Never-seen battle in Indian skies (Mig-35 vs Super Hornet) - Page 5

sohamsri · 04-28-2008, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kuku

126-180 Rafale/typhoon might be a bit overkill in the Afghanistan/Bangladesh/Bhutan/Burma/China/Maldives/Nepal/Pakistan/Sri-Lanka type of a neighbourhood, and a F-16 type of a plane in good numbers should do the job for the AF, until the Chinese and Russians come up with magically produced 5th gen planes then the place might see another little race.

Not f-16s sir. Pakistan already has them. We obviously want something which is better and more modern. Although the reliability of the f-16 is unbeatable.
(contrast to the mig 29s India has)

FullTank · 04-28-2008, 13:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sohamsri

you are right about the pros of rafale.

But i dont think the mig is so bad that it should not be in the race.
MIG-35 IS GOOD FOR GOD'S SAKE ! nobody understands that.

I know that buying the mig 29 was suicidal for India, but thats exactly what the mig-35 is learned form of.

They have fixed all the problems of the mig-29 and added a lot of bonuses.

We'll understand it better when Russia starts inducting it in large numbers in their Air Force first.

There are just too many points why Mig-35 shouldnt be chosen. political wise, performance and maintianence cost wise and also dependency wise. Gorshkov incident, more money for sukhois, holding back codes for brahmos, delays and failure of other equipment purchased besides, india reducing dependency of russia is just some of the reasons.

If you see beyond just acrobatics and consider all factors you will understand why Migs shouldnt be chosen.

Else if your supporting just because of being a die hard russian fan well then there's no point discussing.

BenRoethig · 04-28-2008, 15:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Grape

I stand corrected.

But if that is their "offer" why didn't they send one to India? They sent C's and D's.

Thay would be like Boeing offering Superhornets but sending c/d to the "Flyoff" with a note saying "The ones we want you to buy are much better"

No wonder Saab has not done good in foreign sales.

Because they just finished the prototype. Its like asking to send a F-35C for evaluation.

zraver · 04-28-2008, 15:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Grape

I stand corrected.

But if that is their "offer" why didn't they send one to India? They sent C's and D's.

Thay would be like Boeing offering Superhornets but sending c/d to the "Flyoff" with a note saying "The ones we want you to buy are much better"

No wonder Saab has not done good in foreign sales.

Saab has done very well with foreign sales:

compare- The Gripen has won as many NATO countries as the Hornet, and does way better than France.

Gripen- Czech Republic, Hungary, South Africa, Thailand.

F/A-18 family- USA, Canada, Austraila, Finland, Kuwait, Maylasia, Spain, Switzerland

Rafale- France

Gun Grape · 04-28-2008, 17:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zraver

Saab has done very well with foreign sales:

compare- The Gripen has won as many NATO countries as the Hornet, and does way better than France.

Gripen- Czech Republic, Hungary, South Africa, Thailand.

F/A-18 family- USA, Canada, Austraila, Finland, Kuwait, Maylasia, Spain, Switzerland

Rafale- France

Yea but Gripen is Saabs only game. Do you expect Boeing to push the f-18 over the F-16?

Also look at the Hornets, they are specialized aircraft with lots of unneeded weight. Its a carrier plane. The hornet has done great in that we have sold carrier planes to people that don't have carriers.

The only other customer that should have been interested in the hornets is France. They are the only other country with a real aircraft carrier. And we know they were not going to buy them.

Gun Grape · 04-28-2008, 17:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

Because they just finished the prototype. Its like asking to send a F-35C for evaluation.

But the F-35 wasn't up for the contract. Never send the "B" team for a sale. They should have sent the prototype along with the c/d's

Tronic · 04-28-2008, 17:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sohamsri

and secondly y dont u keep in mind that the hornet is gonna be outclassed by the raptors and the f-35, what do we do then ?

And the Mig-35 wont?

Tin Man · 04-28-2008, 23:07 PM

More on the Gripen. After further reading, this "supercruise" offered by the Gripen is unverified outside of the manufacturer. Indeed, earlier versions could not manage it at all.
The Gripen NG with `414`s has a marginal supercruise at 1.05 Mach, firmly rooted in the transonic regime, and this with a light combat load or maybe even clean. This label will only hinder it, I would suggest SAAB drop this and concentrate on its "real" capabilities.
Even the Typhoon`s 1.2M supercruise seems only slightly better, unless the aircraft can sustain that speed without killing range too much.

