fighters coming out now, it's obsolete in the air to air domain also. We have a short window of about 5-10 years where the MKI will continue to be useful as a frontline aircraft where it will still be useful against PAF. Post-2025, the MKI is history. The upgraded version will be good for another 10 years after it's operational, but it will still not be a commander's first choice against more capable aircraft like the J-20 or SAMs like the S400. Hence a very bad choice if we are to replace the Jaguars with MKIs. We will need aircraft like Rafale, AMCA and FGFA. After a point, the MKI will only be good as a missile truck supporting better aircraft or as a bomb truck if the environment is permissible. The F-15 in the USAF has already been reduced to this status now.

Funny how MKI's are toast post 2025, but te mighty Jag will continue to give it's stellar performance till 2040.

So please stop pushing the MKI down the IAF's throats. The MKI is based on 40-year-old technologies and even they know it is reaching its expiry date. Else they would have followed your advice and bought a lot more.

Well they did, from 150 to 270 of em, and take it what its worth, it will baloon to 300. Not much you or I can do about it.