Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

India Chooses Russian Planes!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by ajaybhutani
    the russian junk has pretty decent airframes and engines radars etc. what they lack is just the avionics and india dsnt have much of a prob with that.
    Now since Pak already is getting F-16 Blk 52 so clearly its clearly " much bettter than F16 Blk 52" goal for IAF in case it can afford it .Teh Lockheed has offered Blk 70. Super hornet from Boeing. Mig29M2 from Mig. and Gripen from JAAS.Lets look at the pros and cons for a while.

    f16 blk 70.
    pros
    1. we surely know that they will kick the ass of anythin in Pak inventory
    2. access to a lot of critical american technology via ToT.
    3. newer series of missiles ECM's etc.
    4. a possible access to source codes for F16 s/w. and so a lot of info about what
    5. Attraction : AESA.
    6. As much fast on shelf delivery as we want.
    Pak will feild.
    cons.
    1. dev cost for blk 70 ( a big heavy amount ).
    2. since blk 60 are going for a hefty 50 mn (am i right) the cost will be real heavy.
    3. Infrastructure investment and logistics problem.
    4. training issues.
    5. sacntion problem with US.

    F18 superhornets.
    pros.
    1. surely better thanF16 in RCS radar etc etc. Can kick the ass of any F16 any day.
    2. again access via ToT.
    3. source codes and AESA .
    4. The aircraft is unknown to asia and thus weaknesses arent visible to conventional enemies.
    5. will also go into the ADS.
    6. over F16 the development cost is saved.
    7. fast on shelf delivery from american factories.
    cons.
    1. the high cost wrt all others but wrt f16 the dev cost is saved so it might even turn out cheaper than F16.
    2. infra and logistics.
    3. training issues.
    4. in future US might put sanctions. so availability of parts that arent shared in toT will be compromied.
    mig29M.
    pros.
    1. cheapest when purchased on shelf.
    2. a lot of similarity with MKI will reduce the produciton costs in india for both the fighters. and also help training.
    3. will be easier to upgrade with the technologies of PAK-FA (just as MKi will be.).
    4. shud compare to F16 Blk 52. but there will be a lot of initian prob with russian overstated claims.
    5. TVC.
    cons
    1. the engine might still not be as good as the american ones.
    2. dsnt have an edge over F16 blk 52.
    3. maintenance isnt as good as Mirage.

    m2K Mk2
    pros
    1. cheap in production in india.
    2. newer missiles from french in the future.
    3. cheap to maintain and fly.
    4. good at land attack.
    5. will at least compare to f16 blk 52.
    6. a lot components might go in common with LCA.
    7. a lot of infra already in place.
    8. a lot of rafale technologies might come with it.
    cons.
    1. the engine is same as in the ones we purchased in 1980s( am i right).
    2. the on shelf delivery from french factories will not be good due to lower french production capacities.
    3. high on shelf purchase cost.


    Gripen.
    pros
    1. newest frame .
    2. small and cheapest to maintain
    3. good platform and surely better than F16 Blk 52.
    4. can someone comment on the cost. ??
    5. a lot of scope of improvements.
    cons.
    1. the american components.
    2. training costs.
    3. logistics problem.


    Other points to look at
    1. Russia : the traditional supplier. and most helpful when in need.
    2. US : just as Manmohan singh said " we need to look at what offer is Us gonna make that we cannot refuse. "
    3. Gripens : it will be better to go for F16 than a gripen owing to obvious surely coming from spares supply by directly buying from US with ToT than when we buy gripen.
    thia is very well written article.

    but my view is india will buy either mirage 2000 -5 or mig 29 . they will be equiped with avionics as present in the su 31mk1.( and these are latest in the market).

    main reason for purchase is that spares will always be avialble.

    regarding F-16, F-18 and groppens. main problem will be spares. you can never trust the US. they have tendency of clamping sanctions on flimsiest of ground.

    so mirages and mig is for us.