The Gripen has done better because it is cheaper, smaller, been around longer (first operational 4th gen`), and is tailored to suit a smaller nations budget and operational requirements. (look at customer list.)

If India wants a tactical fighter bomber with long legs, Gripen isn`t it. I think a country like India should be thinking bigger, and badder than the Gripen.

zraver · 04-28-2008, 23:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tin Man

More on the Gripen. After further reading, this "supercruise" offered by the Gripen is unverified outside of the manufacturer. Indeed, earlier versions could not manage it at all.

Uhmm its had the ability with a loadout for awhile.

Quote:

The Gripen NG with `414`s has a marginal supercruise at 1.05 Mach, firmly rooted in the transonic regime, and this with a light combat load or maybe even clean.

Thats for the 404 with a AAM loadout

Quote:

This label will only hinder it, I would suggest SAAB drop this and concentrate on its "real" capabilities.
Even the Typhoon`s 1.2M supercruise seems only slightly better, unless the aircraft can sustain that speed without killing range too much.

Eurofighter is the one that can only supercruise clean.

Quote:

If India wants a tactical fighter bomber with long legs, Gripen isn`t it. I think a country like India should be thinking bigger, and badder than the Gripen.

if India wants a fighter force that can scatter to the highways to avoid Pakistani or Chinese missiles the Gripen is the right plane. Being able to disperse gives the air force a level of force protection a purely runway bound fleet cannot match.

Tin Man · 04-29-2008, 04:08 AM

[quote=zraver;490180]Uhmm its had the ability with a loadout for awhile.

ZRAVER, honestly, all I have been able to find is something that says the original Gripen can cruise at M1.05, "only on a cold day in Sweden." This is hardly worth trumpeting as an asset, achieving M1.05 in the transonic region where drag is the most problematic, is not worthy of a sales pitch. Do you have anything official, thanks in advance if you have, I can`t find much.

The newer NG is heavier than the original A models and current models, unless the 414 has a significant thrust/efficiency increase that can offset the NG weight growth, I can`t see the supercruise tag sticking any better. Fuel capacity has been increased, adding weight, if engine thrust is increased, the added fuel is moot, unless pilots show judicious use of throttle position!

Quote:

Originally Posted by zraver

Eurofighter is the one that can only supercruise clean.

Typhoon demonstrated M1.2 supercruise with a basic loadout of AAM`s and a centreline tank during the Singapore competition, every time it was asked, in hot conditions, not at all in only clean config. This seems to be something people everywhere keep missing. With EJ-220 more thrust is available, current EJ-200`s have an increased wartime thrust setting which will eat into its life cycle hours if used, but will certainly be utilized if deemed necessary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zraver

if India wants a fighter force that can scatter to the highways to avoid Pakistani or Chinese missiles the Gripen is the right plane. Being able to disperse gives the air force a level of force protection a purely runway bound fleet cannot match.

You are correct in that this is the designed in doctrine with Gripen, it all depends on what India wants of its MRCA. Does India specify this? It would be a bonus, but the extra range of the other fighters is also a bonus.

Deep strike missions are going to be hard for the Gripen fully loaded, but that is something that can be leveled at Typhoon, Rafale and S/Hornet. Only the big Su`s come out looking Rosy there.

Don`t get me wrong, I actually admire Gripen, but I think there are better solutions for India. If two engines are indeed specified, as seems correct, Gripen is immediately shown the door alongside the Viper.

In fact, India won`t go very wrong buying E model Eagles. If I were Indian, this is the ship I would go for, huge capacity, cutting edge systems, massive range, powerful motors.

sohamsri · 04-29-2008, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tronic

And the Mig-35 wont?

No it wont... theres a lot of time in that.

kuku · 04-29-2008, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sohamsri

Not f-16s sir. Pakistan already has them. We obviously want something which is better and more modern. Although the reliability of the f-16 is unbeatable.
(contrast to the mig 29s India has)

If PAF with F-16s can deter the IAF from going for the F-16 people should realize that the SU-30s are the last thing that the IAF should go for, after all a bigger, badder and meaner opposing force called PLA-AF not only has the SU-27/30 type of planes they are also producing modified versions at home.

no sir required to address me, not that old (in life or on this forum).

