India Considering The F-16?

[Rickshaw]

[4. India has access to Russian weapons. Cheap. The Russians don't care about India developing nuke tipped ICBMs because they know who the ICBMs are to be used against: The US.

 

Err, right, yeah. OK, on what basis do you make such an outlandish claim?

 

If the Indians were to purchase ICBMs and abandon their own programme, they would be intended for use against their traditional enemies - Pakistan and China, rather than the US, which has very cordial relations with India. Even at their lowest, during the 1960s and 70s, Indian relations with the US were far from being frosty.

[TSJ]

Err, right, yeah.  OK, on what basis do you make such an outlandish claim?

 

If the Indians were to purchase ICBMs and abandon their own programme, they would be intended for use against their traditional enemies - Pakistan and China, rather than the US, which has very cordial relations with India.  Even at their lowest, during the 1960s and 70s, Indian relations with the US were far from being frosty.

144219[/snapback]

 

Baron: Please read my reply below at message #16 (I think) in which I list 7 or 8 reasons. Thanks, TJ

 

Make that post #17.

Edited February 11, 2005 by TSJ

[Vijay Reddy]

Leaving aside big-ticket items like aircraft, what other equipment would India want from the US? India (as far as I know) has a reasonably capable defence industry. Some programs such as their indigenous tank and light fighter aircraft seem to have taken an inordinate amount of development time, but I would think that items like infantry equipment, missiles, radars, etc. could be developed and bought at home.

144191[/snapback]

 

US could supply India with:

 

1. E-2Cs for the Gorshkov (talks underway)

 

2. American Special forces equipment especially for airborne and amphibious ops. Example - Lightweight carbines equipped with day and night sights, silencers and ammunition, Radio transponders to guide aircraft and helicopters behind enemy lines, Sound suppressors for boat engines, Remote detonation devices/systems,

 

3. DSRVs and portable decompression systems to be used in underwater rescue

 

4. Secure comm and imagery devices for use with military satellites

 

5. Solid fuel rocket technology (long shot but hey...)

 

6. Thermal sights/Night vision tech

 

7. Miscellaneous Electronic Warfare systems

 

8. Encryption systems

 

9. Secure VHF Radios

 

10. Unattended ground sensors that work under all temperatures/weather conditions

 

etc.

 

Some of these have been developed locally but the services would kill for American tech, no pun intended.

[nitin]

India is good at electronics- we make our own range of radars, VHF/HF etc equipment, the IAF, IN , IA are implementing locally developed 128 bit encryption algorithms....

 

Radars- the new Indian corvettes have a locally developed 3D radar, the IAF uses a bunch of local radars, the IA ditto. The IAF and DRDO are now working on building 3 AESA equipped AWAC's. The LCA's radar will be India's first airborne FCR and compares well (features wise) with an intermediate between the Zhuk M and the Kopyo M. An electronic array is already in development.

 

In the past couple of years, the IAF implemented a nationwide ADGES improvement designed and developed by local industry- all bases and defensive/ offensive systems are to be networked and brought online.

 

What India *does* want are certain niche items where Indian industry has a low footprint:

 

DSRV's for sub rescue for eg.

 

Weaponry for special forces- all the gee whiz doodads which are being used to good effect in Afghanistan - like carbines (M4 vs Tavor) etc,

 

Units like the E2C are also niche- there are no comparable systems as far as India is concerned.

 

Other items like solid fuel rocket tech- India has already achieved it.

 

The Agni -1 has it. The Astra AAM (in devpt but test fires already conducted )has it. The Pinaka has it.

 

Similarly in EW - there are a whole bunch of local developers and international suppliers....from DRDO/ECIL/BEL etc and a bunch of private firms locally to the UK, Israel and France..

 

Unattended ground sensors are yet another niche item, which India has already purchased.

 

In other words, the US wants to move beyond the niche item thing and sell entire systems to India.

 

The key word is trust....as long as the US is indefinitely involved with Pak, I dont see Indian security planners relying on the F-16 for a third of the IAF's frontline combat fleet. JMHO.