    Comment


    • #17
      well, when i conducted my research, rmember Ajay, it was massive post on the MiG-29M, JAS-39D, F-16E Block 60, and Mirage 2000-5, the JAS-39D was the most costly to purchase, but was the cheapest to maintain, comparing it to the Super Hornet in cost and the Block 70? i'm not sure
      for MOTHER MOLDOVA

      Comment


      • #18
        hey guy's, how about 126 Su-30mki instead of MiG-29M, JAS-39D, F-16E , and Mirage 2000-5,

        this is sure to kick both PAF and CHINESE AF

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Dima
          well, when i conducted my research, rmember Ajay, it was massive post on the MiG-29M, JAS-39D, F-16E Block 60, and Mirage 2000-5, the JAS-39D was the most costly to purchase, but was the cheapest to maintain, comparing it to the Super Hornet in cost and the Block 70? i'm not sure
          i believe the offers will be made public.The cost will come down considerably for JAS29D too when produced in india but the prob will be the american parts and it will be much graver problem than even buying F16/!8.we will get the F16/18 with a ToT so a considerable part will be made in india and so no problems of th spares with them and for others there wil still be a commitment over the parts wheras in case of Gripen we will have no guarantees from US on parts. US might even refuse to suply the engines for the Gripens to india if it helps india choose F16/18 over gripen or refuse the after sales support. The americans are always known to be shrewd businessmen.

          What i m looking at is what exactly the ameircans mean by the " offer that india cannot refuse". If its really the one that we cannot refuse ( which will cost US a lot in terms of tech transfers( maybe even AESA ) at throwaway prices ) then i guess we can always go for it as it will save us a lot in developmen costs in the future projects. or else cleary the idian american improved relations were just a showoff. and in that case it would be even more dangerous to buy a gripen with american parts.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by duke of coorg
            hey guy's, how about 126 Su-30mki instead of MiG-29M, JAS-39D, F-16E , and Mirage 2000-5,

            this is sure to kick both PAF and CHINESE AF
            the prob is the operational costs which are a hell with these beasts. Then the cost of the plane itself will be much more than say Mig29M/M2K-5 . Further i think it even needs long landing and take off strips. We are looking at a plane taht can be flown at the border areas and even on damaged feilds. (in war it becomes quite important.
            Other factors agaisnt it are.
            1. its a two man machine a singe person will not be able to take out the complete use of the implementation even with optimizations.
            2. if we stick with 2 pilots then training costs increases considerably.

            Comment


            • #21
              the cost of the plane will be much more, $30-35 million, roughly the cost of a Mirage and Fulcrum, maybe slightly more, it has better maintenance costs than the MiG-29M, and probably the Mirage 2000, i'm not sure about that one, they're known to have low maintenance and to be very reliable

              long landing strip, are you sure, adding canards is supposed to reduce the amount of strip required, and so is TVC engines

              what, it can't be flown on damaged air fields?
              for MOTHER MOLDOVA

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by ajaybhutani
                i believe the offers will be made public.The cost will come down considerably for JAS29D too when produced in india but the prob will be the american parts and it will be much graver problem than even buying F16/!8.we will get the F16/18 with a ToT so a considerable part will be made in india and so no problems of th spares with them and for others there wil still be a commitment over the parts wheras in case of Gripen we will have no guarantees from US on parts. US might even refuse to suply the engines for the Gripens to india if it helps india choose F16/18 over gripen or refuse the after sales support. The americans are always known to be shrewd businessmen.

                What i m looking at is what exactly the ameircans mean by the " offer that india cannot refuse". If its really the one that we cannot refuse ( which will cost US a lot in terms of tech transfers( maybe even AESA ) at throwaway prices ) then i guess we can always go for it as it will save us a lot in developmen costs in the future projects. or else cleary the idian american improved relations were just a showoff. and in that case it would be even more dangerous to buy a gripen with american parts.