Blademaster · 04-29-2008, 08:38 AM

[quote=Tin Man;490221]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zraver

You are correct in that this is the designed in doctrine with Gripen, it all depends on what India wants of its MRCA. Does India specify this? It would be a bonus, but the extra range of the other fighters is also a bonus.

That is not part of the design.

Quote:

Deep strike missions are going to be hard for the Gripen fully loaded, but that is something that can be leveled at Typhoon, Rafale and S/Hornet. Only the big Su`s come out looking Rosy there.

Don`t get me wrong, I actually admire Gripen, but I think there are better solutions for India. If two engines are indeed specified, as seems correct, Gripen is immediately shown the door alongside the Viper.

In fact, India won`t go very wrong buying E model Eagles. If I were Indian, this is the ship I would go for, huge capacity, cutting edge systems, massive range, powerful motors.

Then the problem is that why did we get the Su-30s? It would actual make better sense to upgrade the Su-30s with better avionics and better engines.

You have to remember that the MRCA was intented as a stop-gap solution to IAF's declining combat planes and an interim solution was needed until the LCA was brought online to restore or increase IAF's original number of combat planes.

kuku · 04-29-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Selection of MRCA for the IAF

Air Marshal B K Pandey

Former C-in-C, Training Command, Indian Air Force

After the usual scrutiny and associated delay, the Government of India has finally cleared the proposal by the IAF to procure 126 Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) needed to replace the obsolete MiG 21FL and MiG 23 fleet and restore the strength of combat squadrons to the authorised ceiling of 39.5. These aircraft are being phased out progressively on completion of technical life and as there is no certainty of the timeframe in which the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) would be made available in adequate numbers, there is no option for the IAF but to acquire replacements for ageing aircraft from foreign sources to close the gap and prevent unacceptable erosion of operational capability.

The requirement for the IAF is for a 20-tonne class, multi-role, fourth generation combat aircraft or alternatively, a late third generation airframe with fourth generation avionics and weapon systems. The IAF needs a force mix of long and medium range combat aircraft capable of both strike and air defence roles. The SU30 MKI is under induction to undertake long-range tasks in a strategic sense. The proposed MRCA would be expected to perform both roles over own airspace and battle areas in a tactical sense.

The Request for Information (RFI), only a preliminary inquiry, has been sent out to the manufacturers of the four possible contenders. These are the Russian MiG 29 M/M2, the French Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, the Swedish Saab Grippen and the American F16 C/D Block 50/52. Given the elaborate and complex procurement procedures, stringent and multi-layered financial scrutiny, painfully slow decision-making process, the lead time for manufacture and time for training, it may take over a decade for the proposed MRCA to be fully operational in the IAF.

........................

Sweden and US Sanctions

So far there has been no aircraft acquired from Sweden for the IAF. As such, the Saab Grippen would add a completely new dimension to the already complex technology mix of the IAF and the Indian aerospace industry. Though Sweden has a reputation for neutrality, the GE 404-400 American engine on the Grippen could prove to be the proverbial ‘Achilles Heel’ as the possibility of an US sanction may include a ban on the supply of the engine and this could undermine any deal with Sweden .

....................

Strategic Partnership with the USA

Offer by the USA for the sale of F16 to Pakistan and simultaneous offer to India for the licensed production of the F16 and F18, has sparked off an intense debate on whether India should enter into any long-term relationship with the USA for purchase of critical defence equipment, especially a large fleet of combat aircraft. It is not surprising that opinion on the subject is divided. While the F16 meets with the qualitative requirements of a 20-tonne MRCA that India needs, the F18 with a maximum all up weight of nearly 30 tonnes, is a much larger and heavier aircraft and does not fit into the IAF inventory mix. It is closer to the SU30 MKI of which 190 are already under induction. The American offer to be discussed will, therefore, be limited to the F16.

................

Conclusion

India needs a fleet of 126 MRCA to safeguard her security interests. As the Indian aerospace industry does not as yet have the technological strength to meet this requirement on its own, the nation has no option but to turn to the international market, where, unlike in the past, a much wider choice is now available. Undoubtedly, India must procure the best machine, but in so doing, sight of the long-term perspective must not be lost. Aircraft majors around the world see India as a lucrative and expanding market and will compete for the contract that could make a crucial impact in their own struggle for survival in the fiercely competitive world of the global aerospace industry.