 

Swerve, imho the MiG 29 is not a frontrunner. RAC MiG have been tardy with spares in the past, which HAL and the IAF had to make up via local manufacture. So they have that (-). Plus, if we go for the 29, we'll be overreliant on Russia and I'd say the IAF doesnt want that. Even in the 80's we balanced our acquisitions- Jags vs MiG27's, Mirages vs MiG 29's...its just that per unit costs of the MiG's (negligible) made them very attractive vis a vis Western systems in the 80's and early 90's, when the Indian economy was a bit stagnant.

Edited February 11, 2005 by nitin

[nitin]

Well, not really. The engine's american (possibly the ejectorseat as well), otherwise it's all european IIRC.

 

I think the Gripen is out for 2 other reasons;

 

1. Not a great history on large military deals between the twp cpontries.

 

2. The (relatively) limited range of the Gripen.

 

The AMRAAM problem (in the Finnish competition) is no longer as appatent as beore, especially since there are alternatives coming.

144125[/snapback]

 

Per what I know the Gripen has pretty significant US content apart from the Engine. A lot of the electronics assemblies are sourced from the US, from companies like Kaiser. The FCS actuators and much of the FCS hardware comes from Moog. The AESA under development has many critical parts, such as the Tx/Rx antenna block supplied by the US.

 

Then theres the Engine.

If not for this high proportion of (sanctionable) US content, the Gripen would have stood a very fair chance in the Indian competition.

 

Ok here it is:

 

The foreign content of Gripen is high, 60% by value comes from NATO member countries, 70% from EU members (including Sweden), so upwards 30% is US content, contributed by more than 25 companies. (These figures may have changed slightly since South African companies became involved.)

 

Suppliers of some of the systems include:

 

    * Presentation and recording systems, genaral and weapons computers, flight control actuators and air data sensors: Ericsson Saab Avionics

    * Radar (PS-05/A) and system computers (SDS 801): Ericsson Microwave Systems

    * Turn around, servicing, maintenance and testing equipment: Celsius Aerotech

    * Engine: Volvo Aero Corporation in cooperation with General Electric

    * Radome: Nobel Plastics

    * Flight control system: Lockheed Martin, USA

    * APU: Sundstrand, USA

    * Landing Gear: BAE Systems, UK

    * Main landing gear, wing attachment assembly of complete centre fuselages: BAE Systems, Brough, UK

    * Main Landing Gear Unit (actually a large, major lower central section of the fuselage with lots of associated systems): Denel Aviation, South Africa. (from late 2001 for all Gripens)

    * Fuel system: Intertechnique, France

    * INS: Honeywell, USA

    * ECM dispensers: CelsiusTech; Ericsson Saab Avionics is responsible for the EWS 39 system

    * HUD: Kaiser, USA

    * Radio: Rockwell, USA

    * Audio management system: Grintek, South Africa. The one for the export version based on their GUS 1000

    * Hydraulics: Abex, Germany and Dowty, UK

    * Generator: Sundstrand, USA

    * Air and cooling: BAE Systems, UK

    * Escape system: Martin Baker, UK

    * Stores pylons for the export version: Denel Aviation, South Africa

    * Airbrake and scoop actuators: Jihlavan a.s., The Czech Republic

    * Parts of the tailcone: PZL, Poland

    * Fuselage components: Danube Aerospace, Hungary

 

(Back to) more on JAS 39 Gripen.

Document created 1999, last updated 2001 Mar 18 by Urban Fredriksson

http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/partners.html

 

And

http://www.moog.com.au/noq/_programs__c176/

 

JAS-39 Gripen

JAS

JAS-39 Gripen 

JAS-39 Gripen Flight Control Actuators

 

    * FBW Flight Control System

 

    * Direct-Drive Servovalve Technology

 

    * Triplex Digital Flight Computer

 

    * Dual Hydraulic System (4000 psi)

 

    * Triplex Electrical Position Feedback

 

    * Pre-Flight BIT (Built-In Test)

 

    * Multi-Operation – Fully Active – Redundant

Incidentally Moog has supplied the LCA actuators as well, but since the LCA is about creating a local industrial base, several of the actuators have been indigenised and the rest are being worked upon.

For the Gripen, this was obviously not a priority, so I dont think the Indian Govt would like to spend extra on Sweden sourcing parts from elsewhere and having to redesign etc.