                INDIA IS LOOKING AT MIG 29 M2 AND MIRAGE 2000-V . COMPETION IS BETWEEN THESE TWO PLANES. F18 IS TOO COSTLY AND COSTLER TO MAINTAIN. SO IT IS OUT OF QUESTION. EVEN US AIRFORCE PILOTS DO NOT LOKE THAT PLANE

                GRIPPEN. IT IS GOOD PLANE BUT IAF WILL NOT BUY IT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO REDUCE THE TYPE OF PLANES THEY WANT TO OPEATE. FOR GRIPPEN THEY HAVE TO SETUP FRESH MAINTENANCE INFRASTRUCTURE.

                SO IT IS MIRAGES OR MIG 29M2. F- 16 ONLY IF IT IS POLITICAL DISISION.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Dima
                  the cost of the plane will be much more, $30-35 million, roughly the cost of a Mirage and Fulcrum, maybe slightly more, it has better maintenance costs than the MiG-29M, and probably the Mirage 2000, i'm not sure about that one, they're known to have low maintenance and to be very reliable
                  Are u sure u are talking about MKI. bacause
                  1. the monsters weigh at least twice as heavy as the M2K/Mig29M with stores. So clearly the fuel consumptions will be quite heavy for MKI (per hour of flight) than that for these two.
                  2. The Mirage is a beauty to maintain. Thats why the IAF is so much behind this plane and even out LCA was based on the delta design.
                  3. The Mig29M will use better engines RD-33K and similar avionics to the MKI . Though what needs to be seen is how much good can it be wrt AL31 F. but still being half the size they have a huge advantage and will be clearly much much cheaper in fuel costs and maintenance.

                  long landing strip, are you sure, adding canards is supposed to reduce the amount of strip required, and so is TVC engines

                  what, it can't be flown on damaged air fields?
                  The standard SU27 runway is 1200m and for Mig29 standard is 600m.Now add to it the added infra for making big hangers for storing the fighters at bordered air feilds.a smaller one is easier to hide. a smaller runway is again faster to construct faster to repair and easier to hide.
                  About "it cannot take from damaged air feilds i m sorry i sounded wrong. i was merely pointing to the fact taht due the the longer runway length the MKI airfeild will face a lot more of detection and bombing problems( as the target is bigger.) and there will be chances that from the same airfeild the MKI wont be able to fly as some edge of the feild is damaged while the other guys will as they need shorter air feilds.

                  About TVC.

                  1. Is MKI using TVC during take off( is the FBW capable of doing that.).
                  2. I guess we will also have the TVC in Mig29M

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    addition
                    the runway requirement for mig21 is also 600 m so an aircraft with similar /less runway needs will not add on infra costs but MKI will force us upgrade our air feilds.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by killer
                      INDIA IS LOOKING AT MIG 29 M2 AND MIRAGE 2000-V . COMPETION IS BETWEEN THESE TWO PLANES. F18 IS TOO COSTLY AND COSTLER TO MAINTAIN. SO IT IS OUT OF QUESTION. EVEN US AIRFORCE PILOTS DO NOT LOKE THAT PLANE
                      there was a lot of hue and cry too when we purchased the M2K in 1980's.
                      all the four machines can do the job well and so the factors are cost and maintenance along with other inventives ( in offered).
                      i did a mere F16 to F18 comparison. As the One in offer is blk 70 so clearly we will be paying for the dev costs too for F16 blk70. and now compare to the cost of already developed F18 superhornet whole development costs will not be paid by us.so the cost of F16 here goes up by a good number. along with the delays added.

                      GRIPPEN. IT IS GOOD PLANE BUT IAF WILL NOT BUY IT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO REDUCE THE TYPE OF PLANES THEY WANT TO OPEATE. FOR GRIPPEN THEY HAVE TO SETUP FRESH MAINTENANCE INFRASTRUCTURE.

                      SO IT IS MIRAGES OR MIG 29M2. F- 16 ONLY IF IT IS POLITICAL DISISION.
                      [/QUOTE]
                      the IAF is only interested in M2K as its easiest to fly. they havent even seen how easy is it to fly a Gripen or a F16. Add to it the fact that Mig29M is also a comletely redesigned plane.