However, the decision makers in the Indian establishment must penetrate the gloss and read the fine print carefully. Apart from the technological attributes, versatility and operational capability of the machine, they need to bear in mind a number of other important factors such as assurance of long-term logistic support, problems of integration with the IAF inventory, technological gains for the Indian aerospace industry, sanctions and denial regimes, financial implications and the nuances of the political dimension. In the final analysis, the process of selection of the MRCA for the IAF will not only be a techno-military dilemma but a challenging politico-economic exercise as well.

This article first appeared in the Indian Defence Review Volume 20-1, Jan- Mar 05 and has been reproduced here with the permission of the editor.

Security Research Review: Volume 1(3) Selection of MRCA for the IAF - Air Marshall(r) B K Pandey

I think with time the IAF will have different views on the MMRCA.

Now the situation might be a bit different, with active involvement in the Russian fifth generation fighter aircraft project, Indian Airforce might have evolved view of what role the MMRCA will fit into, considering a easy going deadline of 2020, the MMRCA will have to serve with the PAK-FA, LCA, SU-30MKI for a considerable time.

What role will the MMRCA fit into post 2020.
- PAK-FA~200-300:
A air superiority aircraft with limited air to ground ability?
- SU30MKI post 2020- a air superiority aircraft gone strike fighter~250:
Considering its huge range, can it add up on the weapons inventory, may be the radar to become a nice strike plane?
- LCA~220:
A point defence, MiG-21 type of fighter with limited air to ground abiity?
- MMRCA:
What will it fit into?

zraver · 04-29-2008, 09:54 AM

The Gripen is not subject to sanctions by America. It is powered by the Volvo Aero Corporation RM12 turbofan engine based on the F404, the new technology demonstrator is likewise equipped with an American based but fully Swedish built engine.

Gripen - The wings of your nation - Technical Summary
Saab Introduces "Gripen Demo"

04-28-2008, 23:07 PM	#68 (permalink)
Tin Man Contributor Join Date: 06-02-07 Location: In the `shires. Posts: 394 Country:	More on the Gripen. After further reading, this "supercruise" offered by the Gripen is unverified outside of the manufacturer. Indeed, earlier versions could not manage it at all. The Gripen NG with `414`s has a marginal supercruise at 1.05 Mach, firmly rooted in the transonic regime, and this with a light combat load or maybe even clean. This label will only hinder it, I would suggest SAAB drop this and concentrate on its "real" capabilities. Even the Typhoon`s 1.2M supercruise seems only slightly better, unless the aircraft can sustain that speed without killing range too much. The Gripen has done better because it is cheaper, smaller, been around longer (first operational 4th gen`), and is tailored to suit a smaller nations budget and operational requirements. (look at customer list.) If India wants a tactical fighter bomber with long legs, Gripen isn`t it. I think a country like India should be thinking bigger, and badder than the Gripen. __________________ "Liberty is a thing beyond all price.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Bloodiest Battles in History	sparten	General History	30	04-05-2008 04:03 AM
U.S.-India Maritime Cooperation: A Track-Two Dialogue	Adux	Naval Forces	0	02-20-2008 21:11 PM
F-14 vs. F/A-18E/F	troung	Military Aviation	504	12-29-2007 21:31 PM
Indian Military - Daily Update	Endangered	South Asian Defense Topics	1434	12-20-2007 23:56 PM
Indo-Pakistan Talks – Myths, Delusions and Fantasies!!	Ray	South Asian Defense Topics	11	05-06-2007 21:25 PM

04-29-2008, 09:54 AM	#75 (permalink)
zraver Contrary by nature. *Military Professional* Join Date: 10-22-06 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,336 Country:	The Gripen is not subject to sanctions by America. It is powered by the Volvo Aero Corporation RM12 turbofan engine based on the F404, the new technology demonstrator is likewise equipped with an American based but fully Swedish built engine. Gripen - The wings of your nation - Technical Summary Saab Introduces "Gripen Demo"

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 6 (0 members and 6 guests)