 

The IAF already spent through its nose to do that for the Hawk.

Edited February 11, 2005 by nitin

[Slater]

It just seems that Special Forces-related gear could be locally manufactured or purchased from any number of European or Asian countries.

[swerve]

Swerve, imho the MiG 29 is not a frontrunner. RAC MiG have been tardy with spares in the past, which HAL and the IAF had to make up via local manufacture. So they have that (-). Plus, if we go for the 29, we'll be overreliant on Russia and I'd say the IAF doesnt want that. Even in the 80's we balanced our acquisitions- Jags vs MiG27's, Mirages vs MiG 29's...its just that per unit costs of the MiG's (negligible) made them very attractive vis a vis Western systems in the 80's and early 90's, when the Indian economy was a bit stagnant.

 

Nitin,

 

I agree, for all the reasons you give. I was replying to a post which suggested the MiG-29 wasn't a viable contender, & saying why I thought it viable. But that's not the same as saying it's likely to win. In Korea, the Typhoon & Rafale were viable contenders (i.e. they'd do the job if bought), but the F-15 was going to win, unless the Americans insisted on making it unbuyable. They agreed to cut the price & upgrade the equipment fit, & the Koreans bought the plane they always intended to, with the kit they wanted, at a price they were happy with. The tender process was to make sure they got the last two of those three. Same in India, I think. The deal is Dassaults to lose, not MiGs to win, & Dassault will only lose it if they demand an extortionate price or refuse to include decent modern systems. But Dassault aren't stupid, & they want the sale.

 

For a deal that big, I wonder if it's worth a significant upgrade. Would the Rafale radar fit in a M2K? The AESA version (it's PESA now) is being worked on, & should be available by the time they're delivered, IIRC. Is that feasible, do you think? An AESA Indian M2K?

 

From the Gripen figures you cite, it was (pre-S. Africa deal) ca 40% Swedish, 30% other EU, 30% US. Truly international. I'm sure the US components could be replaced, but the development cost would be considerable. Engine would be the biggest problem, then FCS.

 

 

Paul

[Daniel Papp]

I just don't know how does IN want to operate E-2C from a ski-jump? Though someone on BRF claims they could modify it somehow. Using the good old booster rockets?

[TSJ]

I just don't know how does IN want to operate E-2C from a ski-jump? Though someone on BRF claims they could modify it somehow. Using the good old booster rockets?

 

 

Coming in for landing the crash net better be a real doosie, too.

[nitin]

I just don't know how does IN want to operate E-2C from a ski-jump?  Though someone on BRF claims they could modify it somehow. Using the good old booster rockets?

144447[/snapback]

 

 

Well BRF is merely posting what the manufacturers claim. They note that its "possible" to launch the E2C without a catapult...but I hope its not a one way trip!

 

[nitin]

Nitin,

 

I agree, for all the reasons you give. I was replying to a post which suggested the MiG-29 wasn't a viable contender, & saying why I thought it viable. But that's not the same as saying it's likely to win. In Korea, the Typhoon & Rafale were viable contenders (i.e. they'd do the job if bought), but the F-15 was going to win, unless the Americans insisted on making it unbuyable. They agreed to cut the price & upgrade the equipment fit, & the Koreans bought the plane they always intended to, with the kit they wanted, at a price they were happy with. The tender process was to make sure they got the last two of those three. Same in India, I think. The deal is Dassaults to lose, not MiGs to win, & Dassault will only lose it if they demand an extortionate price or refuse to include decent modern systems. But Dassault aren't stupid, & they want the sale.

 

For a deal that big, I wonder if it's worth a significant upgrade. Would the Rafale radar fit in a M2K? The AESA version (it's PESA now) is being worked on, & should be available by the time they're delivered, IIRC. Is that feasible, do you think? An AESA Indian M2K?

 

From the Gripen figures you cite, it was (pre-S. Africa deal) ca 40% Swedish, 30% other EU, 30% US. Truly international. I'm sure the US components could be replaced, but the development cost would be considerable. Engine would be the biggest problem, then FCS.