                      As i said earlier the factor influencing the F16/F18 in the race is just the american ovt trying to pacth up for its destroyed relations with india by saying that " we will make an offer taht india cannot refuse.".

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by ajaybhutani
                        there was a lot of hue and cry too when we purchased the M2K in 1980's.
                        all the four machines can do the job well and so the factors are cost and maintenance along with other inventives ( in offered).
                        i did a mere F16 to F18 comparison. As the One in offer is blk 70 so clearly we will be paying for the dev costs too for F16 blk70. and now compare to the cost of already developed F18 superhornet whole development costs will not be paid by us.so the cost of F16 here goes up by a good number. along with the delays added.

                        the IAF is only interested in M2K as its easiest to fly. they havent even seen how easy is it to fly a Gripen or a F16. Add to it the fact that Mig29M is also a comletely redesigned plane.

                        As i said earlier the factor influencing the F16/F18 in the race is just the american ovt trying to pacth up for its destroyed relations with india by saying that " we will make an offer taht india cannot refuse.".[/QUOTE]


                        what is the difference between mig M2K and Mig 29 M2. because I am told Mig m2 is a latest version of Mig 29 that we bought earlier. they are comparing this mig M2 with su 31 in avionics. so tell me if u know about this latst version in offer.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by killer
                          the IAF is only interested in M2K as its easiest to fly. they havent even seen how easy is it to fly a Gripen or a F16. Add to it the fact that Mig29M is also a comletely redesigned plane.

                          As i said earlier the factor influencing the F16/F18 in the race is just the american ovt trying to pacth up for its destroyed relations with india by saying that " we will make an offer taht india cannot refuse.".

                          what is the difference between mig M2K and Mig 29 M2. because I am told Mig m2 is a latest version of Mig 29 that we bought earlier. they are comparing this mig M2 with su 31 in avionics. so tell me if u know about this latst version in offer.[/QUOTE]
                          the point is india will obviously go for commonality for avionics as far as possible to ease up the spares and production.Just like the recent upgrades in our current fighters carrying the stuff developed for LCA and MKI, the mig29M is purchased will also carry the max similarity possible.
                          This is evident from the fact that india has asked Mig to make a N011M version for its Mig29K fighters for Gorshkov. ( instead of the standard ones.).
                          All these fighters are based on the same mil bus making the commonality of components easier.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by ajaybhutani
                            what is the difference between mig M2K and Mig 29 M2. because I am told Mig m2 is a latest version of Mig 29 that we bought earlier. they are comparing this mig M2 with su 31 in avionics. so tell me if u know about this latst version in offer.
                            the point is india will obviously go for commonality for avionics as far as possible to ease up the spares and production.Just like the recent upgrades in our current fighters carrying the stuff developed for LCA and MKI, the mig29M is purchased will also carry the max similarity possible.
                            This is evident from the fact that india has asked Mig to make a N011M version for its Mig29K fighters for Gorshkov. ( instead of the standard ones.).
                            All these fighters are based on the same mil bus making the commonality of components easier.[/QUOTE]


                            thanks for info.

                            my personal view is that india should go for mig 29 m2 . with french avionic especially beyond visual range air to air missiles. that will do for india. and can take care of F-16 s.

                            Comment


                            • #29

                              thanks for info.

                              my personal view is that india should go for mig 29 m2 . with french avionic especially beyond visual range air to air missiles. that will do for india. and can take care of F-16 s.
                              isnt R-77 good nough for a range ?or theres somethin better in the French arsenal?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                remember in our previous debates, i got the fuel efficiency of each engine, and the engine for the MKI was more effiicient


                                well, the MiG-29M engine doesn't come with TVC nozzles

                                are you sure about the figures for the MiG-29 and Su-30MKI? also, you're talking about the Su-27, which has the difference of having canards and 2D TVC engines

                                so, everything will turn around the cost of the aircraft, yea, in that case, definitely the MiG-29M and Mirage 2000-5
                                for MOTHER MOLDOVA

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X