Paul

144356[/snapback]

 

 

I'd love to see an AESA M2K but I think an AESA M2K is a bit of a stretch, the RDY2 itself is pretty expensive and replacing it with the new Thales AESA will send prices up further. Then theres the issue of whether Dassault would want to undercut the struggling Rafale by upgrading the Mirage 2000 with one of the Rafales USP's.

 

Incidentally the passive RBE 2 had a Mirage 2000 test bed, only difference being that the electrical system was different on the test bed, so technically speaking it is possible to fit the RBE2 into the Mirage 2000. But the RDY 2 was supposed to be longer ranged and more capable. The PESA RBE-2's track here while scan there ability came at a price- the AESA will probably eliminate that shortfall and with update has the ability to get LPI features etc in the future.

 

Personally speaking, they should go for the Rafale with AESA and integrate it with R77's, Derby's and Python's + Israeli LG guidance kits. That should reduce the munition cost some, since the French munitions are supposed to be pretty expensive. This if the 9B$ thing is true and our renowned Indian journalistic establishment is not speaking out of its posterior (we can hope!).

 

I agree about the Gripen, they could replace the US made components but reengineering will be a heck of a job plus the Kroners involved will see the IAF running off ..

[nitin]

It just seems that Special Forces-related gear could be locally manufactured or purchased from any number of European or Asian countries.

144330[/snapback]

 

American special forces gear has the glamour factor!

[nitin]

Something interesting

 

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=1310

 

 

The American F-15 E that has been slotted out of the Aero India show has an Indian connection in the cockpit. Twenty seven-year-old Capt Raja Chari flying the fighter is an Indo-American.

 

Chari, whose father is Indian and mother American, is among the few Indian-origin citizens who make it to the American services. ‘‘My father moved to the US many years ago, but he is originally from Hyderabad. Many of my relatives are still there,’’ Capt Chari said.

 

Advertisement

Though he has been in the city only for the last few days, he has struck an instant rapport with Indian pilots here. ‘‘We interacted with MiG-29 and Sukhoi-30 pilots and I must say, I find a lot of similarities among us. I had a great time discussing flying techniques and manoeuvres with them. They are all extremely well-trained and highly skilled pilots,’’ he added.

 

Clad in a flying suit, Capt Chari first dreamt of flying when he was 13 and struggled all the way to climb into the cockpit. ‘‘It is not always easy. You have to make many sacrifices, give up some fun stuff. I have to stay away from my wife for long periods. But it’s worth all the effort. Flying this craft is an indescribable experience. Every day, I am glad that I am here, working for a higher cause.’’

 

He has been flying the F-15 E for a little less than two years now, before which he flew trainers for three years.

 

The Indian Express caught up with him just as he was leaving to see relatives in Hyderabad. ‘‘I would love to fly this craft there, it’s unfortunate I am taking a civilian flight,’’ he joked.

 

And his advice for aspiring pilots in the country: ‘‘Always keep your eyes on the goal and be prepared to put in plenty of hard work.’’

[TSJ]

Vijay, are you ldev on the "other forum" ? Not that it makes any difference, just idle curiosity.

Edited February 12, 2005 by TSJ

[Ivanhoe]

I'd love to see the Indian Navy prod DOD to resurrect the Common Support Aircraft. Both navies would get enormous use out of it.

[Rickshaw]

Baron: Please read my reply below at message #16 (I think) in which I list 7 or 8 reasons. Thanks, TJ

 

Make that post #17.

144222[/snapback]

 

 

I read it. I wasn't impressed. You appear to be mistaking the chattering of those who are not in power for the level-headed thinking of those that are. India has been moving towards rapproachment with the US for over a decade. Most recently this has taken the form of joint exercises, one of which required Indian aircraft to fly from India to Alaska. Hardly the stuff of hatred, I'd suggest. The realities are that if India wants Pakistani designs in Kashmir and Jamu limited, it has to talk just as much to the Organ Grinder as to the Monkey.

[Rickshaw]

Finally and lastly, I can't think of any other country that Indian ICBMs are needed for except as a deterrant against the US.  As this message is off thread topic, I will no longer post any more messages about Indian ICBMs or nukes. Thanks.

143890[/snapback]

 

And I would point out, again that India's relations with the US are improving, not decreasing. Further, India has made it quite clear that its quest for nuclear detterence is aimed squarely at Pakistan and secondarily at China. You appear to forget that India is still officially in a state of war with China and disputes most of its northern border with that state.

[nitin]

I read it.  I wasn't impressed.  You appear to be mistaking the chattering of those who are not in power for the level-headed thinking of those that are. India has been moving towards rapproachment with the US for over a decade.  Most recently this has taken the form of joint exercises, one of which required Indian aircraft to fly from India to Alaska.  Hardly the stuff of hatred, I'd suggest.  The realities are that if India wants Pakistani designs in Kashmir and Jamu limited, it has to talk just as much to the Organ Grinder as to the Monkey.

144871[/snapback]

 

 

Sir, that was classic!!

Edited February 13, 2005 by nitin

[nitin]

And I would point out, again that India's relations with the US are improving, not decreasing.  Further, India has made it quite clear that its quest for nuclear detterence is aimed squarely at Pakistan and secondarily at China.  You appear to forget that India is still officially in a state of war with China and disputes most of its northern border with that state.

144872[/snapback]

 

Furthermore,

 

I'd love to see this Indian ICBM- the only BM on the cards right now is the Agni-3, squarely targetting China. As of now, an Indian ICBM vs the US is a myth.

 

And if big, bad India is really targetting the US, why is the naive US attempting to sell P3C's, C130J's, F-16's to India?

 

Something doesnt quite add up.

[nitin]

I'd love to see the Indian Navy prod DOD to resurrect the Common Support Aircraft. Both navies would get enormous use out of it.

144703[/snapback]

 

Well the only joint transport a/c program running right now is the MTA- with Irkut.

Nice video here:

http://www.irkut.com/common/img/uploaded/IRTA_full_eng-1.wmv

 

But what you said makes perfect sense- if joint development was offered rather than lic production, it would be very hard for India to refuse!

[alfa]

if France decides to be cocky then it can run into a surprize. like IJT engines and ADS consultancy contract. i think france is dragging its feet on allowing india deep manufactering contract for ALH engines even though 300 have been ordered. (even for shakti only 11% value addition will be done by india)

[nitin]

if France decides to be cocky then it can run into a surprize. like IJT engines and ADS consultancy contract. i think france is dragging its feet on allowing india deep manufactering  contract for ALH engines even though 300 have been ordered. (even for shakti only 11% value addition will be done by india)

144883[/snapback]

 

 

Hey alfa, long time no see. How goes life?

 

The 300 are to be imported- there are no plans to manufacture them.

 

Any source for the 11% VA about the Shakti?

 

HAL is responsible for the design of several of its core components and as of last year, they were busy designing and redesigning ..

[TSJ]

And I would point out, again that India's relations with the US are improving, not decreasing.  Further, India has made it quite clear that its quest for nuclear detterence is aimed squarely at Pakistan and secondarily at China.  You appear to forget that India is still officially in a state of war with China and disputes most of its northern border with that state.

144872[/snapback]

 

It is quite clear that you do not understand what ICBMs are and how they are to be used. Also, you are aparently mystified about the US-Pakistan-India dynamic and its ramifications. Have a nice day. - TSJ

Edited February 13, 2005 by TSJ

[Gregory]

Then, given that IAF Su-30MKI already have strike capability, why not just standardize on them?

[swerve]

Then, given that IAF Su-30MKI already have strike capability, why not just standardize on them?

 

1) For the reason Nitin spelled out, that India doesn't want to be too dependent on a single supplier. India has divided its equipment purchases between different suppliers since independence, e.g. Mystere IV & Hunter, MiG-27 & Jaguar, MiG-29 & Mirage 2000, & seems committed to continuing this policy.

 

2) The Su-30 is a large aircraft, & expensive to buy and operate. The new fighter purchase is intended as a lower-tier supplement, to enable India to have larger numbers than would be possible with a Su-30MKI only fleet. This is a practice followed by many air forces, including the USAF & USN. Your argument, if applied to the USA, would lead to an F-22 only USAF fleet. Maybe it's a good idea, but it isn't what's happening.